The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 19, 2019, 01:49 PM   #51
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,216
"...outrageous hammer and trigger weight..." A target pistol they ain't, but any new firearm requires a trigger job. You won't get 'target pistol' anything for $249 MSRP.
Cerakote is a bit more than paint. However, what you're planning on doing with the thing, a single action .22, is more important than it's MSRP.
And there are a lot of junkers that cost more. The MSRP does not equate to quality from any manufacturer though.
The Ruger Wrangler is a very poor man's SAA in .22 LR. It's really a big kid's toy.
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old August 19, 2019, 02:36 PM   #52
Senior Member
Join Date: September 13, 2005
Posts: 4,286
Yes, define "good". One of my favorites is a 1950s vintage H&R 800 Lynx 22 semiautomatic. ACCURATE ! Paid about $100 for it.
SIGSHR is offline  
Old August 19, 2019, 07:59 PM   #53
Senior Member
Join Date: January 4, 2014
Location: None of yer business, sonny
Posts: 312
A taurus is a good gun for the money, if it works.
gbclarkson is offline  
Old Yesterday, 01:41 AM   #54
Senior Member
Join Date: February 20, 2005
Posts: 2,467
Good gun for the money is a BS term writers and reviewers used to justify that is likely not a great product to begin with. It means for a low price it's not comleate crap. Maybe...

Kind of like "combat accurate" or accurate enough for defensive use or some such BS that translates to the gun put most of the rounds on an IDPA target at 7 yards...

I don't understand cheap guns. I also don't understand prestige guns.. BUT I would rather have a quality item or 2 than a safe full of junk.
RsqVet is offline  
Old Yesterday, 11:01 AM   #55
Senior Member
Join Date: June 15, 2016
Location: Western PA rainforests
Posts: 1,211
I disagree that there is no such thing as "a good gun for the money" or that it is a BS term. I will admit that it can be a risk and what defines it can vary dramatically from one person to the next.

For those that think it is BS, have none of your guns been good for the money?
22lr, 20 gauge, 8mm Mauser, 35 Remington, 30-06, 5.56x45/223, 9mm, 380acp
GarandTd is offline  
Old Yesterday, 01:30 PM   #56
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 638
I would rather have a quality item or 2 than a safe full of junk.
Most on-point quote on the forums today.
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old Yesterday, 04:48 PM   #57
Senior Member
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 15,020
You know how old gun stores have s&w 5 screws under the counter with a $1000 price tag, then at the end of the counter is a 5gal bucket of rusting revolvers.
I wish I could find place with one of those buckets.
Hawg is offline  
Old Yesterday, 06:24 PM   #58
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2007
Location: Missouri
Posts: 7,857
Good gun for the money is a BS term
Couldn't be further from the truth. But then saying "A good gun for the money" is a rude awakening to the truth for gun snobs, and elitests that think if you can afford a thousand dollar gun you shouldn't have any.
My safe if shared by guns I bought at great, cheap prices, and guns I paid much more for. I guess some would call my E. German Makarov that cost me $169 "not a great product". No room, or do I wish to list every "good gun for the money" I have. But I don't consider any of them to be something I didn't get more than the price I paid. Even guns like my Hi-Points, and Rough Riders are good shooters, accurate, and reliable. In fact of the multiple 9MM pistols I have, some from "accepted" makers like Beretta, Glock, Sig, and Walther, my Hi-Point C9 is the most accurate. That in itself places the Hi-Point in the good gun for the money category.
Cheapshooter's rules of gun ownership #1: NEVER SELL OR TRADE ANYTHING!
Cheapshooter is offline  
Old Yesterday, 07:20 PM   #59
Aguila Blanca
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,483
Originally Posted by RsqVet
Good gun for the money is a BS term writers and reviewers used to justify that is likely not a great product to begin with.
I disagree. It's not a BS term, and nobody who uses it claims that "a good gun for the money" is a "great" gun. Both terms are highly subjective anyway, but "good gun for the money" has -- as far as I know -- never been used to claim greatness.

Example: Some years ago I purchased a Yugoslavian Mauser M24/47, in 8mm Mauser. I paid $150 for it, excluding shipping and transfer fee. For chuckles, I put a short Picatinny rail on in place of the original ladder sight, and I mounted a $50 4x pistol scope on it as a "scout" scope.

I took it with me on a visit to a friend in another state, who belongs to a shooting club with a 200-yard outdoor range. For ammo I had a case of Ecuadorian mil-surp ammo. We went to the range, got the Mauser zeroed at 200 yards, and we both shot it quite a bit. Most of our groups were around 4 inches (2 MOA). Not good enough to win any prizes at Camp Perry, but not too shabby for an old mil-surp rifle with a cheap scope, shooting mil-surp ammo.

The only other person at the range that day was a gentleman with some kind of big bucks rifle that must have cost him several thousand dollars, with a suitably big bucks scope on it that also must have cost a thousand dollars or more. We were shooting the Mauser with the left elbow resting on the bench as a rest. Mr. Bigbucks was using a full-blown lead sled. His groups were (charitably) about a foot.

During a break when we went forward to check targets, he saw my target and asked what I was shooting. When I told him, he went back to the bench, packed up, and went home.

This is a true story. The question: which of the two rifles would you consider to be "a good gun for the money"?
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old Yesterday, 09:07 PM   #60
Senior Member
Join Date: March 8, 2001
Location: Deep South Texas
Posts: 1,118
I've long been a fan of smaller caliber handguns, 32 and 38 in revolvers and 32acp and 380 in semi-automatics. One of the first semi-automatics I bought was in the early 70s, a Beretta model 70 in 32acp. It was a great gun, followed by a slightly smaller 1935. In the late 70s I bought a Beretta model 81 also in 32acp and it may have been my first DA/SA experience.

IIRC the Model 70 cost me just under $100.00 which was about $25.00 less than full retail. I don't remember what the 1935 cost but it was used and so likely not very much. The Model 80 was quite expensive though, about $150.00 I think. Now those were really expensive guns at the time, each was about a weeks wage.

Recently a friend has been begging for my Model 80 and when I saw the surplus 80s for sale at just slight more than what I paid for mine about four decades ago I gave in, gave him my old one and bought a new to me surplus. Well the new to me surplus looks better than mine did and shoots as well and I'm happy and he's happy.

I just replaced my Model 70 but that one cost me considerably more than what I paid back in 1974.

So we have a pool of five guns total, two Model 70s, two Model 81s and a 1935. All still work (actually the Model 70 from 1974 may or may not still be working; it went to a Forever Home).

The 1935 certainly has been and remains a "Good gun for the money". I carry it as my primary handgun quite often.

The first Model 70 was great and I sold it for almost what I paid for it so it too was a "Good gun for the money".

The second Model 70 was about the same as what many mid-range modern semis sell for but just has the style and flair that I like. It's one I carry far more often than guns that cost considerably more and I enjoy it, so again I'd say it is a "Good gun for the money".

The same case can be made for the two Model 81s. "Good guns for the money"

BUT a modern Cheetah at $600-$700 or so would not be a "Good gun for the money" right now for me.

That doesn't mean it would not be a "Good gun for the money" for someone else.
To be vintage it's gotta be older than me!
jar is offline  
Old Today, 12:09 AM   #61
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 22,431
In descending order of quality:

1. Amazing gun.
2. Great gun.
3. Good gun.
4. Good gun for the money.
5. Acceptable gun.
6. Not a bad gun.
7. Not a bad gun for the money.
8. Too expensive for what it is.
9. A bad gun.
10. I wonder if I can get the full $25 price at the next gun "buy back" event.
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09068 seconds with 10 queries