Link

Since I've been carrying a handgun, I've know that the hard part to hide is the grip frame. I've thought of the idea of a full length slide (which I prefer) mated to an Officers frame. I never mentioned it to anybody, since nobody else seems to think the same way, but it seems that at least one person does.

Features Historically Pioneered by Detonics:    * Functional reliability in a 1911-style pistol which was smaller than any ever manufactured before;    * Cone-shaped barrel which required no bushing;    * Recoil system with counter-recoiling multiple springs;    * Recoil spring guide rod with buffer;    * Springs easily removable for disassembly because they are not loaded under tension;  WTF does that mean?    * Ejection port lowered and scalloped for more positive ejection and to spare damage to brass;      * First stainless steel semi-automatic pistol to overcome the metallurgical problem known as galling;    * First semi-automatic to use a 3-Dot Sighting System    * Loaded magazine indicator    * Repositioned (forward) rear sight and sloped rear of slide in order to facilitate thumb cocking when the pistol is carried hammer down;  Why would you cary hammer down?    * Heavier firing pin spring than conventional 1911-style pistols introduced as a safety feature against the pistol being dropped on a hard surface, thus helping guard against accidental discharge;    * Feed ramp polished to mirror finish and chamber orifice rounded in order to enhance feeding;    * Rugged internal extractor.

Pioneered my ass.

$1200 for a Detonics?  

Looks like a hammer

pistol is carried hammer down

?!??

Quoted: Features Historically Pioneered by Detonics:    * Functional reliability in a 1911-style pistol which was smaller than any ever manufactured before;    * Cone-shaped barrel which required no bushing;    * Recoil system with counter-recoiling multiple springs;    * Recoil spring guide rod with buffer;    * Springs easily removable for disassembly because they are not loaded under tension;  WTF does that mean?    * Ejection port lowered and scalloped for more positive ejection and to spare damage to brass;      * First stainless steel semi-automatic pistol to overcome the metallurgical problem known as galling;    * First semi-automatic to use a 3-Dot Sighting System    * Loaded magazine indicator    * Repositioned (forward) rear sight and sloped rear of slide in order to facilitate thumb cocking when the pistol is carried hammer down;  Why would you cary hammer down?    * Heavier firing pin spring than conventional 1911-style pistols introduced as a safety feature against the pistol being dropped on a hard surface, thus helping guard against accidental discharge;    * Feed ramp polished to mirror finish and chamber orifice rounded in order to enhance feeding;    * Rugged internal extractor. Pioneered my ass.

Uhm, actually, yes, pioneered.

You...don't know about or haven't heard, or at least don't remember the original Detonics from the 70's, do you...

Things like cone bull barrels and no bushings...yah, pretty much came from Detonics.

Officer/Kimber Ultra-sized 1911's didn't exist, until Detonics made them, and made them work. The captive recoil spring design mostly used by shorty 1911s...pioneered by Detonics. People had been trying to cut down 1911s into belly / pocket guns for years...none of 'em succeeded on a mass scale, until Detonics. Even then, custom one-offs weren't always reliable, either.

They went out of business...and now they're back, with a vengance.

Remember, it wasn't until fairly recently that the "Carry in Condition 1" thing really took hold. Fairly recently being defined as within the last 20 years. Most people carried hammer-down. Either by Army training (how many .mil folks who were issued 1911's were instructed to carry with either an empty chamber, or loaded but with hammer down?), or because they thought it was "safer"...

I am pretty sure they did not pioneer the internal extractor.

I have never heard of a "loaded magazine indicator"... other than weight or visual inspection.

Actually, it's pretty retarded. who hasn't while cleaning their 1911s had the glorious idea to rack the officer slide on the full sizre frame rails and vice versa?

There IS a reason why the Colt commander was made and is still popular... because it fills a niche.

I do carry a 4" 1911 on a compact frame and I can tell you that while it is balanced, it is as good as it is going to get (4.25" is pushing it, and anything more... 5" for example, makes the weapon completely off balance). So, what does this 5" brainchild yield?

Pros:

- longer sight radius (less necessary for CCW and comes at the cost of quicker sight acquisition)

- most reliable topside by design

- Concealable grip


Cons:

- Uglier than a S&W auto (almost as ugly as a Glock)

- Unbalanced weapon

- Harder to grasp for quick draw (this is what made me understand the Commander's value)

- Loss of capacity

- Harder to carry comfortably especially while sitting down



At the end of the day, you have three choices: 5" 1911 with/without bobtail abomination, Commander or smaller CCW, or that thing. Depending on your role, use, comfort, and shooting habits, either a full size or a compact will be far more advantageous. that's an awkward, inefficient solution to a problem that was solved long beforehand.

Quoted: Link Since I've been carrying a handgun, I've know that the hard part to hide is the grip frame. I've thought of the idea of a full length slide (which I prefer) mated to an Officers frame. I never mentioned it to anybody, since nobody else seems to think the same way, but it seems that at least one person does.

I read about a similar concept 8 or 10 years ago. That was back when I still read gun rags.

I am surprised it isn't more popular.

Quoted: Actually, it's pretty retarded. who hasn't while cleaning their 1911s had the glorious idea to rack the officer slide on the full sizre frame rails and vice versa? There IS a reason why the Colt commander was made and is still popular... because it fills a niche. I do carry a 4" 1911 on a compact frame and I can tell you that while it is balanced, it is as good as it is going to get (4.25" is pushing it, and anything more... 5" for example, makes the weapon completely off balance). So, what does this 5" brainchild yield? Pros: - longer sight radius (less necessary for CCW and comes at the cost of quicker sight acquisition) - most reliable topside by design - Concealable grip Cons: - Uglier than a S&W auto (almost as ugly as a Glock) - Unbalanced weapon - Harder to grasp for quick draw (this is what made me understand the Commander's value) - Loss of capacity - Harder to carry comfortably especially while sitting down At the end of the day, you have three choices: 5" 1911 with/without bobtail abomination, Commander or smaller CCW, or that thing. Depending on your role, use, comfort, and shooting habits, either a full size or a compact will be far more advantageous. that's an awkward, inefficient solution to a problem that was solved long beforehand.

My preference is the 5 inch slide in my 1911s. I don't desire anything else. I understand the argument for reduced mag capacity, which IS an issue, but the rest are a moot point, oparticularly for one such as I who has traditionally carried the full sized. My only thought is that concealability is increased, while still maintaining many of the features that I prefer.

Quoted: My preference is the 5 inch slide in my 1911s. I don't desire anything else. I understand the argument for reduced mag capacity, which IS an issue, but the rest are a moot point, oparticularly for one such as I who has traditionally carried the full sized. My only thought is that concealability is increased, while still maintaining many of the features that I prefer.

Maybe you should read the outline again.

If you are used to training on full size 1911s, good luck practice-drawing on a compact grip, which becomes a much more significant setback when have to clear the full 5" barrel. Were it this easy, I assure you the Commander would have been made a "CCO" eons ago, and the Commander as we know it probably wouldn't have existed. Moreover, the balance issue doesn't exactly strike me as moot either.

It seems clear that you want a 5" 1911 with better concealable characteristics which boils down to one of thos "hack jobs" we call the bobtail. Given, balance, capacity, ease of draw on a full-frame bobtail, I can't think of a sane reason why in the world someone would choose a compact frame/5" barrel instead.

Quoted: Quoted: My preference is the 5 inch slide in my 1911s. I don't desire anything else. I understand the argument for reduced mag capacity, which IS an issue, but the rest are a moot point, oparticularly for one such as I who has traditionally carried the full sized. My only thought is that concealability is increased, while still maintaining many of the features that I prefer. Maybe you should read the outline again. If you are used to training on full size 1911s, good luck practice-drawing on a compact grip, which becomes a much more significant setback when have to clear the full 5" barrel. Were it this easy, I assure you the Commander would have been made a "CCO" eons ago, and the Commander as we know it probably wouldn't have existed. Moreover, the balance issue doesn't exactly strike me as moot either. It seems clear that you want a 5" 1911 with better concealable characteristics which boils down to one of thos "hack jobs" we call the bobtail. Given, balance, capacity, ease of draw on a full-frame bobtail, I can't think of a sane reason why in the world someone would choose a compact frame/5" barrel instead.

While interesting to look at, I consider the bobtail to be nothing but a 1911 minus its anus (I believe you coined this phrase). While I know next to nothing about Officer-size guns, this merely interests me. I'd like to at least give one a try, but the $1K price tag precludes me from doing so any time soon.

Quoted: It seems clear that you want a 5" 1911 with better concealable characteristics which boils down to one of thos "hack jobs" we call the bobtail. Given, balance, capacity, ease of draw on a full-frame bobtail, I can't think of a sane reason why in the world someone would choose a compact frame/5" barrel instead.

I wouldn't call a bobtail a hackjob. Functionally, it does not detract or change anything with the way the slide works. It DOES change the spring for the mainspring housing though...but, if the spring weight is comparable for the length, to a normal 1911's MSH spring weight..the difference should be negated. Some decent engineering should see to that.

Since the main functioning spring of the 1911 IS the mainspring (NOT the recoil spring; get that point out of everyone's head and a lot of 1911 work would make a lot more sense), shortening that might have a bad cascading effect.

HOWEVER, given a good spring of the proper weight and if the engineering were worked out properly (as it seems to be with the latest iteration of bobtail 1911s)...I see no problem with carrying or using one.

Actually, one is on my list of things to procure

Quoted: Features Historically Pioneered by Detonics:    * Functional reliability in a 1911-style pistol which was smaller than any ever manufactured before;    * Cone-shaped barrel which required no bushing;    * Recoil system with counter-recoiling multiple springs;    * Recoil spring guide rod with buffer;    * Springs easily removable for disassembly because they are not loaded under tension;  WTF does that mean?    * Ejection port lowered and scalloped for more positive ejection and to spare damage to brass;      * First stainless steel semi-automatic pistol to overcome the metallurgical problem known as galling;    * First semi-automatic to use a 3-Dot Sighting System    * Loaded magazine indicator    * Repositioned (forward) rear sight and sloped rear of slide in order to facilitate thumb cocking when the pistol is carried hammer down;  Why would you cary hammer down?    * Heavier firing pin spring than conventional 1911-style pistols introduced as a safety feature against the pistol being dropped on a hard surface, thus helping guard against accidental discharge;    * Feed ramp polished to mirror finish and chamber orifice rounded in order to enhance feeding;    * Rugged internal extractor. Pioneered my ass.

Seriously, Detonics was THE pioneer of the truly short 1911.  Funny thing is the whole project started as a lark, just an "idea" from a guy who loved to shoot.

Read about it here:

The History of the Detonics Pistols

Quoted: Link Since I've been carrying a handgun, I've know that the hard part to hide is the grip frame. I've thought of the idea of a full length slide (which I prefer) mated to an Officers frame. I never mentioned it to anybody, since nobody else seems to think the same way, but it seems that at least one person does.

I guess you never heard of the Colt CCO?

Quoted: So, apparently I'm not the only one to think this is a good idea.

Apparently.

(It does look a little odd but what the hell, it's your money.)

Quoted: Quoted: Link Since I've been carrying a handgun, I've know that the hard part to hide is the grip frame. I've thought of the idea of a full length slide (which I prefer) mated to an Officers frame. I never mentioned it to anybody, since nobody else seems to think the same way, but it seems that at least one person does. I guess you never heard of the Colt CCO?

I guess you've never looked at one?




Edit: to clarify and not sound like such an ass, here's pics to illustrate:

Colt CCO


Detonics Streetmaster



Something look different to you?

Ahh hell, I swore you said Commander slide. You'll have to pardon me, the anesthasia hasn't completely worn off yet.

height=8

Springs easily removable for disassembly because they are not loaded under tension

So... what the hell does this mean??

cool, thank you for the picture.

I have a Colt CCO and think it might be THE perfect carry package.  Officer frame for concealment and Commander slide for a little more velocity.  It shoots really nice.

The Streetmaster just looks like it would be really unbalanced.

That Condition 2 carry is just too stupid.  Ahern needs to leave it where it belongs, in his detective novels.

Their compact guns might be nice, but they are pricey compared to the others on the market.  Definitely not the only show in town.

Quoted: I have a Colt CCO and think it might be THE perfect carry package.  Officer frame for concealment and Commander slide for a little more velocity.  It shoots really nice. The Streetmaster just looks like it would be really unbalanced.

Seems to be a common thought. Makes sense.

That Condition 2 carry is just too stupid.  Ahern needs to leave it where it belongs, in his detective novels.

I think anymore that the notch is just considered a Detonics trademark. Detonics wouldn't be Detonics without it, and Ahern knows that. I certainly wouldn't carry one that way.

Their compact guns might be nice, but they are pricey compared to the others on the market.  Definitely not the only show in town.

Agreed, but prices seem (to me) to be right in line with other non-MIM guns of that size.

There was a guy over on the 1911 forum quite a while ago who had the frame on a 5" SS Kimber shortened to OACP/CCO length.  It was trimmed by about 3/8".  My preference would be for a CCO.  If you has a blaster with a Commander length slide, you can always get a special 5" Commander barrel from Barsto.  FWIW, the 5" GM barrel will not do well in a CDR.

Good shopping & good shooting!