Why dont people like trading in their guns every few years?

[P-990]

Add another voice to the "Why trade a 2-3 year old gun?" chorus. The 15 year old Gen3 Glock 17 I sold to a friend still worked just like the brand new Gen 4 Glock 19 I replaced it with. My 33-year old S&W K and L frame revolvers (they're older than me... ) work exactly like my friend's brand new 617. Come to think of it, my couple year old Colt 6920 carbine operates EXACTLY like the '70s vintage Colt SP-1 my dad had when I was a teenager.

There just haven't been any significant leaps in firearms technology in the last 4-5 decades. We've changed the way they look, but a modern flat-top M4gery is functionally identical to an early Armalite AR-15. If you can take one apart, you'll be right at home working on the other. Same with shooting and using them.

Which makes me cringe and laugh when I see the "gun of the month" on the latest installment of a print gun magazine these days. Advertising and sales demand that the newest SIG, H&K, Glock, Ruger or whatever must be pronounced with superlatives as "the next revolution". Instead what you're getting is a new paint job and a fancy badge put on whatever proven platform the manufacturer uses. OK, the Ruger American Pistol was a new model, but it's still just a polymer framed 9mm or .45 ACP pistol, whose purpose it to launch little bits of metal to put holes in things. In practical terms it doesn't do anything a WWI P-08 Luger or 1911 doesn't do.

As for cars, technology and time DO in fact march on. My last car was a 10-year old Toyota Corolla I bought brand new in 2006. My new car is a 2016 Subaru Impreza. The new car has backup camera, 4-wheel disc brakes (with ABS), more airbags than a Congressional sub-committee, Bluetooth interface (this is probably my favorite feature), AWD with traction control and still gets 30+ mpg. It is a significant improvement to MY driving experience and I plan to keep this car at least 10-years/150k miles like I did the last one. Yes, I'm one of those "fools" who will buy a brand new car off the lot while completely ignoring the depreciation hit, because I'm planning to stick with it until the sales guys don't think I have money or credit based on what I drove up in.

[natman]

Gun technology changes extremely slowly. My favorite hunting rifle is a JC Higgins Model 50, sold by Sears for $100 in 1950. It uses an FN Mauser action and a High Standard chrome lined barrel. I would have to pay over $1000 to buy a new gun anywhere near as good and would have to shop hard to find one. Even though it's old enough to qualify for Medicare, it's still nowhere near worn out and will still be quite usable in another 66 years.

So why trade it in?

[Mainah]

With the exception of a mid-life crisis truck purchase that Toyota bailed me out of with the frame recall I always pay cash for reliable vehicles with around 100k miles. Those vehicles have depreciated way faster than the used guns that I've purchased.

[desibaba]

What I would love to see in terms of gun development. Sure a lot of people will say it CANT be done but historically that has been proven wrong time and time again with a lot of things.

1. Guns with no/low recoil regardless of caliber.
2. Factory silent guns without a suppressor
3. Ammo that can instantly stop an attacker by releasing a chemical in their body that will make them stop (somewhat like a Tazer) regardless of where the projectile hits.
4. Gun that dont need cleaning ever or years before you have to clean them.

Sure. It sounds like science fiction right now but I do think with the right research and development weapons like that can be a reality.

[Gunplummer]

The part about nostalgia most people forget is inflation. I had a bunch of 55'-57' Chevys. What would it cost to manufacture (An exact replica) one today? I think when a company does bring back a line of guns, they are not nearly as inflated as an auto would be, yet few people buy them. Guns can be manufactured way better than 60-100 years ago, but people will not pay the price. I certainly would not run out and buy a brand new 57' Chevy. I remember the wipers stopping when going up a hill, no heat in the back until you were a block from home, installing a hand choke, tube tires......

[dakota.potts]

Some people do, but you're not likely to find them on this forum unless they're more enticed by the trading and acquisition of firearms than the actual ownership and use (would be an oddity here). You will get biased answers about it on a firearms forum where people are inherently sentimental. If you go to a guitar forum and ask why people trade in guitars all the time, you will probably get similar answers to what you get here.

There are new guns I want. There are guns I have that I haven't shot in a year that I could likely sell to buy the new guns. I like the guns I have regardless of not shooting them often. They are not likely to wear out, not likely to devalue (and could significantly increase in value in the right political climate), and there is sentiment attached to them.

I personally do know people who trade guns all the time. They just like shooting different guns and trade them often. Personally, I would want my carry gun and hunting rifle to stay pretty consistent, as well as any specialty guns (competition rifles etc.) whereas I could see guns being changed out often if they are being kept in a tackle box when fishing or bought as investments or to beat up for a hunting season and then pawn for Christmas money at the end of the yar.

[44 AMP]

I personally do know people who trade guns all the time. They just like shooting different guns and trade them often.

I know people like that, I've been people like that. If you want to see real gun trading going on, its done between the vendors who have tables at guns shows, BEFORE the show opens. (and not just the FFL dealers)

We don't trade guns in at gunshops (autodealers), we trade them between each other, often with little or no cash involved.

And no, we don't trade our good carry gun or favorite hunting rifle, we trade the OTHER guns in our collections, the ones that we got just to check them out, and see what/how they were, and now, having done that, are ready to trade them for the next thing on the wish list.

[dakota.potts]

Nothing wrong with people who do want to trade guns. I could see getting to a point where one day I pick up a gun to use it for a while and see what's up with it and trade it for something else.

Right now I'm still at the point where I have to really want every one I get which makes it really hard to want to trade any of mine

[Boogershooter]

Sometimes you find a really good deal on a gun you don't really want. Too good of a deal to pass up. The little red man on your shoulder tells you to get it, it will be good trading material later.

[desibaba]

I certainly would not run out and buy a brand new 57' Chevy. I remember the wipers stopping when going up a hill, no heat in the back until you were a block from home, installing a hand choke, tube tires......

In the car business I have seen the older dinosaurs talk about their muscle cars from the 60s and 70s like they could run 10 second quarter miles straight from the dealership and were so much better than the muscle cars of today. In reality those older cars were heavy as tanks, overheated, god forbid you get into an accident without any of the safety features of today and drank gas like crazy. A modern V8 Camaro, Mustang or Challenger will give you all the power, reliability and the safety features while giving you close to 30mpg on the highway. Its human nature that we forget the bad while remembering the good.

[barrybenson1776]

For me the answer to this is very simple - I lose too much money on the trade in.

I'd love to get new guns more frequently, but if I buy a gun for $700 bucks in 2015, then try to trade it in in 2016, I get $350 for the trade. I just wasted $350. Nobody, private party or dealer is willing to give me a good deal on the trade in.

If I could get about $500 or $550 for the trade in, it might be worth it. Once Pawn Stars became famous, everybody began to realize that you only get about 40-50% of what your trade in is worth. Now that's the norm.

[kozak6]

It's several factors.

Cars wear out quicker than guns. Cars last longer these days, but a few hundred thousand miles or a couple decades is about it. A well made firearm is extremely difficult to wear out, and most of us here will not even come close to doing so.

Guns are also extremely mature technology.

Imagine if Ford had produced the Model T for a hundred years with no sign of stopping, and that the Model T was still one of the most popular cars in America. That's where we are with guns.

My car was made in 2002 and doesn't even have anti-lock brakes. And the paint is peeling. And it needs a new timing chain. And who knows what else?

Self driving cars will probably be a thing in a couple decades. Maybe even electric ones.

[gyvel]

Foreign competition had nothing to do with it. The buyer demographic at the time was to trade-in, or get a new automobile every 2-3 years. The cars were thought of as disposable by the people buying the cars. The buyers WANTED a new car every 2-3 years.

That was primarily a post WWII thing

[gyvel]

Imagine if Ford had produced the Model T for a hundred years with no sign of stopping, and that the Model T was still one of the most popular cars in America. That's where we are with guns.

And, if the old bastard were still alive, that's exactly what he would have done. This also applies to some gun manufacturers.

[danco]

Trading in a gun every two or three years means that over time I'm losing thousands of dollars in equity and will have only one gun to show for it.

This.

Cars are depreciating assets, guns are investments...

[gyvel]

This.

Cars are depreciating assets, guns are investments...

SOME guns...

[Guggmeister]

In Finland this is a no-brainer. The permit hassle is too much. Easier to just buy more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TRX]

I have several guns that are over a century old. They're still in very nice condition and work just fine. Repair parts are easily available too.

My daily driver is 36 years old, but I don't think it's going to make it that long...

[TimSr]

So basically what this means is when it comes to guns and ammo we are only progressing at a snail's pace compared to things like cell phones, computers or automobiles? I mean today's cars are way better in almost every way compared to one that was made 40 year's ago but a 40 year 9mm pistol is the same in terms of performance? Why aren't these gun companies investing more in research and development?

How people trade in their 10 year old car because of "new technology"?

How many trade in their 10 year old car because it is showing some serious wear and tear, and they don't trust it to be reliable any more?

How many would trade in a 10 year old gun for either reason?

[5whiskey]

Most everyone has explained it, but no one has nailed down why gun technology has slowed. It's actually a very simple answer... modern firearms are actually a very mature technology. Firearms have existed in China since at least the 13th century AD. They existed in Europe and Arabia since at least the 14th century AD. Firearms were in rather common use since at least the 16th century. We're going on over 800 years since the first basic firearms were invented, and 600 years from where firearms started to look like what they do today (with a stock, barrel, receiver, trigger, etc.).

We've had cars for... a little over 100 years. Cars are much more complex than firearms, and there are a lot of areas where technology can advance beyond other systems. For example, brake technology has been mostly the same for 30 years. Differential technology hasn't had any radical advances for nearly 50 years. A differential is a differential, with minor upgrades. 30 years has seen radical changes in ECM, fuel delivery, and many other technologies.

So... we have a much simpler item; the firearm. It's been around for a very long time and it is a mature technology. This versus a much more complex piece of machinery with many different systems; the car. It has been around a little over a hundred years and is not a mature technology.

[jimbob86]

Cars have a limited life expectancy that most are likely to hit.

Cars wear out quicker than guns.

Mostly because most guns don't really get shot that much.

I have a Remmy 721 that needs a new barrel and the little extractor doohickey inside the ring around the bolt face is becoming worn to the point that it won't always reliably extract ....... and I can't find a replacement part (short of stealing it off another 721 with less use).

It is the only gun I have that is in danger of being shot to death........

[Ozzieman]

It’s called a collection.
I collect.

[kilimanjaro]

5whiskey nailed a large part of the reasoning : mature technology.

The revolver, for example, is just about perfect from a standpoint of design, metallurgy, and manufacturing tolerance and precision. It's not going to improve beyond trivial aspects of function.

[45_auto]

I can't think of any significant mechanical advance in automotive technology since disc brakes became common about 50 years ago.

Although there have been major advances in fuel management (computer controlled fuel injection), ignition (computer controlled ignition), brakes (computer controlled anti-lock), and safety (computer controlled air bags).

The next major advance is going to be self-driving (computer controlled) cars.

Anyone notice a trend here that doesn't apply to firearms?

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by 45_auto

I can't think of any significant mechanical advance in automotive technology since disc brakes became common about 50 years ago.

Airbags.

Electric power steering.

Continuously variable transmissions. Automatic transmissions with more than 3 speeds.

Front wheel drive with transverse engine mounting. This technology was basically confined to the BMC Mini 50 years ago, but is now nearly universal among passenger cars and crossover SUVs.

Radial tires.

Suspension in general. With the exception of a few outliers (Corvairs, VWs, Porsches, Corvettes, Jaguar E-Types), solid rear axles and oxcart leaf springs were more or less universal 50 years ago, even on pricey European sports cars; now even many full-size SUVs have sophisticated multi-link rear suspension (and those full-size SUVs honestly handle better than those European sports cars did). Did I mention that modern suspension doesn't need to be lubed every 10k miles and rebuilt every 60k miles?

Variable valve timing and lift; more specifically, systems such as BMW Valvetronic which eliminate the need for a throttle plate.

Turbochargers that really work under normal driving conditions.

Traction and stability control. (OK, it's mostly electronic and works in conjunction with the ABS, but I think it still counts.) Interestingly, stability control statistically delivers a real-world safety benefit that ABS promised but didn't deliver.

All-wheel-drive systems that really work under normal driving conditions.

Multi-piston swash-plate A/C compressors. Even a lot of auto enthusiasts are probably saying "Huh?", but have you ever driven a 1960s or 1970s car and noticed that when you turn on the A/C, there's strong vibration and the engine loses so much power that you'd think the handbrake has just been pulled? Ever wonder why new cars aren't like this? Now you know.

Lastly, although advances in fuel injection and ignition have arguably been incremental, the sum total is pretty amazing; consider that you can buy a fairly inexpensive sedan with a naturally-aspirated 2.0L engine that delivers 155 hp, 150 ft-lb torque, and 41 highway MPG by running 13.0:1 compression on 87 octane gas (Mazda3). And it runs well in all weather, at any altitude, without having to fiddle with the carburetor jets and ignition timing. And without tuneups every 15k miles. And the computer tells you what's wrong with the system when it breaks.