Most expensive CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.
The point I have tried to make is that some who buy the most expensive guns seem to think that somehow that - in itself - will insure they'll come out on top if they get involved in a confrontation.
As I stated before, I have carried some nice guns (even though I don't have much money) just because guns are a big part of my life. On the flip side, I have met people through the shooting sports who are now friends of mine. Some of them have thousands of dollars of disposable income every month. They drive BMWs, take expensive training classes, go on very expensive vacations, and pack pistols that cost more than I make in a month. None of them have ever indicated to me that they thought the quality of their carry gun would give them an edge in a gunfight. They just like nice stuff and they can afford it.

Frankly, I reject your entire notion because I think the "some" you are referring to is such a small minority as to be insignificant.
 
What about those that think a low priced tool, in and of itself will make them invulnerable? And smarter, because they didn't waste their money on a better weapon. If they won't practice, a cheap gun won't make them a better shot no matter how smart they feel.
Yep, Blaming the tool for the shortcomings of the owner seams pretty leftist?
 
I carry a (relatively) cheap gun that I made expensive- Glock with the slide milled to mount a Trijicon RMR with back-up suppressor night sights- probably $1200 in it all together. For me, the enhanced capability it provides me was worth the added cost.
 
I have carried my Ed Brown EE, on rare occasions, and sometimes my Dan Wesson CBOB. Most of the time it's a G27,but variety is the spice of life.
 
The other day Old Fluff kinda ridiculed me for saying that one of the most expensive guns I have carried was a Colt Officers Enhanced. I haven't carried it much for the last couple years and probably have my LCP in a shirt pocket more often than not or my SP 101. 45 years ago I carried a Ruger Blackhawk 357 daily or had it under the seat. My most expensive revolver isn't concealable. I guess when I get over 21,000 posts I'll get to lecture the rest of you too.:D
 
Dicky...

I had no intention of ridiculing you or you're choice in pistols. The point I was making, which is supported by many reports of shooting confrontations as well as conversations I’ve had with some who have “been there and done that,” is that it is a person’s mindset, training, practice and skill that carries the day, and that in itself simply having an expensive customized handgun won’t be what makes the difference between going down or coming up on top.

On the other hand, mostly depending on where you live or where the incident happened, a custom “killing machine” (their term, not mine) can turn a good outcome into a nightmare. More then one experienced observer has suggested that it’s a good idea to carry what the local law enforcement departments do in the way of handguns and ammunition. In Arizona this is generally meaningless, although I know of one case where it wasn’t. In New York I would pay close attention to it.

If your Colt makes you feel better by all means carry it after you have reviewed the legal environment you are in. But don’t think that simply packing an expensive weapon necessarily makes you more formidable.
 
When you have 21,000 posts, you have packed gun in front of a computer way more than anyone else on the THR, too!

Generally when sitting in front of a computer I don't bother to pack anything, but considering the response to my views on this thread maybe I should reconsider. :uhoh: :D
 
On the other hand, mostly depending on where you live or where the incident happened, a custom “killing machine” (their term, not mine) can turn a good outcome into a nightmare.
I believe Massad Ayoob has written about this before, and that whole issue has been mostly debunked. Now, if you live in California, Chicago, NYC, NJ, chances are you're not allowed to legally carry anyway, and one suspects that would be the political climate in which one might have second thoughts about what one is packing ...

More then one experienced observer has suggested that it’s a good idea to carry what the local law enforcement departments do in the way of handguns and ammunition.
Those dang Glock 22s are not the most concealable handguns around, and can anyone find those big boxes of Gold Dot JHPs anywhere? Really, this has pretty much been turned into a non-issue as well. Not to mention that the reality is most folks that do carry regularly are probably packing the least expensive, smallest handguns they can find (lots and lots of little .380s, etc.)

Generally when sitting in front of a computer I don't bother to pack anything, but considering the response to my views on this thread maybe I should reconsider
Old Fuff, I generally respect your opinions, but I think some may be suggesting that you came across as a bit patronizing a time or two.

I don't think anyone in this thread argued that an expensive piece makes one more likely to overcome in a lethal force situation, rather, that many of us prefer (1) quality and reliability and (2) to carry what we shoot the best ... which is for some of us, the best we can afford ... and some of us can afford the best.
 
Rossi .38 special 5 shot is the most expensive I have. Bought it for $250 some 12 years ago, I guess it is worth $300 + today. Can't conceal, no permit but have kept it in the glove box and center console.
 
Dicky...

I had no intention of ridiculing you or you're choice in pistols. The point I was making, which is supported by many reports of shooting confrontations as well as conversations I’ve had with some who have “been there and done that,” is that it is a person’s mindset, training, practice and skill that carries the day, and that in itself simply having an expensive customized handgun won’t be what makes the difference between going down or coming up on top.

On the other hand, mostly depending on where you live or where the incident happened, a custom “killing machine” (their term, not mine) can turn a good outcome into a nightmare. More then one experienced observer has suggested that it’s a good idea to carry what the local law enforcement departments do in the way of handguns and ammunition. In Arizona this is generally meaningless, although I know of one case where it wasn’t. In New York I would pay close attention to it.

If your Colt makes you feel better by all means carry it after you have reviewed the legal environment you are in. But don’t think that simply packing an expensive weapon necessarily makes you more formidable.
I understand your point, and agree somewhat. Living in California, even in a conservative area, adds political dynamics to decision making. Every handgun I carry in public is configured as it was when it left the factory. My CCW Glocks have all the original parts, polished only by normal wear from practicing with them. So does my Baer SRP.

All of my CCW guns are tried-and-true, combat-accurate or better, and get substantial range time. All are sufficient for protecting me and my loved ones in close encounters, but if I needed to take a long shot at church to end a threat to my pastor - I'd sure prefer the 1.5"-at-50 yds SRP to my G26.....
 
To answer the OP's original question I carry:

Wilson Tactical Supergrade Professional - $5800
SIG Sauer P229 - $900
SIG RCS - $900
Dan Wesson VBOB - $1600

I carry the SIG RCS daily in a brief case. The P229 goes in my truck. The VBOB or the Wilson get carried in a holster and get traded out as I feel like carrying them. The only pistol that's been changed from the factory configuration (other than grips) is the VBOB. I had the sights replaced because I cannot easily see the Heine Straight 8 sight and find it difficult to use.
 
Last edited:
For a bottom line here,

I've owned my 70's vintage Charter Arms .44 spl. Bulldog for long enough to know that if I get the drop on you in a "serious" situation, your $ 4,000.00 Nighthawk becomes nothing more than "evidence".

Not to say you are wrong, just keep in mind while you look for every possible advantage, it guarantees absolutely nothing. In the right circumstances an RG will do it.

P.S. If you are at the trap or skeet range with your fairly high $ over-under, and a country boy with a wired together stock "junk" shotgun wants to shoot with you for money, beware, he might go home in your car.
 
Last edited:
P.S. If you are at the trap or skeet range with your fairly high $ over-under, and a country boy with a wired together stock "junk" shotgun wants to shoot with you for money, beware, he might go home in your car.

Uh..huh..and the country boy may want to be careful of the gentleman with the English accent and the $15,000 shotgun because he might be George Digweed.

You know, you can makeup fake situations anyway you want to in an attempt to "prove" a point...
 
your $ 4,000.00 Nighthawk becomes nothing more than "evidence".

Not to say you are wrong, just keep in mind while you look for every possible advantage, it guarantees absolutely nothing. In the right circumstances an RG will do it.

Since I appear to be the only one who posted about a Nighthawk I have to assume this was aimed at me? Perhaps you missed my other post in this thread??? Or is this more of a class warfare thing?

I'm under no disillusion that my 3.5k guns are intrinsically different than my 500 dollar guns. I feel just as safe with any reliable gun on me, period.
 
For a bottom line here,

I've owned my 70's vintage Charter Arms .44 spl. Bulldog for long enough to know that if I get the drop on you in a "serious" situation, your $ 4,000.00 Nighthawk becomes nothing more than "evidence".
So what? Turn your scenario around. Suppose I get the "drop" on you with my $4000 Nighthawk (or whatever) while you're trying to rob me with your old Bulldog. My gun still ends up as evidence. Could the outcome have been the same if I'd been carrying a $500 Glock? Sure, but I like the Nighthawk, I can afford the Nighthawk, and, even knowing that there's a chance that I'd lose it if I was ever involved in a "serious" situation, I chose to carry the Nighthawk.

It's clear from the posts in this thread that everyone is well aware of what may happen if they ever have to use their gun to defend themselves. If you choose to carry a $200 handgun for fear of losing it that's okay, it's your decision, I don't care. If I choose to carry a gun that costs thousands without concern for whether or not I lose it to evidence, you shouldn't let it bother you, it's my decision and it will not affect you in any way.
 
For a bottom line here,

I've owned my 70's vintage Charter Arms .44 spl. Bulldog for long enough to know that if I get the drop on you in a "serious" situation, your $ 4,000.00 Nighthawk becomes nothing more than "evidence".

No - that's merely your bottom line. My bottom line is before you even pulled your "70's vintage Charter Arms .44 spl. Bulldog" - I'd have you lined up in the sights of my Dillon M134 mini-gun.

Once again, Internet hyperbole can be whatever you want it to be...and proves NOTHING.
 
Certainly not directed at you or anyone personally. The fact is I think we are at least moderately in agreement that expensive equipment isn't a deciding factor. It indeed may help, but not deciding.
 
Back to the original question: "What's the most expensive CCW gun you've carried, or have seen carried? I've always heard not to carry expensive guns. Carrying is rough on them, and if you ever are forced to use it, you might not get it back."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top