• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

H&K Germany is in dire financial straits

I'd be more into glocks if this weren't mass. I bought my p30l and my usp45c for less than what I see new glocks go for in the classifieds here

I dabbled in sigs, they arent ambi friendly so away they went.....they were nice guns though
 
drgrant said:
Not really, a CETME is just a CETME, and it will always be viewed as such. HK purists won't even touch them. If we were women, the CETME is the fake coach bag while the G3 /HK91 is the real deal. I know this because I am a reformed HK nutbag myself.

-Mike
Click to expand...

psh, mine will have G3 parts. it's a sick bastardization of a rifle and i am going to love it when it's done.

related: i bought a HK P30 today. for the fatherland.
 
mav said:
This. Sig is a European manufacturer like HK and their metal pistols cost as much as HK polymers. If Sig can profitably manufacture metal pistols at that price point, then HK should be able to drop their prices on polymer pistols. I'll take my Sig220 and Sig229 over any of the HK's.
Click to expand...

I don't think the fit and finish on Sig pistols is quite comparable to HKs. That probably accounts for the price differences to at least some extent.
 
The Bundeswehr has salvaged a lot of them, word is 800,000 - 1,000,000. Lots of spares have likely seen the same fate.
I'm still looking to get my hands on a pristine HK 41 later this year. We'll see.
 
ptrainerchris said:
I'd be more into glocks if this weren't mass. I bought my p30l and my usp45c for less than what I see new glocks go for in the classifieds here
Click to expand...

You mean, what they're listed for. What someone asks for a gun and what it actually sells for, are two different things.

-Mike
 
TOM1960 said:
Wonder if the German government is going to bail them out on the taxpayers' dime, in similar fashion to what happened here a few years ago?
Click to expand...

Can you imagine the hue and outcry from the moonbats if our Govt wanted to bail out a gun maker; not that they would of course.
 
PaulD said:
Money is fungible so on a very basic level, it is the same.
Click to expand...

You are equating tax breaks to bail outs. I am not as they are two completely different things.

The government has no money of its own nor does it produce goods or services; all it has is tax revenue collected from individuals and businesses. So when people or politicians complain about "tax breaks cost x amount to government" it is not true. It was never theirs in the first place. Whereas bail outs are given to companies that either through mis-management or some market force would normally fail and but the government decides to use our money to prop them up.
 
taz-2005 said:
You are equating tax breaks to bail outs. I am not as they are two completely different things.

The government has no money of its own nor does it produce goods or services; all it has is tax revenue collected from individuals and businesses. So when people or politicians complain about "tax breaks cost x amount to government" it is not true. It was never theirs in the first place. Whereas bail outs are given to companies that either through mis-management or some market force would normally fail and but the government decides to use our money to prop them up.
Click to expand...

From an accounting perspective, there's not much of a difference. Does the company have enough money to stay in business? The difference between the two is when they arrive. Another way to look at it is the bail out is simply a tax break in arrears. The politicians look at tax breaks (rightly or wrongly) as a way to create and keep jobs and they look at bailouts as a way to save jobs. There's not a lot of difference there.

The philosophical question of the taxes being stolen is a different argument.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
Take a look at the top round in the photo of the catalog in that article. An oldie but a goodie.
Click to expand...

peoples lack of knowledge of firearms still surprises me,

Maby it supposed to be like that but they forgot to fix it where they were ready to take pics, so they would not be able to pick up the gun and just rack a round,
 
taz-2005 said:
It's nice to see S&W get market share from Glock. And I do see more and more cops with M&P's. I think Worcester has them too.
Click to expand...

They're not really taking share from Glock though... biggest loser recently has been Sig. S&Ws have been popping up in former Sig shops all over the place. I think even NHSP dumped their P220s for M&Ps.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
They're not really taking share from Glock though... biggest loser recently has been Sig. S&Ws have been popping up in former Sig shops all over the place. I think even NHSP dumped their P220s for M&Ps.

-Mike
Click to expand...


Maybe, it is hard to tell since sales numbers aren't readily available. I keep seeing stories like this, or it could all be anecdotal like Duval would say.

Smith & Wesson to provide new service handguns to the San Antonio Police Department | masslive.com

"The order for 2,600 M&P40 pistols firing .40 caliber ammunition is the Springfield icon's largest contract to date in the state of Texas, according to a Smith & Wesson news release.

According to the department reached by phone Tuesday, San Antonio's 2,300 sworn police officers currently use .40 caliber Glock handguns."
 
Last edited:
drgrant said:
They're not really taking share from Glock though... biggest loser recently has been Sig. S&Ws have been popping up in former Sig shops all over the place. I think even NHSP dumped their P220s for M&Ps.

-Mike
Click to expand...

What's the thinking, aside from cost? I've owned a S&W M&P40 and I currently own both Gen 3 Glocks and Sigs. I would take either a Glock or a Sig over an M&P. Personally, I prefer the DA/SA of a Sig to a striker-fired Glock (or M&P) for a carry gun, but I can see the benefit of lower-cost, higher-capacity Glock.
 
mav said:
What's the thinking, aside from cost? I've owned a S&W M&P40 and I currently own both Gen 3 Glocks and Sigs. I would take either a Glock or a Sig over an M&P. Personally, I prefer the DA/SA of a Sig to a striker-fired Glock (or M&P) for a carry gun, but I can see the benefit of lower-cost, higher-capacity Glock.
Click to expand...

Until the Glock Gen 4 came out, the S&W M&P had a significant advantage in being easier to use by people with smaller hand sizes, due to the replaceable backstrap. I suspect that might have been part of the issue in past years.
 
mav said:
What's the thinking, aside from cost? I've owned a S&W M&P40 and I currently own both Gen 3 Glocks and Sigs. I would take either a Glock or a Sig over an M&P. Personally, I prefer the DA/SA of a Sig to a striker-fired Glock (or M&P) for a carry gun, but I can see the benefit of lower-cost, higher-capacity Glock.
Click to expand...

I don't know about Sig, but S&W and Glock pretty much give the departments the guns and they buy the old ones so there is little to no cost to the cities and towns. Then they, the manufacturer, turns around and sells the turned in guns to distributors for sale to their dealer channel. That's where places like CDNN, SOG and Century get them from.
 
Natick PD has S&W .45 M&P's, no Sig's no Glocks. I know some Framingham cops have Sig's, not sure what else they have.
 

Similar threads

Concerns Grow Over ISIS-K Attack in the US; Former Top General Says, 'I Think This Is Inevitable'
Replies
18
Views
411
G4Y4HK
G
Facebook is insane.
2
Replies
43
Views
943
HARRYM
H
Kennedy is a no vote.
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
2K
HARRYM
H
Bill H.4139
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Ron Jablonski
R
Woman allegedly went on Florida highway shooting spree ‘directed by God’ in relation to the solar eclipse
Replies
21
Views
401
Da_lucche
Da_lucche
Back
Top Bottom