1911: cultish fanaticism or really that good?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 1911: cultish fanaticism or really that good? (Page 1 of 3)

Posted: 8/27/2001 8:06:58 PM EDT

I don't want this to be a flame-fest. I really would like to see an even discussion on this.

Like die hard SAAB owners, the 1911 fans are near fanatical when it comes to this pistol. I endeavor to discuss and discover it's true merits and cut through the hype.

I have shot different models.. Kimber, Springfield and Para and have just never been all that impressed. They seem fine, but just not so much as to recieve the madness following. Why is it such a great pistol? Am I missing something?

Is it just its service record? Maybe the .45ACP is the real winner and the 1911 is along for the ride.

Yes, Yes, I realize all the IPSC types use them, but they are usually cusotmized beyond reason. Even the 'base' class models have been "beaver tailed" and "tuned."

Or is this really a case of familiarity and " I have aslways used a 1911 and it is just my nature?'

This is not a 1911 vs -insert Brand X- here thread. Comparissons are fine, but this should not turn into the dreaded 1911 vs. Glock throw down.

For that matter, what so special about the Glock (um, forget I said that! [:)])

Zaz

"I have given up trying to understand people in favor of mocking them."

Posted: 8/27/2001 8:10:51 PM EDT

[#1]

This is a Chicken and Egg thing
There is " cultish fanatisism" over the 1911 cuz it is that good.

Posted: 8/27/2001 8:17:33 PM EDT

[#2]

It is just that the 45 is a battle proven round that has been through everything. The 1911 is a great design that has had time to evolve over a long period of time.

I personally like a 45, but I also have a Glock 23 that works great and I feel safe with. I guess it just all depends on what you want to do with it and how you want to carry it.

Stinger

Posted: 8/27/2001 8:22:25 PM EDT

[#3]

a little of both

but then agien its like the hole

sig vs glock cd 1911 vs hk

ar vs ak

fal vs m14 vs g3

etc etc etc

Posted: 8/27/2001 8:23:12 PM EDT

[#4]

I am primarily a Glock man (23c and 27) but I also shoot a Springfield 1911 and an HK USP40c...................all depends.

I like the tried and true look fo the 1911......it looks like busines and it looks capable.

I like all dem dare weapunzes................

Posted: 8/27/2001 8:58:05 PM EDT

[#5]

I think it really is that good.i only own one hand gun and its a 1911 commander next purchase will be the full size model.I like the way it fits my hand as i dont prefer the double stack mags and now that new guns are now limited to 10 rnd mags(unless you fork out big$$ for pre bans)the 1911 doesnt fall that far behind in cap.8+1 to 10+1.btw if it werent for the 1911 i'd prob go for the hk models as i do not like the glocks(there good but i just dont like the way they shoot)trigger,fit.

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:10:55 PM EDT

[#6]

I suppose someday there will be rabid Baretta 9
fanaticos too. Uncle Sam has a lot to do with the promotion of the 10 feet tall and bullet proof if you have your trusty 45. auto at your side. Sold me. Taught me how and called me an expert. I believe it. Can Do.
Good Luck

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:12:04 PM EDT

[#7]

I think it has to do with tradition and trigger.
From its inception as our USGI service pistol to its place now as the platform for competition pistols, I would agree that the 1911 is tried and true. I would also agree that the .45 caliber cartridge is its most redeeming quality besides the trigger.

I owned a Para-Ordnance P14 and there is no comparison between even just a decent single action trigger and the [b]sproing[/b] of the "Safe Action" Glock trigger. the 1911 wins hands down.

That said, I do not own a 1911 pattern pistol anymore. I went with the pistol that doesn't need 'smithing for reliability. I'm not a hardcore pistol competitor so I am not too worried about the trigger plus the Glock trigger with a bit of practice isn't all that bad.

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:19:29 PM EDT

[#8]

It's a love/hate thing. But in competion their just about imposible to beat. As far as the bells and whistles go no one races a factory stock car.

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:25:52 PM EDT

[#9]

Zazou- Here's my personal reasons for buying 1911's.

Parts, and reliability.
The 1911 series handguns are a lot like the 350 Chevy smallblock. There are tons of readily available parts, both origional, and aftermarket. And, like the ChevSB, you can run it bare stock, reliably,or hop it to whatever you want, with little effort, and a lot of cash..
Also, as noted by others, the shillouette of the old Colt/Browning 1911 says "Gun" to people in a way that a lot of more modern handguns do not. I've had a lot of people at shoots not even notice the BYF-42 P-38 I'm shooting, but just be drooling over the 1944 vintage Colt I'll use..

Reliability is another plus. With good ammo, and mags, the 1911's are tremendously reliable, both in the mechanical, and in the terminal ballistics departments.
The down sides? You have to shoot em frequently to maintain competency.
Also, they're getting expensive.

As to the Glocks, well, other than a 1911, I can't think of another pistol I'd actually leave loaded all the time..

Hope this helps..

Meplat

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:35:21 PM EDT

[#10]

You know, I own 2 1911's. One of them I built up and tuned on a Caspian frame when I was 19 years old. It was a truly rewarding 'smithing project, and the gun is as accurate and well built as any other custom 1911.

That being said, look at the Glock 1911 debate as a race between a 60's Tricked out Muscle Car vs. a Super Fast Jap car.

The muscle car is fun to work on, hauls ass, looks mean, and is uniquely American.
The little Jap car may not be as asthetically butch, nor as rewarding to the mechanic to "tweak", not to mention a "foreigner". But if it goes 200 MPH and wins the race, who fucking cares?

Oh, sure. Those cocobolo grips on my 1911 are purdy, and that trigger is smooth as a lady's belly. But when I weigh those two redeeming virtues against those of the Glock, well, sorry.
The 1911 may be the darling of many shooters, and a fine weapon for shooting at paper or printing groups, but when my ass is on the line, I go Glock.
I have yet to hear about a Belgian Blue finish or Cocobolo grips winning a gun fight.
The trigger?
Like I said. Fine for paper. And yeah. I guess you may one day be in a 50 yard gunfight where you have to make a head shot with your handgun. But I can hit targets just as well with my Glocks as I can with my 1911's. The only difference is, with my Glocks, I never never never have to worry about a jam. Not to mention they have more rounds, and are faster to bring into action then even a cocked and locked 1911.

They are just better guns for what a handgun is meant to do. Guns evolve like everything else.

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:52:53 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
The only difference is, with my Glocks, I never never never have to worry about a jam.

View Quote

Now, KABOOMS, that's another matter . . . couldn't resist. [}:D]

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:55:29 PM EDT

[#12]

Landon, you just gave a perfect description of your confidence in a Glock. I am as sure as you are with my Springfield. I think confidence and capability are more important than the weapon.
Zazou, what are you confident with?

Posted: 8/27/2001 9:56:52 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The only difference is, with my Glocks, I never never never have to worry about a jam.

View Quote

Now, KABOOMS, that's another matter . . . couldn't resist. [}:D]

View Quote

I dunno........that whole KB thing sounds to me like something that happens to folks who shouldda being doing something different.......like they new better or something.

Been shooting Glock sfor over 10 years and never, never a KB...........shoot a 27 and 23c extensively and -0- mf...................to each his own I suppose.

Of course, I tend to get bee stung a lot as the bees don;t much like me........ha ha.

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:08:58 PM EDT

[#14]

X-Kill,
I was just yanking his meat. I have never heard of a KB, save with a bore obstruction, in any firearm. I just get a kick out of the Glock owners and their rabid praise of the Glock pistols. To each their own. I have heard it is either love 'em or hate 'em. I don't hate them, but am much closer to that than loving them. I do tend to shoot them fairly well, which always surprises me as I [b]hate[/b] the trigger. I am very demanding about a crisp, light trigger, and well, they just aren't a good trigger. But I still shoot them better than I should. Go figure. A slabside to me is just what a handgun should look like, and I shoot them fairly well.

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:09:37 PM EDT

[#15]

It's like the Honda-Harley thing. On paper, technically speaking, the Honda is a better bike. Like a Glock. But the Harley is *the* American bike, much like the 1911 is *the* American fighting handgun. It also has been around forever and served in several wars and just has undeniable "swashbuckling" appeal. And of course although it hasn't been cutting edge for 70-80 years, it is still very effective.

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:10:21 PM EDT

[#16]

Bees are like that.
Good Luck

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:22:46 PM EDT

[#17]

1911-types are excellent designs for its time, but there many more recent designed guns that take advantage of more modern technology, and materials. You can modify factory 1911s to equal the more modern guns, but a lot of the more modern guns will perform equal or exceed a 1911 straight out of the box without any modifications at all. No matter how you modify a prop driven airplane, you can't make it into a jet.

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:29:10 PM EDT

[#18]

I agree with Warlord.

The 1911 can be brought into the modern age.

1)A doublestack polymer frame
2) Night Sights
[size=5]3)A GOD DAMN FEED RAMP![/size=5]
4)Double Action Trigger
5)Flared Barrel to get rid of that damn bushing (The weakest link in the 1911 system)

SURE!
Show me that 1911 design, and i'll be the first in line to buy it!
Closest thing is the Para LDA, and even that still clings to a lot of the dusty 1911 ideas.

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:44:15 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
I agree with Warlord.

The 1911 can be brought into the modern age.

1)A doublestack polymer frame
2) Night Sights
[size=5]3)A GOD DAMN FEED RAMP![/size=5]
4)Double Action Trigger
5)Flared Barrel to get rid of that damn bushing (The weakest link in the 1911 system)

SURE!
Show me that 1911 design, and i'll be the first in line to buy it!
Closest thing is the Para LDA, and even that still clings to a lot of the dusty 1911 ideas.

View Quote

I think several makers offer this minus the feed ramp (which isn't necessary anyhow)and double action trigger , which misses the best part of the 1911 anyhow. Single action is where it is at. My Kimber Pro Carry SLE is just about perfect, no barrel bushing, the reasuring feel of solid steel, and that sweet single action trigger.

I really like my G23 and Sig 229, but I love my Kimber. Can't wait to get a full size one. Mostly because of the trigger. If they made the 229 in single action I may reconsider.

Posted: 8/27/2001 10:47:40 PM EDT

[#20]

1911 style pistols, just look boring to me, I think they are well past their prime. A rock or a club is a reliable tried and true weapon also, but that doesn't make them "fun" to use. Yes FUN, weapons should excite the user, to each his own, I guess the 1911's do excite some users, I just don't happen to be one, give me a Sig, HK, or Glock any day.

Posted: 8/28/2001 12:59:23 AM EDT

[#21]

landon, why do you want double action?

for that matter, why does anyone want double action?

is it really that big a deal to disengage a safety?

look at your black rifle.

as fatman #1 would say, "ain't nonez double action."

and we all like that fine.

Posted: 8/28/2001 1:22:59 AM EDT

[#22]

Let's see...

I have owned both a G19 and an M1991A1SS - still have the '91. Now you know where my head's at.

Glock - liked the finish, liked the takedown method, LOVED the hammer-forged rifling.

Hated the wide grip (large paws w/ stubby fingers,) hated the trigger, hated the lack of an external safety.

Not concerned with capacity, calibre a minor issue (have shot HK and Glock in .45 ACP, still prefer the M1991.)

M1991A1SS - Like the external safety, the simple internal safeties (less to go wrong) like the ergonomics (see paws note) and LOVE the single action trigger. A minimal amount of work gave me a 3# trigger with a surprise break. Can't do that with a Glock.

Dislike the cut rifling. Weight is not an issue - I like a chunk of steel in my hand.

M1991A1 more useful in hand-to-hand (pistol-whipping) Easier to find parts for. No trouble looking for "Drop Free" mags - ALL GM mags drop free. Easier to work on. Easier to tune.

I know the G-series and the HKs and the Sigs and everything else are supposed to be cutting edge, but I prefer a tried and proven design, and like things that have been around long enough to figure out thoroly. Me, I carry my M1991A1SS everywhere I go, and it hasn't let me down yet...

BTW - A little cleaning and polish work resulted in ZERO malfunctions - even with SWC!

FFZ

Posted: 8/28/2001 3:32:44 AM EDT

[#23]

Used a 1911 in real combat, goes bang every time.

Have many a Glock, not impressed with reliability, accuracy, or the ergonomics of the them.

Before some jackass starts moaning about the glock being the "Most Reliable Handgun in the GD Universe" they [b]DO[/b] jam. They have a interesting tendency to get little flecks of brass on their top lugs preventing the slide from going into battery.

The 1911 doen't need "tuning" to be reliable, as long as you use ball equivalent ammo. I have never, ever had a jam that wasn't the fault of a crappy magazine or a limp-wristing shooter.

Get the 1911 muddy, wet, sand-filled, or full of vegetation and it will still go bang. That is backed by an 80-year service record.

Oh, and last time I checked, Marine Recon and other spiffy-guy types use 1911s, not Glocks.

All that being said, both will work.

Posted: 8/28/2001 3:42:41 AM EDT

[#24]

The grip angle, ergonomics, and ability to make a crisp trigger.
Also power, the .45ACP gets the job done.

You younger guys need to think about history...
Back when Jeff Cooper, Chuck Taylor, Bill Wilson etc. were calling the 1911 the best, there wen't many alternatives.
It wasn't too long ago that the only practical choices were
1911
S&W 9mm
Walther P38
Browning Hi-power
...or a revolver.

Posted: 8/28/2001 3:48:18 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
1911 style pistols, just look boring to me, I think they are well past their prime. A rock or a club is a reliable tried and true weapon also, but that doesn't make them "fun" to use. Yes FUN, weapons should excite the user, to each his own, I guess the 1911's do excite some users, I just don't happen to be one, give me a Sig, HK, or Glock any day.

View Quote

Hmmm. Pretty is as pretty does, eh?

[sniper]

Posted: 8/28/2001 5:03:46 AM EDT

[#26]

Other than my duty weapon and a Kel Tec P32, my Remington Rand M1911A1 is the only semi-auto I own right now. I've had and would sell many semi auto pistols but not the M1911A1. For me it's all about the history and tradition of the pistol. There certainly is better more modern designs out there these days but I have never found one that feels better in my hand, the grip angle and size is perfection. I liked the Chevy small block analogy. That just about nails it. Plentiful parts that the average guy can install himself and make it into a race gun. You can take just about any brand of frame out there, and there are many inexpensive frames available and build a gun you can win with and not go broke.

Posted: 8/28/2001 5:38:15 AM EDT

[#27]

In the past I have trolled for some time in order to absorb the freeflow of information. From what I have learned here is that handgun likes and dislikes are all dependent upon one thing: [B]PURPOSE[/B]

I found that the 1911A1 is a tried & true design with many benefits. Other guns have different benefits, and thus are sometimes sought for those reasons. If in the past you truly have fired a Kimber 1911 Custom, I don't see how you could possibly want anything else, unless you have a different purpose than 1911 followers and I have.

I [B]LOVE[/B] the:
Thin Grip (Just right for all sizes of hands)
Grip Safety (A necessity in my mind for all HGs)
Thumb Operated Safety (Another GREAT feature)
Phenominal Trigger Pull (With Kimber Customs)
Great Accuracy (A necessity)

These all accompanied by a VERY LONG historical Military proven service record shows a GREAT GUN!

Glocks are nice, but their "Safety" features SUCK! If you ever go to a gunshop watch people as they're handed a Glock - Most of the times I've seen their finger go RIGHT ONTO THE TRIGGER! As we all know, we're all pretty well edgumukaytud in gun safety, but most police officers I know STILL have that one rare time when their finger accidentally finds its home on the trigger. Thus I think the GLOCK is wrong for most normal people. The glock makes a great combat handgun, but I don't think I'd ever use it for competition (because even with the trigger jobbie it still sucks in comparison to 1911), I wouldn't use it for its accuracy (good, but sometimes the large sights are more of a hindrance than helper), but I just LOVE its durability and reliability.

Sorry so long, but I truly believe that a handgun should suit its desired [B]PURPOSE[/B]. In my case: Good Overall Handgun. I just HOPE AND PRAY THAT SOMEDAY KIMBER MAKES A .40 S&W Caliber or 9mm 1911A1!!! (The .45 makes my hand hurt after about 50 rds, call me a panzy/chicken/vag!nal-alternative, I don't care about what people think of me)
[^]
-inuhbadnayburhood

Posted: 8/28/2001 5:54:30 AM EDT

[#28]

I like the single action trigger of the 1911 design.

They are easy to field strip, reliable, have acceptable accuracy out of the box, and proved themselves an adequate sidearm in military engagements from 1911 until 1985.

All of this using BALL AMMO.

The people who bitch about these pistols not being reliable are trying to run hollowpoints thru them, they were never designed for this.

Posted: 8/28/2001 6:16:46 AM EDT

[#29]

I will not rewrite what most of everyone has said about the .45 but let me give two view points.
First: FBI's has recently tested and purchased 1700 Springfield 1911's.......

Let's not start a flame on the FBI but look at
from an aesthetic point of view.

These pistols will be issued to all the field SWAT teams and the HRT. Why? Reliabliltiy and proven performance of the .45 caliber. I read their T/E that helped decide on the Springfield. It was very impressive and demanding, not even my precious Kimber made through the requirement. Only one. The Springfield.

Second: (No bragging intended here) When our team goes to the range and we shoot - we have many Glocks, one Beretta, one HK and one Kimber [:D]
consistanly the 1911 shoots tighter groups and in Hostage Rescue Drills, the 1911 puts 'em closer together and on target every time. Maybe it's part shooter but then again, some of those guys get more range time than I do but it seems that my Kimber can and does put them where it's counts, consistantly - if I will do my job.

Plus - you got to admit, a Condition One forty five - is just a really purdy work of art.

Posted: 8/28/2001 6:20:24 AM EDT

[#30]

I like my 1911A1's.... the bullet is big enough that I don't have to worry if the durn thing is going to expand or not. Solid reliability when left as it's designer meant it to be( With the exception of better sights! [;)]
Single action trigger pull is wonderful, and the combination of thumb and grip safety is well thought out. Did I mention ergonomics? How many modern designs copy the location of the thumb safety, mag release, and slide release?

But, you have to remember that the 1911 was one of a series of progressive designs that started with a pistol that had TWO links on the barrel; one at the muzzle and one at the chamber; and culminated IMHO in the Hi-Power. The Hi-Power shows the real genius of John Browning...

Posted: 8/28/2001 6:26:27 AM EDT

[#31]

I carry a 1911 for one basic reason: I shoot it better and more accurately than any other handgun. To contradict some canards I've read in this thread, I have owned over two dozen different 1911s and shot nearly fifty others and only found one out of all those that had reliability problems (not one that I owned, a friend's series 80 Gold Cup). I have thousands of rounds through my 1911s with no jams not caused by bad ammo (outsized cases).
The 1911 is a very reliable, durable and accurate design and it works for me. I see no reason to use anything else for my defensive handgun.

Posted: 8/28/2001 6:58:17 AM EDT

[#32]

It,s that good!I like the Glocks and Sigs but, Lets see how many of the modern guns hold up to 30+ years in service. For a combat sidearm the first rule is it must go bang every time no excuses!

Posted: 8/28/2001 7:17:32 AM EDT

[#33]

It's a personal preference driven by many factors. Function is a main one, but never underestimate the effects that nationalisim and history have on a buyer. Rifle/handgun technology is fairly stagnant. The theory and design concepts were mastered decades ago. Most makers are making basically the same thing that was made in the day, with slight updates to the tooling/thinking. The Browning high power was made for the better part of 7 decades, and the newest looks/functions just like the oldest.(Although they differ in minor detail)

For large US makers, the MBAs are firmly in control.

To each his own....

Posted: 8/28/2001 7:25:41 AM EDT

[#34]

I've been shooting for more than 30 years and carrying for more than 20. I own quite a few handguns, many of which are designed for competition or cary. I've carried all sorts of different guns, from 1911's to Glocks, to revolvers.

I always end up with a 1911 if conditions allow it. It's a comfort level and a personal choice. They fit my hand, I shoot them well, and I have no qualms about a condition one carry, which scares a lot of even RKI's when it comes to the 1911.

A great gun. Everyone should have one. They are a good tool, can be easily customized by anyone comfortable with modding his AR, and the buy-in price is always low via used guns or the fact that there always seems to be a sub-$300 basic 1911 style pistol on the market.

Posted: 8/28/2001 7:51:35 AM EDT

[#35]

Only a fool pretends to know what is the best handgun for somebody else. You must decide for yourself, what feels best in your hand, what you shoot best, what you feel confident with. I've searched for the perfect handgun for years, Sigs, Glocks, HKs, and have never found a gun that I can shoot better than a 1911. Most critics of the 1911 are talking about problems with an old gun, not a modern 1911 like my Springfield TRP, reliability 100%, accuracy better than any off the shelf Glock, Sig, or HK, except certain target models of course.

Also ask some people who really know about handgun combat, like Clint of Thunderranch what the best combat handgun is, he'll tell ya it's the 1911, are you gonna believe him or some internet armchair commando?

Posted: 8/28/2001 7:56:01 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Also ask some people who really know about handgun combat, like Clint of Thunderranch what the best combat handgun is, he'll tell ya it's the 1911, are you gonna believe him or some internet armchair commando?

View Quote

The guy on the
internet who does not
get paid to endorse a product
that is already over advertised.

Posted: 8/28/2001 7:58:53 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Also ask some people who really know about handgun combat, like Clint of Thunderranch what the best combat handgun is, he'll tell ya it's the 1911, are you gonna believe him or some internet armchair commando?

View Quote

The guy on the
internet who does not
get paid to endorse a product
that is already over advertised.

View Quote

If that's what you believe than you have no idea what kind of person Clint really is.

Posted: 8/28/2001 8:04:22 AM EDT

[#38]

I'm new to guns(started last year), so I'll add the perspective of a newbie.
I don't have a handgun yet(I'm 20, and its 21 to purchase a handgun in PA). But when I get one it is going to be a 1911A1. Why? Besides looking great, being designed in America, the .45ACP round, and 80+ years of service; I like the way it handles and shoots. I have shot a Kimber, a Berreta 9mm, and a KelTec P32, and the trigger on the Kimber rocks! I hate the DA trigger on the others. Haven't shot a Glock yet, but I imagine it will be the same. I'm not concerned about capacity, as the .45 is more than capable of putting a man down, especially with good shot placement.

Well, that's my opinion anyway.

Posted: 8/28/2001 8:20:47 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Most critics of the 1911 are talking about problems with an old gun, not a modern 1911 like my Springfield TRP, reliability 100%, accuracy better than any off the shelf Glock, Sig, or HK, except certain target models of course.

View Quote

Just stating what I have seen, no flame intended.

I occasionally shoot Police Pistol Combat comps at my local club. Most of the web gear ninjas are shooting tricked 1911's. Kimber's, Para's and the like. To date the only gun I have ever seen jam or FTF while running in these comps are the 1911 pattern pistols. My own Para P-14 jammed up with factory ball.

IIRC the Springfield TRP is either right at $1,000 or more. I dished $525 for my 21 and a little over $600 for the 20 with night sights.

Why are 1911 pistols so much more expensive but yet from my experiences they are less reliable. I've never had the first FTF from any of my Glocks.

I will concede acuracy to the 1911 but I'd rather not pay $1,000 for a pistol when I can
buy another for almost half and have better reliability.

Posted: 8/28/2001 8:31:02 AM EDT

[#40]

One point in favor of the 1911 not quite touched on is the widespread availability of spare parts. Now, I'm not necessarily talking about custom parts or such, but the stuff needed to keep 'em going BANG far into the future.
In a related vein, think about the enormous talent pool that is intimately familiar with the 1911, and how to make sure it runs right.
Most other guns can't lay claim to that kind of support base, at least in the US.
Time may come when that support base might be a handy thing...

Posted: 8/28/2001 8:43:45 AM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
If that's what you believe than you have no idea what kind of person Clint really is.

View Quote

No,
I sure don't.
According to you
he is a fool who pretends to know
what handgun is best
for somebody else.

Posted: 8/28/2001 8:49:50 AM EDT

[#42]

Any given 1911 simply won't be as reliable as any given Glock or Sig, and that's a fact, jack.
If anyone on the planet can cite a test where a 1911 and a Glock were fired side by side until a jam, and the 1911 won, i'll kiss your ass. Matter of fact, if anyone wants to take thier 1911 that "never jams" and meet me at my range with a case of ammo and shoot until one of our guns jam, i'll bet you every gun I own that my Glock keeps running by the time your 1911 has jammed. Kimber, SA, Colt, Baer, Wilson, I don't care. Handguns have improved since the days of the 1911. Just like motorcycles have improved, but try telling that to a Harley man.
They just won't hear it.

Posted: 8/28/2001 8:55:32 AM EDT

[#43]

It is that good. It is due to BOTH the design of the weapon, and the effectiveness of the .45acp round.

However, not all 1911's are created equal...just as AR-15s are not created equal. Compare a Les Baer or Ed Brown to a Kimber and you will notice SIGNIFICANT quality differences...the Kimber doesn't come close to matching the quality of a Les Baer or Ed Brown. Compare the Kimber to Llama, and you'll laugh at the Llama (actually, most would laugh at the Llama without any comparison). By the way, I don't consider Para-Ordnance a 1911.

The 1911 has a beautiful trigger pull, as well as being single-action only...which means the same pull regardless whether it's the first, middle, or last round in the mag. Also, the single stack is SUPERIOR in reliability of feeding rounds (from a magazine perspective), and affords a smaller grip for smaller hands. I prefer thin grips to boot! The hand position is also very high on the pistol which gives fantastic recoil control.

Why do you think the FBI Hostage Rescue Team and almost ALL of our Special Forces use 1911 framed pistols? In fact, most of them use Springfield's that have had some more work done to them (notice you never hear anyone saying that a SPECIALTY leo team uses Kimbers...take note!).

Plus, the .45acp is an awesome knock-down round which is most important in a shooting situation (because if you don't hit the bullseye but somewhere else on the body, you want it to significantly change the bad-guy's attitude and posture).

The IPSC argument was made fun of earlier...why do you think the IPSC shooters want to shoot the 1911? It's there for a reason, and the .45acp caliber is there for a reason too. They ain't shooting the low recoil 9mm but choose a heftier grain bullet and recoil.

Last, more Congressional Medal of Honor awards have been given to soldiers due to their actions with the use of a 1911 than any other weapon! That says something more important than all of this.

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:06:12 AM EDT

[#44]

I forgot...LET ME ADDRESS THE JAM/STOVEPIPE ISSUE that many seem to be concerned with.

As stated a minute ago, you need a quality pistol. HOWEVER, most of these errors are caused by improper shooting technique...specifically, bad recoil control. If you let your wrist rock back with the recoil (most people do), then you are not letting the slide do it's job. This is true for ALL auto pistols.

As far as competition...last IDPA match I went to had 5 jams. They were ALL Glocks. In fact, there were at least 8 jams because I saw the same guy get a FTF on three occasions with his Glock. All of them due to improper recoil control.

And as for Clint Smith, well, don't flame him if you don't know him. He knows what he's talking about. I shot 1200 rounds of .45acp through my 1911 at Thunder Ranch without a single jam.

Oh yeah, and Col. Jeff Cooper of GunSite might have a few good things to say about 1911 guns too...I wonder if HE is qualified?

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:07:07 AM EDT

[#45]

I forgot...LET ME ADDRESS THE JAM/STOVEPIPE ISSUE that many seem to be concerned with.

As stated a minute ago, you need a quality pistol. HOWEVER, most of these errors are caused by improper shooting technique...specifically, bad recoil control. If you let your wrist rock back with the recoil (most people do), then you are not letting the slide do it's job. This is true for ALL auto pistols.

As far as competition...last IDPA match I went to had 5 jams. They were ALL Glocks. In fact, there were at least 8 jams because I saw the same guy get a FTF on three occasions with his Glock. All of his jams were due to improper recoil control, because I started watching his hands after the first jam.

And as for Clint Smith, well, don't flame him if you don't know him. He knows what he's talking about. I shot 1200 rounds of .45acp through my 1911 at Thunder Ranch without a single jam.

Oh yeah, and Col. Jeff Cooper of GunSite might have a few good things to say about 1911 guns too...I wonder if HE is qualified?

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:21:58 AM EDT

[#46]

It's a Browning thing; you wouldn't understand....

What hasn't been mentioned is accuracy to go with reliability. I have tried numerous self-loading handguns and the 1911 design is the most accurate IMHO.

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:38:17 AM EDT

[#47]

Was I not clear on this not being a Glock vs. 1911 discussion? [>:/] Grrrrrr!

OK. A sum up frm what I've gathered.

So far the reasons for the 1911 mostly have been tradition, trigger and accuracy (super-$750-$1300 TRP type models), the .45acp round and grip size.

First, reliability is not an argument. Most modern good brands are 99.9% reliable. Much more so than our ability.

All of these other traits can be found in a other .45 pistols, more or less. As far as 80 years of service, that has nothing to do with the pistol itself. Most modern guns go through 25000 round tests and do well.

1911 guys, you are losing me here.

Maybe the short, smug responses of 'it's a Colt thing, you wouldn't understand...' responses says it.

For now I have to just think it is a sort fanatical choice. More belief in a legend then reality.

Thanks, All!

Zaz

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:39:44 AM EDT

[#48]

ZANZOU : Yes sir, the 1911 really is that GOOD!
So much for not starting a flame fest!

Landon: BE REALISTIC, you will need considerably more than a case of ammo, as an owner of 2-21s, an original first imported 17 (with over 2000 rnds thru it) and a daily carried 19 (for convenience), I am aquainted with Glocks. At home though or on the road for trips or vacations the gun always on the nightstand or in my sleeping bag is a MODERN Kimber Classic 45 loaded w/ 10 rnds. of Black Talons in one of Clint's mags.
As for your challenge, I wouldn't want to waste my time or money (not to mention I have all the guns I need). Although someone with an old GOV. model 45 who wouldn't mind shooting out a barrel should take you up on your offer. Understand you'd have to use a 21 and need gosh knows, 5-10,000+ FMJ ball rounds to get started and BE FAIR. Don't forget that although 17s have passed 10,000 round tests on many occasions those same tests were also conducted many years ago w/ 45s and ball ammo.

If I can only have one the 1911 will be the one!
Mike

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:40:29 AM EDT

[#49]

This article is really good about the pros and cons of 1911s.

http://www.americanhandgunner.com/Page2/FeatureJA01.html

Paper

Posted: 8/28/2001 9:54:49 AM EDT

[#50]

"They are just better guns for what a handgun is meant to do. Guns evolve like everything else"

You know there really is some thing to this, If you go to the H&K web site they tell you that the 1911 had alot to do with the workings of the USP.

LOL, it's like the hole 1911 vs. Glock thing is over cuz the H&K wins out do to it having all the good thing from the 1911 and Glock like frame and then it evolved.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 1911: cultish fanaticism or really that good? (Page 1 of 3)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us