diamondd817 826 Posted March 14, 2012 Cost too much? What about gunsmith built guns, or purpose built game guns... like $1200 CZ Customs CZ 75's, $3000 Brazos's, $4,000 SVI's, $4500 Predator Tactical guns. They have no issues selling them all. There are people who put emphasis on price, others on value, others on the status/perceived status of owning one. Sig's and HK's are not custom hand made pieces. They are mass produced combat type pistols, just like there cheap counterparts Glock, Beretta, and M&P's Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zoid 24 Posted March 14, 2012 They are not premium brands, they are just premium prices. The "premium" brands can not do anything better mechanically than the cheap Glocks, M&P's, etc. After mechanics its just personal preference -- ergos, asthetics, metal, poly, etc. Flame away guys! I don't necessarily disagree even having owned both HK and Sig. But there is a driving force that compels people to spend the extra money. Just wanted to see the different reasons. Beretta is actually a gun I feel that has the refinement of the HK/Sig without the heavier price tag. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcpg 4 Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) What? Please edumacate me on why the glock is the point and shoot camera and on Sigs it is otherwise? Personally, I think it is all in your head. Unless you are shooting the Sig in DAO, there should be no reason you cannot shoot it as intuitively as a glock/m&p whatever else. My opinion is based on multiple experiences w/ a Glock 17 3rd Gen and my 226. This past weekend I've shot an XDM 4.5 , HK P30L, Kimber Custom Crimson, a Glock G34 gen 4 & Glock 17 Gen 3. All of which were shot after warming up w/ my 226. I was all over the place w/ the H&K P30L. I went directly to the Glock 17 gen 3 and was spot on again, but surprisingly went back to my Sig and had to re-acquaint my trigger pad as i was noticably putting too much finger and grouped to the left. Easy fix, but it definately wasn't as immediate as going to the Glock despite the 2 different sight systems and triggers. I only practice w/ the 226, but shot a tight groups instantly w/ the Glock 17. I guess my hand easily gets used to a longer finger extension w/ a more definative "click" break as opposed to the 226' smooth "glassy" SA break. I love my Sig, but im starting to gain serious consideration for Glocks. Edited March 14, 2012 by jcpg Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane45 807 Posted March 14, 2012 Im not saying it cant happen/doesnt happen/never happens as I am sure it does but I do find it interesting the HK is th only pistol I have never seen go doen at a match or on the range. I cannot say the same for SIG/S&W/Glock. As for the point and shoot, as I have said before the Glock is the absolute worst for me!!! The XD is next about half as bad as Glock. The HK and M&P both point well for me as they probably have the closest grip angle to 1911. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blksheep 466 Posted March 14, 2012 I have seen HK go down alot with flat springs, trigger springs, broken firing pins etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zoid 24 Posted March 14, 2012 Im not saying it cant happen/doesnt happen/never happens as I am sure it does but I do find it interesting the HK is th only pistol I have never seen go doen at a match or on the range. I cannot say the same for SIG/S&W/Glock. The other thing is that there are not many HKs at matches. They are definitely the minority. I think I've seen a total of like 3-5 in all the matches I've shot over the last year an a half, but then that is just my observation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
O-gre 7 Posted March 14, 2012 You get what you pay for. A 20 year old Civic and a new Lexus will both get you to the same place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maksim 1,504 Posted March 14, 2012 My opinion is based on multiple experiences w/ a Glock 17 3rd Gen and my 226. This past weekend I've shot an XDM 4.5 , HK P30L, Kimber Custom Crimson, a Glock G34 gen 4 & Glock 17 Gen 3. All of which were shot after warming up w/ my 226. I was all over the place w/ the H&K P30L. I went directly to the Glock 17 gen 3 and was spot on again, but surprisingly went back to my Sig and had to re-acquaint my trigger pad as i was noticably putting too much finger and grouped to the left. Easy fix, but it definately wasn't as immediate as going to the Glock despite the 2 different sight systems and triggers. I only practice w/ the 226, but shot a tight groups instantly w/ the Glock 17. I guess my hand easily gets used to a longer finger extension w/ a more definative "click" break as opposed to the 226' smooth "glassy" SA break. I love my Sig, but im starting to gain serious consideration for Glocks. Do you own the hk P30? i will be glad to buy it off of you for good price. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted March 14, 2012 I love these arguments, now that I don't care anymore, it is like watching hipsters trying to decided between the white iphone and the black iphone. After a while you just want the thing to go bang, without to much muss and fuss, brands mean jack, confidence in the gun is everything. Hell, I want my gun to be boring, easy to use, easy to fix, cheap to replace. I'd shoot a glock if it fit my hands just because it is MORE boring and less "special" then the rest of my guns, but it doesn't. Oh, and I've seen H&Ks break. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane45 807 Posted March 14, 2012 Well the only brand I REALLY care about is the one with my name on the side Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikeyboyeee 66 Posted March 14, 2012 This is just a personal question on why HK/Sig owners felt it was worth spending extra money your Sigs or HKs or other "Premium" brands over lower cost brands like Glock and S&W M&Ps. Me personally I do not think Sigs/HKs are better than their counterparts in regard to reliability/functionality/accuracy. But I was still willing to pay more simply because I like them so much in regard to their design and because I have found I really do enjoy shooting them. The "feel" of them is more refined to me and the shooting experience was different (I won't say better) enough for me to be willing to spend a little more. What was your reason for justifying the bigger price tag? I got a GREAT deal ona barely fired 226 9mmwith 3 sets of grips. $660 or so and just couldnt pass it up. I have swince swapped out for E2 grips and LOVE this thing! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
compujas 21 Posted March 14, 2012 The thing a lot of people seem to forget (not necessarily here, but in general) is that Sigs/HKs are metal frame pistols, where Glocks/M&Ps and the like are polymer frame pistols. You can't manufacture a metal frame for nearly the same cost as a molded polymer frame, it's just not possible. That's largely the difference between the two. I look at it more as the $500ish pistols are (usually) polymer frames where the $800+ are metal, and that's mostly the difference in price. Though I do agree with Ray Ray and diamondd about the 92, even though I'm not from Hudson county. I prefer my 92 to my buddy's 226, and it's WAY more lefty friendly. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shane45 807 Posted March 14, 2012 The HK's frame is metal? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
compujas 21 Posted March 14, 2012 Oops, did I just show my ignorance of HK products? Well, my statement still stands for Sigs, which means I have no idea why HK's cost that much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted March 14, 2012 which means I have no idea why HK's cost that much. The Logo is apparently expensive to engrave. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rauchman 3 Posted March 14, 2012 I may be very wrong on this, but it seems whenever HK comes out w/ a new pistol, they have fully vetted it and don't use the public as a beta tester. This seems to not be the case w/ the majority of other makes. Even though I am a big fan the Gen4 Glocks I own, I also recognize that a lot of Gen 4's, especially 9mm's, have had "growing" pains..... as have M&P's, as have newer production Sigs (or at least that was the internet has told me). Even though there may be other platforms that may be "better" in certain areas (ergo's, cost, etc.), in my mind, HK combines exceptional durability, reliability and accuracy into their pistols. I understand the suggested service interval on the recoil springs for the P30 is 25K rounds, vs. roughly 5K on most other makes/models. HK's are mechanically very accurate, yet while their triggers are decent, they are far from exceptional. They are extremely tough service type pistols w/ great accuracy. A lot of other makes play in this arena, but they typically don't go through the testing process that HK subjects their guns to. I know Sig's were once considered on par w/ HK, but I understand since 2004 Sig has changed the QC process on civilian and even LEO pistols to not include the same level of testing that they were once subjected to. I have no direct experience w/ post 2004 Sigs, but I've read a fairly large # of complaints from people that seem to know what they're talking about that for me, I would at least think twice on a purchase of brand new Sig. Oddly enough, Sig's 2022 seems to be the unsung hero of the line. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1911NUT 0 Posted March 14, 2012 Because they out last glocks and M&Ps Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted March 14, 2012 Because they out last glocks and M&Ps That is an interesting idea. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kram 3 Posted March 14, 2012 Because they out last glocks and M&Ps Really? What personal experience do you have with this? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
porkaturbo 0 Posted March 14, 2012 I went with Sig p229 because it "FELT" most comfortable in my hand (small hands - this includes the distance to the trigger) compared to say Glock or SW M&P. However, after trying out a CZ 75 (metal frame at competitive price) I can't justify the price of the Sig anymore - though the Sig still feels more comfortable to hold. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jon 264 Posted March 14, 2012 I like HK because they're better than me and they remind me often. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lunker 274 Posted March 15, 2012 I went with Sig p229 because it "FELT" most comfortable in my hand (small hands - this includes the distance to the trigger) compared to say Glock or SW M&P. However, after trying out a CZ 75 (metal frame at competitive price) I can't justify the price of the Sig anymore - though the Sig still feels more comfortable to hold. I am surprised. I think the doublestack Sigs have the widest grips this side of the Glock 20. Tge CZ is much smaller to me and fits like a glove. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EX Carnival man 223 Posted March 15, 2012 I shot my G23 and a rented Sig P229 side by side at sure shot. The Sig shot very soft, and accurate IMO worth the extra money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SW9racer 262 Posted March 15, 2012 I tried and did not like the Beretta 92, I love the Sig 226 steel German version! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1911NUT 0 Posted March 15, 2012 Really? What personal experience do you have with this? personally ...i owned a G22 .40cal until the frame cracked...i still own a M&P 40cal( which i consider better then the G22) but i had the locking block crack on it or whatever you call it ...smith was great at sending me another one i should say....I mainly stick to the 1911s now but before i traded them i had a SIG P220 45 and a USP 40cal ( i really liked 40s for awhile) ran them just as hard as the Glock and smiths and never had any major problems...just going by what i've seen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lunker 274 Posted March 15, 2012 personally ...i owned a G22 until the frame cracked...i still own a M&P 40( which i consider better then the G22) but i had the locking block crack on it or whatever you call it ...smith was great at sending me another one i should say....I mainly stick to the 1911s now but before i traded them i had a SIG P220 and a USP 40 ( i really liked 40s for awhile) ran them just as hard as the Glock and smiths and never had any major problems...just going by what i've seen I don't know how many rounds you had through the M&P, but a locking block crack is a good thing from the perspective of pre-designed points of failure. I would much rather have a replaceable part fail than a cracked frame. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vlad G 345 Posted March 15, 2012 personally ...i owned a G22 .40cal until the frame cracked...i still own a M&P 40cal( which i consider better then the G22) but i had the locking block crack on it or whatever you call it ...smith was great at sending me another one i should say....I mainly stick to the 1911s now but before i traded them i had a SIG P220 45 and a USP 40cal ( i really liked 40s for awhile) ran them just as hard as the Glock and smiths and never had any major problems...just going by what i've seen Out of curiosity, how many rounds through the G22 and M&P? Also what kind of ammo where you using? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JonF 79 Posted March 15, 2012 I would imagine economy of scale plays a large part of why an HK (or the steel sig's) is more money than a Glock. While i don't know the numbers, its probably pretty safe to assume that Glock sells a lot more G17/G19's than HK sells a P30's and usp's. In addition to the lower production numbers, the HK is hammer fired with safety/decocker which is more complex and more expensive to produce. It also comes in different trigger/safety configurations so that costs even more money to make. Add in labor and overhead to assemble said variations in some expensive European country and assume if both companies were to have the similar profit margin to stay afloat, its not hard to understand the price difference. It would be interesting to know what the production costs of an HK are just to see if there is any added premium built into to thier margins. If there is, I bet its not as radical as you would think. But hey, its easier to sit back in a 'blissful' state and say, "both guns are black, they should just cost the same!" 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1911NUT 0 Posted March 15, 2012 I don't know how many rounds you had through the M&P, but a locking block crack is a good thing from the perspective of pre-designed points of failure. I would much rather have a replaceable part fail than a cracked frame. Pretty much thats how i saw it.. thats why i kept the M&P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites