|
Quoted: Slide release, magazine release, thumb safety on the 1911 aren't Luger ergonomics? Pics of heel release 1911? The thumb safety is absolutely not similar to the Luger, the grip angle certainly is not. The mag release requires salad fingers' thumb to reach, and I also don't agree that the slide release is ergonomically similar. Unless Glocks mimic 1911 ergos too. 
|
|
Quoted: The thumb safety is absolutely not similar to the Luger, the grip angle certainly is not. The mag release requires salad fingers' thumb to reach, and I also don't agree that the slide release is ergonomically similar. Unless Glocks mimic 1911 ergos too. Quoted: Quoted: Slide release, magazine release, thumb safety on the 1911 aren't Luger ergonomics? Pics of heel release 1911? The thumb safety is absolutely not similar to the Luger, the grip angle certainly is not. The mag release requires salad fingers' thumb to reach, and I also don't agree that the slide release is ergonomically similar. Unless Glocks mimic 1911 ergos too. Glock mimics Luger ergos, except the grip safety & thumb safety. 
|
|
Quoted: I'm aware of what the 1911 evolved from, but it's quite a stretch to say that any of what you listed to be "more like" means the 1911 mimics Luger ergos Quoted: Quoted: Yeah, except that they do. The 1911's ancestors looked like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Pistol_US_Colt_M1900_%2810193185426%29_%28cropped%29.jpg After field trials against the Luger, Colt changed the ergonomics by moving the mag release (so it was more like the Luger's), making it lock open on an empty mag (like the Luger), adding a grip safety (like the Luger's), adding a thumb safety (like the Luger's), and making the grip angle steeper (so it was more like the Luger). The final 1911 is heavily derivative of the Luger. I'm aware of what the 1911 evolved from, but it's quite a stretch to say that any of what you listed to be "more like" means the 1911 mimics Luger ergos The Army trialed early Colts and the Luger at the same time and asked Colt to make their ergonomics more like the Luger. That's about as direct as connection as you can get. Quoted: Slide release, magazine release, thumb safety on the 1911 aren't Luger ergonomics? Pics of heel release 1911? This is the .45 Colt design that competed against the .45 Luger in 1907.  Note the heel release. At the Army's request Colt later copied the Luger's button style release. Note that it lacks any thumb safety. At the Army's request Browning later developed a manual safety operable by the thumb of the firing hand; a feature the Army first encountered on the Luger. Ditto for the grip safety. By the time the 1900 was scaled up to .45 Colt had already copied Luger's lock on empty feature. The 1911 didn't spring fully formed from Browning's brow, it was the product of a decade long development cycle and incorporates ergonomics that were pioneered by the Luger and innovations from other engineers. |
|
I dislike the 320 because I built one from an 80% FCU. The Sig 320 was designed by a committee of 50 blind people who were given $1bil and told to spend all of it, broken off into 10 groups and told to each design a separate part or subsystem that looked nothing like anything else used by a modern handgun. Those groups were not allowed to coordinate or communicate. Also, none of them had held a gun before, and none of them were engineers. It is the most needlessly complicated operating system full of dogshit design choices I’ve ever seen. The idea that someone would market a single action, fully tensioned striker fired handgun without any sort of safety except for - essentially - a drop safety (that may or may not actually work) is a staggeringly bizarre choice for the year of our Lord 2025. Sig should discontinue it immediately, admit their mistake, and upgrade everyone to the Fuse. That said, I’m building 1-2 more. For the same reason I buy a bottle of Evan Williams every year - we can prove the existence of free will by doing things we don’t need to do, that we hate. Also, I’m a masochist. |
|
Quoted: The Army trialed early Colts and the Luger at the same time and asked Colt to make their ergonomics more like the Luger. That's about as direct as connection as you can get. This is the .45 Colt design that competed against the .45 Luger in 1907. https://cdn.rockislandauction.com/dev_cdn/74/1637.jpg Note the heel release. At the Army's request Colt later copied the Luger's button style release. Note that it lacks any thumb safety. At the Army's request Browning later developed a manual safety operable by the thumb of the firing hand; a feature the Army first encountered on the Luger. Ditto for the grip safety. By the time the 1900 was scaled up to .45 Colt had already copied Luger's lock on empty feature. The 1911 didn't spring fully formed from Browning's brow, it was the product of a decade long development cycle and incorporates ergonomics that were pioneered by the Luger and innovations from other engineers. This all started because I stated that the Luger is an ergonomic nightmare, to which you replied that the 1911, which is ergonomically pretty good, was designed to mimic it, as though to say that the Luger is ergonomically comparable to the 1911. But it's not, because the thumb safety, while in a sort of similar location, is not as simple to disengage; the grip angle is extremely steep on the Luger; and the mag release is a long reach. So while the parts may be located in similar positions on the gun, they do not interface similarly with the shooter. |
|
Quoted: This all started because I stated that the Luger is an ergonomic nightmare, to which you replied that the 1911, which is ergonomically pretty good, was designed to mimic it, as though to say that the Luger is ergonomically comparable to the 1911. But it's not, because the thumb safety, while in a sort of similar location, is not as simple to disengage; the grip angle is extremely steep on the Luger; and the mag release is a long reach. So while the parts may be located in similar positions on the gun, they do not interface similarly with the shooter. Quoted: Quoted: The Army trialed early Colts and the Luger at the same time and asked Colt to make their ergonomics more like the Luger. That's about as direct as connection as you can get. This is the .45 Colt design that competed against the .45 Luger in 1907. https://cdn.rockislandauction.com/dev_cdn/74/1637.jpg Note the heel release. At the Army's request Colt later copied the Luger's button style release. Note that it lacks any thumb safety. At the Army's request Browning later developed a manual safety operable by the thumb of the firing hand; a feature the Army first encountered on the Luger. Ditto for the grip safety. By the time the 1900 was scaled up to .45 Colt had already copied Luger's lock on empty feature. The 1911 didn't spring fully formed from Browning's brow, it was the product of a decade long development cycle and incorporates ergonomics that were pioneered by the Luger and innovations from other engineers. This all started because I stated that the Luger is an ergonomic nightmare, to which you replied that the 1911, which is ergonomically pretty good, was designed to mimic it, as though to say that the Luger is ergonomically comparable to the 1911. But it's not, because the thumb safety, while in a sort of similar location, is not as simple to disengage; the grip angle is extremely steep on the Luger; and the mag release is a long reach. So while the parts may be located in similar positions on the gun, they do not interface similarly with the shooter. I understand that you like the way Colt implemented Luger's ergos better than the original. That doesn't change the fact that the Colt's ergos are fundamentally copied from Luger's. |
|
Quoted: I understand that you like the way Colt implemented Luger's ergos better than the original. That doesn't change the fact that the Colt's ergos are fundamentally copied from Luger's. Thats like saying the AR copied the AK's ergo's because they both have charging handles, mag releases and safties |
|
Quoted: Thats like saying the AR copied the AK's ergo's because they both have charging handles, mag releases and safties Quoted: Quoted: I understand that you like the way Colt implemented Luger's ergos better than the original. That doesn't change the fact that the Colt's ergos are fundamentally copied from Luger's. Thats like saying the AR copied the AK's ergo's because they both have charging handles, mag releases and safties No. The Army fundamentally wanted an American design - but they most definitely wanted an American design that had the class leading features of the Luger - the grip safety, the thumb safety, and the mag release. Browning (PBUH) did it better than George, but all of those features stem directly from the Luger. |
|
Quoted: Thats like saying the AR copied the AK's ergo's because they both have charging handles, mag releases and safties Quoted: Quoted: I understand that you like the way Colt implemented Luger's ergos better than the original. That doesn't change the fact that the Colt's ergos are fundamentally copied from Luger's. Thats like saying the AR copied the AK's ergo's because they both have charging handles, mag releases and safties If early model ARs lacked charging handles, mag releases, and safeties, while the AK was the only rifle to ever have those things, and then those things were added to the AR after ARs competed against AKs in military trials, I would in fact say that the AR copied the AK's ergos. In real life history, the Luger was the first pistol to arrange the controls in a way without we take for granted now and the 1911's layout is directly and explicitly derivative of it. The Army trialed the 1911's ancestors against the Luger and asked Colt to build a pistol with the Luger's ergonomic features, resulting in the 1911. |
|
Quoted: No. The Army fundamentally wanted an American design - but they most definitely wanted an American design that had the class leading features of the Luger - the grip safety, the thumb safety, and the mag release. Browning (PBUH) did it better than George, but all of those features stem directly from the Luger. My glocks all have mag releases and slide stops, ergo they are hi powers. Which are also 1911's, which are also lugers. Just because these guns have these things on paper, doesn't mean they are the same. An M1 carbine has a fixed charging handle and gas piston, detachable mags, and a safety. Despite that, it is not an AK, nor is it an AR18 Those features did not stem from the luger. The luger was trialed alongside the predecessors of the 1911 until DWM refused to persue the trials simce they didn't want to tool up for .45acp lugers for a few hundred guns, for a contract they weren't guaranteed to win. The luger had little to no bearing on the contracr requirements, which you can clearly see in how extremely different the top 3 contenders were. |
|
Quoted: If early model ARs lacked charging handles, mag releases, and safeties, while the AK was the only rifle to ever have those things, and then those things were added to the AR after ARs competed against AKs in military trials, I would in fact say that the AR copied the AK's ergos. In real life history, the Luger was the first pistol to arrange the controls in a way without we take for granted now and the 1911's layout is directly and explicitly derivative of it. The Army trialed the 1911's ancestors against the Luger and asked Colt to build a pistol with the Luger's ergonomic features, resulting in the 1911. Tell me you've never messed with a luger without telling me |
|
Quoted: My glocks all have mag releases and slide stops, ergo they are hi powers. Which are also 1911's, which are also lugers. Just because these guns have these things on paper, doesn't mean they are the same. An M1 carbine has a fixed charging handle and gas piston, detachable mags, and a safety. Despite that, it is not an AK, nor is it an AR18 Those features did not stem from the luger. The luger was trialed alongside the predecessors of the 1911 until DWM refused to persue the trials simce they didn't want to tool up for .45acp lugers for a few hundred guns, for a contract they weren't guaranteed to win. The luger had little to no bearing on the contracr requirements, which you can clearly see in how extremely different the top 3 contenders were. The Luger was the first pistol to have a push button mag release at the base of the trigger guard. That feature absolutely stems from the Luger, on the 1911 and every other pistol that uses a push button mag release at the base of the trigger guard, just as the concept of a slide stems from Browning's designs. This is basic historical fact. Similarly, it is basic historical fact that the Army compared the Luger to Colts that had no thumb safety and no grip safety, then told Colt 'we like the way your pistol works, but can you make it's ergos more like the Luger?' To deny these simple, incontrovertible historical facts is just a bizarre display of ignorance. |
|
Quoted: The Luger was the first pistol to have a push button mag release at the base of the trigger guard. That feature absolutely stems from the Luger, on the 1911 and every other pistol that uses a push button mag release at the base of the trigger guard, just as the concept of a slide stems from Browning's designs. This is basic historical fact. Similarly, it is basic historical fact that the Army compared the Luger to Colts that had no thumb safety and no grip safety, then told Colt 'we like the way your pistol works, but can you make it's ergos more like the Luger?' To deny these simple, incontrovertible historical facts is just a bizarre display of ignorance. Just because a feature may stem from one design, doesn't mean the follong design is a copy of the previous. There's a million ways you can poke holes in that argument, it's almost as if you discovered the concept of a logical fallacy and said "hold my beer!" The army did not tell Colt to make their pistol like the luger. They pointed out issues with the 1905/1907 and 1909 and colt corrected them. How did they point out these issues? By saying "the Calvary doesn't like that you need both hands to remove the magazine", not "hey we want the luger". |
|
Quoted: Just because a feature may stem from one design, doesn't mean the follong design is a copy of the previous. There's a million ways you can poke holes in that argument, it's almost as if you discovered the concept of a logical fallacy and said "hold my beer!" The army did not tell Colt to make their pistol like the luger. They pointed out issues with the 1905/1907 and 1909 and colt corrected them. How did they point out these issues? By saying "the Calvary doesn't like that you need both hands to remove the magazine", not "hey we want the luger". Lol. 'Sure, the Army tested a pistol with a thumb safety, grip safety, and mag release at the base of the trigger guard, and sure, the Army then asked Colt to make their pistol work more like the Luger, but that doesn’t mean those features were copied!' I guess it's a total coincidence that Colt decided to move the mag release to the same place as the Luger's in the 1909 model. |
|
Quoted: Lol. 'Sure, the Army tested a pistol with a thumb safety, grip safety, and mag release at the base of the trigger guard, and sure, the Army then asked Colt to make their pistol work more like the Luger, but that doesn’t mean those features were copied!' I guess it's a total coincidence that Colt decided to move the mag release to the same place as the Luger's in the 1909 model. How else are you going to make a pistol reloadable one handed? You do understand the luger was a simplified copy of the C93 correct? I'm not going to enter into a debate with people who don't even understand the basics of how trials work, or the basics of the firearms discussed. They didn't say "make it work more like the luger" |
|
Whether the reputation for uncommanded discharges in the P320 is deserved or not, there are plenty of other pistols available that do NOT have the issue reported for the P320. So I don't need to get into whether or not the reputation is deserved, I'll simply spend my money elsewhere on a pistol that doesn't have that reported issue. If someone gave me a P320, I would seek to get rid of it as quickly as possible and wouldn't even load it. |
|
I carried quite a few M9s and was an instructor on the M17. I’ve tried the 226 and the G17. I never could get comfortable with either one of those platforms. I’ve had a 92FS since 2000. It has never failed me and is one of the most comfortable guns I own. I also have a 320. It doesn’t have near the round count my 92 has but is climbing. However if I really want to have fun I’m grabbing one of my 1911s. It’s what I shoot the best and have the most familiarity with since I tend to favor it more. |
|
Quoted: How else are you going to make a pistol reloadable one handed? Quoted: How else are you going to make a pistol reloadable one handed? An HK style lever at the base of the trigger guard? A mag that auto-ejects when empty? A mag release in the front strap operated by the pinkie, a la Savage 1907? A mag release in the front strap operated by the middle finger? A Borchardt style mag release at the top of the trigger guard? A mag release above and behind the grip, where the safety ended up? Most designs (including the 1911) have copied the Luger's mag release position, but there are plenty of different ways it can be done, some of which are still in production. Quoted: You do understand the luger was a simplified copy of the C93 correct? I don't understand what you think that has to do with the discussion we're having regarding the ergonomic innovations of the Luger that were copied by the 1911. Do you think the Luger's ergos were based on the Borchardt? Quoted: I'm not going to enter into a debate with people who don't even understand the basics of how trials work, or the basics of the firearms discussed. Lol. Quoted: They didn't say "make it work more like the luger" No, they said 'we want these features (which we saw on the Luger)'. And when you ask someone to copy features from a different design..... |