who is the highest quality firearms manufacturer? - Page 3

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - who is the highest quality firearms manufacturer? (Page 3 of 3)

Posted: 8/27/2015 4:28:15 PM EDT

[#1]

If you have a say $2k limit I would say Sako. Under $1k Steyr Prohunter, Browning and CZ. And this is we are only talking bolt guns.

Posted: 8/27/2015 4:51:38 PM EDT

[#2]

Quote History

Quoted:
Franchi makes nice shotguns.

http://www.franchiusa.com/sites/default/files/styles/model_hover_large/public/originals/product-firearms/instinct-l-over-and-under-shotgun.png?itok=HOVuBE0N

View Quote

Nicer than Kreighoff? Blaser? Kolar?

Thats not even to mention the next step up; Holland and Holland, Purdey, etc.

Edit: people talking about AR manufacturers and whatnot must be joking

Posted: 8/27/2015 5:01:01 PM EDT

[#3]

BCM, because op said regular run of the mill

Posted: 8/27/2015 5:11:52 PM EDT

[#4]

Quote History

Quoted:

BCM, because op said regular run of the mill

View Quote

Got to agree. Every BCM gun and upper I've had my hands on is very well done considering the price. I need 2 of their 20" government uppers for the growing stockpile of parts.

Posted: 8/27/2015 5:31:54 PM EDT

[#5]

HK

Posted: 8/27/2015 5:33:12 PM EDT

[#6]

Quote History

Quoted:
Any firearm as long as it's a production piece?

Anchutz

"nice" is pretty subjective. Some might think pretty. I tend to think quality + accuracy + durability.

View Quote

Yep Annies sure are nice someday I will own one....

Posted: 8/27/2015 7:06:08 PM EDT

[#7]

Quote History

Quoted:

Actually, MIM is an extension of Powered Metal technology. MIM was developed for one reason …… to eliminate the need for secondary operations on PM parts. It is in affect a "blending" of plastic injection technology and PM technology.

On straight PM parts, it is impossible to mold say threads and other features into a part. With MIM, it is now possible to do things with Powered Metal that could not be done before……. eliminating the need to add these things thru secondary operations.

PM technology has been around for a LONG time….. MIM is "relatively" new.

As far as strength is concerned, PM technology has been used for YEARS AND YEARS to make parts like…….. the huge gears in the transmissions of Case excavating equipment, transmission gears and parts in MANY applications, connecting rods in modern motors ( for years) , came shafts, ball joints, etc. etc.

MANY MANY parts that are subjected to high stress and loads in every thing we use today. In our cars, trucks, motorcycles, snow machines, atvs, electric motors and appliances ……… just about every thing you come in contact with everyday. The strength is there.

As far as maintaining dimensions is concerned, manufacturing processes are improving all the time…… I can only imagine where MIM manufacturing will be in 10 years. As for now? MIM is great technology and has many many uses it is well suited for.

Nothing wrong with MIM.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
NONE

due to mim etc.

retarded statement. MIM =/= cast

As an engineer, this is a bigoted and ill-informed statement on many levels.

The first and foremost is that MIM was mainly introduced to replace machined parts that were costly and time consuming to manufacture. So even if you think casting = MIM, you would not replace machined parts with cast ones. They were machined for a reason!! That is asking for trouble. Especially when speaking about gun parts that are frequently replaced with MIM to save money, such as extractors. There is not only the issue of strength, but as well as being dimensionally correct. You won't even be on the same ballpark with dimensions.

Ok sorry, rant off

Actually, MIM is an extension of Powered Metal technology. MIM was developed for one reason …… to eliminate the need for secondary operations on PM parts. It is in affect a "blending" of plastic injection technology and PM technology.

On straight PM parts, it is impossible to mold say threads and other features into a part. With MIM, it is now possible to do things with Powered Metal that could not be done before……. eliminating the need to add these things thru secondary operations.

PM technology has been around for a LONG time….. MIM is "relatively" new.

As far as strength is concerned, PM technology has been used for YEARS AND YEARS to make parts like…….. the huge gears in the transmissions of Case excavating equipment, transmission gears and parts in MANY applications, connecting rods in modern motors ( for years) , came shafts, ball joints, etc. etc.

MANY MANY parts that are subjected to high stress and loads in every thing we use today. In our cars, trucks, motorcycles, snow machines, atvs, electric motors and appliances ……… just about every thing you come in contact with everyday. The strength is there.

As far as maintaining dimensions is concerned, manufacturing processes are improving all the time…… I can only imagine where MIM manufacturing will be in 10 years. As for now? MIM is great technology and has many many uses it is well suited for.

Nothing wrong with MIM.

Not arguing with that. I am standing up for quality manufacturing of small parts in firearms that have no business being MIM. I've machined trigger group parts and bolt carrier group parts and performed QA on them as well as developing MIM counterparts for those pieces. I know the difference, I know the challenges facing in developing molds that work for these pieces without creating voids and also the fact that at some point you have to decide what kind of voids are acceptable (something you'd never worry about with machined parts).

Most gun companies do NOT go through a proper development process for these MIM parts, and most of them will not pass a QA check if you check it against a proper print with the original tolerances. I know, I've done all this myself.

Development of MIM parts in the firearms industry is not an advanced science like it is in other industries.

I landed a job as manufacturing engineer one of the highest regardeon AR manufacturers on this board and I was highly disappointed in the methods of testing, development and true science done on these weapons we all trust our lives to. I got fed up and now work as an IndyCar engineer doing some real science on the cutting edge.

The smartest people are not in the (mainstream) gun manufacturing business, unfortunately. There's a few, but they are grossly outnumbered.

Posted: 8/27/2015 7:23:48 PM EDT

[#8]

L

Quote History

Quoted:

Not arguing with that. I am standing up for quality manufacturing of small parts in firearms that have no business being MIM. I've machined trigger group parts and bolt carrier group parts and performed QA on them as well as developing MIM counterparts for those pieces. I know the difference, I know the challenges facing in developing molds that work for these pieces without creating voids and also the fact that at some point you have to decide what kind of voids are acceptable (something you'd never worry about with machined parts).

Most gun companies do NOT go through a proper development process for these MIM parts, and most of them will not pass a QA check if you check it against a proper print with the original tolerances. I know, I've done all this myself.

Development of MIM parts in the firearms industry is not an advanced science like it is in other industries.

I landed a job as manufacturing engineer one of the highest regardeon AR manufacturers on this board and I was highly disappointed in the methods of testing, development and true science done on these weapons we all trust our lives to. I got fed up and now work as an IndyCar engineer doing some real science on the cutting edge.

The smartest people are not in the (mainstream) gun manufacturing business, unfortunately. There's a few, but they are grossly outnumbered.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
NONE

due to mim etc.

retarded statement. MIM =/= cast

As an engineer, this is a bigoted and ill-informed statement on many levels.

The first and foremost is that MIM was mainly introduced to replace machined parts that were costly and time consuming to manufacture. So even if you think casting = MIM, you would not replace machined parts with cast ones. They were machined for a reason!! That is asking for trouble. Especially when speaking about gun parts that are frequently replaced with MIM to save money, such as extractors. There is not only the issue of strength, but as well as being dimensionally correct. You won't even be on the same ballpark with dimensions.

Ok sorry, rant off

Actually, MIM is an extension of Powered Metal technology. MIM was developed for one reason …… to eliminate the need for secondary operations on PM parts. It is in affect a "blending" of plastic injection technology and PM technology.

On straight PM parts, it is impossible to mold say threads and other features into a part. With MIM, it is now possible to do things with Powered Metal that could not be done before……. eliminating the need to add these things thru secondary operations.

PM technology has been around for a LONG time….. MIM is "relatively" new.

As far as strength is concerned, PM technology has been used for YEARS AND YEARS to make parts like…….. the huge gears in the transmissions of Case excavating equipment, transmission gears and parts in MANY applications, connecting rods in modern motors ( for years) , came shafts, ball joints, etc. etc.

MANY MANY parts that are subjected to high stress and loads in every thing we use today. In our cars, trucks, motorcycles, snow machines, atvs, electric motors and appliances ……… just about every thing you come in contact with everyday. The strength is there.

As far as maintaining dimensions is concerned, manufacturing processes are improving all the time…… I can only imagine where MIM manufacturing will be in 10 years. As for now? MIM is great technology and has many many uses it is well suited for.

Nothing wrong with MIM.

Not arguing with that. I am standing up for quality manufacturing of small parts in firearms that have no business being MIM. I've machined trigger group parts and bolt carrier group parts and performed QA on them as well as developing MIM counterparts for those pieces. I know the difference, I know the challenges facing in developing molds that work for these pieces without creating voids and also the fact that at some point you have to decide what kind of voids are acceptable (something you'd never worry about with machined parts).

Most gun companies do NOT go through a proper development process for these MIM parts, and most of them will not pass a QA check if you check it against a proper print with the original tolerances. I know, I've done all this myself.

Development of MIM parts in the firearms industry is not an advanced science like it is in other industries.

I landed a job as manufacturing engineer one of the highest regardeon AR manufacturers on this board and I was highly disappointed in the methods of testing, development and true science done on these weapons we all trust our lives to. I got fed up and now work as an IndyCar engineer doing some real science on the cutting edge.

The smartest people are not in the (mainstream) gun manufacturing business, unfortunately. There's a few, but they are grossly outnumbered.

Just like Sig's PM ejectors that were snapping like twigs on their 357's ....gimme forged and milled any day!

Posted: 8/27/2015 8:19:13 PM EDT

[#9]

SIG Sauer

Posted: 8/27/2015 8:29:03 PM EDT

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:
easy peasy its lorcin Raven.

View Quote

Posted: 8/27/2015 8:31:20 PM EDT

[#11]

Quote History

Quoted:
ha ha wow that looks like my kids did it with a dremel

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Gunsmoke makes some quality guns with engraving that is 2nd to none.

http://wingman26.com/images/shooting/ag3-engraved.jpg

ha ha wow that looks like my kids did it with a dremel

With a 16P nail in the collet.

Posted: 8/27/2015 8:48:37 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:
HK.

View Quote

First post nails it again

Posted: 8/27/2015 8:50:48 PM EDT

[#13]

Overall = Beretta

Posted: 8/27/2015 8:54:34 PM EDT

[#14]

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned FN.

HK obviously is up there as well....

Posted: 8/27/2015 9:00:42 PM EDT

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
They claim half inch at 300yds with it too.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:

Not gonna read the OP.

Fuchs rifles are nice.

http://truthaboutguns-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/i2.png

They claim half inch at 300yds with it too.

I've never heard of Fuchs, but those are some beautiful rifles.

Posted: 8/27/2015 9:04:03 PM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:
Gunsmoke makes some quality guns with engraving that is 2nd to none.

http://wingman26.com/images/shooting/ag3-engraved.jpg

View Quote

Wasn't Rich arrested recently?

Posted: 8/27/2015 9:10:41 PM EDT

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:
Holland and Holland, upper end Berettas, Merkel, Heym, etc.

And HK WTF? Not even in the same league.

View Quote

Came to post the same, my uncle has a Merkel and it is a sexy and accurate gun but not many know of them.
He has a safe full of high end guns and the wood alone on some of them is worth more then some people's whole collection.