I need opinions on 1911s


May 28, 2010, 07:52 PM
I've recently got into bulls-eye shooting and I'm enjoying the hell out of it. Right now I only have a S&W 41 22. and I want to purchase something in .45 so I can compete in a full bulls-eye match. To be clear I fully expect to sink in money towards accurizing in order to make any of my choices suitable for bullseye competition. After looking at all different styles of .45 pistols I am inevitably led to the 1911 platform due to the mountain of parts available to it and the expertise available. The thing is, I don't know what brand of 1911, out of the hundreds, to look for. I've done my searching but with the 1911 there is definitely so much information available that it's difficult to sift through the non pertinent data. Right now I am interested in a few particular choices:

1. SIT Spartan- Pros: STI Parts, QC, factory backing, and is new Cons: Armscor made frame and slide (the forward cocking serrations and the billboard on the side doesn't do it for me but that is just a personal preference issue and not a mechanical fault of the gun)

2. The WWII US Govt Property Colt at the local funstore that someone has already fooled around with (previous owner seems to have stippled the front strap and installed adjustable sights) -- Pros: Heritage. It's very cool. (I know, I know. Not a rational reason to choose this particular gun but the heart wants what the heart wants). Someone has already cut it up so I wouldn't feel bad accurizing it. To be honest, If I didn't know any better (which I don't) I could swear it was set up to be a hardball gun. Cons: It's well used. Probably a 90% gun. More importantly, I wonder how the steel in this old war horse compares with modern weapons.

3.Chinese Made Norinco- Pros: Supposedly made of 5100 series steel. Supposedly seriously top shelf stuff to make a gun out of. Definitely good steel for large knives. Popular platform for custom 1911s (so im told) Cons: Chinese

That's what I'm looking at now. I'm not particularly considering anything from Springfield or other makers, but if someone can make a compelling case I'm all ears.

Oh, and thanks for your time and opinions

If you enjoyed reading about "I need opinions on 1911s" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
May 28, 2010, 08:22 PM

Look into a Les Baer with the optional 1.5" guarantee. 1911's own the bullseye circuit. Lotsa fun and challenging too.

May 28, 2010, 08:26 PM
If you like the old colt and the price is right I would jump on it IF...
-The barrel to bushing fit is tight
-The barrel to slide fit is tight
The barrel to slide fit can be checked by pushing firmly on the barrel hood with the slide forward. I wouldn't worry about Colt's steel, I'm not the biggest Colt fan but I know they don't make junk. The other 1911 I would look for on the used rack is a kimber custom classic, not the custom II, the custom classic is built like a true 1911 should be (No drop safety). As for other formats of pistols, well, there is a reason the 1911 has been taking names and kicking but for nearly a century!

May 28, 2010, 08:30 PM
Sorry you are not going to like mine but here it is anyway. The 1911 sucks in this modern day in my opinion. There are far better designs available from a sundry of gun makers I think you are very ill informed especially since the OP's first choice "STI" is one of the most popular brands in competitions. What did you have in mind Doc Glock, since you only had bad things to say without mentioning an alternative. I often say " if you are complaining without a solution in mind you are just part of the problem" think about that next time you post.

For the OP I would reccomend STI just not the model you selected, I would look at the Trojan for single stack and the Edge for a double stack. Of course these are double the suggested price bracket through your examples. Nort to mention Les Baer is only a few hundred more than my suggestions and a much better gun IMHO.

May 28, 2010, 08:36 PM
Sorry you are not going to like mine but here it is anyway. The 1911 sucks in this modern day in my opinion. There are far better designs available from a sundry of gun makers.

I agree. Far to complicated for the average shooter.

May 28, 2010, 08:45 PM
Doc Glock I take it you like the plastic since forum name is Glock

May 28, 2010, 08:48 PM
The 1911 sucks
Not exactly. ;)
Far to complicated for the average shooter.
Seriously? Didn't seem complicated to me at 17, and still doesn't. Wonderful piece of engineering IMHO.

Anyway, the OP wanted an opinion of the three 1911's, not someone to tell him 1911s suck.

May 28, 2010, 08:57 PM
Of the 3 you listed, I'd get the Spartan. What I would Recommend is a Springfield, a Mil-Spec is a great gun to build on.

BTW: Ignore people who say foolish things while not knowing what they are talking about, you know who they are.

May 28, 2010, 08:57 PM
Doc Glock and EddieNFL: I'm not trying to be critical of your opinion but is there another .45 platform out there that can compete as successfully in a bulls-eye competition? I'm not trying to say that only 1911s can be successful in bulls-eye matches it is just that it seems to me that 1911's can get to the accuracy standard demanded by bulls-eye a bit easier than any other platform. If I'm wrong please speak to it.

schmeky: The Les Baers sure are nice. I wish I could afford one. My overall goal is to build a competitive bullseye pistol out of a mid-range 1911. I think that's doable. I know, I know. I'd probably be happier just saving up and buying top shelf the first time but making something better than it ought to be is an attractive endeavor. I dig the extra effort. "A little poison now and then makes for agreeable dreams." -Nietzsche

The Real Mags: The Trojan sure is nice and is definitely on my short list.

May 28, 2010, 08:59 PM
Banned? Clique? :confused:

Interesting that you felt the need to tell the OP his pistol of choice sucks, and then later list what you deem weak points to the design. Raining on peoples parades just isn't nice. ;)

Over and out. AC

May 28, 2010, 09:00 PM
STI is always a good choice. Nothing but good press on STIs.

May 28, 2010, 09:01 PM
I have no experience with RIA, but from what I understand they are pretty good for the price. I haven't heard of too many people complaining about them. To my knowledge they are made in the Phillipines. Just a suggestion.

May 28, 2010, 09:10 PM

If you want to build your own, there are numerous platforms to pick from. This is my Norinco I fitted a Kart barrel to; I managed to get 5 rounds out of 7 into 3/4". The problem with a gun like a Norc is the slide to frame fit. Keep in mind the slide frame fit is not critical for accuracy, but for the utmost in accuracy potential, i.e. competitive bullseye shooting, it could be the difference between winning and loosing.

All the advice you've been given is good (well almost all of it :rolleyes: ), and if you don't already know, a precision fitted match barrel is the heart of the 1911's superb accuracy potential.


May 28, 2010, 09:10 PM
You could always pick up a Fusion longslide .45, they are tight and solid pistols that are accurate as sin.

Jim Watson
May 28, 2010, 09:13 PM
Does that get me banned from your clique?

No, Doc Glock, but it will make it darned hard for you to shoot in NRA Conventional Pistol competition (bullseye matches.)

I guess you could shoot a Pardini or S&W in the bigbore phase.
But it has to be a very accurate .45 ACP of some sort.

And you could shoot a Beretta for Service Pistol.

For the O.P., I would try to fit in a Colt or Springfield and when I was sure I was having fun, get it accurized by a bullseye specialist gunsmith.

May 28, 2010, 09:15 PM
My fixed barrel blow back Makarov and CZ 82 9x18 shoot much more accurately to play with in my opinion.

Doc, with all due respect, where do you shoot that Makarov and CZ in bullseye competition???

May 28, 2010, 09:15 PM
Hey Schmeky, is that an STI hammer on your 1911?

May 28, 2010, 09:20 PM
Seriously? Didn't seem complicated to me at 17, and still doesn't. Wonderful piece of engineering IMHO.

Doc Glock and EddieNFL: I'm not trying to be critical of your opinion but is there another .45 platform out there that can compete as successfully in a bulls-eye competition?

And my wife tells me I'm as subtle as a brick through a window.

My firearm choices are as follows:

Target practice - 1911

Carry - 1911

IDPA - 1911

IPSC - 1911

Three Gun - 1911, 1100 and M4

Bedside - 1911

PPC (years ago) - 1911

Lots of folks complain the 1911 is to large, heavy or uncomfortable for concealed carry. I've always subscribed to the Smith theory that a gun should be comforting, not necessarily comfortable. Maybe I'm too ignorant to know any better or maybe I'm not very sensitive.

I am by no means a gun expert

But you are well versed in internet lore.

May 28, 2010, 09:21 PM

I'm just showing you this to show you can think out of the box. This is a CZ-97 I accurized. The best group I have ever fired @ 25 yards from a sandbag rest is 5 rounds in 9/16" with this pistol. So there are alternatives.


Jim Watson is right, when the time comes, someone that specializes in bullseye 1911's will need to do some magic on whatever you choose.

May 28, 2010, 09:24 PM
Schmeky: That is a fine example of a 1911. Simple and accurate.

I suppose what I'm looking for is a reason not to lay money down on the old Colt. My biggest concern is not being able to get the colt to the accuracy standard needed or shooting a well worn gun to the point where it's not feasible as a bullseye gun.

Thanks for the great suggestions so far

May 28, 2010, 09:27 PM

Got the hammer here:


May 28, 2010, 09:34 PM
I knew the 1911 fan boys would flame me but I just don't like the 1911 platform at all and that is just my opinion!

No, it's a personal preference. I guess I could find a Glock thread and post my dislikes, but I'm not interested in Glock threads.

May 28, 2010, 09:37 PM
Thanks Schmeky, I've been looking for one like that.

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 12:32 AM
The 1911 sucks in this modern day in my opinion


Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 12:39 AM
The 1911 design has several design weak points.

Plunger tube staked on and vibrates loose. not on quality guns.

Ejector only staked on and vibrates loose. not on quality guns.

Hammer spring capture by rust in housing. never heard this one before.

Sear leaf spring spring varies with other functions, trigger, grip safety. so?

Not left hand user friendly. ambi controls are available everywhere

Weak stress point at barrel link. not an issue on quality guns.

Sharp edges when carrying concealed. not on a properly made one.

Too many friction points that require constant lubrication. well, you have the rails and barrel.

Non consistent tolerance specs by clone makers for parts. that's the nature of the design.

Use of MIM parts by current clone makers. not an issue if they're quality.

Now JMB also designed the .25 ACP and the .380 ACP so the 1911a1 was not God's gift to handgun shooters. who said they were?


May 29, 2010, 12:51 AM
I have been out of bullseye shooting for well over 20 years. I do know that the Beretta M9 is being used and very effectively in competition. The armorers have got accurizing it down to a science. The same can be said of the 1911. My advice would be to move up with the times and take advantage of what has been learned. When I started the philosophy was that the 1911 was the alpha and omega of autoloaders. Being realistic alot of better designs based on the Browning short recoil system have come down the road. I am not attempting to upset anyone at this late hour but even John Browning was evolving his design but not able to finish it. Perhaps others have. I own Glocks and Sigs and have had Government models ( I prefer the term). I enjoy all the pistols and dont knock people for their choices only their bad attitudes and treatment of others. I enjoy firearms period...

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 12:56 AM
I am not attempting to upset anyone at this late hour but even John Browning was evolving his design but not able to finish it.

yes he did. the original design was changed quite a few times by mr. browning for better reliability/army's feature demands, during the pistol trials, and after adoption.

browning died before the hi-power hit the market, and that design was changed by FN before prodution.

May 29, 2010, 12:58 AM
Les Baer... All things equal, it's pretty hard to out shoot a good 1911 in bullseye shooting.;)

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 01:16 AM
^^agreed. (with the glock part lol)

the glock's simple design does make more sense for general issue in the modern military. both economically, and from a maintenance standpoint.


Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 01:19 AM

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 01:22 AM

i think everyone's seen that hickock video.

that can be done with any quality pistol of similar caliber, not just glock, my friend :)

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 01:45 AM
Well who has ever done it with a 1911........no one!

1911 at 200 yards ;) :


May 29, 2010, 02:05 AM
I am a Glock fan and competed with 1911/Glock with very good results. For me, it does not have to be 1911 vs Glock at all. I started out with a 1911 and became a Glock convert. I like both platforms, and both have their pros and cons.

As to OP, I am also in the market for another 1911. My first choice is STI Trojan, but I can't buy a new Trojan in California. I can buy Kimbers/RIAs, but I have considered S&W and Sig too.

Pistols are simply tools (like a sling shot) I use to make holes on my targets. Both platforms are great for making consistent holes really fast.

May 29, 2010, 02:35 AM
Here's another one:

Shooting a Quarter 100 Yards Away: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHJVmc4PKUM

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 03:35 AM
Sorry guys but I don't believe either video. You can not see the shooter and the target at the same time. But you do get an B+ for trying..

right, it's a conspiracy lol

May 29, 2010, 04:35 AM
lol to complicated!? if a 1911 is too complicated your an idiot.

May 29, 2010, 05:05 AM
For the OP:

The cost of a good target grade 1911 is $900 to $1000 new.

Add in the cost of frame, slide fitting $150 minimum
Rebarreling to bullseye standards $250 minimum
Action work $125

Add this to the initial cost of the pistol and you are in the $1425 to $1525 range. A couple hundred more and you could be into a Les Baer Bullseye gun, either the softball or hardball gun.

I know economics is a huge issue and so is the vision you have for your bullseye pistol when you get it the way you really want it.

Good luck with your bullseye shooting. I cut my teeth on it and its a great tool for learning precision handgun shooting. I even go so far to say the epitome of handgun marksmanship.

May 29, 2010, 07:28 AM
I just finished my first season competing in Bullseye. What a hoot. I even won a plaque for 3rd Sharpshooter. I believe I was one of the few competitors shooting a stock gun using iron sights with full power hardball, a Kimber Target Match. I have competed with 1911's for many years. JMB's wonderful design is not for beginners. If by 'complicated' Paladin means it takes training and practice, I agree. If he means that the gun has to be maintained, I agree.
All that being said, at our awards banquet, I won a Springfield XDm 3.8 9mm. I started the holiday early and shot the new toy yesterday. I am impressed. It gobbled up every round I fed it and I had no trouble printing sub 1" groups, 20 rounds at a time. Cleanup took 5 minutes or less. Next season, I will still compete in Bullseye with my Kimber, but I am seriously thinking of putting in the practice time to be able to shoot the XD in some of the other venues.

May 29, 2010, 10:18 AM
The human eye can not see a quarter at 300 feet with out a visual aidI could easily see a quarter sized object at 100 yards when my eyes were young.

I see you are still trying to piss on the OP's parade. Make ya feel good, does it? :rolleyes:

Why don't you start a 1911 bashing thread and wallow around in it. ;)

May 29, 2010, 10:50 AM
"lol to complicated!? if a 1911 is too complicated your an idiot."

It's "you're", and being too complicated is relative. It's possibly complicated for a first time 1911 owner, but probably not overly complex for a veteran 1911 owner.

You can't just call someone an idiot because their brain doesn't work exactly like yours or someone else. I'd hesitate to call anyone an idiot because there are so many forms of intelligence.

tfields, perhaps your form of intelligence is all things mechanical. In that case, good for you!

May 29, 2010, 10:56 AM
This thread got weird.

Gents, your advice is well appreciated. As cool as that CZ-97 and an XD that can shoot 1 in', I think I'm going to stick with a 1911 as there are more "go fast" parts available.

I'm not looking for a home defense gun, I have a fully converted saiga 12 for that.

To use what I hope is an accurate analogy, I'm the guy lookin' to buy/build a race car to compete with on the racetrack not use it to go to the grocery store and pick up the kids with. Not to say that glocks or other pistols are "grocery getters" but that the intent of their design is different than that of a bulls-eye target pistol and I have doubts that Glocks can attain the level of accuracy needed as easily as a 1911.

When I want something that works in a blender full of acid at the bottom of the sea a 1st generation Glock 17 would be a fantastic choice... But I don't want a pistol that works in a blender full of acid at the bottom of the sea.(although that would be nice) I want a pistol capable of shooting a ragged hole at 50 yards. It seems to me that as a platform, 1911s are capable of that.

Now, I'm not trying to insinuate that 1911s are the only guns capable of good bullseye scores. Hell, I'd love to have a S&W 9-52 or a Sig 210 to use during the center-fire portion, but buying two pistols is generally more expensive than buying 1 pistol.

Changing hats. Is an old WWII era Colt viable as a platform from which to build a bullseye pistol or am I hampering myself?

May 29, 2010, 11:01 AM
For Bullseye, a 1911 is almost mandatory due to the .45 ACP portion of fire and the need to shoot small groups at fifty yards. One other possible option would be the S&W 945, but Bullseye is dominated by 1911s. In my experience, most shooters use the same 1911 for the .45 and centerfire portions of the match. The S&W M41 mentioned by the OP is often seen at local matches.

I have two 1911s set up for Bullseye, one with a red dot sight and one with iron sights. The red dot sighted gun is a Baer Prowler III, and the iron sighted gun started life as a Colt 1991A1 that Travis Strahan turned into a real Bullseye pistol. As I get older, the Baer sees more range time. My eyes just will not handle the rigors of iron sights.

A lot of Bullseye smiths like the SA GI and SA Mil-Spec guns as good base guns. I also see a fair number of modified Colts. I would think there is nothing wrong with the old US Property Colt as a base gun unless the slide is cracked. A new Kart barrel and fitted bushing is probably the best first modification to make. Lots of barrels are good shooters, but Kart barrels are both easy to get and not too expensive.

May 29, 2010, 11:34 AM

You're killin' me here.:eek: I'm not sure of where to dispose of all my outdated, "mutated" 1911's. All of mine , except one, shoot very accurately and run like clocks. Many failed in Vietnam because they were used in WWII and were continually and consistently armored. As for the rust, the steel is much better today and can withstand the wet, humid climate of Nam. Now...where's the nearest dumpster?:rolleyes:

May 29, 2010, 11:52 AM

THANK YOU for your service Sir. Vietnam was a tough place to hang out! Glock on brother.

May 29, 2010, 11:52 AM

I am sorry this thread got weird on you, but it happens more often that it should. Sounds like you have navigated the advice very well and will make the right decision.

Personal opinions are fine, but bias is a road to nowhere. Let us know what you do.

May 29, 2010, 11:59 AM
(shakes head) Doc Glock, just so we're on the same sheet of music (at least in the same genre), what pistol would you use for the .45 acp portion of a Bullseye match?

Don't just say "I'd use X brand or Y brand". Please explain to me how the design and make of your chosen pistol allows it to shoot under 2 inches at 50 yards or what you would do to that pistol to consistently get it to do so.

Oh and keep in mind The pistol and the process to accurize it have to be readily available and favorably comparable to the 1911. No one-of pistols involving Gaston Glock, a block of adamantium, and machine tools blessed by the pope.

May 29, 2010, 12:20 PM
Yep... specifically what would you do to a DA striker fired pistola to make it the sweet shooter a SA Les Baer is. (besides a trigger job).

I don't believe it!:neener:

May 29, 2010, 12:47 PM
Doc Glock, as another Glock fan, I would agree with some of your perspectives and opinions. However, the OP asked for opinions on 1911s.

What if the OP asked for opinions on Glock models and a STI fan pissed on Glocks with the 25 yard accuracy STI models will leave the Glocks in the dust with?

May 29, 2010, 01:51 PM
oops, wrong place. Argghh. Pay attention AC

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 02:07 PM
I might have been born in the dark and arrived on a tulip truck


May 29, 2010, 03:42 PM
if a 1911 is too complicated your an idiot.

I wouldn't go that far. Some folks thrive on simplicity; others enjoy investing the time required to master a device. Lots of Chevy drivers think they could handle John Force's ride at full throttle for 1,320 feet. They would be shocked...if they survived the ride.

The 1911 isn't for everyone. I cannot shoot any other platform as well. If I invested the time??? Sure, but I'm too far down life's path.

May 29, 2010, 07:13 PM
Sorry you are not going to like mine but here it is anyway. The 1911 sucks in this modern day in my opinion. There are far better designs available from a sundry of gun makers.
The 1911 is one of the best fighting handguns of all time, that is proven with an almost 100 years in service. If you look at military SF units, elite law enforcement teams, and yes Doc Glock, many, but not all successful competitive shooters, you will see a 1911 in their holster. Why? They haven't came up with anything better yet, PERIOD.

P.S. I own several Glocks myself, Models 20-10mm, 30-.45ACP, 17-9mm, 26-9mm

May 29, 2010, 07:29 PM
To bad the 9x18 is ineamic when it come to knockdownpower. No pun intended, lol. I do like the accuracy the fixed barrel design provides. But I'll stick to a larger caliber for a fighting handgun. To each his own.

May 29, 2010, 07:35 PM
Lets just say this, the best combat handgun is the one that is in your holster when the shooting starts. Besides, A handgun is only good until we find a rifle.

May 29, 2010, 07:52 PM
Doc Glock, didn't mean to piss you off. I wouldn't want to be hit with either one. And yes, spelling has never been a strong subject for me. But the fact is that the .45acp is a harder hitting round and has more muzzle energy. Not to say that you can't put a round in you attackers face and stop him instantly, but a .45acp fired from a 1911 or a Glock or whatever has a higher chance of a one shot stop that a 9x18, or a 9x19.

May 29, 2010, 07:58 PM
Before this thread develops further into a 1911 vs the world thread, I just wanted to let everyone know that I put the 1944 made colt on layaway. I spent a good deal of time going over the pistol looking for cracks and other defects and was satisfied. I look forward to rebuilding it into something truly accurate.

Also I've rationalized that I can pick up an STI Trojan or Spartan in 9mm later to fill my need for a dedicated pistol for the center-fire portion of a conventional pistol match.

To throw you a bone Doc Glock, I'm sure i could use a makarov should I so desire for this course of fire. I don't know if I'd want to but I suppose I could.

May 29, 2010, 08:09 PM
Paladin, good luck in you future competitions. What ever pistol you choose make sure it is what you like and are proficient with and not what's in style. Hope my posts helped some.

May 29, 2010, 08:19 PM
If I recall correctly, the most one shot stops were done with a .22 caliber bullet.

NATO 5.6 MM is .22 caliber and I have never seen a .45 caliber rifle in all my years in military service.

I have seen a lot of bad guns go down when hit with a 9 mm diameter projectile which is .355 in in diameter such as 38, 38 long, .38 special, 357 magnum, 357 Sig, 9 mm Luger, 9 mm Browning Cort(.380 ACP) and the 9.24 mm Makarov.
Thought we were talking about handgun calibers, not vary many pistols chambered in 5.56 NATO. I'm not saying that 9mm isn't capable of stopping the enemy, I was just saying that I believe the .45acp to be better in this aspect.

May 29, 2010, 08:26 PM
Doc Glock: I'm paying a little over 700 for it. It already has a set of ellison adjustable sights and it looks like someone has already set it up as a hardball gun. Everything seems pretty tight. the frame has a tiny bit of play but I'm ok with that for now. I liked it so I'm buying it.

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 08:58 PM
If I recall correctly, the most one shot stops were done with a .22 caliber bullet.

30 cal ;)

(7.62x39 ak47)

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 09:02 PM
And I was driving the truck!......don't take it apart please.

lol :)

May 29, 2010, 09:04 PM
Doc Glock, I totally agree. We both would rather have a good handgun than a phone in a bad situation. By the way, the ice cream comparison was cool. That's one of the things that make this country great, the open exchange of ideas and different views. Oh, I remembered that you mentioned you served in Vietnam, happy memorial day.

May 29, 2010, 10:15 PM
I know you guys are a bit uh ... slow on the internet memes, but you are aware that Doc Glock has done nothing but troll since he's been around, right?

That being said, I think when my next 1911 comes around I'd get another Colt. Just cause it seems like ... the right thing to do. And because mine has treated me real well so far.

Full Metal Jacket
May 29, 2010, 10:16 PM
^^he's got his opinions, which i don't agree with, but he is entitled to them.

trolling is trying to cause arguments--doc glock hasn't done that at all.

try again ;)

May 30, 2010, 12:22 AM
No....... Common Sense. The human eye can not see a quarter at 300 feet with out a visual aid. If the quarter only got bent like also shown that was a very weak hit. !911 bullets would simple bounce off people at that distance.

Early Military test of the 1911 at 250yds penetration of white pine 4inch. Early ordnance test determined velocity and energy remaining at 250yds to be 666fps and 226 foot lbs That at 250 yds and would hurt you at 100 will not bounce off

Thats from Jerry Kuhnhausen shop manual I would say he has forgot more about a 1911 than you will ever know

trolling is trying to cause arguments--doc glock hasn't done that at all

he will thats his nature He also says he has a Singer MFG co. 1911 (they made 500) he values at 150K But he hates 1911's

May 30, 2010, 12:37 AM
Doc glock,

The spirit of this forum is not to go into threads and give advice people didn't ask for. If all you are going to do here is look for any thread asking for anything about 1911s and bash them, you have just earned the distinction of being the second THR member ever to go in my ignore list.

When the Glock design is as old as the 1911 design is, it won't be more popular than ever nor dominating any class of anything.

Full Metal Jacket
May 30, 2010, 12:53 AM
come on guys.

do you really get riled up at people's opinions like this in person? so what if someone doesn't like your gun?

May 30, 2010, 12:57 AM
If all they want to do is intrude into and crap on someone's question instead of answer it, then yes, I will absolutely walk away and ignore them. I doubt I will miss the conversation I might have had otherwise.

Why do we call it The High Road again?

May 30, 2010, 01:15 AM
Paladin I am confused did you ever get a clear answer or am I having mental failures to feed? I have been out of this but I would recommend to you as was recommended to me years ago to not sink a lot of money into a first pistol but just get something that meets the requirements. Yes I would say get a new pistol if you can. You can always keep it for fun. And their are certainly good Smith & Wessons and even Springsfields that mite work well in a Government model platform. Sig Sauer also offer a P220 version in single action that mite meet your needs. Glock 21s are usually large for most people but I dont think they have an accepted Bullseye platform. I could be wrong. H&K I believe now has a .45 thats aimed at that competition. There are many choices. You will spend some money but not the really big bucks that others do. SEE how you like this part of the game. You can do as I did and even borrow a pistol before jumping with both feet. Way back I guess in the 1930s and into the 50s revolvers were the hot set up but they were put away for the auto. One more thing to those reading this yes Mr. Browning evolved his design but the final one he worked on became the High Power and was completed by Saive.
He worked with him. If time permitted who knows what the outcome might have been. Also Carl Walther double action P38 is a neat "modern" design with a good track record. And finally Gaston Glock studied many pistol designs to come up with his by borrowing as many others have facets of the most successful designs. I think the Glock will be around for many years. In this country having a big aftermarket is indeed a moneymaker just like automobiles. And as with cars and trucks too many take apart good pistols and ruin them. Then they get a bad bad rap and make food for discussion on forums just like this. Good Luck Paladin. Spend wisely.

P/s I would stay away from Norincos or cobbling up old military pistols. The steels in those are soft and steel alloys today are much superior. Again evolution takes place. Norincos are soft because of the way they do business. Take the money and run and never look back. Same with Chinese tires. The DOT has more complaints and other incidents than you can imagine.

May 30, 2010, 01:46 AM
Doc Glock Is there a reason you seem to be stalking me around and making absurd accusations friend?

stalking you? I have been member since Join Date: February 3, 2004 and have over 3700 posts You the one that shows up every where I have been a member for years and attack Bersa and my boards. Your one been ban from 4 boards in now 5 months of 2010 not me. Last one was the Walther Forums . In Apr.

Full Metal Jacket
May 30, 2010, 02:17 AM
Gaston Glock studied many pistol designs to come up with his by borrowing as many others have facets of the most successful designs. I think the Glock will be around for many years. In this country having a big aftermarket is indeed a moneymaker just like automobiles. And as with cars and trucks too many take apart good pistols and ruin them.


i think the glock will prove to be as endearing a design as the 1911.

i still like my 1911's better than my glocks though lol :)

May 30, 2010, 02:25 AM

Thank you for your advice.

I was under the impression that the Chinese made Norincos have a reputation for being made of an unusually good grade of steel (a 5100 series steel). Good knives can be made with that type of steel (Im thinking of 5160 in particular) This is not to say that a Norinco is heat treated properly, which makes all the difference in the world, but the alloy has the potential for very good toughness and better wear resistance than 4100 series carbon steels.

As for the steel in an older US GI pistol, my biggest concern would be the heat treat. For all I know only the critical wear areas of the pistol were hardened. This is probably an unfounded fear. If these old workhorses have gone through the years with thousands and thousands of rounds through the pipes and still work, they must have been made well.

May 30, 2010, 03:31 AM
If anyone is interested; the particular pistol I chose looks exactly like the pistol found here


The grips look the same, the sights look the same, and weirdly enough, the texturing job on the front strap is exactly the same.

From what I've researched the sights and that texturing job were common stuff to do back in the 50s and 60s. Ironically I was flipping through a pile of old gun rags after putting the pistol on layaway and I came across an article written in that era about accurizing government 1911s. The article even outlined the procedure of using a punch to achieve the same fronstrap texture!

Small world.

May 30, 2010, 04:53 AM
The 1911 sucks in this modern day in my opinion.



That is indeed AN opinion, however, that opinion is not shared by everyone, and certainly not by those in the bullseye community.

The STI Spartan is an excellent low end 1911, and I would highly recommend checking out Dawson Precision for a decent price. They are accurate and well fitted.

For a higher end gun, check out the Les Baer PII with the accuracy enhancement option.

May 30, 2010, 07:50 AM
Doc GLock opined:

The 1911 design has several design weak points.

Then it continues, and all I can say is...

Wow, Doc. Just wow. Your theories are so flawed that I don't know where to start, so I'll just say this:

The problem isn't in the design. The problem is in the recent execution of the design. Various manufacturers wo want a piece of the rather large 1911 pie seem to make up the specs as they go...which hasn't worked well. They also substitute cheaper materials in order to increase the bottom line...and they very often run into trouble with that. This is a sad state of affairs, but it wasn't always so.

Just FYI...Plunger tubes don't "vibrate" loose. They loosen up from operating the thumb safety places a side-load on'em...because they aren't properly staked...and because they're not made of the right stuff. That statement alone indicates that you don't really understand the gun and how it functions. I'll assume that this is from lack of experiennce, and is based on a few observations and drawing an incorrect conclusion based on opinion or internet talk rather than facts.

I'd suggest that you take the time to educate yourself by reading and talking to people whose experience with the 1911 goes back to a time when they were made right. Mine goes back over 45 years. There are others here who have been involved with them for even longer than that...and they remember.

Be well...and welcome aboard.

May 30, 2010, 07:58 AM
trolling is trying to cause arguments--doc glock hasn't done that at all.

I disagree. His original post was worded to do just that...and seems to have worked very well.

May 30, 2010, 08:51 AM
Troll? Nah. I don't pick up on that...at least not yet. Doc just needs education.

F'rinstance...His Glock is closer to the 1911 than he'd like to admit. The biggest design flaw in the Glock is the lack of a manual safety, as evidenced by the sheer number of leg shots during reholstering. People under stress may not always remember to remove their fingers from the trigger. Even some who aren't under stress, but simply have a brainfart at the wrong time can wind up on an operating table.

The thumb safety was added to the 1911 at the request of the US Cavalry for that very reason. To allow the mounted trooper to place the gun on-safe and reholster it in order to regain control of a frightened, unruly horse. Even in those unenlightened times, the boys realized that reholstering under stress with fingers on triggers could present a serious problem for both horse and rider. A point that Gaston Glock either failed to consider, or simply ignored it...and it's gotten a lot of people hurt.

May 30, 2010, 09:42 AM
Sorry you are not going to like mine but here it is anyway. The 1911 sucks in this modern day in my opinion. There are far better designs available from a sundry of gun makers.

Opinions without justification are like a**h***s, everybody's got one.

May 30, 2010, 09:42 AM
Troll? Nah. I don't pick up on that...at least not yet.

Perhaps "angler" status applies.

Mal H
May 30, 2010, 10:03 AM

If you enjoyed reading about "I need opinions on 1911s" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!