How important is easy maintance to your gun selection

I’ve never considered disassembly/cleaning when deciding on buying a gun. I’m not the most mechanically inclined but I’m good enough to change my cars oil or build an AR15, so gun cleaning is pretty simple.

Not a factor

Never thought about it.

Doesn't matter to me.

I've never considered it. I like what I like and buy accordingly. But, I consider myself mechanically inclined and like to tinker, so if something does break I consider it a challenge rather than a problem.

Mac

Important. Especially when it comes to things that can be field stripped without tools vs things that require tools to field strip.

After hearing/reading so many horror stories about the early Ruger MK series I hesitate to buy anything earlier than my MK IV. I saw several at my FFLs a couple years ago and talked myself out of buying one. Maybe if the price wasn't as high as a new MK IV I'd take a chance and hopefully learn a thing or two.

Depends.
If it's something bought purely for the cool factor, to take to the range and show off, it doesn't matter much.
If it's something I'm going to carry, the thing I'm going to grab if I have to get out of Dodge, or I may in the future take on a trip if dad ever gets me out hunting, it needs to be easy.
I'm in Florida. We have four things in abundance: rain, salt, mud, and sand. There's a big chance things would need cleaned on the field.

It matters to me and Glock has spoiled me. Maybe I’ve cleaned, detailed and maintained a few thousand too many things in my life. Whatever I have, I want it to be designed to operate, not to be high maintenance.

Six of one, a half-dozen of the other.
Not a huge fan of the Ruger Mk series of 22lr pistols, but own a Nylon 66, which is arguably worse.
But, I was tiough enough to own a CZ52, and currently own a Colt 1903 which is either an easy or a awful pistol to take apart, depending upon who you ask.

Don't bother me. As far as the older Ruger MK'S. I don't take mine down all the way.

I have a Mark II. The horror stories are greatly exaggerated.

It does not enter into my buying decisions.

It’s not a huge factor for me. But simple disassembly is quite nice!

If that was my only concern, I would never have bought the Stoeger Luger (22LR). It is a PITA to disassemble and reassemble.

Never paid much attention to it as a purchasing decision. I never found any gun particularly difficult to break down if you just take the time to follow instructions. Never did understand what the big deal was about Ruger MK's. If you just paid attention to what you were doing it isn't hard. Yeah, if some takedowns were more convenient it would be nice. But I actually enjoy sitting in my man cave and relaxing with a good takedown and cleaning. Love the smell of Hoppe's #9.

For guns I shoot every week ,simple works.For cool factor and others ,no matter.

Slight concern with me only in select cases. I will never buy a revolver again in which I am not satisfied with the gas ring design. I understand the need for cleaning, but I shouldn’t have to disassemble a double action revolver to the point of removing the cylinder from the yoke every single time I shoot to avoid binding.

It might concern me if it was another Ruger MK 1-3 situation I really don't think about that factor. Generally easy of maintenance seems to be one of the features of most modern firearms. At least those that I considered buying.

It depends on the purpose of the firearm and just how easy it is or isn't. I'm in the camp that keeps guns thoroughly clean and will clean them after every session they are fired. If I know I will fire it again the next day, it might just involve swabbing the barrel and wiping it down, but otherwise, it gets field-stripped and cleaned throughout.

For me, a gun like an AR-15 is 'hard' to clean, compared to a Mauser-style bolt-action rifle. It's not really hard, but suppose I fired two shots. It would be a pain to clean it afterward for just two shots -- the Mauser would be so much easier. Similarly, a lever-action or another semi-automatic action like an M1A or Mini-14 is just harder than bolt gun or single-shot. They're not really hard -- there must be some guns that are truly a difficult puzzle, but they must be pretty obscure -- so if I got to use it enough before I cleaned it, I wouldn't be bothered by a few more disassembly steps.

For an EDC piece, ease of cleaning would be way down the list of priorities. I can see the value to law-enforcement, some of whom neglect everything to do with their firearms. I'm not saying this is characteristic of law enforcement people -- there are all kinds. I think it is fair to say that the Glock design reduces administrative burden compared to something like a S&W 4006 which itself probably demanded less attention than a blued-steel 1911. For me personally, none of this is a concern. I don't have any problem maintaining one gun, a full-size revolver.

No, not really.

Although I do appreciate pistols such as Beretta 92 series and SIG P series with lightning fast field-stripping, no tools required, and only five parts to clean.

I don't factor ease of cleaning in when purchasing a firearm, but admittedly it does come into play when selecting which ones go to the range. This one is great and fun, but a hassle to clean.

A couple extra seconds/mins sways your decisions that much? Crazy...

Zero thoughts given on my end.