New everday-carry pistol: don't laugh!

[Uni-Vibe]

I've been carrying a compact 1911 since getting licensed.

Bought a Ruger 9e. Got it new in the box from a guy. Paid $300 cash and got the gun plus 3 mags. I bought it because I'd never had a poly framed, double stack, striker fired gun. I figured if I didn't like it, I could get my money out of it or trade it off. But I took it to the range and --

Yeah! Points not unlike a 1911. Feels good in the hand. Easy to operate and shoot. Carries 17+1. I don't have to baby it like my pretty 1911s; if it gets dinged or gets a spot of rust, who cares? It fed & fired all kinds of ammo, cast lead reloads, various bigmouth hollowpoints.

Never thought I'd pack a $300 or so gun, but why not, if it works!

[Ron3]

Nothing to laugh about. If the gun works well and you shoot it well carry it.

A used Glock is worth $300-350 so don't feel weird carrying a $300 gun. Not sure what it's value has to do with anything, really. It works, you like it, go with it.

[Gary1911A1]

I have held one in my hand and it felt good to my 1911 trained hand. Maybe I should give it a try the next time someone has them on special. I agree with Ron3. As long as it's reliable, durable and I can shoot it well I'm happy with it.

[ramairthree]

Yeah. Cost is not an issue.

Your $3000 race gun that gets finicky with a grain of sand and some belly button lint that you go to the safety area and clean between stages or similarly costing shoot the balls of a knot bullseye gun you have a minute per shot to play with may not be ideal carry guns.

Your 200$ Star BM that has fed mag after mag of HSTs without a hiccup when dusty, wet, sandy, dry, even with coated with debris from the year it spent under the seat of your Bronco may well be.

[tacticaldesire]

Most people would be better off with $300 handguns and more training. Nothing wrong with your purchase.

[medicman816]

Most people would be better off with $300 handguns and more training. Nothing wrong with your purchase.

Couldn't agree more. Spend $$$ on training and ammunition; then fix what doesn't work, when it doesn't work. The older I get the more brand agnostic I become. Just give me something that works.

[Mrgunsngear]

Most important thing in a carry gun is that you’ll actually carry it ALL THE TIME. Second is reliability and 3rd how well you shoot it. If this gun checks the blocks for you then rock (carry) on!

[Pilot1]

Couldn't agree more. Spend $$$ on training and ammunition; then fix what doesn't work, when it doesn't work. The older I get the more brand agnostic I become. Just give me something that works.

I often carry a Bulgarian Makarov which cost me $100 a several years ago, a Polish P-83 which cost me $200 a few years ago, and a CZ PCR which cost me $300 several years ago. I have many pistols that cost many times more than that. Those are the ones I carry the most. None of them have ever failed.

[BuzzinSATX]

Nothing wrong with that choice as long as it works for you.

I never personally understood why some guys carry a really expensive firearm for EDC. If you get into a shooting with that $3500 WC 1911, it’s going into a locker for a long time. I have nothing against loving and carrying 1911’s, but maybe carry a $700 Ruger or SA and keep the Wilson for the range...

Of course, if it’s your money, do as you want. Just my overly simple POV.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Uni-Vibe]

That's what I think. The Kimber Ultra Carry 9mm that the Ruger replaced is a thing of beauty. I grew up shooting 1911s so when I got licensed it seemed to make sense to get a smaller, lighter 1911. But now the cheapo Ruger has replaced it (17>8). You could buy about four of the 9e for what one Ultra Carry would cost.

[MountainRaven]

Nothing wrong with that choice as long as it works for you.

I never personally understood why some guys carry a really expensive firearm for EDC. If you get into a shooting with that $3500 WC 1911, it’s going into a locker for a long time. I have nothing against loving and carrying 1911’s, but maybe carry a $700 Ruger or SA and keep the Wilson for the range...

Of course, if it’s your money, do as you want. Just my overly simple POV.

Considering the potential costs associated with legal fees when involved in a 'good' shoot, $3500 is a drop in the bucket. And, again, assuming the shoot was good, you won't be without the pistol forever.

And most people who own $3500 1911s don't have just one pistol, so it's not like they're going to have to rush down to their LGS after their pistol is put in evidence to buy a new one. And even if they did, they wouldn't have to buy the exact same pistol. A place-holding 1911 doesn't need to be that expensive, so long as it's a 5-inch 45 from a reputable manufacturer, it should be OK.

And if your $3500 1911 get damaged from storage or mishandling by the government, you can either look at it as adding character to the pistol that you used to save your life/your family's lives/your friend's life/&c. and/or you can probably send it back to the manufacturer for a tune up (and given the warranties companies like Nighthawk and Wilson have on their pistols, combined with the known provenance than the pistol was used in a good shoot, they'd probably be happy to make it good-as-new).

So I think worrying about what might happen to your $3500 pistol in the aftermath of a shooting is putting the cart before the horse.

[BuzzinSATX]

Considering the potential costs associated with legal fees when involved in a 'good' shoot, $3500 is a drop in the bucket. And, again, assuming the shoot was good, you won't be without the pistol forever.

And most people who own $3500 1911s don't have just one pistol, so it's not like they're going to have to rush down to their LGS after their pistol is put in evidence to buy a new one. And even if they did, they wouldn't have to buy the exact same pistol. A place-holding 1911 doesn't need to be that expensive, so long as it's a 5-inch 45 from a reputable manufacturer, it should be OK.

And if your $3500 1911 get damaged from storage or mishandling by the government, you can either look at it as adding character to the pistol that you used to save your life/your family's lives/your friend's life/&c. and/or you can probably send it back to the manufacturer for a tune up (and given the warranties companies like Nighthawk and Wilson have on their pistols, combined with the known provenance than the pistol was used in a good shoot, they'd probably be happy to make it good-as-new).

So I think worrying about what might happen to your $3500 pistol in the aftermath of a shooting is putting the cart before the horse.

No argument from me on your points above....like I said, your money, your choice. Whatever floats your boat and gets the job done ✅

[MStarmer]

I think the Rugers are solid choices, there are far worse out there to be sure. One of my friends pulled an old P-85 that had been loaded in his safe for a decade or so and it ran flawless, even dry. For example I like my LCR far more than my 340PD that cost 3X as much.

As far as my gun going into evidence, like said that's the least of my worries at that point. First I will happy to have survived, and if it's ever returned (in whatever condition) it's going in a display case on my wall, it's earned it's retirement.

[alcante262]

I shot one of those and liked it myself.Have you tried some shooting for groups.Someone had said it shoots tighter groups with 147 gr type bullets.

[Uni-Vibe]

I shot one of those and liked it myself.Have you tried some shooting for groups.Someone had said it shoots tighter groups with 147 gr type bullets.

I got some Federal 147 grain FMJ and will try those at the next range trip. But with a mixed bag of 115 stuff, it shot as well as any street-survival pistol needs to.

[Dienekes]

I like nice guns, but mine range from a full coverage Master engraved 1911 to a used beater Ruger Standard .22 auto that looks like crap. The former looks gorgeous while the latter is the best plinker I've ever owned. My work gun for years was a Ruger Security Six that was on its second barrel before I retired.

About a week ago I snapped up a Ruger EC9s 9mm compact, $212 OTD. Don't have that many rounds through it yet, but in two outings I have been impressed. It's small, thin, has a great trigger, and is 100% so far. Price wise I practically stole it, and figured that if I didn't like it I could keep it around as a spare/loaner or move it easily. In my prime, my work from the leather was never very fast, and nowadays I rely on treachery and "starting" from a sneaky low ready if I can. This little gun shoots pretty well out at 20 yards, but up close, boy, does it shine. The cast-in fixed sights are pretty well on, and the trigger feels a lot like a decent DA revolver's. It is QUICK; my times were good and in my last run 8 out of 8 were in 2". And it was easy!

If it stays 100% reliable, it may not only retire my J frame 442, but be the one on me unless I leave the house to go out and about. In which case I have duty-sized stuff.

If this keeps up this thing could be a Glock 43 and Shield 9 killer, at half the price.

We'll see.

[S. Kelly]

I just wish Ruger would make the SR series without a safety. It'd be the perfect range gun/beater/CCW gun.

[Pandaz3]

I have the LC9s Pro, no external safety, on those rare times I carry a Nine, this is the one.