If you look at new ppk/s problems you will see what I am going through with a new PPK/S. Honestly what kind of company charges high end prices and then expects you to accept cheap knock off quality. All the people at Walther I have spoke to are very pleasant and respectful with an eagerness to help. Then they tell you if a gun runs 2 mags of ammo it is good to go. My gun has become not only a aggravating issue but a safety issue in my opinion. So what have some of you experienced ?
Walther as a company
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Joined
·
2,866 Posts
"Walther as a company" is a wholly owned subsidiary of Umarex.
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Joined
·
329 Posts
Personally. I do not care. I have owned Colt, S&W, M&P, Beretta, Ruger, and Walther handguns. Tracking who owns whom does not mean anything to me. I buy a gun, and I evaluate that gun not the company. I owe a PPS M2. It is one of the finest guns I have owned. Every day I trust my life to it.
You really need to do your homework on any gun you plan to buy - no matter who makes it. Even then there can be issues. I've sent new guns back to Ruger and S&W for warranty service they shouldn't have needed.
In the end, after you have made your purchase, the quality of customer and repair service is what counts.
They all can be hit-or-miss in that department.
In the end, after you have made your purchase, the quality of customer and repair service is what counts.
They all can be hit-or-miss in that department.
I bought the new PPK/S as a fun gun to enjoy. I would never consider it for concealed carry. While I have not had malfunfunctions, it doesn't compete with modern designs. I usually carry the Kahn P380 as an easy to conceal pocket weapon. The PPK/S is too heavy for a .380. The blowback design makes it very snappy, and there are 9X19mm designs the same size and lighter.
Joined
·
3,447 Posts
In Germany we differentiate between Walther/Ulm and Walther/Arnsberg. Arnsberg = UMAREX = cheap and nasty
Joined
·
121 Posts
We do the same here in the US Martin.
Joined
·
3,330 Posts
Why is anybody surprised that the new-production PPK/S are having issues? The bigger question to me is why people would not buy nice-condition vintage Walther (or Manurhin or IA/Ranger) instead of unproven Umarex knockoffs? Beating a dead horse, I suppose...
Joined
·
326 Posts
Hello all, I doubt whether Walther/Ulm would still exist, if Wulf.Heinz Pflaumer from UMAREX/Arnsberg had not bought the company. The problem with some Walther/Arnsberg pistols is that in their production MIM-technology is often used instead of milling.
Best wishes,
Dieter.
Best wishes,
Dieter.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no MIM used in the new PPK/s.
I hate to see anyone get a bad gun. It pretty much sucks when a gun does not just function reliably.
That being said, the PPK has always had the reputation as being a gun that is somewhat....finicky.
Or, as another forum member puts it, is designed to reliably operate with a narrow band of parameters.
That band of parameters is narrower than would be expected with a modern firearm.
If you buy a PPK or PPK/s and expect to use it as a self defense firearm, you should think about that going in.
I hope Walther does right by the OP and gets him a gun that works. It's not a Glock, M&P, PPQ though. It's just not.
If it was a car, it would be a Triumph Spitfire, not a Toyota Camry.
I hate to see anyone get a bad gun. It pretty much sucks when a gun does not just function reliably.
That being said, the PPK has always had the reputation as being a gun that is somewhat....finicky.
Or, as another forum member puts it, is designed to reliably operate with a narrow band of parameters.
That band of parameters is narrower than would be expected with a modern firearm.
If you buy a PPK or PPK/s and expect to use it as a self defense firearm, you should think about that going in.
I hope Walther does right by the OP and gets him a gun that works. It's not a Glock, M&P, PPQ though. It's just not.
If it was a car, it would be a Triumph Spitfire, not a Toyota Camry.
Moon would call that "a sooth".
For the roughly 50 years from 1929-1979, .32 and .380 ammunition came in only one flavor: round-nose FMJ of well-established, unvarying pressure and velocity. The ballistics in each caliber were known and reliable, and manufacturers designed their pistols accordingly. The process followed closely the universal military practice of rigidly prescribing the particular cartridge that was acceptable for use (and no other).
Today this is no longer the case. New bullets and new propellants and dozens of new manufacturers have so altered both the internal and external behavior of both calibers that reliability is no longer assured. Nowadays pistol manufacturers and designers have to play roulette to achieve reliability with a broad range of ammunition, and invariably compromises must be made. The military still specifies the particular ammo acceptable for a given weapon --which is optimized for that loading-- but in the commercial arena all bets are off. Maybe it works and maybe it doesn't. It's strictly "try it and see."
M
Dieter is absolutely correct as to his first assertion. Walther could not otherwise have survived.
However, we differ as to his second. There is nothing inherently wrong with MIM parts; the most modern manufacturing techniques employ MIM very effectively and produce components that are as good or better than anything made by old-fashioned milling.
The real problems are two: substandard fundamental design, in which the emphasis is on "cheap to manufacture" rather than on functionality and durability; and scant or absent quality control and inspection to cut labor cost.
They get away with it because in today's "disposable product" society, consumers don't expect much. They buy a box of ammo and if 47 of the 50 make it out the muzzle, they think that's pretty decent performance, and they imagine the gun was a great buy because it was affordable and only had to be returned under warranty twice (the factory naturally paying the FedEx)--which of course demonstrates terrific customer service.
Those like me who still believe that a gun should work straight out of the box and last a lifetime are dying off.
M
I agree with your first point completely Mike. I'm not sure about your second point. I'm not sure the semiautos of old were more reliable than the semiautos of today.
The modern semiauto service pistol is pretty dang reliable. Probably at least or perhaps more reliable than any semiautos ever produced.
When we talk about guns designed for the civilian market though, I probably agree with you. There it seems it is mostly about price point. The firearm is treated as a consumable which will probably be replaced when the next generation Taurus Sputem or Rufer LCPx comes out. There it seems good enough for the cheapest price possible rules the roost.
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!