On current firearms quality, and such...

[Slater]

I've been reading and posting on various firearms boards for a good many years now. Like most others, I've read the countless threads on issues/problems with various brands of pistols, rifles , and shotguns. A general feeling is that "they sure don't make 'em like they used to".

Do you think that the majority (I'm not sure how to put a percentage on it) of current firearms are problem-free and we mainly hear about the problem guns, or are today's guns really that troublesome?

[Firefly]

I think most people are full of crap.

Most weapons today work just fine provided they are quality. The only problem is that there is a glut of people pumping stuff out. This is sorta good, sorta bad.

The only thing that I concede "isn't made like it used to" is S&W Revolvers. Only because of the fruity lawyer locks. They can be removed, but it's unnecessary and stupid.

There are things simply not made anymore because they were expensive to make and have fallen into obsolescence. There simply aren't enough collectors to justify remaking them.

Most people now just screw with their stuff trying to "customize" it, then cry about it online.

I dare say things are pretty darn good now. We have the advent of lighter, more accurate, and more accessible rifles.

Nostalgia gets us all, but go back in time 16 years. What did you really have then and what do you have now?

The good ol days weren't always so good. It's easier to get in contact with customer service now and with the internet; there's a strong incentive to stand by your product.

Just my take.

[soulezoo]

I would say it is a give and take.
On one hand we have better technology and engineering and materials.
On the other hand we have "profits first " that leads to inferior craftsmanship and factory shortcuts. So to demonstrate, why is a pre '64 Winchester so valued? An 870 of 6 months ago or 20 years ago? How about a "pre" vs "after" Remington made Marlin lever action?
Back to "on the one hand" we have Glocks (have the same argument on 3rd vs 4th gen Glocks) HK and Sig pistols. But there's no Python to be had. The model 700 isn't what it once was... But not bad either.
Metallurgy should be a lot better... But I presume due to cost it often isn't. Or maybe it just doesn't need to be.
AR15's are certainly much better and widespread than 30 years ago. So are semi-automatic pistols. Revolvers, no.
Deep question

[lawusmc0844]

I would say with some companies QC is not as high as before, and Im sure the political climate over the last 7 years isn't much help either. However I do think we are mainly hearing about problem guns because most of the time people do not report anything if their gun is boringly reliable. I currently trust my life to any of my guns but I've had some issues before...

Out of the 3 Glock 19s I bought, I have 2 earlier Gen 3s that have worked flawlessly. My primary one with nearly 8000rds through it recently had the OEM extractor replaced with a Apex one because it started to erractically eject casings. The other is my dad's that is rarely ever shot but whenever I shoot it, it ejects like it should. The late Gen 3 has had a bad extractor from the start, quickly replaced with a Apex. Even with the improved extractor, it still will throw cases towards my head. My buddies primary Gen 4 G19 has the same problem but he doesn't care as long as it functions.

Springfield MC Operators are highly regarded production 1911s. I love mine but I did send it back a few months ago because POI was left (not a big deal but for the price POA/POI should be dead on) and after 2000+ rds cases were beginning to randomly get crushed and weakly ejected or stovepipe/FTE.

At a shotgun course I took a few years ago, Mossbergs including mine ran flawlessly. I remember the 870s had the most issues, including a NIB 870 Tactical that couldn't even chamber a round. I don't remember the exact cause but with all the things I hear about Freedom Group guns its not surprising.

Overall I believe firearms quality is GTG, some companies like BCM have great QC but with these recent PSA threads, there are companies that let lemons out of their factories.

[MegademiC]

For ars, there are more, much higher quality choices than before.

Pistols now are lighter, hold more, for less cost, and they still last a lifetime.

[turnburglar]

If you want to buy garbage, it's definitely out there. On the flip side I'd say we have better guns now than we have ever had. I also believe handguns are getting exceptionally well made and shoot well without costing more than a grand.

[Kain]

The "they don't make them like they used to" comment is valid in some areas and is a double edged sword. I have handled older guns from some companies that compared to their current production models are just amazingly more refined, smoother, and higher attention to detail. Older Smith revolvers are a good example here, as are some older shotguns, finishes seem higher quality, all metal parts, more hand fitting smoother actions. Stuff the newer models don't show, but then at the same time, the new guns are no more expensive and may be cheaper even when you stop and account for inflation. On the flip side, there are other older guns out there that the reason they don't make them anymore was because they were prone to breakage, had issues, would dump a mag, or tube, in the case of shotguns again, or were just ****ing bricks to carry around and the newer models have improved on the design, perhaps made it cheaper, but those cheaper parts, a la MIM usually, while they might not be forged steel, and thus is inferior to some people, the argument can be made that they are just as durable while being cheaper. Plastic as well can fall into this category.

As far as issues, while some of the old gun myths from yesteryear still crop up the truth is we are more connected now than we were ten years ago let alone 30. If someone has an issue they are more than capable to post their trash all over the web in ten different sites in the span of a lunch break with time left over for a hoho. The amount of bullshit posted online is also astronomical. I have seen guys outright lie about the reliability or lack there of a platform for no other reason than it was cool at the time and literally in less than an hour completely contradict themselves in another thread(IE, "I've run 250,000 rounds through my glock and never cleaned it, replaced, parts, and shoot junk ammo and it had never jammed ever because it is the greatest gun ever. two hours later, yeah my glock starts jamming after a few hundred rounds of brown bear.... Um wait a minute?). You have people who will compare two different rifles and stack it intentionally in favor of the one they choose to sell guns or just to justify their position or purchase or cater to their base. This is fact that I have seen on some sites and it has gotten me banned from some places as well for pointing it out.

The point I think I am trying to get out here is that you have to stop and learn to see through the bullshit and read between the lines. Also take into account that every company is capable of putting out a lemon, some companies can have this happen and instantly everyone and their dog will jump on it, other companies can do this and people may ignore it, make excuses, ect. I don't care if it happens because it will and it is why you vet a gun before using it for anything serious or betting the farm on it. What I do care about is how the issue is handled and whether it is a common occurrence. Also one should note parts will break after extended usage, and people trashing a gun for breaking something after thousands of rounds should be ignored because parts do wear and parts do need to be replaced. Following a regular maintenance and cleaning cycle is something that any serious shooter should do in my opinion, but that is for another thread.

[BoringGuy45]

The "they don't make 'em like they used to" is a favorite stance of much of the gun community. Other than shooting, there's nothing gun enthusiasts like better than to show off how set in their ways they are. I don't know why it's such a badge of honor to not try new things, but apparently it is. A lot of guys will pick an era in history, or a particular generation of a certain model, and they'll insist that nothing good has been made since. Also, there's an expectation of 100% perfection in every model of gun. We get tons of guys in the store who have a LONG list of manufacturers they will never use because they either experienced, or talked to someone who experienced, a malfunction of some kind in a gun from that brand. There are people who could shoot 20,000 rounds through a gun without a single malfunction, but then will quickly sell that gun because their buddy had a single stovepipe with the same model.

To be honest, I think the exact opposite is true. I think we have more good choices now than we ever had. 20 years ago, aside from Colt, the other "good" choices were Bushmaster and Olympic Arms. Look at what we have today. If you're looking for a duty-grade pistol, today we have Glocks, M&Ps, HKs, Sig P220 series and P320 series, and Walther PPQs to name a few.

Of course, all it takes is for one guy to have a problem with, say, his new Glock. He'll post it on a forum, and have a bunch of old school Glockaphiles declare that "This would NEVER have happened with a Gen 2 or Gen 3". Then someone would tell him to forget Glock and get a PPQ. Another guy would tell him the PPQ is a mall ninja gun, and if he really wanted a solid piece, he needed a VP9. And of course, someone would tell about the lemon VP9 they just recently got rid of, and insist he try an M&P, as their M&P NEVER failed them. And then another guy comes on and says screw the M&P, his can't make it through a full magazine without jamming. The general way of doing things is that we don't believe in patting on the back for a good job, but we're all for a kick in the ass for a bad job. That's why according to Yelp reviews, there's not a single restaurant in the U.S. that isn't a roach nest with medium-rare e.coli as it's signature dish. Same deal with guns: Guys who love their guns are usually too busy shooting them to write how much they love them. Guys who hate them are going to take the time and bash the object of their frustration.

[Tzook]

I think we live in the age of generally reliable weapons. There are a few exceptions to the rule of course, crappy guns and brands that experience a significant amount of failures. In all actuality, even something awful and shitty like a hi-point is "generally" reliable. Never would carry one, or even buy one for that matter, but I think if you're comparing what we have no to the guns of the past, even the lowly hi-point would be considered reliable.

[crusader377]

I think overall guns available today are high quality. In some areas the quality is exceptional. For example there are more good choices in the pistol market than there have ever been. For example 40 years ago, if you wanted a quality semiautomatic pistol you really only had a choice between a M1911 and a BHP. Even 20 years ago you could add the wonder 9s and the early Glocks to the list but you were still limited to probably 6-8 good choices. Now days, there are at least 20 models of guns in the mid-priced market ($400-$600) that are solid, reliable, defensive pistols. ARs are they same way.

[SteyrAUG]

As someone who has been buying guns for decades, crap guns have always existed.

As long as there are people who don't want to spend more than the price of a nice steak dinner on a firearm there will always be crap.

The only real issue is when quality firearms become junk. Once upon a time Kimbers were considered top of the line 1911s, everybody wanted one, so they started cutting corners. We saw the same thing happen with SIG. Even FN decided to make a "hobby gun" when it came to their AR rifles for the commercial market.

The other issue is mostly perception. When Glocks were first introduced in the mid 80s they were "plastic shit with a crap trigger." Everyone hated them, they were a joke. Then they were referenced in "Die Hard 2" as the Glock 7 in 1990 and suddenly it was the best damn gun ever made and you had to have one. Same gun, nothing really changed but perception.

[Averageman]

I think also what we are seeing is pressures within the market that haven't been there in the past.
Colt, Browning, Remington, Mossberg are all now competing for a market share when new up and comers are innovating new ideas and pushing quality products out there on the market.
Sadly I think some of the first things the old guard in the firearms industry have done to compete is to drop their guard at times on things like R&D and QC.

[SteyrAUG]

The "they don't make 'em like they used to" is a favorite stance of much of the gun community. Other than shooting, there's nothing gun enthusiasts like better than to show off how set in their ways they are. I don't know why it's such a badge of honor to not try new things, but apparently it is.

To be fair NOBODY will ever make an engineering wonder like the Broomhandle Mauser or Luger ever again, and if they did, it would probably cost $10,000 and nobody would buy it. Not saying this make them superior to modern guns, but such things will never be made again.

You will also never encounter something like the S&W blue finish found on P&R revolvers. Probably not cost effective, might be a lost art. I'm not sure anyone could even reproduce the old Colt blue finish. Again, not saying it makes a gun superior to modern guns, but I understand why people love them.

[Blstr88]

For every person who goes online complaining about a gun malfunctioning there are 100 other owners of that particular firearm shooting away without issue.

People flock to the internet/forums when they're looking for a solution to an issue...not to just make a post that their gun is working perfectly. Thats why it seems theres so many more issues.

[l8apex]

I think people just like to bitch about things in general, the Internet made it easier to spread information. Both true and untrue - bad news always travels fast.

Ever seen someone at the range or during training bitch about their equipment but can't clear a malf to save their life. Then there are those that are the shooters that will fix the malf and work through the drill and finish.

Some are born to bitch, some are born to be work horses and power through issues.

We currently have the best choices in the history of firearms.

[Moose-Knuckle]

I would say it is a give and take.
On one hand we have better technology and engineering and materials.
On the other hand we have "profits first " that leads to inferior craftsmanship and factory shortcuts. So to demonstrate, why is a pre '64 Winchester so valued? An 870 of 6 months ago or 20 years ago? How about a "pre" vs "after" Remington made Marlin lever action?
Back to "on the one hand" we have Glocks (have the same argument on 3rd vs 4th gen Glocks) HK and Sig pistols. But there's no Python to be had. Ten model 700 isn't what it once was... But not bad either.
Metallurgy should be a lot better... But I presume due to cost it often isn't. Or maybe it just doesn't need to be.
AR15's are certainly much better and widespread than 30 years ago. So are semi-automatic pistols. Revolvers, no.
Deep question

Mirrors my thoughts and I was going to use Remington 870s and Marlin 336s as an example of this along with Springfield Armory's M1As.

[brown3345]

I recently had to return a new in box Rem 700 300 win mag to Remington because it wouldn't shoot under 6 inches at 100 yds (they had to install another barrel). I have a Mossberg 930 that will not feed reliably with anything but Winchester 3" foster slugs. A Browning Buckmark URX with FTF issues. And a single shot target 22lr pistol that came with a bad trigger. Never in my life have I ever had so many duds in the gun safe. Yes, I think quality has taken a drastic slide in recent years.

[MAUSER202]

To be fair NOBODY will ever make an engineering wonder like the Broomhandle Mauser or Luger ever again, and if they did, it would probably cost $10,000 and nobody would buy it. Not saying this make them superior to modern guns, but such things will never be made again.

You will also never encounter something like the S&W blue finish found on P&R revolvers. Probably not cost effective, might be a lost art. I'm not sure anyone could even reproduce the old Colt blue finish. Again, not saying it makes a gun superior to modern guns, but I understand why people love them.

I think you summed it up well. My new Browning shot gun shoots well and is very reliable. But comparing it to my 1958 Belgium made auto 5 , the contrast in fit, finish and overall look of craftsmanship is night and day. There is a certain nostalgia with old firearms and the fit, and finish of them that modern weapons, no matter how reliable and accurate they are, will never equal. At least not at average consumer prices.

[brickboy240]

People love to complain about newer 1911s and all but anyone remember back when you really had two choices for a 1911?

You either bought a new Colt Govt Model and sent it straight to the smith for polishing/throating or you rolled the dice on an Auto Ordinance or LLama monstrosity.

Now you can buy a fairly cheap Philippine, Turkish or Brazilian made 1911 and chances are, it WILL feed some or all 45ACP rounds right out of the damn box.

Yeah those guns are not as well finished and they might have a cast frame or loads of MIM parts and maybe a plastic trigger but most fly 100% right out of the box. Back in the day....if you got a Colt that ate everything right out of the box...that was some sort of miracle! LOL

[ScottsBad]

I think the internet forums have made more information, good or bad, available.

[26 Inf]

I think you summed it up well. My new Browning shot gun shoots well and is very reliable. But comparing it to my 1958 Belgium made auto 5 , the contrast in fit, finish and overall look of craftsmanship is night and day. There is a certain nostalgia with old firearms and the fit, and finish of them that modern weapons, no matter how reliable and accurate they are, will never equal. At least not at average consumer prices.

It seems what many of us are yearning for are the days of manufacturing where gun parts could be manufactured to close tolerance, but not close enough to just assemble without hand fitting. The hand fitting required a craftsman of sorts, who could do their part in the assembly of the firearm, whether it be adjusting the hand on a revolver or ensuring proper fit of the side plate. Say what you want about unions, but the union workers at Colt, S&W and Remington turned out some beautifully functioning weapons.

I have a Belgium Browning Sweet Sixteen that my mother gave my dad on their sixteenth anniversary, the fit and finish on it is beyond compare to a modern Browning. It is a piece of art, I doubt I'll ever shoot it again.

In today's world, parts are made to better tolerances, less hand fitting is required and workers are either paid a straight hourly wage or are paid by the piece.

How many of you think anything on the AR's you buy is hand fitted? And most work just fine, thank you CNC and MIM.