I think I am going to consolidate to one pistol caliber...

[SiriusBlunder]

<Pulls Pin on a 4-Banger>

And that caliber is...45 ACP.

You may all now opine about the various levels of sanity and sense involved in this decision and proceed to attempt to talk me out of it.

Aw man, I thought it was going to be .32 NAA. I Am Disappoint. :-)

[revchuck38]

<Pulls Pin on a 4-Banger>

And that caliber is...45 ACP.

You may all now opine about the various levels of sanity and sense involved in this decision and proceed to attempt to talk me out of it.

Ain't no sanity nor sense therein.

[mmc45414]

I am/have also truncated significantly. My use case is that I am 99.99% focused on doing my volume shooting with 9x19. 70% of my pistols are 9mm, I plan to buy more, and this is the only cartridge I plan to stockpile significant ammo for. But I will always want some revolvers around, and I will always have at least one (currently two) 1911 in 45ACP.

But I plan to focus, at least for the foreseeable future, on:
- 9mm
- 38/357
- 22LR
My feelings are that for me, if there is something those three (actually four) will not do, I am going to be very unlikely to be doing it.
And I have a cool variety of guns those three cartridges cover (including a 9mm AR), and I can keep buying more that I find interesting (like maybe a 6" GP-100 with an SRO on it...) without straying.

What is the advantage of totally eliminating others?
- I am always going to keep 22LR around, 5k costs $300 and it doesn't take up much space.
- If I load up (am currently out...) 500-1,000 rounds of 45ACP that will last me indefinitely.
- If I load up 1k of .38 and a few hundred of .357 I am covered there.

OTOH, that leaves 44mag and .380 on a bubble.
I have a sweet 5.5" stainless Super Blackhawk, but damn if I can remember the last time I shot it. Not going to market it, but I would make somebody a deal.
I have a bunch of .380 rounds, so I might get an LCP Max, shoot up the ammo and decide if I like it when the ammo is gone, and just keep a few boxes of factory ammo if I do.

I have a Kahr P-40 I have had forever and I will keep it because it has traveled many miles with me (but I did just get a Shield Plus, soooo....).

So I am all for thinning things down, without going to extremes. But I have figured out I do not need a ton of ammo on hand for every single thing I find interesting.

[Elwin]

I’m going to make a concerted effort to not have guns that I shoot in volume that aren’t .45 ACP (for full size 1911s and some likely future revolvers) or .38. Spl. (snubs and other revolvers). That way I at least have only two I have to reload for, and I’m already set to load them. There are still 9mm guns around but if they’re not something I shoot much I don’t need to load for them.

I crave simplicity in all things so I’m all for narrowing as much as possible - I just don’t think I can get down to less than two. The 1911 being the only auto at least means I only need to stockpile one pattern of mag…

[HeavyDuty]

Probably single greatest challenge to this idea is the lack of a pocketable, reliable, available, snub.

If I convince myself to keep .22s on hand, then maybe a .22 LCR could do the job.

:30 to go from just one to two. How long before a third is added?

[RevolverRob]

Aw man, I thought it was going to be .32 NAA. I Am Disappoint. :-)

If Beretta brings out the 80X in .32ACP - such that I can ream a barrel out...

Then I could do the same to a vz.61...

[fatdog]

Since you live in a 10 round hellhole state, I don't see this as completely irrational, except you need to make some allowance for some pocket thing, assuming you eventually beat down the man and get your CCW in place...

All the short barrel pocketable .45's, to the extent there are any, suck.

[Guerrero]

Well... maybe two

Probably not three

Definitely less than four

Maybe

[Borderland]

I could live with one pistol cartridge, probably 45 acp. I would also have to have a revolver cartridge, probably 38 Spl. I didn't have a 9x19 until a few years ago so almost sure I could live without that one, but I have three.

I like to mess around with old revolver cartridges so I'm at a disadvantage here. I'm loading 32 S&W Long and 38 Short Colt just because I'm curious about older out-of-date stuff. New cartridges just don't appeal to me.

[BillSWPA]

If I still lived in New Jersey, I would be much more heavily invested in .45 ACP given the current 10 round limit and the restrictions on hollow point ammo.

I bought my 1911 when the 10 round federal limit was in effect. I wanted something full size, easy to shoot, and without wasted size efficiency from being designed to take a magazine I could not obtain without paying scalper's prices. When limited to 10 rounds, 8 rounds of the biggest bullet I can get in a thin, easily concealed single stack package makes sense. Despite the limited capacity as compared to many other available choices today, I would not feel significantly handicapped by having 8 rounds of .45 or 25 rounds total on my person.

I have not come across a handgun which makes it as easy as a .45 1911 to start from a holster and put a fast, accurate, decisive hit on target.

Having said all of the above, I am currently heavily focused on 9mm and .22 lr. for almost all of my current shooting. at least 98% of the time, I can be found carrying a 10 shot subcompact 9mm. .22 lr. is worth its weight in gold as an inexpensive training tool as well as a tool for teaching beginners and children.

I would not be without .32 ACP and .380 ACP as NPE guns and/or guns for people with hand, wrist, or elbow conditions.