The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 22, 2017, 01:39 PM   #1
jackstrawIII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 901
Improvements?

In this thread I'm going to do two things I don't often do:
1. Pretend that gun companies care about my opinion.
2. Praise Glock.

It seems to me like the firearms industry is in a race with itself. Companies are trying to out-feature, out-innovate, and out-gimmick each other in an effort to get ahead and win over more of the market share.

While I understand that these companies are trying to make a profit, it really bothers me as a consumer. I wish that companies would focus less on creating something "new", and turn that focus into refining what they already have.

Perfect example: The Remington RP9, which they're now basically giving away because nobody has any interest in spending money to buy them. Answer me this, was anyone (besides Remington employees, maybe) looking for Remington to make a poly handgun? Did anyone think to themselves, "Gosh, I wish Remington would make a budget level poly gun because there aren't already 100 other options in that market segment."?

No.

The market was already saturated and yet Remington felt the need to get a piece of the action. As a consumer, I wish Remington had taken that energy and focused on improving the quality control of their bolt action line of rifles. I don't want Remington to make pistols, I want them to make better bolt action rifles.

Now, on to Glock. I'm not a Glock guy (don't shoot them well), but I will honor them for their approach. They know what they do, and they do it well. The world has need of simple, reliable, commonly available poly guns and Glock fills that niche. Instead of trying to offer every different product under the sun, they've worked on "perfecting" the product they have... and I think we can all say that it's worked out well for them.

Curious to see if I'm the only one, or if others agree. We don't need so many "new" products every year... we need more consistency and quality control.
__________________
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 01:41 PM   #2
PlatinumCore16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2017
Location: Colorado
Posts: 424
I'll agree to that. Savage has been doing that and it's worked out for them.
PlatinumCore16 is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 02:17 PM   #3
sigarms228
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 29, 2011
Posts: 1,765
Coming out with new products and refining what you already sell are not mutually exclusive. I am glad that both are happening. Remington screwed itself years ago and should not be considered the norm as far as a manufacturer in the firearms industry.
__________________
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.”
― Benjamin Franklin
sigarms228 is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 03:20 PM   #4
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
While I agree that specialization can have advantages, I think current business choices have more to do with survival than gimmicks. Using one company as an example also has problems.

For instance S&W could have easily stayed making pistols and never made any rifles. But their M&P15 line has become rather popular as has the M&P15-22. Locally I'd say S&W ARs might be the most popular ARs. If you asked me years ago if S&W "needed" to make an AR15 I would have said no.

SIG is another example of a company that has greatly expanded their lineup. There certainly are some mixed reviews at times when it comes their rifles (and sometimes the pistols too) but both the MPX and MCX seem to be popular items for them. And you can't forget the P320, which just won them the largest handgun contract I can think of.

HK made hammer fired pistols for a long time despite having the first polymer framed striker fired pistol. Given that their stock was downgraded twice by Moody's I'd wager that those in the company that were honest would tell you that the VP9 came out at a crucial time in order for them to get more civilian sales and help with their cash flow since they had been unable to make liability payments.

And Ruger, heck Ruger makes just about everything I can think of, even moreso than S&W.

While I think that Remington has become a sad story I don't think they are the market as a whole. What's popular in terms of firearms can vary over time. While shotguns and bolt action rifles were and still are staples to an extent, so are striker fired polymer pistols. It's not a coincidence that SIG, FN, HK, and Beretta, which were once the hallmarks of hammer fired pistols, added striker fired polymer pistols to their lineup. It's sort of like the automaker that doesn't sell a pickup truck in the US. It can be done, but you're writing off a big piece of the overall market. Even if all you get is a little piece of that market that's better than no piece.

As for Glock, Glock has had such a large market share for some time that they could rely on just pistol sales alone. But that's because they were pushing the other guys away from the table. While they were taking market share from the guys that had been the go-to option for pistols for years, those companies that got pushed aside to an extent diversified to get more sales now and to help mitigate that issue in the future.
__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness

Last edited by TunnelRat; May 23, 2017 at 08:47 AM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 03:41 PM   #5
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackstrawIII
Curious to see if I'm the only one, or if others agree. We don't need so many "new" products every year... we need more consistency and quality control.
And yet Colt is routinely and widely castigated for NOT coming out with new products.

You can't please everyone.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 03:54 PM   #6
JoeSixpack
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,048
Personally I think the market is fine, They make guns in various colors to appeal to first time buyers, pink pistols sometimes appeal to women.. that's fine more women are getting into something that's traditionally a "man" thing.

I do think it's kinda sad how everyone pretty much just copies the glock formula, Polymer frame, Striker, "safe action" trigger.

Even worse is when they take old guns and trying to redesign them with polymer frames.. it might be one thing if said retrofits ran along side their traditional model but they generally end up replacing it.

You're right Glock has refined their pistol over time but that's really all they do.. just make tweaks in size and caliber, that's kinda boring.

One of my favorite companies right now as far as innovation goes is Kel-tec, They seem to be one of the few companies embracing bullpup design I just wish they could produce them in quantity enough that you didn't have to wait years to find a new design at a reasonable price.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 05:46 PM   #7
JDBerg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2015
Location: PA
Posts: 1,835
We could debate here all day that S&W should have kept building the 3rd Gen guns along with the M&P guns, but we all know that the polymer guns have a much higher profit margin, so the S&W corporate mandate was to crank out the plastic guns & kill off the 3rd Gen metal guns!
__________________
Words to Live By: Before You Pray - Believe; Before You Speak - Listen; Before You Spend - Earn; Before You Write - Think; Before You Quit - Try; Before You Die - Live
JDBerg is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 06:17 PM   #8
GarandTd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2016
Location: Rural PA
Posts: 1,639
Both are necessary IMO for a business to remain successful.

Build a loyal following with a quality product. Nurture that following by listening to the loyal customers and acting. Expand loyal following with refined quality and new products.
__________________
22lr, 20 gauge, 8mm Mauser, 35 Remington, 30-06, 5.56x45/223, 9mm, 380acp
GarandTd is offline  
Old May 22, 2017, 08:12 PM   #9
GarandTd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2016
Location: Rural PA
Posts: 1,639
I feel like some of the lesser known gun manufacturers of "other" guns are winning some of the market over by actually listening to the consumers of their products and making relevant changes. And...they're doing it at bargain basement prices.

Two examples, both Turkish. Canik and Sarsilmaz.

Canik has a great product in the TP9 series and they've been constantly improving upon it.

Sarsilmaz gave the K2P 9mm a facelift with an updated frame including finger grooves. More styled slide serrations and some bulk removed from the muzzle area. 3 different back straps and 2 17 Rd mags. And, I've seen it listed for less $ than the 1st generation.
__________________
22lr, 20 gauge, 8mm Mauser, 35 Remington, 30-06, 5.56x45/223, 9mm, 380acp
GarandTd is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 06:31 AM   #10
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
While I am not interested in every new offering, I'm nonetheless glad that gun companies continue to innovate. The Remington RP9 is a good example. It may be a perfectly serviceable handgun, and I ordinarily value function over form in guns, but that sucker makes my Glock look sleek and graceful by comparison. That said, I'm sure someone out there wants one, and I'm glad that Remington has them to offer. Competition is good for the consumer, and that's me.

Glock's business model is boring, but it works. Glock uses a simple, reliable design, and markets the snot out of it.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 07:10 AM   #11
random guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 28, 2017
Posts: 272
I think Remington's rocky sales in pistols has more to do with performance issues (real or perceived) than leaving their traditional field. I gave them a look just because they are Remington but their execution is not yet top o' the heap, at least judging by internet test samples.
random guy is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:24 AM   #12
jackstrawIII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 901
Quote:
For instance S&W could have easily stayed making pistols and never made any rifles. But their M&P15 line has become rather popular as has the M&P15-22. Locally I'd say S&W ARs might be the most popular ARs. If you asked me years ago if S&W "needed" to make an AR15 I would have said no.

SIG is another example of a company that has greatly expanded their lineup. There certainly are some mixed reviews at times when it comes their rifles (and sometimes the pistols too) but both the MPX and MCX seem to be popular items for them.
Thanks for sharing this. In my opinion, S&W and Sig are PERFECT examples of what I'm saying. Let's start with Smith. I like the S&Ws that I own. The M&P9 is one of the best non-Glocks out there and I've owned a few nice revolvers, including the 627 Pro I have now. However, as we all know, the Quality Control and Fit and Finish of their standard revolver line has suffered as of late.

Smith and Wesson was historically known as a high quality revolver/handgun company. To see the quality/consistency of their revolver line to take a drastic step down is just sad. It kills me.

Now to Sig. I respect Sig as a company historically. Obviously they've done something right and continue to do something right. However, it's generally agreed here on the Forum and elsewhere that "old West German Sigs" are higher quality than what they're producing these days in the P226, P229, and P220 lines.

As I said before, the Sig P series of pistols is legendary and it's so disappointing to see the quality control and reliability go down. When I say reliability, I'm not talking about the performance of a "good example". I'm talking about the consistency of "good examples".

Quote:
And yet Colt is routinely and widely castigated for NOT coming out with new products.
Not by me :-)

Quote:
I think Remington's rocky sales in pistols has more to do with performance issues (real or perceived) than leaving their traditional field. I gave them a look just because they are Remington but their execution is not yet top o' the heap, at least judging by internet test samples.
You're exactly right. I'm not bashing Remington for trying something new. It's a quality issue. I'd rather have them make JUST good bolt actions than inconsistent bolt actions and questionable pistols.
__________________
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:35 AM   #13
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
If S&W had just stayed making revolvers and SIG just making classic series pistols I'm not sure they would have survived until today. Like it or not the choices to expand their product lines came from a need, not just a desire. I think you're letting your personal desires for certain products from each company cloud you to the realities of the firearms market.

Quote:
Quote:
And yet Colt is routinely and widely castigated for NOT coming out with new products.
Not by me :-)
Colt after the Colt All American 2000 stayed with making 1911s and ARs. Now they're bankrupt (and it's not the first time). Diversifying your product line isn't just about gimmicks.
__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness

Last edited by TunnelRat; May 23, 2017 at 08:44 AM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:37 AM   #14
adamBomb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2015
Location: coastal NC
Posts: 645
Quote:
It seems to me like the firearms industry is in a race with itself. Companies are trying to out-feature, out-innovate, and out-gimmick each other in an effort to get ahead and win over more of the market share.

While I understand that these companies are trying to make a profit, it really bothers me as a consumer. I wish that companies would focus less on creating something "new", and turn that focus into refining what they already have.
Companies need to keep pushing the envelope in order to stay in business. Ask blockbuster how focusing and refining their video store chain worked out for them. Instead they should of jumped on digital video right away but nope they decided not to compete until it was too late.

Quote:
Now, on to Glock. I'm not a Glock guy (don't shoot them well), but I will honor them for their approach. They know what they do, and they do it well. The world has need of simple, reliable, commonly available poly guns and Glock fills that niche. Instead of trying to offer every different product under the sun, they've worked on "perfecting" the product they have... and I think we can all say that it's worked out well for them.
I would argue that Glock copies the market just like every other company (ie g43/G42). And when they released the G42 is had a bunch of problems.
adamBomb is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:44 AM   #15
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
Quote:
However, as we all know, the Quality Control and Fit and Finish of their standard revolver line has suffered as of late.
Quote:
As I said before, the Sig P series of pistols is legendary and it's so disappointing to see the quality control and reliability go down.
Internet forums and general opinion are typically that the quality control of basically every major manufacturer has gone down in say the past decade, and that includes Glock which you use as your main example of why specialization is key. Whether this is due to the sheer quantity of firearms every manufacturer is putting out now (not just model diversity but even of classic series pistols from those companies' past), the ease and readiness by which people can share and report problems with their firearms online, or some combination of both is hard to discern easily.
__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness
TunnelRat is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:48 AM   #16
jackstrawIII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 901
Quote:
If S&W had just stayed making revolvers and SIG just making classic series pistols I'm not sure they would have survived until today. Like it or not the choices to expand their product lines came from a need, not just a desire. I think you're letting your personal desires for certain products from each company cloud you to the realities of the firearms market. Colt after the Colt All American 2000 stayed with making 1911s and ARs. Now they're bankrupt (and it's not the first time). Diversifying your product line isn't just about gimmicks.
I agree with you and this is well said.

I think I'm not explaining myself well. I'm NOT saying that companies should not innovate, create, or diversify. I'm saying that they shouldn't sacrifice the quality of their already successful models in order to bring out the next best thing.

Let's use Toyota as an example of a company I think is doing it right. There are lots of ties between the gun and car industries.

Toyota is famous because of the the Camry and the Corolla. Now, do they make other good vehicles? Sure. The Rav, Tundra, Tacoma, Highlander, etc are all great vehicles.

The fact that Toyota has been able to adapt to today's market and today's consumer is good... but if they let the reliability of the Camry decline when then started making Tundras... this would have been a horrible decision and would have tarnished the Toyota brand.

Toyota is doing it right.

I think companies like Remington, S&W, Sig, etc could take a lesson from them. I will echo what I said before. I like the M&P series and S&W still makes some great guns, but them letting the quality of their revolver line suffer is like Toyota dropping the Camry. It just doesn't seem wise.

That make more sense?
__________________
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:52 AM   #17
PlatinumCore16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2017
Location: Colorado
Posts: 424
Agreed on the Colt thing. Their firearms are just a "brand name" and whilst they are supposed to be very high in quality, their prices are so high above other products of the same quality that they drove themselves bankrupt. They depended upon their name to get them along and in today's consumer market, that's not enough.

I know I said that I think Savage is doing a great job to hang with the best of them (not trying to come off as a fanboy). They just released a new line of ARs and by all accounts, they hit a home run with them. S&W is also doing a great job and I'm torn between the M&P15 or the MSR15. Savage hasn't gotten into pistols and honestly, I hope they don't. They are expanding their long guns with an H&R clone and they also just updated their O/U. I think they're going to be around for a good long time, but I hope that they continue innovating as much as the rest of them.
PlatinumCore16 is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 08:52 AM   #18
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
Toyota hasn't dropped the Camry anymore than SIG dropped the P series or S&W dropped revolvers (S&W stopped making the classic line for a bit but now are making many of them again and given the number of nice revolvers on the used market I imagine there is some question of how many sales they're getting given the cost of making those handguns new). But Toyota has had many recalls in the past decade. You keep cherry picking examples without realizing that even the examples you're picking have had issues, including Glock (not just the Gen 4 fiasco, as someone that has owned a dozen of them I go out of my way now to buy older Gen 3s of certain dates). I've owned 80 handguns and I've seen quality issues from the vast majority, even ones that stayed with one line for a long time.

And since you like car analogies I'd point to the one I gave before:
Quote:
It's not a coincidence that SIG, FN, HK, and Beretta, which were once the hallmarks of hammer fired pistols, added striker fired polymer pistols to their lineup. It's sort of like the automaker that doesn't sell a pickup truck in the US. It can be done, but you're writing off a big piece of the overall market. Even if all you get is a little piece of that market that's better than no piece.
__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness

Last edited by TunnelRat; May 23, 2017 at 09:45 AM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 09:28 AM   #19
PlatinumCore16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2017
Location: Colorado
Posts: 424
I think another thing that is important is warranty work/standing behind your product. Carrying on the car analogy, one of the Asian based car manufacturers had a serious issue a little while back and they came out, apologized, and said they would fix it at all costs. No idea if they actually followed through, because I lost track of the story.

If one of my firearms has a serious issue, I just want it fixed in a concise amount of time and 1 trip. Or to have it replaced. If the manufacturer stands behind their product, I'll give them a chance.
PlatinumCore16 is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 09:34 AM   #20
briandg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
No, in general, companies don't care about individual opinions or complaints. Why would they?

For one thing, people are in general idiots. They will complain if the cheese on their hamburger is off center. If their fixed sight handgun doesn't fire to the same point of impact every time they might trash that entire brand mercilessly all over the internet without even trying to contact the maker.

Any company will generally apologize for what they feel is a trivial complaint without really caring at all. When my wife bit down on a piece of dry roasted rat femur, planters paid attention. When a green stink bug appeared in a bag of frozen peas, birds eye paid attention. When a steel nut showed up in a can of vegetables, gee, we got a coupon because they figured that I was lying.

A magazine that doesn't function well will happen occasionally, and seriously, the only thing that is owed is a free replacement with free shipping. If a gun vaporizes, well, both ammo supplier and firearms maker will step forward.

In general, though, any complaints will be logged and added to databases that check for statistical anomalies that could indicate large scale trouble. So while in general, if the product is minimally "substandard", like the pepperoni on your pizza is heavier on the right side (or the left side), every person in any business will roll their eyes and say something insulting as soon as they hang up, reports of mushy crust or snotty drivers will at least be logged.
__________________
None.
briandg is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 10:02 AM   #21
reddog81
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,633
I'm pretty sure we have more reasonably priced firearm options available to us today than at any point in time and people are complaining about it...

If you don't like the new quiz-bang tactical super-rail then just buy the old model.

Consistency and quality control have nothing to do with new products. New products bring in new customers, quality products bring back repeat buyers.
reddog81 is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 10:05 AM   #22
jackstrawIII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 901
Quote:
Internet forums and general opinion are typically that the quality control of basically every major manufacturer has gone down in say the past decade, and that includes Glock which you use as your main example of why specialization is key.
- TunnelRat

Quote:
But Toyota has had many recalls in the past decade. You keep cherry picking examples without realizing that even the examples you're picking have had issues, including Glock (not just the Gen 4 fiasco, as someone that has owned a dozen of them I go out of my way now to buy older Gen 3s of certain dates).
- TunnelRat

Quote:
Glock's business model is boring, but it works. Glock uses a simple, reliable design, and markets the snot out of it.
- Spats McGee

TunnelRat, thanks for diving in. You make some very good arguments. With that said, I have a couple thoughts.

You bring up how both Glock and Toyota (my examples of companies that are "doing it right") have had QC issues just like everyone else. This is certainly true, but statistically it's not at the same level as some of their competitors. Reliability in the gun industry isn't standardized, but it certainly is in the auto industry(Consumer Reports, KBB, Edmunds, etc).

That's not really my point tho. What Toyota and Glock both have on their side is rock solid brand identity. This goes along with what Spats said. Glock and Toyota aren't really blowing minds at the trade shows, but their investment into quality (with a few hiccups) and their commitment to keeping their core products essentially unaltered over many years has won them incredible amounts of brand loyalty and an unshakable place in the industry. I don't even like Glocks, but let's face it, the Glock 19 is one of the standards by which other pistols are judged and the Camry has been a mainstay in the sedan segment longer than I've been alive. They got that by being consistent in their brand and product.

Contrast that with Remington (sorry to pick on Remington, but it's the example we're using here). The reputed quality of one of their core products (bolt action rifles) has been in question for years. The Remington 700 is their "Camry". Instead of focusing on the product that anchors their brand, they released a poly pistol, totally out of left field. Is the RP9 a bad gun? No idea, never shot one. But is that what Remington needed in order to promote their brand? I don't think so.

Brand reputation is often based on a handful of successful products. For Remington, it's the 870, 1100, and the 700 (in my opinion). My willingness to give my money to Remington would be based on my perceptions of those products. Just like my willingness to give CZ my money is based on the reputation of the 75 series pistols and the 500 series rifles. The new CZ P10 coming out really interests me because I TRUST that when CZ stamps their name on a gun, the gun is going to work.

My whole point is, I think some companies have lost that trust with consumers (or at least with me). And I think the reason is that they've compromised their "key" products in a race to come out with the latest and greatest thing.

I'm not necessarily saying Rem shouldn't make a poly gun. I'm saying that if the reliability of the Remington brand as a whole isn't addressed, the RP9 is just wasted effort.

Does that make sense?
__________________
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 10:12 AM   #23
jackstrawIII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2016
Location: Upstate NY.
Posts: 901
Quote:
New products bring in new customers, quality products bring back repeat buyers.
This is very true. Yes, innovation is vital to increase your customer base.

However, if you lose the repeat buyer due to lack of quality, you'll begin to dry up your customer pool until it kills you. Which is my point.
__________________
In God we trust.
jackstrawIII is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 11:17 AM   #24
TunnelRat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2011
Posts: 12,181
And I'd say again that I don't consider Remington indicative of the industry as a whole. As far as problems on a "statistics" basis, my undergraduate degree is in applied math statistics. There is nowhere near enough information out there, imo, to make judgements on firearm manufacturers as whole, especially if we want to establish a trend over time as problem reporting before was limited to telling your buddies at the gun store.

For that matter I will still argue that Glock from Gen 4 onward has had numerous issues, including a rash of ejection problems that may have gotten better but continue to show up on forums (including here). To me the anecdotal information out there, and that's what it is, doesn't really support that these days Glock is significantly better than the competition when it comes to out of the box reliability. My point here isn't to pick on Glock. My goal is to point out that given the anecdotal nature of any evidence of issues declaring one company better, or worse, isn't particularly easy. And then we have to factor in production numbers as well.

You keep pointing to Remington, but my argument would be Remington is a statistical outlier in just how bad it is. Pretty much any company compared to Remington currently would have better quality control.

As far as Toyota not blowing minds at trade shows, Toyota has been a leader in hybrid cars for years. To the point where even new hybrid cars struggle to match the performance of the Prius (a fact that still baffles me). Toyota didn't just rest on their laurels. They continued to innovate and to me that's part of the reason for their success. I'll again bring up Colt. Colt is absolutely a company that kept to its core products and while they had stumbles over the years when it came to a 1911 or AR they were bedrocks people would point to. Colt declared bankruptcy not long ago and it wasn't the first time. I get what you're saying about keeping core products strong, but I think you're still missing why these companies are expanding their lines.

The CZ P10c is to me indicative of a consumer market that despite being disappointed in the past by early rave reviews refuses to learn a lesson. I find it crazy how people have essentially crowned it as almost the king of striker fired pistols based on what are some initial reports of pre-production models (not you specifically but online it is brought up constantly). Yes they have made good pistols in the past including a striker fired pistol. But their reputation was built on hammer fired DA/SA pistols. It would be like me saying Chevy is going to produce a great compact car based on me owning and liking the Silverado. I think the enthusiasm has more to do with people eager for new products than a basis in reality. In a year we can judge how the P10c is doing, but the amount of fanboys it already has is a bit nuts imo.

Quote:
I'm NOT saying that companies should not innovate, create, or diversify. I'm saying that they shouldn't sacrifice the quality of their already successful models in order to bring out the next best thing.
Quote:
My whole point is, I think some companies have lost that trust with consumers (or at least with me). And I think the reason is that they've compromised their "key" products in a race to come out with the latest and greatest thing.
I would again state that you're underestimating how important new products were for a number of these companies. You've already admitted that these new products likely kept a number of companies in business. You keep saying you're not opposed to innovation and new products but then keep pointing to gun companies that haven't produced new products as the standard and blaming the failures of a number of these companies on the desire to have new products.

To go back to Remington, that is a company that has been failing for a number of years now, since well before the RP9. To me even if they hadn't produced the RP9 they would continue to fail. They've fallen by the board far more than any other manufacturer I can think of. I don't see them righting the ship any time soon, perhaps ever.

While there are plenty of people that prefer the older S&W revolvers and the German P series SIGs, to me those product lines haven't been nearly as tarnished in reputation as say Remington nor do I think on the whole they're as bad as some claim. And I honestly don't think those bad examples from S&W and SIG are because of them making other products. I think it has more to do with an industry that produces far greater quantities than it did before and is rushing to get everything out the door. I think you can have a diverse product line and produce quality products. And difficulties while bringing a new product line up to speed aren't uncommon but don't have to be permanent.

I also question whether things are really that much worse for a number of companies, or we're simply more aware of it both because of the sharing capabilities given to us by the internet and simply because of the much greater quantity, not just diversity, being produced today. Even if I only had a 1% QC issue rate, if I produce 100 pistols a month that means 1 is bad. If I produce 10,000 pistols a month that means 100 are bad. Given the lack of actual data from before I don't think you can ignore these factors in the overall impression of the state of QC of the industry.
__________________
Know the status of your weapon
Keep your muzzle oriented so that no one will be hurt if the firearm discharges
Keep your finger off the trigger until you have an adequate sight picture
Maintain situational awareness

Last edited by TunnelRat; May 23, 2017 at 01:45 PM.
TunnelRat is offline  
Old May 23, 2017, 11:48 AM   #25
sigarms228
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 29, 2011
Posts: 1,765
Quote:
Now to Sig. I respect Sig as a company historically. Obviously they've done something right and continue to do something right. However, it's generally agreed here on the Forum and elsewhere that "old West German Sigs" are higher quality than what they're producing these days in the P226, P229, and P220 lines
I don't agree that is generally agreed about SIG. You and others may believe this but that does not mean generally agreed. Many also believe the new SIGs are better and more robust with the milled stainless steel slide. I have read plenty of complaints about older SIGs having rust issues on the slide, more maintenance with the breech block and roll pins, and cracking frames on the older West German P226s. I own examples of both and am perfectly happy with both as are many many others..

As far as Glock. I like Glock too but they took a real kick in the shorts over brass to the face and ejection problems starting with late third generation. It also took them a while to get the RSA correct on the fourth generation Glock 19s.
__________________
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic.”
― Benjamin Franklin
sigarms228 is offline  
Reply

Tags
development , glock , new guns , quality control , remington

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 09:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.10150 seconds with 8 queries