This is what Questar sent me as a BNIB Pistol,there were 2 more small chips on frame, and 3 lesser marks on slide
When I sent the top 2 pictures and email about it,the response was "hard to see the problem I am referring to from photo", not one of the approx 10 people I have shown the picture to, has had the slightest difficulty seeing the problems with the finish
Didnt demand anything from Questar,allowed them the oppurtunity to step up and do the right thing,but upon their denial of seeing the isue,it was easy to see where this was going,decided not worth the argument with them and just spend the $200.00 and get it refinished
I would have said prior to this that the service from Questar was great,this was the 3rd Pistol I purchased from them since July/2011
Sending this pistol could be a mistake or oversight, that we all could make, denying that you could see the "problem" ,well thats what have the issue with
How many of the Questar fans that are going to jump all over me ,would accept this from a private sale CGN member as BNIB,or would sell this as BNIB to a CGN member,I am guessing ,none
For those that think that the marks are no big deal or its going to get marked up from use anyways,I agree, but we have a word for that,it is called a USED Pistol,not BNIB
Would say that any of the loyal Questar fans are welcome to purchase this Pistol as BNIB ,however the stripped Slide and Frame are at Arma-Coat in Alberta getting a refinish in Matte Black,you are welcome to buy it ,when I get it back and put it on EE
Also selling my other Sig on EE now that was purchased at the same time as this 226.
In the process of buying a new SIG 229-40 for my son on GunBroker .com and having Prophet River import it for me,at least then I wont be under the illusion that I am purchasing from a Canadian Retailer and they will stand behind the product they ship
It always fascinates me how some people can (either intentionally or unintentionally) misinterpret events and communication. It's also quite interesting how the internet seems to encourage people to "take sides" without ever actually getting the facts or at the least knowing both "sides" to a story (and there are always at least 2 sides to every story

).
Here are the FACTS:
- Glenn bought 2 guns that Questar put up for sale on GunAuction.ca back in October;
- These 2 SIG's were advertised as BNIB (which they were) and being cleared out because they were "old inventory" (had been in our inventory over a year)... bidding started at $1;
- Glenn received his 2 guns and according to his original email he gave "them a quick look over" and found no issues with them;
- Some time later Glenn did a further detailed cleaning and inspection and at that time found no issues with 1 of the guns but found some finish issues with the second gun;
- He emailed us on Friday November 11th (see email below);
- Scott replied to Glenn's email on Monday the 14th (see below);
- Glenn emailed back a response on Nov 14th (see below);
Here is the email that was initially sent to us:
Hi
I purchased a Sig 229 and a SIG 226 on the Thanksgiving Gun Auction
When I received them I took each one out of the plastic bag and give them a quick look over,the of course were smeared with oily residue
Just last week I took both out and for the first time wiped them dry with a soft cloth
The left side of the slide near the front has serious wear about 1" long and right down to bare metal on the edge contour
The right side in the same location is lesser so
I just sold a 20 yr old 12(6)Glock23 that had been only fired 200 rnds but had been holstered and handled almost daily ,that looked almost new compared to this SIG
The reason for writing you is to find out, how this could have gotten this way,I cant imagine Questar could have put this much wear on the slide of a unfired gun in stock
These are my first Sigs ,are the finishes so poor that this happens to a gun in transport and stock with some handling,or is there something I am overlooking
I am truly stumped
I may get the Slide refinished , at arma-coat, I know their finish will hold up better
The 229R-9-BSS-USTB looks great
Scott replied to his email simply pointing out that from the pictures (which are fuzzy enough that even the SIG engraving can't be clearly seen) it was difficult to see if the wear marks were "right down to bare metal" as had been described by Glenn. There was no suggestion that marks or discolouration wasn't visible in the pictures... simply that the pictures were not clear enough to make a proper assessment of the damage.
Glenn's email had asked:
The reason for writing you is to find out, how this could have gotten this way? and so that is what Scott responded to:
Dear Glenn,
Thank you very much for your email.
It is a little hard to see in the pictures you provided the amount of wear or lack of finish you are describing.
These guns where new from SIG and only test fired when they left the factory and possibly some minimal test firing once we received them. The finish SIG uses generally is very durable and stands up to normal use quite well.
Regards,
Scott
To clarify, Scott didn't say that Glenn's gun had been test fired by us, but simply said that it was possible that it might have been and the reason he acknowledged this was possible is that there were some shipments of guns from SIG where they had installed a different slide lock lever in some of their E version 40S&W guns (high cap magazine guns) and that slide lock lever wouldn't work properly with the 10 round magazines so we had to swap out the levers for the correct versions. This was done a long time ago and it's possible that we might have test fired some of the guns to confirm proper function but that would have been a minimal number of rounds (10 or less) and even if Glenn's gun was one of those it would not account for the wear marks that he was describing ("down to bare metal").
Here is the response that Scott received back about an hour later...
I really am surprised you cant see it,I could get my wife to use her better camera and better skills to really highlight this, but don't think it is required to see the issues
Going to put it on CGN as new condition/unfired , lets see if it is just me that can notice it,although ,honestly I think we both know the answer to that
I should have immediately wiped it down and inspected and photographed it,however I knew Questar had the gun out to photograph it ,and it must be as expected for a BNIB Pistol from Questar
If it was a Norinco clone from Marstar,I would have detailed everything and sent it back to them
I wasn't asking for you to do anything ,just maybe some answers as to what could have worn the slide like this,on a quality SIG,it is clearly not just me dropping it ,the slide is worn ,focused on the worst area,also there are about 4 smaller areas of concern
Please don't bother replying,I will take care of this myself, not willing to spend the time and energy on a public internet pissing match as often these situations become.
And no I actually would never sell this pistol to anyone, as being in expected new condition
Again, Scott didn't say he couldn't see the marks, simply that he couldn't confirm from the blurred photos that the marks were "down to bare metal" as described... Glenn seems to have twisted Scott's words into a belief that Scott was saying he couldn't see any marks or issue.
Glenn very clearly wrote that he did not want a reply to his last email (so we didn't) and he makes referrence in his Gunnutz post that he:
"Didnt demand anything from Questar,allowed them the oppurtunity to step up and do the right thing"
I would suggest that if you are looking for help to resolve an issue that you make that clear when you contact us... we're not mind readers. In the past Questar has been known to go above and beyond for customers... we don't always make everyone happy but we do try. Having said that, if you want us to work with you to resolve an issue then you have to make it clear that you have an issue you want our help to resolve... you need to supply us with more than a blurry photo and an unstated expectation that we will do something even though your own emails say otherwise.
Again I say that people seem to misunderstand each other... we read your first email and understood that you were asking how there could be wear marks on the SIG you bought... we answered that question to the best of our ability. The gun came to use that way from SIG... plain and simple. We don't have a retail store so we don't have guns on display or guns being handled by shoppers or staff. We buy the guns directly from SIG... guns are opened by CBSA but not handled... guns are opened by us upon arrival to confirm serial numbers for CFC registration. Other than that the guns are kept as shipped by SIG in their factory boxes. The only exception to that would be if a gun needed to have work done on it (aftermarket barrel install, etc.) which might require test firing... and even then we're talking a very limited number of rounds, afterwhich the gun would be cleaned and inspected by us for any damage/marks.
It is unfortunate that you apparently misunderstood Scott's reply to your original emailed question as a refusal by Questar to discuss options to resolve your concerns. He expected you would reply back with either clean pictures better showing the extent of the damage or a request to send the gun back to us to be either fixed, replaced or refunded... you never did any of these things. Instead you wrote to say forget about it and don't reply to me.
This whole thing seems like an unfortunate failure to clearly communicate and the resulting misunderstandings that followed. I don't expect Glenn to change his mind or his opinion of Questar... but hopefully others can draw their own conclusions based on the FACTS of what happened.