Tweet
Actually, I have no affirmative indication that the parts swap has fixed anything at all. I have fired 77 rounds through the gun, which went back to Kahr due to a light-strikes issue that occurred about 2-5 times in 100 rounds. So it would require many hundreds of rounds even to tell whether this light strikes issue was resolved.
And while I agree that this level of service is excellent from the perspective of just one problem, the fact that ANY gun requires THREE RMAs before it gets fixed correctly is just impossible to defend. No matter how good the service is, any product you buy, upon which you are expected to depend your life, that requires service for catastrophic failure THREE TIMES before it is fixed can only be described as a total failure of quality control, plain and simple.
I have two other handguns from two different manufacturers and NEITHER of them has had a single failure of any kind since new. I have no idea how above and beyond the Smith & Wesson service is because in 1K+ rounds my el-cheapo Sigma 9mm has not had one single solitary failure. Ditto that for Ruger. Not to mention these guns cost $100+ less than my "budget" CW9.
The reason I suggested that replacing the entire gun would be a good idea is because it makes common sense given the data that I have personally collected and the general vibe among gun owners about Kahr's quality reputation.
- Kahr has a bad reputation currently for the quality of their polymer pistols
- Kahr has some known failure rate related to light strikes and magazine drops in CW9 pistols, and barrel peening in PM9s, which are feeding this bad quality reputation
- However many guns come back for RMAs due to the known common issues, there are two choices. Either replace the whole gun and wind up with a nearly guaranteed fix for the customer and a happy customer, or swap some parts and hope that it fixes it. The second option has a very poor track record of success.
So the real solution is for Kahr to stop producing so many CW9s with light primer strikes and magazine drop issues. In the meantime, they are suffering a huge reputation black eye that is worsening because it appears that it almost always takes multiple returns to the factory to fix these problems.
Quite frankly, I think when you register the pistol for warranty, Kahr should send you a note that says "with some ammunition and under some circumstances, your pistol may experience light primer strikes. If this proves to be the case, please contact Kahr customer service and we will promptly replace the pistol". Period. Ditto that for magazine drops. It may take 300-500 rounds for the customer to discover this problem so Kahr can't very well be expected to find it on test-firing a couple of rounds out of a manufactured gun, so until they find the ironclad engineering solution they need to do something to rehabilitate their image.
This is my opinion, and as I stated before, I like my Kahr pistol and will likely buy more of them. I make these suggestions because I think they are clearly the best thing for Kahr and will result in a better quality image and increased sales.
And while I agree that this level of service is excellent from the perspective of just one problem, the fact that ANY gun requires THREE RMAs before it gets fixed correctly is just impossible to defend. No matter how good the service is, any product you buy, upon which you are expected to depend your life, that requires service for catastrophic failure THREE TIMES before it is fixed can only be described as a total failure of quality control, plain and simple.
I have two other handguns from two different manufacturers and NEITHER of them has had a single failure of any kind since new. I have no idea how above and beyond the Smith & Wesson service is because in 1K+ rounds my el-cheapo Sigma 9mm has not had one single solitary failure. Ditto that for Ruger. Not to mention these guns cost $100+ less than my "budget" CW9.
The reason I suggested that replacing the entire gun would be a good idea is because it makes common sense given the data that I have personally collected and the general vibe among gun owners about Kahr's quality reputation.
- Kahr has a bad reputation currently for the quality of their polymer pistols
- Kahr has some known failure rate related to light strikes and magazine drops in CW9 pistols, and barrel peening in PM9s, which are feeding this bad quality reputation
- However many guns come back for RMAs due to the known common issues, there are two choices. Either replace the whole gun and wind up with a nearly guaranteed fix for the customer and a happy customer, or swap some parts and hope that it fixes it. The second option has a very poor track record of success.
So the real solution is for Kahr to stop producing so many CW9s with light primer strikes and magazine drop issues. In the meantime, they are suffering a huge reputation black eye that is worsening because it appears that it almost always takes multiple returns to the factory to fix these problems.
Quite frankly, I think when you register the pistol for warranty, Kahr should send you a note that says "with some ammunition and under some circumstances, your pistol may experience light primer strikes. If this proves to be the case, please contact Kahr customer service and we will promptly replace the pistol". Period. Ditto that for magazine drops. It may take 300-500 rounds for the customer to discover this problem so Kahr can't very well be expected to find it on test-firing a couple of rounds out of a manufactured gun, so until they find the ironclad engineering solution they need to do something to rehabilitate their image.
This is my opinion, and as I stated before, I like my Kahr pistol and will likely buy more of them. I make these suggestions because I think they are clearly the best thing for Kahr and will result in a better quality image and increased sales.
Comment