Talking with Ken Hackathorn yesterday, we were both lamenting the steady decline of professional integrity in the firearms industry. Gone it seems are the days when you could trust a deal on a handshake or expect companies to stand behind their products. Perhaps it’s the economy or perhaps it’s just the nature of growth, but business is definitely leaving business ethics behind.
Ken relayed a discussion he had at the SHOT Show with a well known company. This company makes plenty of good products, but one of their more popular items has been plagued recently by QC problems. When Ken first brought this up, the company rep denied the problem existed and called it an internet rumor. So Ken explained that he’d personally experienced the problem with his own pistol and had seen students and friends who also suffered from it. At that point, the rep reversed course and admitted that there was a problem, but that it “only affected two or three percent” of the model in question and so it was just easier for the company to fix the ones that were returned than change production and quality control procedures to make sure the problem didn’t happen in the first place.
To which Ken replied, “Would you buy a fire extinguisher for your home if you knew that 2-3% of them wouldn’t work, but would be replaced by the company in the event of failure?”
Because you know after your house burns down, getting a new fire extinguisher will make everything better.
For a short while one of the big gun companies put a guy in charge of its Quality Control department who’d come from a major washing machine manufacturer. He had all sorts of ideas of how to change the company’s QC program to be more efficient. And to his credit, those ideas had worked to make his former company incredibly successful and well known for reliability. But the problem is that a pistol is not a washing machine. Probably 99% of all washing machines get used regularly, and if they fail there’s probably less than 1% chance that anyone will suffer more than a day of going commando. In contrast, probably 90% of pistols sold in this country will never see a full box of ammo go through them, but if one fails when it’s needed, people die. There’s a pretty big difference between a Federal Air Marshal who’s forced to wear dirty socks and one whose gun jams in the middle of a hijacking. Is that really so difficult to understand?
I appreciate that any company, making any product, is going to produce some lemons. But I also know by years of first hand experience at big gun companies that there are steps that can be taken to keep the lemon rate to a minimum. Or, conversely, there are plenty of cost cutting measures that companies could choose not to take, so they didn’t have so many problems. Rather than watching the majority of the industry race to the bottom in terms of quality so they can have the most aggressive price, it would be nice to watch a few more companies put their pride and resources behind making truly bomb proof guns you could trust when you took them out of the box for the first time.
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
Re: Excuse my ignorance, but what am I missing here…?
SIG.
FAMs get some leeway in which guns they can use. It’s the ammo that they can’t choose. But yes, I believe that Sigs and HKs are very common.
Todd, I for one would like to know what company you are speaking of. If this said company really has these issues then please let us know so we won’t run the possibility of becoming a casualty of one of their defective products. Thanks.
This is what happens when companies are run by accountants. Traditionally companies were either run by people who had an idea and loved their work or by designers that knew the product and how to make is successful. Today it is just about money.
Glock Gen4, Sig [Exeter], Kimber Solo, Springfield EMP, S&W M&P 9, etc.
There are lots of QC issues at lots of companies right now that are being denied or ignored.
Lots of companies play this game…and continue to get away with it because so many of us keep buying whatever the glossy gun magazines tell us to buy.
+10 on Nyal’s comment. Practice and training won’t do much if the hardware fails during the 2.2 seconds one has to draw and fire in a SD situation.
Fortunately, the market will make them pay. If I’ve guessed right about the company in question, the field is indeed crowded and folks will gladly ignore them. I know I’ll never have to buy anything from them.
@Davey Doodle
Who do you think it is?
I thought FAMs had to either carry the P229 or P239.
FFO could carry the USPc .40 LEM.
Is this correct?
Quality 1911? I believe that Ed Brown would rate on par with anything manufactured by Wilson or Les Baer. Many who build custom 1911’s choose to use Ed Brown internal parts for their guns. I can personally vouch for the Ed Brown accuracy but here is some accuracy proof for you…seeing is believing – 1.2in at 50 yards
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=275678&highlight=ransom+rest
Todd,
Any thoughts on telling us who the manufacturer is? Again, all my training and practice won’t help if my gun fails due to manufacturing defect/oversight, etc.
Some of us actually have to rely on or weapons for more than sport.
Best,
Joe
Joe,
I think it is clear that we were talking about Sig, but the issues are applying across the board right now to S&W, Glock & Sig. The whole industry is having issues.
Best,
Andrew
Folks, I’m not going to name the company. I wasn’t party to the conversation and it’s not my place to do so. Furthermore, the example given was just that, an example. The whole point is that it’s not the least bit uncommon in the industry right now. So naming Company XYZ would just make one company look worse than many of its competitors who follow the same “fluid QC standards” and attitude toward problem reports.
Andrew, thanks for filling me in. I never owned sigs and never had to carry them so I wasn’t familiar with recent issues.
Todd,
While I can understand the position that you’re in I do have to call BS on your neutrality. First, if I knew a piece of equipment was flawed do you think that I wouldn’t tell my team about it because of a fear that it may be an unsubstantiated observation? Seriously, would you instead tell me to let them test it out themselves on the street because I was playing Switzerland?
If you weren’t going to tell us then you shouldn’t mention it all. It may cost you some product reviews but it would certainly cost me much more if I’m going through a door with defective hardware.
So Todd, pick a side and stick with it but please don’t play both sides and then hide behind some vague, I know something that you don’t, excuse. This is very disappointing. I was hoping that perhaps this site was more than just internet ninja’s testing their gear.
If I sound harsh then it’s because I’m being harsh and taking a side.
Todd:
I hear what you are saying about the problem being worse now. And for those two companies you worked for, I have no doubt you are correct.
But, it has also been a recurrent problem in the firearms industry for a very long time. Ask any Marine who was in the hill fights up near the DMZ in 1967 (and lived through the experience). They would have been delighted to have 2-3% failure rates on their M-16’s. A lot of Marines died with a cleaning rod in their hand trying to knock a stuck cartridge out of the chamber. Ask the guys in the 4th Infantry Division in the Central Highlands why the point man on patrol was always given an M-2 Carbine (which could dependably fire full auto) rather than an M-16 (which could not).
And companies lying? Colt executives repeatedly testified under oath before Congress that nothing was wrong with the M-16, while the military insisted that the whole problem was caused by a failure to clean the weapon properly (the 1960’s version of “limp wristing,” made worse because so many of our guys died because of that excuse).
I could go on about military weapons. The M-73 and 219 machine guns, for example, were almost completely useless unless you wanted a single shot weapon, but the overall point is correct. Both design and quality control have always been big problems with firearms companies. Not all companies always, but with many companies often, and truth has often been a casualty. I don’t doubt that some are going through particular QC problems right now (I have two troublesome Gen4’s myself), and history doesn’t excuse the current problems–or lies–but the issue isn’t a new one and the Internet does get the word out far faster.
I think Todd is giving us as much he can without completely shutting himself out of the industry.
Consider him human source intelligence. He can give you a good part of the puzzle, but he’s never going to be able to give you everything lest he compromise himself. Then he gets shot, drawn and quartered.
Take what you can get, and be happy that Todd is so openly active with the shooting community instead of only working inside the industry.
There’s plenty of info about what sucks and what doesn’t on P-F.com and his endurance tests here.
If you want more than that, CONSIDER PAYING HIM FOR IT LIKE THE ATF DID. This is his livelihood, after all!
Re: Joe – “So Todd, pick a side and stick with it but please don’t play both sides and then hide behind some vague, I know something that you don’t, excuse.”
Joe, The point is not which one company said this but that virtually all of them have done this. If you’ve read Todd’s posts in the past you’ve heard him criticize a number of them by name and any reading of the forums will tell you who has what problem.
M&P’s have lousy accuracy & sometimes “dead” triggers because of weak sear springs.
Glock has horrible extraction issues in Gen 4 guns and earlier models would fail if you put a light on them.
Beretta turns out stylish guns designed by artists that are turds in use.
SIG is happy with guns that break.
H&K has weak magazine springs on $60 magazines and denies there is a problem then eventually says it’s normal and springs need replaced every 100 or 500 rounds or whatever it was.
Ruger’s new pistol goes full auto and it’s a “minor safety issue”.
They all justify it by saying it’s a rare problem knowing full well the problem is widespread but rarely surfaces because most don’t actually shoot their guns.
The only thing we can do is hold the companies feet to the fire and hope that enough bad word of mouth and warranty repairs makes them change their ways.
@ lomshek ……. Ruger goes full auto?? Please explain
Tyler — Thanks, dude!
Joe — You’re still missing the point. It’s not about what company happened to say something to one person in one meeting about one product. All of it should be treated as suspect these days. Just look at the immediate assumption everyone jumped to about it being Glock.
If you go back and read the post, you’ll see the whole thing was about a problem that was initially dismissed as a mere “internet rumor.” There are plenty of places all over the ‘net you can go to if you want to read about what guns are having which problems.
cct125us, When the SR9 was first released they had an almost immediate recall. The official reason was the gun would fire if dropped with the safety off. There were a number of forum posts where folks claimed some of the guns were going cyclic.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=289457&page=3
It is not hard to understand that if the striker is so easily jarred off the sear that it fires if dropped some guns could go full auto due to marginal sear engagement.
Ruger never acknowledged the full auto issue which could be as much not wanting to encourage the idiots to NOT return their “machine pistol” and someone gets killed as it was to avoid admitting they did such a poor job sticking a Glock trigger in a Ruger that they completely botched the job. Ultimately the fix took many months. This doesn’t count the LC9 recall.
Todd’s original subject and all of these companies having issues makes one wonder if the companies don’t do any early production high round count shooting to see what breaks just like Todd has done in his 50K tests.
It seems all of these companies would rather have the customers be their beta testers than spend the cash and time on testing. Rather than acknowledge a widespread problem almost all of them will claim a “few” models had issues and that all the rest “meet standards” be it accuracy, trigger quality or something else. That standard keeps getting dumbed down to coincide with actual gun performance.
If this is an article about sig I would consider the source as being an ex sig employee and might question the ethics of the topic a little bit.
Joe, Joe, Joe. First I’m a bad guy because I won’t tell you what you want to know. Now I’m a bad guy because I’m an ex employee of one company that the post could be about and somehow I’ve got a grudge (but didn’t name the company why?).
Thanks for playing.
In my own experience, going back to the mid-1970s, there’s nothing new in this attitude, nor is it confined to firearms manufacturers. One of my earliest purchases was a Colt Trooper Mk III .357, which, while extremely accurate, regularly shooting touching groups at 25 yards, seized up twice on me in the first 500 rounds. In both cases I was unable to open the cylinder without dismantling the gun, requiring a trip to a gunsmith for repair. I was told it was an unusual problem. The gun also had the front site channel milled at a slight angle (shame on me for not noticing it when I bought it), which, with the reliability issue, made keeping the gun a non-starter. So I traded it in on a Browning Hi Power.
Which worked perfectly with ball ammunition for over 1,000 rounds, but would not reliably feed any hollow-point commerically availble at the time. So I traded it in on a S&W Model 19.
Which mostly worked really well, except the firing pin snapped after about 2,000 rounds. Again told this almost never happens, and to be fair, it didn’t for the rest of the time I owned the gun, which probably saw another 2,000-3,000 rounds, mostly mid- to full-power .357, befeor I got rid of it. I never did see the lead spitting etc. for which the 19 was notorious, though I may not have had it long enough for them to surface.
And I had a couple of 1911s, a WWII-vintage Remington Rand and a NIB Gold Cup, neither of which would reliably feed any type of ammo. The gunshop smiths I consulted about these problems again told me they were unusual, but were not able to correct them. And did I mention that the Gold Cup had its hammer mounted crooked (shame on me again for not noticing when I bought it)?
So, despite the gun mag fervor for 1911s at the time, I got what was then called a Browning Double-Action .45, which was, infact, the original Sig-Sauer P220, complete with stamped sheetmetal slide and heel magazine release. No problems whatsoever feeding any kind of ammo, including the then notorious 200 grain Speer “flying ashtray,” in ~2,000 rounds. I sold it to a friend who used it for more than 20 year after without a failure, though he didn’t shoot much. Again to be fair, I also had a SW1911 since that never jammed in about 2,000 rounds, but needed a VERY firm grip to ensure the grip safety was engaged.
Fast forward to late last year, when I bought one of the “no compromise” pistols, in part based on the ToddG close-to-100,000 shot test of the p30. My experience with the p30L hasn’t been quite as good. After 200 flawless rounds of 124 grain NATO ammmo, and another 100 with 147 grain Hornady custom, I experienced seven stovepipes in 150 rounds with 115 grain ammo, and two with 50 rounds of AE 125 grain. Another 200 rounds of NATO and 100 of 147 grain AE went without a hitch, as did a box of S&B 115 grain, but after more than 800 rounds, I can’t say I truly trust the pistol. This is in keeping with what I have read on the Internets. Being more patient these days, I am willing to work with it, and I anticipate it will get over its problems. If not, I am willing to find some competent help to correct it, as I really like the platform.
By contrast, I have a P7, built in late 1980 or early ’81, that has fed everything, no problems whatsoever, for thousands of rounds. Ditto a whole stream of S&W N frame revolvers over the years.
etc. etc.
And don’t get me started on cars, dishwashers, health insurance companies or banks. I’ll just note that a Chevy dealer recently told a friend of mine that a new car using a quart of oil every 1,500 miles was normal. Not an unusual claim at all in my experience.
So what’s the point?
Planned obsolescence, building to a “price point,” lax QC and customer “service” that denies the problem and/or blames the customer are widespread and longstanding corporate practice for at least the past 40 years in my personal experience. Based on tales my father, uncles, grandfather etc., and historical readdings, it goes back to time immemorial.
The bright side is complacency in design, quality and customer service creates opportunities for new companies. It is positively amazing to me how many high-quality offering exist today — and, really, how much better they perform overall than what I found years back.
So be informed and vote with your wallet. And keep yelling when things don’t perform as they should — but also when they do. The manufacturers will respond.
Joe renew, Todd has not been secretive about his criticism of some of SIG’s decisions lately nor has he pulled punches on any other manufacturer. Maybe he is avoiding naming the company in this case because he was not party to the conversation himself. Just a thought.
Hey, Todd.
You know you’re being a hypocrite here: I don’t recall you having any qualms about dumping on CZ a while back.
(I apologize for the thread hijack, well sort of)
Haird, “No Compromise” 9mm’s don’t do well with 115 (or lower charged 9mm/US 9mm ammo) ammo. they are built to shoot NATO spec’d ammo, which is often a bit stouter than commercial US ammo. Just passing on info, not trying to start a flame.. Good luck with the P30L.
As for the orig. post/issue in this thread. I think Lomshek and Tyler both hit the nail on the head. First off, Todd is just passing on info in general (as Tyler mentioned). Also, he was not party to the conversation he referred to in the OP, which he pointed out came from Ken Hackethorn, so he is passing info 2nd hand. Which to me, shows he is being responsible in his reporting. Now, I’d like to think that if Todd had been the person having the conversation, he would be more forthcoming with the company name.. but that is speculation on my part, based on meeting Todd once, and following this site for a while now… to say he is with holding info because he used to work for Sig USA, is a stretch, just look back through the posts on this site, he has been very critical of Sig USA in past, as he has of Beretta (where he worked at some point)… Anyway, I’m not saying anything that folks who regularly participate/read this site don’t already know… again, not trying to “P” anyone off, just my observations/thoughts.
The P30L/P30 is only sensitive to weak impulse 115gr ammo while the recoil spring is brand new and stiff. It has no problem once broken in, which doesn’t take much.
Mike–
Except that, in that case, Todd related personal experience he’s had with CZs in his classes to make a point about why they might not be the best choice for ‘serious’ pistol users…
In this post, he’s using a conversation — that, remember, he didn’t take part in — as an example of problems in the firearms industry as a whole. The entire point of this post is that there’s no need to be specific about the company; it’s happened with them all.
He could just as easily have written “Ken relayed a discussion he had at the SHOT Show with (SIG|GLOCK|Smith & Wesson)” and the post would’ve been just as relevant.
I dunno, ToddG makes a special point to take a major dump on the SERPA every few hours it seems. A big stinky dump at that.
Yet now he holds back on the name here. What’s up with THAT?!
I believe theSERPA posses a direct safety issue to the operator and a liability issue to the instructor. A firearm that malfunctions on the firing line, with guidance and supervision from an instructor, may not pose a similar hazard to others. Therefore, I do not believe this is a fair comparison to use against Todd.
Sorry, I flew of the handle a bit there.
In my former life I was a medic then I got shot now I have a desk job. Faulty guns are a sore topic as a result. I’m annoyed about the issue but I should NOT have dumped it all on you, sorry.
I get that everybody’s got to make a living.
Joe
I have owned a handgun for over ten years. In this period of time, I have purchased handguns from most of the major manufacturers. I have traded all of these handguns, with the exception of 3 (G22, PPS and P220), because of reliability/defect issues from the factory. I have empathy with all who wish to know what company X is bad; however, like wall street states “Past performance does not guarantee future results” or Caveat emptor.
Here’s what I’d say. Todd didn’t want to put Ken in a position that Ken didn’t want to be in.
I think that’s the long and short of it.
If Ken wants to come talk about it, great if not. He’s not going to blab about something him and Ken were talking about in private to just appease everyone. I think it’s funny over one blog post, he’s now being seriously scrutinized.
If he wants to torpedo his professional integrity with Ken, and other people, he could just go ahead and reveal that information. Just saying.
That being said, is the Glock endurance test complete? We’ve been 5-6 weeks without an update.
Todd,
Great Website and wonderful information passed on to us to read.
Everyone must remember that Todd was not in original conversation with the gun company so why would he risk putting out his name on a conversation that he was not a party of. Would You?
You read and make decisions on all kinds of information passed on to you daily and now some people are pissed and calling names because he will not name the company. Use your own judgement and resources to piece together the company.
“Thanks for playing.”
Todd, I really hope that you don’t think this is a game.
JT
JT – That’s a common phrase stolen from TV game show hosts when a person provides the wrong answer. It is commonly used (with some sarcasm) in response to a wrong assumption.
Can the Sig P250 problems be solved with a complete spring change or is it a more complex matter ?
A lot of interesting information in these posts. I own a company up in Canada that is involved in the development of transparent armour, and so have a interest in firearms…an an appreciation for problems stemming from Murphy’s Law, ill-designed equipement, &c.
Comments on the sear issues related to the Rugers have me wondering about the design of the Steyr M series:
http://thefiringline.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-465156.html
Also, I’m aware that the Sig P229 failed the NIJ drop-safety tests.
If it wasnt Glock, then it might as well have been Glock.
Someone should tell the entire Glock management and reps that they are going to be dropped into a hot LZ in three days time with only those POS G4 G19s that they are purveying right now as we speak. Next we will tell them that the enemy will not be outfitted with WWII surplus Nambu but with factory HK polymer–any model will do. I bet shipments would stop immediately and the entire G4 G19 stock would be recalled for “improvements and maintenance.” Or Glock will be looking for a new generation of reps and management. 😉
The point is they are not taking their failures seriously and one gets the impression they don’t care if people die as beta testers.
To add insult to injury regarding the Gen4 situation, my agency recently received a batch of new Gen4 Model 19s from GLOCK. And wouldn’t you know that at least some of them were shipped to my agency with the original “wrong” RSA… When I alerted our FTS guys, a department wide bulletin was sent ordering all guns returned to the range for retrofit. Thanks GLOCK!
p30man, couldn’t have said it better myself
Am I the only guy on the planet who likes the Gen4 G19? Mine has performed absolutely without flaw for 5,000 rounds now with the OEM extractor, ejector and original RSA. Shoulda bought a lottery ticket the day I bought this pistol.
Re: Am I the only guy on the planet who likes the Gen4 G19? Mine has performed absolutely without flaw for 5,000 rounds now with the OEM extractor, ejector and original RSA. Shoulda bought a lottery ticket the day I bought this pistol.
I have a relatively early production Gen4 19 that gave me a handful of failure to feed mals in the first several hundred rounds. And they occurred with a new shooter running the pistol. Since then it’s run like a clock with both the original RSA and the upgrade version… And I actually like the standard Gen4 grip frame and magazine release.
My problem is not so much with GLOCK and their Gen4 issues, but more with the fact that they are allowing firearms to get into the hands of law enforcement with an RSA that they themselves say is not in spec. That’s outrageous. And hard to excuse, let alone tolerate… Rant over.
***************
Am I the only guy on the planet who likes the Gen4 G19? Mine has performed absolutely without flaw for 5,000 rounds now with the OEM extractor, ejector and original RSA. Shoulda bought a lottery ticket the day I bought this pistol.
***************
If you haven’t gotten any malfunctions, don’t worry about it then. 😉