You are why ppl hate posting here, u a name brand whore clearly just because some dude used it nd qualified u go buy it, all the power to u girl but stop clowning on a gun u probably never shot.
I'm new here, and trying to decide between 2 pistols. Any help?
- Thread starter mildlyconcerned
- Start date
Hey he called it out, and now I am calling him out for it. Funny, he posts some bs comments no one bats an eye, I call him out on his bs and transportRR loses his mind.
I owned a viking, great gun i juss hate polymer guns.
Didnt lose my mind, never had one
Touche
Ok I can accept that you dislike poly guns, I don't understand the reasoning but it's a free country as far as what you think so I can't tell you what you like, I have a problem with that chaps statements that the HKs are not that great for accuracy.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/09/jim-barrett/gun-review-hk-usp-tactical-45/
They are among the most accurate and durable pistols out of the box. You don't like them because they are polymer or whichever subjective reason you wish to chuck out, great. But when you twist facts I will step in. Now you specifically didn't that guy chucked out a fair bit of misinformation, about how HKs are not that accurate, and that if he is looking for accuracy he should look elsewhere. They aren't gamer guns, their triggers aren't set up to make them race guns, in any other respect they give up nothing to any competition gun. Yes I am talking about the accuracy, and as for the durability front, I don't need to convince anyone of their toughness.
Does this mean I am recommending a HK to the OP? Probably not, if he is looking at norcs and Vikings his price point is significantly lower than even the least expensive used H&Ks. And then there is the price of mags, and other parts when you need to replace them. H&Ks aren't cheap. If it's stretching your budget don't go for one. For a great poly pistol I would recommend a glock, or M&P(with an upgraded trigger and no mag disconnect). Both plenty accurate. If you have to have metal, look for an older sig, but from what I have seen there seems to be some ongoing quality issues, maybe they resolved it, I don't really know, haven't bothered following it too much.
Ztune, In rebuttal to your posts:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, who uses the viking?
Childish.
I don't want to hear about these clowns that play silly goose with their gamer guns, I want to know which professionals runs this amazing gun. GSG9? I see usp and glock, KSK? USP. Did the seal team 6 run vikings? Oh wait they ran HK45s. Hmmm, what about Aussie SAS? Wait they use usp do they? Isn't that an overrated HK? What about the Grom sf of poland a former commie country? USP? WHAT? I could keep going but you get the picture. Hmmm, who uses the viking, oh it is used as a training pistol for the kazakh army, not even the main issue. LOL
The Viking is a sporting pistol, it has a military variant which is identical in every way save for the fact that the MP-443 'Grach' is made of steel.
Who uses the military variant?
Russia - in 2003 it was adopted as a standard sidearm for all branches of Armed Forces of the Russian Federation; since September 2006 used as service pistol in law enforcement. It is adopted as a standard sidearm for special police units (SOBR) and rapid response units of riot police (OMON).
Kazakhstan - since 2007 used as service pistol in private security companies[15]
So the people that like to run around in fruity coloured shirts like to run a cz or whatever your no name russian pistol is whoopty do.
Those people in the fruity coloured shirts ARE WHO YOU ARE CURRENTLY ADDRESSING. I'm guessing quite a few of us are sports shooters, talking about sports shooting in a thread dedicated to choosing a sports shooting pistol.
But I see how in your crazed rush to vilify your worship HK's you might have missed that point.
As for that 'no name' BS this is just flat out unfounded and proves your ignorance: The Viking is made by Baikal, the western trading name for Izhmekh which brought the world the Makarov Pistol (which should need no introduction).
In addition it was one of the primary factories producing Mosin-Nagant and SVT-40 rifles during World War II for standard issue to Soviet troops.
There is nothing 'no name' about them.
Again tell me what the professionals that use these for what they are meant for run again? Oh right HK Sig or Glock for any tier one unit worth a damn. Hmmmmm surprise surprise.
Professionals? Tier one units? We're talking about a pistol for sporting here. Maybe you shouldn't post until your knowledge of pistols comes from somewhere other than video games and being a wannabe paramilitary.
I reiterate: SPORTS SHOOTING.
Just out of curiousity how many rounds do any of your pistols have, and out of them how many malfunctions have you had with each one?
I've already qualified my experience with these pistols - I'm not doing it again just to serve your rabid fanboyism.
Ok I can accept that you dislike poly guns, I don't understand the reasoning but it's a free country as far as what you think so I can't tell you what you like, I have a problem with that chaps statements that the HKs are not that great for accuracy.
I would accept if you said they were good for accuracy, they're definitely not great for it - the fit is too loose and combined with use of the more common external slide rail that it uses lends itself more to reliability than accuracy which is a common trait of military pistols. As a military pistol the HK shines, no question about that.
In addition I never said the accuracy was poor - it's just not as good as a dedicated sporting pistol or a CZ and it's accuracy is rivalled by the Viking.
They are among the most accurate and durable pistols out of the box.
Doubtful:
The proof is in the pudding:
Equipment survey for production class USPSA 2009 and 2010:
0 HK and 0 Sigs were used both years. I feel compelled to remind you that production is effectively 'out of the box' shooting - no modifications other than sights can be performed.
So the number of people who choose HK and Sig for practical shooting in national tournaments is 0. If they gave up nothing to sporting pistols and CZ's out of the box, more people would shoot them. There's no arguing that point.
Oh and 17 competitors used CZ's, which made up about 15-20% of the competition.
It's a similar story in ISPC Production.
You don't like them because they are polymer or whichever subjective reason you wish to chuck out, great. But when you twist facts I will step in.
I'm not twisting facts - everything I've said is based on empirical or observation evidence.
Now you specifically didn't that guy chucked out a fair bit of misinformation, about how HKs are not that accurate, and that if he is looking for accuracy he should look elsewhere.
He should look elsewhere - military pistols are not target/sporting pistols and they rarely do well in IPSC: see above.
They aren't gamer guns, their triggers aren't set up to make them race guns, in any other respect they give up nothing to any competition gun.
They give up a lot to a competition gun which is why we HAVE competition guns, which is why they uncommonly register at world class IPSC and never win it - as I've said: anything that doesn't work or isn't as good is quickly thrown away.
Special forces teams don't have the same luxury, generally speaking they get what they're given.
Yes I am talking about the accuracy, and as for the durability front, I don't need to convince anyone of their toughness.
They are durable guns no question of that, you seem to be under the impression I'm bagging out the USP. I'm not - I'm simply saying it's over rated and unused as a sporting pistol (this is the only personal opinion I shared about the gun, if you have a problem with that fine it's your money; I feel the evidence speaks for itself however).
You can spout all the garbage you want about special forces - but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
If you want to debate the matter further I recommend you create a new thread instead of derailing this one - not that there's much left to debate.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, who uses the viking?
Childish.
I don't want to hear about these clowns that play silly goose with their gamer guns, I want to know which professionals runs this amazing gun. GSG9? I see usp and glock, KSK? USP. Did the seal team 6 run vikings? Oh wait they ran HK45s. Hmmm, what about Aussie SAS? Wait they use usp do they? Isn't that an overrated HK? What about the Grom sf of poland a former commie country? USP? WHAT? I could keep going but you get the picture. Hmmm, who uses the viking, oh it is used as a training pistol for the kazakh army, not even the main issue. LOL
The Viking is a sporting pistol, it has a military variant which is identical in every way save for the fact that the MP-443 'Grach' is made of steel.
Who uses the military variant?
Russia - in 2003 it was adopted as a standard sidearm for all branches of Armed Forces of the Russian Federation; since September 2006 used as service pistol in law enforcement. It is adopted as a standard sidearm for special police units (SOBR) and rapid response units of riot police (OMON).
Kazakhstan - since 2007 used as service pistol in private security companies[15]
So the people that like to run around in fruity coloured shirts like to run a cz or whatever your no name russian pistol is whoopty do.
Those people in the fruity coloured shirts ARE WHO YOU ARE CURRENTLY ADDRESSING. I'm guessing quite a few of us are sports shooters, talking about sports shooting in a thread dedicated to choosing a sports shooting pistol.
But I see how in your crazed rush to vilify your worship HK's you might have missed that point.
As for that 'no name' BS this is just flat out unfounded and proves your ignorance: The Viking is made by Baikal, the western trading name for Izhmekh which brought the world the Makarov Pistol (which should need no introduction).
In addition it was one of the primary factories producing Mosin-Nagant and SVT-40 rifles during World War II for standard issue to Soviet troops.
There is nothing 'no name' about them.
Again tell me what the professionals that use these for what they are meant for run again? Oh right HK Sig or Glock for any tier one unit worth a damn. Hmmmmm surprise surprise.
Professionals? Tier one units? We're talking about a pistol for sporting here. Maybe you shouldn't post until your knowledge of pistols comes from somewhere other than video games and being a wannabe paramilitary.
I reiterate: SPORTS SHOOTING.
Just out of curiousity how many rounds do any of your pistols have, and out of them how many malfunctions have you had with each one?
I've already qualified my experience with these pistols - I'm not doing it again just to serve your rabid fanboyism.
Ok I can accept that you dislike poly guns, I don't understand the reasoning but it's a free country as far as what you think so I can't tell you what you like, I have a problem with that chaps statements that the HKs are not that great for accuracy.
I would accept if you said they were good for accuracy, they're definitely not great for it - the fit is too loose and combined with use of the more common external slide rail that it uses lends itself more to reliability than accuracy which is a common trait of military pistols. As a military pistol the HK shines, no question about that.
In addition I never said the accuracy was poor - it's just not as good as a dedicated sporting pistol or a CZ and it's accuracy is rivalled by the Viking.
They are among the most accurate and durable pistols out of the box.
Doubtful:
The proof is in the pudding:
Equipment survey for production class USPSA 2009 and 2010:
0 HK and 0 Sigs were used both years. I feel compelled to remind you that production is effectively 'out of the box' shooting - no modifications other than sights can be performed.
So the number of people who choose HK and Sig for practical shooting in national tournaments is 0. If they gave up nothing to sporting pistols and CZ's out of the box, more people would shoot them. There's no arguing that point.
Oh and 17 competitors used CZ's, which made up about 15-20% of the competition.
It's a similar story in ISPC Production.
You don't like them because they are polymer or whichever subjective reason you wish to chuck out, great. But when you twist facts I will step in.
I'm not twisting facts - everything I've said is based on empirical or observation evidence.
Now you specifically didn't that guy chucked out a fair bit of misinformation, about how HKs are not that accurate, and that if he is looking for accuracy he should look elsewhere.
He should look elsewhere - military pistols are not target/sporting pistols and they rarely do well in IPSC: see above.
They aren't gamer guns, their triggers aren't set up to make them race guns, in any other respect they give up nothing to any competition gun.
They give up a lot to a competition gun which is why we HAVE competition guns, which is why they uncommonly register at world class IPSC and never win it - as I've said: anything that doesn't work or isn't as good is quickly thrown away.
Special forces teams don't have the same luxury, generally speaking they get what they're given.
Yes I am talking about the accuracy, and as for the durability front, I don't need to convince anyone of their toughness.
They are durable guns no question of that, you seem to be under the impression I'm bagging out the USP. I'm not - I'm simply saying it's over rated and unused as a sporting pistol (this is the only personal opinion I shared about the gun, if you have a problem with that fine it's your money; I feel the evidence speaks for itself however).
You can spout all the garbage you want about special forces - but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
If you want to debate the matter further I recommend you create a new thread instead of derailing this one - not that there's much left to debate.
Last edited:
I was not aware of this. I thought they had HK rifles and sig p226 as their primary handgun.
HK45c maybe?
Back to the thread. I love the CZ Shadow!!
Hk45 is the lates acquisition of the USSOCCOM to add to their long list of pistols, I may be mistaken but last I was informed the HK45 is replacing the sig 226 as the main sidearm of the seals. But the 226 is still there, but I think the first active seal mission the hk45 saw was with seal team 6.
As for waffleking, that's delightful, I'm not interested in gamer guns, and like I said, the accuracy of the hk leaves nothing to be desired, because like I said and there is more than enough proof floating around the internet that the mechanical accuracy of the hk is second to none, the trigger is where it leaves something to be desired. I have no problem, with the lem myself. It more than does the job for what I need it to do. My criteria for a pistol is it needs to go bang every time the trigger is pulled, I don't care if I was swimming, sitting on a muddy patch, at a range, whatever, any gun related malfunctions as long as I maintained the pistol as recommended is unacceptable. Accuracy, most service pistols are more accurate than most of their shooters.
If op wants a gamer gun, sure you are the expert, I don't know nor do I care enough to tell him what to shoot. If he wants serious hardware. Buy a glock or m&p.
Just as a side note Ztune,
I just took the time to actually look at who uses the CZ75, and a rather long list of military, paramilitary and law enforcement. Delta Force among them. I hardly think these organizations would consider the CZ75 if it wasn't; to quote you 'serious hardware.
To further the point: Česká Zbrojovka claims it is in service with "more Governments, Militaries, Police and Security agencies than any other pistol in the world." Not just any company can make that claim.
As far the the Viking goes, the Russian military is very pragmatic with it's weapons choices - I doubt they'd make it standard issue if it didn't work.
Again, not saying the USP is bad - but you seem to treat it as the be all and end all of pistols. It's not - it's a viable military and self defense option; as a sporting pistol however it falls by the wayside like so many other military pistols. That has been proven. As a military pistol, it's good but is certainly rivaled by CZ, Glock and numerous others. The only difference is the USP usually costs more; at least for civilian purchase. And frankly it's just not worth the extra dosh (this is the only opinion I offer on the HK, even then it's an opinion based of facts). The Viking has every bit of the reliability - possibly more so though it's hard to test; the viking is unique in the fact that it uses an SMG style feeding ramp and magazine or 'dual feed ramp' as opposed to a single feed ramp which every other pistol uses. This offers an incredibly reliable feed in general use and rapid fire.
As I've said previously; I've put 2,000 rounds through mine including rounds of dubious quality and it's eaten them all and asked for seconds - I've not had a single failure of any kind. And my research before I bought the pistol indicated that this kind of reliability is normal for the Viking. Overwhelming anecdotal evidence for this website and many others seems to indicate as much.
Combined with it's CZ influenced ergonomics and trigger and a HK/Sig influenced breech locking mechanism the result is an incredible amount of handgun for less than what you pay for a HK. Especially given the accuracy is on par with Glocks and HKs. The only thing that the HK has over the viking in my observation is the finish - the Viking has machining marks visible on the slide where as the finish on the HK is very high. That being said, this is purely aesthetics and does not affect the performance of the gun. If I were to offer some conjecture here it would be that Baikal has sacrificed aesthetics to save on price while retaining a high degree of function.
It is this rational that leads me to conclude for a cheap pistol it is very difficult to overlook the Viking; it's kind of an ugly duckling though.
I think we'd all appreciate it if you would stop dismissing other pistols without doing your research. I certainly don't want to hear your opinions about a gun you've never shot.
Why?
YOU'RE NOT QUALIFIED.
Not in the sense that you don't meet the minimum requirements to have an opinion, but because you haven't qualified your opinion. In order for anyone to give a damn about your opinion, we need a frame of reference so we know what makes you tick and what your experience with other pistols is like. You seem to really like HK's, that's great - they're a good gun! But you've thrown out a bunch of praise for a gun without really telling anyone why it deserves it over another pistol and you certainly haven't qualified why it would be a good pistol for the OP.
And 'because seal uses it' isn't a justification; as I've said - Delta Force uses CZ and Spetznaz uses the Baikal alongside their Glocks.
You're like the salesman that tries to sell you the most expensive thing in the shop without thinking about whether or not the customer needs or wants it.
FYI: No one likes that guy. Think about that next time you laugh in someone's face.
I just took the time to actually look at who uses the CZ75, and a rather long list of military, paramilitary and law enforcement. Delta Force among them. I hardly think these organizations would consider the CZ75 if it wasn't; to quote you 'serious hardware.
To further the point: Česká Zbrojovka claims it is in service with "more Governments, Militaries, Police and Security agencies than any other pistol in the world." Not just any company can make that claim.
As far the the Viking goes, the Russian military is very pragmatic with it's weapons choices - I doubt they'd make it standard issue if it didn't work.
Again, not saying the USP is bad - but you seem to treat it as the be all and end all of pistols. It's not - it's a viable military and self defense option; as a sporting pistol however it falls by the wayside like so many other military pistols. That has been proven. As a military pistol, it's good but is certainly rivaled by CZ, Glock and numerous others. The only difference is the USP usually costs more; at least for civilian purchase. And frankly it's just not worth the extra dosh (this is the only opinion I offer on the HK, even then it's an opinion based of facts). The Viking has every bit of the reliability - possibly more so though it's hard to test; the viking is unique in the fact that it uses an SMG style feeding ramp and magazine or 'dual feed ramp' as opposed to a single feed ramp which every other pistol uses. This offers an incredibly reliable feed in general use and rapid fire.
As I've said previously; I've put 2,000 rounds through mine including rounds of dubious quality and it's eaten them all and asked for seconds - I've not had a single failure of any kind. And my research before I bought the pistol indicated that this kind of reliability is normal for the Viking. Overwhelming anecdotal evidence for this website and many others seems to indicate as much.
Combined with it's CZ influenced ergonomics and trigger and a HK/Sig influenced breech locking mechanism the result is an incredible amount of handgun for less than what you pay for a HK. Especially given the accuracy is on par with Glocks and HKs. The only thing that the HK has over the viking in my observation is the finish - the Viking has machining marks visible on the slide where as the finish on the HK is very high. That being said, this is purely aesthetics and does not affect the performance of the gun. If I were to offer some conjecture here it would be that Baikal has sacrificed aesthetics to save on price while retaining a high degree of function.
It is this rational that leads me to conclude for a cheap pistol it is very difficult to overlook the Viking; it's kind of an ugly duckling though.
I think we'd all appreciate it if you would stop dismissing other pistols without doing your research. I certainly don't want to hear your opinions about a gun you've never shot.
Why?
YOU'RE NOT QUALIFIED.
Not in the sense that you don't meet the minimum requirements to have an opinion, but because you haven't qualified your opinion. In order for anyone to give a damn about your opinion, we need a frame of reference so we know what makes you tick and what your experience with other pistols is like. You seem to really like HK's, that's great - they're a good gun! But you've thrown out a bunch of praise for a gun without really telling anyone why it deserves it over another pistol and you certainly haven't qualified why it would be a good pistol for the OP.
And 'because seal uses it' isn't a justification; as I've said - Delta Force uses CZ and Spetznaz uses the Baikal alongside their Glocks.
You're like the salesman that tries to sell you the most expensive thing in the shop without thinking about whether or not the customer needs or wants it.
FYI: No one likes that guy. Think about that next time you laugh in someone's face.
Last edited:
Wow kids, we sure got some kinda quasi-hostile there for a bit. heheehe.
I'll be short and sweet, i'm a brokea$$, and i'm cheap, like cheap enough i go to the dollarstore and complain about the price. THAT cheap. So that being said, i don't need a rolex gun, i need a timex. And i do thank everybody for their thoughts an opinions, but unless i win the lotto, i am indeed going with the Norinco NP-34 because I really love the Sig but couldn't for the life of me justify that kinda money, and the Viking 446 because its got everything i want. They're both steel, i do NOT want polymer, thats just a personal choice, and if i can or could find surplus 443's i would consider one of those merely because they're cheaper than the 446, and i don't mind shaving a few dollars on every corner i can.
I want reliability, reasonable quality i can depend on, and that it be all pretty and ###y and perfectly blued and shined up...matters little to me.
So thanks everybody!!! Guess the only way anybody can help now is letting me know if there even IS such a thing as surplus 443s available in canada. (?)
I'll be short and sweet, i'm a brokea$$, and i'm cheap, like cheap enough i go to the dollarstore and complain about the price. THAT cheap. So that being said, i don't need a rolex gun, i need a timex. And i do thank everybody for their thoughts an opinions, but unless i win the lotto, i am indeed going with the Norinco NP-34 because I really love the Sig but couldn't for the life of me justify that kinda money, and the Viking 446 because its got everything i want. They're both steel, i do NOT want polymer, thats just a personal choice, and if i can or could find surplus 443's i would consider one of those merely because they're cheaper than the 446, and i don't mind shaving a few dollars on every corner i can.
I want reliability, reasonable quality i can depend on, and that it be all pretty and ###y and perfectly blued and shined up...matters little to me.
So thanks everybody!!! Guess the only way anybody can help now is letting me know if there even IS such a thing as surplus 443s available in canada. (?)
Unfortunately not,
The MP-443 is military only and has only been around since 2003 - it's quite now.
However there is a steel frame MP-446 - keep an eye out for that; I had the choice of purchasing it or the polymer variant when I got mine. Because I'm cheap too, I bought the polymer - that said the steel wouldn't be much more (it was a difference of around $100 here).
So check out anyone that deals in them - I think Vinzer sports is your importer over in Canada. Probably worth giving them a call.
Edit:
Just found this link:
http://interammo.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=32_34&products_id=84
Steel frame, 6 Mags for $700 Canadian. That's a bloody good deal and 100% solves your mag issues - that aside same website has it with 2 mags for $550. For $150 more you get 4 mags. That's effing cheap.
The MP-443 is military only and has only been around since 2003 - it's quite now.
However there is a steel frame MP-446 - keep an eye out for that; I had the choice of purchasing it or the polymer variant when I got mine. Because I'm cheap too, I bought the polymer - that said the steel wouldn't be much more (it was a difference of around $100 here).
So check out anyone that deals in them - I think Vinzer sports is your importer over in Canada. Probably worth giving them a call.
Edit:
Just found this link:
http://interammo.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=32_34&products_id=84
Steel frame, 6 Mags for $700 Canadian. That's a bloody good deal and 100% solves your mag issues - that aside same website has it with 2 mags for $550. For $150 more you get 4 mags. That's effing cheap.
Have you been reading my posts or did you just read the first sentence and then respond? I have been recommending this guy a glock or m&p for the last 3 posts I made. Where do you see me say buy the HK? I don't want him to buy the cheap hk? Why? Because there are none. Parts are expensive. mags are expensive, the bloody gun itself is expensive.
You wanted a frame of reference. The first handgun i shot was TDCs glock 17. Chucked at best 500-1000 rounds through that with no issues, and probably have another 500 or so on other miscellanous glock 9mm, over 1k on his 22 conversion. Around 200 on a sig 226. I am reasonably accurate with the sig, but the grip is too big for my itty bitty hands, I have tried some other stuff like the burrito px4(despise the thing with a passion), S&W M&P, I have also shot a cz75, more on that later. My first pistol was a p30l I purchased late summer currently has 1900 through it the 3 times I took it out (600,1000,300 rounds per session) shortly to go to 2200. Maybe higher when I get a chance to grab more ammo, either way I haven't experienced a single failure in the gun yet. My usp that I purchased last sunday went through it's test 300 with no flaws, looking forward to seeing what it can do around christmas time when I will probably do a 1500 round test day on the usp. If you would like I would be happy to tell you the results of the test. Ammo used so far was 900 bdx 124 grain, and 1000 cci blazer 115 grain for p30L and 300 rounds of bdx 124grain for the usp. Oh and all of this was 9mm. That's personal experience
The reason I am not so trusty on cz are because I have seen too many threads with them suffering glitches far too regularly, that I have not really heard that many complaints from glock or hk or m&p owners. Not at that volume at any rate. On top I have seen too many non high mileage czs be it poly framed shadows or metal framed 75 choke up under simple problems with feeding, extraction ejection etc. I have shot a couple cz75 myself. I dislike the slide in frame design because it is harder to operate with gloves on, and although I haven't attempted it so take this with a grain of salt, a more difficult slide to manipulate if you have sweat or blood on your hands or it's raining. Everything is very smooth on it. And that oversized mag release in my eyes is another liability, in a stressed situation I can see the defensive shooter accidentally ejecting the magazine. The standard trigger is nothing to brag about as far as I am concerned the second one I tried had some funky doodle match trigger and it was nice, but the lingering doubt in the guns reliability dogged me. As a result I never got one.
As for vikings I'm still not entirely convinced it's all that great. For starters it's a heavy sob(the metal variant at least), shooting 1k rounds in one session my shoulders probably won't like me. Either that or your shoulders are made out of cable steels used in bridges. As for value, I don't know how much spare parts are or where you get them, same with magazines, I have a source lined up for mine, but in general HKs are a ##### for sourcing spare parts & mags as well.
Incidentally what time frame did this viking chew through the 2000 rounds? Was it over a year? A month? And like I said I know nothing nor do I care about competition guns. You seem to have more intimate knowledge about that because I assume you competed or compete currently.
The op has made up his mind so there really is no point to try and convince him otherwise, if you are trying to pinch a penny hk is definitely not for you.
Last edited:
Well this thread went weird...
Hk45C and Hk45 are premium pistols -- really nice, and really expensive. Glock and M&P's are solid guns, that one does not have to worry about Russian politics if you going to be able to get parts in a year or 2, and have a proven track record from proven companies.
Hk45C and Hk45 are premium pistols -- really nice, and really expensive. Glock and M&P's are solid guns, that one does not have to worry about Russian politics if you going to be able to get parts in a year or 2, and have a proven track record from proven companies.
