The thread “If you could only have one gun” got me thinking. What if you could only own firearms from one manufacturer?
I personally don’t have any brand loyalty. There are some brand names I trust and some I don’t but whomever makes the rifle, pistol, or shotgun that best fits my needs at a good price is the one that gets my money.
But what if we were all forced to have unwavering brand loyalty? Which brand would best cover all your needs?
I assumed there are enough strongly opinionated people around here that we would get plenty of whys;) But yes everyone, please share why!
Like the S&W choice. Problem for me is that they don’t make a shotgun for clays or a classic hunting rifle. Though their AR10 might be serviceable for the later.
That was my first thought as well. They cover all the categories I need and then some with solid products. The only thing against being all in on Ruger for me is their EDC and home defense pistol options aren’t at the top of my wish list. Though they make very serviceable options in these categories as well.
Ruger. Shotguns would be the only thing they don’t currently produce, but they used to. I’d say they could again, if they saw a market for the Red-Label again.
Ruger, from beginner rimfire 10/22 and Single Six to competition ready firearms, has everything I need and want.
With their acquisition of Marlin, I maybe back in the lever action market.
I’m not saying that other manufacturers are crappy because there are a lot of great brands out there I’m just comfortable with M&P and I’m a Smith&Wesson fan boy.
I’m with you on Smith and Wesson! I am a little biased since it’s my EDC, but a think the bigger reason is that they have been able to make quality firearms in various different categories. The only other one that I think would be similar would be Ruger.
My favorite (current) riflemaker doesn’t make handguns, my favorite riflemaker of all time was closed by the US Government in 1968, and my favorite handgun maker doesn’t make affordable rifles.