Gun heresies I need to unload ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
WVGunman said:
1. "sells well" and "free" (and even "market") are terms with no universal definition, making this a matter of semantics.
...
3. Then why do Colt 1911A1s still sell, when one can buy a Glock? People are not actually rational actors, or marketing would have no purpose. We buy for a lot of reasons, not just for quality. Making an effective weapon cheaply is not arcane knowledge, and neither is padding a profit margin by convincing suckers they're getting a deal.
Click to expand...
“Sells well in the free market” means profitable for manufacturers and distributors without any subsidies.
Why wouldn’t you have both 1911s and Glocks?
 
Incorrect generalizations that a bigger gun will get left at home or is inexplicably less accurate.
Ex: A 380 that will get carried is better than a 45 left in the glovebox, or at home.
Ex: A hit with a 380 is better than a miss with a 45 (Bigger caliber is always less accurate in this cliche)

Criminals / psychos are assumed immobile.
Ex: When I go to indian country I carry a spare mag.

Criminals / psychos are assumed nocturnal.
Ex: Carrying bigger/more if out late.
 
Okay, I'm in.

#2: My Ruger Mark III bull target bull barrel (or Mark IV Hunter for that matter) are loads more accurate in my hands than my Ruger SR22. No comparison. The SR22 is a dependable plinker with almost all ammo, and I love the grip, but that's all it is.

#4: Given that I can't find a new revolver for $350 that is anything other than Charter Arms or Heritage, I'm not surprised. But what did those Sidekicks cost new? Cause I'd put a new S&W 63 or a used 34 up against them any time.
 
My only Ruger handgun (ever) is the new Mark IV Standard, short barrel version, bought last December in a retail store.

Not only is it 99-100% reliable with any type of ammo (Golden Bullet, Federal 'blue box', Win. etc), it even operates with most subsonic rds. I've tried.
These are just my experiences, and contrary to whatever "hearsay" many people mindlessly repeat (like true AK accuracy...), in my opinion, not over-priced.
 
Bfh_auto said:
Mine is the 3006 has too much recoil for the performance. 308 nips at it's heels with less recoil. If you need more than 308, a 300wm is great
Click to expand...
  1. "Performance" at what task? Hunting, MAYBE. But I don't hunt. I can shoot my .30-06 Savage 112BVSS with 200gr. Sierra Matchkings over 4350 and not blow cases or beat my gun to death.
  2. 300 Winmag eats barrels. What's the barrel life compared to a .30-06 or .30-06 improved?
 
Ok I'll bite.
#1: Rugers are pretty inexpensive for what they are. You can spend a lot more for less.
#2: If your MKIII didn't shoot much better than an SR22 (unless it was mounted in a vise) something was wrong with the gun or the shooter.
#3: $400 is dirt cheap in the shotgun world, but I agree that the 870 Express is overpriced for the lack of quality compared to the cheapest offerings from Mossberg or Winchester. The 870 Wingmaster is still a nice gun, but pushing $800 new.
#4 & 5: I agree 100%
#6: Chevy vs Ford- whatever floats your boat.
#7: see #6
#8&9: absolutely
 
WVGunman said:
[*]People debate "one shot stops" all the time but gloss over the obvious: If your first shot doesn't stop a gremlin shoot him again.
Click to expand...

I read a comment from one of the professional Africa hunting guides once, that Europeans would keep pumping bullets into the animal until it went down, while an American would typically take one shot, then stop and admire his work. Which was why there were always armed bearers to take the follow-up shots to take down an angry animal if necessary.
 
Love the point about the old H&R 22 revolvers. Those things are sweet.

My personal unpopular opinions:

-The Hi Point is an absolutely fine pistol for what you pay for it.
-The Heritage Rough Rider, kind of the Hi-Point of revolvers, is actually a great pistol for what you pay as well. Definitely chintzier than the H&Rs, but they're nice shooters.
-Wolf ammo is perfect for most offhand-blasting applications.
-You could switch out the average range commando's $1000 name brand AR-15 with a $400 DPMS and he'd never see a difference.
-Following "mil spec" is stupid. You are not the military. You have different needs than the military.
-People confuse their love of 1911s being great range guns with them being great military/defensive handguns.
-AKs are pretty much trash, and SKSs are the guns that everyone thinks the AK is.
-Caliber wars are pointless, especially for hunting. If you're trying to prove that X pet cat cartridge is better than Y because it has 2" less drop at 500 yards, you've only proved why the difference between them is basically irrelevant.
-Most people over-clean their guns. I get it, it's a often habit drilled into them by the military or their dad, it's an excuse to fondle their guns more, but it's not really necessary. Even something like a Hi-Point will run just fine dirty for several hundred rounds.
-People often get fixated on reliability with guns for no real reason. If I'm just out plinking with a pistol and my gun jams - guess what, I just take 2 seconds to pull the slide back and clear it, then go again. No biggie. To be fair, for some applications it can literally be life and death, but overall, something like demanding CRF feeding for a hunting rifle that will sit in a blind for a few hours one day per year is missing the point. It's usually more tied up in a sense of "rugged masculinity" with the gun as some "ol' reliable" totem than it is in any actual need.
 
Last edited:
Ok
1 I'm a capitalist, stuff is worth what people are willing to pay. 9mm PC meh I'd rather have a AR.
2. Ok but they screwed up the safety on the SR22, down to fire is the only correct MOA.
3. All new pump shotguns suck, give me a old pawn shop store brand QC was a real thing in the mid 1900s.
4. I'd like to find a nice 999.
5. Yup the Hi Points are OK but have gotten over priced see your #1 plastic, blowback, stampped steel and a zamek bolt. Again I'll take an AR.
6. Bla bla bla ad nauseum
7 & 8 158gr +p LSWCHP > 32 mag and usually cheaper.
9. People gloss over alot Evan Marshal the guy that literally wrote the book on one shot stops says exactly that in the book shoot to stop the threat.
 
WVGunman said:
  • Many Ruger products are overpriced whatever their quality. $450 for the blowback-with-a-plastic-stock 9mm PC carbine? It's a 10/22 with a bigger bolt, and the 10/22 sells for less than $300.
Click to expand...
The only cheaper 9mm Carbines I've seen are Hi Point and Kel Tec, and the Ruger is a huge step up in quality according to every review I've read. So, I fail to see how it's overpriced. At least, not if you prefer apples to apples comparisons.
  • My Ruger Mark III with a bull barrel was only slightly more accurate than my Ruger SR-22. I say "was" because once I realized this I sold the Mark III.
Click to expand...
Not generally true. You may have gotten a lemon. You may have an issue with the Mark III grip angle vs. the SR-22 grip angle. But the Mark series is more accurate than the SR-22.
  • Those old .22 revolvers that Harrington & Richardson made before they went belly-up in the 1980s (The model 922, the Sidekick/929, etc.) are better values now than any new revolvers you can get for less than $350.
Click to expand...
I'd tend to agree. I keep hearing good things about the Heritage Rough Riders, and am tempted to get one since they're so cheap, though I'm a little skeptical.
  • Given that a .45 ACP cartridge weighs literally twice what a typical 9mm round weighs and is much bigger, cutting your ammo capacity in order to carry a .45 makes no sense. The same logic applies here that led the U.S. military to get rid of 7.62 caliber for 5.56: Two smaller/lighter bullets are ultimately more effective than a single big one.
Click to expand...
Capacity matters. But you can get a full sized .45 that's only a couple of rounds lower capacity than the same size 9mm, so .45 is still an option. I've gone to 9mm strictly for ammo costs, but I do like .45. I wasn't aware that the military dumped the 7.62. I always liked the M-60, and I don't think a SAW could really adequately replace them. Then again, I guess that depends on what else is available. Maybe some M-60 roles are being filled by other weapons?
  • A six-shot .32 Magnum snubbie revolver is a better choice than a 5-shot .38 Special.
Click to expand...
Reasonable decision. The .38 is more powerful, but the .32 is softer shooting and has one more shot. I'd go .38 (or .357), but don't think this is an unreasonable position.
  • For what +P ammunition costs, most people would be better served spending the extra on regular ammo and practicing their defensive shooting. No one actually NEEDS +P ammo.
Click to expand...
I think most people buy practice ammo and buy defensive ammo in lesser quantities, so I'm not sure what the issue is. It's not like most people spend that much on their defensive ammo over the lifetime of the gun.
  • People debate "one shot stops" all the time but gloss over the obvious: If your first shot doesn't stop a gremlin shoot him again.
Click to expand...

I'm going to offer my own unpopular opinion: If you have to call someone a "gremlin" or "goblin" to be able to shoot them, then maybe you're too immature to own a firearm. If you can't face up to the fact that you may have to shoot another person, then you probably will have problems dealing with the mental aftermath of a defensive shooting. As far as the one stop shot vs. shoot until the threat stop thing goes: The two aren't mutually exclusive. One is a (not especially useful) measure of ammo effectiveness, the other a tactical consideration.
 
As someone who has been outshot by a HiPoint against my much more expensive pistol, and someone who outshot a $1,400 Cooper with my T/C venture, I agree with CapnMac. And yes, we both switched Gus and the results were still the same.

Why anyone would buy a new pistol in 38 vs a 357 is beyond me. Unless you just HAVE to have a pink lady smith that is only available in 38.

New pumps are certainly not what they once were. And why anyone would buy a new Wingmaster is silly. Used ones go for $250-$400. And they’re slicker than Clark Griswalds snow sled.

If you bought a 45 (‘cause it’s a 45) and can’t shoot it well, then sell it and buy something that fits you and you can control. Your life SHOULD be more important than your pride.
 
Thank you sir. I now see the light and shall divest myself of all that nasty +P and +P+ ammo that I don't "Need". The Camp Carbine too. Perhaps I can find someone to trade me a High Point for it:rofl:
 
#7 is kind of interesting in that I think +P ammo isn't really meaningful at this point. Usually it's a smidgen extra pressure to get another 50 fps out of a round. I think manufacturers do that to still stay well within pressure safety specs for caliber, but the direct tradeoff is that you also don't really get much more power, however you measure that.
 
BLB68 said:
The only cheaper 9mm Carbines I've seen are Hi Point and Kel Tec, and the Ruger is a huge step up in quality according to every review I've read. So, I fail to see how it's overpriced. At least, not if you prefer apples to apples comparisons.
Click to expand...
I've owned both a Hi-Point and a Kel-Tec, though not a Ruger. Given that all three are blowback actions with plastic furniture, I'd love to hear these reviewers explain just what is higher quality on the Ruger. So it can take Glock mags; so can the Kel-Tec. So it has a threaded barrel; so does the Kel-Tec. So it takes down ... the Kel-Tac folds in HALF. The Hi-Point has none of this but is $200 less than the Ruger, $100 less than the Kel-Tec and as accurate as either one. So what does the Ruger have? I'd say either its fancier plastic or just a bunch of well-trained customers who assume anything that says "Ruger" on it is worth the asking price. Like I said in the beginning: If a blowback, wood-stocked 10/22 can sell for less than $300, why should the blowback, plastic-stocked PC carbine cost $450?
 
WVGunman said:
I've owned both a Hi-Point and a Kel-Tec, though not a Ruger. Given that all three are blowback actions with plastic furniture, I'd love to hear these reviewers explain just what is higher quality on the Ruger. So it can take Glock mags; so can the Kel-Tec. So it has a threaded barrel; so does the Kel-Tec. So it takes down ... the Kel-Tac folds in HALF. The Hi-Point has none of this but is $200 less than the Ruger, $100 less than the Kel-Tec and as accurate as either one. So what does the Ruger have? I'd say either its fancier plastic or just a bunch of well-trained customers who assume anything that says "Ruger" on it is worth the asking price. Like I said in the beginning: If a blowback, wood-stocked 10/22 can sell for less than $300, why should the blowback, plastic-stocked PC carbine cost $450?
Click to expand...

There's a bit more going on in the 9mm than the 10/22.

I mean if a Chevelle...
 
WVGunman said:
I've owned both a Hi-Point and a Kel-Tec, though not a Ruger. Given that all three are blowback actions with plastic furniture, I'd love to hear these reviewers explain just what is higher quality on the Ruger. So it can take Glock mags; so can the Kel-Tec. So it has a threaded barrel; so does the Kel-Tec. So it takes down ... the Kel-Tac folds in HALF. The Hi-Point has none of this but is $200 less than the Ruger, $100 less than the Kel-Tec and as accurate as either one. So what does the Ruger have? I'd say either its fancier plastic or just a bunch of well-trained customers who assume anything that says "Ruger" on it is worth the asking price. Like I said in the beginning: If a blowback, wood-stocked 10/22 can sell for less than $300, why should the blowback, plastic-stocked PC carbine cost $450?
Click to expand...


Plastic 9mm., or wood .22, Ruger charges what the market will bear. It's economics 101.
 
WVGunman said:
I've owned both a Hi-Point and a Kel-Tec, though not a Ruger. Given that all three are blowback actions with plastic furniture, I'd love to hear these reviewers explain just what is higher quality on the Ruger. So it can take Glock mags; so can the Kel-Tec. So it has a threaded barrel; so does the Kel-Tec. So it takes down ... the Kel-Tac folds in HALF. The Hi-Point has none of this but is $200 less than the Ruger, $100 less than the Kel-Tec and as accurate as either one. So what does the Ruger have? I'd say either its fancier plastic or just a bunch of well-trained customers who assume anything that says "Ruger" on it is worth the asking price. Like I said in the beginning: If a blowback, wood-stocked 10/22 can sell for less than $300, why should the blowback, plastic-stocked PC carbine cost $450?
Click to expand...

BTW, PSA had the Ruger PCC for $399.99 yesterday.
 
CDW4ME said:
Incorrect generalizations that a bigger gun will get left at home or is inexplicably less accurate.
Ex: A 380 that will get carried is better than a 45 left in the glovebox, or at home.
Ex: A hit with a 380 is better than a miss with a 45 (Bigger caliber is always less accurate in this cliche)

..............
Click to expand...

No, the the weapon you have *With You At The Time* beats the weapon you own but don't have with you.
 
paulsj said:
He does not understand that wonderful utopian world where we must love everyone also includes the armed forces. Some new recruits would not be able to handle .45ACP or .308. The same holds for .40 S&W and law enforcement. It too powerful.
Click to expand...
The Armed Forces are not germane to discussions of individual choices.
Many in the decision making levels of the Armed Forces make decisions based on prior decisions. For instance, the Armed Forces - as a group - decided some time after the Second World War that marksmanship was simply too difficult to teach en masse while keeping training costs at a minimum. Consequently, 'firepower' has replaced marksmanship. The same concept applies to law enforcement agencies in greater or lesser degree.

Of course, the agencies involved write up large reports and policy papers with much official jargon to justify such decisions.

Then individuals observe this activity and assume the real reasons for making such decisions are what the agency - Armed Force - claims and follows suit.

"Decision makers" are NOT immune from believing myths and inflated claims.
 
Any deep belief that included the phase "...doesn't need..." is like suspect. "Need" is a very subjective concept.

There are many deeply cherished myths in the world. Many apply to firearms. Read and study. Talk to those who own firearms different than one's own. I'm not rich enough to get one of everything and thoroughly test it. I rather think I'm not alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Oregon shooters I need directions to the dump
Replies
4
Views
695
Double Maduro
D
murf
  • Locked
remington new golden 22lr
Replies
23
Views
1K
Owen Sparks
O
D
  • Locked
Need help IDing Harrington & Richardson Revolver
Replies
9
Views
958
BluesBear
B
G
  • Locked
What should I buy next?
Replies
19
Views
862
TheoShooter
T
M
  • Locked
South Berwick Rod and Gun (SBRGA) range report 1/10/10
Replies
2
Views
639
MacTech
M
Back
Top