1st cheap-then upgrade-why?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Axis II

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Messages
7,179
How many of you guys have bought the bare bones cheapest gun or scope you could afford and upgraded it later and why did you upgrade?

I'm getting the urge to upgrade a few things. I've got a Mossberg 500 but something tells me I need a nice autoloader. maybe a stoeger or berretta a300. I keep saying I'm going to get into bird hunting but barely find the time to deer hunt. im also getting the urge to upgrade my 45-70 to a lever gun but keep telling myself its only used 1 week a year, why?

ive got a few other things that were purchased on a cheap budget and see something on sale nicer and say well its only $600 and I will sell the other one to foot the bill for the new one. im fighting this urge right now with these black Friday deals. :)
 
Ran Tasco scopes on everything for years. Got a Burris Fullfield coming tomorrow, for $150 from Cabela's.

For accessories, I start cheap, to see what works and what doesn't. I don't needlessly spend money, and I don't want to buy all top-of-the-line stuff, only to find out I could have gotten the same results for 1/4 the price. So, I buy once, learn the plusses and minuses, and buy a second time, and don't buy a third.

For rifles, I usually buy what I know will work the first time, and upgrade it as I go, but keep the same base.

For handguns, I go through them so quickly, there is no pattern. I buy whatever strikes my fancy, shoot it until it no longer does, and trade towards the next one. I have owned more handguns than most people still own, but my current crop consists of 2.
 
Last edited:
How many of you guys have bought the bare bones cheapest gun or scope you could afford and upgraded it later and why did you upgrade?

When I made less money, I bought what I could afford which was pretty much simple and cheap. Like my old single shot 12 gauge bought for dove hunting back in the '90s.

Once I started making more money, the option to upgrade to better or more versatile equipment became possible. Not that I can afford high end things, just that I could buy better than I could before. That single shot 12 gauge got set aside for a SxS Stoeger in the early 2000s. That Stoeger wasn't expensive, but it was more than I could swing a decade or so earlier.
 
I bought a S&W SD9 then upgraded the trigger and put sights on it, investing an additional 50% of the gun price in parts. That total probably put me in the price range of the much better M&P model, but then I still would have upgraded the sights.
 
I think, like in my case, I bought what I could afford at the time. As I found out what I liked and didn't like, as my salary increased, as my life responsibilities changed, so did my needs and wants. There is nothing wrong with upgrading as long as your core needs are being met. It can turn ugly when you spend money you don't have just to scratch an itch.
 
Decent quality inexpensive firearms actually retain their value better than a pricier gun. Since a newer buyer is unlikely to "get it right" in terms of the preferences they will later develop, buying a $300 gun that could be sold off for $280 makes a lot more sense than buying an $800 gun that you'll only get $600 for used.
 
I don't necessarily buy the cheapest, but I do buy barebones. I do that because I don't want to pay for things I don't want or need. I buy it, then run it and run it and figure out how I want to change it to better fit me. That way I can spend my hard earned money on things I know I want and will be useful
 
I waited for months to get the best price on a the Taurus Millennium G2 PT111 - $197.98 including shipping, then i went out and purchased 18 and 20 round Mec-Gar mags for it, then I purchased $17.00 spacers for the mags I had purchased:

http://www.shapeways.com/product/L3...0_1480101900_63a31790d8e2e7f6735d6705aa6e8ea0

I don't know why I did it except that I thought it was neato...

That's the trouble with many auto-loaders, whether handgun or long gun. Magazines, magazines, and more magazines. :)
 
There's a difference between cheap and inexpensive. Upgrades on cheap guns are like puttin' lipstick on a pig. Upgrades on an inexpensive firearm on the other hand can be a enhancement. Many times folks new to something tend to go inexpensive as they do not want to make an big investment in something they do not know if they will enjoy. Sometime folks need to live within their means and cannot afford more at the time. As long as folks are spending their own money and not compromising their welfare or the welfare of their loved ones by spending money needlessly, who are any of us to question their reasoning?
 
I always figured, if I buy something with the intention of upgrading later, I'll wind up paying for two, but ultimately only using one. Better to save a little longer and get what I really want.
 
I'd say you need to separate cheap from inexpensive but quality. I make a lot more than I did as a staving student in the 1990s but I still prefer a Mossberg 500, Ruger 10-22, and Glocks. I can afford nicer but often don't feel the need to do so. Are you fully funding your retirement, have health insurance, out of credit card debt, have a college fund started for your kids? If no, I'd focus on those things first as they will reap you more benefits. If yes, and this is discretionary money, buy for this hobby or another.
 
ohihunter wrote:
How many of you guys have bought the bare bones cheapest gun or scope you could afford and upgraded it later and why did you upgrade?

Never.

I buy a gun the way I want it and then use it.

I did buy a synthetic stock for my Mini-14, but that's not so much an upgrade as I would have bought a synthetic stocks at the time I bought the rifle except they weren't available.
 
Buy the best you can afford. Later, if you feel the need to upgrade do so. You may find that you never need to do so.

Also, over time as you gain knowledge you may find there are other guns that are better suited for you and what you need. When I was young I didn't know, what I didn't know. As I've gotten older I like to think I've made better choices. But at the same time the guns I've bought and then sold or traded weren't wasted money. I gained knowledge and after 40 years of gun trading now a lot more than I did when I started.
 
A lot of us have wives, kids and responsibilities. It's not easy to go out and buy the best there is.
So, we buy what will get us into the game. Then we sell it and try to trade up. Either that or we
add stuff to the gun. In my case there is a new trigger no matter what I buy. We're all playing
the same game.

Zeke
 
when i buy a ruger, i accept it as poor out of the box.
by the time i got done modifying my 22/45, i had doubled the price.
of course, i then had a match grade gun.
 
Oh boy, you do have the sickness.
Not that that's a bad thing. You really can never know what you want, until you have some experience to build and reflect on.
 
when i buy a ruger, i accept it as poor out of the box. (??)
by the time i got done modifying my 22/45, i had doubled the price.
of course, i then had a match grade gun.

Interesting statement. I have a Ruger Single Six .22LR/Mag revolver with the 6" barrel that I have used occasionally for hunting. Once, I had to take a shot at a squirrel 10-12 yds. away using only my strong hand (rt.) as I was balancing the 12 ga. in my left. One shot w/ iron sights, right through his throat. This gun has never had any modifications done to it nor do I see any need for them.
 
ohihunter2014

One of my first gun was a Charter Arms Undercover; I think new it cost me $88. The comparable S&W Model 36 was close to $150 and the greatly coveted Model 60 was nearly twice that, when you did find one. At the time the Undercover was all I could afford. It was decent enough but a S&W was better built and would have been my first choice if I had the money at the time. So I do believe in upgrading when your financial situation allows for it.
 
When you double the price you don't get double the performance. In firearms what you are buying is a bullet launcher. If it's a 9mm handgun then the important part that works is the chamber and barrel. If you can point it down range and it hits what you are aiming at it does the job. Same with 30-30, or .30-06, or .300 Blackout.

When you get really good doing it it's a matter of skill and a lot of practice went into it. Now, the better gun? What it offers is some enhanced options, like a trigger that doesn't impede the shooter as much as the basic one, or sights that are more precise or can be seen in more conditions. You mostly don't get more speed from the bullet, you get it easier to put on target and incrementally better shot placement.

As for the rest of the price it's largely social club fees. I saw 1911's on sale Black Friday for $400 - but a $1100 gun will get more envious stares and still not shoot almost 3 times better in the hands of an expert. Think about that. What we fuss over for the most part are social - a hammer fired vs striker fired gun really offers very little difference. Pull it out in self defense and your ability and timing are what will have a larger influence. Same shooting ducks with a shotgun - not to forget the lever action .30 guns were the tool that nearly brought the whitetail deer to extinction. Yet start a discussion over the "best whitetail rifle" and the two things given short shrift are the .30-30 and lever actions. With the current trend in AR's lever guns have lost their social rank. Lots of bolt gunners try to maintain theirs, but it's about a good first shot and an ethical followup - which is where self loaders have always held the advantage.

Now, given that, what good does spending twice or three times for one gun do over another? The game cannot distinguish any difference, same as a game fish cannot tell if you are holding a $29 rod and reel or a $290 set up, All it can tell is that the hook is sharp and set.

We buy cheap needing the job done - my first hammer was a Stanley fiberglass I paid $11 for. It roofed my house pretty well. The next one I bought was an Estwing, which really didn't do things much different. It cost $29 and it still does the same job, smack nails and pull them. But, keeping it cleaned up and in good shape, it certainly looks better. The reason I bought it was that I thought I wanted a flatter set of claws. They don't necessarily lever nails out better. Guns don't necessarily do much more for twice the price. They just look "better" and we feel better owning them.
 
My first .45 was a Springfield GI model that I bought with the intention of gradually turning into a "race gun." It was what I could afford at the time, and the $100 here and $200 there was easier to manage than buying a $1200 pistol in the first place. With what I've learned from the experience, I don't think I'd do that again, although it sure did make me familiar with how a 1911 works.
 
i have to disagree a bit.
if i pay extra for a S&W, or if i modify a ruger it's all about the trigger.
nothing to do with bragging rights.
i simply do better work with a good trigger.
i have yet to find a bad factory barrel.
for me, the trigger is always the limiting factor, so that's what i spend on.
 
When I hear what my coworkers spend on golf clubs I don't feel so bad spending my hard earned money on guns. Once I have all my bases covered then I'll go after what I really want.
 
A lot of the time, it's the difference between no gun and a gun.

This is the reality for a lot of folks looking to purchase a gun. They want a gun, but there's other things their money has to go to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top