Quote:
Originally Posted by gman51
My point is not how many rounds should I shoot through a gun before deciding it is dependable for carry. My point is there are far to many new guns having serious malfunctions that the guns have to be sent back to the factory. I stand by my belief that guns shot under 500 rounds having serious failure should not be happening. Either poor machining or materials, or quality control at each step of the building process is causing these failures. I guess with the cost of labor and production time for greater quality control just can't be paid for with the cost of the guns these days. A $350 semi auto would probably cost over $500 in order to pay costly quality control. Perhaps like was said above make them quick and get them sold then let the buyers inform us of the defective guns.
I just wonder were guns made 30 years ago of better quality than guns produced today? I guess that is a stupid question. Was a defective new gun almost unheard of 30 years ago?
I have a 40 year old Marlin model 60 that goes bang with every pull of the trigger but friend's new Remlin Model 60 is a jamamatic. I guess I answered my own questions.
|
Much like today the S&Ws and Colts from the 1970s and 80s sometimes had issues. I owned a number of S&Ws from that time. Some were excellent but I guess maybe 10% of these guns major functional issues that should have been obvious to someone with even rudimentary QA skills. Don't even get me started on the Colt Government Model problems I had back then.
In the last year I have purchased two Rugers and my wife bought a Model 67 about two years ago. I would much prefer these three guns to some of those clunkers that I owned in the 70s or 80s. Do I think that the newer guns are better than the old ones? I am not sure.
I think what I would do is understand that there are going to be some bad guns and some good ones. Get rid of the dogs. Then when I found one that shoots good and I liked, hang on to it forever.