What features would you want to see incorporated in a updated 1911 for serious military/LE use in the 21st century.

I think the USMC MEU/SOC gun comes close but needs a couple more additions. Fully supported ramped barrel, and a full length dust cover with a machined-in Picatinny rail.

What else? Perhaps a Aluminum or Titanium frame to compensate for the extra weight of the longer, thicker frame under the muzzle?

That Caspian titanium deal, with rail, Novak night sights, nice trigger, extended mag well. Some more that I missed too.

neon lights, yo

Parkerized and loose tolerances.

Ambidextrous magazine release.  Larger capacity magazine.  Polymer frame.  Reliability out of the box.  Oh wait a minute, that gun already exists.  It's called a HK USP.

[img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=476[/img]
[url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url]
[url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url]

There are better finishes than parking, and the tolerances should be tight enough for accuracy AND reliability, like the Kimbers and Springfields we see today.

Yeah well I think HK is on the militaries shit list after the MK23 fiasco.

Can you get a USP in single action only, with frame mounted safety? Oh, wait a minute, thats a McCormick plastic framed 1911! Never mind.

1911's already have ambi mag release-you use your right thumb when in your right hand and your left forefinger when in your left hand.

What "MK23 fiasco"?

What fiasco was that?

Why would you want a SA only handgun?  The USP is DA/SA.  Best of both worlds.  Also, the safety IS mounted on the frame.

[img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=476[/img]
[url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url]
[url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url]

This is the gun you want:

[img]http://www.huntercustoms.com/images/ld1.jpg[/img]

The work of Bob Hunter of Hunter Customs

A decocking mechanism.

The "MK23, Boat Anchor, Mod 0, 1 EA" fiasco.

I don't care how accurate it is at 25 yards as long as it goes bang every time I want it to.
And I like parkerized.

u speak english? that Mod 0, 1 EA looks like gibberish

Oh........my.......God........

That's beautiful!

Then wtf do you call your half-assed attempt to question my military nomenclature classification of the MK23 'handgun'?

Well, for starters...

Let's get rid of the grip safety.

still waiting for you to explain the "fiasco"

They built a very expensive gun that no one uses.

We have seen lots of pictures of SF from Afghanistan, the Philippines, and Iraq.

Not one frame shows a Mk 23 handgun.

1911's, SIGs, even Berettas, but no HK's.

Now I cant say its a [i]mechanically[/i] bad pistol, it would actually have to see use before you could say that.

There is no point to double action. It just adds parts, weight, and complexity for what purpose?

The handgun, especally for soldiers, should handle as close to the same as their rifle/carbine does. And the 1911 and the M16 are close, probably as close as you can get between a rifle and a handgun. Flicking off the manual safety with your thumb as you draw and present the pistol is just like flicking the selector with your thumb as you shoulder the rifle. The grip safety requires no thought to use, is analogus to the Glock safe trigger, and provides a very effective guard against a dropped or fumbled handgun.

Oddly people care about handguns going off when dropped but not rifles, why is that?

Are you talking? Are you posting? Do some keyboard research, study up on grammar & etiquette, and then resume operations on arfkom.

I would like to have a custom 1911 built up on a Caspian Recon Race Ready titanium frame w/ a Caspian slide-to-frame fitted 4340 hi-carbon steel slide w/ Novak sights. Add a couple of Barstow barrels (one in 5" and another in a little longer length for the can), an ambi-mag release, a nice ambi-safety, hi-ride beaver tail safety, an integrated mag well/back strap checkered in 20 lpi, dehorn it and finish it in boron carbide. Thanks, that will be $1.8k at the first window!

You didn't know either...  [:)]

You beat me too it with the two barrels. Either a run of "drop in" 5.5 or 6" threaded barrels that actually ARE drop in OR a special SOCOM upper entirely.

I wonder if a picatinny rail on the TOP of the slide would work or if whatever device you put on there would cause jams?

Dehorning or "melting" for all guns yes.
I think the MEU/SOC already has Trijicon Novak pattern sights with tritium inserts.

Now the issue of high caps. There have been issues with the Beretta at least about sand in the magazines. The cartridges in a double collum have to roll like ball bearings against each other and the sides.

The way to eliminate this is to eliminate witness holes and put long vertical indentations in the mag wall-like all assault rifle mags have-so the cartriges only touch the walls at a couple really small points and there is pleanty of room for sand to shake out. Not perfect but it goes a long way.

Problem is that, with the .45ACP cartridge, a double collum magazine is already a handful. Adding internal ridges like this is going to make it that much wider.

Single stacks are less succeptable to sand jams like this.

This sort of leads me toward a single stack magazine like the Wilson 47 series mags used with the MEU guns.

Remeber these guns and their magazines are going to spend most of their time getting drug through dirt. But in the occasions when they are needed, 100% reliablity is required.

So you're going by pictures you've seen?  I'm not saying you're wrong, but wouldn't you think that quite possibly the guys that might use the Mk 23 wouldn't really want photos out there of them using it?  Wouldn't they be using them during secret missions?

Also, aren't the SIG and Beretta used by the military both DA/SA?

[img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=476[/img]
[url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url]
[url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url]

Yes, it is really a big secret you know. Very hush hush and all. LMAO. I know that the Beretta is a SA/DA gun and believe that that the Sig P226 operates just like all other standard production Sigs.  

Because it keeps the manufacturer from putting in some really stupid features, like a combo decocker/safety (I really like my Beretta, but that safety design... UGGHH. There's no way to leave it cocked with the safety on)...

Also it provides the same length pull every time (as opposed to DA/SA (i.e. Beretta), with the shorter SA pull, and the long 1st pull if you don't hand-cock), without the extra pull weight of DAO...

Then again, I allways hand-cock my 92FS, and rarely use the safety (because of the de-cocker)...



Only if they can find a way to put it in a 'sane' place, NOT integrated into the safety... With my 1911, I just lower the hammer manually (being careful to do it s-l-o-w-l-y)...


Personally, I'd just give it a full-length guide rod and a barrel support system that locks up tighter... I'm not big into mounting stuff underbarrel on my guns, so a rail is a side-note... Maybe put 2 threaded holes on the frame under the barrel to attach one if needed (think hole in AR carry handle)...

A built electronic lock that only allows the gun's owner to pull the trigger and can also completely disable the gun by remote control at the discretion of law enforcement.

Unalterable features in the chamber, firing pin and bolt face that results in a unique ballistic fingerprint imprinted on every fired round.

You forgot a .38 & .22 conversion kit. Rookie...that's all.

Well Cylinder and Slide does make a drop in decocker system that replaces the thumb safety and existing hammer.

After you chamber a round, you put the safety on then push the hammer forward. When you push the safety lever down it cocks the hammer again.

They call it the "Safety Fast" system. It was in all the gun porn rags when it was introduced two years ago. Have hardly heard a peep about it since.

But why would you want to decock a 1911 unless you were returning it to condition three for stowing somewhere?

I dropped the AR once. It wasn't loaded, but it still sorta freaked me out, 'cause it was almost aimed at me as it fell. (It was aimed away from me before the fall, but fell butt backwards off the bench) At any rate, the action slammed shut (no magazine inserted), but the hammer didn't fall. Has anyone [i]ever[/i] really had a stock gun go off from being dropped a reasonable distance? (I'm not talking about tests where they drop a 1911 out of a helicopter) It seems like it's a pretty popular movie occurance, but does it really happen in real life?

I believe the decocker/safety on the Beretta was requested by the military not just thrown in by the company.  The Beretta is more for the common solider and they don't train them well enough to handle a SA only handgun.

The "extra parts" argument doesn't really fly.  Reliability is what matters.  I would rather have a choice.  While I carry my personal firearm cocked and locked, it's nice to know that if for some reason the hammer was already down, I could still just pull the trigger and make it go boom.


You can make fun all you want, but believe it or not, our military does actually conduct secret missions.  Hell, the Army still wont say that the Delta Force exists.  Plus, I would think that something like the Mk 23 would be used for a very specific operation and purpose and not a everyday carry handgun.  It's like saying the Barrett 50 cal isn't carried and used a lot by the common solider, so it must be a failure.

[img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=476[/img]
[url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url]
[url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url]

We didn't buy 15,000 Barrets.

Buying that number of weapons does not jibe with a intention to use it just for "certain" situations.

There are only 300 MEU/SOC .45's and we have seen them MANY times. Delta probably doesn't have many more of their custom .45s, and even THOSE have been filmed in Afghanistan.

There probably are not more than 1000 M1911s still in US Military Service. Maybe as few as 600. And yet we still see them far more than the much more numerous Mk23. Nor has the appeared in any written accounts of operations.

I have a Colt Government model. I changed the trigger, because I liked the "cool factor" I changed the grips because they felt better. I MIGHT get night sights on it... Other than that... why fuck with a great gun?

Well, one time I borrowed a Beretta 92fs that I took out while setting up targets "just in case". Since I didn't have a holster I just stuck the gun in my right hip bdu pants pocket. Someway, somehow, the it fell free and in slow motion I saw the muzzle pointing directly up at me as the gun fell directly on the back of the hammer which was down on a loaded chamber. Luckily it didn't go off and I nearly shit my pants. That's as close as I want to get to an AD.

Really. Well I was in the Army and have attended the SFOD-D briefing, but I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I also worked as an armorer and the MK23 is generally regarded as a waste. It usually collects dust & space in the arms room of units that have them on their MTO&E. Certainlly it works well as a sentry neutralization tool/ take down tool/ offensive action capable handgun, but what other options were/are available in the arms room inventory that could do that job? Additionally HK's customer dis-service was a big turn off to those of us who had to serivce & repair them, not to mention the cost involved in buying repair parts was rediculous.

What school did the Army send you to learn to be such a smart ass?  Jesus! [;D]

So our military screwed the pooch on that one.  If they aren't going to be used, why don't they destroy them instead of leaving to collect dust?

I didn't even have the MK23 in mind when giving my original comments.  It's too bulky and heavy for everyday use.

[img]photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/IG_LoadImage.asp?iImageUnq=476[/img]
[url=www.nra.org][b][red]NRA[/red][/url] [url=www.nra.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.gunowners.org][b][red]GOA[/red] [/url] [url=www.gunowners.org][blue]Life Member[/blue][/url]
[url=www.saf.org][red]SAF[/red][/url] [url=www.saf.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/url]
[url=sas-aim.org][red]SAS[/red][/url] [url=sas-aim.org][blue]Supporter[/blue][/b][/url]

This with a flashlight rail frame is all I would ever want or need:

[img]http://www.streetpro.com/hyam/images/spring1sm.jpg[/img]

quote by Lumpy196:
"This with a flashlight rail frame is all I would ever want or need"


well said.

I think the current Springfield Loaded, or Kimbers would make a nice choice.

[img]http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/spr_9109L_sm.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.pornleo.com/galleries/photos/freelance/tzn20020601.jpg[/img]

H&K made exactly what the government asked for. How would you put them on a shitlist for delivering a product that was chosen through trials and then delivered when promised. Whether or not the operators use it is moot; the contract didn't ask for employment training, just for a big ass pistol. That is what they got.

You took the rollmarks off the slide refinishing it, what maker is it?

It would be interesting. If the Military ever asked for a new batch of 1911 type pistols, look at all the contenders there are now. Colt, Springfield, Kimber, and now S&W all with enough production capacity.

And Lightfighter's comment is exactly to the point.

HK built precisely what SOCOM asked for.  It's not their fault that SOCOM put out a spec for something they really didn't need.

What they needed was something to replace their cobbled together collection of HK P9s with suppressors, S&W "hush puppies" and a handful of High Standard suppressed .22lrs.  What they should have asked for is either SIG or Beretta or Colt or whoever, to give them a modified pistol set up to reliably function with a suppressor.

Now a sidenote:

Making a handgun function reliably with a suppressor and maintain accuracy is actually a pretty tall order. Most prior suppressed handguns used by the military ended up being glorified single shots because the mass of the suppressor screwed up the operation cycle BADLY. The Navy Pistol burned out it's suppressor in less than 2 magazines of subsonic ammunition.  The ammunition came with a suppressor rebuild cartridge in the package. Later suppressor designs eliminated that problem, but were heavy and didn't eliminate the cycling problem. Straight blowback actions cycled OK since they didn't have any barrel movement required in their action function, but blowback's don't have much power.  

Accuracy was also an issue since many early can created a chaos of gasses in the suppressor that tended to mess with the bullet. Only recently has suppressor design reached the point that using a suppressor can actually IMPROVE accuracy.

Aiming has always been a problem with suppressors since the body of the can tends to obscure the target for standard sights.  The Navy Mark 19 (i believe) had special raised sights to clear the suppressor, so did the P9s's and Berettas I have seen.

When taking into account all the shortcomings of previous systems the HK pistol was overwhelmingly successful except in it's weight and bulk.

The Mark 23 is reliable, accurate as hell, has good reasonably low profile iron sights usable with and without the suppressor, uses a proven cartridge that is already sub-sonic so doesn't need special loadings for effectiveness.  It doesn't need different ammo for suppressed and non-suppressed use.  The pistol goes from non-suppressed, to suppressed modes by simply attaching the suppressor.  Suppressor maintenance is relatively simple and the unit is durable.  It can be mounted with an accessory rail for lights and lasers (both of which have gotten dramatically smaller and lighter since introduction.

Sure, you could certainly manage the mission with modern suppressor designs (all post dating the MK 23 contract) and a few modern pistols like the USP, but the USP was a follow on to the MK 23 project.

I'd say they did pretty good considering what they were looking to do, the cartridge requirement (.45 ACP) and all.

And as far as I can tell, the MK 23 was never meant to replace all pistols in SOCOM.

The Army has 1911's with extended barrels that take suppressors. And they had them before the SOCOM pistol was even ordered.

Some bonehead thought that they were inadaquate because they weren't double action.

Back to the original question. If I had my pick I'd choose an HK Tactical with a can on my belt if needed. I love my 1911s, and I also have a Mark 23 with KAC can. It's a safe queen. The Tac is light enought to ue as a defensive sidearm, and has the threaded barrel for a can. 12 round mags as well. I have this setup, and while I love my Wilsons, if I had to choose one of the guns I own to take into battle, it would be the Tac and the can.

Increase the mag capacity, maybe to 10 by semi-double stacking.  The grip is getting too close to too wide already.  Beaver tail but retain the grip safety.  Ambi safety and slide release.  Profile and knurl the trigger guard to accommodate a two hand grip.  Recoil Compensate, 3 dot low profile sights.  S&W type extractor.  Fully supported and throated.  Minimize the extraneous holes for crud entry.  Rail under foreframe for light.  

Try to keep it within the general dimensions of the current pistol. Ultimate goal is for good shooter using two hands to hit target at 50 yds and for any but the smallest soldiers/Marines/sailors to hit center of mass at 10-25 yards snap shooting either hand.

The original was setup for short range snap point and shoot conditions in lousy field conditions.  Keep that as the goal for a new one, it isn't supposed to be zippy the wonder pistol for 75 yard shots.

I have an original bring back from WWI Army of Occupation and with the exception of getting it throated and refinished I aint gonna change anything.  Its fun now. And is interesting to compare to a full trick job.

(yeah yeah I know, my step-grandpa while a guard at a WWII a/c plant in Burbank got it cadmium plated.  That plating is beginning to wear so refinishing again won't hurt the value if I was to consider selling)

Its a Springfield rebuilt by Hilton Yam.  The roll marks are there, they just dont show up in that pic.  Its not my gun, anyway, its off Hiltons website. Im currently abusing a Wilson SGP similar to it.

[img]http://stiguns.com/guns/TacticalLite/images/Tactial415_2a.jpg[/img]

Its high cap . Proven design.

Is that a propriatary frame they use?

That would have to be a contender, just not in stainless.

One thing I hope will come out after the AWB expires is that the makers will decide on a Standard for double wide 1911 mags, so you can buy mags anywhere like with the single stack Goverment Models.

Why not?  S/S - passivated black.

per MIL-C-13924 - Black Oxide coating for steels (black passivation)

Class 2, 3 or 4 are for stainless steel.  

Doesn't provide hardly any corrosion protection, so there is probably something better out there

You'r right, just not [i]naked[/i] stainless.

What's wrong with naked? [naughty]