Gun manufacturers parts sale poll

riggins_83 · December 9, 2009, 05:04 PM

I was going to purchase a Springfield XD 45 but purchased a Glock 21 instead simply because the only parts Springfield will sell are the slide spring and magazines. Essentially everything else requires the gun to be shipped back to Springfield. When I mentioned this to the shop owner he said "I don't blame them, if I was a gun manufacturer I wouldn't sell parts either."
This got me to thinking. From a lawyer standpoint I can see why companies wouldn't want to sell parts. From a consumer standpoint it's not really an advantage, especially with parts that are drop in (firing pin, mainspring, etc).
How do you feel about manufacturers selling gun parts (other than the frame).

kwells6 · December 9, 2009, 05:10 PM

I think it would make life easier, but they make more $ this way, plus its a liability issue if some average joe does it, rather than their gunsmiths

riggins_83 · December 9, 2009, 06:59 PM

Here's my stance: If you're really afraid of being sued by a customer who installs the part wrong (such as a trigger) require customers to fax a waiver and be able to purchase the part directly from you.

10-96 · December 10, 2009, 01:44 PM

I voted for "Selling Some Parts".
My reason behind that are because any time a manufacturer sells a piece, part, or doo-dad it's WAY more expensive than what Brownells would sells it for. Ever buy Beretta parts from Beretta? They're 20+% cheaper now that Brownells became primary distributor. So, I opine that manuf's ought to use places that sell and re-sell items at fair market value.

edward5759 · December 10, 2009, 03:05 PM

I can see non critical parts being sold, such as a recoil spring.
But I do not blame Springfield’s decision.
I blame the lawyers.
If I bought a Chevy or a Glock and then did a modification on it, later resulting in an injury I can still sue the original manufacture. Fact.
I was a commercial loader. If someone bought my ammo, shot it and then reloaded it. I could be held as partly responsible in court. Courts very rarely put blame on one person. You might get 95% of the blame but that other 5% is going to cost the manufacture some money.
That is why my Insurance policy cost me as much as 65% of my sales.
After market sales on products are going to close doors and disappear. That is the reality if it.
Ask a Lawyer he will tell you.

Ed

View Poll Results: As a gun manufacturer would you be willing to sell parts to customers directly?
Yes, I'd sell any parts	1	7.69%
No, I wouldn't sell any parts at all	0	0%
Yes, I'd sell some parts	2	15.38%
Yes, some parts with a liability waiver	3	23.08%
Yes, any part with a liability waiver	4	30.77%
Even with a liability waiver I wouldn't sell any parts	3	23.08%
Voters: 13. You may not vote on this poll

December 9, 2009, 05:04 PM	#1
riggins_83 Senior Member Join Date: January 19, 2009 Location: Wherever I may roam Posts: 1,506	Gun manufacturers parts sale poll I was going to purchase a Springfield XD 45 but purchased a Glock 21 instead simply because the only parts Springfield will sell are the slide spring and magazines. Essentially everything else requires the gun to be shipped back to Springfield. When I mentioned this to the shop owner he said "I don't blame them, if I was a gun manufacturer I wouldn't sell parts either." This got me to thinking. From a lawyer standpoint I can see why companies wouldn't want to sell parts. From a consumer standpoint it's not really an advantage, especially with parts that are drop in (firing pin, mainspring, etc). How do you feel about manufacturers selling gun parts (other than the frame). __________________ l've heard police work is dangerous. Yes, that's why l carry a big gun. Couldn't it go off accidentally? l used to have that problem. What did you do about it? l just think about baseball. -Leslie Nielsen

December 9, 2009, 05:10 PM	#2
kwells6 Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Central Arkansas Posts: 437	I think it would make life easier, but they make more $ this way, plus its a liability issue if some average joe does it, rather than their gunsmiths __________________ "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."

December 9, 2009, 06:59 PM	#3
riggins_83 Senior Member Join Date: January 19, 2009 Location: Wherever I may roam Posts: 1,506	Here's my stance: If you're really afraid of being sued by a customer who installs the part wrong (such as a trigger) require customers to fax a waiver and be able to purchase the part directly from you. __________________ l've heard police work is dangerous. Yes, that's why l carry a big gun. Couldn't it go off accidentally? l used to have that problem. What did you do about it? l just think about baseball. -Leslie Nielsen

December 10, 2009, 01:44 PM	#4
10-96 Senior Member Join Date: October 19, 2005 Location: Tx Panhandle Territory Posts: 4,159	I voted for "Selling Some Parts". My reason behind that are because any time a manufacturer sells a piece, part, or doo-dad it's WAY more expensive than what Brownells would sells it for. Ever buy Beretta parts from Beretta? They're 20+% cheaper now that Brownells became primary distributor. So, I opine that manuf's ought to use places that sell and re-sell items at fair market value. __________________ Rednecks... Keeping the woods critter-free since March 2, 1836. (TX Independence Day) I suspect a thing or two... because I've seen a thing or two.

December 10, 2009, 03:05 PM	#5
edward5759 Senior Member Join Date: September 15, 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ. 30 miles from water, two feet from Hell. Posts: 355	limited part sales only on non critical parts I can see non critical parts being sold, such as a recoil spring. But I do not blame Springfield’s decision. I blame the lawyers. If I bought a Chevy or a Glock and then did a modification on it, later resulting in an injury I can still sue the original manufacture. Fact. I was a commercial loader. If someone bought my ammo, shot it and then reloaded it. I could be held as partly responsible in court. Courts very rarely put blame on one person. You might get 95% of the blame but that other 5% is going to cost the manufacture some money. That is why my Insurance policy cost me as much as 65% of my sales. After market sales on products are going to close doors and disappear. That is the reality if it. Ask a Lawyer he will tell you. Ed