[Blueduck]

Though many like different trigger systems and types of guns for concealed or duty carry for different reasons. It seems a lot, if not most of those admitted that for competition and speed games the short, light, consisitent trigger of the 1911 was pretty much unbeatable. Tough not to believe them looking at the results of big matches.

However, Ernest Langdon recently beating out all the 1911's with a true double action Sig 220 at the IDPA Championships and Dave Sevigny's recent preformance with a virtually stock Glock at the IPSC Factory Nationals seems to have this trend in a bit of jepardy....

Fluke that a couple of mutant great shooters just happen to use or like guns and trigger systems once considered substandard for world class events? or proof that other guns and trigger systems can really compete with the king of comp guns????

[444]

It's the man, not the gun.

[Sarge]

Up until the '70's, the 1911, Browning Hi-Power and the S&W 39/59 pretty much ruled the roost. They were the best of their day- but they were all designed around hardball, and choked with varing frequency on the JHP's available at the time.

The next 15 years brought us the Browning (JP Sauer) BDA, later be reborn as the Sig 220; the 92 Beretta; the CZ75; the new-generation Smiths; the HK's, and the Glock. JHP ammunition was also redesigned with reliability included as a performance factor, and the end result was that autopistols became an entirely sensible alternative to the revolver.

I carried the 1911 for years, and shot it better than anything else- but I knew the Sig 220 was very, very good. It wasn't until I quit the other guns altogether and focused my entire training regimen on the Sig, that I really began to find out how well I could shoot the Sig. For the first year I entertained the notion of returning to the 1911- but I have come to prefer the Sig hands down. You just point it, concentrate on the front sight, and press it off.

Handguns are not a game with me, and I'm no Ernest Langdon- but Mr. Langdon proved a point. Pick a good gun, and practice with until you can shoot it to the limits of your potential. You'll surprise a few people in the process- maybe even yourself.

[Sean Smith]

Skill counts for alot. So do action jobs that make your DA trigger weigh less than some SA triggers. CDP is for heavily modified guns; trick out a SigSauer P220 trigger enough and I'm sure you can make it almost as friendly for rapid, accurate shooting as a good single action.

Another thing to consider is that IDPA has fairly short courses of fire, so accumulated small "mechanical" speed advantages wouldn't be as apparent as in USPSA matches with much longer coures of fire. And of course, the fact that Mr. Langdon is a super-duper shooter who happens to like DA/SA semi-autos doesn't hurt, either. :D

If he proved a point, it is that (a) he is really good, and (b) a heavily modified SigSauer is competitve with heavily modified 1911s if you are really good... not exactly a mind-blower there.

And Dave Sevigny shot in Production class in USPSA with the Glock, a class which doesn't even allow 1911s. At the same match Todd Jarrett won in Limited-10... with a 1911, as usual. Leatham won Limited with what looks an awful lot like... a 1911 (if a mutant widebody variety).

http://www.shootingusa.com/SHOW_NEWS/show_news.html

Of course, non-1911s are fairly popular in IPSC overseas, but then again 1911s aren't as popular (or available) over there, either.

[John Forsyth]

Having seen these people shoot, Leatham, Langdon, and Sevigny, up close and personal, (I held the timer) you are seeing the best of the best. They could pick up a Highpoint and give you their gun and still whip your you know what. Their transition times are phenominal.

The pistol they use is secondary to their talent. It ain't the arrow, it's the Native American.

[Tamara]

I seem to recall chewing the fat on this topic ten-ish years ago before the STI/SVI revolution, when CZ-based guns (Were they called Witnesses, or something else back then?) were making a strong showing in IPSC shooting...

[KMKeller]

Sean, you said that CDP is for heavily modified guns. From the list I'm looking at in the rule book, it shows some minor mods affecting accuracy and trigger pull with most mods being present on most 1911s from the factory. Am I missing something?

[Andrew Wyatt]

Dave sevginy is a good shooter. i'm sure he'd do as well with whatever he used.


the 1911 is still better, though, as evidenced by who wins the unlimited classes.

[jercamp45]

it is really the shooter, not the machine. BUT the 1911 is an incredible machine in the hands of an experienced shooter!
The Sig, CZ-75 are very nice pieces of hardware, but darn near worthless in the hands of an unskilled shooter. I have seen pistols that were masterpieces of the combat gunsmiths art in the hands of people who could not hit fish in a bucket....did not help them. But I saw a fairly well trained shooter out shoot NYPD Cops with their own weapon too!(back then, the motto was duck, count to six then run!! Ooops, NY reload!!)
I ain't no master...but I make fairly small groups. I shoot the 1911 best, but I can do a similar level of work with the Sig and CZ too.
It is indeed the shooter...not the gun!
Jercamp45

[Blueduck]

And Dave Sevigny shot in Production class in USPSA with the Glock, a class which doesn't even allow 1911s.

Combining the scores (including deducting the points for Daves minor 9mm) and he would have come in a close 2'nd to Jarrett beating all all the other shooters with high end guns in limited ten. Still pretty impressive in my book ;)

[Sean Smith]

Am I missing something?

Maybe. It kind of depends on how you define "heavily modified." But in CDP you can do just about ANYTHING to improve the accuracy and trigger pull as long as it doesn't involve hanging stuff on the outside of the gun. That covers ALOT of ground... you can replace the barrel and ALL of the action parts. I'm not even sure a minimum trigger weight is specified.

In CDP, it is basically legal to gut the entire gun and replace all the innards with custom-made parts. I'm sure you can gut a SigSauer P220 and replace everything inside the gun to get a competitive firearm, but that doesn't say much about the 1911 vs other guns per se.

[Ramshackle]

In the hands of a skilled shooter most guns will come alive. However, for the average shooter the 1911, with its crisp trigger and short reset, makes them shoot better. To say that the top shooters can compete as well with an SA/DA compared to a 1911 is just that. It's the average shooter that's the issue.

[Skunkabilly]

Ernest Langdon can outshoot me if he had duct tape over his eyes and had 550 cord binding his wrists and ankles together and I had my Beretta that he done up for me....

[Tamara]

The question isn't "Can Ernie, using a BlastOMatic 2000, outshoot Bob, using a Zapmeister 40k?", it's "Could Ernie, using a BlastOMatic 2000, outshoot himself with a Zapmeister 40k?" ;)

[Sean Smith]

Combining the scores (including deducting the points for Daves minor 9mm) and he would have come in a close 2'nd to Jarrett beating all all the other shooters with high end guns in limited ten. Still pretty impressive in my book.

That doesn't tell the whole story, though. Major PF only helps you if you aren't getting A-zone hits. I'm guessing Dave didn't have many B's and C's if he won in his class. That still leaves him with the big rate of fire advantage because he was shooting 9x19 at 125 PF, hence a better score than he would get at Major power factor like Jarrett was shooting in Limited-10 or Leatham was shooting in Limited.

And in Production, a Glock is probalby the closest choice to a single-action 1911 that is allowed by the rules in terms of trigger pull.

[GeneS]

the 1911 is still better, though, as evidenced by who wins the unlimited classes.

Wasn't one of the more recent Open Class World Shoots won with some kind of CZ-75 clone?

[OF]

The question isn't "Can Ernie, using a BlastOMatic 2000, outshoot Bob, using a Zapmeister 40k?", it's "Could Ernie, using a BlastOMatic 2000, outshoot himself with a Zapmeister 40k?" Exactly. Everyone here is comparing shooters, when the thread was opened to compare pistols.

All other things equal, what makes a better platform for solving whatever shooting problem you have? IDPA, IPSC, life, war, whatever.

Just because Sevigny kicks mucho rear with a Glock doesn't really say anything other then the Glock in his hands can reach that level of performance. That doesn't really shine any light on the comparison...

- Gabe

[OF]

And in Production, a Glock is probalby the closest choice to a single-action 1911 that is allowed by the rules in terms of trigger pull.A really good point. It's the very rare DA/SA that makes it to the finals.
That action type is just a compromise any way you look at it.

- Gabe

[Sean Smith]

Wasn't one of the more recent Open Class World Shoots won with some kind of CZ-75 clone?

Being from a country STI and SV don't regularly deliver to will do that. :D

In all fairness, there are probably several platforms you can use where if you replace all the parts it will approximate what a pseudo-1911 racegun can do.

[Harold Mayo]

It's the craftsman, not the tool.

[Gunslinger45]

A better test of firearms might be to take 10 average shooters (like me) and using a variety of handguns let each shoot 100 rounds through them shooting the same course. The problem arises here in that different people again will prefer different handguns. So I guess I'm not any closer to a real test than the above mentioned matches.

I like my Kimber Pro Carry's because they are 1911's. Even then I had to put mid-length triggers in them and slim grips on them in order to get them to fit my hand just the way I wanted them to. Now they fit dang near perfectly! I also had to put Chip McCormick thumb locks on them, as the stock ones were really bad news.

I had a S&W M1006 that I simply could not operate. Even with a straight back grip panel (I hate those one-piece things) I could not operate the decocking lever with my shooting hand. I also had a hard time reaching the DA trigger for that first shot. With either gun I can't reach the mag release with my shooting hand but with the Smith it was much worse.

As far as DA/SA Vs SA only goes I prefer the smooth same feel every time SA trigger pull. When it comes to SA Vs DA only I guess I could get used to the shorter than traditional DA trigger pull that DA only guns have. But the combo of a heavy traditional DA first shot trigger pull followed by subsequent lighter SA trigger pulls is for the birds, as far as I'm concerned (Lord love you if you like the combo).

I guess to say that one type of handgun was out performing the other you would need a broad base of different shooters and every model of auto pistol available. The only mods allowed would be those allowing shooters to get a good grip on the guns. Everything else then would have to be stock out of the box. If you then would like to see how mods affected the guns performance you'd have to allow for similar mods to each gun (if possible) and have the same broad base of shooters shoot them. The results would be interesting.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[MrAcheson]

Its the shooter and not the gun.

Its the 'smith not the action. A custom-smithed hand-built 1911 race gun is wonderous. However the idea that other quality designs can't be custom-smithed and hand-built to the same level of performance is a steaming load of "it". The 1911 is a wonderful tuner gun, but that doesn't mean you can't tune other actions to be as good or superior.

[Sean Smith]

Its the shooter and not the gun.

Innacurate cliche. It is the shooter AND the gun. Just like everyone else, Rob Leatham et. al. shoot better with better guns. That's why great shooters still shoot expensive guns when the rules allow them. Competition shooters aren't constantly pushing the hardware envelope just for fun. Shooter skill may be most important, but the gun matters.

[444]

I agree that it's the shooter and the gun, however the point is that if you take one of the best action pistol shooters in the world and give him any reasonable gun and he practices with it like he normally does, he is going to kick some serious butt. Another point is that the a given gun may help you to shoot better (there is no doubt about it), but that is only one part (IMO a small part) of the equation. The operators skill and experience are what makes the winner, equipment plays a role but it is not nearly as significant.

[OF]

Sure, 444, but the issue here is comparing those guns. It's only a small part, but it's the part in question.

- Gabe

[Mike Irwin]

Never did have an unbeatable mystique to me...

[444]

Yeah, it's the part in question, but to me at least it doesn't prove a whole lot for exactly the reason that Tamara mentioned.
If Joe Blow wins a match using Gun A, that doesn't mean Gun A is superior to all others. It also doesn't mean that the score Joe shot with Gun A couldn't be beaten by Joe using Gun B.
Not to mention the fact that if Joe put in the same amount of practice and was having a real good day, he might have shot the same or a better score with any number of different guns. Joe won because he is a very skilled person.l

[Illuminate]

I would imagine that a lot of people who use the 1911 in their competitions is do so - at least in part - because they have trained with 1911's. Whether or not it's the "best" gun, it is a very established gun. That has to be taken into account as well. Tradition is not something easily broken, whether it needs to be broken or not.

[Correia]

Illuminate, gotta disagree big time on that one. Us competiton shooters are the most NON-traditional bunch of shooters out there. If you show us something that allows us to shoot that much better, we will be using it the next week. :)

[Sean Smith]

Yeah, this looks REAL traditional... ;)

[Illuminate]

Haha, I guess I'm wrong. Shouldn't compare everything to the military. :p

[Wakal]

The 1911 isn't a tyro's gun.

That is part of the reason that the US Military went to junkernines instead of staying with the 1911 platform. From my experience both as an instructor and as a guy who has to regularly qualify, most military folks these days have never...ever...touched a firearm of any sort prior to coming in the military. The manual of arms on a 1911 requires some attention and The Powers That Be would rather spend the time on touchy-feely "consideration of others" training :banghead: rather than allow range time.

The top of the heap...the cutting edge, as it were...in 1911 technology is probably the S_I (STI/SVI) platform. The top IPSC shooters, with very few exception, are the sort who would spend any amount of money for any advantage (real or perceived)...and most who are allowed to choose, choose to shoot an S_I.



Alex

[Ford]

Just got back from the range and I still can't shoot anything as well as a 1911.
I have shot Glocks, H&K's, Kahr's, etc.. and still I am best with the 1911.
From what I took to the range today....Kahr PM9, Springfield XD40, Kimber Compact CDP and Wilson Stainless Protector. The Kimber and Wilson were by far the best.
As a side note, I tried using shok-buffs in my Kimber and they worked great. Recoil was noticeablly less.
Just shoot what you shoot best.