- Messages
- 1,946
- Reactions
- 2,831
Trade for a laptop?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I believe a lot of that is the USA Century Arms builds that were so inferior to original CETME and HK quality, and gave black eye (falsely) to the platform
I think the OP's question could be rephrased as...."at what point in the price continuum of handguns does the actual increase in quality drop off and the law of diminishing returns set in?"
Lets compare 3 used handguns; a $100 Jennings, a $500 Glock and a $1000 H&K. In my humble opinion, the $500 Glock is the best value of the three choices. The Jennings is by far the cheapest, but is so poorly made and unreliable as to be essentially worthless as a functional firearm and a complete waste of the $100 spent on it. The H&K is by far the most expensive...and is certainly the best in terms of pure quality....but is it truly "twice" as good a functioning pistol as the Glock? Probably not, so for many people the $500 premium over the Glock is also wasted money. Both the Jennings and the HK occupy opposite ends of the price/quality continuum, with the Glock resting comforably in the optimum middle.
I think the OP's question could be rephrased as...."at what point in the price continuum of handguns does the actual increase in quality drop off and the law of diminishing returns set in?"
Lets compare 3 used handguns; a $100 Jennings, a $500 Glock and a $1000 H&K. In my humble opinion, the $500 Glock is the best value of the three choices. The Jennings is by far the cheapest, but is so poorly made and unreliable as to be essentially worthless as a functional firearm and a complete waste of the $100 spent on it. The H&K is by far the most expensive...and is certainly the best in terms of pure quality....but is it truly "twice" as good a functioning pistol as the Glock? Probably not, so for many people the $500 premium over the Glock is also wasted money. Both the Jennings and the HK occupy opposite ends of the price/quality continuum, with the Glock resting comforably in the optimum middle.
Well, Classic, hope you got the insults out of your system...with all due respect, of course...to address Addicted's questions more fully, your choice and mine, and everyone elses depend on personal preference, intended use and of course the amount of money one is able to commit to a firearm. In the renowned late Col. Cooper's opinion, the ONLY pistol worth having was an as issued 1911 in .45 ACP. While he was a widely respected and educated man, he too had his opinion, and it is no more or less valid than yours or mine.
One excellent resource I have discovered is Gun Tests magazine. They accept no advertising, hence are not influenced by manufacturers touting their "latest and greatest."
More to your point is the Feb. Shooting Times mag, with their 1911 shootout comparison. 7- .45's evaluated, prices ranging from $449 to $874. the next price point hovers between $900 and $1300 for Kimbers, Colts and Sigs, and then there are the Ed Browns and Les Baers.
The quantifiable difference between high and low end? They all shoot, all function pretty flawlessly, and as far as looks go, well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I agree with others who have stated that a Ford Focus and a BMW 650 will both get you to Walmart for more ammo...its up to you which strikes your fancy.
Hope this answers your question. As to your thoughts on my Kimber, well, I've already covered that.
Classic, I see you are fairly new to the site. A suggestion would be, to bring facts to the discussion, not invective. Conveyed with the greatest respect, naturally.
Sounds like the OP has already made up his mind and is sitting back waiting to defend our choices. Kimber over here, by the way. Of course you are free to purchase (or not) the weapon of your choice. I have many guns in my safe, among them XDm. A good carry pistol, but I also shelled out for my Kimber. Does my choice make sense to you? With all due respect, I really don't care.
Hmmm I'm thinking the next remark is directed toward... Just because you say "With all due respect" doesn't make your post any less offensive.
The OP was just wondering and looking for the communities input, not the "bubblegum" from evltwn..................
Rant over...
The HK is the best plastic gun on the market but you're going to pay Sig money for it... Kimbers look cool but they are called MIMbers for a reason. You gotta replace almost everything to get the MIM parts out of them - Frame, Slide, Barrel, Bushing, trigger and springs aren't MIM...
By the time you replace all the other parts (some should be installed by a qualified smith) you quickly find yourself nearing Les Baer money which has NO MIM parts.
There have been a few good analogies in this thread that most likely resolved this for you. But just to hear myself talk...Actually the original "OP" (myself) has never owned either is not on the attack. I am simply curious what it is about the two makers that people are willing to fork out several hundred extra dollars for. Maybe I am missing out. No need to become defensive just a curious gun lover. As I browsed the handgun ads I always wondered why someone would fork out so much money when there are cheaper quality choices.
I thought the second reply was a good answer.