No, not pieces of junk or inexpensive ****, but guns that have the potential to be truly great. Not individual guns but a model run.

My nomination would be the Mini-14. If it could just hit a pie plate at 100 yards, 20 rounds semi rapid, I'd be happy.

__________________
Regards, Ron
USASA 1965/69

Mine would be the Kimber 1911s. 1911s are my favorite pistol platform, and Kimbers are absolutely beautiful guns, but made with poor quality control and even worse customer service. I have had three of them, and I don't ever want another. Oh, I would love a Raptor, but not unless and until they improve their quality, offer a lifetime warranty, and stand behind their guns with good service.

I'm a little surprised by this. I've had 2 Kimber 1911s and have been pleased with both of them. They are not the high-end custom guns that Kimber would have you believe, but it seems they are about where they should be in the mid-price range for 1911s (if Brown or Wilson is worth $2-3K). I've had no personal experience with their customer service so I can't speak to that aspect.

Interesting question by the OP and I tried hard to think of a series that I was personally disappointed in. Overall the "bad" guns I've owned have been inexpensive junk, so they don't count. The one series I've wanted to like and that I think has potential, but that I haven't jumped on board with due to poor reviews is the S&W Nightguard revolvers. I like the concept of lightweight revolvers with big dot night sights, but haven't jumped on board for one yet.

Ruger Mini-30

__________________
Buy American
Vote Responsibly

A year or so ago I bought a Remington-branded combination over-under rifle shotgun in .223/12 ga., manufactured in Russia by Baikal. I though it might make an ideal knock-around/camp gun, but ... It had awkwardly placed iron sights that would embarrass a blacksmith, let alone a gunsmith, and was equipped with 3/8" dovetail grooves such as are used for mounting airgun optics. There was no way to mount a scope or quality red dot robust enough to stand up to stout 12 ga. loads and permit accurate aiming of the rifle barrel. It also came with a pathetic owners manual that left many unanswered questions. Rummaging around online, I eventually found the original factory owner's manual (in both Russian and English) including performance specs, which stated that the factory spec for the rifle barrel is roughly 4 MOA! If I'd been willing to tolerate 4MOA, I might as well have bought a Mini-14. I sold it before making any further investment of time, tinkering, or money.

S&W 4566, lucky if it would hit a 4X8 sheet of plywood at 25 yards...not just me, others shot it with the same results, traded it = some $$$,at a gun show for a 686 4"...best deal I ever made..

Kimber 22-HS rifle.

Went back to the factory three times, never shot right, finish on the stock split and cracked...almost wrapped it around a tree, but sold it instead. The first time it went back on my dime- they said they would reimburse me and never did. No wonder they quit making them (rimfire rifles).

Put a scope on a 9422 Legacy and never looked back.

__________________
Lost it all in a boat accident

I bought a military frame Hi Standard Sharpshooter from a friend that is a beautiful, well balanced, jamomatic. It doesn't matter what I do to it or what I shoot through it.

__________________
LIVE FROM THE DAWGHOUSE

It's a target-rich environment out there. When I was into muzzle loading I sold a reliable, accurate T-C Hawken to get a custom-made proper Hawken replica. It was one beautiful rifle, but we could not get it to fire reliably. I finally sold it at a loss in frustration. So now thirty years later I picked up another T-C Hawken to rehabilitate and will pick up where I left off. The old one wasn't authentic, but it served me well and I was foolish to turn loose of it.

I have learned to be VERY skeptical of popular claims of how wonderful certain guns are, versus other ones in disfavor. I do not get on with SIGs very well, and I finally gave a 220 to a friend who actually can shoot the damn thing well. Had a Ruger P97 that was supposed to be a great gun--other than the fact that the thing choked every other magazine. Even the factory gave up on it, took it back, destroyed it, and sent me a NIB one--which I promptly consigned and dumped. I owned Ruger stock for many years, but absolutely hate their P-series pistols.

It looks to me like we are repeating the experience of GM customers in the late 70's--there is a ton of stuff on the market that is fundamentally ****, and we are expected to believe the hype and pay top dollar for the privelege of owning it. I worked most of my career carrying a plebian Ruger Service or Security Six 4' .357, and as Buffalo Bill said of his old Remington percussion revolver, "It never failed me". My old agency adopted about four different "perfect" service weapons in ten years after I left it, only to find another "new and improved" weapon the morning after.

P.T. Barnum made his fortune on the premise that there was a sucker born every minute". Nowadays I suspect that said suckers are born every second.

While I do not own one, I have shot three Seecamp's - two .32's and a .380. All three were incapable of shooting a full magazine without a jam.

Now I know there are many here that swear by them, but after shooting THREE different ones, you could not give me one for free! To me there is NO substitute for reliability, and IMHO the Seecapt just doesn't have it.

Chief38

Beretta Storm 9mm carbine. I owned one back when they first came out and while factory 10 round mags seated fine, it would not seat the high capacity mags at all. I bought the adaptor to seat the M92 style mags and they would just fall out and onto the ground. When I took it back to the shop there was actually a Beretta rep on hand that day and he told me that they knew of the problem and that what I needed to do was take out the spring where the mag catch was and rebend it. I asked him why I should be having to fix anything like that on an $800 gun. It was quickly sold off. A nice gun to shoot but defeated by a $3 part.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

That's easy - the BG38 and BG380.

With the potential of unseating Ruger's LCP/LCR, S&W has fumbled it big time.

Horrible little guns, just horrible.

I have to vote for the Ruger Mini-14.

Great looking, handy package that just does not shoot worth a pint of spit. If a stock $250 10/22 can hold 3-4 inch groups rapid fire at 100 yards why can't a $700 plus Mini-14 hold groups under 6 inches?

The Jeff Cooper sponsored Bren 10. I never owned one, but it was announced years before it was released. When they finally got the bugs worked out of the design and put the gun on the market without the magazine because they had supplier problems. You did get a coupon for a free magazine or two when they became available. When the magazines finally became available, they didn't work very well. The company soon folded. I understand there are hundreds or thousands of Bren 10s out there without magazines.

__________________
NRA Benefactor

HK VP-70Z. Very first of the polymer frame, high capacity pistols, with the most God-awful trigger ever put on a gun.

For me the most disappointing firearm with which I ever had experience was a Browning Challenger II .22 LR pistol. It simply would not fire a magazine of ammo without a failure to feed, regardless of the brand of ammo used. But, this has a happy ending. At that time I had been reading articles by Bob Melick lauding the S&W M-18 as the ideal .22 LR revolver for range and field use. I took that Challenger to the local ACE Hardware store and traded it to the owner. He ordered me a brand new S&W 18 even up. I had $180 in the Challenger. The year was 1984. I have no idea what was the actual price of the little Model 18. But it was a marvelously accurate revolver!

__________________
<><

I would agree on the Beretta cx4 Storm. I got the .45 thinking "hi cap mags are just around the corner". Well you can get 16 round mags but for $100!? FAIL. At least I was able to bump the XD's mags from 13 rnds to 16. Pure love. Still enjoy shooting the cx4 but it could be so much more if given a lil more thought.

Well it ain't MY idea!
I got a T/C Hawkin kit for my birthday 25 or so years ago. A pretty rifle, to be sure. I haven't seen 2 shots anywhere near each other yet with it.

HOWEVER
We had a tree house out on the farm where we hunted.
It rained and my BIL and I met at the tree house for lunch one Primitive Weapons Season day.
My wife figured that's what we would do at lunch time so she brought a thermos of coffee and some sandwiches
During lunch we decided to cash in for the day. BIL aimed at a target we had set up about 100 yards away and emptied his rifle.
Miss Nancy asked if she could shoot mine.

So - She aims at the target and *pop* the primer went off. With the gun still on her shoulder (albeit loosely) she started to turn toward us and was saying "Gee, that wasn't bad" when the main charge finally light off.
Her glasses were on her head sideways and she had a look on her face that I can still see RIGHT NOW

__________________
In dog years I'm dead.

The S&W Model 39/59 and all of their descendents. I've never owned one or even fired one, because the decocker/safety lever is completely unreachable with my thumb, without shifting the gun significantly in my hand. Nothing like the perfectly placed 1911 safety. Whoever thought the slide mounted lever on the 39/59 was a good idea (or on any gun, for that matter) must have an extra joint in their thumb, or ape-like digits.

Ruger Mini 14.

S&W Escort.

AMT Hard Baller.

The Ruger was a waste of good ammo. The other two wouldn't feed a magazine without at least one jam.

My personal disappointment was with Dan Wesson revolvers in general. Others love them, I just never saw the appeal. After I realized that the cylinder could be spun out of full lockup without much effort, I totally lost interest. I had a nearly new Model 15 that I gladly traded for a 66-7. I kept a fixed sight Model 14 just because it looks cool, but I'll never trust it for anything serious.


+1 for the AMT Hardballer. I've got 3 of them, and only one works right. The other two are jam o matics.

Also add the AMT Backup, but the one I have, an older .380 seems to work fine.

AMT made some great looking guns, but a lot of them just don't seem to work right unless you have work done on them.

Ruger mini 14 gets my vote for lousy. It amazes me how many guys will end up with $1200-$1400 into one so it will shoot along side a $750 AR. The mags for the Ruger mini SUCK and are expensive especially compared to those for an AR. For some reason, cutting about a half of an inch off the barrel of the mini seems to get them to group. Just not worth it to me. Just so you know, I've only tried 5 of the clunkers. None of them performed even marginally. They are the AMC Pacer of guns.

__________________
Go big or stay home

Remember the A-Team TV show?

What did they use?
How many people were shot?

remington 742 and 7400, and i love my gb mini 14!

__________________
WILL WORK FOR AMMO!

Almost indentical experience, except mine was a 4566TSW and I sold it and bought a S&W 1911...best deal I ever made.

michael thornton, I love my Mini-14 too!

Cheap Winchester and Remington auto .22s. Nylons, 190s and the like. Putrid accuracy and horrible triggers. New 597s aren't any better from the one my buddy had, it was a bull barrel model and he took it back and got his purchase price for payment on a Ruger 10/22 bull barrel, which didn't shoot much better.

__________________
Wayne
Torn & Frayed

I absolutely had to have the Taurus 945 SS in 45acp as soon as it came out (about 20 yrs ago). Paid $450 I think. Dogdoo is more functional. Traded it even for a 4" 66-5 HB which I still have. Guns are a "live and learn" kinda item. Joe

__________________
Wisdom chases me; I'm faster

I've never owned a Kimber, but one friend of mine who I go shooting with regularly has a couple kimber 1911's and every time we go to the range, he has issues with them. FTE, FTL, one time one of them ejected the spent cartridge, a LIVE ROUND, and then jammed as it attempted to chamber another round. That was a first. Meanwhile my revolvers and mid 70's Colt 1911 work fine. The last couple times we went, the Kimbers stayed at home and he used his SIG's.

Not a lot of love for the Mini

I had a mini 30, its the ONLY gun I ever got rid of. I traded it to a dealer of another rifle.

It was a total ***, at 100 yards off a rest it was all over the target. Then to make matters worse it would fall apart. The op rod would pop out of the bolt tang. This would force you to field strip the gun. Then fight the bolt past the op rod since they were out of place.

Its gone and I dont miss it.

My old 10/22 is a very good gun. My 44 deerstalker carbine is fun and hasnt failed me yet.


Some folks think the Mini is better than an AR...

I WOULD HAVE TO SAY THE GLOCK MODEL 23. I CARRY ONE FOR WORK AND IT REMINDS ME OF THE WOODEN GUN WILL FARRELL WAS GIVEN IN THE MOVIE "THE OTHER GUYS". IT IS A OLDER GEN 1 AND PROBABLY HAS THE "NEW YORK" TRIGGER( 10 LBS.). SECOND WOULD BE THE NEW SMITH MODEL 40 CLASSIC. I CARRIED AN OLDER MODEL 40 IN THE 80'S AS BACKUP WEAPON. THE NEW CLASSIC IS STIFF AND THE TRIGGER IS HORRIBLE. SOLD IT WITHIN A MONTH. ACTUALLY TRADED IT ON A WINCHESTER LEVER ACTION 22 MAG. WITH CASH.

Come on now, Glock 23 isnt that bad. It's my primary carry weapon. It's a gen 3, they improved a lot since first introduced. Never liked the glocks trigger, but it's a tough little gun and very concealable.

I picked up a Glock 23 and H&K USP Compact 40 at the same time. Although I don't like the 23, I happen to shoot it very well. The H&K, although completely reliable, would never shoot where I was aiming. Nobody could hit with it.

Far and away, the most disappointing gun I ever bought was the Mini-14.

Supposedly copied and improved on a very mature product design, but they must have done everything wrong.

I traded mine for a used, cheap saddle, I got the best end of the deal.(still have the saddle)

I bought the first Walther P22 I saw, a 4 digit serial number gun. Nobody else I knew had one at the time. Well as all of you probably know turns out the first ones had a lot of issues. Jamomatic, no matter what ammunition I tried, and the barrel kept loosening up, and it would not stay tight. There are 2 screws that lock the barrel in place, the threads were stripped in 1 of the holes. And the God-awful trigger. And...
I hear they have brought QC up a long ways, but nothing would convince me to try another. Even if mine didn't have the problems it did, there are much better quality .22 pistols out there than the P22.

__________________
Geoff. Since 1960.

Mauser 98K. They can be shot out and suffer bedding problems like any other milsurp. Even worse, I have acquaintances who have found the same can be true of the Garand. GASP!!

Of modern guns my Howa 1500 is a disappointment in some ways. It shoots NATO surplus in bigger patterns (note, not groups) than a FAL. It does better with heavier rounds. For some reason the original Hogue stock seems to bring recoil worse than my milsurps in 7.62 NATO. I'll never understand that. It now lives in a Knoxx stock but I have yet to shoot it in that configuration.

I am confused by the mini-14 comments. I'm guessing it must have been the older versions. I've had no issues with my new versions. They are not as accurate as my AR's etc, but I have no issues shooting acceptable SD groups out of it. They are light little all day carry guns, great if SHTF for that role, they are not AR's and never were sold as precision battle rifles.

But, everybody is entitled to their opinion.

I'm going with the Kimber opinion as well, not that accurate or dependable...IMO...as well as several PD's who tried them.

For me it was the Colt Combat Elite I purchased back in the early '80's when I first got involved in USPSA. I was naive enough to think it would be just what I needed to be competitive as a novice to the sport.

Out of the box it wouldn't feed even hardball and on those rare occassions it did, it would send the empties directly back at the center of my forehead. (I developed an interesting flinch where I would duck my head to deflect the hot brass with the brim of my cap.) It shot nowhere near where it looked, had a miserable trigger, and the slide cycled with the smoothness of driving over a set of railroad tracks.

At the first match I participated in, when told to "load and make ready" the slide stop fell out as I cycled the pistol to load! Not quite the auspicious start I had in mind.

I put more money into that gun than it was worth...not to customize it...just to get it to function properly and shoot with some measure of accuracy. I truely believed that pistol set my shooting "career" back a full year or two. I finally sold it off at a loss and for many years after, never trusted a four-lettered 1911.

Roe

Desert Eagle .44 Mag. Did not function with anything but full power jacketed bullets. Grip was way too big, pistol is way too heavy. Lousy trigger. It is single action, but they intentionally gave it a very long travel in an attempt to make it feel like a double action. A very impractical gun. It was impressively accurate though.

Colt 2000 and anything made by Taurus.

My biggest disappointments were both Kimber of Oregon Classics. One in .22LR and one in 22 Hornet. Bought both at the same time which was a considerable investment for me. I'm a gunsmith and tried everything I knew in bedding, barrel hand-lapping, careful reloading of the .22 Hornet, ammo selection for the .22LR, barrel seasoning and break-in. Nothing could get either of these rifles to shoot off the benchrest better than 2 moa. I knew that I could rebarrel them, but didn't see why I should have to rebarrel expensive rifles. I sold both at gunshows. ......... Big Cholla

Anyone remember the Coonans. Yeah that one. FTF's FTE's
piece of junk.


chuck

__________________
They hold no Quarter

Magnum Research BFR 45-70. Lots of promise of purported quality. A frame screw was permanently loose after one brief range session. It was returned to the distributer via local dealer. Lots of money tied up for 7 weeks getting them all to make a decision. Got full refund and will stay away from MR in the future.

Wow, so mini-14s are a no go? I had thought about getting one in place of an AR. Just felt it looks classier and less ruthless. Now I dont want to

__________________
S&W 686-6 Plus Pro Series

Definitely get the AR. Set up correctly, they are a wonderful shooting platform.

For the money and the Name :
1970's/80's Colt Mustang in .380.
Blessings

__________________
TEXAS, by GOD

If its "less ruthless" you want, get a KelTec SU16 or one of the hunter special camo ARs. Both also use standard AR mags.

I hear people claim "well these latest ones are accurate" but I assume that is just relative to the garbage they've been peddling for years

The Walther P22 has the potential to be a great little gun. After I fired a few boxes of ammo through mine, I had no problem identifying the deep, ugly gouges in the slide where the disconnector(?) made contact. I found out, after I bought the gun, that this was a common problem. Aside from that, I was impressed. I got rid of it and bought a new Bearcat, which is another story. Bill Ruger was a mastermind with his numerous investment casting procedures. My Bearcat failed, due to the cylinder stop not engaging the little projection on the hammer. I took the gun apart and discovered that all the parts appeared to be cast and thrown together, with no evidence of handfitting. That's okay, I guess, but the tolerances are really big, which allows parts to be drawn from a bin and put together with no worries. My plan was to fix the cylinder stop, which I did, and do a little stoning on the moving parts. The components just flopped around in the receiver. Stoning anything would have made it worse.
Soooo....after my long-winded response, the P22 and Bearcat could be great guns with some tweeking. Cheers!

__________________
GMC-USN, Retired/1978 to 2001

Sig Mosquio 22. Beautiful feel to the gun ,but can't shoot a clip with out jamming. Big disappointment.

Actually relative to what they are sold as, carry/ranch rifles. They were never sold as a precision battle rife. Comparing a Mini-14 to an AR is like comparing an Accord to a Shelby Mustang and complaining the Accord is a terrible car because it's not as fast as the Mustang.

*** does not apply to the mid-90's and before Mini-14's...I know they were inaccurate. I'm referencing the redesigned ones.

Not to be a know it all but the Mustang did not come out until 1986.