I am about to make a considerable purchase on a rifle but given the political climate in WA I started thinking today it might be better to opt for three or four cheaper rifles with evil features.

I was curious on what people’s thoughts where on the topic of quantity over quality.

Why not get quality quantity?

How different is quality rifle vs quantity rifle these days. Are you looking at moa, how cool it looks, finish, what differences?

What are the requirements and more importantly could you even tell in a realistic setting?

Well, it depends. There are several price points to factor in so it's not a simple answer, but generally I try to go for the maximum quality AND quantity.

Avoid garbage bottom end guns. Avoid expensive add ons that are useless or cosmetic or don't add to the resale value. Buy used higher quality when you can to maximize your $$.

By way of example, let's look at handguns. Let's say your budget is $1000. You'd be best getting two mid range guns (or a mid range gun, mags and ammo) and not 3 lower end or 1 upper tier...

Bottom end, $300 Keltec and Taurus. Probably going to be lower quality and headaches.
Middle range, maximizing $ for quality - SW, Glock, Walther, Springfield, etc. $500-600 all the time.
Upper end, HK, Sig offer $1000 guns. Sweet guns, but don't deliver anything over the middle range.

That's a tough one. What kind of purchase are you looking at?

I don't have any big 'wants' right now* so I've been gathering AR parts for my niece and nephews, five total (I think all I'm missing is 5 barrels and stocks right now, just bought five sets of sights from PSA)

They are ages 2-12 right now and I don't plan on building a rifle with them till they are 18. Who knows what the political climate will be by then (or even if they will want an AR). If it's better then they can pick newer/better parts and laugh at the ancient crap I bought for them now. If it's worse they will be glad I have a complete set of unobtanium set aside.

*I do have stuff that I'm working on. Just bought an M203 receiver and need to form 1 it. Why? Because we can right now. Gathering the stuff to reload chalk rounds has been interesting.

Here's a sauggestion...if you're thinking about AR pattern rifles, start muying matched upper and lower receiver sets. If you must stay on a tight budget, get as many lowers as you can. These are the serialized number parts.

You can get everything else through the mail, but the lower is the crucial part.

We have a little breathing room since the ballot measure decision. But I share concerns long term about bans and restrictions. So it is prudent to spend limited funds on the most likely targets of bans and restrictions, and forego accessories like scopes and grips and slings.

That means serialized parts, 11+ capacity mags, and ammo are top priority. Next is probably uppers, barrels, and trigger control groups. Next are the extra sights, scopes, upgrades to cosmetics, slings, etc.

(i.e. one $500 gun is more useful than 10 $50 slings. 5 $10 AR mags are more useful than 1 $50 sling)

I found that if you buy a complete upper from PSA, and the lower separate I'ts cheaper. Something about some tax on a completed gun. Someone told me if I did this with my AR-10 I would have got it for $600 instead of $700.

That is actually a good idea, that way you're not paying tax on non-serialized parts though an FFL

Don't let the government run your life like that. If you do, they win.

Do what you're going to do, and deal with the BS when it gets here.

It's all about balance. I'd rather have one Colt 6920 than three olympic arms, or a dozen Hesse/vulcan/blackthorne/whatever they call themselves today.
On the other hand, I'd rather have two of those Colts, or a couple BCMs, DDs, than a full priced Larue. Or some good lowers and parts kits to build three or four good quality rifles.

If it's about benchrest shooting then you're going to have to choose between your competition gun and a possible investment.

Firearms and Ammunition Tax on complete firearms... and this includes firearms in a "knock down," state. Meaning all the parts to make a working firearm, even if everything is in pieces.
11% for rifles. So of course manufacturers will add that to their prices, or maybe a little more to make up for their time and having to pay someone to deal with it.

Not really trying to preach to anyone, but here are my thoughts.

Quality is much more important than quantity with few exceptions.

You will never regret having a quality firearm. You MIGHT regret having too much money in it especially if you don't really use it much.

You will almost always regret having a low-quality firearm and you will likely regret having too much money in it at any price.

That's the crux of the situation. What may be a low quality firearm right now could tune into unobtanium at the stroke of a pen.

A distinction should probably be made. Is it about what you want or about what will increase in price?

If there's allegedly no regret to buying a high end firearm, why do we routinely see them for sale - DAILY - at deep discounts and losses? Clearly some people do indeed regret buying that premium gun.

And while not brand bashing, there are some brands out there where people bought premium and regretted it due to less-than-premium-performance (er. Kimber...)

And I get remarkably glee from some of my allegedly "low quality" firearms. I'm guessing by low quality you mean the oodles of $50 stripped Anderson lowers, $400 Glocks, etc.

I understand your point in a normal market - but when there's a looming threat of banning with a pen stroke, and prices soaring overnight, the analysis is different.

I'm North of 200.
I enjoy a cheap Mauser as much as an expensive fn57 or Aug or whatever.
Some high dollar, lots of medium and large dollar.