Calibre, consolidation and cutbacks.

[Pond James Pond]

For quite a while I would wonder why people would have numerous guns in the same calibre. For me, with a limited number of slots in my cabinet and limited funds, I felt that one gun in each calibre would maximise my shooting experience given my restrictions.

Since then however, despite wincing at the cost of some of the guns I have and the add-ons I have acquired, I've realised that the biggest ongoing cost, for me, is ammo. Reloading mitigates this to a point, but not all calibres are cheaper reloaded!

So this lead me to thinking that ideally, whilst I may have several guns, reducing the ammo selection between them would mean I spend less, or rather am less likely to spend a lot as often, trying to keep all my calibres stocked at decent levels.

Do others on here perhaps make gun choices on the basis of pooling a few guns around the same calibre for the sake of convenience, or do you get guns in different calibres to not be caught short by a shortage of stock?

 

[noelf2]

From my experience, there are two kinds of gun owners. Serious, and practical. You just have to decide what you are.

 

[Pond James Pond]

From my experience, there are two kinds of gun owners. Serious, and practical. You just have to decide what you are.

Sorry, but I'm genuinely a bit lost there.

What do you mean by "serious" and "practical" and why can't someone be both?

 

[P5 Guy]

I'm thinking a 'PRACTICAL' gun owner would be focused on firearms for a particular purpose. Hunting, target shooting matches and such. Where a 'SERIOUS' gun owner just buys guns for their collector value and would say buy S&W Chief Special pistols in all three calibers offered and other variations, like two tone, stainless steel and blued.
I could be wrong.

 

[noelf2]

That's exactly what I mean. Thanks. I guess those that are serious are commonly referred to as gun collectors and gun nuts. If you focus on bullet consolidation, you are practical. Nothing wrong with that. But the serious gun owner focuses on the gun, without regard to practicality and sometimes not even the likelihood it will ever be shot. One of my favorite guns is a Nagant revolver. It just fascinates the heck out of me, and its history engages my mind. I didn't get it because I wanted to stick with 30 caliber bullets that are common to other guns I reload for. I have never met a gun nut that wanted to stick with a common caliber or cartridge. I'm sure there are serious collectors of one gun and/or caliber, but I haven't met one yet. Maybe that's you?

 

[Pond James Pond]

Not me. At least not so far.

I'd love to buy all sorts of guns, except for the money (1) and the restrictions the law places on me (2). So I am a wannabe serious shooter, hampered by circumstance. Indeed money (2), still hobbles me in that I can't really afford as much ammo as I'd like to shoot, nor shoot as regularly.

So let's say I am a serious shooter, forced into the mould of a practical one.

Let's call me a "practicious" shooter!!

 

[noelf2]

I'd love to buy all sorts of guns, except for the money (1) and the restrictions the law places on me (2). So I am a wannabe serious shooter, hampered by circumstance.

No that's not how it works. You are what you are, no matter the circumstances. Your confession above proves you are squarely in the serious camp.

 

[Tinbucket]

Calibre, consolidation, cutbacks

Firearms is a hobby somewhat.
I have several .22s. Some are semi autos and my favorite is a browning .22 lever action sometimes.
Nothing like good walnut and blued steel etc in a well made tool.
Several rifles and shotguns that cross suitability lines for various ranges etc.
If I like and have the funds it goes home with me.
Can't use more than one at a time or at least I can't but that has never been the point.

 

[berettaprofessor]

Do others on here perhaps make gun choices on the basis of pooling a few guns around the same calibre for the sake of convenience, or do you get guns in different calibres to not be caught short by a shortage of stock?

Neither. I choose Option C: I make gun choices based on what I want/like, without regard to convenience, caliber or ammo supply. They are MY PRECIOUS. Well, except for 40....I don't have any but I have the 9mm equivalent in several genera.

 

[44 AMP]

I don't know if "serious/practical" is the right word combination, but even if we stick with that, there isn't a wall between them, its not an either/or situation.

The "practical" gun owner who has only those guns to cover his uses can be quite serious about it.

James, you are in a situation that is very familiar (money), and at the same time almost completely alien to most US shooters (govt limit on # of guns you can have). The US restricts certain types, and gets interested when you buy several at once, but generally doesn't seem to care about how many you own, overall total.

Some people have chosen to focus on just a few guns and calibers, and use them for everything they do. Cost matters, and fewer calibers means less expense in many ways. There is something to be said for standardization.

There is also something to be said for diversity, if your situation allows it.
Or variety.

While I don't play golf, I understand why a golfer has a bag full of clubs. Each one does something better than the others in a certain situation. Something similar applies to firearms.

Another (very broad) analogy, most people don't drive the same make and model car their entire lives.

I have acquired a number of guns, in a wide range of calibers, and several guns in the same calibers over the years. Some were bought because they were in a caliber I already had, some were bought because they were in a caliber I did NOT already have, and I wanted to try it.

I guess I'm not "practical". But I had practical covered by the time I was legally a full adult, and I've had a lot of time since then, to be ..impractical, and "serious"(?) (still doesn't seem like the right word...)

one thing I have learned, while you can learn a LOT by reading about them, you won't learn everything (good and bad) until you have one yourself.
(which applies to a lot more than guns, now that I think about it, )

 

[Pond James Pond]

James, you are in a situation that is very familiar (money), and at the same time almost completely alien to most US shooters (govt limit on # of guns you can have). The US restricts certain types, and gets interested when you buy several at once, but generally doesn't seem to care about how many you own, overall total.

Some people have chosen to focus on just a few guns and calibers, and use them for everything they do. Cost matters, and fewer calibers means less expense in many ways. There is something to be said for standardization.

Whilst I was interested in other people's approach to this, certainly in my case, you've captured the essence of my situation and the drivers in my decision making. There are times when I list all the guns that I'd love to own just to know what they are like to shoot, or even just because I like the look of them and want to handle them (Astra A60, P232 cases in point), but when the reverie clears I'm still left in my predicament.

I do have a selection of guns that I enjoy, and apart from objects of desire that I can't justify, I am happy with my choices. However, prices being what they are here (they'd turn the hair of US shooters white in a flash!). However, I don't like to have no ammo at all and keeping those different calibers stocked is expensive (yes, even when just components!) and because they are all different, I can't just plunder one or two stocks of a given calibre.

I don't see how I could do it though without whittling down my existing collection. Perhaps get a 9mm revolver? Trade my AR and CZ to get a 7.62 semi-auto? Those would be very expensive changes in themselves, just to drop costs of .223 and .38spl!!

I just have to shoot less....