I do not like to disparage gun manufacturers. Maybe as long as two decades ago or more, I became aware of serious quality control problems plaguing an icon of American handgun manufacturers. Around the same time, the manufacturer was close to moribund. But for its military contracts and BK restructuring, it probably would have dissolved Based upon recent Internet postings, articles, and my direct knowledge of two handguns I used to own that were manufactured by the company under review, recent indicators of substandard quality control have exposed continued deterioration of product quality.
I used to own two handguns manufactured by the aforementioned manufacturer. I never completely trusted either. I sold both of them. I owned another famed brand of a 1911-A1 that never left me feeling comfortable. I sold it.
I know of the importance of profit. If expenses continue to exceed revenue, no company can remain viable. Restaurants striving to tread water are infamous for compromising quality of their cuisines in effort to minimize expenses. What they wind up doing is alienating longtime customers who were used to delicious meals. When financially strapped restaurants opt to substitute ingredients and/or modify recipes to mitigate expenses, they wind up losing loyal, longtime customers. Compromising quality is a downward spiral that rarely ends with modicum of positivity.
Compromising product quality will have consequences. There is a quality premium included within prices of all consumer goods and services, especially handguns. I will pay that premium, within reason. I believe that a handgun that might be used to save lives should be of the highest quality affordable. Perforating paper at ranges and recreational shooting at safe areas is frustrating when shooters have to frequently fix malfunctions stemming from inferior quality born of the objective of stablizing the revenue-expenses quation.
While I no longer own products of the aforementioned manufacturer or any other 1911-A1 manufacturer save Springfield Armory, I would become sad should it go belly up. Its name is internationally recognized. It bears the name of a legendary 19th century firearms genius. No, it's not John Moses Browning.
Admittedly, I have no direct proof of the company's alleged fairly recently deteriorating quality control. My direct experience with two of its products was, euphemistically, less than positive. However, I hope it's able to recapture eminence that once defined it
I hold high praise for late 20th century Sig "P" series handguns. They were precision-crafted double action handguns. They had no safeties which made them extremely desirable for me. However, at heart I am a 1911-A1 aficionado. My opinion is the 1911-A1 rests alone at the pinnacle of handgun designs.
Until about five years ago, I had no direct knowledge of Springfield Armory 1911-A1 handguns. The the 1911-A1s of other brands that I owned caused me doubts about reliability. I wanted a 1911-A1 for recreational target shooting to occupy my kids between trout bites. Articles about SA 1911-A1s were all positive. Shooters who owned them loved them. The SA TRP .45 repeatedly popped up as favorite among competition tactical shooters. I stumbled upon a deal too good to pass up on an SA 1911-A1 Loaded Model .45 ACP. I grabbed the deal. My intent was for it to become the source of fun diversion for my kids while trout were napping. That 1911-A1 has been absolutely flawless. It was far more accurate than my other brands of 1911-A1s. SA sublime quality convinced me to sell my other 1911-A1s and go with only SA 1911-A1s. Now I own four SA 1911-A1s, although my Springfield Armory EMP 3 9MM is not a precise 1911-A1. But it's closer than close enough. It functions identically to precise copies of 1911-A1s. That translates to unmodified muscle memory (conditioned response).
BTW, my opinion is SA's MSRP for the Loaded Model is low balled Mt opinion is it's worth far more than I paid.
My point is the once definitive manufacturer of 1911-A1 handguns has lost its status and luster. For an unknown reason, assuming its true, and too many identical posts and articles exposing identical quality control problems lead one to the conclusion that it's true, it opted to market inferior products while assuredly relying upon its once famed name to coax shooters to purchase its products. One doesn't have to be a NASA scientist to predict that compromising quality will produce insurmountable consequences.
For me, the only name of highest quality 1911-A1 handguns in Springfield Armory. There is a premium for knowledge that a self-defense handgun is 100% reliable. If my life and lives of my kids were to hang in balance, that premium would produce rewards that cannot be measured in money.
For many reasons, I hope the aforementioned, once preeminent 1911-A1 manufacturer adjusts its priorities resulting in emphasis on quality. The way I see it, if I were to fail, I'd want to bow out with a legacy of highest quality.
Another cost of production is litigation. Ethics and morality are routinely abandoned when lawyers get the notion to steal money others have lawfully earned. But that concept would require volumes to elucidate. Ditto for onerous and unnecessary political/bureaucratic regulations.
Most consumers see products. I look at products comprehensively. What processes are involved in manufacturer? What are surcharges involved in manufacturing that are not disclosed; e.g., business licensing, insurance, litigation defense, political and bureaucratic (administrative legislation) regulation, etc? Undisclosed cost of manufacturer are tantamount to a hidden tax that consumers must pay.
I used to own two handguns manufactured by the aforementioned manufacturer. I never completely trusted either. I sold both of them. I owned another famed brand of a 1911-A1 that never left me feeling comfortable. I sold it.
I know of the importance of profit. If expenses continue to exceed revenue, no company can remain viable. Restaurants striving to tread water are infamous for compromising quality of their cuisines in effort to minimize expenses. What they wind up doing is alienating longtime customers who were used to delicious meals. When financially strapped restaurants opt to substitute ingredients and/or modify recipes to mitigate expenses, they wind up losing loyal, longtime customers. Compromising quality is a downward spiral that rarely ends with modicum of positivity.
Compromising product quality will have consequences. There is a quality premium included within prices of all consumer goods and services, especially handguns. I will pay that premium, within reason. I believe that a handgun that might be used to save lives should be of the highest quality affordable. Perforating paper at ranges and recreational shooting at safe areas is frustrating when shooters have to frequently fix malfunctions stemming from inferior quality born of the objective of stablizing the revenue-expenses quation.
While I no longer own products of the aforementioned manufacturer or any other 1911-A1 manufacturer save Springfield Armory, I would become sad should it go belly up. Its name is internationally recognized. It bears the name of a legendary 19th century firearms genius. No, it's not John Moses Browning.
Admittedly, I have no direct proof of the company's alleged fairly recently deteriorating quality control. My direct experience with two of its products was, euphemistically, less than positive. However, I hope it's able to recapture eminence that once defined it
I hold high praise for late 20th century Sig "P" series handguns. They were precision-crafted double action handguns. They had no safeties which made them extremely desirable for me. However, at heart I am a 1911-A1 aficionado. My opinion is the 1911-A1 rests alone at the pinnacle of handgun designs.
Until about five years ago, I had no direct knowledge of Springfield Armory 1911-A1 handguns. The the 1911-A1s of other brands that I owned caused me doubts about reliability. I wanted a 1911-A1 for recreational target shooting to occupy my kids between trout bites. Articles about SA 1911-A1s were all positive. Shooters who owned them loved them. The SA TRP .45 repeatedly popped up as favorite among competition tactical shooters. I stumbled upon a deal too good to pass up on an SA 1911-A1 Loaded Model .45 ACP. I grabbed the deal. My intent was for it to become the source of fun diversion for my kids while trout were napping. That 1911-A1 has been absolutely flawless. It was far more accurate than my other brands of 1911-A1s. SA sublime quality convinced me to sell my other 1911-A1s and go with only SA 1911-A1s. Now I own four SA 1911-A1s, although my Springfield Armory EMP 3 9MM is not a precise 1911-A1. But it's closer than close enough. It functions identically to precise copies of 1911-A1s. That translates to unmodified muscle memory (conditioned response).
BTW, my opinion is SA's MSRP for the Loaded Model is low balled Mt opinion is it's worth far more than I paid.
My point is the once definitive manufacturer of 1911-A1 handguns has lost its status and luster. For an unknown reason, assuming its true, and too many identical posts and articles exposing identical quality control problems lead one to the conclusion that it's true, it opted to market inferior products while assuredly relying upon its once famed name to coax shooters to purchase its products. One doesn't have to be a NASA scientist to predict that compromising quality will produce insurmountable consequences.
For me, the only name of highest quality 1911-A1 handguns in Springfield Armory. There is a premium for knowledge that a self-defense handgun is 100% reliable. If my life and lives of my kids were to hang in balance, that premium would produce rewards that cannot be measured in money.
For many reasons, I hope the aforementioned, once preeminent 1911-A1 manufacturer adjusts its priorities resulting in emphasis on quality. The way I see it, if I were to fail, I'd want to bow out with a legacy of highest quality.
Another cost of production is litigation. Ethics and morality are routinely abandoned when lawyers get the notion to steal money others have lawfully earned. But that concept would require volumes to elucidate. Ditto for onerous and unnecessary political/bureaucratic regulations.
Most consumers see products. I look at products comprehensively. What processes are involved in manufacturer? What are surcharges involved in manufacturing that are not disclosed; e.g., business licensing, insurance, litigation defense, political and bureaucratic (administrative legislation) regulation, etc? Undisclosed cost of manufacturer are tantamount to a hidden tax that consumers must pay.
