Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44

Thread: "Works for me" ... a slippery slope?

  1. #11
    Gucci gear, Walmart skill Darth_Uno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    STL
    The “works for me/just as good” argument is usually a defense of a weapon, accessory, or level of access to said weapon that is substantially less than optimal. It’s one thing to know you’re not running with the best setup, and articulating why you’re doing it anyway. Usually out of some degree of necessity. I expect most members here could fall somewhere around that category.

    It’s quite another to be completely unaware and think because you shot a mag of Wolf through your PSA last year that it’s just as good as a BCM, which is where most of Reddit is.

  2. #12
    @ASH556, I think you’re using “works for me” in a very appropriate context. That’s not to be confused with the dude that puts 50 rounds/year through a Hi-Point and says “well, it works for me” when someone points out the downsides of a Hi-Point.

    Here’s an example for me. I love my Beretta 92G Elite LTT. I think that’s the perfect refinement of the 92 design. Guess what though, I can shoot 98% as good with my old lightly modified 92FS as I can the Elite LTT. The old 92 in question has a Wilson rear sight, LTT grips, D Spring, and G conversion. That old 92 flat works for me.

    At any rate, I think you’ve got a perfectly good carbine that should serve you well. I also think you’ve tested it and verified that it does, in fact, work for you.

  3. #13
    For the use you are thinking for that rifle seems to me that reliability is the most important concern. You have that. Even a bone stock M&P Sport will do 99% of the things I can see us getting into. It would have to get to a total societal breakdown before I can see needing to shoot beyond 50-75 yards. I can't get back to the first post here in the 'Reply' mode so I may not be remembering correctly. My only thoughts on further upgrades would be a light and a laser in case SHTF at night.

  4. #14
    There’s a significant difference in the dismissive “it works for me” usually used to justify sub-optimal gear choices and the world of “I have practiced and trained with my particular setup and can meet or exceed established standards that have been found to require a degree of proficiency/reliability. Therefore, I can attest that my choices are sufficient for my needs.”

    The latter is a mouthful in a conversation but sometimes proper articulation is what separates us from the simpletons (very elitist sounding, I know). If you can honestly say that though, don’t concern yourself with those who may become dismissive of your own assertions of “it works for me”.

  5. #15
    S.L.O.W. ASH556's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Braselton, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by HCountyGuy View Post
    There’s a significant difference in the dismissive “it works for me” usually used to justify sub-optimal gear choices and the world of “I have practiced and trained with my particular setup and can meet or exceed established standards that have been found to require a degree of proficiency/reliability. Therefore, I can attest that my choices are sufficient for my needs.”

    The latter is a mouthful in a conversation but sometimes proper articulation is what separates us from the simpletons (very elitist sounding, I know). If you can honestly say that though, don’t concern yourself with those who may become dismissive of your own assertions of “it works for me”.
    Thanks for all the feedback thus far guys, good stuff. I do want to clarify that I care less about others dismissing my gear and assertions of "works for me." It's more about a self-check-up to make sure that I'm not rationalizing my way into a sub-par setup. On the flip side of things, having taken classes, shot matches, and regularly shot performance standards, quals, etc with some legit dudes, I think I have a decent idea of what realistic performance is/should look like/can be pushed for. And for all that, I'm finding that there's a ton of "fluff" gear being used out there just because it's the new hotness or because someone saw someone use it. Thinking for myself about what gear I need and knowing what I can do with said gear is liberating and empowering. BUT, you have to do the work to figure that out, and that takes time and resources. The problem is we all start out not knowing and most never do the work to find out. Some simply copy those who they deem to be "in the know." That's not necessarily a bad starting point, but it's just a starting point. Others assume they know and stop there. Those are the fudds with the Taurus/Highpoint/DPMS whatever garbage guns that "work for me."
    Food Court Apprentice
    Semper Paratus certified AR15 armorer

  6. #16

    Software over hardware

    I think “works for me” is more commonly a problem when applied to software than hardware. Hardware has a floor of acceptable quality. Something along the lines of the used “glock, aimpoint, 6920” holy trinity of real world social use. It’s a simple bottom line that you clearly understand. Any fancy gear above that can add performance capability and won’t be a liability.

    Fairly clear cut. I love to use and toy with Gucci gear but I can perform at an acceptable level of baseline standards for my purposes with my 6720 and legacy T1.

    It’s the software that becomes an issue. If your TTPs aren’t appropriate, your SR15 with LPVO won’t save you. That’s where the “FUDD” lines are drawn in my estimation. Learning to be the type of tactician who can dominate your personal “operational” environment, whatever that is, is a much more difficult path especially for civilians. It may be cliche, but your brain really is the weapon. I prefer to focus on software skills these days.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by EPF View Post
    I think “works for me” is more commonly a problem when applied to software than hardware. Hardware has a floor of acceptable quality. Something along the lines of the used “glock, aimpoint, 6920” holy trinity of real world social use. It’s a simple bottom line that you clearly understand. Any fancy gear above that can add performance capability and won’t be a liability.

    Fairly clear cut. I love to use and toy with Gucci gear but I can perform at an acceptable level of baseline standards for my purposes with my 6720 and legacy T1.

    It’s the software that becomes an issue. If your TTPs aren’t appropriate, your SR15 with LPVO won’t save you. That’s where the “FUDD” lines are drawn in my estimation. Learning to be the type of tactician who can dominate your personal “operational” environment, whatever that is, is a much more difficult path especially for civilians. It may be cliche, but your brain really is the weapon. I prefer to focus on software skills these days.
    Well said.

    Ill take the trained guy with a hi point over a gucci glock owner who never shoots of trains.

    Get the best hardware you can reasonably afford and then train your ass off.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Warped Mindless View Post
    Well said.

    Ill take the trained guy with a hi point over a gucci glock owner who never shoots of trains.

    Get the best hardware you can reasonably afford and then train your ass off.
    While I agree with the trained>untrained thing, in my experience, people that unironically buy Hi Points don't train, and most of the people I know with Gucci Glocks do.

  9. #19
    Four String Fumbler Joe in PNG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Papua New Guinea; formerly Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Casual Friday View Post
    While I agree with the trained>untrained thing, in my experience, people that unironically buy Hi Points don't train, and most of the people I know with Gucci Glocks do.
    It's a spectrum.
    Some people are duffers trying to buy skill via multiple $3,500 customs guns, but never put in the disciplined training needed to get gud.
    Some buy multiple $3,500 custom guns they never shoot, so they can brag about them.
    Some people go all John Frumm and ape the setups of their heros, but never actually really get around to shooting their guns.
    Some people get a thrill from Nostalge de la boue, and go lo fi hipster
    Some listen to the gun counter commandos and get derp that's 'just as good!'
    Some get the right hardware, but never get around to installing the software.

    And sometimes you can do all the right things, and still get a lemon.
    "You win 100% of the fights you avoid. If you're not there when it happens, you don't lose." - William Aprill
    "I've owned a guitar for 31 years and that sure hasn't made me a musician, let alone an expert. It's made me a guy who owns a guitar."- BBI

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Casual Friday View Post
    While I agree with the trained>untrained thing, in my experience, people that unironically buy Hi Points don't train, and most of the people I know with Gucci Glocks do.
    Agreed. I know of exactly 0 people who train and shoot crappy guns. That said, I have, oddly enough, seen quite a few people with super cutom guns who couldn't hardly bit paper at 7 yards. More many than sense I guess. But hey, their instagram pics are probably cool looking lol.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •