Variety vs. Redundancy

Y

YankeeIronSights

New member
Hi folks,

Given a limited budget, would you prefer to purchase a variety of handguns or rather have redundancy of handguns?

I know some gun owners prefer to keep just handguns that they shoot well and do not care about collecting firearms. Other gun owners are collectors and want to learn how to shoot and maintain a variety of gun models and technologies.

Which philosophy do you support or favor?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Initially I couldn't see having more than one of a model,,,

initially I couldn't see having more than one of a model,,,
But somehow I wound up with three different model 36 revolvers.

One 1 7/8" blue round butt,,,
One 3" Nickel round butt,,,
One 3" blue square butt.

I didn't think I needed any past the 3" square butt,,,
But then again, when has "need" really mattered.

I have a friend who has 4 or more Glock 19's,,,
When I asked him why,,,
He said, "Why not?"

Go figure,,,

Aarond

.
 
YankeeIronSights said:
Hi folks,

Given a limited budget, would you prefer to purchase a variety of handguns or rather have redundancy of handguns?

I know some gun owners prefer to keep just handguns that they shoot well and do not care about collecting firearms. Other gun owners are collectors and want to learn how to shoot and maintain a variety of gun models and technologies.

Which philosophy do you support or favor?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hmmm. redundancy. So, I have 2 XDS-s, 2 snubbies. Same holster works for each xds, a different holster covers both snubbies. snubbies share speedloaders. A couple XD 40s, that have (some) parts and holster and magazine commonality.
 
Last edited:
It isn't easy to pigeonhole me or many gun owners, I suspect! But if forced, absolutely give me the variety over redundancy any and every day.

That was how I began my journey three decades back, I've followed along pretty closely.
 
I am not sure there is a generic answer to your question. Considering, the "given a limited budget" qualifier, and since the post is in the Handgun forum; it would be easy to say: just get a G19 and a .22 LR conversion unit, or a 1911 and a .22 conversion unit, etc. and then call it good.

The old cliche "Beware the man with one gun" has some merit. But, what about "the man" that is competent with revolvers as well as single action, DA/SA, DAO and striker-fired pistols?

As for "Which philosophy do you support?" I don't consider myself a collector. Rather, a longtime enthusiast and acquirer. I do have multiples of the few models I consider as tools.
 
For anything used for HD/SD, I want redundancy JIC one needs to go in for repair, I have one I am already familiar with for life-saving duty. Other than that, a smattering of fun guns needs to have a variety about them - even if they are all the same caliber.

Example - in 9mm, maybe you use a G19 for edc/sd/hd, so 2 of those; but then you add a S&W 547 and a J frame, a SIG P210, maybe a HK P7 and a nice 1911 9mm all for grins and giggles.
 
I started out in teens with one of everything Ruger made in SA. ( it was possible in 60s )
Then switched to S&W revolvers and had a short stint with autos. I did dabble in Colts
Brownings & High Standards too. Now I'm 80% S&W revolvers. I'm not really a collector,
more of a shooting hoarder. To stay in my "collection" the gun whether rifle or pistol has
to be a accurate shooter. I don't care who made it or what it cost, if it don't shoot it has to
scoot. I've owned dozens of guns of same make & model. Some shoot like a target gun and
others not so good. They have to be judged separately, depending onthe type shooting you
will be doing.
 
I only believe in redundancy for a carry gun, a Glock 19. I compete with one and carry the other same model. Is it necessary? No. The parts are easy to replace and the pistol is easy to service.

I do have the 17, 19X, and 34, too. To round out the Glock pistols I also have a 30 and 30S. The reason I like the Glock is that the operation and action are the same, apart from small differences.

I also did recently acquire a CZ 75 SP-01, CZ 75 Compact, and CZ. Shadow. Again, similar actions and function. Through two are for competing. They’re not as easy to strip down into their components, as a Glock, though. I do enjoy steel frame guns for follow up shots.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
When I first got into shooting, I liked to play the field a bit more. After doing this I have found several brands/platforms that have been worthy of buying multiple of in the future and I fully intend to.


1911s are a great example. I love 1911s. I have a Colt Commander that suits me just fine. But there are still so many more 1911 options out there. I am totally willing to own a high end one, maybe a cheap one as a range toy, Id love a 3" someday as well. But I don't think I could bring myself to buy another Colt Commander similar or exactly like the one I already have. Unless it was a bargain! then I might consider.
 
Variety is the spice of life. If I never tried new things, I would not know what works for me and how best fit & best fun varies for certain needs and situations.

I would rather try something new and sell it later than limit my world to some preconceived idea of what best/good/fun/accurate 'might' be. You can borrow and try stuff, it not the same as owning for a while and putting in the trigger time, hunting time, carry time.
 
You should strive for redundancy in combat weapons. You don't want to train like heck with a glock and then carry a single action revolver. Your defensive guns should all have the same action and ergonomics. Any time you have to draw, you had better be sure that you don't have to think too much about the pistol itself, and whether or not you have your safety on or if you have to cock your hammer.
 
After shooting a bunch of guns, I found what I like. I buy a lot of those. I buy other..."patterns"(?)...here and there to try them out. So far nothing has come along to displace my favorite..."pattern"...
 
Variety is the spice of life. I like learning different systems. It's a form of prepping, I guess. The ability to pick up any type of firearm and be able to shoot it competently is important to me.
 
I shoot all the guns I "collect." My collecting focus is Browning and Colt with a few odd ball flintlocks and percussion black powder muzzleloaders. I don't collect doubles -- the collection is all different firearms and they all get shot. 50 - 55 +/- guns. My goal is educational plus enjoyment. I shoot paper plates, tin cans and clays.

.02. David. :)
 
Can't have enough! I actually have two identical S&W 686's, one for me, one for her. Why? Because in the wonderful nanny-state of NJ, I can not take her gun to the range without her, and she can't take mine without me!

There are times we don't go together, and we both love the 686. I use mine to teach newbies with. Start them with wad cutters and slowly move them up to .357 Magnum if I feel they are ready for it. She will take hers to the range and easily shoot 200+ rounds of wadcutters just for fun.

Other than that, those are the only two identical guns we own. I have several other 686's in various lengths, not to mention a bunch of other models of revolvers and semi autos. I collect, plink, and shoot competitively with many of them.
 
Which philosophy do you support or favor?
Click to expand...

BOTH!!!! :D

Don't worry about that limited budget thing, it doesn't mean you can't get what you want, it just means it takes longer, and requires a bit more self discipline saving money. ;)

I say both, because I have a wide variety of handguns, that I bought to check out and learn, AND I have duplicates of my favorites, just in case.

You can read about, (or watch) guns you are interested in, but you cannot really know how they will fit, work, and feel for you, until you have one and use it. Not everything turns out to be as good as it looks from a distance.

And as I said, my favorite guns, I have "spares", not only for the "if one breaks I still have another" but also because, if you ever use your gun defensively, the police WILL take it. When everything is completely settled, you can get your gun back, but it could be weeks, or months, or maybe even longer. And our precious guns are just one more piece of "evidence" to the police, who have a reputation for not treating them in the same way we do....
 
On a limited budget, I'd want to stick to one centerfire caliber and one .22lr handgun.


If truly limited, the 9mm is the best all-around semi-auto caliber as it is reasonably effective for SD, it is reasonably accurate for target/range, and is cheaper than about any other auto-loading centerfire caliber.

It is also cheaper than .38sp or .357mag- at least where I live.

If on a budget, lets' keep reloading for another day.


I would want the .22lr to practice and plink, and the centerfire for skill and self-defense.

A handgun and conversion kit has the advantage of the EXACT same manual of arms. However, a decent conversion kit will cost about as much as a reasonable .22lr handgun.

If you have one of each, you and a friend can shoot without taking turns.


As your income increases, you can begin branching out.

You can pick more sizes of same handgun in same caliber [redundancy].
You can pick more calibers of same handgun [control redundancy- but caliber variety].
You can pick different handgun platforms, in either same or different caliber.


My personal experiences lead me to not recommend .40S&W as the ONLY handgun caliber to new shooters.

If you are not familiar with it, it is easy to develop bad flinch/anticipation habits, that can take a longer time to break you of.


Modern 9mm projectile design is something I'd bet my life [or my wife's] on- as it is shot placement that is more critical.


My recommendation:
.22lr first
Then 9mm.
Then .45acp.
Then .357mag

And THEN, decide what you want to wind up with.


Now, if you have the budget, here is another option:

Glock G35/22/23 [yes- it IS .40. Hang on....]
.40-9mm conversion barrel for appropriate length slide [between $240 and $100- depending on brand and new/used].
9mm mags.
.40-.357sig barrel [$225-100]
no new mags.
.22lr conversion kit for top end. [$325-250]

End result? One serial numbered frame, and 4 calibers: for a cost that is less than 2 Glock handguns new.


Or, Glock G22 [I like the sf] in .45acp
.45-10mm conversion barrel.
10mm to .40 conversion barrel [not recommended, but it works].
does anyone do a 10mm to .357sig barrel?
.22lr conversion top end.

The disadvantage of this second option is that there is no 9mm priced ammo involved.


You can do something like this with a .40 BHP, or a Springfield XD, or a Beretta, or a Sig P226/229, or a CZ. You can also do a variation on this with a 1911: .38super, with 9mm barrel, and .22lr conversion top end. Or .45acp with .22lr conversion top end.


And in all of these 'conversion' projects, you could be out $1000-1500.

Or, you could buy a basic G19 and a conversion 22 top end for about $800.

or you could buy a used G19 and a Buckmark/Ruger Mk IV for about $800.

Or,

Or,

Or.

YOU have to decide. Isn't it fun?


Oh, and then you can get into historical collecting too! 9mm handguns from WWII! [walther P38, or Star B are reasonably reliable].
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top