Warped perspective?

[Pat-inCO]

Do I have a warped perspective, or am I just too cautious?

I was reading on another gun forum and there is a thread on a specific model (I'm
trying to be nebulous so no one thinks I prejudice on the model) that he had
changed a laundry list of parts in the trigger assembly (one of those you can
trade the trigger group, included different weight springs) and "suddenly" it jambs. :roll:

I look at that and think WHY would you go out, buy a new gun, shoot it just enough
to know it is functioning properly, and then change a plethora of parts? If you
wanted something THAT different, why not purchase what you want? - - - If it was
an older model that was far beyond "broken in", it could be one approach to trade
out parts, but a virtually new one? Is there something wrong with buying what you
really want? - - - I'm looking at the price difference and to me it looks like, without
the problems, he is paying MORE for the replacement parts, than he could have
paid for the upgraded model. . . . . Humm. I may have partially answered my own
question; he wants to play gun smith and completely messed it up.

One thing I perpetually have in the back of my mind is Mas Ayoob's statement
about not using modified guns for self defense. Mas recommends a "factory" gun
just to avoid smart-alec lawyers trying to nail your hide to the wall about
modifications, should you be unfortunate enough to have to use it to defend
yourself.

Like I asked, do I just need a different perspective?

 

[blume357]

I think that Was Ayoob's analogy is a little too thought out.... I think it would depend on the modifications and then some expert discovering the modifications as well as the modifications then being something that would appear to be excessive.. and this all has to be after a really bad thing happens... which is very unlikely and the bad thing also has to be suspicious....

Now as for the original part of your question... well some folks just have to make things more better.... I've been known to do that on some of my guns and even a couple that I've carried. All of my Sig P226s have the shorter trigger reset and a slightly better trigger than factory... but I don't hardly ever carry one of those... they are more for showing off at the East Coast Ruger Gathering when Contender sets up his combat course.....
The Sig P239 I carry now as wall as the one before that both had lasers on them... does that qualify for Ayoob's danger sign?
As for other guns... well I'd say if a person owns more than one 10/22 and has not modified the poor factory trigger then they really don't deserve the rifle.....

Just my 3 & 1/2 cents worth....

 

[TRanger]

It has always beat me why some people buy a good gun and then proceed to louse it up by tinkering with the mechanism. If, after shooting it a while, you discover something that NEEDS modified, that is one thing. But just to change parts for no good reason is a sure road to trouble. I have seen countless examples of good guns made virtually useless by needless modifications.

 

[Rick Courtright]

Hi,

I have a rather simplistic view of this: untiI I know more than the engineer who designed a piece of equipment, I'll honor his knowledge and work by not dinking around with it right out of the box. If he's any good at what he does, he's probably already done what I plan to, and rejected it for one of several reasons. Engineering's a compromise, so nothing's perfect, but most things I play with work pretty well "as is."

My old gunsmith boss got lots of requests to start modifying guns right out of the box and generally told the new owner to go put 1000 rounds or so thru the new gun, then they could start with the mods. He laughed about how the engineers often "got smarter" as the round count increased.

Rick C

 

[Bob Wright]

I must say that on two of my guns I ordered, I had them shipped off for modifications before I ever saw the gun.

Gun No. 1: Smith & Wesson Model 29, .44 Magnum. Return to factory for installing a 5" Full Lug barrel and pinning. Why? I wanted a 5" Full Lug .44 Magnum and S&W did no offer that except with non-fluted cylinder and round butt. I got what I wanted.

Gun No. 2: Ruger Blackhawk, .45 Colt. Return to factory to fit .45 ACP cylinder, convertibles not offered at that time. Also fit, polish and blue Dragoon style grip frame and new grips.

Numerous Super Blackhawks: Fit standard Blackhawk hammer in place of that beavertail hammer. Why: More positive grip on the hammer spur when working fast.

Boils down to the fact I know what I want, factory reluctant to provide it to me.


Bob Wright

 

[blackhawknj]

To each his own. I like my guns "stock", biggest change on any of my revolvers are more comfortable grips, my M1911s all have flat mainspring housings.

 

[Pat-inCO]

Boils down to the fact I know what I want, factory reluctant to provide it to me.

BUT, you didn't go do it at your kitchen table. You had the people that knew/know
how to make the changes you wanted, and paid them to do it.

 

[Rick Courtright]

To each his own. I like my guns "stock".

Hi,

So do future prospective buyers!

Once upon a time a long time ago, on a car forum, I saw a very well written response about "modifying" one's car. In a nutshell, the author's point was "beauty lies in the eye of the beholder, and your absolutely gorgeous (to you) one of a kind car may be nothing but a pile of junk to somebody looking to buy it." For example, when I go to a car show and there's a fantastic example of a '63 Chevy low rider, one the guy could have easily $50k-$75k or more sunk into, I'll look at it. I'll probably admire the artwork, the engineering, the craftsmanship, and the 1000s of hours the fellow's put into bringing it all together. But if I really wanted a '63 Chevy, his would be the last one on earth I wanted, while somewhere across town there's a 90+ year old little ol' granny whose son bought one while he was in the Army, parked it in her garage with under 100 miles on it when he shipped off to Viet Nam, and never made it home. Sentiment aside, that car's worth some bucks.

Guns, cars, motorcycles, and I'm sure a host of other potentially customizable items kinda follow that same rule.

Rick C

 

[hittman]

Every time a "custom" gun seller says to me "I've added ________" I'm deducting price I'll pay.

 

[contender]

I think the OP is more interested in the fact that many people fail to accept a factory offering of a firearm BEFORE trying the gun out to see if it will do as they wish.
Customizing, or modifying anything (guns, cars etc,) often boils down to a couple of things.
One, options desired but not offered by the factory. From a custom color on a car to a different grip option,, to more elaborate changes. The factory may not offer that grip type that fits YOUR hands,,so you need to swap it out. It's not possible for any factory to offer ALL the different things a person wants on his or her gun. WAY too many different people with different ideas of what they want. Some items,, like what Bob mentioned,, easily done & done by the factory, to fit his desires & needs.

But second,, I truly think the OP is more interested in the "whys" of many CASUAL gun owners who THINK they have to change out many things on their gun,, w/o actually knowing if it's a good idea or not. Many casual paper blasters do not know what true accuracy is or understand what it takes to achieve it. A different trigger or trigger group may make many guns better for the serious shooter,, but MANY casual shooters do not know why or how a GOOD trigger will assist them in accuracy. Thrown in the modern attitude of "looking cool & tactical" w/o knowing if the add on's actually do anything,, is WHY many small parts companies are in business & make money. I blame Hollyweird for their portrayal of firearms with features that look "cool" which makes the moviegoer think they will look as cool as the actor if their guns look like that.

But I'll say the most probable reason for the OP's actual question is based in the FACT that MANY, MANY gun owners are NOT what we'd call "REAL" shooters. They think by adding parts to a guns action will make up for their lack of ability & that changes will make THEM a better shooter. Basically, they fail to do the one thing to make them a better shooter & that is to learn how to shoot properly & understand what it takes to be a good shooter.

A simple example I've seen way too much is how a casual shooter goes to a gun range, puts a target at 5-10 yds,, shoots a 5-6" group (or bigger) and thinks he & the gun are GREAT!
Or,, one of my oldie but still often used comments; "I can hit a pie plate at 100 yds,,, I'm good enough to go kill a deer."

 

[RoninPA]

Pat, not a warped perspective at all in my opinion. Personally, I don't do anything to a new gun until I have shot it quite a bit to see how it performs FOR ME. Then, if I'm not happy I'll investigate what I might need to do to make it a better shooter, for me and whatever quirks I have while shooting (I also will listen to advice from shooters who I know are experienced and proven shooters).

Example: A long while back, I got started shooting PPC. I started with a stock block 6" GP100. Scored so-so and got a lot of advice from the seasoned PPC shooters. They weren't worried about me competing with them, but they wanted to help new shooters perform better. I changed out my hammer and trigger return springs and cleaned polished the internals. My scores went up. More shooting and practicing (practice was about 480 rounds per week - basically 3 matches) and I got better but was starting to plateau. So, it was time for major changes before year 2. Replaced the barrel with a PPC barrel and a PPC 4 position rib sight. Was shown how to set up the sight for the best target acquisition at the longer ranges and then more practice. Scores went up dramatically (not still not as high as the long time shooters - these were guys who went to the National Police Week shoots in Jackson, MS every year and were very competitive). Ended the year pretty good. No more changes needed just more practice. I ended the year as the #4 shooter on the DE Governors Civilian Top 20 list. The next year I would have been in the running for the most improved (had to show improvement over a 3 year period) but I was selected to join a special team to go to Egypt to help them open a new F-16 base) Oh well

While I was doing this, there were many new shooters joining us and a few seemed to have a new gun every other match. Asked about it, they said they weren't happy with the other one(s) as they didn't seem to shoot good with them. Asked about practice, they didn't, they bought their whiz-bang guns and only shot them during the matches. They couldn't understand why they needed to practice with them as they (the guns) where supposed to be the ends all models. No matter what advice they were given by the top shooters, they wouldn't listen.

When people come to the shop wanting things done to their firearms to "make them shoot better" I always ask how much they have shot the gun and how much practice they have put in. Most are next to nothing. I tell them to shoot them for a year, practice as much as they can and then come talk to me about what they want to do. I follow up and probably 8 times out of 10, they didn't need anything but practice to get a good feel for what they were shooting. The others were people that figured out what they wanted done after the gun was "broken in".

 

[bobski]

its the natural of man.
man is never satisfied.
and, we live in a gizmo, leggo, transformer world where nothing is good enough.
the capitalist society is partially to blame, and America has been for the longest time the leaders in innovation.
every generation has been coaught up in gizmos.
remember vw fab kits to make them look like Porsche's?
as it is written....there is nothing new under the sun. all is............vanity.

 

[bobski]

the main issue with guns is....

people buy guns mostly based on reports, and testimonies.
having a certain gun also does something to the ego.
it also is a ticket into certain groups and projects perceived abilities or interests.
i/e: wearing black and riding Harleys....makes you a biker. lol.
or driving an suv makes you a soccer mom.

#1 mistake of 99% of gun owners is, they buy the gun and THEN do something with it.

lets use me as an example.
I wanted to make history in the navy by being the first parachute rigger to go distinguished since the Vietnam war. (PR1 JOHNSON did it in 1970.)

in order to do it I needed a match 1911a1. it needed to be dead on perfect.
I bought an old army team members guns who had them in his gun case in his attic since 1955.
he knew my goal and he was happy to sell them to me. he set records with those guns that haven't been broken to this day. they were built at quantico usmc match dept.

they shot clover leaves at 25 yds. I changed the sights because the driver blade slot was too small and slowed down needed adjustments on the line. see? I changed it because I had to.

once I established what I wanted to do, I bought the gun for the mission.
made adjustments.
then I practiced 3 times a week.
then I competed.
it took me 4 years to do it, but I did it.

so, today, people buy guns not knowing what they want it for. they don't know why they want to improve their guns, they just do it because everyone else does it. (its the cool thing to do)
and then they cant hit the broad side of a barn with it, get discouraged, and sell it.
happens every day.

 

[hittman]

Ahhh...."make them shoot better". That's nothing 500 rounds and some range time won't fix. :lol:

I traded into a new Glock 43 and wanted to carry it some. I put 800 rounds through it before my license was up for renewal. The gun performed flawlessly through those 800 rounds. I scored 294 out of a possible 300 on my qualification.

 

[Paul B]

Well I like 1911s so have a few. All but one were worked over by the late great F. Bob Chow in San Francisco. You may recall a news article about the last gun shop in San Francisco closing its doors. It was run by his sons and AFAIK they were still doing custom 1911s. Mine were done by Mr. Chow personally. The only 1911 style firearm I have that is strictly almost stock is a Colt Combat Commander that I did a proper polish job of the feed ramp and replaced the grip safety with a beavertail style. The original safety will eat a hole in the top of the web of your hand unless you replace it. I have the scar to prove it. The only other change I may make on it is add a set of decent sights. The ones it has now are ridiculously small.
Paul B.

I knew Mr. Chow personally. As a kid on Saturday I would hang out in his gun shop and when it was slow he'd allow me to sometimes handle a gun I showed interest in. Back in the day, there were two who did 1911s, especially target versions, Frank Pachmeyr and F. Bob Chow. I'm proud to have known Mr. Chow and feel honored that I actually own three pistols he did for me. They were built to be reliable and accurate.

 

[Mobuck]

I only carry "bone stock" guns except for sights or grips. I figure at the ranges I may need to use a CCW, I'll forgo the extra little bit of accuracy for reliability and not give some dumb arse lawyer the leverage that a "highly modified killing machine" type of gun might offer.

 

[jgt]

At times we just have to let people experience the pitfalls in such endeavors before they understand. We all have areas in our lives like that.

 

[Paul B]

I only carry "bone stock" guns except for sights or grips. I figure at the ranges I may need to use a CCW, I'll forgo the extra little bit of accuracy for reliability and not give some dumb arse lawyer the leverage that a "highly modified killing machine" type of gun might offer.

If you looked at two of my "Chow" 1911s, one would look perfectly stock. Other than the finish and sights you couldn't tell it from an original. The big change on the other is again sights. It has the Smith & Wesson adjustable sights inletted into the top of the slide. Number three is strictly a target gun based on a Caspian frame with the slide from a Colt Gold cut. A very accurate target gun BTW. WE shot that one from a Ramsome rest at 50 yards and the average for the groups was 2". I can't shoot that good.
Paul B.

 

[exavid]

I've modified some of my pistols. I have a Buckmark .22 I use in Bullseye shooting at my club. It had a 4lbs. + trigger until I did the 'Heggis' flip on the sear spring reducing the pull to 2lbs. I did the same mod on several other Buckmarks on members of my shooting club as well. I had a Ruger SR9 that I replaced the transfer bar with a Ghost 'Rocket' transfer bar to reduce the trigger pull and action. Both helped with precision shooting matches.
I just bought a Ruger model IV 22/345 Lite I will be using for Bullseye practic and intend to install a Volquartsen trigger it to get the pull down to 2lbs which is a lot better for serious target work.

I don't think there's anything wrong or foolish to adapt any firearm to the needs of the shooter. I don't modify anything on my carry pistols, I don't what some judge to make a big deal about that if I ever had to use it for real. Carry guns I have are strictly stock and loaded with stock ammo.

 

[wunbe]

I once was a considerable collector of Ruger #1s -- @40 at the peak of that madness -- and each of them I hunted with got trigger work so that they would all break crisply @ 3lbs. No surprises. They did not all shoot the lights out but with some stock work many did. The triggers from the factory were well enough made but highly erratic out of the box --the pull weight range was from 5 to 8 lbs -- and they were hardly smooth breaking.

Once you get to na a single gun really well you can greatly enhance your enjoyment and your confidence in clean kills when it counts.

My 'keepres' are all #1s with nearly identical triggers.

My single Ruger wheel gun also was 'tuned' by a master smith and is smooth as butter.

wunbe

 

[Number9]

The problem is to many gun owners "think" they know what they want and how to modify a firearm!
Many will read about a new part to make their gun better.. so they think, "well, I do this and see what happens!" only to discover things don't work as planned.

The difference is knowing exactly what you want and to have the experience to know the outcome before you even take it out of the box!

 

[blackhawknj]

Fashions of the times. 40 years ago I was shooting IPSC in a small way, it was "in" and chic to have a modified M1911, squared off trigger guard, polished feed ramp, action job, sights, etc. I was shooting an AMT Hardballer, Pachmayr grips, white outline rear sight the sole modifications. Regularly came in the top and won a couple of matches.
Ed McGivern wrote that his guns were basically stock.

 

[muzzleloader]

Every time a "custom" gun seller says to me "I've added ________" I'm deducting price I'll pay.

Exactly my thought, but they actually want to get every penny back. Sorry, but to me it's still a $500 glock.

 

[mohavesam]

Better advice is to carry a gun which, if you ever have to draw it, let alone fire it at another person, you may never see again. So carrying a $2000 handgun may not be the best idea. Then again, some would argue "needing" a Maserati to drive to the grocery store? YMMV.

Experience talkin' here. It gets tossed into a drawer or barrel at the evidence room. Your PD is not responsible for scratches, rust, etc.
I see nothing wrong with most of the DEFENSIVE guns on the shelf today. They are decades beyond what was available just a few years ago.
Remember, you carry a gun to save your life and get away - NOT for a gunfight. The jury will decide which door you exit through...

 

[Ale-8(1)]

Better advice is to carry a gun which, if you ever have to draw it, let alone fire it at another person, you may never see again. So carrying a $2000 handgun may not be the best idea.

Some would ask "What's your life worth?" To which I'd say "Well, if you think $2000 is the right amount why not $3000 . . . or $5000 . . . or what?"

When they came out I bought a G26. Seemed like the best thing at the time, and while there have been a bazillion similar guns developed since then I've seen nothing that, to me, makes any of them "better" than the little Glock. I've shot it a lot and IT. GOES. BANG. EVERY. TIME.

I have no idea how I could spend $1000 or more "improving" on it and I fully understand the potential for its loss in the event of a bad situation. If it allowed me to survive, it served the purpose and I can always replace it tomorrow.

Indeed, YMMV.

:mrgreen:

 

[exavid]

I enjoy a firearm that's esthetically pleasing but I want only firearms that are functionally excellent. I have polished the feed ramps on every gun I own. That's not for looks it's to make sure ammo will feed flawlessly. Clean them after every use, keep them lubed as necessary and cycle (remove and replace) the ammo in my carry gun magazines each month. A collector I'm not, guns are for shooting.

 

[toysoldier]

The only firearm I've changed was a Chinese SKS. An Acraglass bedding job and some careful, conservative work on the trigger made a big difference. I'm not a good enough shooter to make expensive pistol mods worth while.

 

[exavid]

I recently bought a Ruger Model iv 22/45 Lite for bullseye practice. The light weight is good for my artritis. I plan to make two changes, add a compensator as much for balance as to help the light pistol stay on target during fast fire and a Volquartsen (sp) trigger kit. I got used to my Buckmark's two pound trigger and the Ruger sure feels heavy after that. Sure like the quick takedown.

 

[nvbirdman]

The best way to improve a gun's accuracy is to take the money you were going to spend on improvements and spend it on ammunition.

 

[Paul B]

The best way to improve a gun's accuracy is to take the money you were going to spend on improvements and spend it on ammunition.

Not necessarily true. I'll grant you the more you shoot, theoretically you should improve but there will be a big difference in your shooting between an untuned 1911 and afull bore accuracy job. My strictly stuck Colt Combat Commander is at best on a good day a 2.5/3" gun from a rest. Decent sights may improve that a bit but not much I'm thinking. On the other hand, I have several 1911's reworked by the late F. Bob Chow, a talented gunsmith who specialized in 1911s and one will do 2.0" at 50 yards using a Ransome rest. Another is easily a 3" gun at that range but it isn't a specialized target gun. I have another he did foe me that shoots about the same, maybe slightly larger groups now since I've had that gun since 1962.
The bad news is I don't really shoot them enough to shoot to their standard which is my bad. So yes, I think certain mods on guns, especially 1911s do make a difference. That 3" at 50 yards gun at first glance look strictly stock except for the beavertail grip safety and ambidextrous safety but one you try the trigger on that gun you'll see where the important work was done. The gun was built to be as totally reliable as any firearm can be while still giving better than decent accuracy.
Paul B.