All Boards I've ever seen always have a lot of posts concerning which is the Best Firearm and which is the Worst. Always seems to be some excellent reasons posted in support of most everyones comments. Fortunately no one ever argues about what someone else has actually seen or experienced.

What do you think helps the Firearm Manufacturers the most?

Question:
If you are commenting on a firearm you have actually handled, do you believe the Firearm Manufacturers benefit the most from:

Choices:
1. Posting good things about the Firearm and post the features I really like about it.
2. Posting bad things about the Firearm and post the features I really dislike about it.
3. Both the good and the bad as objective as I can be.
4. Other.

Question:
If you have a firearm and found it to be functional, but with minor problems, do you believe the Firearm Manufacturers benefit the most from:

Choices:
5. Fixing the minor problems myself or let a GunSmith do it.
6. Returning it to the Manufacturer so they have the opportunity to resolve the minor issues.
7. Other.

Question:
If you have a firearm and found it to be non-functional, with major problems, do you believe the Firearm Manufacturers benefit the most from:

Choices:
8. Going on and get the problems fixed by someone I trust. Obviously the Manufacturer will just make a bigger mess of it and eat up a lot of my time and effort.
9. Returning it to the manufacturer so they can see what got past them and allow them to have the opportunity to correct " ALL " the problems.
10. Other.

Question:
Do you think the Firearm Manufacturers have personnel that look at the Hunting and Shooting Boards?

Choices:
11. Yes.
12. No.
13. Other

Question:
If you answered " Yes ", do you think what they see on these Boards has any influence on new products?

Choices:
14. Yes.
15. No.
16. Other.
17. I answered that they DO NOT look, so this question does not apply to me.

Question:
If you answered " Yes " do you think what they see on these Boards has any influence on their desire to produce a better Quality firearm?

Choices:
18. Yes.
19. No.
20. Other.
21. I answered that they DO NOT look, so this question does not apply to me.

 

I think the manufacturer should have the first go at fixing any issue with a firearm they manufactured. Hopefully it is a "learning" experience for them to improve QA... As to looking at the hunting and shooting boards... I imagine that some might actually encourage certain employees to review the boards to find out what is being said about their products... Some may actually dedicate a resource to this effort while others may not at all... I would say it's a hit and miss thing but you can bet that somebody from just about every company checks them out, whether officially or not...

Ken....

Interesting poll. I'd guess that some manufacturers will occasionally look at the outdoor sites but I don't think they pay attention to them. If that were the case, ya wouldn't have so many people bad mouthing Kimber. They'd be jumping through hoops to improve their quality control.
JMO Bear in Fairbanks

Just because a MANUFACTURER might benefit doesn't exactly mean that I will benefit.

If it costs me $125 to ship a rifle (from Cali / sigh) to a manufacturer where a local smith can fix it for $50 (and faster I might add), then why would I ship it?

IF the manufacturer agreed to pay for the shipping, then yes, by all means, send to the manufacturer...

My money has ZERO defects.
I expect at least that from the manufacturer.

If I purchased a "lemon" firearm brand new, I not only expect them to fix it, I'd hope they would replace it for free.

I like the idea of Sending it back to the folks who made the error too.

Maybe 12-15 years ago I got a new Bolt Action rifle that had some kind of a problem with the Bolt when you fired it. Seems like it "moved" slightly, canted, or something. I took it back to the Gun Shop where I'd swapped for it and they took care of sending it back - at their expense. Granted, I did a lot of business with them, so the $20 Shipping cost was of little concern to them.

Got it back fairly quickly with a letter detailing what they determined was wrong and that they had fixed it. They sure had fixed it and returned it with No Charge(of course it was new). It is still one of the rifles I use a good bit.

Unless they can see the actual problems first-hand, it is very difficult for any Company to make a worthwhile Corrective Action to their process.
-----

For those of you who think the Firearms Manufacturers do not look at the Board, ask some of the guys who have been around for awhile if they remember the M70 Flick in the Remington catalog. I think it was last year or the year before.

Anyway, someone on this Board picked up on it and it was quite funny. Within 36hrs, the Remington web site had replaced the flick on the net. Of course it was way too late to change the catalog. The Marketing Dept sure got an ear full over that fiasco.
-----

Then out of the clear blue I got a call last night from an old buddy who gets checks from the Columbia, SC, FNH-USA manufacturing plant. Strange coincidence.

I agree 100% with " ireload2 " !.

If one pays the money one should expect full dollar value !.

An inexpensive firearm is nonsense !.

A quality firearm should be just that , at a reasonable cost and free of defect !.

CEO's Salaries and severance packages , Drive corporations to bankruptcy not the work forces behind them !.

Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...

I think that they should know what is best for their firearm. By reading forums and going to gun shows. Getting involved with their guns by holding contests. Going to matches and asking about their gun. The likes and dislikes. You know Like maybe the sights on the gun.

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:
If I purchased a "lemon" firearm brand new, I not only expect them to fix it, I'd hope they would replace it for free.

I am in the middle of just such a problem with a semi-custom manufacturer. They have promised to either fix the rifle by rebarreling it, or by building me a new rifle. it is a fairly expensive piece, (to me, anyway), and I expect the perfection they advertise. You will most certainly hear about it by name brand and the litany of the problems I incurred if they don't.

I actually have had very few (2) firearms that came with a problem. As the were what I considered major ones-- I had the manufacturer fix them. But if it was a thing I felt confident to fix-- I would.

quote:

Originally posted by jetdrvr:
I am in the middle of just such a problem with a semi-custom manufacturer. They have promised to either fix the rifle by rebarreling it, or by building me a new rifle. it is a fairly expensive piece, (to me, anyway), and I expect the perfection they advertise. You will most certainly hear about it by name brand and the litany of the problems I incurred if they don't.

I'd say you are doing the correct thing by waiting to see how well they address the problems you have found. If they get them all resolved to your satisfaction, that speaks well for them.

Then the only question would be, "Why did they not notice the problems in the beginning?"

Best of luck to you.
-----

Just noticed the thread has had "590 Views" and 38 responses. Interesting that so many folks have no opinions at all about the people whomake our firearms.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Just noticed the thread has had "590 Views" and 38 responses. Interesting that so many folks have no opinions at all about the people whomake our firearms.

I'm one who looked at the poll and then didn't answer. I came back to answer alot later. The subject seems to be more complicated than the range of answers allows. I think manufacturers may be interested in what Craig Boddington thinks, but not what you and I might think. His audience is a little larger.

I have owned a lot of firearms in the last 40+ years (between 200 and 300 or more). Most of these firearms were bought used, some were well used and some were only slightly used. All had some type of problem, mostly bad triggers and bedding problems that the manufacturer would not fix. For what I paid, I could afford to fix these problems.

If you buy a firearm from Wally-World you’s pays your money and you’s takes your chances. I have seen very few rifles that came from Wally-World that didn’t have problems. Most had bedding problems. Some would not fire. Some had bolt handles fall off. And some had backwards mounted scope and sights that were mounted off center. It seems that when manufacturers start selling to the big retailers that quality control goes out the window.

I have never bought a firearm new or used that was truly bad. A lot have had triggers that I did not like and some have had bedding problems but these things are easy to fix.

Hey ColeK, Welcome Aboard!

quote:

Originally posted by Wink:
...The subject seems to be more complicated than the range of answers allows. I think manufacturers may be interested in what Craig Boddington thinks, but not what you and I might think. His audience is a little larger.

Hey Wink, What other "Options" would you have added?

You have an excellent point about Craig Boddington's audience being much larger.

Do todays Gun Writers typically include "problems" on firearms? I seem to remember Mr. Boddington mentioning brands not being available in the Lefty configuration many years ago. But I do not remember a lot of Negative print from any of the Writers when I was taking the magazines. Perhaps that has changed now, I don't know.

I remember when the "WSMs" first came out there seemed to be a good many "Feed Problems" reported on this Board. Never heard anyone mention a Writer had seen the same thing and put it in print.

And it seems theKimber users have some legitimate complaints about the Magazine Spring Retention causing Feed Problems. But I've not seen any of them mention a Writer said anything about it in a magazine either.

Granted the Writers get to handle 1-2 samples unless they have gone on a multiple-Writer Guest Hunt/Shoot, so perhaps the limited quanty they handled just didn't exhibit the problems.

However, I always remember a Writer, Layne Simpson, "Lied by Omission" about the Ruger M77 MarkII, when he failed to mention they had gone to a non-adjustable trigger design in the first Shooting Times article about them. I was seriously thinking about getting one of them back then when the Gun Shop Owner told me about the new 2-stage non-adjustable trigger. I was sure glad he knew me well enough to tell me. As a fact, when it was time to re-new Shooting Times, I just dropped it. I figured if they would not tell me about a Major Design Change, I really didn't need to be fooled further by them. I just this week got an offer from them where I can get 24 issues for $12. Still seems a bit high for not knowing if their material is accurate or not.