FOR ME BUYING A GUN IS SO MUCH MORE THAN PRICE ALONE!

[chief38]

I don't know if I am alone here or there are others who share my gun buying ways. I always look at the Company that produced the firearm, their history, reputation and track record over the years. Of course their product and model has to be worthy, top notch and stand up to the test of time. I have always bought name brand products even though there are some decent "knock offs" out there at half the price or less.

As an example, when I was in the market for "Cowboy Six Shooters" the ONLY ones for me were Colts. They are the original, the one always associated with the old west, and there is just no denying that. I never considered some of the other brands like European American Arms, Ruger, Umberti, etc. because they are not Colts. When I shot Cowboy Action S.A.S.S. matches for 20 years I used two genuine Colt SAA's while most used knock offs to compete with. I have never even owned other brands. While some may feel I was foolish to use such expensive and valuable guns, I enjoyed shooting the matches with the "real deal" every single month. There were only a few others who did the same.

I'd rather own one genuine, hand engraved and individually assembled vintage Belgium made Browning Superposed shotgun than 5 Japanese Citori's. Not that the Citori is a bad gun, it's certainly not, - it just doesn't have the allure, history or track record of JM Browning (the man), at least for me. That is the way I am with most items I purchase - it's what made the item famous and popular in the first place. So while I may not have the largest collection of anything, it is all about the real deal to me.

I was just wondering if there are others who feel the same way. Like I always say - it isn't easy being me - LOL!!

 

[Modified]

The name itself doesn't matter to me. The quality of the firearm does.

A Colt SAA is only cool if its old. If it's new I would prefer a USFA SAA because I like them better.

Or, a Great Western is a fine SAA, and very very cool in its own right with interesting history. Also fully acceptable to me. It's interesting in its own way over a Colt.

I wouldn't consider them "knock offs". They are truly their own thing. And I can evaluate the quality of them for myself.

The italian "knock offs" are often very very nice guns in many cases for someone who isn't well heeled but wants to play around with an SAA. I've directed many people to cheap Ubertis as a way to get to know an SAA and decide if they can afford to invest in a real Colt. Ultimately, the SAA was in big part successful due to the design, frankly they are easy to make. If you handed one of the new, tuned, Ubertis to Sam Colt, he would have been very pleased I imagine.

Regarding the Browning guns made in Japan; Miroku did a bang up job. I still think they made the best .357 Lever Gun produced to date (Browning 92). I treasure mine. I sort of get what you are saying, but I feel like this isn't actually an example of what you mean.

A better analogy to me than your two examples might be the difference between a S&W and a Taurus. The latter using the same tooling, simply shipped to brazil, and producing the "same" gun. But it's not the same gun.

For someone who hasn't had the opportunity to handle and use a lot of guns going for the name brand is typically a good shortcut to quality. But there are a lot of treasures that are not "name" brands. Particularly in easy to produce guns like the SAA. For difficult to produce guns (like Hand Ejectors), there really is no comparison between the knock offs, like the Spanish guns or Taurus, and the real thing.

In the end my collection is largely "name brand", but there are "off brand" production guns sprinkled into it that I absolutely treasure due to their quality, or at least the attempt at quality. I have two Miroku made guns, the aforementioned Browning 92 in .357 and a Liberty Chief from 1960. The 92 is simply the finest example of modern production gunsmithing applied to a glorious John Browning design, but the Liberty Chief is something else.

It's an attempt. The design is a bizarre amalgamation of DA Colts and S&Ws. The fit is excellent. The finish is later Colt Python style (kind of crappy). It's a neat example of talented and experienced people trying to make a thing well, and I love it for that. The 20 year gap between my 2 Mirokus shows a huge leap in gun making know how, and I love to own both of them for just that reason.

 

[Breakaway500]

I buy the best my pay grade can afford. Sometimes that's an original McCoy and sometimes it's not.

I'm surprised how good "knockoffs" can be and occasionally they are better than originals!

May not have the same panache but won't keep me up nights..

 

[chief38]

Thankfully most of my major purchases were made when they still made the real McCoy's in the real factories and made them with pride. Anything after that was either purchased as NIB - old stock or used in great condition.

Again, Miroku does make a good product - just not part of what I personally wanted in a Browning. After hunting for decades, shooting thousands of sporting clays, trap and skeet I have enjoyed my Superposed so so much! To me there's no substitute.

 

[BAM-BAM]

For me the first question is "for what purpose?" do I need the gun.... or is it just "want"?

Second Quality.

Almost all my guns are from major manufactures.. Smith,Beretta,Ruger, Sig, CZ... never a big Colt fan (Dad's New Service was too big, bad experience with a .38 Diamondback back in the 80s, don't like the factory grip frame.) but have a couple.

Picked up a Springfield Armory SA 35 about a year ago..... to save my Browning HPs.

 

[luvsmiths]

I don't know if I am alone here or there are others who share my gun buying ways. I always look at the Company that produced the firearm, their history, reputation and track record over the years. Of course their product and model has to be worthy, top notch and stand up to the test of time. I have always bought name brand products even though there are some decent "knock offs" out there at half the price or less.

As an example, when I was in the market for "Cowboy Six Shooters" the ONLY ones for me were Colts. They are the original, the one always associated with the old west, and there is just no denying that. I never considered some of the other brands like European American Arms, Ruger, Umberti, etc. because they are not Colts. When I shot Cowboy Action S.A.S.S. matches for 20 years I used two genuine Colt SAA's while most used knock offs to compete with. I have never even owned other brands. While some may feel I was foolish to use such expensive and valuable guns, I enjoyed shooting the matches with the "real deal" every single month. There were only a few others who did the same.

I'd rather own one genuine, hand engraved and individually assembled vintage Belgium made Browning Superposed shotgun than 5 Japanese Citori's. Not that the Citori is a bad gun, it's certainly not, - it just doesn't have the allure, history or track record of JM Browning (the man), at least for me. That is the way I am with most items I purchase - it's what made the item famous and popular in the first place. So while I may not have the largest collection of anything, it is all about the real deal to me.

I was just wondering if there are others who feel the same way. Like I always say - it isn't easy being me - LOL!!

Didn't Colt produce the first double action revolvers?

You dont own any of those "Knock off' Smith and Wessons, do you?

 

[Ivan the Butcher]

I disagree. 2 weeks after I found my second Citori 410, I came across a suitable Superpose 28" 410. The claim was it was just rebuilt and in 100% condition and over $8K. I already own two nice Superpose, one 30" 12 and one 28" 20. The 410 28" didn't have the balance or graceful action of my Superpose' and at 4 times the price of my newest 725 410 was found very lacking!

The Superpose design was a typical J M Browning break through design during the depression. However, Val Browning and the Moriko engineers further advanced the grace and handling of O/U shotguns From 1973 to this day, and is shows!

Chief 38 must have been very mild on his SAA, to have competed for 20 years and not had a breakdown. I knew two national SASS competitors That had typical problems at 40 to 60 Thousand rounds, then did complete rebuilds at that 60k point. This isn't about A gun, it is typical of the design!

On a different hand, I had Vaqueros, My first pair were 5.5" blue Beisleys, my second are 4" Stainless standard and all old models. NO they won't do tricks like a Colt, but that will get you Safety Violations or expelled during a match! My first pair is at 55,000 rounds each and no (ZERO) breakdowns and the second is at 20K each and would be unheard of to be worn out at all. (There could of course be manf. defects, but they show up quicker than 20K rounds!)

But I do agree that when I buy, I look at much more than just "Apples to Apples" price. One of the things I look at is, the LGS's history with me and others. How bad and how quickly did they start gouging, in the shortages?
Did they "Start a trend to Normal" of did they stay as high priced as they could for as long as they could?

AS we reach a new normal, guns and ammo will cost whatever they cost, but I won't buy anything I don't have to from the thieves, and I'll give as much business I can to those that tried to be fair.

Ivan

 

[Puller]

I don't know if I am alone here or there are others who share my gun buying ways. I always look at the Company that produced the firearm, their history, reputation and track record over the years. Of course their product and model has to be worthy, top notch and stand up to the test of time. I have always bought name brand products even though there are some decent "knock offs" out there at half the price or less. . . .

Couldn't agree with you more. That's why my everyday carry is a Glock.

 

[djohns6]

I don't criticize anyone's choice of gun . Buy what you like , or what you can afford , Whether it's a Colt , or a High Point , enjoy it .

 

[swagmeister]

Quality of build and reliability are two of the most important factors for me when considering the purchase of any firearm, regardless of cost. I'd rather have a $400 Tisas 1911 that works out of the box in comparison to a $1500-$2000 Colt 1911 that you have to spend several more hundred dollars to make it function correctly!

 

[Brian Parrish]

Business Philosophy

Thank you for your thoughts. I agree to a certain extent.
When a successful business gets sold, one of the important items included in the sale is called, "good will". The new owner often wants to make a greater profit by cutting costs while the perception of quality is still high. Eventually word catches up so the next step is to sell the company to someone else before the good will is completely destroyed. That buyer can sometimes build it back but they need to spend the capital to reestablish a new perception of quality and it sometimes does not work. Usually, they are stuck with the loss. These practices are well known in every business including the firearms industry.

In my mind the name Smith & Wesson meant something in the past especially before the company was sold to Bangor Punta. This name has been used to sell knives and tomahawks and nearly anything else you please by people who bear no relation or connection to the people who created and supported quality products for most of the 20th century. I prefer to think in terms of human individuals. The person's commitment and philosophy of quality control is what makes the difference. I don't want to be fooled by a name, any name, even more so in this day of Amazon and WalMart. When that person is there and insisting that proper practices are followed it will be good, not perfect but good. When he is gone, a certain inertia will hold the practices in place but incremental cost cutting will eventually prevail whether it is sold to a new owner or not.

 

[Camster]

I was once a huge Belgian Browning fan, however after owning a Citori Grade III Lightning in 28 gauge, the allure of a Superposed was diminished.
Not only would the price tag of its Belgian equivalent, a Pointer Grade, be priced well into the stratosphere, given the number of years since the Belgian was produced, I wouldn't know for sure what its history was with regards to salt wood or anything else. I like "new", I like "perfect", so I try to stick with current production guns.
That belief did bite me recently however. I owned some perfectly nice Smith Model 41s in the past, and thought I'd own another before I croak.
It went immediately back to Springfield for cosmetic issues.

 

[Rock185]

Chief38, I certainly understand your point of view, and share some of that myself, especially where the COLT name is involved. The Force is strong with the COLT name. But I'm more with Modified on this, in that quality means more than name to me.

That little flat trigger spring went limp almost immediately after I bought my new case and blue Colt SAA years ago. Beautiful gun cosmetically though. My Freedom Arms revolver has none of the Colt's storied history, but build quality far exceeds the Colt. Most of my Colt expedience is with the various O-Frame pistols. I've had quite a few over the last 50 years or so, some of them were even good right from the factory. A number of others, not so much. My last two Gold Cups, and a rather expensive Colt custom shop SCG, have all needed to go back for warranty work. The barrel/slide/frame fit, trigger and reliability of some other manufactuer's production 1911 type pistols I've owned have exceeded many of my Colts. But I still like Colts, and in fact bought another new one within the past year. Yep, it needed to go back to Colt with an issue..

 

[rockquarry]

I don't know if I am alone here or there are others who share my gun buying ways. I always look at the Company that produced the firearm, their history, reputation and track record over the years. Of course their product and model has to be worthy, top notch and stand up to the test of time. I have always bought name brand products even though there are some decent "knock offs" out there at half the price or less.

As an example, when I was in the market for "Cowboy Six Shooters" the ONLY ones for me were Colts. They are the original, the one always associated with the old west, and there is just no denying that. I never considered some of the other brands like European American Arms, Ruger, Umberti, etc. because they are not Colts. When I shot Cowboy Action S.A.S.S. matches for 20 years I used two genuine Colt SAA's while most used knock offs to compete with. I have never even owned other brands. While some may feel I was foolish to use such expensive and valuable guns, I enjoyed shooting the matches with the "real deal" every single month. There were only a few others who did the same.

I'd rather own one genuine, hand engraved and individually assembled vintage Belgium made Browning Superposed shotgun than 5 Japanese Citori's. Not that the Citori is a bad gun, it's certainly not, - it just doesn't have the allure, history or track record of JM Browning (the man), at least for me. That is the way I am with most items I purchase - it's what made the item famous and popular in the first place. So while I may not have the largest collection of anything, it is all about the real deal to me.

I was just wondering if there are others who feel the same way. Like I always say - it isn't easy being me - LOL!!

I've never had regrets buying the "original" model (Colt ARs and Colt 1911s, for example) as opposed to copies. I don't like to save money on a gun purchase then wish I'd bought better even if the copy works and shoots well.

 

[StrawHat]

I consider why I am making the purchase. I have had several collections and one ongoing accumulation of firearms. My first collection was Committee of Safety Muskets. I was able to acquire 11 of them. Technically, they were all originals but by the same definition, they were also all copies as they were handmade by various gunsmiths to a standard. Very few were signed so one had to know how which smith handled different parts. It was a lot of fun researching back in the days before the internet. Eventually, that collection went down the road. Next was a collection of ACW Cartridge Carbines.

Long story short, when collecting, there is not a lot of choice.

My accumulation of firearms is mostly Name Brand but a couple of close copies sneak in!

For me, these are great shooters and I do not need to go after originals.

Kevin

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Many years ago a very good friend told me that he did not cheap out on three things - his doctors, his lawyers, and his firearms. I always liked that.

However, I don't agree with the OP. Quality is where you find it.

The "replica" SAAs (they're not knock-offs) from many excellent makers are a mainstay of cowboy action shooting. Moreover, I probably saw as many Ruger Vaqueros and Blackhawks in my CAS days as I did replica SAAs. Another "mainstay" of the game.

Colts were few and far between. Nobody wants to break an old one and for sure most folks didn't want to spring for the dollars for a new one just to bang away in a CAS match.

The only routinely seen old guns (pre-1900) were double-barreled shotguns. Those were plentiful and inexpensive. Plus some 97 Winchesters - those were not expensive for a while but I think that they are now. There were replicas available; I've lost track.

Back in the day most of the main match rifles were modern versions of the 1866, 1875, and 1892 Winchesters, generally Italian-made or Brazilian. But there were certainly many vintage pieces used, too.

But those are toys as far as I am concerned. For defensive tools I use quality guns only, e.g., S&W, Beretta, CZ, Walther. No replicas so maybe the OP and I are on the same page there but I'm not overly fond of Colt revolvers and presently own just one, a vintage Cobra that was a gift from a friend. It's my walking outside with a fanny pack gun.

As an aside, an old friend of mine recently decided to buy his first AR. He told me he bought "the good one". A Colt.

I haven't yet told him that the world is full of "good ones", in the millions, and that his Colt AR is nothing special.

 

[Golddollar]

For me the first question is "for what purpose?" do I need the gun.... or is it just "want"?

For me the questions are "Do I want it?" and "Can I buy it without ending up in the poorhouse?"

 

[lowriderfxr]

Usually when I buy a gun , especially a used one, a primary concern is , will I be able to easily get my money back if I need to sell it. My situation now, after a retirement and a good job in a second career is such that I don't really need to be so concerned , but it's a hard habit to break. For that reason I usually buy a name that's respected and well known , like Smith & Wesson !

 

[Goldstar225]

Chief, I get where you're coming from. I've no doubt that you obtain a high level of pleasure in owning and using the "real deal" as opposed to other quality firearms. That in and of itself is justification enough. As for me, my selection of a firearm is based upon function, quality, and value.

 

[LostintheOzone]

I'll shoot anything if it works. I like Colts however and have had many. When I find something that works I generally stick with it but I have no blind brand loyalty. So many companies have forsaken their commitments to quality, gone out of business, or been sold into the global corporate market that it makes no sense anymore to hold them up as something special. Colt is now owned by CZ. Marlin, Remington and Winchester are just trademark names being used by others, etc. Those companies, for all intents and purposes no longer exist, just the name.

I do however like some of the products that some of those old line American companies produced. I just purchased a Remington shotgun built about 30 years ago because I like the quality of that time period. I have a Remington shotgun that I purchased 53 years ago. I'm old enough to know about those but the average buyer these days wouldn't. Same would hold for Colt and a few others.

Just depends on the end use and product reliability for me.