Arex Rex Zero 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
12,968
Location
Northern Kentucky
I've been planning on getting a new 9mm handgun for some time. I was leaning towards the Ruger american compact then I saw this the other day and have consumed all of the content about the firearm I can and I really want it now.

They are made in Slovania, imported through a company in Nevada and cost about $600. 17+1 with 4.25 inch barrel. DA/SA with decocker

I haven't even held one yet because no local shop has it. It's been out for one year. This would be my first non striker fired gun but with a heavy DA pull I would probably carry it with the safety off.

Anyone have any experience with it? I posted the best videos I came across so far. Share your thoughts.
 
Haven't shot one, but did get a chance to hold one at a shop recently. They seem like a very good quality pistol. The gunmakers in eastern Europe have really stepped up. I don't think you should have any reservations about the gun. The only issues you run into with something like this is mags are trickier to track down and aftermarket support is lean.
 
Actually the mags are one of the best parts, they are available directly through the company who imports them and only $25 each, but the Holsters are very limited
 
I watched MAC's video reviews of these. EXCEPTIONAL performance in his standardized torture test.

I'd buy one of these before a Sig P226, because it's different, and appears to be great quality for what you pay.

I don't own a DA-SA handgun. I think one of these would be a unique and very cool way to add one to my collection.
 
I'm sure this is an OK pistol. That said, I've never personally gotten into clones. The only reason many of these are purchased is based on cost, nothing more. This one appears to run around $400.00 less than a Sig P-226. ($600 vs. $1,000+ for the Sig). While many guns have been very successfully cloned, I would stick with the original. Hi-Power vs. FEG. Beretta M-9 vs. Taurus PT-92 . And various other cloned models, overall do not live up to the same quality and reliability standard many of the originals do.

Yes, this was a fair test, and the gun performed well. But if you look at overall performance of many clones involving hundreds of guns over hundreds of thousands of rounds, reliability problems tend to surface more with most all of the clones. About the biggest exception to this rule is the 1911. There are simply so many of them produced by so many manufacturers, it's all but impossible to pass judgment on them as a whole. But even with them, the Colt's pretty much set the quality and performance standard for 1911's in it's price range. Same with AR's.

It's no different with generic drugs. They cost less for a reason. Many of them are manufactured overseas, and are not up to the same quality standards the brand name pharmaceuticals are, which are made here. People tend to have issues with them because of that. And many doctors refuse to prescribe them because of those issues. A pistol purchased for defensive purposes can be just as important to your health as a prescription drug. With that in mind, I'll save money somewhere else. If it's just a range toy, that's another story.
 
Originally Posted By: john_pifer

I'd buy one of these before a Sig P226, because it's different, and appears to be great quality for what you pay.


I'm the opposite. The 226 has been in the US for decades now. Parts are readily available. Mags are readily available. You can get "OEM" Mecgar mags (the best there is) for $17. It has a proven track record. You will be able to find spare parts and replacement springs for it now, 20 years from now, 50 years from now. These European imports are only imported for perhaps 5 years, then another importer may or may not import it. Good luck finding any proprietary parts any time in the future.

As to cost, I can buy ten P226 pistols today in my area, used, for less than $600 a piece. Also, a used pistol will be of higher quality than any current 226 leaving the factory. 1988 to about 2005 was the sweet spot for Sig quality. If much rather find a nice used Sig for under $600 than drop $1000 on a new Sig or $600 on a clone.

If you want a cheap clone, the Canik pistols are amazing at under $350.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
I'm sure this is an OK pistol. That said, I've never personally gotten into clones. The only reason many of these are purchased is based on cost, nothing more. This one appears to run around $400.00 less than a Sig P-226. ($600 vs. $1,000+ for the Sig). While many guns have been very successfully cloned, I would stick with the original. Hi-Power vs. FEG. Beretta M-9 vs. Taurus PT-92 . And various other cloned models, overall do not live up to the same quality and reliability standard many of the originals do.

Yes, this was a fair test, and the gun performed well. But if you look at overall performance of many clones involving hundreds of guns over hundreds of thousands of rounds, reliability problems tend to surface more with most all of the clones. About the biggest exception to this rule is the 1911. There are simply so many of them produced by so many manufacturers, it's all but impossible to pass judgment on them as a whole. But even with them, the Colt's pretty much set the quality and performance standard for 1911's in it's price range. Same with AR's.

It's no different with generic drugs. They cost less for a reason. Many of them are manufactured overseas, and are not up to the same quality standards the brand name pharmaceuticals are, which are made here. People tend to have issues with them because of that. And many doctors refuse to prescribe them because of those issues. A pistol purchased for defensive purposes can be just as important to your health as a prescription drug. With that in mind, I'll save money somewhere else. If it's just a range toy, that's another story.


There's a lot of misinformation here.

First, generic drugs can cost less for a BUNCH of reasons that employ a lot more than a perception that they are made overseas. There are just too many variables to make blanket statement about their effectiveness.

Second, just about every major firearms platform has been cloned at some point and cloned well. I can think of examples of the Beretta, Several Walthers, CZ, 870, H&K and the list goes on. The entire XD line was built on a clone, and they aren't made here. Again, too many variables to consider and the notion of being made overseas automatically compromises quality isn't close to being true.

Third, Specifically with 1911s, only until it was cloned did the 1911 become more reliable as many older colt barrels and ignition sets weren't good for 50K rounds to say the least. Also within it's price range, Colt isn't the standard any more. There are just too many good 1911s out there in the $800-1000 range. Apples to apples, even the old $350 Norinco 1911s back in the day were better built than a Colt. Tool steel parts, tough as nails frame and slide, and a chrome lined barrel. Which is why certain semi-custom companies, when they stated out, would built on Norinco frame but not a Colt, due to inconsistencies. But the pony on the side makes people feel good.
 
The one poster is certainly right about current sig quality. Sig has let itself go a bit. You can especially see it on their rifle line, but also they like to slap their name on a lot of rather cheaply built accessories. Also, there have been changes to the sig line over the years. A West German or German sig can employ different construction methods and materials, especially relating to the slide assembly.

A nice used German made Sig is the way to go if you like the platform and want the original. I have seen far more Exter NH made 226 and 220 guns have problems than I ever saw for the imports. Part of me thinks Sig was hurting and was looking for a way to cut costs and raise profits, and their QC dept too a kit. Other major makers have been guilty of this. First comes to mind is any company that is part of the Freedom Group, but Colt had some really iffy years for consistency as well when they were struggling.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JDM396
The entire XD line was built on a clone


Please describe which pistol the XD is a clone of. And dont say HS2000, because the HS2000 and XD are built and sold by the same company, so not cloned. The XD being the American import version of the HS2000 that is sold to the rest of the world.
 
Originally Posted By: JDM396
First, generic drugs can cost less for a BUNCH of reasons that employ a lot more than a perception that they are made overseas. There are just too many variables to make blanket statement about their effectiveness.


It doesn't change the fact many people do not obtain favorable results with them. And because of that many doctors WILL NOT prescribe certain types of generic medication because of those problems. It doesn't matter why or how, if the brand name produces favorable results and the generic does not. Which is the case in many of these instances. No "perception", just fact. I myself have been prescribed bad generics. After switching to the brand name, the problems ceased. It's immaterial what the reason was why. It's another case of the clone not working as well, or at all. Many guns are the same.

Originally Posted By: JDM396
Second, just about every major firearms platform has been cloned at some point and cloned well. I can think of examples of the Beretta, Several Walthers, CZ, 870, H&K and the list goes on.


And again it doesn't change the fact many of these clones are not up to par in regards to quality. Just because they are cloned in large numbers does not make them the same. Many are sub standard. The Springfield XD is nothing more than the HS-2000 designed by Marko Vukovic, and produced by I.M. Metals with Springfield's name on it. Springfield spent millions advertising it, put their name on it, over doubled the price, (the HS-2000 sold for $250.00), and packaged it with $5 worth of molded plastic "gear". If anything, Springfield "reversed cloned" it. It's their gun to begin with. It's also no better of a gun now than it was then. It's still the same gun built in the same plant, by the same people, on the same machinery.

Originally Posted By: JDM396
Third, Specifically with 1911s, only until it was cloned did the 1911 become more reliable as many older colt barrels and ignition sets weren't good for 50K rounds to say the least. Also within it's price range, Colt isn't the standard any more. There are just too many good 1911s out there in the $800-1000 range.


I agree. That's why I said the 1911 is the exception to the rule. That said, Colt still manufacturers some of the best 1911's and AR-15's in their price range today. Few would dispute that.
 
Quote:
It doesn't change the fact many people do not obtain favorable results with them. And because of that many doctors WILL NOT prescribe certain types of generic medication because of those problems. It doesn't matter why or how, if the brand name produces favorable results and the generic does not. Which is the case in many of these instances. No "perception", just fact. I myself have been prescribed bad generics. After switching to the brand name, the problems ceased. It's immaterial what the reason was why. It's another case of the clone not working as well, or at all. Many guns are the same.


This simply isn't true, and shows an amount of ignorance of real world experience in the health industry and how generics are produced. Generic drugs, sold in the U.S. have the same FDA compliance requirements as brand name. Generics have been prescribed for decades with no issues outside of a placebo effect, because they are identical to the brand name, the FDA ensures that. Again, concerning anecdotes as proof, there too many variables to consider. For starters, doctors won't prescribe generics due to the kickbacks.... or lack thereof.


Point remains that you've stated that "overall do not live up to the same quality and reliability standard many of the originals do." The problem with this theory, is that many actually do. If you believe different, great, then provide otherwise with your reliability or longevity tests. What's interesting is.... that the MAC video posted... .shows a reliability test with the Sig Clone and Sig's Legion Series....that blows your theory out of the water. MAC makes a pretty strong recommendation for these Sig clones, and it's not the first one he's recommended over the years.

Quote:
I agree. That's why I said the 1911 is the exception to the rule. That said, Colt still manufacturers some of the best 1911's and AR-15's in their price range today. Few would dispute that.


I think it's safe to say that Colt is behind the times, and has been for awhile. They are decent 1911s, but overpriced, and the fit and finish is mediocre compared to what's out there. Most guys that actually shot a bit realize this and move on. Lots of Colts sit in safe in lieu of hard use. You just don't see them in Single Stack competition classes or pistol Classes for a reason.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JDM396
This simply isn't true, and shows an amount of ignorance of real world experience in the health industry and how generics are produced. Generic drugs, sold in the U.S. have the same FDA compliance requirements as brand name. Generics have been prescribed for decades with no issues outside of a placebo effect, because they are identical to the brand name, the FDA ensures that. Again, concerning anecdotes as proof, there too many variables to consider. For starters, doctors won't prescribe generics due to the kickbacks.... or lack thereof.


I'm sorry but you're WRONG, and it IS TRUE. I just got finished telling you I've had it happened to me personally with generic diabetes medication. Are you calling me a liar? Did I react to the medication because my doctor didn't "get a kickback"? The fact is they not all are of the same quality. A clone of anything is just that, a clone. A facsimile. Be it a gun, a "Rolex" watch, or a drug. They are not always as identical as they appear, or say they are. Quality can be, and in fact IS cut in many cases, to produce what claims to be the same item, cheaper. I know others who also had trouble with generic medication, that did not have with brand name product. What does that have to do with "kickbacks"? Many times a doctors insurance carrier will mandate that he prescribes the cheaper generic first. And can only prescribe the brand name if they have a reaction to the cheaper generic. Hardly a "kickback". You don't know what you're talking about.


Originally Posted By: JDM396
Point remains that you've stated that "overall do not live up to the same quality and reliability standard many of the originals do."


I did, and many times they don't. If they did generic medication would not cause the problems in people that the brand name product doesn't. Anymore than the overall quality of a Taurus clone is identical to a original Beretta product. It's not. Just look at forums where people are constantly sending back their Taurus clones trying to get them fixed. They are a [censored] shoot in regards to quality, and always have been. All you are putting forth are your opinions. You are entitled to do that, but it doesn't make it fact. The Sig clone seems like an OK pistol. They, like many clones took a proven design and produced it cheaper. Sometimes they get it right, and many times they do not.

This "test" was one guy with one pistol. And he got favorable results. It hardly speaks for an entire production run of weapons over a period of decades. If you like this gun, by all means buy it. If you think Colt is, "behind the times", (whatever that means), then don't. I don't know what else to tell you. Just stop trying to tell me something I know to be fact isn't.
 
Quote:
I'm sorry but you're WRONG, and it IS TRUE. I just got finished telling you I've had it happened to me personally with generic diabetes medication. Are you calling me a liar? Did I react to the medication because my doctor didn't "get a kickback"? They fact is they not all are of the same quality. A clone of anything is just that, a clone. A facsimile. Be it a gun, a "Rolex" watch, or a drug. They are not always as identical as they appear, or say they are. Quality can be, and in fact IS cut in many cases, to produce what claims to be the same item, cheaper. I know others who also had trouble with generic medication, that did not have with brand name product. What does that have to do with "kickbacks". Many times a doctors insurance carrier will mandate that he prescribes the cheaper generic first. And can only prescribe the brand name if they have a reaction to the cheaper generic. Hardly a "kickback". You don't know what you're talking about.


Not calling you a liar, some people just don't understand that the placebo effect is very real in many cases. Comparing a Rolex to generic drugs is intellectually dishonest at best. I don't know enough about your situation, but citing the warm and fuzzies on brand name drugs and completely discounting the generic market shows a compromise somewhere in terms of education on what generic drugs really are and how they are approved in the US. Finally, whether you like it or not, realize or not, docs do in fact get kick backs from name brand companies. Typing in bold won't change this reality and this really is no secret.


Quote:
This "test" was one guy with one pistol. And he got favorable results. It hardly speaks for an entire production run of weapons over a period of decades. If you like this gun, by all means buy it. If you think Colt is, "behind the times", (whatever that means), then don't. I don't know what else to tell you. Just stop trying to tell me something I know to be fact isn't.


You just made a generalization about the generic drug market from one test sample... you. However a guy posts a video, states his criteria, and does a 1000 round test with the gun, and that's not significant?

I won't be buying this gun, although it looks like heckuva buy. I can't do the DA/SA transition after owning all the major platforms out there at some point. Nonetheless, in many years of experience I find that the "clone" snobbery is usually by people who don't actually shoot their guns. There are god knows how many clones out there that have established a good reputation, especially if you consider rifles and shotguns. One thing remains, the videos are impressive IMO, and speak more than any opinion given here. Mine or yours.

Colt is behind the times because they took years to employ simple ergos that many 1911 shooters end up wanting. Extended or enhanced controls, beavertail, better sights, etc etc. You usually have to pay $1000-1200 for a Colt to get you these options. Again, people that shoot a lot don't usually stick with the original configuration due to comfort and split times. A little bit of irony here.... Sig released a Colt mustang clone a few years back.... and made it significantly more reliable because original was a paperweight in a lot of cases.

I'm really not sure why this concept is so foreign? We are on an oil forum where it is shown time and time again that marketing can instigate false perceptions. Seems from the video that compares the clone and name brand that it applies in the gun world too.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JDM396
............citing the warm and fuzzies on brand name drugs and completely discounting the generic market shows a compromise somewhere in terms of education on what generic drugs really are and how they are approved in the US.


I'm not, "completely discounting the generic market". Stop overreacting and talking so foolish. I'm saying not all generic drugs are the same quality of their brand name counterparts. Just like guns and everything else that's cloned cheaper. Adverse reaction to generic drugs is REAL. It's happened to me, and to others I've know. There is nothing "warm and fuzzy" about it. And this FDA you refer to, as this great protector of the population in relationship to prescription drugs. And who supposedly assures our safety through quality and rigorous testing of drugs, are the same one's who approved Vioxx, Darvon and Darvocet, Fen-Phen, Redux, and dozens of others for dangerous, and fatal side effects.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
............citing the warm and fuzzies on brand name drugs and completely discounting the generic market shows a compromise somewhere in terms of education on what generic drugs really are and how they are approved in the US.


I'm not, "completely discounting the generic market". Stop overreacting and talking so foolish. I'm saying not all generic drugs are the same quality of their brand name counterparts. Just like guns and everything else that's cloned cheaper. Adverse reaction to generic drugs is REAL. It's happened to me, and to others I've know. There is nothing "warm and fuzzy" about it. And this FDA you refer to, as this great protector of the population in relationship to prescription drugs. And who supposedly assures our safety through quality and rigorous testing of drugs, are the same one's who approved Vioxx, Darvon and Darvocet, Fen-Phen, Redux, and dozens of others for dangerous, and fatal side effects.


It's not foolish or overreacting, you spoke pretty plainly about your opinion on clones and have tried to apply all sorts of red herring ever since. Seems there's a bit of back tracking here but let's not beat a dead horse.

In regards to your general statement about firearm clones....I'm curious.... do you have anything we can reference that you can present to contradict the videos.... that MAC has posted with regards to this particular Sig clone? Maybe back up your statement JUST a little? Because watching the vids I see 1000 rounds in a very short amount of time and torture test that the original couldn't pass. Not the end all be all of evidence, but a darn good start in lieu of words on a forum.
 
Originally Posted By: JDM396
In regards to your general statement about firearm clones....I'm curious.... do you have anything we can reference that you can present to contradict the videos....


Why would I contradict Mac's video? I already said in my first post the gun performed well. That in no way absolves every gun ever cloned since the dawn of time. Or does it mean that clones in general are of the same quality as the original. Be they guns, drugs, watches, Gucci purses, or Harbor Freight generators. Or anything else that's made cheaper, and not held to the same quality level, or contain the exact same materials or manufacturing standards as the original product.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
In regards to your general statement about firearm clones....I'm curious.... do you have anything we can reference that you can present to contradict the videos....


Why would I contradict Mac's video? I already said in my first post the gun performed well. That in no way absolves every gun ever cloned since the dawn of time. Or does it mean that clones in general are of the same quality as the original. Be they guns, drugs, watches, Gucci purses, or Harbor Freight generators. Or anything else that's made cheaper, and not held to the same quality level, or contain the exact same materials or manufacturing standards as the original product.


Right, we get it. This gun looks good per the information we have, but gun clones are bad because Gucci and Generic drugs. Fascinating logic in lieu of real world evidence.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: JDM396
Right, we get it.


I really don't think you do.


That's probably because you just may not know any better. Again, it's really not a secret that there's a ton of "clones" out there that work as well and sometimes... better... than the original. In the sense that some would probably argue the semantics of some definitions of clones all day long. Point is that several platforms copied previous ones and expanded on the previous, in which this gun isn't an exact clone of a Sig either, there are some differences.
 
If you haven't seen their page, Arex has been manufacturing defense parts for 20 years and firearm parts since 2005. In 2012 when they got a plant for making barrels it was the last piece they needed to start their own firearms business.

So they are relatively new when it comes to the complete fire arm game but all of their experience gives them a good leg up for the new product. They talk about how they have manufactured parts for major European firearms companies so they probably got a lot of knowledge from that.

The first video I posted shows their cnc machines at work if you haven't seen it I highly recommend it, since it's a fairly short video and production is decent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top