TargetTalk

Owner of Matchgun worked for Morini? started Morini?

Now he formed his own company Matchgun.

So, is there any significant difference between Matchgun MG1 and Morii 162?

I can't find the price for Matchgun MG1 here in US. Is it comparable or cheaper than Morini?

Where can one get a Matchgun here in U.S.? or do I have to buy it straight from Matchguns.com

Neal Stepp at http://www.iss-internationalshootersservice.com/ can help you.

Cesare Morini is not the owner of Matchguns. He wasn't the owner of Morini SA, either. He left Morini for SAM Lugano, which in turn he left for Matchguns, in both cases not too friendly departures.

Matchguns is owned / financed by Stefano Calzetti - check out the MG2 threads, he appears here as Kalz.

The MG1 is very similar to SAM's K11 - K15 series, but has almost nothing in common with the CM162. Perhaps the comp / front sight unit is interchangeable, but that'd be it. You look at any pictures of those two, it's immediately noticeable.

If you can't find anyone who wants to handle Matchguns or has the exclusive sights for the US, I'm sure Stefano can accomodate you. They are quite used to selling pistols directly.

Matchguns and Morini, any major difference?

You bet!
Quality of arms made by Matchguns is repeatly proven inferior to same of arms made by Morini.
(Despite what some frequent poster here, with direct personal links to Cesare, tries to concince you)

Matchguns and Morini, any major difference?

You bet!
Quality of arms made by Matchguns is repeatly proven inferior to same of arms made by Morini.
(Despite what some frequent poster here, with direct personal links to Cesare, tries to convince you)

Sorry about that misprint.
CONVINCE is the word. It may be rewritten as MISLEAD.
Mislead you into believeing Matchguns arms are up to the quality of Morini arms. In fact they are not.

Anonymous wrote:Matchguns and Morini, any major difference?

You bet!
Quality of arms made by Matchguns is repeatly proven inferior to same of arms made by Morini.
(Despite what some frequent poster here, with direct personal links to Cesare, tries to convince you)

Sorry about that misprint.
CONVINCE is the word. It may be rewritten as MISLEAD.
Mislead you into believeing Matchguns arms are up to the quality of Morini arms. In fact they are not.

Once again it is an anonymous user who makes pretty serious statements. If you don’t have the balls to sign up, the shut up!!!

I own an MG1e and a 162e -0 there are differences between t the two pistols. I've only had the MG1e less than a week, so I’m limited in what I can share. I can state the finish of the pistol is on par with the Morini 162e, the trigger from a setup/feel appears to be superior, but electronics are noisier. What I like about the MG1e, is the ability to adjust the grip angle. The rear sight of the MG1e is very nice, and maybe superior to the 162e. With that said, the reliability of the 162e from my experience has been great and the 162e, uses AAA batteries versus the A23s in the MG1e.

After I shoot the MG1e for a while, I’ll write a review of it.

PS I don't have close connections to anyone at MG, and if you've read my other threads about my MG2 I've had my share of challenges with it. I did find the company excellent to deal with and very supportive and believe they are producing some excllent pistols.

On a side note - I'd love to purchase a Morini CM22, but went with a MG2 because the trigger gaurd of the CM22 is tiny. My finger touches the gaurd.

Brian

If Matchguns pistols are "up there" with Morini, Pardini, Steyr etc.

Why do they not feature in the medals at major international competitions?

j-team wrote:If Matchguns pistols are "up there" with Morini, Pardini, Steyr etc.

Why do they not feature in the medals at major international competitions?

Good question.

There are now MG2 used in top level competitions like the WC but no MG air pistols while there are a lot of Morini 162 (it is the second most used pistol, not far behind the Steyr in number of shooters using it).

Anyone that makes a statement that the quality of Matchguns is inferior to Morini, or other makes for that matter is either stupid, or extremely ill informed. I have owned in excess of 25 pistols over the years from all of the top manufacturers and the quality and functionality of my MG2 RF is unsurpassed in manufacture, and well ahead in inovation. Its time for those without personal experience [ and a measure of engineering expertise ] to think a little more before repeating comments heard from even less knowledgable people. Comments such as that from " guest , only serve " to highlight his/her technical and engineering knowledge shortcomings.

deadeyedick wrote:Anyone that makes a statement that the quality of Matchguns is inferior to Morini, or other makes for that matter is either stupid, or extremely ill informed. ... Comments such as that from " guest , only serve " to highlight his/her technical and engineering knowledge shortcomings.

hmmmmmmm, it seems to me that anyone familiar with the long history of Cesare's creations, as cutting edge as some are, would be hard pressed to make the above statement. The various iterations of various guns that have been made over the years since his leaving Morini in Bedano are great for a gunsmiths banck account and their various difficluties seem to me to be "technical and enginnering shortcomings".

As many have said on this forum, if you want the newest radical designs, then this is the wway to go, but don't expect not to have to work on them.

Hm, I don't know many gunsmiths who've filled their bank account by working on his pistols ;-)

And of course the point of contention was "quality" . These pistols are made from aircraft quality materials, and machined by computer controlled [CNC] machines, therefore the quality issue is nonsense. Unfortunately, manufacturers and designers moving the goalposts with regards to design and function are burdened by financial limitations, and don't always have the luxury of unlimited testing . The reality is that sometimes the fine tuning process may not have been completed before the financial necessity of recouping funds through sales is required. However, these people are laying their futures on the line for us, the consumers, in the interest of moving pistol design from what it has been for God knows how long, into the 21st. century. I for one applaud Cesare Morini and Stefano Calzetti for their genious, and the risk they take every day stepping outside the circle. People like this don't come along often in history, and I believe that through the passage of time , it would proven a mistake not to give them our support and patience.

So we should buy something that does'nt work, or at least many of their other products don't work, simply because it is a new novel design? Versus buying something that is tried and true.? Yep, thats what I'm going to encourage all my customers to do. Of course, I may have to change my slogan from "Quality has no regrets" to "Novelity has its ups and downs"

I think Cesare's guns are fine for those who want to play with new stuff. and be the beta testers. I kow a lot of guys get their kicks trying to fix stuff and/or make something better. Nothing wrong with that concept at all. But for the beginning shooters and those new to sport, such as Guest who started this thread, owning such a gun is a sure recipe for disapointment. They want to shoot, not wonder why their gun is'nt working.

There are people who are adventurers and explorers and there are others who aren't. The adventurous will try innovation and welcome change and the successes (and failures) it brings. Other's find comfort in the tried and true that everyone else has. Morini's electronic trigger is an example of innovation becoming mainstream.

We might also see these oppsite ends of the continuum in Walther users, SSP vs GSP Expert, the former innovative, the latter an increment of a 40 year old design.

Neither is "right", its just our disposition.

I agree with our moderator, the bleeding edge is probably not the space for new shooters.

BTW we have an MG1 and MG2 in the family, the MG1 was selected over the tried and tested due to it's balance and adjustability.

Yep, thats what I'm going to encourage all my customers to do. Of course, I may have to change my slogan from "Quality has no regrets" to "Novelity has its ups and downs"

I'm sure that from an importer/retailers point of view, that this is a sensible perspective Scott. And I'm not advocating new shooters become beta testers for manufacturers, but as the knowledge base for the newer more contemporary designs grows, the need to provide "in field" unpaid testing diminishes, and I stand by my point that support during the early phases of development is essential. I also don't believe in non factual or innacurate comments being left without response, responding often provides a more balanced platform for people to make their decisions .

ausdiver99 wrote:. Morini's electronic trigger is an example of innovation becoming mainstream.

.

hmmm... Have you told Hammerli or that Morini pioneered the electronic trigger?

or, dare I say it, Walther FP

hmm thats what you get when you believe what you read on the web. The Matchguns site references the fact Morini pioneered electronic triggers.

"Cesare Morini. Morini is a man that gave to target shooting many new innovations such as: the first precompressed airgun, customized anatomical grips, and the electronic trigger. "

www.matchguns.com

Wonder why nobody's come up yet with the Green FP... AFAIK the first eTrigger... although the Morini design is really the first one that worked well in mass production.