Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 11/11/2003 7:11:27 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:14:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/11/2003 7:17:10 AM EDT by QuietShootr]
funny.  in the Gunsite class I took last week, the only guns to run perfectly were my Springfield 1911, a couple of custom Colts, and a Taurus revolver.  The Glocks needed periodic relubrication in the cold.

Edited to add...3 1911s ran perfectly?  I'd bet a sawbuck that they were the Kimbers and the Springfield.  My instructor commented at the end of the class that one of my classmates' Wilson CQB was the first Wilson gun he'd ever seen complete a class.  Lots o' custom smiths tighten them up beyond field reliability standards.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:15:57 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:17:01 AM EDT
The only two Glocks that jammed were in .45. I assume that the only 1911's that didn't jam were in 9mm. That is hardly a fair comparison, because it seems obvious to me that the ones in .45ACP were more jam prone.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:18:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:
Bah, I shoot my Glocks all the time here in the artic north, they run fine, they must have been limp wristing!

Or lead reloads...



Everyone shot factory ammo, no Russian shit or reloads.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:18:36 AM EDT
Wouldn't this have been more valid if all guns were 45 caliber and all using the same ammo?  I can't see how you can conduct a "scientific" test without eliminating all variables minus the guns.  Especially when the 1911 was designed around the 45acp.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:18:43 AM EDT
Nice scientific test, NOT.

Were they all using the same ammo?

Were they all in about the same condition?

Silly things like this prove nothing.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:20:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/11/2003 7:21:24 AM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:20:49 AM EDT
I've got a Glock 21, 36 and a Wilson CQB. None of the 3 has ever jammed. So much for anecdotal evedence. I guess that's why the medical proffesion doesn't rely on it.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:21:06 AM EDT
They were probably using 'flying ashtrays' in the .45's.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:25:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:
Keep clinging to the past baby!

Actually I shoot tons of russian shit, never had a problem.

Maybe I should have posted this in the pit, ha ha.


Them darnfangled auto-mobiles! One them scared Bessy on the way to town again today! Get a horse darn ya!



Hey, I'm just telling you what I observed.  Shall we get Pat Rogers over here and ask him about Force Recon's new Glocks?  Oops..shit, they aren't carrying Glocks.  They must have gotten those 1911s cheaper.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:31:03 AM EDT
None of my Glocks has ever jammed on me.  But, my 1911 that was made in 1913 hasn't either...
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:47:31 AM EDT
October 20-24 my Wilson CQB went thru 1471 rounds at Thunder Ranch without the first problem.  







Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:49:34 AM EDT
I'll put my Wilson CQB up against any Glock.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:50:05 AM EDT
This experiment describe my experiences perfectly.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:57:37 AM EDT
"In Before The Beer Slayer makes a Glock Ka-Boom slam!"

Never, ever, EVER have I had ANY issue with my 27, ever.  I cannot say that about ANY gun or rifle that I own, not ONE, except the Glock.  Slam all you want, they are well made, reliable weapons for the purposes they are intended for.  Period.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 7:59:47 AM EDT
The only issue I have ever had with my glock is that it hates to feed and extract WOLF ammo.

My Springfield Champion eats the shit out of the WOLF.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:06:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Camp_Ninja:
"In Before The Beer Slayer makes a Glock Ka-Boom slam!"

Never, ever, EVER have I had ANY issue with my 27, ever.  I cannot say that about ANY gun or rifle that I own, not ONE, except the Glock.  Slam all you want, they are well made, reliable weapons for the purposes they are intended for.  Period.



I've got news for ya...My Makarov in 9x18and my CZ75B cam make the same claim.  Feed em ANYTHING and cost <$400 new.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:11:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:11:33 AM EDT
90% of the jams I see are caused by handloaded ammunition (and 90% percent of the time they happen in "match tuned" 1911s).
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:15:25 AM EDT
I love 1911's. And I have a sneaking suspicion Rob Leatham does too!



My thoughts on Tupperware's GLOCK --> hainsawkill.gif
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:15:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dolomite:
90% of the jams I see are caused by handloaded ammunition (and 90% percent of the time they happen in "match tuned" 1911s).




Count my 1911 as one of the 10% then.  
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:24:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By W-W:

Originally Posted By The_Camp_Ninja:
"In Before The Beer Slayer makes a Glock Ka-Boom slam!"

Never, ever, EVER have I had ANY issue with my 27, ever.  I cannot say that about ANY gun or rifle that I own, not ONE, except the Glock.  Slam all you want, they are well made, reliable weapons for the purposes they are intended for.  Period.



I've got news for ya...My Makarov in 9x18and my CZ75B cam make the same claim.  Feed em ANYTHING and cost <$400 new.



Oh I believe ya, just relating my personal experiences.  I have had great experiences with friend's Makarovs.  No experience of consequence with the CZs.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:45:27 AM EDT
I really don't have a dog in this fight...but

I think that experiment was a crappy comparison.

1911's in 9mm and 40 should never have been included. Although they can be made reliable, its a lot more work than in 45. The 38super is somewhere in between because it at least retains the proper cartidge length and doesn't use jerry-rigged mags.

In addition a lot of people bring high dollar "match" 1911's to classes. God only knows why. But the tight chambers and other specs on these make them a lot more difficult to run for hours and hours at a defensive class.

If a 1911 has a throated barrel (non-match), tuned extracter and good mags, it will
probably digest anything you put through it for an infinite number of rounds.

On the other hand, that is the strength of the Glock. Pull it out of the box (and preferably put in a 3.5lb connector) and you're good to go -- in whatever caliber you choose.

Link Posted: 11/11/2003 8:57:31 AM EDT
I thought this would be something more interesting, like a one-on-one 'duel'.

What really matters is who can achieve the first hit.

Procedure:

Shooters start with pistol pointed down at 45 degree angle (don't start from holster, since if you do, the draw/holster will be too much of the equation) with the pistol in proper carry mode (cocked & locked for the 1911).

Use a PACT or similar timer, and engage IPSC targets (doublt taps to the chest) at 5, 10, and 25 yards. Record the results for different shooters using the Glock .45 and the 1911 .45.

The results that should be recorded:

1) Points.
2) Time. For both shots.
3) Comstock score.

All pistols use the same ammo. Jams will factor into the overall result, but will be put in prospective (if 1911s jam more often but dominate on score, 1911s are the better choice. Who cares if your gun never jams if it is usually slower).
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:00:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:03:45 AM EDT
What sort of 1911 mags were in use? More often than not, 1911 stoppages that I have experienced were mag related. My Kimber choked frequently with the factory magazine, but no problems since I went with Wilsons. But then again, Glock always provided properly functioning mags WITH the gun.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:15:30 AM EDT
I don't run anything but the Wilson 8-rounder.  The two factory mags are relegated to beater/dummy use.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:20:01 AM EDT
Science no!!

I can tweak a 1911 seven ways to Sunday making it only shoot 158 grain FMJ with exactly 5.7 grains of Bulleye - a different bullet profile and it will fail or a different powder charge or brand and it will fail.

Lesson - you can take something as reliable as the day is long and screw it up.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:22:09 AM EDT
Why do I want a gun I have to upgrade as soon as I get it. All this talk about non stock 1911's against a stock Glock. You dont need to upgrade the thing. Just face it guys, Glock is a good gun. KB's happen to both the Glock and 1911's. I have a Kimber SS Target .45 that I love and shoot IDPA with most of the time. But I carry my Glock, It has never failed me like the Kimber has. Now the Kimber has only failed a couple of times, but when MY life or my Family is in danger I want to know it will shoot when I pull the trigger. My Glock will do just that. Screw speed if the gun wont fire, or wont cycle a new rnd into the chamber. Im not anti 1911, I love my Kimber. But the Glock has proven itself to me.

I go to matches all the time and see all sorts of failures with 1911's, I have shot the Glock Match when it came to San Antonio TX and didnt see but 1 failure. They had over 250 enter the match and 1 failure. No KB just a feeding failure. I refuse to say Glock is a piece of sh*t with what I have seen.  
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:33:01 AM EDT
You don't.  Buy a Springfield Loaded or Kimber, and they're GTG right out of the box.  The ONLY thing I did was buy Wilson magazines for mine.

I'm not saying the Glock is a POS.  I am saying that I don't think it's any more reliable than a good 1911...but they're not all good.  If you had 10 different manufacturers making Glocks, you'd see the same sort of variation.  
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:34:58 AM EDT
Glock is the Arnold Schwarzenegger of Pistols.  You can't trust either one.  Neither one can speak English worth a damn.  Both think Diane Feinstein is hot.  And Aimless thinks they're cool.

I'll keep my 1911s, thank you very much.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:41:12 AM EDT
Why buy a pistol that you can't customize to your personal specs rather than take one out of the box as designed by someone else?

I don't think that 25% of the rifles owned by members here are stock - they've added optics, RIS/RAS/WTF for handguards ...
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:56:15 AM EDT
Paul,
I've customized my Glocks to suit my needs. The great thing is most of the parts are drop in, no fitting required.   With the possible exception of match grade barrels, there isn't much you can add/subtract from a Glock to make it less reliable.

However, as someone said earlier it's comparing apples to oranges because there are so many manufacturors of the 1911 and only one Glock.

The first handgun I ever shot was a 1911. All I have now are Glocks. I am looking to add a 1911 to my collection. Personally I think both are great. Anything that doesn't have that long DA trigger pull for the first shot is tops in my book.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 9:57:41 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:00:47 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:03:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/11/2003 10:09:00 AM EDT by A-nus]

Originally Posted By 1911Shootist:
Glock is the Arnold Schwarzenegger of Pistols.  You can't trust either one.  Neither one can speak English worth a damn.  Both think Diane Feinstein is hot.  And Aimless thinks they're cool.

I'll keep my 1911s, thank you very much.






My wife carrys a stock(added an extended slide release and houge grips) colt 1911-a2, at the range we shoot wolf no real problems to speek of. verry reliable.



glocKB's still suck




Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:05:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/11/2003 10:06:59 AM EDT by 1911Shootist]

Originally Posted By Aimless:

Originally Posted By 1911Shootist:
Glock is the Arnold Schwarzenegger of Pistols.  You can't trust either one.  Neither one can speak English worth a damn.  Both think Diane Feinstein is hot.  And Aimless thinks they're cool.

I'll keep my 1911s, thank you very much.


I buy a pistol to carry that will work everytime I pull the trigger as it's a serious business-god forbid I have to shoot someone I want the f-ing to work. You buy guns for mushy emotional reasons.

You have an emotional attachment to 1911s, "speaks english" "likes Diane Feinstein"-it's a chunck of machined metal and some springs- those are no more sensible reason to choose a firearm to defend your life than banning guns because they have bayonet lugs. You sound like a Democrat.




You didn't have to get viscous by accusing me of being a Democrat.  Actually, my post was mostly tongue-in-cheek.

But if you want to be serious for a moment, I'll stack my Wilson Protector or Baer TRS against anything you care to bring to the corral. (And whether your pistol speaks good English or not. )
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:08:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:10:57 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:11:08 AM EDT
My Kimber HAS failed me and my Glock has NOT. I have shot about 5k through each of them. My Glock may not be able to shoot as well as my Kimber in accuracy, but Im sure the groups I get with the Glock will end a persons life just fine if it were used for self defence situation. Plus I can get higher capacity mags for the Glock should I want to. Im not taking 1st place at IDPA matches but I know I can shoot better than most of the NRA member out there so dont give me crap about not needing more rnds if I would just hit the target the first time. Just making a observatin about being able to carry more rnds.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:11:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/11/2003 10:20:43 AM EDT by A-nus]
Stood next to a guy who had one and had a peice of cheep plasic in my neck for about a week. Don't know any of the details cause the guy packed up and rushed away to get his hand pached up.

I won't even shoot next to a guy if he has one.


Also do a search on www.google.com under glock phase 3 malfunction NYCPD has a bunch of stories about that.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:30:56 AM EDT
My Jennings .25 would wup'm both I say.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:33:51 AM EDT
Here are the results, with each gun listed- very telling, if you ask me.  1.) 1911's, customized or not, had way more jams than the Glocks. 2.) Glocks were GTG out of the box, with little or no mods made, while the 1911's needed much more custom work to be fast and even close to reliable- no surprises here.  

--------------------------------------------------

___
1st Place - "H.M."  Glock 17  *709.93 sec.*
(Heinie Sights, 3.5# connector w/ new York Spring)
NO MALFUNTIONS


2nd Place - "J.F."  STI 9mm  *731.53 sec.*
(Polymer Widebody, undercut grips, beveled magwell, trigger job, trigger insert, hard chrome, After extractor, lightened and serrated slide, adjustable rear sights, fiber optic front sight, full lenght guide rod)
1 jam (locked back with round still in mag)
*Shooter said the mags are causing it
**This happened another time, but did not count since it was on the last round of a stage.

3rd Place - "G.L." Glock 17  *755.04 sec.*
(Extended mag release)
NO MALFUNCTIONS


4th Place - "R.P."  SV 9mm  *888.60 sec.*
(Stippled undercut grips, beveled magwell, trigger job, lightened slide, bomar sights, fiber optic front sight, full lenght guide rod)
2 jams (failed to feeds)

5th Place - "A.C." Les Baer- Thunder Ranch Special 45cal  *889.44 sec.*
(S&A mag well, replaced grips)
2 jams (failure to feeds)


6th Place - "D.C."  Glock 34  *960.28 sec.*
(Sights, Gip Tape, JP mag well)
NO MALFUNTIONS


7th Place - "R.C."  Springfield 9mm  *996.07 sec.*
(hogue grips)
NO MALFUNCTIONS


8th Place - "P.B." Glock 17  *1001.42 sec.*
(Steel sights, extended slide release)
NO MALFUNCTIONS


9th Place - "T.B." Colt Lwt Comander 38Super  *1028.22 sec.*
(Bomar sights, magwell, checkered front strap, grips, EWG sear and hammer, trigger, coating-TEFCOAT 2, throating and polishing)
1 jam (fail to extract)


10th Place - "J.M."  Glock 21 45cal.  *1039.26 sec.*
(Stainless steel guide rod, extended slike release)
4 jams (all failing to feed first round from mag when dropping the slide with slide release)


11th Place - "A.C."  Glock 21 45cal.  *1043.63 sec.*
(Titanium guide rod, aluminium seattle slug, heinie sights, extended slide release, precision locking block)
4 jams (3 failing to feed first round from mag when dropping the slide with slide release, one stove pipe while shooting up side down)


12th Place - "M.A."  Colt 45cal.  *1047.61 sec.*
(Mag well)
2 jams (failure to feeds)


13th Place - "R.S."  Glock 19   *1082.38 sec.*
(Guide rod, mag well, titanium firing pin, plunger, 3.5# connector, trigger job, extended slide release and extended mag release)
NO MALFUNTIONS


14th Place - "J.S."  Glock 17   *1092.93 sec.*
(3.5# connector, stainless steel guide rod)
NO MALFUNTIONS


15th  Place - "D.G."  Springfield Armory   *1172.38 sec.*
(S&A magwell, Kart barrel, checkered front strap, customized by Alan Tillman @ A.R.T. Enterprizes)
5 jams (failure to feeds)
*** Staff stopped counting at 5 jams


16th Place - "S.M."   Norinco 45cal.   *NO SCORE* Late arrival
(No comments on modifications, Not stock though)
3 jams (2 Failure to feeds, 1 failure to extract - it needed pliers to extract the empty case)


17th Place - "T.B."   Les Baer 45cal.   *1389.36 sec.*
(Les Baer Priemer II, magwell, arched mainspring)
4 jams (failure to feeds, shooter used table to help force gun free from being locked closed)


18th Place -  "G.W."  Glock 17   *1544.81 sec.*
(Heine Straight 8 night sights, 1/2 trigger job, grip tape)
NO  MALFUNTIONS

1911 Jams - 21
Glock Jams - 8

2 Glocks failed (both Model 21's 45cal)
8 1911's failed (varied)

Oh, just in case anyone missed it, a Glock won the match.

Link Posted: 11/11/2003 10:34:48 AM EDT
"We have already had one Glock Team shooter volunteer to put his gun the safe and not clean it for the next year and come back to shoot the next Glock vs 1911 match. And he said, "We got to give the 1911's a chance, I figure it would only be fair!"
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 11:01:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/11/2003 11:01:50 AM EDT by Silence]
Glock still sux

And anyone that directly or indirectly supports a company like glock sux.

Sarah Brady applauds your support of Glock.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 11:26:12 AM EDT
I have been shooting my Colt 80 series Gold Cup in IPSC for about 15yrs. I shoot a Glock also. Model 19.

A jam on either one is a what the shit just happened circumstance.

The Gold Cup's sites failed, Cheap Colt quality not design, the spring detent tube had to be re-staked at maybe 5000 rnds.  The series 80 parts failed at maybe 10,000 rnds. I used quality magaiznes.

The Glock has maybe 7,000 rnds through it in 4 yrs. Most of them on full auto, failures on it can be linked to not liking 115gr ammo. Heavier ammo runs it well. I had the trigger reset spring break once, I got spares.

On reliability and feeding I would go with the Glock.

For trying to hit anything at distance and quality of trigger pull and accuracy I would go with the Gold Cup.

For Carry it would be Glock in the winter with a jacket and in the car. Never the huge 45, and a KelTec P32 anyother time when clothing or lack thereof is an issue.

Link Posted: 11/11/2003 11:40:39 AM EDT
My Colts function 100% flawlessly using hardball and hollowpoints.

My Colts have the occasional hiccup with my hand loaded semi wad cutters.

Take your Glocks and shove em.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 11:52:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:

True for gun games, I'll pass on a "fast jamomatic" pistol for serious purposes.

Slow and inaccurate doesn't cut it real world either. No one is talking about 'jamomatics', either; a 'jamomatic' isn't going to win in a competition, either, unless alibies are allowed for hardware failures.

The proper way to evaluate a firearm is to make accurate, fast shooting the deciding factor. If a gun's jamming interferes with its performance, it losses, reguardless of its other performance parameters. On the other hand, if it is consistently slower (statistically), just because it is 100% reliable doesn't make it a good choice.


Link Posted: 11/11/2003 11:57:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Aimless:
Not relevant, the military can obtain new 1911s, I'm sure because it's already a gun with a part number and so on, Glock isn't. Why? because Glock doesn't have second strike capability, which the military required for the pistol trials that selected the 92, does anyone teach you to pull the trigger twice on a misfire instead of going to the appropriate clearance drill-nope! So much for the military's view on pistols.



Force Recon is using what it want to use--that which works best! If they wanted Glocks, they could get them. Besides, the "new" 1911s are probably not really M1911's in military service: I'm pretty sure they have a new P/N.
Link Posted: 11/11/2003 12:07:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dissipator556:
"We have already had one Glock Team shooter volunteer to put his gun the safe and not clean it for the next year and come back to shoot the next Glock vs 1911 match. And he said, "We got to give the 1911's a chance, I figure it would only be fair!"



An unusual match if a Glock won. Shooters need to shoot both types of pistol, not just their own pistol, to properly evaluate performance.

The exception is if significant quantity of data is present, to "average out" shooter skill. That doesn't happen with such a small sampling, so you "test" had no value.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top