To buy: K100(mk.6) or Bul Cherokee

Which would you chose?

  • Grand Power K100 (Mk.6)

    Votes: 31 60.8%

  • Bul Cherokee

    Votes: 20 39.2%
  • Total voters
    51
pottsy

pottsy

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Location
Conservative Territory.
Ok, I am looking to decide specifically between these two guns as my next 9mm:
K100(mk.6) or Bul Cherokee

What opinions are out there by those who are familiar with these guns? Hopefully from someone that has used at least one, if someone is familiar with both and can offer an opinion that would be great.

Thanks.
 
coltfan said:
Bul has MIM parts...
Click to expand...
K100 has cast parts, including the slide, which is arguably worse than MIM. Very few guns these days (even relatiely expensive ones like HK and Sig) are 100% cast and MIM free.
 
Last edited:
I am a newby shooter who picked up his first pistols in December, so my opinion is not worth a great deal. I have a .22 Browning, a .40 Steyr MA-1, and a BUL Cherokee G 9 mm (with the optional stock). The .22 is, of course, a delight to shoot. The .40 S&W is so much more powerful that I very quickly developed a flinch that I am still trying to correct.

To the point: at first I did not like the Cherokee at all but, as I became used to it, I found it nearly as easy to shoot as the .22 even though it has nearly the power of the .40. On my last outing, a couple of days ago, I was able to shoot a two-inch ten-shot group at ten yards. For me, that's miraculous.

The Cherokee is surprisingly big, compared to the Steyr, but quite a bit better looking and the sights are less confusing. The stock actually degrades my accuracy as my elderly eyes can't focus on the sights when I use it.

I know nothing of the K100.
 
So far running at 8 for K100 and 4 for Bul.... interesting...
I need more votes !

Now as for purchasing either gun. Who carries them other then Marstar?

Thanks.
 
:D
DO YOU TRY to make the slide by MIM ??? :-D
Slide of K100 is from 34CrNiMo6 steel cast with next CNC machining.
all others parts of K100 are from solid steel, made by CNC technology .
Is the cast arguable worse than MIM ?
hmmmmmmmm, you are the EXPERT :)
worse about prices only. but about quality ? :-D NO!
we was trying some MIM parts ,for example hammer, but it was frangible, and when we testing it, it was broken after 7000 shots. so we dont use MIM.
hammer from solid steel has lifetime more than 100 000 shots
Yaroslav

capp325 said:
K100 has cast parts, including the slide, which is arguably worse than MIM. Very few guns these days (even relatiely expensive ones like HK and Sig) are 100% cast and MIM free.
Click to expand...
 
good choice, any problems with the K100 they seem to get resolved on here as Yaro actually replies which is rare for any gun maker. I hope they make a 45 in the future:dancingbanana:
 
k100 said:
we was trying some MIM parts ,for example hammer, but it was frangible, and when we testing it, it was broken after 7000 shots. so we dont use MIM.
Click to expand...
Well, just because you couldn’t figure out how to make a strong MIM hammer does not mean the MIM process is inherently flawed. Sig Sauer, Heckler & Koch, and Smith & Wesson, among others, utilize MIM hammers. I've never heard of a Sig, HK, or S&W hammer breaking after 7000 rounds. I agree that solid steel hammers are preferable, but I'd be okay with a properly made MIM one.

Now since you are the one who brought up the superiority of solid steel, maybe you could explain why you cast your slides instead of machining them from solid bar stock, like most other gun makers? Wouldn’t you agree that a slide made from solid steel is inherently stronger?
 
MIM is a technology when metal dust is assorted in wax,and that is then under high pressure pushed into the form and then it is sweltered.Already from initial principle,where MIM parts are parts from dust joined with pressure and heat,components MIM are cellular.Thanks to which are few levels more fragile then solid cast or forging.
MIM is of course fantastic method for components,which are not mechanically strained.For mechanically strained components it is possible to use only if they are overequipped in thickness.it is the case of HK hammer.SIG uses CAST ,with SW revolver the hammer is not overused,therefore the MIM in there is without a problem.
The construction side of K100 is designed that firing pin is inside the hammer.Our hammer is hollow and walls are relatively thin and MIM can be used on the components really only when they have thick walls.

Cast for Slide: at the present when using high-alloyed CrNiMo steel for Cast production reach better parametres compare to use of low-alloyed steel in form of solid steel.
Cast for slide use Colt,STI,Para ordonance,BUL,and of course K100.Just over in Canada you have a company which makes very good casts for all US and Canada producers: http://www.alphacasting.com/realisations/police.html

Why other producers use solid steel? answer: PRICE.
if I buy cast from foundry for 200USD and material in raw bar form it costs 2 USD per kilo,providing you use CNC technology,treatment of raw Bar to semiproduct into CAST form will not cost more then 10 USD(of course if the shape of the component is suitable to be treated by CNC technology)For example we invested money in technology of the cast of steel insert component however after producing cca 2000 pistols we came back to production technology from raw bar by CNC we save cca 10USD compare to use of cast which cost us 15USD.
Unfortunately the slide of K100 has locking items designed in the way that use of CNC is slow,therefore we use CAST and CNC is used for final works.
Regards,

capp325 said:
Well, just because you couldn’t figure out how to make a strong MIM hammer does not mean the MIM process is inherently flawed. Sig Sauer, Heckler & Koch, and Smith & Wesson, among others, utilize MIM hammers. I've never heard of a Sig, HK, or S&W hammer breaking after 7000 rounds. I agree that solid steel hammers are preferable, but I'd be okay with a properly made MIM one.

Now since you are the one who brought up the superiority of solid steel, maybe you could explain why you cast your slides instead of machining them from solid bar stock, like most other gun makers? Wouldn’t you agree that a slide made from solid steel is inherently stronger?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the explanation of your manufacturing process, but the following is incorrect:

k100 said:
Cast for slide use Colt,STI,Para ordonance,BUL,and of course K100.Just over in Canada you have a company which makes very good casts for all US and Canada producers:
Click to expand...

Neither Colt nor STI use cast slides. STI uses cast frames in some models but the slides are forged. Colt uses forgings for both slides and frames. Para Ordnance slides are indeed cast, but there have been reports of them cracking (which is not to suggest that your slides are also susceptible to cracking). Just FYI.
 
Clearly from reading this thread I now need to go and buy 2 more guns.....sigh will it ever end!!!

I shot a Charles Daly 1911 which is the same as the Bul, very nice gun. If I had the coin I would buy the Commander version. Although to be frank, if I am shooting a 1911, I will stick to .45acp for that platform. The only other gun type I will get in .45acp is a 220.

The K100 seems interesting, hope I will get a chance to shoot one day.
 
Cast can be superior in some ways, in some aplications it is more rigid I think. I think that the bhp in .40 with forged slide/frame suffered problems, they had to use cast slide I belive for it to stand up. I wouldn't worry about a gun in 9mm that has a cast slide, especialy since this was probably was factored in duirng development.
 
k100 said:
MIM is a technology when metal dust is assorted in wax,and that is then under high pressure pushed into the form and then it is sweltered.Already from initial principle,where MIM parts are parts from dust joined with pressure and heat,components MIM are cellular.Thanks to which are few levels more fragile then solid cast or forging.
MIM is of course fantastic method for components,which are not mechanically strained.For mechanically strained components it is possible to use only if they are overequipped in thickness.it is the case of HK hammer.SIG uses CAST ,with SW revolver the hammer is not overused,therefore the MIM in there is without a problem.
The construction side of K100 is designed that firing pin is inside the hammer.Our hammer is hollow and walls are relatively thin and MIM can be used on the components really only when they have thick walls.

Cast for Slide: at the present when using high-alloyed CrNiMo steel for Cast production reach better parametres compare to use of low-alloyed steel in form of solid steel.
Cast for slide use Colt,STI,Para ordonance,BUL,and of course K100.Just over in Canada you have a company which makes very good casts for all US and Canada producers: http://www.alphacasting.com/realisations/police.html

Why other producers use solid steel? answer: PRICE.
if I buy cast from foundry for 200USD and material in raw bar form it costs 2 USD per kilo,providing you use CNC technology,treatment of raw Bar to semiproduct into CAST form will not cost more then 10 USD(of course if the shape of the component is suitable to be treated by CNC technology)For example we invested money in technology of the cast of steel insert component however after producing cca 2000 pistols we came back to production technology from raw bar by CNC we save cca 10USD compare to use of cast which cost us 15USD.
Unfortunately the slide of K100 has locking items designed in the way that use of CNC is slow,therefore we use CAST and CNC is used for final works.
Regards,
Click to expand...

:owned:
 
hori said:
good choice, any problems with the K100 they seem to get resolved on here as Yaro actually replies which is rare for any gun maker. I hope they make a 45 in the future:dancingbanana:
Click to expand...

I was actually hoping they had a .40 S&W... but alas... another 9mm will do.
 
K100 has cast parts, including the slide, which is arguably worse than MIM. Very few guns these days (even relatiely expensive ones like HK and Sig) are 100% cast and MIM free.
Click to expand...
Well, I guess I shall argue the topic. MIM (metal injection moulding) is a high production oriented powder fabrication process, necesitating organic binders intermixed with the metal powders run on plastic injection moulding type equipment. The binder is then baked out of the green moulded part, then sintered. In conventional powder metallurgy (PM), no organic binders are used, the metal powders are pressed at over 50,000 psi, then sintered, resulting in a part with superior mechanical integrity compared to an MIM part. The only advantage to MIM technology is high production volume and resulting lowered production costs compared to PM; forging/machining; and modern casting techniques. Modern vacuum melt investment cast technology is capable of rivaling machined forged billets in mechanical performance properties.
 
And...........I am planning to buy a GP K100 target version. This will be my first wondernine; the only other 9mm I have is the venerable Browning Hi-Power.

I like the micrometer adjustable rear sight in combination with the high visability fiber optic front sight on the target model of the K100. Rotary barrel lock-up is the cat's ass compared to the tilting barrel Colt/Browning lock-up (got lots of those). I had a Colt 2000 with rotary barrel lock-up (slick), but the DAO trigger on that was such a piece of ####, it killed its appeal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom