Should You be Prepping Guns or Glass?

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAOk dude, what?  I know, the title is deceptive - but here is my question… should I be investing in more guns or the accessories that make them better, like optics otherwise known as “glass”?  Glass is a term for optics, likely because most optics, particularly hunting scopes, are made with glass.

Most shooters will tell you that your budget for a firearm should be as follows: if you pay X for your firearm, the optics should cost 2-3X.  In other words, if you buy a $700 rifle, the optic on top should cost between $1,400 and $2,100.  That seems like a lot but it brings me to my current conundrum.  I have some money that I want to invest in defense, typically that means firearms.  BUT – should I be buying more guns or optics for the guns I already have?

More guns is nice because it gives me spares and redundancy for the ones I already have.  It also gives me the ability to arm more people in my family or group should they be without weapons.  But, any operator will tell you that properly zero’d optics will make you more proficient which results in more hits (kills) and that helps you win the fight.  What good is 10 guns if you can’t get rounds on target?  Wouldn’t ONE gun that was effective be better?  Good question.

Currently I am looking for a new optic for my AR – and no, there is no “right” answer.  BUT – there certainly are better options and much better options if you are willing to spend the dough.  Consider that preppers are mainly considering defensive capabilities.  I hope you are not prepping to siege your friends and neighbors!  Defensive shooting will require long, medium and close-quarters capabilities and therefore an solution that gives you all of those capabilities is optimal.  Preppers should also be considering quality and durability – when the SHTF, will not be able to overnight you a new optic.  You need to buy quality!  I also want simplicity, I have been considering the brand new Eotech package found here.  At $1,000, this optic, gives you close quarter capabilities via the regular Eotech holographic sight but also the medium range via the flip to the side magnifier.  This isn’t perfect given the time it takes to switch between the two (yes, even though it is minimal) and you have parts that can get caught in your gear and cause problems.  Eotech are rugged and battle tested so you are GTG there.

The solution I would really like is this one.. (insert homer simpson drooling sound) the Trijicon ACOG with RMR red dot on top.  I really want this, but at $1,700, it is almost TWICE the Eotech and the equivalent to another AR or two pistols, etc.  You have the battle proven ACOG which is a mid to long range scope, the durability that cannot be rivaled (these optics get run over by HUMVEEs and still maintain zero, actual quote “Decided to go with an ACOG after seeing one that was mounted on an Army M4 get run over by an LMTV (armored scout car) in Afghanistan. After the armorer checked it out, both the ACOG and the M-4 were still operational and on zero“) but you also get the CQ ability of the red dot for 30 – 100 yard engagements.  The transition is seamless as there are no parts to move, simply bring your eye up or down and re-engage the target.

Ok, so I am using my blog to work through my quandary.  WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?

What about training?  Doesn’t it make more sense to spend money on training with ONE weapon than buying a bunch?  Yes/No?  On one hand you will master that weapon but you better hope it lasts!  With limited financial resources – we must choose.

Ah, the life of a prepper.  So much to prep – so little time – so much less money!



Posted on by Suburban Prepper in Firearms 7 Comments