PDA

View Full Version : The flip side of "buy a cheap gun and have money left over for ammo..."



beltjones
05-30-2012, 12:54 PM
We've all heard the advice, and many of us have given it, that one would be better off buying the cheaper of two pistol options in order to have money left over for ammo or training. Usually it goes like this:

"Should I buy an M&P or an HK?"

"If you buy the M&P you will have money left over for ammo!"

What about the flip side - would you agree to shoot a gun you don't like if you were given an amount of money for ammo or training?

It might work like this: You get a Taurus 24/7, and it's the only pistol you can use or train with for a year. However, you get $250/month for ammo or training. You can obviously purchase your own ammo or training, but this $250 would be in addition to whatever your current budget happens to be.

Would you be better off with the gun you have now, or would you be better off using the crappier gun with more ammo and more training?

tremiles
05-30-2012, 01:30 PM
1. Take Taurus.
2. Take $250/mo for ammo and only spend $25/mo. No one is actually going to believe that a Taurus is going to run more than 120 rounds a month anyway.
3. After 4 mos. purchase M&P with DKAEK, Ameriglo Pro-Op sights, quality holster, mag pouch, ammo.
4. If M&P exhibits lock up issues by 5th month, buy Barsto barrel from Apex or fitted SL barrel from G&R.
5. Turn Taurus into "Guns for Kicks" program for new shoes.
6. Sell shoes on craigslist to make up ammo loss in first 4 mos.

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk 2

Shokr21
05-30-2012, 02:41 PM
I WILL get flamed for this, maybe not on this forum, but most forums I would get flamed for the following.

I have owned 4 taurus pistols. My first pistol purchase was a pt1911, bought in 2009. I was entranced with the 1911 and wasn't a shooter so to speak. I have owned the pistol for 3 years and shot ~1800 error free rounds. I know that isn't a high round count by any means, but I haven't shot it in almost a year and a half. I won't sell it because it was my first purchase and there's a little sentimental value (silly I know, but it's my first purchase).

The 2nd pistol purchase I made was a pt111, a 3" barrel 12+1 capacity polymer frame. I bought it for carry. vetted it with 1000 error free fmj's and 100 jhp's before putting in my waistband (with a good holster). I teamed up with a pt145 (same as pt111 but in .45 and a 10+1 capacity), vetted, but carried little.

I sold both of those to finance a glock 19, that choked and sputtered through the first 650 rounds, new ejector vetted and now my carry.

I also had a pt92, a railed beretta copy. ~1500 rounds error free, more accurate than I (3" groups off bench at 25m). I like the pistol, but wanted a g17. I sold it to my uncle and bought a glock 17 with enough money for defoor sights.

My point is Taurus in general have a very bad rap. I have a sample size of 4 that have shot in excess of 4500 rounds error free (again not a high round count, I know). I bought taurus, simply because they were cheap and I didn't "know". I sold Taurus because I wanted to be able to actually have aftermarket support for my pistols.

I've had 2 glocks, 2500 rounds down range between the two since February of this year. My 19 coughed and sputtered, but it's fixed now.

I haven't had a training opportunity come up yet, that fit with my schedule. That should change soon, as there are a couple local classes coming this fall that are looking promising.

My recommendations to my friends are simple, glock 19/26 or m&p fs/c, depending on their intended use. I wouldn't tell someone that they shouldn't buy a taurus, I would share my experience and explain that for another month's savings they could get a much more vetted and easily supported in the aftermarket pistol.

Considering the most expensive part of shooting is ammo, I find it silly to make a decision on a firearm because of a $100 price tag difference that's practically irrelevant.

beltjones
05-30-2012, 02:51 PM
Don't get hung up on the Taurus thing. It was just an example of the first gun I could think of that I wouldn't want to shoot. If there is a better example for you, then please use that.

Chris Rhines
05-30-2012, 03:13 PM
I guess that it depends on the gun, and what I'm doing with it. For enough free ammo, I can overlook some pretty profound dislikes.

It would have to be USPSA Production or Single Stack legal, and it would have to be reliable and accurate enough that it's not holding me back as a shooter. That's pretty much all I ask.

-C

167
05-30-2012, 03:25 PM
I would shoot and carry most handguns for around 1,500 rounds of ammo a month. Free ammunition is definitely my weakness.

Suvorov
05-30-2012, 04:29 PM
I don't think anyone here says buy a "cheap gun" - I think people are saying buy a less expensive but quality service pistol and then use the extra money for ammo and training. While there are a lot of HK lovers here, and while HK does make wonderful pistols, there is a point of diminishing return when spending $1000 on a pistol when a $500 pistol will do (I would still much rather carry my $500 Beretta92C over my $900 issue HK USPc).

So to try to answer your question, do I think your typical beginning shooter who goes out and buys a suboptimal $500 Glock/Beretta/M&P/etc or even a trade in S&W 3rd Gen (warts and all for $300) and then spends a $200 on a case of 9mm and $300 on a weekend pistol course from a reputable instructor is going to be able to out shoot another typical beginning shooter to buys a $1000 HK45 (that fits his hand like a glove and gives him unlimited pride of ownership) and a box or two of ammo?

Absolutely!

Shokr21
05-30-2012, 04:38 PM
Don't get hung up on the Taurus thing. It was just an example of the first gun I could think of that I wouldn't want to shoot. If there is a better example for you, then please use that.

Fair enough, I was just trying to give my experience with the brand.

For me it was between M&P's or Glock's. I shot both equally well and both could be had locally for a $25 difference. The difference for me was locally available aftermarket support. Glock won that hands down.

I think this is more of an issue with newer shooters, not so much with members here. Trying to save money on a pistol, ie a $500 pistol vs a ~$300 pistol. Will the $300 pistol do the job for most shooters? more than likely. But the diminishing returns of a glock or M&P vs a hk are evident. I'd like an hk p30, but I don't think it does anything significantly better than a glock or an m&p, certainly not $400 better.

Not trying to start a brand war, like I said I'd like an hk, but I don't NEED one.

I bought my glocks and have set myself up to be able to make all the ammo I'll ever need. I'm now trying to find good classes locally.

jetfire
05-30-2012, 05:20 PM
Andy has just successfully described my entire business model with the first post. ;-)

ummm
05-30-2012, 05:24 PM
I like tremiles' idea, except forget the m&p; I'll wait 20 months for something I could never otherwise afford

http://ccgunworks.com/old%20site/limited_1.jpg

Plus, the Taurus 92F "imitation" -- didn't Taurus buy the actual Beretta factory down in Brazil, complete with all the machinery and license to reproduce the design in place at the time? So you'd essentially be getting a pretty real Beretta 92F, albeit an older version...never used one, but I've read that the older 92F's are well-regarded weapons. Ben Stoeger seems to do pretty well with a Beretta ;)

Sig Willy
05-30-2012, 06:20 PM
It certainly would be nice to buy a well made (and well priced) pistol to own but are they really worth the price they command? I think some do but not all. I only based this on my observations and reviews on the net. Over a year ago I wanted a pistol for HD/SD and since I'm on a budget I did a lot of researches online. I bought a Keltec PF9 9mm pistol ($285) at the range. Turned out to be a good pistol and since I bought it for SD it turned into a range gun. Who would've thought that shooting is so much fun?

After 1200 rounds I thought I need a range gun that will serve as SD as well so I sold the PF9 to fund a new gun. More researches later The Sigma 9mm really looked good pricewise ($320) and qualitywise. I bought it at the range last Feb as I do all my gun related business there (they're good people and family run.) The Sigma has a hard trigger but I didn't mind it and when SHTF I don't think I'll notice. Great shooter (600 rounds) and I still have it, it's a keeper. They were also the first time I owned and shot a 9mm and I'm impressed with it.

I never shot a 40sw before and I wanted one to try so I ordered a Sigma 40 last March at the range. Their suppliers were back logged so after two weeks of waiting I decided to get a different brand so they showed me a Sig P250c 40sw they have on sale for $415. It felt good in my hand and seemed well made so I bought it. That was a great shooter too. They both never failed on me after 500-600 rounds (each) so far.

I think I did good even though others didn't like their triggers but they didn't bother me.

UNK
05-30-2012, 07:27 PM
Crosman Custom Pistol and 11-year Old Lucas Morgan Wins State Pistol Championship!

Posted By admin on May 8, 2012

2012-pistol-awards-4Lucas Morgan looks like most any 11-year old, except for the neck full of medals won with a 2300KT designed in the Crosman Custom Shop. He recently added the Nebraska State Progressive Pistol Championship by scoring a 393 of a possible 400, a new state record. He followed that with the Nebraska 4-H State Championship, Sporter Class title where he also outshot all but one in the next age group of precision shooters. Lucas outperformed shooters using some of the most recognized names in competitive shooting: Steyr, Biakal, Pardini, Moroni, Feinwerkau.

His father, Dave, is the pistol coach for the Lincoln (Nebraska) Shooting Stars and contacted Crosman ahead of the Nebraska State Championship. Dave was considering an alternate front sight for the 2300 that is in use on another Crosman competition pistol and eventually visited with Mark DeBoard, Shooting Services Manager and Crosman Prostaff.

“Here’s a kid who built a gun from the ground up right in our Custom Shop for around $300 and is out there scoring better and taking home medals against shooters using pistols costing thousands of dollars,” said DeBoard.

Lucas designed his 2300KT with the Lothar Walther barrel and Williams rear sight. Open 24/7, the Custom Shop has a huge variety of options, starting with the 2300KT pistol base configuration or the 2400KT carbine. Build one today!

Joe in PNG
05-31-2012, 06:55 AM
Cheap is a strange thing. For roughly the same price, one can get a PA-64 or a HighPoint; a Bersa or a used K Framed Smith; a 1911 like object or a Glock/M&P; a Sig 220 or H&K 45 or Kimber... A $500 Glock is often a much better gun than a $1100 Kimber, even if it's $600 cheaper.

But back on topic- If I was on a limited budget, and had to buy a cheap gun so I can have ammo money to shoot it, or get a good gun and scrimp for ammo... I have always found it best to go with something good when starting out. Heavens knows I've bought my share of cheap guns, only to sell them off at a big loss because I wasn't happy with it, and wanted something better. And it's not just the gun, but the extra mags, holsters, ammo... I can get 9mm at pretty much any Wal-Mart, but my best friend who owns a Makarov has to either trek around the county, or order online if he wants ammo or even spare mags.

tesseract
05-31-2012, 11:17 PM
Cheap is a strange thing. For roughly the same price, one can get a PA-64 or a HighPoint; a Bersa or a used K Framed Smith; a 1911 like object or a Glock/M&P; a Sig 220 or H&K 45 or Kimber... A $500 Glock is often a much better gun than a $1100 Kimber, even if it's $600 cheaper.


And for those of us with champagne tastes on beer budgets, there's always the used market... I have 2 HK USP Compacts I bought, used, for the cost of 1 new one; I've seen Gen2 Glocks in great condition sell in the $300 range.

I know some people don't always feel comfortable with a gun that may not have a warranty, and a gun that they don't know where it's been or how it's been treated. I get that; we each have our own comfort levels.

As far as the original question, I'd be more than fine using a mid-90's Sig for free ammo. ;)

Tamara
06-02-2012, 07:14 AM
I know some people don't always feel comfortable with a gun that may not have a warranty, and a gun that they don't know where it's been or how it's been treated. I get that; we each have our own comfort levels.

Phhhttt! Taking the depreciation hit by buying a new gun is for suckers. Out of the I have no idea how many hundreds of guns I've owned, if ten were bought new, I'd be shocked. (And even then, they were often bought as discontinued overruns from discount wholesalers, like my S&W 296 or Mateba...)

If there's a more durable consumer good than a quality firearm, I don't know what it is. As I type, there's a 110 year old Smith revolver next to my elbow I bought last weekend. Works fine.


My point is Taurus in general have a very bad rap. I have a sample size of 4 that have shot in excess of 4500 rounds error free (again not a high round count, I know). I bought taurus, simply because they were cheap and I didn't "know". I sold Taurus because I wanted to be able to actually have aftermarket support for my pistols.

I look at it from a different perspective: I stopped carrying Taurus pistols when the problem rate got above about 30%. For the end user, that's a 70% chance of having a satisfying ownership experience; for the dealer, that's three pissed off customers out of every ten.