Pistol Smith Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What makes Springfields less value than Colts? Again, with the shits and giggles, I asked the local dealers around on the trade value on my 2000 SA Loaded and was given the price of $300 at every store, but my Colt MK IV Series 80 was quoted at $450. Hell, the new 1991's were going for $100 more than the 2001 Springfields. Does price really dictate how good a firearm is? Price isnt everything right???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Never trade a pistol unless you just have to.
Always retail it yourself. The dealer wants
to gove you 300 so he can retail it for 450.
The Colt's cost more up front and there are fewer of them. They are certainly not any better pistol out of the box. Maybe 25 years ago or longer they were.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
378 Posts
For this area, used Springfields don't hold any where near the resale of the Colt or Kimber, but it's not so much over quality, it's just a matter of what people will actually pay for a used gun.
Whether the guns are equal or not, a dealer can't sell a SA quickly unless it's a very low price around here.
::shrug::
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
bufford5

Value is relative to the individual buyer.

You always get better money for your gun selling it yourself.

I am a retailer. I do this for profit. If I cannot clear 10% it is not worth the time as overhead costs. Hence I as a retailer have to keep that in mind when obtaining product.

Remember a gun to a retailer is product. A gun to an owner is a possession. That means your gun is a means to pay the rent.

You also incurr the costs of selling the gun when you do it yourself. You also incurr the risks. Be thankful you are not in the states trying to prevent private transfers. AKA the Barbara Striesand (B.S.) Gun Show loop hole

Do your research but you get what you pay for front end or back end.

A Springfield is a better value upfront that than an equivelant priced Colt but a Colt with the same features up front would cost more.

On the back end. Springfields have less resale value where Colts have a better resale value.

It is a Pure Bottom Line point of view.

I just bought a Springfield loaded 1911 9 mm that was sitting next to a Colt 1991 9mm.

The Springfield was a better value with more features but the Colt has better resale.

I would buy the Springfield again in a moment. It is a blast to shoot. It is a possession not a piece of merchandise. That is the perspective I obtained it from.

I hope this helps.
_________________
Be safe and keep the brass flying

Terry Peters

http://www.pt-partners.com

Do your research but you get what you pay for front end or back end.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: PT-Partners on 2001-04-28 23:47 ]</font>
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top