Why do PCC's cost more than a .22lr?

Q

Quiet

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
125   0   0
Most, if not all of the PCC's on the market today are simple-blowback actions designed for anemic low-pressure short-range cartridges in a stock/frame of moulded plastic. Its a block of steel on the end of a spring in a plastic box with a rifled tube. They are basically a closed-bolt STEN gun with more automation like CNC & injection moulding so they don't need teach Rosie The Riveter how to run a manual lathe or spot-weld. Aside from the extra picatinny rails and a extra pound or so of weight on the bolt, how are they any more complicated to engineer and produce in quantity than department-store Savage/Cooey 64? How is it possible that can they cost as much or more to churn off the assembly line than a quality locked-breach rifle calibre semi-auto rifle with some actual reach & accuracy like the AR-15?

Even 3rd world countries rejected the cheap surplus pistol-calibre SMG's that flooded the world market in the post-WW2 era because the development of the intermediate rifle cartridge provided such a huge tactical advantage. Why are we paying more to take a step backwards?

I don't understand it.

Edit: I guess the bolts could even be steel castings.
 
Last edited:
I'm not an expert but I'll try to approach this from 2 sides of why .22lr rifles are so cheap and why 9mm blowback rifles are expensive.

Cheap .22lr rifles use a lot of cheap weak plastic parts, receivers are commonly made out of aluminum, zinc alloys or in some cases just polymer/plastics. All these materials are cheap, and manufacturing is cheaper. Easier and faster to CNC an aluminum block rather than a Steel block. Casting polymer parts or zinc alloys is insanely cheap once the process is figured out and set up for mass production. That is probably 90% of the savings right there.

Because .22lr is such a weak round you don't need as much material to accommodate it, bolt weight is only part of the equation. For 9mm heavier bolts need stronger springs to catch it, more forces need a stronger receiver to absorb it and components have to be built to withstand 9mm forces. A 9mm round jammed into a .22lr 10/22 will explode the gun. The bolt doesn't have enough weight to slow down the recoil, the chamber and barrel is thinner (less material), the trigger group would shatter as it wasn't meant to absorb 9mm recoil energy just .22lr forces (cheaper materials).

.22lr blowback rifles if they were built to the same standards as a 9mm blowback rifle would be almost as expensive. Steel receiver and parts and more material to bulk up pressure bearing areas.

9mm blowback rifles have to be made of steel, and have to withstand 9mm forces which is literally no joke. You can see an inexpensive 9mm rifle being the Hi-point carbine, lots of polymer parts and zinc alloys which give it that very bulky look to have enough material present to withstand 9mm.

I'm not sure about gas operated rifles, but the AR-15 is quite frankly an anomaly. A million people make AR-15's they have to compete with each other and a race to the bottom in price is usually the best way to stand out. Also many people/countries use the AR-15, that there are millions of parts and mass production of parts severely knock the price down.
 
Those cheap Cooey’s would cost more today, if they were made nowadays ... no plastic bits and probably more labour.

As mentioned, the Hi-Point is today’s cheap pcc and I believe stamped steel?
 
Compare a Ruger 10/22 and a Ruger PCC..... I'm not surprised the PCC costs more.


Usually I hear people wondering why a .22lr handgun is almost as expensive as a centre fire.... even though they require similar efforts and materials to build.

There is an assumption that .22lr is an entry level, cheap calibre and that the guns should therefore be cheap as well..... of course you can spend thousands on a nice .22lr or pellet gun if you want to as well.....

Don't sweat the small stuff and buy what you want and can afford.

At the end of the day, guns today are cheaper then they have ever been when adjusted for inflation.
 
Last edited:
i think the 10/22 is a good comparison, as the pc9 is a big 10/22. by the time you build a 10/22 out to the same functionality as a pc9 you would be at about the same price point. perhaps a bit less, but when you look at sales volumes, probably ten 10/22's get sold for every pc9.
 
Yah i think economy's of scale is the biggest factor. Then niche demand ( aka the cool factor) is the second biggest.
 
Quiet said:
Most, if not all of the PCC's on the market today are simple-blowback actions designed for anemic low-pressure short-range cartridges in a stock/frame of moulded plastic. Its a block of steel on the end of a spring in a plastic box with a rifled tube. They are basically a closed-bolt STEN gun with more automation like CNC & injection moulding so they don't need teach Rosie The Riveter how to run a manual lathe or spot-weld. Aside from the extra picatinny rails and a extra pound or so of weight on the bolt, how are they any more complicated to engineer and produce in quantity than department-store Savage/Cooey 64? How is it possible that can they cost as much or more to churn off the assembly line than a quality locked-breach rifle calibre semi-auto rifle with some actual reach & accuracy like the AR-15?

Even 3rd world countries rejected the cheap surplus pistol-calibre SMG's that flooded the world market in the post-WW2 era because the development of the intermediate rifle cartridge provided such a huge tactical advantage. Why are we paying more to take a step backwards?

I don't understand it.

Edit: I guess the bolts could even be steel castings.
Click to expand...

on the 22lr vs the centerfire guns still have to deal with more pressure and more violence than the 22lr cartridge. So you need to use higher end material and can get away with cheaper material for 22lr.

2 parter on why 22lr is so much cheaper and why some ars cost as much. Economy of scale, The AR15 from any quality marque is more expensive than all but some truly obscene options. But to consider is economy of scale. All the R&D on established 22s such as the 10/22 has been paid off a while ago, same for ar15s. Compared to say a ruger pc carbine which exists in smaller numbers and as a result cost per unit is higher.
 
In general.. everything is going up in price. Specifically in the shooting industry, everything has went up in price considerably (firearms, components, ammo etc).. in some cases 50% or more the past decade or two.

It's really not a fair comparison to compare "prices" with the WWII era economy. I don't think comparing any of the current generation of guns (centerfire or not) to something that was sold decades ago at a "bargain" is realistic at all. As stated, to build a Cooey today would likely result in a retail price of $500+ for what is essentially the most basic of designs, at likely a much poorer fit and finish.

Even relatively simple .22 pistols and revolvers on the market are creeping up to the 1k price point these days. That would have been outrageous 10 or 20 years ago.
 
Steyr101 said:
In general.. everything is going up in price. Specifically in the shooting industry, everything has went up in price considerably (firearms, components, ammo etc).. in some cases 50% or more the past decade or two.

It's really not a fair comparison to compare "prices" with the WWII era economy. I don't think comparing any of the current generation of guns (centerfire or not) to something that was sold decades ago at a "bargain" is realistic at all. As stated, to build a Cooey today would likely result in a retail price of $500+ for what is essentially the most basic of designs, at likely a much poorer fit and finish.

Even relatively simple .22 pistols and revolvers on the market are creeping up to the 1k price point these days. That would have been outrageous 10 or 20 years ago.
Click to expand...


Inflation is starting to be more noticeable and will likely shock people in the next few years.
 
Can-down said:
Inflation is starting to be more noticeable and will likely shock people in the next few years.
Click to expand...
If Trudeau continues to print money to cover his deficits our dollar won't be worth the paper it is written on. There is no sign he has stopped. Every body in Canada want something for free from the Gov't. Nothing in life is free.

Take Care

Bob
 
Quiet said:
Most, if not all of the PCC's on the market today are simple-blowback actions designed for anemic low-pressure short-range cartridges in a stock/frame of moulded plastic. Its a block of steel on the end of a spring in a plastic box with a rifled tube. They are basically a closed-bolt STEN gun with more automation like CNC & injection moulding so they don't need teach Rosie The Riveter how to run a manual lathe or spot-weld. Aside from the extra picatinny rails and a extra pound or so of weight on the bolt, how are they any more complicated to engineer and produce in quantity than department-store Savage/Cooey 64? How is it possible that can they cost as much or more to churn off the assembly line than a quality locked-breach rifle calibre semi-auto rifle with some actual reach & accuracy like the AR-15?

Even 3rd world countries rejected the cheap surplus pistol-calibre SMG's that flooded the world market in the post-WW2 era because the development of the intermediate rifle cartridge provided such a huge tactical advantage. Why are we paying more to take a step backwards?

I don't understand it.

Edit: I guess the bolts could even be steel castings.
Click to expand...

That's a pretty dumb question with a really simple answer: PCCs are bigger. In case you weren't aware, making bigger things takes more time and more material (shocker!). As mentioned, they also require higher quality materials in their manufacture because they deal with much greater forces.

People also want features. Theoretically, we could make "sten guns" (or a close relative of them) for very cheap, but they would have to be made in the millions and lack many of the features the shooting public wants. Start adding features such as a nice trigger, adjustable sights, ergonomics, etc. and the price goes up. It's pretty simple.

As for your comment about some PCCs being more expensive "than a quality locked-breach rifle calibre semi-auto rifle with some actual reach & accuracy like the AR-15", it's a very simple tale of economics and features. Why does a Lexus cost more than a Lada? Why does the newly developed PCC that was funded, developed, and manufactured by a private entity in the last 10 years; cost more than the government-funded firearm (made in the multi-millions) that has been in constant production for the last 70 years by multiple organizations? Gee, that's a toughie.
 
Blastattack said:
That's a pretty dumb question with a really simple answer: PCCs are bigger. In case you weren't aware, making bigger things takes more time and more material (shocker!). As mentioned, they also require higher quality materials in their manufacture because they deal with much greater forces.

People also want features. Theoretically, we could make "sten guns" (or a close relative of them) for very cheap, but they would have to be made in the millions and lack many of the features the shooting public wants. Start adding features such as a nice trigger, adjustable sights, ergonomics, etc. and the price goes up. It's pretty simple.

As for your comment about some PCCs being more expensive "than a quality locked-breach rifle calibre semi-auto rifle with some actual reach & accuracy like the AR-15", it's a very simple tale of economics and features. Why does a Lexus cost more than a Lada? Why does the newly developed PCC that was funded, developed, and manufactured by a private entity in the last 10 years; cost more than the government-funded firearm (made in the multi-millions) that has been in constant production for the last 70 years by multiple organizations? Gee, that's a toughie.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the formulas for designing blow-back guns were also settled at least 70 years ago, certainly earlier than locked or delayed semi-auto actions. Steel is not a precious metal. Questioning why I should pay an extra 1-2k for what amounts to a scaled-up .22 with a couple extra pounds of steel weight isn't dumb. Using your car analogy, paying a Lexus price for a Lada is dumb. I think a lot of these PCC's could be compared to putting a 2-cycle lawnmower engine in sports-car-like body and that's fine if that's what you are into, unless you are trying to sell it for the price of the real thing.

I agree with the points that have been made about economies of scale and inflation. I was not making a comparison to plastic/zinc trash .22's but other firearms of equivalent quality. I get it that a lot of the designs we see today depend on production methods that need a high initial investment but are suited to mass production, so if there isn't much of a market for them they will remain relatively expensive.

With nearly all of the higher performance semi-auto options (that enjoy economies of scale due to the US market, or Chinese production) suddenly banned in Canada, I think some people are willing to make this compromise because there's not much else to choose from and most people don't shoot past 50 or 75 yards at the range anyways. If that's you, I have no problem with that, but for myself, unless I see options that more appropriately match my conception of price/value I will stick with a decent .22 as a short range trainer/plinker
 
Something as simple in construction as 77/22 goes for around $1250 or so. At least mine did in the last batch that Prophet River brought in.

Some of the takedown 10/22's are $800.... which (if I recall) was around the price of an entry level PC9.

As mentioned before, there will always be the low end stuff available to all who want to pinch pennies. Even before the most recent ban.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom