Shotgun Forum banner
41 - 58 of 58 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,969 Posts
No idea. Obviously, a "ban" has no basis but no basis was the basis for it in the first place. As far as I know, any rink-a-dink club can ban whatever they want-- with no basis, or no reason at all.

It makes them appear stupid if that is the case, but appearing stupid didn't seem to bother them before. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Delighted with how this all worked but appalled at the process. It didn't deter me from buying my Summit Ltd. Thanks go to all those that forced the dildos to say uncle. Thank you Wes and thank you Randy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
688 Posts
That is the best news we could hope for in this rotten mess! I am the happy owner of 2 CG guns and have been well cared for by Wes and Company. I hope for the sake of our sport, the lessons learned will serve as an example for responsible actions by ALL parties involved in the future. That was sorely lacking in this case. Thanks Wes and Randy for putting the truth out there for us to see! Best Wishes...HHD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
719 Posts
Not to bring up this old post, but CG has never made a long gun barrel according to CG. They have them made by Fabarm to their specification. A direct quote from CG. So corporate wide yes!

The barrels are inserted into a CG mono block and I believe cold solidered, like Beretta does.

What are we saying, 3 or 8 barrels blew up is not the case. They are proof to 1360 BAR to withstand say 40,000 or so psi, so a double load of primer or power (right) can happen, but some posting say they tried it and no problems. So did the proof house fail to properly test the firearm?

Well try having a USA court try to get an Italian firarm manufacture records on proof test. Good luck, set you in 10 years.

On the other hand, Beretta has millions of dollars invested in manufacturing equipment. A one Stop shop with its own proof house in factory. How can you say that for CG, unless you count Fabarms factories and CG assembly falicity.

Lets try to be objective. If some rich person got really injured or his kids, the lawyers would have a field day. All sorts of experts would testfy on both side of the issue and our 12 unimformed jurors wouldnt have a clue, unless one of them did reloading!. So the question is whose attorney beat up the other attorney. Hail Ceasar!

The story goes as follows: When John Browning was testing his theory in 1920's that his lock up with a flat bolt was sperior and force was verticle, thus a tall receiver, he removed the flat blot according to the story and fired the gun and it did not break.

Now Wilson's book has a story about Beretta designer, who removed a cross or u bolt and tested his horizontal theory and P. Berett called him " Mad", well the breech also failed to open and P. Beretta has been making them for 83 years or so. CG 13 years or so, unless you count B. Rizzini guns under the Guerini brothers management team. Hail Ceasar!

If I buy a used 2003 CG Summit Sporting used how can I believe a "Pit Stop" free as it may, would be an insurance policy , when one of my grandkids take up Sporting Clays? My grandkids dont have a rich grandfather, so they may be out of luck.

Final point: CG refuses to release any repair or warrantee work they perform, saying company policy. Not so with Beretta, Perazzi or others, browning, etc. Why is this so called Company policy? Hail Ceasar!

Both great designer had proven their respective theories many years ago. Modern day, Browning 725 ,and CG have come arround to a simular conclusion as Beretta great designer"Lower barrels position in receiver". Therefore the breech systems of CG/725's all follow the vertical/ Browning theory, but I never heard of a Browning to blow up. Had 25 Browning and 15 Beretta and nada!

Hail Ceasar and their investors and attorneys!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
178 Posts
frankgoss said:
Not to bring up this old post, but CG has never made a long gun barrel according to CG. They have them made by Fabarm to their specification. A direct quote from CG. So corporate wide yes!

The barrels are inserted into a CG mono block and I believe cold solidered, like Beretta does.

What are we saying, 3 or 8 barrels blew up is not the case. They are proof to 1360 BAR to withstand say 40,000 or so psi, so a double load of primer or power (right) can happen, but some posting say they tried it and no problems. So did the proof house fail to properly test the firearm?

Well try having a USA court try to get an Italian firarm manufacture records on proof test. Good luck, set you in 10 years.

On the other hand, Beretta has millions of dollars invested in manufacturing equipment. A one Stop shop with its own proof house in factory. How can you say that for CG, unless you count Fabarms factories and CG assembly falicity.

Lets try to be objective. If some rich person got really injured or his kids, the lawyers would have a field day. All sorts of experts would testfy on both side of the issue and our 12 unimformed jurors wouldnt have a clue, unless one of them did reloading!. So the question is whose attorney beat up the other attorney. Hail Ceasar!

The story goes as follows: When John Browning was testing his theory in 1920's that his lock up with a flat bolt was sperior and force was verticle, thus a tall receiver, he removed the flat blot according to the story and fired the gun and it did not break.

Now Wilson's book has a story about Beretta designer, who removed a cross or u bolt and tested his horizontal theory and P. Berett called him " Mad", well the breech also failed to open and P. Beretta has been making them for 83 years or so. CG 13 years or so, unless you count B. Rizzini guns under the Guerini brothers management team. Hail Ceasar!

If I buy a used 2003 CG Summit Sporting used how can I believe a "Pit Stop" free as it may, would be an insurance policy , when one of my grandkids take up Sporting Clays? My grandkids dont have a rich grandfather, so they may be out of luck.

Final point: CG refuses to release any repair or warrantee work they perform, saying company policy. Not so with Beretta, Perazzi or others, browning, etc. Why is this so called Company policy? Hail Ceasar!

Both great designer had proven their respective theories many years ago. Modern day, Browning 725 ,and CG have come arround to a simular conclusion as Beretta great designer"Lower barrels position in receiver". Therefore the breech systems of CG/725's all follow the vertical/ Browning theory, but I never heard of a Browning to blow up. Had 25 Browning and 15 Beretta and nada!

Hail Ceasar and their investors and attorneys!
Go away...........
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
178 Posts
frankgoss said:
They are proof to 1360 BAR to withstand say 40,000 or so psi,
1360 bar = 19725 psi

In any case, you´re wrong about the 1360 bar thing too.

The CIP proof pressure (125% of mean service pressure) for shotguns chambered to accept either 76 mm or 89 mm 12 gauge cartridges is 1320 bar (19144 psi).

Fabarm voluntarily requests that their guns be proofed to 1630 bar (23641 psi)

A gun proofed to 1630 bar will not tolerate anything close to 40,000 psi without spectacular failure.

You have no credibility here........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,824 Posts
frankgoss

I normally wouldn't waste my time saying it, but you've earned your spot on my permanent ignore list. Congratulations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,100 Posts
I think it is interesting that Frank posted his response to me on this board when he had previously been posting on the "CG Lovers" board. I suggested there that if he's so worried about the used CG he's allegedly looking at might blow up, that he should just buy a Beretta instead.

Yet another thoughtful statement from Frank: "[Beretta has] a one Stop shop with its own proof house in factory." Oh yeah Frank, an in-house testing facility is so much more effective than a neutral, independent third party. Do you not understand that CG (as does Beretta) sends its barrels to the national proof house, not because it is cheaper to do so than having its own in-company proof house, but because it is required by law for every gun manufactured in Italy?

And Frank, you say in another post that you spent your life working as a CPA, yet you dismiss out of hand as biased the inspection of the QSC gun by an independent testing lab simply because CG paid for the test. Then you question, without a single iota of proof, the ethics and methods of the Italian proofing house, touting Beretta's in-house testing as superior If that were true, then by your standards, no company needs to hire a CPA, it should be able to fully rely on its own in-house accounting department to verify the books.

Frank, you are obviously not looking for faults in Browning as diligently as you are looking for rumors of faults in CG, as you state that you have never heard of a Browning barrel blowing up. If you want to see a blown up Browning barrel, just Google "Browning shotgun barrel blow up." The first post is a string of pictures of blown barrels. But I'll bet every one of those blown barrels was caused by an improperly reloaded shell or a clogged barrel.

Yes Frank, a US court could get copies of Italian proof records; but they would probably be handed over voluntarily (which records would only confirm the proofing certificate from the national proofing house that comes with every new Italian-made shotgun). While I probably don't know as much about international discovery procedures as you do, I do think from a practical view that in 2009 there was no incentive for the highly respected Italian national proof house, a facility which has a government mandate to test every gun made in Italy, to "cook its books" to accommodate a relatively new gun company by passing otherwise faulty barrels. In fact, since testing in Italy is mandatory, not optional like it is for guns made in the USA, it is in the Italian proof house's best reputational interest to fail faulty barrels, not pass them.

So after reading your latest post on this board, I say to you, Frank Goss, please please don't buy that used CG you say though about a dozen post on different boards and threads that you have been looking at. Please, oh please, buy a Beretta. I'm sure that Beretta-made barrels, so mighty with all that in-house proofing, will not blow up, even after being shot with overloaded reloads.

And to all of you who shoot, love and legitimately carp about the CGs you actually own, Happy New Year. Mary Ann
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,100 Posts
Thanks Trickster, and before I go off for a proper New Year's Day of overeating, overdrinking and watching football (or as you Brits call it hand egg ball) a final thought on our friend Frank.

When I first responded to his posts I thought he was legitimately seeking information, but when he got to the point that he was opining that White, a nationally respected testing house, had risked its reputation by putting out a bogus opinion for a fee from a small start up gun company, and that the Italian national proofing house was bent, I decided he was either a grassy knoll conspiracist, a troll, stupid, or trying to dirty CG's reputation so that the price of the CG he complains that he will have to pay more for used than it cost new in 2004 will come down (as a CPA, does he not know about inflation and adjustment to real dollars? $2.5K in 2004 is $3.2K in adjusted 2016 dollars).

He complains that every bit of information CG puts out for its customers is somehow indicative of an inferior product. Since CG recommends you loosen the chokes before storing, he trumpets that as a sign there is something wrong with the chokes and neither the chokes nor the barrel have nickel in them. Yet on the first shotgun I bought, a 28 gauge Beretta, Chuck at Ray's Hardware made sure I bought choke grease, showed me how to apply it, and cautioned me to loosen the cokes periodically; telling me about his son-in-law who failed to do so and now has a fixed choke gun. And a few years ago I watched as they put my friend Hugh's semi-auto Beretta in a padded clamp while they used a set of vise grips to get the choke off; Hugh now owns the world's most fully constricted choke and now loosens his chokes and cleans the threads regularly.

There are legitimate complaints about CG--the Tinalloy finish didn't work out well, the very pretty oil finish on the stocks tends to get damaged after contact with sweat, sunblock lotion and bug spray, when I ordered my Syren it took four months longer to get to me than promised, etc. But one thing NOBODY can legitimately fault CG or Wes Lang on is their devotion to making safe guns, they are effing psychotic about safety. MAJ
 
41 - 58 of 58 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top