Please don't say all.

I am sure there are worse offenders, but Arsenal is using some pretty crappy fire control group parts these days. The rest of the rifles are solid, outside of the finish, but you know you have a problem when the Tapco replacement is considered by most to be an improvement.

The 10/22 is now being manufactured with some plastic parts, correct?

Pretty much all of Sig's line up is junk these days.

That's been true for quite some time now.  But now they have even more plastic.



 

SIG 556 might be the worst offender

The Beretta 92FS series uses lower quality parts these days, plastic guide rode and trigger I think

Glocks

The recent spate of .22LR "tactical" guns (Colt/Umarex M4, GSG5 etc.) are mostly crap... plastic and pot metal.

I'd say any .22 umarex makes and stamps colt/walther/etc.  Sig's QC seems to have down the crapper.  I think the argument could be made for the 870 express.  10/22.  LMT's use of a mim gas key counts for me.

Name one thing Glock has cut corners on? You can't since they haven't.

The current 10/22 with the crappy finish & plastic trigger group is not worth $200.

They were looking to cut weight and cost. In part for the military who apparently wanted the polymer guide rods as they were better for use in the desert as I'm sure the other polymer parts are to a point. The trigger and mag release with there metal inserts, the polymer lanyard loop and guide rod all work just fine for the job. They are not poor quality as far as polymer parts go. This is becoming a polymer pistol world afterall and it's seen as modernization to some. I do prefer the more expensive to make, heavier steel parts myself though.

It's a good thing I only paid $100 for mine then.  

I don't know what Henry used to use for their leveractions, but the material they are using now is junk.  Some galvanized cast-pot metal type crap, probably melted down garbage cans from the streets of the NYC.  Go ahead, call me a Henry hater, I don't care, doesn't mean the material that make up Henry leverguns isn't shit.

LMT's

How's the quality level on the little .22 model 60s?

plastic triggerguard, but its more accurate then my old 10/22 and is reliable with the walmart federal 550 rd value pack. Not bad for 129.99

I think most with experience and who are long time Beretta 92 series users would agree quality in general is not what it once was.
They are still a fine handgun though. I'm not sure why a polymer guide rod would hold up better in the desert, seems counter intuitive. Anyway it's not an important part. As you said there has been a cheapening of the design in general.

Regarding the Beretta, I noticed the plastic parts on a pistol I bought a few years ago but they seem well though out and unlikely to result in lower durability or reliability.

I will admit that the slide is not as silky smooth as an old used Italian 92 I had years ago, but I don't think the US made guns have ever been up to Italian standards in that regard.  Maybe after I put a few thousand rounds through the US made gun it will smooth out.  It is still smoother than any other pistol I have racked, just not as smooth as that tired old Italian.  The machining on the old Italian was much better too.

The price on new 92s can be quite reasonable; the new 92/M9 I bought was cheaper than a Glock/S&W/Ruger polymer pistol.

I noticed that Winchester had started slightly modifying the Model 70 design to makes it cheaper to produce before they shut the factory in 2006.  Most of the changes were pretty minor, although there was one cut-out in the receiver that was probably too big and could result in problems. They were making some other changes at the same time that definitely improved the gun.  The new models they are making in South Carolina have more improvements, but the price has gone up quite a bit.

There is a lot of plastic on the last couple of 870s I have bought, but again I don't see any problem as far as function goes.  They don't seem to be parts that will produce wear problems, and of course they won't rust.  Like the new 92s, 870s are very reasonably priced.  I know some people who have had problems with the finish on newer 870s rusting, but those people didn't properly store their firearms.

I'd rather have a Beretta or Remington include some well thought out polymer parts than have those companies start making their guns in China or Russia to compete.

The polymer parts of the current 92FS and M9's do give a certain leeway for users who don't have the best maintenance skills. They function better when not lubed as well compared to steel parts. That's one thing I learned well in the Army, as even though the Army teaches a soldier the basics of cleaning a weapon, they don't really get into much on how and where to properly lubricate the weapons the soldiers are using. The M9 being one of them and many soldiers don't have much experience with firearms prior to service. That's also why I don't give much weight to any soldier saying the M9 sucks. I know it doesn't and is one of the best pistols in the world. It's easy for someone to form opinions based on military weapons though and how there maintained. Weapons that are also beat to hell, poorly lubed and using lowest bid contracted parts also at times unliked there civilian counterparts often enough.

I've had my M9 and 92FS for about 6 years now if I remember correctly. I should have bought one or two a long time before loving the M9's in the military and everyone I came in contact with in the civilian world. I can't really say quality has gone down in the US versions separate from the use of the polymer parts even though there a difference between the US made and Italians. Both of mine have been super smooth from the start and have only gotten smoother in action from use. I wore them in a bit with very little lube in part to break them in and have been using Tetra grease and CLP on them ever since. There excellent pistols. I did toss the polymer guide rods early on for Wolff's, changed out the hammer and trigger return springs and am now using ISMI chrome silicon recoil springs. My M9 has all steel parts except for the lanyard loop, but I actually decided to put back in the polymer, metal insert trigger and mag release in my 92FS as I carry it as a CCW at times and it's a little lighter. As said, the polymer parts function just fine.

I'm going to second this. I have yet to see corner cutting.

Put me in as a third. It's one of the things I like best about Glocks. You know you're going to get a gun with good parts with all the durability and reliability you would expect from a duty pistol.

Also, with the 92FSs and the plastic parts, they have not affected the reliability or durability of this great pistol that I can tell in my experience.

Could you explain?

I haven't been keeping up with ARs since the election, and I would like to know where LMT is cutting corners.

This concerns me.  I was considering getting a 92FS.  Should I look for a used one in good shape?

I kind of wanted a Beretta so I could eventually get a CX4 with magazine compatibility to go with it.  I might have to opt for a CZ75 instead.

You mean to tell me that none of you noticed that Glock is now making frames out of plastic?  I only own the original, metal framed Glocks because they'll last longer.

They decided to start using MIM gas keys with cracked staking.  Also the assembly and machining have gone down
somewhat.  In addition the customer service is lacking as well.

Here are a few threads discussing LMT problems-

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=446576

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=455946

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=457139

You'd be foolish to think the new ones aren't any good. There are alot of fools on Arfcom though. But obviously my opinion means only so much. Want more? Go here.



Beretta Forum

Thats good to know.  You know how sometimes you pick up a gun and you feel like it was tailor made for your hands?  That's how the Beretta 92 is for me.

Depends on what model you choose.

Ruger 10-22

I bought both a new Beretta Brigadier .40 cal pistol and I replace all the plastic parts, which I wasn't too crazy about, but my older, Italian made, Model 92FS needed a big brother!!

As for Sig, I've purchased 2 Sig 556 rifles over the last 2 years and I'm selling one at a lost since the QC sucks soooo bad, its not even funny!!!  I just can't get over the fact that Sig is now fielding less than quality firearms, just to save a few bucks.  Now, I can say that I will never buy a new Sig product since I don't have any faith in them or the company anymore AND yes, I'm sorry to say that since my late 80s P-226 and my 90s P-220 are my best handguns.

BTW, the problem with my Sig-226 Classic is all the slop between the upper/lower receivers, poor finish, a cheap (Chinese??) plastic folding stock, a less than reliable plastic magazine and a cheesy/cheap Chinese red-dot optic sight...  What were they thinking!!!  Oh well, I guess I'll correct the stock issue by buy a true European Sig non-adjusting folding stock for the price of $250.00 to $350.00, have it duraKoated in a "Sig" gray or a "SOCOM" black finish, purchase an Aimpoint optic and buy more Pmags for it.

As for the slop between the upper/lower receivers, yes, it doesn't affect its function, but at $1,800.00, there shouldn't be any at that price.  

I just wished I waited for the Ruger's piston AR rifle now!!!

Damn.  The Glock kool-aid drinkers are abundant in here, too.  

Glock isnt unique.  They've had their ups and downs like all other firearms companies.  Cutting corners?  Yeah, they have.  But to their credit they stepped up and replaced the thousands of frames they FUBAR'd.

Nothing Chinese related to firearms is "cheap". More like shitty American QC issues.

How about the lever actions? Still good QC from the major manufacturers?

Can you explain that comment or give some specific examples of the differences between US and Italian made 92\M9's? Not saying your wrong I'm just curious to read what you feel the differences are?

In my personal experience, LMT's CS has always been lacking and their machining and assembly has always been inconsistent at best. When they do it right, they make a fine product but again, in my personal experience, they mess up a lot for a so-called "Teir 1" manufacturer.

I will say their switch to using a MIM gas key is one of the only true examples in this thread of a company cutting corners.

I love how the rule around here is if you think a company makes a good, reliable product at a fair price that you are somehow a kool-aid drinker? [rolleyes}

In the world of firearms, they are actually

You do realize there is a difference between releasing a bad or out of spec part and cutting corners don't you? Has Glock released some out of spec or non-100% functioning firearms over the years? Sure, name a company who hasn't but in my experience, Glock does that much less often then most other firearm manufacturers.

Has Glock cheapened their design? Hell no and if anything, the have constantly improved it. If you're going to sit there an insist that Glocks have been cheapened then site a specific example of a part that is of lower quality today compared to when the Glock was first released? (little hint: You can't because it hasn't happened).

Marlin has cheapened the 336, but not that bad as you can still buy the higher quality 336C.

The 336A & 336W just have walnut-finished birch stocks, the front sight is attached by 1 screw. The 336C has walnut stocks, and the front sight is attached by 2 screws.

They did quit drilling & tapping the side of the receiver for a sight, and now only drill & tap the top of the receiver.

I heard Remington released an 870 they call the Express that has one MIM part and a durable plastic trigger guard

I think Lympago brings up some very important points.

If a part that use to be made from some type of metal and is now made from some type or plastic or polymer, does that automatically mean it's now cheaper or less reliable? From a cost perspective maybe (usually but not always) but from a functional and reliability standpoint, polymer does not automatically mean lower quality. Often a well designed polymer part using the right materials and manufacturing techniques is as strong and reliable (If not more so) then the metal part it might have replaced.

The problem here is 2 fold... 1. Most of us are old enough to have seen, shot and\or owned old school all steel weapons. Some of those weapons where\are very well made workhorses that have stood the test of time. Being human, we are by nature afraid of change so when we see gun makers moving away from the steel we are so accustomed to and moving towards materials we are less familiar with, we automatically assume the worst. 2. The other part of the problem is, most of use do not have a good understanding of plastics and polymers. We assume based off of our experience with cheap $1 plastic items that we bought at Walmart\made in China. If those items can be broken with little effort then it stands to reason that all items made from "plastic" are crap. That's like saying all girls by the name of Pam are tramps because you knew a total slut in HS with that name. Even those few who do know a lot about plastics and polymers can't usually tell what exact formula or material a part was made of or what process was used to form it just by looking at it. So until the part is tested (either in a lab or after years of use in the field) we have no idea about the true quality of that part.

The thing is, like it or not the days of all steel, hand machined firearms are over. Steel and the cost of processing and machining it have just become way too high to be practical. Even the few examples of old school steel and bluing that do still exist don't usually sell well because most people aren't willing to pay for it. Take the S&W 41. Some might argue that the machining and blueing on the 41's aren't as nice as it use to be but overall, it's still an old school all steel firearm that is made as well today as it was 50 years ago but how many people looking for a .22 buy a $700-$800 41 and how many buy a ~$300 Ruger made mostly of plastics and MIM steel?

Another funny side note, 30 some-odd years ago, people thought the AR was a cheap piece of junk because the receivers were made of Aluminum instead of steel. Same thing with the 10/22. Those new "plastic" parts that everyone is complaining about are replacing Aluminum parts that were considered cheap and tacky when the 10/22 first came out. These days, nobody thinks anything bad about Aluminum being use appropriately in firearms. I believe Polymer will someday (sooner rather then later) be thought of in the same way.