Quality or Quantity?


PDA






C5rider
April 3, 2012, 08:51 AM
I got back into firearms a little over a year ago. Handguns have been my main focus. I'm beginning to feel that I've come to a crossroads so far as firearms are concerned. Do I go with Quality or Quantity?

More than simply how much you pay for a gun or even what type of gun you own, would it be better to own only one gun and shoot it VERY well or, have several that you're pretty good with?

Each gun I own has its own "personality", like whether it shoots high/low or whatever. Some of them have adjustable sights but some don't.

I think most of us aren't immune to seeing another gun and (whether we'd admit it or not) wanting it. I'm envious of those guys who have gun safes the size of bank vaults, but do they really shoot EVERY one VERY well? Probably not. And, if I decided that I don't need an arsenal, when I find one that I do really want, do I make room by passing another on to a different owner?

I guess I'm just going through the process of finding my own means within this great American sport. What say you?

If you enjoyed reading about "Quality or Quantity?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
OARNGESI
April 3, 2012, 09:02 AM
A little of both is nice like one day youll want to shoot a 357 the next time a 1911. No reason to limit yourself

Sky
April 3, 2012, 09:06 AM
Probably by the time you place one in the trunk of your car and one in the glove box ( not to mention your carry piece) with several others strategically placed sneakily through out your house you can call it good unless you are a collector. Some get the warm and fuzzes from just owning and rarely shooting.

I know guys that do all the above and I just figure it is a free country so do what gives you individually the fuzzes.

PabloJ
April 3, 2012, 10:08 AM
Definitely quality over quantity. I have hunting revolver, pocket pistol, centerfire rifle and no use for any shotgun. I do not want any more guns. If I buy one another must go.

mgmorden
April 3, 2012, 10:18 AM
As said, a little of both. I like to have a nice variety and have my bases covered. When I want to shoot a wheel-gun I want to be able to do that (and several more modern ones + single actions). When I want to shoot 9mm, or .40, or .45, I want to be able to do that.

This "little of this, little of that" approach necessitates that some of my guns be a bit budget oriented. Not el-cheapos that don't work - just solid pieces for good prices.

Once the bases are covered though, unless I find a specific use for a gun, then getting yet another full-size plain-jane 9mm just because it's a good deal becomes boring. Unless I find a specific job for the gun, most of my current wish-list stands head and shoulders above anything I have now. For example, though its a ways off, my #1 wishlist item right now is a custom built 2011 pattern .40S&W built on an STI frame. Runs $2500-3000. I can't afford it right now so I'm still saving, but realistically anything less simply isn't going to do much for me.

Roan
April 3, 2012, 10:55 AM
I generally recommend that you have a handful of high quality pistols that you like and treat you well. Then build a collection of lower priced handguns to satisfy your magpie-like acquisition instincts. That way, you can occasionally pick up a new, interesting toy but never have to worry about using it in a critical situation because you can fall back on the much more quality pieces.

MrBorland
April 3, 2012, 10:58 AM
Even if you're not interested in quantity for the sake of a full safe, you'll likely go through some quality and quantity to discover what it is in a handgun you like and shoot well. It's a normal process; take your time, and it'll be a fun journey.

I myself got hooked early on revolvers, but even with the specialization, I'm still experimenting and adding (sometimes subtracting) to my safe.

The War Wagon
April 3, 2012, 11:01 AM
QUALITY will never disappoint you - especially if you have to part with some of it, to finance something else! :cool:

MrDig
April 3, 2012, 11:09 AM
I'm in the middle ground here, I have an assortment of guns, mostly rifles and handguns. Due to budget I was a if it goes bang buy it buyer. I shopped mostly used and tended toward Bolt and Lever Guns, Revolvers and all metal Semi-Auto Pistols. I found a good deal on a Sig P250, and a Used S&W Model 10, I'm starting to see the light on why people would pay $1000 for a gun, sometimes you do in fact get what you pay for, and Quality in a Smith and Wesson is vastly different from Charter Arms. Ruger is a nice middle ground between Smith and Wesson and Taurus for quality and price point. These are all things I have learned from shopping around and buying a "big" name brand when the price is fair. In the end Quality is important but if I didn't buy other guns that disappointed me from a Quality perspective I would never know the difference.

C5rider
April 3, 2012, 12:28 PM
All good responses and thanks for sharing. I bought my first shooter (a Tokarev) and wondered about folks paying $1000+ for guns. Either I've gotten used to the taste of "burgers" or, realizing that value CAN have a price tag, now I'm starting to look at some chunks of sirloin. I'm certainly not up to "filet" standards, yet.

Like most of you said, I'm likely just finding my own level in the sport. Nice thing is that there's room for everyone and, I can change my mind as my tastes move around.

bannockburn
April 3, 2012, 12:42 PM
Really nothing wrong with either side of the question on whether to go with quality or quantity when your getting back into the gun buying realm. When I started out it was mainly quantity as I didn't usually have enough money to buy the more expensive quality guns that I wanted. As I grew older and my income level rose accordingly, I focused more on quality, having found that for some guns there really was a strong connection between paying more and getting a quality ( more reliable, better accuracy, nicer finish), gun in return.

tarosean
April 3, 2012, 12:43 PM
Taste that filet and you will never go back. :).. Id rather have 10 quality guns than 100 mediocre run of the mill ones.

ColtPythonElite
April 3, 2012, 12:49 PM
I'll take quality any day. Quality guns are decent investments. I have some firearms that I have used and not made into safe queens that are now worth several times what they cost new.

Bobson
April 3, 2012, 12:51 PM
I'm in the quality boat too. Obviously I enjoy guns, whether looking at them, handling them, cleaning them, or shooting them; but I get more enjoyment out of owning one or two guns, and shooting them well/accurately, than I could ever get out of owning ten or twenty guns and not shooting them nearly as well.

While some people might be able to own twenty or thirty guns, and be proficient with each of them (and that's awesome, don't get me wrong), I know I couldn't do it, due to matters of time (at the range) and money (for ammo and such) if nothing else.

mcdonl
April 3, 2012, 01:26 PM
I am all for the little of both, but with a little different take on it...

I say start out with quantity... for instance... buy an RIA/ATI/Norinco 1911 AND perhaps a Rossi/CA .357... if you find that you really love, or really do not care for one of the guns then ditch it and get something else...

I know some are going to say there is no comparing a RIA to a Kimber (As an example), but thats BS IMHO... they are similar enough where you will know if you enjoy the platform.

Then... once you have gone through a few guns, and learn what you enjoy or do not enjoy then go for the quality. That worked for me... I now have less but I have better quality.

allaroundhunter
April 3, 2012, 02:13 PM
Quality.

100 cheap guns that don't shoot accurately or are unreliable are not as fun as 5 that shoot lights-out each time you pull the trigger. (And some style points are awarded for an aesthetically pleasing gun that you can tell someone worked on)

A Glock is a cheap, but quality gun.

I would rather have a Wilson Combat (or other high-end 1911) than 5 Glocks. The 1911's will shoot better, and they just look good :cool:

Dnaltrop
April 3, 2012, 02:23 PM
Life is too short.

Buy fewer, nicer guns and you'll be happier in the long run.

Not that there aren't reasons to own cheap guns, (C&R's, low income, tickled fancy...)

People collect PEZ dispensers... bottle openers... shiny spoons...Ceramic Shoes...

5 decades of newspapers stacked through the house and 3 mummified cats...

I'd rather see 5000 boxed high points than the newspapers and cats again.

Guillermo
April 3, 2012, 03:14 PM
I never saved money buying a cheap gun or a cheap tool

Lawdawg45
April 3, 2012, 03:27 PM
I got back into firearms a little over a year ago. Handguns have been my main focus. I'm beginning to feel that I've come to a crossroads so far as firearms are concerned. Do I go with Quality or Quantity?

More than simply how much you pay for a gun or even what type of gun you own, would it be better to own only one gun and shoot it VERY well or, have several that you're pretty good with?

Each gun I own has its own "personality", like whether it shoots high/low or whatever. Some of them have adjustable sights but some don't.

I think most of us aren't immune to seeing another gun and (whether we'd admit it or not) wanting it. I'm envious of those guys who have gun safes the size of bank vaults, but do they really shoot EVERY one VERY well? Probably not. And, if I decided that I don't need an arsenal, when I find one that I do really want, do I make room by passing another on to a different owner?

I guess I'm just going through the process of finding my own means within this great American sport. What say you?

To me, a firearm is a most valuable possession in that it can passed onto your children, but some day your life may depend on it's flawless operation, so I say buy quality and become familiar and proficient with it and let the quantity amass over time. :cool:

LD

mr.scott
April 3, 2012, 03:45 PM
I have my select quality guns. Then I have stuff just for fun. I like hitting up pawn shops and making deals in other people's stuff. Lol

JustinJ
April 3, 2012, 04:27 PM
I like variety. Just for concealed carry i have an HKP2000sk, Ruger LC9 and Ruger LCP. Which is carried is primarily a funciton of what i'm wearing. For HD and plinking i have a Glock 21, SW MP .40, Tokarev, SW .357 mag, etc. I'm sufficiently proficient with all that may fill a defensive role against realistic threats.

22-rimfire
April 3, 2012, 05:01 PM
I only buy quality tools and I only buy quality firearms. That was not always the case, but I learned. The cheapies are gone for the most part.

I would rather have fewer firearms that are well made. But every gun does not have to be made by S&W, Colt, Kimber etc. Ruger makes pretty good stuff.

browningguy
April 3, 2012, 06:10 PM
100 cheap guns that don't shoot accurately or are unreliable

As a famous (or infamous) man once said, quantity has a quality all its own.

There are a lot of inexpensive guns, rifles, pistol and shotguns, that function just fine and are accurate enough for their intended use. I shoot a (relatively) cheap EAA Witness Match and would be happy to shoot bullseye at 25 yards against any of the guns costing twice as much, because they aren't any more accurate or functional. A CZ 52 is a cheapo relic, even though the ergonomics are terrible it works fine and shoots good enough for a battlefield pistol.

I actually like 1911's, and even though I can afford whatever I want I could never convince myself to pay $3k for a production 1911. I would pay that much for one with nice engraving and superior fit and finish though. Once you get above a certain threshhold the only thing making it worth to me more is aesthetics. My EAA for example has been fired in numerous 3 gun and IDPA matches, and it has never had a single failure, you can't get much more reliable than that, no matter how much you spend.

I ahve some customized HiPowers that look and run sweet. But I also have a pair of XD's in 9mm that run and function just as well, they just aren't as pretty.

easyg
April 3, 2012, 08:35 PM
Here are a few points that I consider when buying firearms:

I don't buy guns to impress others.
I buy guns to defend my family and myself.

One need not spend a fortune in order to obtain some excellent quality reliable firearms.

It there ever comes a time of civil unrest, more guns are better than less guns.

Some say: "Fear the man who owns but one gun. Chances are that he knows how to use it".
But I say: "Pity the man who owns but one gun.
If it ever breaks he's S.O.L.".

jmace57
April 3, 2012, 08:42 PM
OK - I'll be in the minority here. I like quantity. I won't buy crap, but I'd rather have 5 CZ-82s. than a single Colt 45. I'd rather have 2 walther PP clones than a real one.

larryh1108
April 3, 2012, 09:00 PM
I agree with browningguy.
Just because it didn't cost $1000+ doesn't mean it won't function and work as intended. A $400 Rock Island can shoot accurately and function 100%, just like the $3000 custom 1911. It won't be as refined or as pretty, though. That becomes a matter of choice.

As the hair gets grey you tend to learn a few things. At one point I had well over 30 handguns of various calibers, mostly run-of-the-mill shooters. Every one functioned perfectly or I wouldn't own it. They all did as they were intended. However, as the OP stated, I was good with all of them but not great with any of them. I was good enough, if needed, for any SD situation. I know them all and once I hit 1500 rounds with a certain gun I was satisfied that I could use it well.

I wanted one or more of all the popular American calibers. It got to a point that I didn't shoot the "older" guns as much as I used to and finding time to shoot them all as well as the cost of ammo made me realize I had too many guns :eek: for my needs.

QUALITY will never disappoint you - especially if you have to part with some of it, to finance something else!

The same can be said for the cheaper guns. If you paid $350 for it used and kept it 5 years you should still be able to get $350 for it. What I decided was to sell 2 or 3 less expensive guns to get "better" guns that I will shoot more and get more proficient with. I love the 1911 platform and I got a top of the line Kimber and a custom that way. I scratched that itch. I can now sell my other 1911s because I doubt I'll shoot them any more and I don't like safe queens. I am in the process of selling more to buy better, per caliber. I think I have 6 or 7 9mms. I have a PM9 for carry as well as a PCR. I have a HK P7. I have a 1911 9mm. I have 3 BHPs in 9mm. Do I need 3? I think so. They are all different. I can't sell any....

Sigh, I still need a shrink. I thought I figured it out. I guess I didn't.
Nevermind, ignore my post. :banghead:

Coltdriver
April 3, 2012, 09:23 PM
I don't think its how many you own. I think what matters is how many you have owned.

And along the way, you will find a keeper or two.

I have never bought junk ever. I find you always get your money back on used quality firearms. However there is a limit. As you get higher and higher in price your available market to sell the gun to in the future also gets smaller.

As your taste in finer arms grows you may find your collection gets smaller but your satisfaction level goes up. Its hard to beat the experience of a truly fine firearm.

You can, after all, only shoot one at a time.

Stealth01
April 3, 2012, 09:35 PM
I'm fortunate (and blessed) enough to purchase quality over quantity. I have absolute faith in my primary CCW weapons being two Kimber 45s (with demonstrated reliability) and two Wilson Combats one in 45 and one in 9mm. I can shoot them all equally well and routinely rotate which one I carry based on what I'm wearing. When it comes to self-defense I'll pay more for the confidence...

http://i1129.photobucket.com/albums/m512/kengallagher/804cbc53.jpg

MCgunner
April 3, 2012, 10:32 PM
I've got a bit of both. Some are both in one gun, contrary to what a snob will tell you. Rugers are affordable and high quality. My recent SR22 purchase is my 8th Ruger. The junk I own is .22 caliber, old Erma LA22, a Charter Arms exploader...er, explorer 2 (actually reliable, but the trigger REALLY sucks), a Phoenix Arms HP22 (Zinc, but it was cheap and is accurate and pretty reliable between servicing for this and that, usually the recoil spring). I keep the junky .22s for various reasons, the old Erma was bought in college many years ago. The Charter Arms and Phoenix arms are just not worth selling, wouldn't buy a good meal at a fancy restaurant, and, hell, why not keep 'em around. LOL

I ain't ashamed of the junk .22s and I have a Ruger Mk2, a Ruger SR22, A scoped TC .22 match barrel (a single shot), and a Rossi 511 Sportsman that are pretty danged decent to actually take to the range. I wanna get a Browning Buckmark as my next .22. I really ain't interested in another revolver, even single action .

CCW or hunting, I have higher quality guns, proven to ME 100 percent reliable and highly accurate for what they are. I like what I've got. They're not expensive as in Sig Sauer, but I'd cry if a cop took a thousand dollar handgun for evidence and marked it with an engraving tool, it happens. I'm not rich, can't afford to be a snob. .22s aren't that serous for me, but I do like the higher quality stuff for plinking.

Oh, and I own CHEAP Pietta cap and ball replicas along with my Ruger Old Army. Tell ya what, those Piettas are danged fun and the 5.5" Remmy is accurate, about 3" at 25 yards off a bench, won't scare my ROA or anything, but that's pretty impressive. The '51 Navy is about half that good, not quite accurate enough to make a fun plinker.

I have 26 handguns, now, and none of 'em are for sale, junk or quality. :D

C5rider
April 3, 2012, 10:38 PM
Great replies guys! I appreciate it. Right now I'm at that stage where family life keeps the gun purchases limited, and on the lower end of the financial scale. That's okay, because I could use a purchase-governor once in a while. :D

I did make a few purchases from that realm that I'm pretty satisfied with. I purchased a Llama, knowing that they are out of business. But, l liked the gun, so I bought it. It needed a little "tuning" but now, it eats my reloads like candy. And, I learned a LOT about tearing one of these things down. I read up on the design and decided to give it a try, with safety in mind.

I won't say it's a 1911, but, the parts of the puzzle match closely enough that I could know what they were in one. :D I wouldn't have attempted that with something that I had paid much more for. Maybe it wouldn't have even needed it.

I have always had a soft spot for orphans at my LGS. But, I see my tastes are changing. i really like every gun that I currently own. Maybe I'm lucky.

jbr
April 3, 2012, 10:42 PM
I have one large caliber hunting rifle - Quality all the way, several 9's - from very nice to very cheap and reliable. Pocket 380 - cheap but reliable. one .40 - Quality. A 12ga and a 20 ga. - both very nice. One .22 target pistol - high quality but not outrageous.
your young - mix it up - some time it's fun to try and find a cheap gun that performs great. Other times it fun to buy that really cool looking collectable gun and there is always room for some "utility" guns. The only line I draw is reliable - if it doesn't work well, why have it.

MCgunner
April 3, 2012, 10:44 PM
Look for good USED guns if you know what to look for. Some of my favorites were used. I paid 197 dollars for a near new condition early 90s nickeled Taurus M66 after inspecting it at a gun snow. That is the BEST medium frame 4" I've owned, shoots .38 OR .357 fave loads into 1" at 25 yards, is tight and perfectly timed and has a fantastic trigger, as good as my old M10 Smith and Wesson early 60s vintage which is also in great shape. I had a M19 Smith, a Ruger Security Six, and a Rossi 971 that could NOT shoot with this Taurus. At 191 dollars and change, I think I'd get my money out of it if I sold it. The 19 wasn't a bad gun and I got more for it than I paid for it and I bought it new, but the 66 is slightly more accurate and just as nice, though it's nickeled instead of blued, but is a nice satin nickel, great working gun.

You can find deals, that's most of the fun IMHO. When you find such a nice gun at a low price, it's a special pat on the back feeling. :D

BTW, lots of good deals on eastern bloc 9x18 service guns. I picked up a very accurate Radom P64 last year for under 200 bucks.

My SIL had a Llama .45. It broke something, neither his or the gun's fault, and he could NOT get the part anywhere. The smith broke it while rebluing it. He got a new Taurus TCP for the gun, which isn't that expensive, but it's a new gun and shoots real nice.

Teachu2
April 3, 2012, 10:48 PM
I enjoy mechanical devices, especially firearms. I like to shoot - everything. I don't hunt anything but varmints and occasionally dove, but I'm up for any kind of target shooting.

I buy based on value to me - not to someone else. I buy each gun for a particular purpose. I have a Mossberg 500 12ga that is both a HD gun with the 18" bbl and a loaner sporting gun with the 28"VR (if one of my sons decides to come along). My Beretta 5901 is my skeet/clay gun - not a beautiful gun to look at, but a pleasure to shoot and a bargain price. I also have a Remington 1100 LT 20 ga that is a beautiful gun, purchased in case my wife wanted to shoot, and bought slightly used at a great price. Rifles include 3 .22-250s (my sons like to participate in varmint shooting), a .223 CZ, a Savage .17HMR HB stainless, a Ruger 10/22 that's getting upgrades (my current project gun), a S&W M&P 15 Sport (what a FUN gun!), a Hi Point 4595 carbine (HD and a ball to shoot!), and my bargain long-range target rifle, a Remington 700 ADL Varmint that I've restocked and put a Jewell trigger in.
My main interest is handguns. I'm a long-time 1911 fan, but currently only own two, both Colt .45 Government models. The next one will be a 1911 in 9mm, both for fun and because I want one to tinker with. Other handguns include a Kimber .22LR conversion for one of the 1911s, a Ruger 22/45, a S&W .22LR snubbie that I inheirited, a S&W .38 Chiefs Airweight (carry gun), a S&W 686+ SSR for target practice/matches, a Ruger LC9 (wife's carry gun), and a Glock 30 (carry gun).
So I guess I'm both a quality and a quantity guy. I introduce others to firearms, so I like to have a variety of guns at hand. I think I'm a value guy who views guns like tools - I want guns that will shoot where I want every time, and while I enjoy a beautifully-finished gun, I won't spend a lot more for a pretty finish over a plain one. Maybe that makes me a utility guy. Just bought the Glock 30, and it certainly wasn't for it's beauty! If I hadn't rented one first and been impressed with it's function and accuracy, I wouldn't have bought it. Same with the M&P 15 Sport.
I buy guns that I want to shoot. I'm not a collector, I'm a shooter with a developing interest in gunsmithing who enjoys turning antis into shooters. My guns reflect that.

larryh1108
April 3, 2012, 10:58 PM
But, I see my tastes are changing. i really like every gun that I currently own. Maybe I'm lucky.

I think we all love the guns we currently own or we wouldn't own them. Cheap junk, old classics or modern whatever, we own them for a reason.

You say you won't call your Llama a 1911. Well, it is a 1911 style pistol. I laugh because over the years the purists said the Llama could never be called a 1911 because of the external extractor (among other things like the grips, etc) but lo and behold, S&W and Sig both have 1911s with external extractors. Now since it says S&W and Sig, you don't see the purists jump up and down and proclaim they aren't 1911s like they did with the Llamas. It amuzes me the double standards that run amuck out there.

1911?
http://i342.photobucket.com/albums/o435/larryh1108/Llamas/Llama45left.jpg

1911?
http://i342.photobucket.com/albums/o435/larryh1108/Kimber/KimberGCleft.jpg

Confederate
April 3, 2012, 11:13 PM
Times are changing, but back in the 80s I was going with quantity and quality. What do I mean by that? It means that I would sell my Beretta 92, which went from something like $192 to $350 almost overnight. Once it was selected as our new military side arm, I found I couldn't afford to keep the one I already owned. I sold it at a great profit and bought two S&W 559s. I put one in the safe and shot the other.

I also sold my Colt Gold Cup and some others and sold my S&W 686s so I could buy two Ruger Speed-Sixes that were on sale. The Rugers were .38 Specials that I had converted to .357s for almost nothing. I was a dealer back then and I was constantly selling expensive quality handguns and buying inexpensive quality handguns.

.

CraigC
April 4, 2012, 11:09 AM
As the years pass, much more quality than quantity. There was a time when I might have bought 12 guns a year. Never anything cheap but I simply bought what interested me. Now I'm a lot more deliberate, focused and discerning. I don't mind waiting and paying for quality. Even though I make a lot more money than in years past, I buy much fewer guns. Which is not to say that I am a snob and don't enjoy less expensive guns. I do. Lots of great .22 rifles can be had for $200 or less. I'm just at the point where I'd rather work towards a Cooper than buy five more lesser guns. Where I'd rather build an engraved custom Ruger Bisley than own five or six factory models. Where I'd rather find a nice S&W 1950 Target than two or three new "Classics". Where I'd rather have a nice USFA than two or three Uberti's.

460Kodiak
April 4, 2012, 02:50 PM
I'm somewhere in between. I like to have two handfulls of guns that I'm proficient with. Having Dozens of guns does me no good.

The War Wagon
April 4, 2012, 02:56 PM
Taste that filet and you will never go back. :).. Id rather have 10 quality guns than 100 mediocre run of the mill ones.

PRECISELY! My days of mediocre guns are LONG behind me. :cool:

tnelson31
April 4, 2012, 10:25 PM
Life is too short.
I'd rather see 5000 boxed high points than the newspapers and cats again.
Again???

orionengnr
April 5, 2012, 12:17 AM
I never saved money buying a cheap gun or a cheap tool

My choice for Post Of The Month.

Corollary--I have wasted a ton of money buying Rossis, Kel-Tecs, etc.

As a famous (or infamous) man once said, quantity has a quality all its own.
That would be Josef Stalin. As it related to MiG 15s, Kalashnikov rifles, and conscripted troops, (in its time) it contained a grain of truth.

However, it is not a universal truth (note that the winner of Cold War prevailed with fewer but higher-tech subs, aircraft, etc). :)

I don't earn enough money to throw it away.
That is not to say that I shouldn't have bought several AKs when they were $279 or SKSs when they were $69 each. But I didn't, so that is that. :)

22-rimfire
April 5, 2012, 01:28 AM
My least expensive guns are the Ruger Mark II and Ruger 10/22. Trying to remember if anything cost less that I still own....Okay. I have a Colt Junior (22SH) or two that didn't cost much and a few Colt Derringer's #4 (also 22SH). Never shot any of these.

I am not particularly interested in milsurp guns that often tend to be inexpensive.

I prefer quality. But I make exceptions for Rugers. :D

CraigC
April 5, 2012, 09:38 AM
I don't earn enough money to throw it away.
That's what folks don't realize and the US would be a better place if they did. Many think that by buying cheap, they're saving money. In reality, they're usually throwing it away. Unfortunately, a lot of people measure their wealth by quantity. Even if it's a quantity of cheap Chinese garbage. Good stuff costs more but it lasts.

brnmuenchow
April 5, 2012, 10:03 AM
I would say a little of both, my father for ex. has a Colt "Gold Cup" 1911 he really loves, but does not shoot very often (He does not want to accidently ruin the finish on the gun)-- so he is currently looking for another 1911 that he wont be as worried about and currently is looking at the Desert Eagle 1911 "G" Full-Size Pistol for msrp $826.00. He knows that there are cheaper 1911's out there but he also needs to feel secure about the overall functionality of the gun. Granted my father's financial situation is better than mine over the last couple years, I on the other hand have gone another route. I have some really nice guns that I purchased back when times were good, not that I abuse any guns I own but I now have several '40's-'50's era WW2 guns that may not look as nice as a modern day $1K+ gun but for the price avg. $100-$250 a gun and everytime I pull the trigger they all go "BANG"! One day I hope that some of those guns may become real collector pieces, so I take good care of them but right now if my Yugo M57 craps out or gets dropped in the sand by a beginner shooter I wont feel a need to cry over it. :)

MCgunner
April 5, 2012, 12:39 PM
Corollary--I have wasted a ton of money buying Rossis, Kel-Tecs, etc.

If I were a rich man, I wouldn't buy a gun under 6 figures. :rolleyes: Not that they'd be any better, but I could be a rich snob. Hell, I might own a football team or a NASCAR team or run for president or something.

For me, Kel Tec and Rossi are decent, not top of the line, but function just fine. I don't own, but one KT, but it's my favorite carry and has been since I bought it new in 1996. I have 2 Rossis, one's a .22 that gets fired about every range trip just because. However, I do shoot my Mk2 a lot and my new SR22 has taken center stage lately. Funny, though, even though the SR22 and the Rossi 511 shoot about the same 2" groups with Fed lightening off the sand bags at 25 yards, I seem to hit more plates off hand with the Rossi. Sight radius is about the same, too. I'm still working on understanding that conundrum and learning to shoot the SR22 a bit better.

larryh1108
April 5, 2012, 07:06 PM
I don't earn enough money to throw it away.

Are you throwing it away by spending $800 on a range gun when you can get an equally reliable but less refined one for half the price or are you throwing it away because a $300 range gun is a piece of crap that will surely break apart into a million pieces and you are out the $300?

WC145
April 5, 2012, 07:24 PM
I learned to buy quality, it never disappoints.
Interestingly, over time, quantity seems to have taken care of it's self.

Sig Bill
April 5, 2012, 08:14 PM
I wanted an SD gun that's easily concealed for carry so after much browsing I went to the range and bought a KT PF9. That gun was perfect but I had to eliminate some ammo that caused FTEs like the WWB value pack. After that it was 100% and my fav loads was Rem UMC 115 HPs and WWB 147 HPs. My range loads has always been Fed Champ 115 FMJs.

Funny thing is I bought it for SD and it turned into a range gun so I had over 1000+ rounds through it in several months. I think I wore that sucker out though it still shoots so I sold it back to the range half price and ordered a Sigma 9mm. The ads says it's a range/SD gun so I say ok. It's a great gun and had 500 rounds through it already. It's a keeper for sure.

Now I wanted to try a 40sw so I ordered a Sigma 40 and after two weeks I found out it's pretty well back ordered at their suppliers so my RO suggested the Sig Sauer P250c they have on sale. I bought it and shot 230 rounds in three trips inside a week. Talk about a hand beater but I like it.

They're both great values, well made and no issues at all with a variety of ammo. Both though have their own unique triggers and takes some getting used to it.

David E
April 5, 2012, 08:37 PM
Quality or Quantity?

It's a bit of a balance, but it depends what your goal is.

I'd rather own one custom gun made to my specs that cost $5000 than 50 Hi-Points. Unless my goal was to arm 50 friends and relatives. (which it isn't)

But I'd rather spread that $5000 out over 7-10 handguns that'll cover my wants and needs far better than any single gun could.

C5rider
April 6, 2012, 12:47 AM
Thanks for the insights guys. Interesting, informative and, definitely kept on the High Road.

Both though have their own unique triggers and takes some getting used to it.
I think Sig Bill touched on something that also plays into the equation. When I go between a couple of my guns at the range, there's always a re-learning on where each gun shoots. Now, it's not a problem but, I'm always reminded of the guys who I admired who could hit EXACTLY where they wanted, each time, without a "warm up shot" to figure out where their gun would poke the hole. They didn't have a lot of guns, but the ones they did have could put the fear of God in a quarter at 15 yards! And it didn't take many shots to do it.

So, moving the question of "Quantity or Quality?" away from the cost of our guns, is there anyone who has chosen to shoot one or two guns VERY well, instead of shooting a safe-full, fairly accurately?

Swing
April 6, 2012, 12:54 AM
Quality for primaries. Quantity for secondaries. Call it good. ;)

hso
April 6, 2012, 01:00 AM
would it be better to own only one gun and shoot it VERY well

Yes

Unless you just like having things instead of being able to use them.

JohnKSa
April 6, 2012, 01:05 AM
If I had to do it over again. I'd spend more on training, ammunition, range fees, high quality safety equipment (ears & eyes), and less on guns.

Sig Bill
April 6, 2012, 01:09 AM
I remember someone saying, "beware the man with one gun, he may know how to use it."

csa77
April 6, 2012, 01:31 AM
IMO you can never have too many guns. but its all depends on your definition of quality vs quantity

id rather have a boat load of guns that work well then 1 superb museum grade hand made holland and holland

on the flip side I'd take one complete and matching lee metford or a 6mm navy lee over 30 mosin nagants

DesertFox
April 6, 2012, 01:40 AM
Trading a DPMS and Bushmaster for a Colt recently pretty much sums up how I feel - on the quality side. Would have killed me to even contemplate it in my younger years but resale value of quality alone is nearly reason enough.

MrBorland
April 6, 2012, 03:12 AM
is there anyone who has chosen to shoot one or two guns VERY well, instead of shooting a safe-full, fairly accurately?

Yep. :cool:

To a large degree, shootin's shootin', so picking one & shooting, rather chasing equipment, is a path to mastery of all.

David E
April 6, 2012, 03:13 AM
I remember someone saying, "beware the man with one gun, he may know how to use it."

Yeah, that guy may exist, but usually the guy that only owns one gun also owns the one box of ammo he bought with the gun.

David E
April 6, 2012, 03:27 AM
is there anyone who has chosen to shoot one or two guns VERY well, instead of shooting a safe-full, fairly accurately?

For pure recreational shooting, taking 5-10 guns to the range might be fun, but little else.

But it behooves the well rounded shooter to master the different gun types.

Last year, I focused on 1911 types. This year, it's Glocks and M&P's.

Later this year, I'll do a brief stint with snubbies for the State Carrygun Match to defend my title. I find that doing this keeps it fun and my interest high. Not to mention that, at any time, I can pick up any of my guns and perform to a high level from the very first shot.

murf
April 6, 2012, 03:40 AM
go with quantity. you will find your quality in that quantity and sell the rest...or not.

murf

el Godfather
April 6, 2012, 04:16 AM
Quality.

I can never with the argument of quantity over quality unless some specific situations, but this isn't one of it.

To me a collection of 10 very high end and very well made handguns is far more impressive than 50 mediocre handguns.

Guillermo
April 6, 2012, 10:50 AM
but usually the guy that only owns one gun also owns the one box of ammo he bought with the gun.

And then we can buy it and add to our collection

:D

Ragnar Danneskjold
April 6, 2012, 11:06 AM
Definitely quality over quantity. I have hunting revolver, pocket pistol, centerfire rifle and no use for any shotgun. I do not want any more guns. If I buy one another must go.

I'm almost the same way. I wouldn't qite say I sell one if I buy one, but I try to keep things very simple. For instance, when I got my M&P9 fullsize and Comapct, I sold my other full size autos and am thinking about selling my Millennium Pro. I like to have one style of gun filling one role. 1 shotgun, 1 precision rifle, 1 5.56 AR, 1 7.62 AR, 1 fullzise 9mm, 1 compact 9mm, and so forth. I don't want to have 2 different shotguns, or 3 different full sized autos. And I definately picked one caliber, 9mm and sold my .40SW and my .45.

It streamlines my ammo purchases, makes buying holsters, parts and magazines easier (M&P mags work in both the full size and the compact). To me I think of what job the gun is filling (HD, precision, tactical training, CCW, etc) and pick the best gun for me that fits that role. Anything else gets sold.

mdauben
April 6, 2012, 11:10 AM
Taste that filet and you will never go back. .. Id rather have 10 quality guns than 100 mediocre run of the mill ones.
I have to agree with Tarosean. Quality guns are generally so much more enjoyable to shoot, and I don't buy guns just to fill up my safe.

BossHogg
April 6, 2012, 11:34 AM
I have all my gun needs covered. Now it's all about the deal. If it's something I reload for and is what I think is a good deal I'll pick it up. One can never have enough guns if you enjoy shooting. Almost everything I buy any more are used revolvers. I lov'm and just plain getting tired of chasing brass.

I never have cared for cheap oddball caliber guns. For many years now I've counted anything but the 9mm, 38/357, 45 acp and 45 Colt an oddball caliber.;)

taraquian
April 6, 2012, 12:06 PM
I go with the buy em all and see what you like approach. I have a lot of what people consider entrylevel guns,Rugers, Mossberg, Bersa, etc. Some of the cheapest have been the best. My Thunder 380 has been a far better gun than my Colt govt 1911.

Besides, you'll be the favorite site at your LGS.:rolleyes:

Dudemeister
April 6, 2012, 12:33 PM
I personally think you can have both.

There were a few gun "types" or "styles" I wanted, so I got them. For example I wanted a classic SAA style, so I got a Uberti, then I also got a Ruger. If I had gone for "quality" I should have bought a Colt or USFA, but then I wouldn't have had money to buy other guns. The I had yearning for Luger, so I got one. Not a collectable (which I probably wouldn't have ever fired), but a shooter grade, so I enjoy that.

The same with other guns. You can have "quantity", without skipping on "quality". It depends on what your definitions of those words are.

As far as the idea of owning and shooting just one to get "really good" with it. I don't think that's the right approach. I think one should be fairly proficient with ANY firearm. If you get/own one example of the few major types (SAA types, SA/DA revolvers, 1911 types, Glock types, etc), you'll eventually shoot all of them enough to get proficient at it.

Consider the situation where you won't have access to your favorite gun, but you'll have to use or defend yourself with whatever is available. Wouldn't you rather know you can handle anything without any problems?

Just something to think about.

Boarhunter
April 6, 2012, 12:43 PM
Cheap guns call out my name! And I have lots of 'em! You can accumulate quite a stash by buying regularly over a period of 38 years.

But that does not necessarily mean that they are junk. We live in a time when there are many options available for purchasing good, reliable handguns for a relatively fair price.

And that does not necessarily mean that I shoot them all. I will typically have a few, operationally-similar, that I shoot and carry virtually all of the time. But I am a bit promiscuous with my firearms; it is nice to occasionally pull some new piece out of the safe that I have not shot in years and put a few rounds through it. Great fun and adds spice to life.

Yes, I have a few high-dollar guns as well, but none that are not "shooters." And I like them just fine.

But cheap guns call out my name....

Boarhunter

David E
April 6, 2012, 12:56 PM
Again, it depends on your goal.

I've noticed more than one person on "Doomsday Preppers" where the person has bought some "weapons" to defend their stash with......that were Hi-Points.

I don't want to hijack the thread, but IMHO, those people bought the cheapest they could find simply so they could put a check mark on their "things to buy" list.

browningguy
April 6, 2012, 01:29 PM
A random sample of pistols I shoot that I have pics of. I think I have about 42 pistols currently, although a couple of them are old and worn enough now that I don't shoot them anymore, but I have shot all of them. The pistols I shoot the most are my BHP's, Springfield XD's and EAA Witness Match. After that the .22's get a lot of lovin'.

Some are pretty nice pistols, some are middle of the road, and some very inexpensive. But I can shoot them all, and no matter what I shoot I'm never going to win an IDPA championship, I'm old, slow, and can't see good enough so I just go to have fun.

In shotguns it's pretty similar, I have everything from a Benelli Montefeltro Silver, Beretta over unders, and a Mossberg 500. Each has their place in the scheme of things, and just because one is a lot cheaper than the other does not make it less of a gun.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/22pistolpack.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/40HPStandard.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/1971Browning.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/bda-1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/beretta76.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/bersa380.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/browning1910.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/browning1971.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/browninghpcompetition.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/BunchofBrownings.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/cz30th03Small.jpg

SimplyChad
April 6, 2012, 01:57 PM
Both have your target piece thats fine. But of the guns I use the most and find the most reliable i think I payed 450 for the most expensive. I hunt I carry and I just like to shoot. Look for deals and know that sometimes that $300 vs that $500 gun just isnt worth 200 bucks

SimplyChad
April 6, 2012, 01:58 PM
Life is too short.

Buy fewer, nicer guns and you'll be happier in the long run.

Not that there aren't reasons to own cheap guns, (C&R's, low income, tickled fancy...)

People collect PEZ dispensers... bottle openers... shiny spoons...Ceramic Shoes...

5 decades of newspapers stacked through the house and 3 mummified cats...

I'd rather see 5000 boxed high points than the newspapers and cats again.
You sir owe me a new key board and an explaination.

mcdonl
April 6, 2012, 07:11 PM
Just because you own a lot of guns, and not all of them are top quality it does NOT mean that

a) you do not have any quality guns that you can shoot well

b) you cannot shoot your standard production guns any less accurate than a top priced gun

coalman
April 6, 2012, 08:01 PM
I get what I want and can afford. I view guns as tools. My wants are small compared to many though. And, so is my collection. All get used. So, quality... but, that's somewhat relative and subjective.

larryh1108
April 6, 2012, 08:54 PM
Some equate price to reliability. Not true, in most instances. Today there are a lot of nice pistols in the $300-$400 range new as well as a lot of used and Milsurp for $175-$300. Many of these pistols are just as reliable as a $2500 pistol, just not as pretty.

wanderinwalker
April 6, 2012, 09:42 PM
I remember someone saying, "beware the man with one gun, he may know how to use it."

Like a couple of others above, I've never bought this idea. Somebody with one gun is likely to have stored it in a drawer, with a box of ammo missing 6 "shells". I'd be more confident in an enthusiast with a small reloading set-up, a couple of different firearms and a yearly range membership.

As for "quality versus quantity," I think it's possible to have both, within reason. I'm a fan of S&W DA revolvers of just about any stripe. I have yet to pay more than $500 for one, though that will change if the right one comes along and I want it, for sure. They all work the same and feel similar. If you can shoot a 4" K-frame, you can shoot a 6" N-frame or a 1 7/8" J-frame. Granted, some are easier to shoot than others... :scrutiny:

While I don't own a 1911, I had a pretty good working knowledge of how to run one as well. And Glocks? They're like DA S&W revolvers; they all the same.

(Really, shooting is all about front sight and trigger press. Less time spent chasing magic bullets and perfect pistols and more spent putting holes in things will prove that every time.)

Sig Bill
April 6, 2012, 09:59 PM
I don't know why y'all twist that quote around. It may be true what you said but the opposite is also true. I was talking about owning one gun which is my Sigma 9mm and I had a lot of practice with it because it's all I can afford. Then the board member quoted it and I agreed with him.

David E
April 6, 2012, 10:01 PM
I don't why y'all twist that quote around. It may be true what you said but the opposite is also true. I was talking about owning one gun which is my Sigma 9mm and I had a lot of practice with it because it's all I can afford. Then the board member quoted it and I agreed with him.

See? I said guys like you exist!!

sixgunner455
April 7, 2012, 01:41 AM
I owned one gun for several years - a Ruger MKII pistol. I shot it as much as I could, thousands of rounds per year. Then I traded into a muzzleloader, which I used to hunt with.

Those were my only two guns for a number of years after that. I have more now, but I could certainly get by with one or two again, if I had to. I'm glad I don't have to.

WYOMan
April 7, 2012, 11:37 AM
There is an old saying. Quality is a quantity all it's own. I agree.

SquareBeer
April 30, 2012, 01:43 AM
Quality vs. Quantity........


We believe a fine mix of quality and value is your best choice.

Personally we think it is a balance with some factors; what will the gun be used for, what caliber will be required, where will it be kept, who will use it, will it be a ccw and so on.

Just as in electronics, cars and other retail items some carry a higher price tag because of the name. Only you can make the choice but there are many things that can help you.

Arkansas Paul
April 30, 2012, 10:39 AM
I'm all for a good mix. There are quality guns that don't cost a fortune. I shoot a Weatherby Vangaurd during deer season and I got it for $390 brand new. I guess I could have saved and got a higher end rifle, but it would have taken away from other purchases and the Vangaurd works just fine. So a nice balance of quality and quantity are what I shoot for. I don't want just one custom gun and nothing else. By the same token I don't want a house full of NEF Handi rifles and Hi-Points, though I have nothing against them.

ptb351
April 30, 2012, 11:56 AM
I would take quality over quantity. I would much rather get (as an example) 1 very nice gun a year than say, 2 that were not as nice.

Bushpilot
April 30, 2012, 01:14 PM
I admit to owning a few "cheaper" guns that I have lots of fun with. However, if had to choose between quality and quantity I'd pick quality and overall my collection reflects that. Most of the guns in my collection are quality made and if not absolute top shelf are close to it. Still, I enjoy having a wide variety of different types to shoot. I also enjoy simply owning some that I rarely if ever shoot like my Luger for example.

jmace57
April 30, 2012, 09:07 PM
Actually it's the opposite WYOman...it was attributed to Stalin, where when his generals kept talking about the quality of the German troops the Russians were facing said "quantity has a quality all its' own".

SleazyRider
April 30, 2012, 09:46 PM
from a sow's ear is very compelling to me, and it gives me great satisfaction to restore a "hopeless" car, motorcycle ... or firearm, to like-new or very serviceable condition. For example, I took apart a rusty old Sterling .22---which has a sterling reputation (that you for recognizing the clever pun) as being unreliable junk---and remade many parts to more exacting standards, as well as made several design changes, such as opening up the ejection port. I took liberties that I certainly would never have taken with a "quality" firearm, and as a result, learned a heck of a lot in the process. The gun, by the way, runs like a train, and digests any ammo without a belch or hiccup. Very satisfying! And, yes, if I paid myself the sterling sum of ten dollars per hour, I could have bought a Wilson 1911 with the money I "earned." No regrets or apologies.

I'm doing the same right now to an old Honda Z-50, but that's another story ... .
Yes, quality over quantity for me, too. But sometimes to fully appreciate quality, it's good to get your hands on an old junker, roll up your sleeves, and get down and dirty a bit! :)

asia331
May 1, 2012, 01:40 AM
Quality first; depending on your particular life style that might mean good large bore sidearm, battle rifle, a carbine for the truck and a general purpose revolver.

After that I recommend parts and components to provide the logistical back-up to keep'em all serviceable and ready. Not a glamorous task but without components your unserviceable arms are mere conversation pieces.

Scipio Africanus
May 1, 2012, 07:48 PM
Quality! Here is my take:
Firearms, particularly handguns, may be called upon to defend your life or that of your family. Buy accordingly, what is your life or that of a loved one worth?

Then buy a lotta ammo and practice like your life depends on it!

larryh1108
May 1, 2012, 08:13 PM
Buy accordingly, what is your life or that of a loved one worth?

That statement is so lame. Seriously, if your most expensive gun cost $800, someone can and will say "Well, for $200 more you can have Gun X. Isn't your life worth it?"

The fact is there are many guns that are totally reliable (ask a Hi Point owner) that don't cost $1000. If you spent $1200, then isn't your family worth $1500? If you spent $2000, isn't your family worth $2500? Really, really lame expression used by so many posters here. You're trying to shame another poster into spending more money by saying his choice in a firearm isn't good enough, by your own standards. That is so wrong. How much money does it take to show that you value the life of your family? $5000?

Gtimothy
May 1, 2012, 10:53 PM
Quality over quantity or vice versa? It all depends on your preferences and how deep your pockets are. As you have seen in this thread most people think quality over quantity. I have to admit, a well made gun is a work of art and just feels right! But there are also people who can't go into a gun shop without buying something "new". :rolleyes:

Look in their safe and you will see a smorgasbord of guns... sometimes duplicates of the same gun in the same calibre! :scrutiny:

Me, I started out with a Ruger GP-100 police trade-in that was in very good shape and a 1911A1 that I built out of surplus parts. I had to wait 15 years before I could pony up the bucks for my "dream" gun (Sig P229) but eventually got there. I only have 5 hand guns but I'm happy with them all. Its your call, your money, your collection. Do what makes YOU happy!:D

oneounceload
May 1, 2012, 11:46 PM
Quality rules - just read my sig line below

SquareBeer
May 2, 2012, 10:06 PM
Yes "Quality" is great!
However, many MISUNDERSTAND quality for the price.

If you enjoyed reading about "Quality or Quantity?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!