I need a .45 and I'm not sure if I should get a Springfield Armory Loaded 1911 or HK USP45. I have plenty of 1911 experiance but havent had a chance to try the USP45 and there are no rentals in my area.

Any opinions appreciated...
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/review/pix/px9608.jpg
http://geowww.geo.tcu.edu/student/frazier/usp45_lg.jpg

I would say the USP would have a slight edge in reliability.
It will probably take any ammo you feed it.
I don't think the SA would feed all ammo reliably.
You would need to find what ammo it will shoot 100% of the time.
That has been my experience with 1911s.

That said, they are both damn fine guns.

I'd go with the 1911, for the price of a USP you can get a really nice 1911. I've always found the USP to be a bit unwieldly and ugly

1911, but not a Springfield.

Kimber maybe?

First off, unlike what Floppy said there is nothing wrong with a Springfield.  Although I am a recently converted Springfield to Kimber fan, I would not hesitate to buy a Springfield.

The 1911 is easier to conceal, much cheaper, and can be customized to the hilt.

As far as reputation goes the HK might have an edge in out of the box reliability, maybe.

If you have the chance to handle them both, and better yet shoot them both I would suggest doing that before you lay out your hard earned money.

But given the vagueness of your question I'd choose the 1911

I would go with the newer designed HK US, 10-12 shots vs 7-8, newer materials & technology.

Get both!  Getting serious though, both are fine guns, and I'd say it depends on what you want to do with it.  For concealability, get the 1911.  And for a target gun, the 1911 will have a better trigger.  I've got a Kimber Gold match and a Colt 1991A1 that I'm slowly customizing.  Both are great guns, but considering the initial cash outlay on the colt was half that of the kimber, I hate to say it but the benefits of the kimber are marginal.  Even after an arched MSH and a Kings beavertail, the colt is still 400 bucks under the cost of the kimber, every bit as reliable and I can't shoot any better off a bench rest with the kimber either.  The basic Kimber/Springfield loaded will cost much less than the Gold match and that won't be as big of an issue.  

I've also got the HK45 USP.  The HK has a coolness factor, and it's also been reliable, but I've never had a reliability problem with any of them.  It's very accurate for a combat gun, even given it's marginal trigger.  It's far easier to clean, and makes a great home or car defense weapon.  I also carry it hiking, fishing and camping.  If the idea of carrying cocked and locked gives you the heebie-geebies then it can be carried decocked with the safety on or off.  Both types of gun can be carried cocked and locked safely, the HK gives you the choice of either mode.  A bonus of the HK is that it's just under a pound lighter than the 1911, but percieved recoil is about the same.  It's got a bif fat grip that helps in that area as well, but it's thickness makes concealment more challenging, and if you don't have gorilla hands like I do, then the 1911 may be a better choice.  

I'd handle both and feel the trigger on both and go from there.  

On a final note, I thought it was interesting that I had to shorten my reloads by about a fifteen thousandths of an inch because the bullet was jamming into the rifleing on the HK, which could cause pressure problems.  They had worked fine in the 1911's.  If you reload, make sure that the bullets cycle smoothly in the gun before you shoot them.  If you shoot factory loads, it won't ever be a problem.

1911 are hard to beat. Maybe a Glock but not a H&K.

If your going to get a 1911, get a Colt

i've got the Loaded, my friend has the USP.  i like them both, i can't hit s#$t with either one.  i love the classic look of a 1911 so that's my vote.  i have an XD9 for my tactical tupperware.

Quoted: I've always found the USP to be a bit unwieldly and ugly

Ah but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think the HKs Sigs Glocks and the like have their own kind aesthetic apeal - a kind of get down to business frankness in their bold lines.

Quoted: I would say the USP would have a slight edge in reliability. It will probably take any ammo you feed it. I don't think the SA would feed all ammo reliably. You would need to find what ammo it will shoot 100% of the time. That has been my experience with 1911s. That said, they are both damn fine guns.

I agree...that said I have 1911's because they fit my hand better.

I got to try the HK USP vs a Kimber classic a couple of hours ago through a friend of a friend.

Impression: The HK USP .45 is huge. Far bigger than I expected and it made my hand crap after a few minutes while trying to keep a proper hold. To be honest the HK didnt feel worth its price tag. The trigger also felt horried and cheap compared to the Kimber. The single action was sloppy with too much creep.

It pains me to say this, but USP wasnt what I expected at all and I'm glad I had the chance to shoot and it handle it. If I had bought blind I would be regretting it.

Thanks for all the advice. I'll have my 1911 in a couple of weeks...Now I need to be sure what model I really want

nothing wrong with either.... get both

I did!

I would go with the 1911A1 first.  I always come back to this one.



however, I've since aquired a P220,  takin' her out to the range in a few weeks, I'll get to run all 3 through their paces  

I don't think you can go wrong buying a Springfield Loaded.