With guns like the Dagger and BRG9, why pay more for FN, Glock, Walther, H&K, etc?

[stchman]

With the advent of the PSA Dagger and Buffalo Cartridge Works BRG9, why spend $500 - $650 on a more expensive gun.

I've shot enough polymer framed striker fired guns in my time to know that the differences between all the brands aren't that much.

I saw that an FN 509 is $625, a Glock 17 is $539, a Walther PDP is $649, a VP9 is $749.

Quite frankly some of these prices are absurd. I know that maybe the greatly overpriced poly strikers have a few more refinements, but their prices are ridiculous.

I own a VP9 and a Glock 19X, they are good guns, but I personally don't think they are a whole lot better than the Dagger and BRG9 Elite, certainly not that I paid almost 3X for them as the lesser expensive alternatives.

I can maybe agree with getting a Glock as the aftermarket is the best and you can pretty much get any part you need.

At least one thing, I can see little reason to buy a Hi-Point over Dagger or BRG9.

 

[unclenunzie]

For me it is track record and use by LEA. If a major LEA either issues or permits off-duty use of a particular pistol that means a lot to me. Some years ago NYPD authorized the SA XDS. That meant something extra to me beyond the gun itself meeting my needs at the time.

 

[dogtown tom]

With the advent of the PSA Dagger and Buffalo Cartridge Works BRG9, why spend $500 - $650 on a more expensive gun.

Reliability, reliability, reliability.
When a large law enforcement agency adopts a particular handgun, their officers will put more rounds through it than your typical consumer and expose any faults that handgun has.
Similiarly, both FBI and military have exhaustive testing procedures that expose reliability issues. Not all manufacturers choose to submit pistols for those tests.

When an LE agency adopts the Dagger it will be interesting to see how they come out.

I've shot enough polymer framed striker fired guns in my time to know that the differences between all the brands aren't that much.

Shooting doesn't tell you how often Brand X is returned to the manufacturer.

I saw that an FN 509 is $625, a Glock 17 is $539, a Walther PDP is $649, a VP9 is $749. Quite frankly some of these prices are absurd.

Hi Point owners believe anything over $200 is absurd.

A $539 Glock 17 has a well deserved reputation over the last four decades.
The Dagger was announced at SHOT in 2020, in production for less than two years.
The BRG9 has been out less than a year.

Get back to me in ten years.

 

[citizenconn]

I've shot enough polymer framed striker fired guns in my time to know that the differences between all the brands aren't that much.

That is why I stick to 1911s with a couple steel frame carry guns in the mix. The guns you mentioned don't offer any advantages I value and have several disadvantages I want to avoid.

Maybe you can get your "guns" in Repo Man land.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I liked my Chevette.
It was tough and reliable.
I didn't confuse it with my Corvette.

 

[stchman]

OK, maybe I should have talked about the vast majority of us who are not going to be going into combat.

If we get right down to it, 99.9% of people don't need a gun that passed a military trials that showed that their pistol didn't experience a stoppage for 5000+ rounds. Most people aren't going to shoot that many rounds in 10 years. Quite frankly, most people that think they need that level of reliability don't need it either as they aren't going to be going into combat anytime soon.

With all this being said, I am speaking of the average person that will buy a handgun.

I am speaking of folks that want an SD or HD gun and don't have the vast amounts of cash and aren't going to "vet" their gun by shooting 500+ rounds of whatever JHP ammo they are going to use.

 

[stchman]

A $539 Glock 17 has a well deserved reputation over the last four decades.
The Dagger was announced at SHOT in 2020, in production for less than two years.
The BRG9 has been out less than a year.

Get back to me in ten years.

The Dagger and BRG9 aren't new tech guns, the Dagger is essentially a cloned Gen 3 Glock(which is a proven gun) and the BRG9 is essentially a clone of a Springfield XD9(which is a proven gun). PSA has shown that they can make guns well and we all know the Turkish can make a good pistol(Canik, Tisas, Sarsilmaz, Girsan, etc.).

 

[.38 Special]

Technically, 99.9% of people don't need a gun.

Beyond that, there's a good case to be made for carrying the least expensive reliable gun you can get. I'm sure quite a few people do exactly that. Few of those are going to be gun people, though - and bear in mind what kind of a website you are posting on...

 

[stchman]

Technically, 99.9% of people don't need a gun.

Beyond that, there's a good case to be made for carrying the least expensive reliable gun you can get. I'm sure quite a few people do exactly that. Few of those are going to be gun people, though - and bear in mind what kind of a website you are posting on...

True, but I do think 99.9% of people who are of age and are law abiding citizens should own guns, practice with them, promote firearm safety, etc.

I am aware of what site I am posting on, I am posting on a pro-gun website, this discussion is about firearms. I own expensive guns and less expensive guns, I was just bringing up a discussion that I think the lesser expensive firearms have gotten to a point that the more expensive ones aren't truly needed. 10 years ago this was not the case. but now technology and manufacturing techniques have brought reliable firearms to folks that have less money. No longer do people with less money need to buy junky guns like Jimenez, Phoenix, Cobra, etc.

 

[Ks5shooter]

When something goes bump in the night I have my Glock that goes bang in the night.For range toy maybe a clone,but then why not just take my Glock.

 

[bubbaturbo]

I bought most of my revolvers and 1911s before striker fired plastic framed guns existed. Then I bought some Glocks, HKs, etc. before I ever heard of PSA and BRG. So for me it's a question of why would I buy a Dagger or BRG9 when I am satisfied with what I have. I won't buy a Ruger Wrangler either because the only thing about one that is interesting to me is the price. I know I won't be satisfied with one.

I don't know what I would do if I were buying my first gun all over again. I tend to agree that a lot of plastic guns are over priced. I'm guessing most people have no idea that you can get a Dagger online from PSA nor are they willing to attempt that so they buy from a gun store which probably means Glock, S&W, Ruger etc.

 

[unclenunzie]

I am speaking of folks that want an SD or HD gun and don't have the vast amounts of cash and aren't going to "vet" their gun by shooting 500+ rounds of whatever JHP ammo they are going to use.

I would argue this supports buying the more proven brands/models, and being satisfied with a less costly number of rounds through it. The end result will probably be similar total cost, but on balance a better result. That said, I have several inexpensive/cheap guns that have never failed in several hundred rounds, so if I were in immediate need and had low fund levels, I'd make do with something like what has been proposed. It all really comes down to what a person can afford, balanced against what they really want out of their handgun.

 

[Mk-211]

What people are missing here and it applies with EVERYTHING people want.

People are cheap! They live on a champaign lifestyle but want it at beer can price!

I could care less who makes something cheaper, I expect it to be at least safe to use. If " I " like it and want it, that's for me to decide. It's also "my" job to be 100% sure it's not a POS.

If you don't do your homework, doom on you!

 

[hso]

I am speaking of the average person that will buy a handgun.

You mean the average plinker that doesn't need anything more than a .22lr?

Or do you mean the average person buying a gun that they need to depend upon the one time they use it to protect their life or the lives of loved ones?

In the former I can certainly agree that you don't need the gun to have combat reliability to go BANG every time you pull the trigger. In that case the occasional "click" isn't a big deal.

OTOH, where your life or that of your loved ones are dependent on the gun firing every time I think investing in that reliability is pretty important since you can't afford it to go CLICK!.

 

[DeepSouth]

2 points to consider.

1: Most people tend to buy what’s available at the local brick and mortar.

2: Marketing is done because it works.

 

[bearcreek]

Someone who isn't going to put a gun "through it's paces" (most people) should get a weapon that's a proven model from a proven manufacturer, IMO. If a person is willing to put the time and money into testing something new, then by all means, go for it. This applies regardless of whether the new thing is a polymer knockoff or the latest, high dollar version of a 1911.

The price difference between a PSA Dagger and a Glock 19 is well under $200, once shipping and FFL fees are factored in. $150-ish is cheap insurance.

 

[Mike J]

I have a Dagger & like it. There is nothing wrong with it. In all honesty I waited until they had been out for about a year before I bought one. I remember my father's advice to never buy the first year of a new model. I just wait a little bit & let someone else do the beta testing. The Dagger is fine. Now I'm curious about the BRG-9. I'm not familiar with it.

You don't have to spend a fortune to get a reliable firearm. I have seen S&W M&P's for under $400. When I bought my M&P 2.0 40 Compact a couple of years ago I paid $350. If one is patient enough to watch & wait there are deals to be had. That is why I don't really care for the cheapest pistols. Usually for $100 more you can get something much nicer.

 

[Blkhrt13]

I will try a dagger in the future. But likely just a range, stash gun. I do have several Canik handguns that are cz clones and I don’t think they are any less reliable as they are a UN certified ISO manufacturer. I will prolly get a real cz one day as well. But for now the 150 dollar used clones are reliable and have eaten 500-600 rounds each since I bought them years ago with no wear.

 

[jmr40]

In today's world $600 isn't a lot of money. Factored for inflation paying $600 for a gun today is the same money as paying $175 in 1980. What would $175 buy you in 1980?

Those guns may well be just as good but until they are proven a $600-$700 pistol is cheap insurance. I may well end up with a Dagger just to see if I like it. But it will take a while to prove to me they are just as good.

 

[citizenconn]

What people are missing here and it applies with EVERYTHING people want.

People are cheap! They live on a champaign lifestyle but want it at beer can price!

The elasticity of firearms prices varies greatly, as with most other goods and services. Many consumers see paying more for a particular firearm (or car or boat or sunglasses or college degree or most any other consumer item) as a badge of status and would not be happy paying less for a "less prestigious" product even if in reality it was equally or more reliable than the higher priced item which they or the market perceives as conferring higher status to own.

Other consumers derive greater satisfaction from getting a "bargain" for a less expensive product that they perceive to be of equal or similar value to a more expensive alternative.

The rest of consumers are between the two extremes. The great strength of a market economy is that the invisible hand of the market identifies these disparate viewpoints and fills them such that I can pay $300 for a 1911 while the next guy pays $3000 for one and depending on our individual perceptions we both will be happy with our choices.

 

[unclenunzie]

In today's world $600 isn't a lot of money. Factored for inflation paying $600 for a gun today is the same money as paying $175 in 1980. What would $175 buy you in 1980?

Those guns may well be just as good but until they are proven a $600-$700 pistol is cheap insurance. I may well end up with a Dagger just to see if I like it. But it will take a while to prove to me they are just as good.

In my first job in 1980 my weekly paycheck after taxes was $99.75. I remember because I didn't crack $100. Call it about two weeks pay for a young person just starting out that's a lot of cash.

 

[Shanvanvocht]

Most people aren't going to shoot that many rounds in 10 years.

If I shoot ONE BOX of 9mm a week (not much for a range day) I'll put 5000 rounds through my carry gun in less than two years.

 

[dogtown tom]

The Dagger and BRG9 aren't new tech guns, the Dagger is essentially a cloned Gen 3 Glock(which is a proven gun) and the BRG9 is essentially a clone of a Springfield XD9(which is a proven gun). PSA has shown that they can make guns well and we all know the Turkish can make a good pistol(Canik, Tisas, Sarsilmaz, Girsan, etc.).

This ain't like prescription meds, brand name vs generic.
The term "essentially" is meaningless.

A genuine Glock beats a copy every time.

 

[WestKentucky]

Open market is a great thing. So is copyright law. Open market pushes similar goods to advance in some way so as to gain market share and be profitable. Copyright keeps that advancement as the sole property of its owner/originator. The thing is that advancement stoppages lets the knockoffs catch up. It’s time for some innovation from some of the big boys, otherwise the playing field is very even and cheap trumps most things in that situation. I’m perfectly fine paying $300 less for what is essentially the same. I also paid a grand less for my RIA 10mm than a Delta would cost… but I had a delta that was trash so my cheapo is actually better! Innovate and ignite the market because if your still, THEY will.

 

[dogtown tom]

OK, maybe I should have talked about the vast majority of us who are not going to be going into combat.

I differ. I want a gun I can rely on if it were to come to combat.

If we get right down to it, 99.9% of people don't need a gun that passed a military trials that showed that their pistol didn't experience a stoppage for 5000+ rounds. Most people aren't going to shoot that many rounds in 10 years. Quite frankly, most people that think they need that level of reliability don't need it either as they aren't going to be going into combat anytime soon.

Yeah, but when your life and the lives of your loved ones is at stake do you really want to explain what a great deal you got on some clone that had a great rebate?
Not me.

With all this being said, I am speaking of the average person that will buy a handgun.

So am I.

I am speaking of folks that want an SD or HD gun and don't have the vast amounts of cash and aren't going to "vet" their gun by shooting 500+ rounds of whatever JHP ammo they are going to use.

So am I.
I would rather have a $500 Glock and fifty rounds of ammo than some clone and 500 rounds of ammo.