View Single Post
 
Old 01-15-2020, 10:54 AM
glenwolde's Avatar
glenwolde glenwolde is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,724
Likes: 1,606
Liked 6,323 Times in 2,299 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoke View Post
When I first started out I bought a bunch of junk guns, mostly Llamas. I owned a .25, a .32, a .380, a 9mm and a .45ACP. I have to admit that of the five the .32 and the .380 weren't bad little guns.

I owned one Taurus (PT92) and one was enough. The words "Taurus" and "Quality" don't belong in the same sentence. The only good thing about that gun was we bought it for 90 bucks and sold it for around 300. I don't know of a single reputable trainer who recommends a Taurus Junk for anything. I've seen them fired in reviews and at 20 yards the spread is only about 2 inches.

Even quality manufacturers such as CZ occasionally turn out a lemon. I owned a CZ RAMI in .40 S&W that would not reliably feed JHPs to save its life. I sent it back to the factory 3 times and they couldn't get it right either. I ended up selling it to a pawnshop and never looked back.

In general I've had good luck with CZ products. My wife bought a CZ82 for $189.00 that would have fed a rock if I could have got it in the magazine.

I owned an RIA 1911 that I paid $400.00 for that never fumbled once. The only problem I ever had with it was a tendency to rust.

I think first generation M&Ps are a great deal.

I'm trying to align the statement "I owned one Taurus (PT92) and one was enough." with "Even quality manufacturers such as CZ occasionally turn out a lemon."

Is it because you owned other CZ's before the lemon CZ? It seems to me that many times if a shooter has a bad experience their first time out with a brand it's dead to them for life. On the other hand if they get a lemon after already having experience with a brand it seems to be far less of a problem.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Like Post: