Gun value question

[superduty truck]

Seriously...I'd much rather have a totally beat-up Glock model 22 or 23, than a brand-new Hi-Point .40, anyday. The .40 is a fairly high-pressure round, and the Glock can handle alot more pressure than the High-Point can even come close to.

I C GLOCKman. I agree with him and others. Follow the saying you get what you pay for. As a Hi-point no thanks. I would take a Taurus or a Rossi (both fine arms) over hi point.

 

[1bluedog]

I was at the range shooting the 1911's and my friend brought a Hi-point 9mm. After a few mags, I would say I was impressed. Was accurate and fed w/o flaw. The only cons is that it is real heavy and ugly. I would buy one for $100.

MD

 

[craigz]

I'm having a real hard time trying to come up with a self-defense scenario in which you would have to shoot someone through two windshields.

Maybe if you were fleeing from a raging madman in reverse?

 

[zenheretic]

I'm having a real hard time trying to come up with a self-defense scenario in which you would have to shoot someone through two windshields.

Maybe if you were fleeing from a raging madman in reverse?

Sounds like a craptastic Hollywood movie scenario.

===

I'd be surprised if the Glock 40s can stand up to the same torture shooting tests that the 9mm can handle.

 

[Tim-Gabz]

20th rounds of reloads in my G21. Some were very hot loaded but that tended to hurt the hand. The Browing Hipower had a great line for instintive shooting that the Glock does not have. Couldn't get .40 in Zim at the time so I went for .45. I tend to agree with Glockman on the 22 or the 23.

I have seen too many cheap guns giving trouble after 200rounds to be comfortable carrying less than a decent brand.

 

[Cougar Allen]

fleeing from a raging madman in reverse?

Playing chicken on a one-lane bridge!