Noticed less Hipoint hate/bashing

[Ash]

918v,

I own, collect, and shoot store-brand rifles - particularly Western Field and Revelation rifles. IN the 1960's and early 1970's, the basic rifle still had a polished blue, iron sights, and a walnut stock (even if it had pressed-checkering).

Those rifles today would be considered middle-grade rifles and would be more than $800 each. A Remington 710, had it appeared at the same time made by Remington, would have been snubbed in a way that made a Post 1964 Winchester seem well-loved.

We have greatly accepted cheapened equipment. Some have even swallowed the cheapness as improvements.

 

[MCgunner]

Polished blue and wood have weaknesses. I like my stainless/polymer Remington M7 .308, can be rained, snowed, sleeted upon and sheds it like neoprene. Stock can't warp with dryness or wetness, a good thing for a gun that's sighted in in Corpus Christi and used for hunting in New Mexico. Yes, in many ways, stainless/polymer IS an improvement. I had a wood stock on my 10/22 and bought a Hogue overmolded stock for it, big improvement IMHO. Ditto for the polymer I put on my Savage 110 to replace the birch. the fact that it was free floated also helps shave a half inch off the groups. I prefer the full dipped camo/plastic stock finish on my Mossberg 500 waterfowler to the Revelation 310 I had, too. It's much more rugged in salt marsh conditions. Traditional ain't always better, even walnut, not if you actually USE the firearm.

But, the topic is high point. ...oh, sorry....

 

[918v]

You missed the point. It's not the choice of materials. It's the choice of quality of the materials. There is a difference between a Model 7 synthetic and a 710. There is a difference between HiPoint's potmetal construction and a quality manufacturer's choice of aluminum/steel/polymer. This isn't about traditional. It's about cheap crap.

 

[1911Tuner]

No argument that Hi-Point pistols are substandard when compared to higher quality and higher priced guns. They're not very impressive. They are, however...functional for the most part, and as long as a given pistol will fire 10 times in a row without stopping...it'll probably save your life in all but the most grave of circumstances.

That's the whole point, after all. No? To market a pistol that nearly everybody can afford so that even those lacking the wherewithal to buy a Les Baer Custom or Wilson Combat CQB can have an effective means to defend themselves.

Many years ago, Rohm/RG revolvers sold for about 15 bucks. Near the end of their run, they were selling for 50...but in the beginning, they were much cheaper. They were also absolutely the worst junk that had ever been perpetrated on the American market. Most RGs would start to give problems in less than a hundred rounds.

But...

They weren't meant to be fired a hundred rounds. They were intended to be there for emergencies. Cheap life insurance that would fill a niche for those less fortunate. If a given RG .38 would fire 5 times...it could well mean the difference between raped and unsullied....alive or dead.

Today, the Hi-Point fills the same niche.

 

[Ash]

"Traditional ain't always better, even walnut, not if you actually USE the firearm."

Hey, I actually USE my firearms.

Mine have been used for decades.

Matte black, no irons, plastic - er - synthetic stocks, these things may be your cup of tea. Fine by me. I like my walnut, polished blue, iron sights. I use them, and have done so for a very long time.

Odd, isn't it, that good double shotguns are still largely without synthetic furniture and matte finishes - including those that actually get used.

Like what you will. But your rifle would have been rejected out-of-hand three decades ago by men who used their firearms. The 710 would have been ignored completely. Are you fine with a lower-level of manufacture as long as accuracy remains? Okay, fine by me. There's plenty of room for that. Accuracy trumps all things, and for many that is all that is required. They are easily satisfied with, indeed prefer, features that lower costs. It does not change the fact that standards of manufacturing have gone way down.

By the way, my rifles remain accurate regardless the weather. They are properly bedded, have good glass (I like the Nikon Monarch scopes personally), have properly-adjusted triggers, good mounts and rings (mine sport old Redfield twist-on mounts with steel rings that have been properly lapped). They are built to a higher standard than modern equivalents. And, they really get used.