TargetTalk

Tycho wrote: The award for the most unfriendly gun ever must undoubtedly go to the CM102E, which never really worked, and nobody ever found out why - users were basically abandoned by the manufacturer.

To anybody stating some gun is generally "worst case"; this is a dearing statement. For the statement to have some validity it needs to be backed up by "statistical significanse". To get any reliable, "stat. significanse" over this topic we need opinion from a large "population" of owners/user with better than superficial experience, from long time use of many similar pistols.
So, I´ll make a poll, to investigate the validity of the statement:

Forum users opinion of the worst .22 auto SP type/model of gun, introduced during the last quarter century (25 years):

Fjodor wrote:Forum users opinion of the worst .22 auto SP type/model of gun, introduced during the last quarter century (25 years):

I have got a feeling that the CM102E is slightly older than that.

To have any claim to credibility, which I feel would be dubious in any event, you should change the title to "worst gun I have used for an extended period".

As an example, how many people on this forum have actually fired a CM102E. If they haven't then how can they say that something else is the "worst gun".

Similarly, although I have fired a CM102E I took an instant dislike to it so only fired about 20 shots. Would it be fair for me to say that is the "worst gun" based on the fact that I didn't like it. If so then the Hammerli 208 would fall into the same category, but to call that a bad gun would be stupid. The fact that it didn't suit me did not make it a bad gun.

Perhaps a more useful question would be:

"What is the worst target-quality standard pistol you have owned, and why? Be specific."

This question might draw out some interesting stories. I know I'll have to think a bit to decide on one ;-)

FredB

Not on the list but the Ruger MkII. It makes my list because it is so often promoted as a "target" pistol by gun shops. I sometimes find myself tearing my hair out in frustration when new shooters insist on buying Ruger MkII's (and now MkIII’s)- often only because they are "shiny" and "look cool". When I point out that if they spent a little more they could get something 2nd-hand which is vastly superior, I can almost sense them thinking "hmm yes - but it wouldn’t be shiny would it?"
Arrgh!

I do not know how to take this post. Just because I had a really bad experience with one of the guns on the list does not make it the worst gun. As a BE shooter I can tell you that I had a horrible experience with a 1990s era High Standard Victor made in Texas. It sure was nice to look at but that was it. I had great difficulty in finding anyone to take it off my hands! It mad me appreciate, REALLY appreciate the Hammerli 208S that replaced it (and I still have it).

John H wrote: Not on the list but the Ruger MkII. It makes my list because it is so often promoted as a "target" pistol by gun shops.

Well, As I read the some 10 pistol SP (standard pistol "alternatives" I think Fjodor is aiming at match grade standard pistols.
The different Mks of Ruger are often titled plinkers.

[quote="Guest Twenty]
I had a horrible experience with a 1990s era High Standard Victor made in Texas. [/quote]
If I am not totally off, the last model af the Victor appeared prior to 1983?

Fred wrote:Perhaps a more useful question would be:

"What is the worst target-quality standard pistol you have owned, and why? Be specific."

This question might draw out some interesting stories. I know I'll have to think a bit to decide on one ;-)

FredB

Fred, i support your interpretation of the initial guestion.

My worst gun? A SAKO Tri-Ace, dating back to 1983 or so, but not listed above.

Fred wrote:Perhaps a more useful question would be:

"What is the worst target-quality standard pistol you have owned, and why? Be specific."

Even that might not give sensible results Fred.

In my case it would be a 1980 GSP. Why? Because it wasn't as forgiving as my FAS 602, the only other standard pistol I have owned.

Do I think the GSP was a bad gun? Not at all. It's just that the 602 suited my style of shooting better.

I can not participate in this poll. It is not a fair way to poll as it steers toward only one choice and most people have not had experience w/ enough other guns of the same make and other makes to make a judgement. Just because you had one gun that did not function 100% does not mean all guns of that make were junk. I have shot many of the guns mentioned, however I have only owned a Pardini SP and a Matchgun MG2. I had many jams from my Pardini and it did not feel and fit me as well as I would have liked. I can not vote and say the Pardini is the worst gun, I have no right to judge all the Pardini SP's by my experience w/ only one. As for my MG2, it is absolutely reliable, and the closest I have come to having a pistol be an extension of my own body and mind! Others have had problems w/ the earlier ones, but I know of 7 or 8 in my area that the owners just love their MG2's, and a couple had trouble in the beginning, but were patient and let the dealer make it right. Now, they are very happy w/ their MG2's

Brooks

Where is the "None of the above" or "Other" Option?

The top half dozen or so worst guns aren't even on the list.

My worst standard pistol is a FAS 607 that I bought used about 5 years ago. (I'm not suggesting for a second that the FAS 607 is a bad pistol in general; I'm simply relating my experiences with one of them.) What makes it so bad is, ironically, that it points and shoots beautifully....during training only. In a match, however, there will be multiple malfunctions, no matter how well the problems had seemed to be sorted out the previous day in training. I have done everything conceivable to increase reliability - I won't go through the long boring list - but nothing I've done has solved the problems.

IMHO this is the worst kind of target pistol, because it constantly dangles its promise in front of you, only to snatch it away at the most inopportune times. Perhaps the next worst kind would be a pistol that is totally reliable but unpleasant to shoot (e.g. poor balance, lousy trigger, etc.). I've got one of those, too.

FredB

deadeyedick wrote:The top half dozen or so worst guns aren't even on the list.

Is that a fact?
Halv a dozen of post 1983 introduced match type .22 standard pistol models?
Which are those "half dozen"?
I am missing the Hammerli 280 only.

Forgot that: missing a cople of bad Benelli models too.

In the list of candidates to the election of "worst gun" I am missing the less well working FAS. Wasn´t the latest FAS .22 model "released" after 1983?
Some FAS models are well known for jamming, following my memory from years of spent time at the pistol ranges.

E.
Guest





Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 6:32 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

deadeyedick wrote:
The top half dozen or so worst guns aren't even on the list.


Is that a fact?
Halv a dozen of post 1983 introduced match type .22 standard pistol models?
Which are those "half dozen"?
I am missing the Hammerli 280 only.

Back to top

Benelli, Sako,Fas, Ham 280/280s, unique, and another cheaper Walther, that the nomenclature escapes me at the moment....not to mention some of the eastern european gems that have been produced.

David Levene wrote:

Fjodor wrote:Forum users opinion of the worst .22 auto SP type/model of gun, introduced during the last quarter century (25 years):

I have got a feeling that the CM102E is slightly older than that.

To have any claim to credibility, which I feel would be dubious in any event, you should change the title to "worst gun I have used for an extended period".

As an example, how many people on this forum have actually fired a CM102E. If they haven't then how can they say that something else is the "worst gun".

Similarly, although I have fired a CM102E I took an instant dislike to it so only fired about 20 shots. Would it be fair for me to say that is the "worst gun" based on the fact that I didn't like it. If so then the Hammerli 208 would fall into the same category, but to call that a bad gun would be stupid. The fact that it didn't suit me did not make it a bad gun.

I wonder who designed the CM102E, is it Cesare ? This pistol uses many new concepts found later in modern pistols - including de MG2 designed by Cesare - like the tubular magasine, the electronic trigger, the hammerless design...

The later Morini, not designed by Cesare if i am not wrong, the CM22M doesn't have these new concepts (usual magasine in front of the trigger, no electronic trigger, classical hammer).

About the CM102, I never tried it and even never saw a real one, so cannot say if it is the worst gun but it has a good chance to win the price of the hugliest pistol.

jipe wrote:I wonder who designed the CM102E, is it Cesare ?

Yes

The later Morini, not designed by Cesare if i am not wrong

You're not wrong. It's a design that was marketed (to Morini, Peters Stahl, and for himself as R.B.A.) by Renzo Bonora, although I believe that Bruno Civolani (of Benelli) was also involved in a earlier stage (Tecnoest).

I don't agree with the subject.

FWB model65 could be considered the worst gun compare to any present model.

High standard won Olympic medals before. That's why it is still promoted as a competition gun.
Fas also won many world cup!!
The old Walther had its Championship times with so many winning titles.
etc.

I think the worst thing in shooting is the shooters minds! Not the guns!

Sam TH wrote:
FWB model65 could be considered the worst gun compare to any present model.

High standard won Olympic medals before. That's why it is still promoted as a competition gun.
Fas also won many world cup!!
The old Walther had its Championship times with so many winning titles.
etc.

I think the worst thing in shooting is the shooters minds! Not the guns!

Maybe you are a bit off topic here?
FWB 65 is a .177 single shot lever-cocked air pistol, not a .22 standard .22 auto. And it was introduced back in, well, yes, not long after 1965. That is more than 25 years, isn´t it?

The worst thing in shooting is an unreliable gun. It brings uncertainty to the shooters mind, - during competitions!