TexasCHLforum.com

"If it's on the Internet, it must be true."

I must admit I get a kick out of the Hi-Point bashing AND kudos on the Web. If Internet lore is to be believed, the Hi-Point carbines are cheap, but "go bang every time," are fun to shoot, and generally receive great reviews. On the other hand, the Hi-Point handguns are cheap junk because....??? Well because that's what the Internet lore says. After all, a lot of people seem know someone who's uncle's, cousin's friend's sister-in-law's boyfriend had one once and it was junk. They never owned one, but they "heard" the horror stories. And, of course, they read it on the web.

Seriously though, I'd like to know if there is any definitive proof/data that Hi-Point handguns have any more malfunctions, failures to fire, inaccuracy, recalls, etc. than S&W, Baretta, Colt, Sig, Ruger, etc. Sure they're cheap and not made with the finest materials. But where is the "concrete evidence" that they are junk? Let's see, I'm a "for profit" manufacturer who makes a product that I warranty for the first owner and all subsequent owners, and will repair/replace at anytime for free, but it is junk. Seems like a hard way to stay profitable to me.

In my collection, my Sig had feeding and magazine issues (fixed by Sig), my Browning had feeding issues, (returned to and fixed by Browning), my Baretta went back to Baretta because it could not be re-assembled after field stripping (Baretta replaced the gun), my Diamondback went back to Diamondback for trigger issues (replaced by Diamondback). My Glocks have never failed, nor have any but one of my late 19th century, or early 20th century C&R handguns.

So, inquiring minds want to know.