In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Hi Point warranty turn around time

JTofSDJTofSD Member Posts: 119 ✭✭
edited October 2014 in Ask the Experts
I am new to being a Hi Point owner. I have heard of the life time warranty, but do not know personally anyone who has had to use it. I was wondering, how long is the average turn around time from sending in weapon for service to getting it back?

Just wondering what your experiences have been?

Comments

  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 16,704 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Friend of mine had one,,2-3 weeks-
  • JTofSDJTofSD Member Posts: 119 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by us55840

    The only people I've met that have a Hi Point were the ones that wanted to get rid of 'em.

    [8D]


    Most of the people I know either have a Hi Point and have had good luck with one, or have not owned one. They are hot sellers around where I live (Eastern South Dakota) and few are seen for sale used.
  • JTofSDJTofSD Member Posts: 119 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Grasshopper
    Friend of mine had one,,2-3 weeks-


    Thanks
  • geeguygeeguy Member Posts: 1,047
    edited November -1
    Warranty time frame was 2 weeks a few years ago. People who build the gun are very nice.

    About the gun: It goes bang, and can actually hit a target at 25 ft., but it's a "fun" gun just to chew up ammo and the metal wears fast. It's a cheap gun and that's what you get. I used one as my "loaner" for guys that just wanted to "go shoot" and didn't own a pistol, had it returned once for service, came back like new. They are heavy and bulky.

    Best of luck
  • gunnut505gunnut505 Member Posts: 10,290
    edited November -1
    Never had occasion to send my 9mm carbine in over the last 6 years, probably because it's way overengineered.
    The extractor is 3 pieces of metal, so no problems there.
    The stock looks flimsy, but after I backed over it accidentally; there were no cracks or dents.
    The only "problems" inherent in a Hi Point carbine are the 10-round mag, and the fugly look of it.
    Thinking about blowing another $210 to get one in .45acp.
  • beantownshootahbeantownshootah Member Posts: 12,776 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The topic of Hi-Point pistols comes up frequently. You can do a search on prior posts for a lot more information.

    I don't own one, but I have tried one. Never used the warranty, but I have heard that customer service is good and turnaround is relatively quick. Company is American owned and based in the midwest somewhere (I think Ohio).

    On handgun. . .well, its ugly, top heavy, and uses a simple blowback type action (explaining part of the low cost and poor balance). Trigger is plastic, frame is low-cost zinc-alloy with powdercoat finish. Gun has poor intrinsic accuracy. Single stack gun has relatively low capacity, at least compared to most modern service guns in 9mm or .40SW. I've heard of magazine issues with these, though the one I tried ran OK.

    Good points? Well, trigger pull was surprisingly good (not match grade, but only maybe 4-5 lbs), and the sights are actually pretty good.

    Personally speaking, I wouldn't buy one of these pistols. Not that the guns themselves are so terrible (though they are pretty low-end), just that at a retail price of $200 or so, you can do a **LOT** better with very little more money.

    EG, you can find a Ruger P85 used for as little as $250, and the gun will basically be better than a Hi-Point in EVERY way (concealability, balance, durability, accuracy, capacity, etc). In the unlikely event you ever have a problem, Ruger will be there to help. Smith .38 revolvers in serviceable condition can be had in the $250 price range, and these will also last forever.


    Never shot one, but from what I've heard the Hi-Point Carbine is quite a bit better than the pistol. Its basically the same design, but in a better overall package, where a blow-back type action makes a little more sense. Again ugly, but if you're looking for a low cost pistol-caliber carbine, this one will probably be OK.
  • JTofSDJTofSD Member Posts: 119 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by beantownshootah
    The topic of Hi-Point pistols comes up frequently. You can do a search on prior posts for a lot more information.

    I don't own one, but I have tried one. Never used the warranty, but I have heard that customer service is good and turnaround is relatively quick. Company is American owned and based in the midwest somewhere (I think Ohio).

    On handgun. . .well, its ugly, top heavy, and uses a simple blowback type action (explaining part of the low cost and poor balance). Trigger is plastic, frame is low-cost zinc-alloy with powdercoat finish. Gun has poor intrinsic accuracy. Single stack gun has relatively low capacity, at least compared to most modern service guns in 9mm or .40SW. I've heard of magazine issues with these, though the one I tried ran OK.

    Good points? Well, trigger pull was surprisingly good (not match grade, but only maybe 4-5 lbs), and the sights are actually pretty good.

    Personally speaking, I wouldn't buy one of these pistols. Not that the guns themselves are so terrible (though they are pretty low-end), just that at a retail price of $200 or so, you can do a **LOT** better with very little more money.

    EG, you can find a Ruger P85 used for as little as $250, and the gun will basically be better than a Hi-Point in EVERY way (concealability, balance, durability, accuracy, capacity, etc). In the unlikely event you ever have a problem, Ruger will be there to help. Smith .38 revolvers in serviceable condition can be had in the $250 price range, and these will also last forever.


    Never shot one, but from what I've heard the Hi-Point Carbine is quite a bit better than the pistol. Its basically the same design, but in a better overall package, where a blow-back type action makes a little more sense. Again ugly, but if you're looking for a low cost pistol-caliber carbine, this one will probably be OK.


    I own the Hi Point carbine. I mostly bought it because it was a third the price of any other similar carbine. I have not tried the Hi Point pistols. From what my friends tell me they are rugged and dependable. No one I know who has one has had to send it back for warranty work. I have known people who had to send back a Taurus or a Ruger in for warranty work. Some of those service jobs took a long long time to get back. I am not saying Hi Point is better, I am just sharing the experiences of my friends.

    As to the ugly question, that seems really subjective. To me a firearm is not supposed to be pretty like jewelry is.

    Thanks for your thoughts.
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 16,704 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thought the question was turn around time? ,,,I stand on my 2-3 weeks answer,,everyone knows what they are so don't scare of a gunowner here by telling him its a piece of junk or whatever,,they work-
  • beantownshootahbeantownshootah Member Posts: 12,776 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by JTofSD
    I own the Hi Point carbine. I mostly bought it because it was a third the price of any other similar carbine. I have not tried the Hi Point pistols. From what my friends tell me they are rugged and dependable. No one I know who has one has had to send it back for warranty work. I have known people who had to send back a Taurus or a Ruger in for warranty work. Some of those service jobs took a long long time to get back. I am not saying Hi Point is better, I am just sharing the experiences of my friends.

    As to the ugly question, that seems really subjective. To me a firearm is not supposed to be pretty like jewelry is.

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    You're welcome. Of course appearance is subjective; I think its implied that I'm just stating my opinion here.

    In this case, I'm quite a bit more concerned about the guns poor balance and build materials/quality than its appearance. If everything else about the gun were good, I'd easily overlook the appearance, but the fact that its ALSO ugly isn't helping any! Reminds of me of that old joke:

    Doctor: I'm afraid you have cancer.
    Patient: I want a second opinion,.
    Doctor: You're also ugly. [;)]

    On Taurus. . .I won't buy one of those either. The guns have issues, and the customer service has issues. No thank you.

    On durability of Hi Point, some of this comes down to how much they're shot. If you don't put a lot of rounds downrange, how can you know if the gun is durable or not?

    I don't know anyone who shoots a lot who uses a Hi-Point; but I've seen any number of Colts, Smiths, Rugers, Beretta, Glocks, SIGs, etc with tens of thousands of rounds downrange.

    While empirically many of the ZAMAK/zinc-alloy frame .22s seem to hold up OK, I'm not so certain that this frame material will hold up to repeated pounding from a centerfire caliber like .40SW.

    So far as I know, NONE of the "major" gun makers (Smith, Colt, Ruger, Beretta, SIG etc) use this material in frames of centerfire guns. Other than Hi-Point the only other gun makers I'm aware of that use ZAMAK for centerfire gun frames are Jimenez/Phoenix/Bryco and the like, and all those guns also have poor reputations for durability.

    Now, maybe for $150 you shouldn't have high expectations. From that perspective, if you want to look at a Hi-Point as a sort of low-cost "disposable" or "drawer" gun, potentially useful for certain personal defense scenarios, that's probably apt.

    Some people have use for such a gun; I happen not to be one of them. I'd rather pay more and get more.
Sign In or Register to comment.