Talk:Hi-Point Firearms

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rifle pics[edit]

If anyone has/can get any, I'd love a pic or two of one of thier rifles to use on the page. I'm also stuck for what other content to add to this one.... --негіднийлють (Reply|Spam Me!*) 08:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WIki God's,

How do I mark the following statement as un-substantiated: "However, Hi-Point is considering a change to its current warranty for the carbines, due to the high return rate of weapons with modified stocks from ATI, which cause damage to the Hi-Point Carbines" As far as I know, this opinion has not been publicly released by MKS or, Beemiller/Hi-point. The only record that exists is a person on a forum relating a telephone conversation. Before buying Hi-points, check youtube.com for a take-down or field strip video with good resolution, freeze frame and examine carefully. This may help you decision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.155.110.2 (talk) 18:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'm not saying it's not true; but, as stated above, MKS/Beemiller has made no press release or official statement regarding this claim.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.104.220 (talk) 03:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add additional information[edit]

What would be the best way to add these?

General Information

  • www.mkssupply.com
  • www.hi-pointfirearms.com
  • “Gunsmith’s Creation now infamous; maker of rifle used in massacre feels pride, pain”. Walsh, Sharon. The Washington Post. Washington: Apr 30, 1999. pg. E01.
  • www.impactguns.com/store/hipoint.html
  • www.promagindustries.com/highpoin.asp
  • www.doingfreedom.com/gen/0103/bargainpistols.html
  • www.amfire.com/php/container.php?content=newsPost.php&newsPostID=124
  • “Complete guide to compact handguns”. Gangarosa, Gene. p. 240-1. ISBN: 0-88317-203-8
  • www.vpc.org/studies/deadhip.htm

Model CF .380

  • www.mkssupply.com/handgun_details.asp?Gun=380comp

Model C9

Model A

  • www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/5449/fireoverhp.htm?200528

Model B

  • www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/5449/fireoverhp.htm?200529

JC 40 S&W

  • www.securityarms.com/20010315/galleryfiles/2900/2963.htm
  • www.mkssupply.com/handgun_details.asp?Gun=40SW
  • www.michiganmilitia.com/SMVM/weapons/hipoint40.htm

995 Carbine

4095 Carbine

Handgun Drills/ Troubleshooting

  • www.kuci.org/~dany/firearms/all_drills.html
  • www.sightm1911.com/lib/tech/FTF_FTE.htm
  • “The same – But different?” Clint Smith. American Handgunner 2006 Tactical Annual.

Model JHP .45 ACP

  • www.mkssupply.com/handgun_details.asp?Gun=45ACP
  • www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=Reviews&rop=showcontent&id=80
  • www.shootingtimes.com/handgun_reviews/hipoint_100605/index.html

Disassembly 995 Carbine

  • Gun Digest firearms assembly/disassembly Part 4: Centerfire Rifles. 2nd ed. Pages 179-187. ISBN: 0-87349-631-0. (Note: there have been some changes in the design since this book was published…)

Targets

-- wolf_from_wv [ 16:15, 25 May 2006‎ ]

Improved models have been introduced by Hi-Point since most of these sources were published (I suspect due to Hi-Points liberal warranty program that lets them know what works and what fails), so technically most of these sources are out-of-date. They may have some historical value. --Naaman Brown (talk) 16:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Press release[edit]

NPOV? This article seems a little too "press-release" like for me... Chris 13:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


POV, Definitely! Full of unsubstantiated, subjective comments such as: "compared to a Jennings, the Hi-Point shines as a decent quality handgun". That's like saying "compared to a Trabant, the Yugo shines as a decent automobile"!

Also, the article contains comments such as "the carbine is popular among knowledgeable firearms collectors", and that they "have seen service in various law enforcement agencies".

Another questionable line is that the Hi-Point sacrifices aesthetics for "ease of use" and "price". That's nonsense. There are literally dozens of handguns and carbines that are aesthetically pleasing, which are just as easy to operate and far more ergonomic. Nor is the aesthetics of a handgun design necessarily a constraint on manufacturing costs. This is all simply opinion on the part of the author(s)

These statements are nebulous to say the least. Apparently the statements are intended to illustrate some measure of acceptance of Hi-Points as worthwhile firearms, but actually add nothing of concrete worth. The article's references include firearms forums, and worst of all, "gun-rag" articles, both of which are notorious for ill-informed opinions and in the case of gun-rags, hype for hire.

The article smells of manufacturer/marketer/kool-aid influences, if not outright authorship. All of the subjective opinion should be stripped out and simply describe the Hi-Points as priced for the low end of the firearms market.

PS... I'm not exactly up to speed on how this "talk" section functions. Its not like your typical forum reply, so excuse me if I did not follow the process correctly. pjmcmulle

While there are some POV issues here, you seem to have a LOT of anger that tends to imply you have personal issues with Hi-Point. Perhaps you would like to disclose your personal bias issues? 75.172.7.128 (talk) 04:49, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to reword the first paragraph a bit to deal with some of these POV issues. SupremeDalek (talk) 22:24, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jargon?[edit]

Another POV problem is that this article reads as if written for the handgun user rather than a general readership. Sentences like "HiPoint recommends hosing out the action with a powder solvent like breakfree powderblast or another aerosol solvent, then every 500-800 rounds running a patch or 2 down the barrel" seem out of place in an encyclopedia entry. Sergeirichard (talk) 17:22, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably that is because whoever wrote it is a handgun user. For the sentence you mentioned I would have preferred to see some reference to back it up, like the manual (which is available online). SupremeDalek (talk) 22:23, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ATI stocks[edit]

There was a statement in the article, referring to how ATI stocks damage Hi-Point carbines, and, how Hi-Point is considering changing the warranty because of this. Statements like this, need to be cited, from reliable sources. I've removed it for now, but, if one can find a source for that, we can re-add it. SQLQuery me! 12:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rewording of something[edit]

One of the lines in this article needs either to be removed or backed up, "Some people are wary of Hi-Points because of the high rate of jams (falure to fire, feed and eject are very frequent)" from the last paragraph on the first section. I am an Arms Dealer, and I sell dozens of Hi-Points, and have heard few complaints except from the .380's, (The slide is too heavy to be properly operated by the .380 shell, unless you have a perfect stance). Dreg102 (talk) 14:34, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeet Cannon/Naming contest section.[edit]

Okay this sounds absolutely ridiculous if you do not know the context, but Hi Point recently had a promotion where they had online fans name their new pistol. Naturally, /k/ and other people raided their polls and the new firearm is now named the "Yeet Cannon 9". Absolutely real, not even kidding. Here's a link on their website: https://www.hi-pointfirearms.com/hi-point-handguns/9mm-OGYC.php

The poll results and questions are all over the place in firearms communities and blogs, you can find a plethora of information just about anywhere. There also was an attempt by Hi Point to not have it named "Yeet Cannon", but public outcry and backlash brought not only one, but 2 pistols into existence. It's entertaining to say the least.

https://www.guns.com/news/2019/07/01/yeet-cannon-hi-point-bows-to-crowd-favored-yc9-handle-for-new-9mm-pistol https://www.ballisticmag.com/2019/07/02/confirmed-hi-point-yeet-cannon/ https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/06/29/yeet-cannon/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.180.82 (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Haskell[edit]

Apparently this company used to be called Haskell before changing its name([1],[2]). Shouldn’t that be mentioned somewhere in this article? Overlordnat1 (talk) 11:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[3] This article on Hi-Point's website seems to indicate that Haskell was one of several companies that was eventually merged into the Hi-Point brand, and not an old name for the current company. Loafiewa (talk) 14:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction[edit]

So is "Strassell's Machine, Inc" an alternative name or the parent company's name?--84.132.157.63 (talk) 11:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hi-Point_Firearms&oldid=1202699581"