How many chances do you give a gun or manufacturer?

[raftman]

Many (perhaps even most) of us have had some bad experience with a certain gun's or manufacturer's inadequate performance, quality, reliability and related matters. Sometimes these problems are so serious, or so persistent that we decide it's not a gun worth keeping. There's lemons from just about any brand, and so, sometimes, we're willing to buy another gun of the same model, or one from the same manufacturer, in hopes this new one will be better.

But, I've read comments from folks who've said things like "I've owned 5 guns of such and such a brand and all them were garbage!" Which to me seems strange. I personally don't see myself giving a gun more than 2 chances. If a faulty gun is a rare thing among a certain brand, and I just happened to have the misfortune of getting it, it seems pretty dang unlikely that it would happen to me twice, much less 5 times or more.

The question this brings me to, is just how many chances do you think a certain gun or manufacturer should get before you decide, "Ok, no more!" And furthermore, what is your rationale for how many chances you'd give?

 

[hoytinak]

I gave Kahr 3 chances but all three were with the same PM9. I had to send it in to them 3 times for FTF and it still never got fixed because of that, I will never own another Kahr.

 

[greyson97]

i dont like my gsg-22 ak. its mostly plastic, FTF FTF FTE, all sorts of bad stuff, plus horrible sights and trigger. i def am not getting the gsg-5 or their new 1911 .22

 

[Tom2]

Any gun that malfunctions seriously once, is enough for me to dump it poste haste even after it is fixed, as I cannot bring myself to trust it fully unless it is a safequeen or plinker of no consequence. Even then, it is on thin ice. Some people pay maybe 5-800$ for a new gun and then it jams up or has a serious malf. That is like buying a new luxury car and the engine stalls out constantly just off the lot. I guess alot of new cars used to be that bad years ago. Do not recall anyone keeping a car for 10 years 30-40 years ago. Now you can actually do that. An expensive gun is much simpler than a car and should be wrung out to some extent at the factory to justify a high price and screen out of box lemons.

 

[Chesster]

I may give a second chance if I get one lemon, but the second lemon will be my last. I usually read forums for experiences first and may pass if a particular item gets a consistent bad report or if the mfg. has poor customer service.

 

[firemedicman]

I had the Beretta M9 issued to me in the Marines, it did nothing but jam on me. I'm not sure if my weapon was just too old, had been misused by the jarhead before me, or mine was just a lemon. But I'll have a hard time buying one when the money's comin outta my pocket.

 

[27Veer]

My son just got his Taurus PT140 back and it shot very sweet on the range today.

 

[gyvel]

Two trips back to Ruger didn't fix the problem on my SP 101 that had trigger lockup issues. That's it for them...

 

[B. Lahey]

When I get lemoned, and the company is unable to fix it after multiple returns, that's the end. Only Kahr/Auto-Ordinance and Allied Armament have been that bad so far, but with my luck there will be more.

If a company that had previously made me a great pile of wonderful, reliable guns (Colt, FN, etc...) stuck me with a lemon, I may be more forgiving, but that hasn't happened yet. So far the gun companies I have purchased from have been entirely awesome or entirely terrible, none of that confusing shades of grey stuff.

 

[Firepower!]

Where is the option for ZERO?

If a particular gun in question is for my CCW use, there are no second guesses. One bad gun would end that company's creditability to be my ccw gun.

That said, it can still produce a wonderful handgun that will be part of my collection.

 

[imthegrumpyone]

You guy's seem to for get "man made" it's going to work-it's not going to work-this is a far cry from a perfect world, no matter what you buy your chance of a bad one is getting worst. It's all about money no one cares about pride in workmanship. Companies know if you don't buy, there's someone right behind you that will. When you get right down to it, we only have ourselves to blame we continue to accept inferior work and high prices.

 

[Suwannee Tim]

I have had lotsa trouble with Rugers over the years, QC issues, sent them back, mostly they did not get fixed or fixed right. My policy presently is not to buy anything from Ruger that I can get from somewhere else, AR15 piston gun for example but there are some Rugers, Super Redhawk / GP100 for example that have no peers.

 

[PSP]

I gave Kahr multiple chances, mainly because I wanted thier guns to work so bad I could taste it. They are so well designed for carry that I went through four of them to find one good one.

I used to own a Mosquito, but I now own other Sigs, so I guess that counts too. I'm a pretty tolerant guy.

 

[45Gunner]

Once is enough for me. If the gun has serious, continual problems then how could I ever trust it to defend my life or the life of my loved ones?

I take the same attitude with most everything else....get a lemon of a car, I'll never buy that brand again. Go to a restaurant and get a bad meal...I'm gone forever.

 

[MTT TL]

It depends upon how much I spend.

For example a car company gets one shot to get it right on a new car. If the car is a lemon I never buy another (echemm GM, Chrysler) because it is not worth finding out if the first new thing they sold me was a representative sample. A car is too expensive to not be right the first time.

The same is true for guns. If I spend $1200 on a new gun I expect it to be flawless or easily perfectible. If I spend $200 on a new gun I know what I am getting is not top quality and may need work.

 

[win-lose]

I didn't vote because because there wasn't a good option for my approach.

For me, I'll give a gun 2 or 3 chances to be fixed and proven. Otherwise it is gone.

For a company, once they treat my situation in an unprofessional manor, they will not have any further business from me. Otherwise, I'm a pretty patient guy, though experience does guide my future purchases.

 

[scottycoyote]

im with grumpybutt.......as long as guns are manmade you are going to have problems with them. You could probably list out the 5 most recognized guns for reliability and youd still have a long list of people who had problems with one.

I try to cut this problem down on the buying side, i do my research on a gun and see what people are saying about it (ie this forum and others) before i even go shoot it. If theres a lot of bad press, i wont even try the gun until it turns around.

that being said, if i got a gun that was pretty favorably reviewed and i really liked it, id probably give it 2 trys to get it fixed before i gave up on it.

 

[bambam1723]

I was starting to become a Remington fan until they gave me trouble about a rebate. I wrote a hard wordeed letter and they called my house and explained the problem with the rebate. Turns out it was my fault. So....I gave them a second chance by sending them the letter, and they redeemed themselves by calling promptly and explaining my boneheadedness politely. I resent the receipt and all is well again....well it will be if I get the check.

Anyways, I always at least give a second chance....a third does not happen

 

[DennisD]

I voted 1. I'll never own another Taurus. The M85 I tried spit so much copper jacket and lead it locked up after 10 rounds. I cleaned out the shavings and checked the timing. Went back to the shop the next day. Luckily, the store owner knows me and my gun maintenance habits. He gave me a full refund on trading it in on a Ruger SP101.

 

[Dustin0]

I’ll give them 2 Chances but after that I’m do. But it has more to do with how they handle it. Like, I had a PT1911 that had a bad barrel and bushing. Taurus fixed it. I have been pretty happy with it. There turnaround time sucked 12 weeks. But I think I would buy another. There quality control is going downhill fast. I see problems all over the place with them.