Which had more revolutionary impact: Glock or Colt 1911?


PDA






el Godfather
April 12, 2012, 07:08 PM
Dear THR,
This is going to be an interesting thread for argument sake. Which had more revolutionary impact on the concept of semiauto: Colt 1911 or Glock?

1911 pistols just got better over the time to a point where they saw a lot of action in wars, civilian SD/HD guns, competition, and it especially became the icon platform for the .45 ACP. Most major manufacturers copied the design and still do to this date. A collection is incomplete without a quality 1911.

Whereas, Glock, once considered a plastic gun (although not the first polymer pistol) opened the doors for polymer guns after it got widely accepted by LEAs and civilians. It became the icon of utility gun for many people around the world. Offered in variety of different caliber, cost effective, easy to use and clean, tremendous amount of accessories, and a household name for many LEAs currently around the world. Its always among the front runners of the guns considered for LEAs or civilian SD/HD pistols. Durability is amazing and reliability is super.

You decide and share with us your opinions.

Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "Which had more revolutionary impact: Glock or Colt 1911?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.W.Dale
April 12, 2012, 07:16 PM
By the time it was introduced the 1911 wasn't exactly cutting edge and certainly had counterparts from other firms that were its equal in function. Despite our army's clinging to it for so long it had largely been superceded by double stack and double action offerings as a fighting arm within 20yrs.

Glock didn't invent the poly pistol. They merely combined the feature with a then unheard of reliability and a completely new autoloader trigger operation*. 30 years later we still have nothing that fundamentally surpasses that first Gen glock in terms of function reliability or operation.

*I can show you a 120 year old revolver with a metal version of the glock trigger safety*

JohnBT
April 12, 2012, 07:23 PM
I suppose if John Browning hadn't invented the tilting barrel design used for the 1911 then Gaston Glock would have come up with it on his own 70 years later. Or maybe he wouldn't have. But he didn't need to, did he?

sohcgt2
April 12, 2012, 08:29 PM
I love my Glocks and consider my 1911's antiquated relics. That said, there is no comparison in "revolutionary impact". The 1911 is the base of most of the current pistol market worldwide 101 years later. Glock introduced plastic as a viable frame material. 1911 is, and likely will be for a very long time to come, the most revolutionary pistol design. It may be the second most revolutionary handgun design after the cartridge revolver.

19-3Ben
April 12, 2012, 09:04 PM
Glock introduced plastic as a viable frame material.

Nope. H&K (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_VP70) beat Glock to the punch by over a decade.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 12, 2012, 09:22 PM
Between the two I would say the 1911 is. Glock did nothing but popularize polymer as a handgun frame material.

mljdeckard
April 12, 2012, 09:35 PM
It's not that the Glock wasn't innovative or imitated. It's more that the 1911 did so many things that are still imitated this much later. I wonder if there will still be 'Glock pattern' pistols 75 years from now.

Armed012002
April 12, 2012, 09:58 PM
Glock is evolutionary. Gaston's contribution was to combine many ideas into one of the most simplistic designs in history.

A minimal amount of machining is necessary. Every part simply drops into place. There is no filing or fitting parts. The design is simple with very few parts.

Compare that to the 1911. A lot of machining is necessary. While MIM helps some, parts need to be fitted or else reliability suffers. The design is complex with many parts.

A Glock is mass production nirvana.

Parish the thought, but John Moses Browning was very much interested in designing mass produced firearms. If he were alive today, he would likely design something that looks and is made a lot like a Glock! :eek:

oso
April 12, 2012, 09:59 PM
the 1911 without question. all other semi auto's are based off the 1911. nothing has come out that is that revolutionary different. well unless you want to consider attempts at caseless ammo.

smallbore
April 12, 2012, 10:06 PM
The 1911.

Dr.Rob
April 12, 2012, 10:10 PM
Browning's design has influenced the majority of centerfire auto pistols made to date.

Arguably, a lot more Glocks ended up in civilian hands than 1911s in both models early years. Glock was well marketed, well engineered and has proved itself to be a great pistol. The 1911 has 100 years of service to back it up.

Think about it. Colt was darn near the SOLE provider of 'serious' US made centerfire semi-automatic handguns for decades. Until Colt's patents expired, if you wanted a .45 you likely bought a Colt if you wanted a 9mm you bought something else, or maybe a Colt. Glock came to the market with much more competition, and specifically competition in the wondernine era.

Ask me in another 20 years and I MIGHT say Glock has edged the 1911 out.

Drail
April 12, 2012, 10:13 PM
This is hilarious. To seriously compare a 1911 to a Glock is about like comparing a 69 Z-28 to a Yugo.

R.W.Dale
April 12, 2012, 10:23 PM
This is hilarious. To seriously compare a 1911 to a Glock is about like comparing a 69 Z-28 to a Yugo.

Only for complete fanbois incapable of looking beyond personal bias at something objectivity.

Its really easy to tell who is who here. Wich do you think you are?


Its true that the 1911 is the first handgun to feature the short recoil operating system. But its also a bit of a dead end with its pivot link. EVERYTHING else not using the P38 locking block or a rotating bbl traces its roots back to the Browning Hi Power.

Essentially there are three major species of locked breach automatics

1911's and variants
Cam locking BHP derivatives
And
Wlther p38 descendants

jmr40
April 12, 2012, 10:29 PM
Glock.

The 1911 was not particularly popular or well thought of until quite recently. While it served for a long time it was not especially popular nor well liked by many, maybe even most.

The 1911's popularity took off in the 1960's when playing pistol shooting games became popular. Long after it had ever served any useful purpose in combat. It has never been anywhere near anyones top choice as a LE handgun. You could make a good argument that the S&W 59 was more revolutionary than the 1911.

I don't think any gun has been as universally accepted and used as Glocks in such a short time frame. They have re-written all the rules about what a combat handgun should be.

weisse52
April 12, 2012, 11:14 PM
THE 1911. I am done now...

SK2344
April 13, 2012, 12:46 AM
I voted for the 1911 for all the Historical reasons which I will not elaborate on. The 1911 was a Great Military Gun to say the least and I will leave it at that but the fact remains that if I had to go into Battle in WW Three, a Glock 21 would be on my hip without a doubt in my mind! It would have to meet Military Specs and have a safety lever but this would be my choice.

allaroundhunter
April 13, 2012, 01:03 AM
The results speak for themselves. I do enjoy my Glock. Was it more revolutionary than my M&P? Absolutely. The XD? Yep...

The 1911? Not a chance in h***.


.....you certainly like to start some controversial threads don't you, Godfather?

7thGenAustinite
April 13, 2012, 01:11 AM
yep… hands down the 1911 wins this

dogtown tom
April 13, 2012, 01:19 AM
Ya know....JMB did design a few guns BEFORE the 1911. Pretending that the 1911 is some sort of innovative or revolutionary design is ignoring JMB's other designs.

To say that the 1911 had more impact in the US might be true. It is certainly not the case worldwide.

JMB cleverly licensed Colt to market his designs in the U.S. and FN owned the rights to much of Europe. These exclusive licenses kept the Hi Power out of the US market until the '50's.


IMHO, neither gun was revolutionary in design. If the JMB design had not been adopted by the US military it likely would not have ever been produced. If Bruce Willis hadn't uttered his famous line about the Glock 7 most of us wouldn't have heard of one.:D

X-Rap
April 13, 2012, 01:20 AM
I don't know about revolutionary but I've got both and the Glocks are the ones I bet my life on.

GLOOB
April 13, 2012, 01:49 AM
Glock made a beautiful design. Machine the slide, striker, and extractor. Forge shape the barrel in a hydraulic press. Stamp out and injection mold the rest, and make it easy to slap together. And end up with a safe, reliable, and durable handgun.

I think a lot of people underestimate the amount of thought that went into the first Glock pistol. To say they simply made plastic popular is way off base. Other makers are borrowing a lot else from the design. Even if the Glock had an alloy frame, it still would have made a big impact on the firearms world.

tarosean
April 13, 2012, 02:29 AM
Glock made a beautiful design.

well thats got to be a first...

tarosean
April 13, 2012, 02:45 AM
I suppose if John Browning hadn't invented

we could darn near say that about anything to do with modern guns.

Skylerbone
April 13, 2012, 02:49 AM
It appears to me that very few posters know much of the history or reality of either platform. Just as history repeats itself for those who ignore it so too will the topic at hand. Better to call it what it is: a poll of which people like better.

Celebrate them both for what they heralded, don't tell me about miles per gallon, it's not why I shoot.

allaroundhunter
April 13, 2012, 02:55 AM
Better to call it what it is: a poll of which people like better

A poll of what people like better? You do see that Glock isn't winning right?

Skylerbone
April 13, 2012, 04:46 AM
I didn't vote or look at the results, that was not the point for me. Nearly every thread like this suffers from the bias of its respondents. There have been intelligent responses but I doubt those members were the only ones allowed to vote.

wwace
April 13, 2012, 05:45 AM
Let me say this: I bought my first Glock several months ago, a Gen 4 G35. My first impression is that it is very poorly and cheaply made. I am sure it runs ok, I am just of the school where I judge quality by an objects feel. I have never owned a 1911 but recently ordered one, I have never picked up a 1911 that appeared to be a POS. This is my opinion as to what I feel.

As for this poll there is only one answer, John Moses Browning was a genius of firearm design, The 1911 while not the only autoloading pistol of the period was and is the single most important pistol of the 20th century, to say nothing of the fact that it entered service 70 years before Glocks came about. The simple fact that today 1911's are more popular than ever with some 20 companies making them as fast as we can buy them. While the Glock has obviously had a huge effect on the market I believe it has more to do with marketing than the actual design.

JohnBiltz
April 13, 2012, 07:24 AM
Let me say this: I bought my first Glock several months ago, a Gen 4 G35. My first impression is that it is very poorly and cheaply made. I am sure it runs ok, I am just of the school where I judge quality by an objects feel. I have never owned a 1911 but recently ordered one, I have never picked up a 1911 that appeared to be a POS. This is my opinion as to what I feel.

As for this poll there is only one answer, John Moses Browning was a genius of firearm design, The 1911 while not the only autoloading pistol of the period was and is the single most important pistol of the 20th century, to say nothing of the fact that it entered service 70 years before Glocks came about. The simple fact that today 1911's are more popular than ever with some 20 companies making them as fast as we can buy them. While the Glock has obviously had a huge effect on the market I believe it has more to do with marketing than the actual design.
I am of the school who judges quality by whether it actually works or not. My lifetime experience is that more Glocks work than 1911s. None of which has anything to do with this thread. It is quite possible that the car that made the most impact on the automobile industry was the model T. Nothing revolutionary about the car, the car was pretty vanilla, it was the process of making it that changed everything. Glocks may be the most revolutionary manufacturing process to hit firearms since Colt did interchangeable parts. My guess is 50 years from now the Glock way not the Glock firearm is going to own the business.

Plan2Live
April 13, 2012, 07:58 AM
I wonder if there will still be 'Glock pattern' pistols 75 years from now.
Maybe, especially if they fix the grip angle. :what:

tarosean
April 13, 2012, 08:05 AM
Glocks may be the most revolutionary manufacturing process to hit firearms since Colt did interchangeable parts. My guess is 50 years from now the Glock way not the Glock firearm is going to own the business.

What did they do exactly? Maybe your talking about Glock night at the Gold Cup? :cool:

tarosean
April 13, 2012, 08:07 AM
Nearly every thread like this suffers from the bias of its respondents.


Isn't just about 99% of the theads on this board?

wickedsprint
April 13, 2012, 08:15 AM
the 1911 without question. all other semi auto's are based off the 1911. nothing has come out that is that revolutionary different. well unless you want to consider attempts at caseless ammo.

Pretty sure the Luger predates the 1911.

wickedsprint
April 13, 2012, 08:17 AM
Maybe, especially if they fix the grip angle. :what:

I keep hearing this comment...what's wrong with the grip angle? I shoot mine fine. Maybe my angle is off haha.

meanmrmustard
April 13, 2012, 08:20 AM
The results speak for themselves. I do enjoy my Glock. Was it more revolutionary than my M&P? Absolutely. The XD? Yep...

The 1911? Not a chance in h***.


.....you certainly like to start some controversial threads don't you, Godfather?
+2. Albeit the Glock is considered the standard for reliability and ergonomics, you will not see me post a pic of one that I own, cuz I don't and won't. I'm a "shiny things guy", a history guy. These two are apples and oranges in every way minus caliber. The 1911, although not immediately popular, was aiding in war winning offensive a defensive fighting decades before Gaston thought to make a pistol out of Glad Ware.

fatcat4620
April 13, 2012, 08:47 AM
I suppose if John Browning hadn't invented the tilting barrel design used for the 1911 then Gaston Glock would have come up with it on his own 70 years later. Or maybe he wouldn't have. But he didn't need to, did he?
.... where to start. Do you even know how a1911 works?

fatcat4620
April 13, 2012, 08:53 AM
How many non clones coppied the 1911 design? I can only think of the TT33. Now how many non clones have coppied the glock design? The high-power was the JMB design that changed the world. Not the 1911. And what if luger had won the contract? Then the 1911 would be just as important as the pocket hammerless.

oso
April 13, 2012, 09:06 AM
JMB didn't just design a 1911 in 1911 and colt made it. he had been designing automatic pistols for 11 years prior to the 1911, so there was 11 years of refinement before the 1911. the luger pre-dates the 1911 but but the designs are different, comparing apples to oranges. you don't see the luger influence in todays pistols.

jimbo555
April 13, 2012, 09:28 AM
In 1911 compared to its competition the colt 1911 was compact and reliable.The fact that there are so many companies selling every one they make 100 years later says something!

wickedsprint
April 13, 2012, 09:33 AM
We brag about it being a military sidearm but a lot forget that it existed as part of a "kit" which usually included a rifle.

In terms of weapons, especially handguns being used as the SOLE deterrent/offensive weapon system there are much better options with more reliability, capacity and accuracy.

In these terms, I believe the Glock to be more revolutionary.

Some here are interchanging revolutionary and legendary.

R.W.Dale
April 13, 2012, 09:37 AM
Some here are interchanging revolutionary and legendary.


I'm just surprised nobody has used the corney adjective VENERABLE yet :banghead: ....... yet

Hangingrock
April 13, 2012, 10:19 AM
What we are talking about is two different periods of time with different manufacturing technologies. It’s like comparing apples and oranges.

The Glock is as close to plug and play as you can get with interchangeability of parts. One of the problems with the 1911 style pistol is in the number of manufactures producing their particular rendition.

While I own both 1911 pistols and Glock pistols If I were to travel to some remote place and be responsible for upkeep/service/repairs I’d opt for the Glock.

fatcat4620
April 13, 2012, 10:58 AM
JMB didn't just design a 1911 in 1911 and colt made it. he had been designing automatic pistols for 11 years prior to the 1911, so there was 11 years of refinement before the 1911. the luger pre-dates the 1911 but but the designs are different, comparing apples to oranges. you don't see the luger influence in todays pistols.
I was pointing out that a luger in .45ACP competed against the 1911 for service pistol contract. If luger had won then today the 1911 would be a relic of the past like his previous designs.

onebadcaballero
April 13, 2012, 11:36 AM
Alvin C. York. Enough said.

wickedsprint
April 13, 2012, 11:48 AM
Alvin C. York. Enough said.

Imagine if he had a Glock 21...

huntsman
April 13, 2012, 11:48 AM
yeah if you're a WWII Vet or the kid of a WWII Vet 1911

If you're a kid a gamer and movie buff Glock.

Baba Louie
April 13, 2012, 11:58 AM
1911 came about during the transition from wheelguns to semi autos for horse soldiers, the G-Perfection came about during the transition from wheelguns to semi autos for some police agencies... so they both got that going for them.

Revolutionary Impact at time of public acceptance? I'd say Glock.
Fewest number of parts to make something go BANG reliably (a sort of revolutionary impact unto itself)? I'd say Glock.

X-Rap
April 13, 2012, 12:00 PM
In purely revolutionary terms they both have their place. The 1911 transitioned the US military into the semi auto pistol era and Glock for the pistol what Henry Ford did to the Auto.
Both pretty revolutionary in their own right.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 13, 2012, 12:49 PM
yeah if you're a WWII Vet or the kid of a WWII Vet 1911

If you're a kid a gamer and movie buff Glock.

I'm 19 years old, I like to watch movies and sometimes play video games when I have the spare time. I would take a 1911 over a Glock any day. I don't like the grip of the Glock and never will. Don't be so narrow minded.

kopcicle
April 13, 2012, 12:53 PM
Both , either or , even if it's apples and oranges . Polymer was going to find it's way into the arms industry sooner or later but the Glock popularized it .

There were self loading designs around the turn of the (previous) century but only two designs have stood the test of time , those of John Moses Browning and Dieudonne Saive .

I voted both . The 1911 as the leading edge of self loading pistols and the Glock as the leading edge of materials technology .

I still think the edge goes to the Glock as more revolting ...



come on you knew it was coming ....

~kop

JRH6856
April 13, 2012, 01:10 PM
1911.

The BHP and Glock designs are derived from the 1911.

huntsman
April 13, 2012, 01:44 PM
Don't be so narrow minded.

I’m not narrow minded it’s just a generational bias brought on by the entertainment of the Era.

When I was a kid I carried a 1911 BB-gun in my old man’s WWII holster and watched army movies, kids nowadays are exposed to more Glocks than the 1911, the 1911 may still be relevant to some youths(like yourself) but I’ll bet it’s a minority.

JRH6856
April 13, 2012, 02:41 PM
Itís like comparing apples and oranges.

I disagree. It's more like comparing oranges and peaches. ;)

Teachu2
April 13, 2012, 02:47 PM
I'm a long-time 1911 fan, but my last three handgun purchases have been a G30, a G34, and a M&P 9c. All are fine firearms.

The 1911 got my vote. It's popularity waxes and wanes, but you can buy a brand new 1911 today from dozens of manufacturers. It's interesting to me how many competitive shooters are moving from Glocks to 1911s. Of course, that has little to do with the impact of the gun in history.

Glock built on what came before it, using modern technology to revolutionize the production of handguns. Then, at least in the U.S., they engaged in marketing to LE in a way that bordered on predatory (you can make your own decision as to which side of the border!) in order to get Glocks adopted by many agencies, which led to widespread public acceptance. The quality of Glock products has built on that initial market penetration, and forced a number of other manufacturers to compete - much like Ford's assembly line revolutionized the auto industry. Ford, like Glock, used technology to revolutionize the production of a product that was pretty similar to others. Ford, like Glock, simplified the product as much as possible, standardized parts so that they were interchangable and could be mass produced, and initially produced one model - in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.

The 1911 was a design breakthrough, the Glock a manufacturing breakthrough. Both have had, and will continue to have, a large impact on the industry.

JRH6856
April 13, 2012, 02:53 PM
I was pointing out that a luger in .45ACP competed against the 1911 for service pistol contract. If luger had won then today the 1911 would be a relic of the past like his previous designs.

Actually, the Luger didn't really compete, it dropped out. DWM, Colt and Savage were invited to resubmit corrected designs for the final trials but only Colt and Savage did so. Colt won and both the Savage and the Luger became relics of the past.

Both the Browning HP and the Glock designs are evolutionary descendents of the 1911. They are not so much revolutions in firearms design as they are revolutions in the 1911 design.

MachIVshooter
April 13, 2012, 03:10 PM
Pretty sure the Luger predates the 1911.

It does, but it did not influence future design as the 1911 did. Same as the argument about bolt action rifles; Many designs (and good ones) predated the Mauser, but the Mauser is the design upon which most other bolt rifles to this day are based. Even the Remington 700; It's really only the push-feed and extraction system that are different.

Comapring the Luger to the 1911 is like comparing a Wankel engine to a standard piston engine. Both work, but one is superior and became the standard design.

As for Glock vs. 1911? The 1911 was really the first truly successful autoloading pistol. Yeah, the C93, C96, Luger and a handful of others predate it, but the simplicity and reliabilty of the M1911 made it the platform upon which most other pistols are based. Really, the only thing we see different in modern designs is that the link is replaced with a solid camming slot or bevel on the barrel, and there is no separate bushing on the snout. Otherwise, everything but some of the Berettas and a few other oddballs use a tilting barrel short recoil design.

Browning was unquestionably the most infuential gun designer of the 20th century. There are other very notable designers, but most had only one or two major achievements to their credit (Gatling, Maxim, Luger, Mauser, Pederson*, Garand, Stoner, Kalashnikov, etc.). Browning has many.

*John Pederson had some incredibly advanced and ingenious designs that got around Browning/Colt patents, but just never made it mainstream, save for the Remington model 17 that later became the Ithaca 37, which also had Browning design. Browning himself is said to have praised Pederson as being a genius of firearm design.

wickedsprint
April 13, 2012, 03:44 PM
I'm 19 years old, I like to watch movies and sometimes play video games when I have the spare time. I would take a 1911 over a Glock any day. I don't like the grip of the Glock and never will. Don't be so narrow minded.

I used to say the same thing. A lot of have changed our opinions about a lot of things since we were 19.

FYI saying you'll never change your mind meets the definition of "narrow minded".

Nushif
April 13, 2012, 03:53 PM
The quality of Glock products has built on that initial market penetration, and forced a number of other manufacturers to compete - much like Ford's assembly line revolutionized the auto industry. Ford, like Glock, used technology to revolutionize the production of a product that was pretty similar to others. Ford, like Glock, simplified the product as much as possible, standardized parts so that they were interchangable and could be mass produced, and initially produced one model - in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.

Probably the best comparison here. Ford didn't invent the car. But he sure impacted the car market.

Browning came up with a great idea that arguably made the semiautomatic pistol the way of the future. But the Glock is the better consumer gun.

ku4hx
April 13, 2012, 05:44 PM
As much as I appreciate Glocks, and own several, I voted for the 1911. I class it right up there with the M1 Garand which General George Patton called, "The greatest battle implement ever devised". The 1911 went to war along side the Garand, and it too served us well. To me that means everything.

Happily, I'm the proud owner of both. Both are old battle horses with a few scratches, dents and dings, but they both still shoot wonderfully well. I like my Glocks, but I'm proud of my 1911.

GLOOB
April 13, 2012, 07:22 PM
Glock made a beautiful design.
well thats got to be a first...
Well, notice I said "design" not "gun." Also FTR, I did not vote.

Teachu2
April 13, 2012, 07:54 PM
Quote:
Quote:
Glock made a beautiful design.

well thats got to be a first...


"Elegant" is the word engineers and mathematicians use for the simplest solution (as in fewest parts involved) to achieve the desired result.

Cosmoline
April 13, 2012, 08:07 PM
he 1911 was really the first truly successful autoloading pistol.

No way. The Colt 1903 and Colt 1908 were both very successful among a broader range of markets than the early 1911's. And that's just Colts. There was also an obscure pistol called the Luger.

the platform upon which most other pistols are based

I don't see evidence of that. A great many pistols over the past century have utilized features that owe nothing to the 1911. Single action pistols with a myriad of toggles and external safety devices did not become the paradigm for future development. The future belonged to pistols using DA/SA triggers and decockers from Walther.

The 1911 style has never been particularly popular outside the USA and its territories, for either law enforcement or military.

JRH6856
April 13, 2012, 10:09 PM
There was also an obscure pistol called the Luger.

As long as we are going there, don't forget the Mauser C96.

The 1911 style has never been particularly popular outside the USA and its territories, for either law enforcement or military.

Most countries prohibit civilian ownership of military weapons and calibers if they allow civilian ownership of firearms at all. Kind or hard to create a lot of market interest under those conditions. Even the police in many European countries are prohibited military calibers which is why the .380 gained popularity. But the 1911 style was pretty popular in Spain where it was copied by Star and Llama among others. Llama made 78% scale 1911 in 380, 32, and 22 for the police and civilian markets where they existed.

MachIVshooter
April 13, 2012, 11:40 PM
No way. The Colt 1903 and Colt 1908 were both very successful among a broader range of markets than the early 1911's. And that's just Colts. There was also an obscure pistol called the Luger.

None of which endured the test of time. All nice guns, and I like them, but they are inferior to the 1911 as service handguns go.

I don't see evidence of that. A great many pistols over the past century have utilized features that owe nothing to the 1911. Single action pistols with a myriad of toggles and external safety devices did not become the paradigm for future development.

I'm not talking about clones. I'm talking about the operating principle. The 1903/08, Savage 1907, Nambu, and many others were blowback, the C93, C96 and Luger used complicated toggle systems, none of which we see today in service handguns. The short recoil system pinoeered in the 1905 and made ubiquitous by the refined version-the 1911-became the standard, with a few exceptions.

And not to play grammar cop, but one of my pet peeves is the misuse of the word "myriad"; It means 10,000, and shouldn't have "a" before or "of" after. I know it's common today (even recognized), but that doesn't make it right ;)

The future belonged to pistols using DA/SA triggers and decockers from Walther.

Making autoloading handguns double-action was a natural evolution, but I give credit where credit is due, and the P-38 is definitely an influential design, especially the deckocker. But the operating system of the P38 was not widely utilized; Beretta (and copies) is the only notworthy gun I can think of that uses the P-38's locking block.

ttheel
April 13, 2012, 11:43 PM
The answer to this if obvious.....the 1911.

Feanor
April 14, 2012, 12:03 AM
Dear THR,
This is going to be an interesting thread for argument sake. Which had more revolutionary impact on the concept of semiauto: Colt 1911 or Glock?

1911 pistols just got better over the time to a point where they saw a lot of action in wars, civilian SD/HD guns, competition, and it especially became the icon platform for the .45 ACP. Most major manufacturers copied the design and still do to this date. A collection is incomplete without a quality 1911.

Whereas, Glock, once considered a plastic gun (although not the first polymer pistol) opened the doors for polymer guns after it got widely accepted by LEAs and civilians. It became the icon of utility gun for many people around the world. Offered in variety of different caliber, cost effective, easy to use and clean, tremendous amount of accessories, and a household name for many LEAs currently around the world. Its always among the front runners of the guns considered for LEAs or civilian SD/HD pistols. Durability is amazing and reliability is super.

You decide and share with us your opinions.

Thanks.
There's nothing revolutionary about the 1911, or 1911A1 pistol, they're sexy, and they delivered a big bullet, other then that they were/are complicated to fieldstrip, and repair.

The Glock, which has a little 1911 in it, was highly revolutionary, so much so that it chased Colt out of the defensive pistol market entirely, and damn near destroyed S&W, virtually obsoleting S&W's 3rd gen autos overnight. Before Glock, there was no such thing as reliable from the box, certainly there never was a reliable 1911 that came that way from the box! But Glock's did, they were also virtually impervious to oxidation, every part was interchangable with any other Glock, they could be fixed by anyone with but thirty minutes of good instruction, and having but 34 parts there wasn't much that ever really needed fixing anyway!

There is no comparison, the 1911 is sexy, but its not anywhere close to the Glock pistols revolutionary design. Also, while its true that others developed polymer framed firearms long before Glock did, it was Glock that mainstreamed them, period!

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 14, 2012, 12:08 AM
I used to say the same thing. A lot of have changed our opinions about a lot of things since we were 19.

FYI saying you'll never change your mind meets the definition of "narrow minded".

Sorry but I can't just change my hand shape nor will I learn to like the strange grip on the Glock because why would I? There are plenty of other handguns that fit my hand better like my XD. Why would I ever get a Glock for serious use?

4thHorseman
April 14, 2012, 12:13 AM
John Wayne would never use a Glock! :D

gunnutery
April 14, 2012, 12:51 AM
It's a little hard to compare between marketing, manufacturing and ownership in 1912 vs. 1985 and beyond. And it complicates things a little bit to compare them between a military pistol vs. law enforcement pistol and the respective markets.

Aside from those issues clouding the debate, I think Glock had more advantage and made more of a revolutionary pistol. The choices Glock offers for a lower, more stable price give it the edge. The choices range from 7 different chamberings, 6 or more different frame sizes (including the SF and G36 models), not to mention the simplicity of operation and great aftermarket (swapping calibers etc.) and parts availability.

That being said, the 1911 also has different calibers to choose from but didn't have many options to choose from in the beginning (because there weren't as many). But of the chamberings that are offered now, how long did it take to even get one made in 9mm. The prices often vary quite drastically as well, and there are many companies to choose from vs. the one company of Glock (which could be good or bad I guess).

I think the market has also given the advantage to the Glock since gun ownership is through the roof right now, where as it hasn't been in times past, which makes it a little different to debate around.

Cosmoline
April 14, 2012, 01:01 AM
None of which endured the test of time. All nice guns, and I like them, but they are inferior to the 1911 as service handguns go.

The thread is about what had "more revolutionary impact." The 1911 absolutely has staying power, no question. But it did not have a revolutionary impact. By falling back to a large-bore low muzzle velocity round it was in many respects a retrogression to black powder ballistics. Maybe a sensible retrogression, but still a retrogression not a revolution.

Revolutionary doesn't mean best or best selling, it means something that revolutionized the field of semi autos. The 1911, evolving from the 1900, was a successful pistol in the US and some other countries. It's lasted a long time and has a devoted following. But I don't know what would be considered particularly revolutionary about the design.

pinoeered in the 1905

Well if we're going to focus on the operating system, perhaps the Colt 1905 should be considered more revolutionary than the Glock. If we consider the pistol as a whole, the 1911 didn't revolutionize much of anything. Simple blowback pistols remained far more prolific, and big bore semis never caught on much outside the USA. Most nations didn't regard the handgun as particularly important in warfare and were not as concerned with stopping power as our military was. Their police mostly stuck with small bore handguns as well. So it's tough to say the 1911 revolutionized semis when you just don't see it inspiring much imitation.

On the flip side, I realize the Glock polymer design was not as truly revolutionary as is sometimes thought. But it did revolutionize the semi-auto market in a way the 1911 simply never did. The Glock design has penetrated very deep into civilian, law enforcement and military forces worldwide. It also inspired far more direct imitations and near forgeries than the 1911 ever did.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 14, 2012, 01:07 AM
There's nothing revolutionary about the 1911, or 1911A1 pistol, they're sexy, and they delivered a big bullet, other then that they were/are complicated to fieldstrip, and repair.

You do realize that back in the year, 1911, the 1911 handgun was revolutionary? Field stripping a handgun was much more involved back then beyond 1911s.

JRH6856
April 14, 2012, 01:15 AM
Maybe the poll should have asked: Which designer had the most revolutionary impact, John M. Browning or Gaston Glock?

Feanor
April 14, 2012, 01:57 AM
You do realize that back in the year, 1911, the 1911 handgun was revolutionary? Field stripping a handgun was much more involved back then beyond 1911s.
No, I don't! Frankly the 1911 was never revolutionary, and certainly nowhere near the revolutionary status of the G-17 pistol. The G-17 owes much to the Browning design, but it is itself, a far superior rendering of it. The Glock is supremely simple, this simplicity is its genius.

John Moses Browning would have greatly approved of it.

wickedsprint
April 14, 2012, 02:38 AM
Sorry but I can't just change my hand shape nor will I learn to like the strange grip on the Glock because why would I? There are plenty of other handguns that fit my hand better like my XD. Why would I ever get a Glock for serious use?

They work, that's why. Come back in a few years...

For me it was shooting a friends Glock 30 better than I ever could previously with my beloved 1911s and their "optimum" grip angle.

That being said, some glocks feel better than others; I hate the feel of the 17.

tarosean
April 14, 2012, 03:10 AM
Maybe the poll should have asked: Which designer had the most revolutionary impact, John M. Browning or Gaston Glock?


Your kidding right???

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 14, 2012, 03:27 AM
They work, that's why. Come back in a few years...

So does my XD, why change?

Kiln
April 14, 2012, 05:50 AM
And not to play grammar cop, but one of my pet peeves is the misuse of the word "myriad"; It means 10,000, and shouldn't have "a" before or "of" after. I know it's common today (even recognized), but that doesn't make it right ;)

Not to play grammar cop, but I learned in third grade not to start sentences with "and" or "but". I know it's common today (even recognized), but that doesn't make it right. ;)

beatledog7
April 14, 2012, 08:15 AM
The two have been differently influential since their inception, and taken together are probably the two most influential semi-auto handguns still.

After all, the OP didn't ask us to choose between a 3rd generation S&W and SA XD.

It depends on what one needs a gun to do. For me, it's last resort SD/HD first, range plinking second, barbecue oohs and ahs a distant third.

Give a great shooter the best classic 1911 (i.e., a single stack) that money can buy. Give a box-stock Glock 21 (or just about any other polymer double-stack .45) to another great shooter.

Run a timed drill, 10 targets at 25 yards and closing, simulating incoming assailants. First guy to hit all targets wins.

This doesn't prove a winner for the poll, but it tells me which of the two firearms I want to carry.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 08:46 AM
I was pointing out that a luger in .45ACP competed against the 1911 for service pistol contract. If luger had won then today the 1911 would be a relic of the past like his previous designs.
Isn't that particular pistol one of two made, the other being destroyed? If memory serves me, it's also one of the most valuable handguns in the world.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 08:48 AM
The two have been differently influential since their inception, and taken together are probably the two most influential semi-auto handguns still.

After all, the OP didn't ask us to choose between a 3rd generation S&W and SA XD.

It depends on what one needs a gun to do. For me, it's last resort SD/HD first, range plinking second, barbecue oohs and ahs a distant third.

Give a great shooter the best classic 1911 (i.e., a single stack) that money can buy. Give a box-stock Glock 21 (or just about any other polymer double-stack .45) to another great shooter.

Run a timed drill, 10 targets at 25 yards and closing, simulating incoming assailants. First guy to hit all targets wins.

This doesn't prove a winner for the poll, but it tells me which of the two firearms I want to carry.
Sadly, the Glock shooter would win if his opponent is using a "classic" 1911 to hit 10 targets. Think about it.

beatledog7
April 14, 2012, 08:50 AM
Sadly, the Glock shooter would win if his opponent is using a "classic" 1911 to hit 10 targets. Think about it.

Yes, that was my point.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 09:00 AM
Yes, that was my point.
Wasn't being frank, was agreeing. As much as I hate to admit, ability to carry more ammo on itself gives the Glock an edge. But, all things being equal, give me 8 targets and I will hit them faster and more accurately with a 1911. Glock grips suck, and that "you can train yourself to like it" jazz doesn't sit well with me. The 1911 has been spawned under different names for many years since patent expiration. What's been influenced, manufacturer-wise, by a Glock? The S&W Sigma?

X-Rap
April 14, 2012, 10:51 AM
Another fair comparison lies with the guns ability to be maintained and repaired. Take 10 1911's from the same maker and 10 G17's, take them all apart and mix em up real good and put them back together and fire 500 rds from each gun. Which ones will have fewer functional problems?

ttheel
April 14, 2012, 11:01 AM
No, I don't! Frankly the 1911 was never revolutionary, and certainly nowhere near the revolutionary status of the G-17 pistol.

Laugh out loud at this. I am not a Glock hater at all but to say that the 1911 was not revolutionary is a ridiculous statement.

19-3Ben
April 14, 2012, 11:24 AM
OK, I'm going to have to wade into the mire here with a question.
I've heard a few of you say that before Glock came along, there was no such thing as a reliable, out of the box, semi auto.
Nobody has questioned this, as though it were the Gospel truth. But here's the thing, there was: Sig p226 (and several other Sigs), S&W 3rd gen autos, Ruger P85, Beretta 92, CZ75, etc....
Yes, they were all metal guns, but AFAIK, they all enjoyed reputations for reliability and they all preceded Glock. In fact, several off that list even competed in the military trials to replace the 1911 as the primary sidearm of our military.

So I'm just curious if those of you who say "before Glock came along, there was no such thing as a reliable, out of the box," have taken those other pistols into account.

MachIVshooter
April 14, 2012, 11:41 AM
The Glock, which has a little 1911 in it, was highly revolutionary, so much so that it chased Colt out of the defensive pistol market entirely, and damn near destroyed S&W, virtually obsoleting S&W's 3rd gen autos overnight.

Reality does not reflect this claim at all. The 3rd gens weren't even around when the Glock was introduced, and when they were brough to market in 1988 (4506) and 1990 (5906, 4006), they sold a ton of them to LEAs, despite being significantly more expensive than the Glock. They remained in a very large number of police officer's holsters until very recently, being replaced by the M&P just as often as by a Glock.

As for Colt, they never really had much of a foothold in the defensive handgun market to begin with.

JohnBT
April 14, 2012, 11:58 AM
".... where to start. Do you even know how a1911 works?"

Sure, you put the bullets in the clip and pull the thingy and they shoot out the end. Right?

:rolleyes:

John

MCgunner
April 14, 2012, 12:19 PM
Locked breach delay blowback was a JMB invention without which most of the centerfire autoloading handguns today would not exist, save for low pressure rounds like 9x18. Even though I'm not a huge fan of the 1911 in today's world, I think the answer to this poll is sort of obvious to all, but the most ardent Glock fanboys.

JohnBT
April 14, 2012, 12:30 PM
Glocks and JMB's tilting barrel.

http://books.google.com/books?id=CVfH8nI2IuUC&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=glock+tilting+barrel&source=bl&ots=CzNht8_acb&sig=76Uig05NFgmsek8M6Rxf2rFVrE4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SJaJT8XGC4r5gge9mcXICQ&ved=0CGwQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=glock%20tilting%20barrel&f=false

From the link, on Page 17 of The Gun Digest Book of the Glock By Patrick Sweeney:

"Gaston Glock knew he had to use one of the variations of the Browning tilt-barrel locking system..."

Hunter2678
April 14, 2012, 12:39 PM
The 1911 IMHO...Glock should thank it for keeping the American soil intact so they could start a factory here in the first place. :D :cool:

I wonder how many glock lovers have ever read the Book written by Paul M Barrett. I think his (G. Glock's) comments and feelings about American gun owners will surprise you.

baylorattorney
April 14, 2012, 12:55 PM
Without a doubt 1911. Time tested. True. HISTORY IS THE HARSHEST OF JUDGES

Armed012002
April 14, 2012, 03:05 PM
The 1911 can be described as evolutionary and even legendary, but I don't see how its revolutionary.

The 1911 is another way to shoot multiple self contained metallic cartridges in a handgun. It wasn't the first handgun to do so.

An example of a revolutionary change in firearms was the transition from cap and ball to self contained metallic cartridges.

There have been very few revolutionary changes in firearms.

If the 1911 shot caseless ammo or laser beams, that would be revolutionary.

coalman
April 14, 2012, 04:58 PM
The 1911 and Glock were not the first of their kind, but they both were revolutionary in ushering in new respective eras in their time and successfully engineered pioneering concepts that have made them both timeless.

GLOOB
April 14, 2012, 05:20 PM
Locked breach delay blowback was a JMB invention without which most of the centerfire autoloading handguns today would not exist, save for low pressure rounds like 9x18.
He invented the tilt action for pistols. But there were many other locked or delayed blowback actions used in both pistols and rifles before JMB came along. Ironically, the 1911 never became very popular in foreign countries or LE. The US military was one of the biggest users. And now they rely on the Beretta which doesn't use the Browning tilt mechanism.

R.W.Dale
April 14, 2012, 05:29 PM
Most cite the 1911's tilting barrel delayed blowback operation as their reason for choosing it as being most revolutionary.

Can someone more up on the matter chime in and answer the question "was it the first"?

I'm thinking it's not, that that distinction goes to one of the earlier colt models.

jmr40
April 14, 2012, 06:29 PM
John Wayne would never use a Glock!


John Wayne was an actor who never fired a shot in combat. Far more 1911's have been used to shoot people in movies than in real life. Real people, who depend on real guns to protect themselves from real bad guys choose Glock by a very wide margin.

Guys who like to go to the range and shoot at targets and pretend they are John Wayne choose the 1911.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 06:57 PM
John Wayne was an actor who never fired a shot in combat. Far more 1911's have been used to shoot people in movies than in real life. Real people, who depend on real guns to protect themselves from real bad guys choose Glock by a very wide margin.

Guys who like to go to the range and shoot at targets and pretend they are John Wayne choose the 1911.
Minus the John Wayne talk, how is any of this statement substantiated? How wide a margin, and where are you pulling these numbers from, because as far as this thread is concerned, there is no margin.
Folks who like to throw bullets around like a John Woo movie choose Glocks. There, now we're being subjective.

357 Terms
April 14, 2012, 07:03 PM
how is any of this statement substantiated? How wide a margin, and where are you pulling these numbers from, because as far as this thread is concerned, there is no margin.

I think if you look at most of what jmr40 says you will quickly see most of his statements are ridiculous.

Hunter2678
April 14, 2012, 07:10 PM
Agree /\/\/\/\/\/\

JohnBT
April 14, 2012, 07:15 PM
"Guys who like to go to the range and shoot at targets and pretend they are John Wayne choose the 1911."

When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 07:20 PM
I think if you look at most of what jmr40 says you will quickly see most of his statements are ridiculous.
Well, I apologize if I come across as abrasive, but I do not appreciate unsubstantiated data from my peers. I do not agree that there is a margin at all between the two arms listed. They both have pros and cons, neither being massive enough to establish a "margin". Sales are both high, ergos are opinion based, cost is also up to the buyer as both can be had for as cheap or as high as you'd like. It's a fanboy's theatre here.

StrikeFire83
April 14, 2012, 07:24 PM
Um...Who cares?

They're both good guns. So much argument over something as incoherent and meaningless as "most revolutionary."

They're both great platforms. Get proficient with the one you prefer and carry away.

Averageman
April 14, 2012, 07:26 PM
I think a lot of people underestimate the amount of thought that went into the first Glock pistol.
A lot of people underestimate what it took for JMB to invent the 1911,..and then come up with ways to modernize it without changing the basic design.
All mods to the 1911 were capable of being done in the field with tools availabe and the only machining being done with a file. That is through two Worlkd Wars.
I like Glocks and own two, they are my "go to" side arm, that being said, while sick and having some surgery on my abdomen, a 1911 was much easier to carry.
Each have their place.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 07:30 PM
Um...Who cares?

They're both good guns. So much argument over something as incoherent and meaningless as "most revolutionary."

They're both great platforms. Get proficient with the one you prefer and carry away.
Many of us obviously.

StrikeFire83
April 14, 2012, 07:40 PM
Well, enjoy yourselves. I learned a long time ago that banging your head against a wall is only fun for a little while.

Have at it, broheim.

4thHorseman
April 14, 2012, 07:42 PM
Quote:
John Wayne would never use a Glock!
John Wayne was an actor who never fired a shot in combat. Far more 1911's have been used to shoot people in movies than in real life. Real people, who depend on real guns to protect themselves from real bad guys choose Glock by a very wide margin.

Guys who like to go to the range and shoot at targets and pretend they are John Wayne choose the 1911.

Really, John Wayne was never at the Sands of Iwo Jima? Really?
Next you will be telling me Rambo never fired a shoot with a 1911 in combat either!!!!
Or Arnold Swartzenagger never fought the Predator with a 1911!!!! GEEEZZE!!

GLOOB
April 14, 2012, 08:18 PM
FTR, as a youngun that didn't grow up watching John Wayne, I find his representation of a tough guy cowboy totally ridiculous.

john5036
April 14, 2012, 08:32 PM
On handguns, the 1911 no contest. Impact on the gun community? I'd give it to Glock.

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 09:01 PM
FTR, as a youngun that didn't grow up watching John Wayne, I find his representation of a tough guy cowboy totally ridiculous.
You've obviously never seen True Grit.

MachIVshooter
April 14, 2012, 09:06 PM
I'm thinking it's not, that that distinction goes to one of the earlier colt models

Correct. The 1911 was a refinement of the 1905, which in turn was a refined/updated 1900. All Browning designs, of course.

The 1911 gets the distinction because it is, by far, the most notable and more-or-less final incarnation of that JMB design. So in a sense, it was still the first, though the 3rd generation of the first. It would be sort of like arguing that the current Glock 4th generation guns do not embody what Glock did revolutionize; They do, they're just a later, more refined version of it.

4thHorseman
April 14, 2012, 09:28 PM
FTR, as a youngun that didn't grow up watching John Wayne, I find his representation of a tough guy cowboy totally ridiculous.

Say it aint true, Joe!

Hunter2678
April 14, 2012, 10:01 PM
Eastwood would pown Wayne!!

meanmrmustard
April 14, 2012, 10:32 PM
Eastwood would pown Wayne!!
Lee van Cleef would brush his 'stach with em both. Teehee

4thHorseman
April 14, 2012, 11:09 PM
Eastwood would pown Wayne!!
Lee van Cleef would brush his 'stach with em both. Teehee

Well pilgrim, if you feel froggy, jump." :neener:

B!ngo
April 15, 2012, 12:04 AM
It's interesting reading the back and forth arguments based on the OP's question. Interesting because we are comparing dissimilar things.
The 1911 is a 'design'. Created by Browning and over the years, licensed and/or implemented by many companies. With small variations here and there, yielding incompatibilities between some of the varied parts, but still the same 'design'.
Glock is a company that makes one type of a gun, but it their means of implementation in manufacturing, sales and marketing that made them famous. That no one else can produce their gun will preclude them from reaching the level of fame of the 1911 design. We already see a number of different and completely incompatible guns, derived from those same ideas that led to Glocks, growing in adoption. The XD, M&P, maybe others will, over the next 100 years, likely make Glocks success over the last 25 seem like a brief blip in time.
I own neither, but if I was to buy another gun to use in anger, it would be the Glock. A more up-to-date design and very well implemented. But the gun that will likely still be sold, shot and discussed 100 years from now will the the 1911.

HKGuns
April 15, 2012, 12:45 AM
Looks like I have to add 62 people to my ignore list.

R.W.Dale
April 15, 2012, 01:17 AM
Correct. The 1911 was a refinement of the 1905, which in turn was a refined/updated 1900. All Browning designs, of course.

The 1911 gets the distinction because it is, by far, the most notable and more-or-less final incarnation of that JMB design. So in a sense, it was still the first, though the 3rd generation of the first. It would be sort of like arguing that the current Glock 4th generation guns do not embody what Glock did revolutionize; They do, they're just a later, more refined version of it.

So there's absolutely NOTHING revolutionary about the 1911 WRT to the the tilting barrel. Because the 1911 is just like the glock in that it borrows IT'S lock up principal from an earlier JMB pistol.

This thread isn't about wich is more revolutionary the 1905 colt or glock. Its about the 1911 v glock. Your comparison about first to fourth Gen glocks to lend credence to lumping the 1905 in with the 1911 is a bit of a stretch. Many Parts interchange and the controls are the same on all glock models. This isn't the case betwixt the 1905 v 1911.

Feanor
April 15, 2012, 01:20 AM
Laugh out loud at this. I am not a Glock hater at all but to say that the 1911 was not revolutionary is a ridiculous statement.
Prove it!

MachIVshooter
April 15, 2012, 01:48 AM
Your comparison about first to fourth Gen glocks to lend credence to lumping the 1905 in with the 1911 is a bit of a stretch.

1900:

http://collectorebooks.com/gregg01/coltpistol/DSC09448.jpg
1902:

http://www.coltautos.com/images/1902S_6807a.jpg

1905:

http://www.spearingdecoy.com/antiquearms/SOLD%20Archive/Chell%20Baker/Pictures/Chell-Baker001-1_edited-1.jpg

1910:

http://www.antiquetrader.com/wp-content/uploads/AE-11-10-semi-auto-pistol-Lot1784.jpg

1911:

http://www.oryansroughnecks.org/weapons/1911_2.gif

Gen I Glock:

http://i37.tinypic.com/anzokn.jpg

Gen II Glock:

http://pictures.gunauction.com/4539074207/10538571/aug31%20002.jpg_thumbnail0.jpg

Gen III Glock:

http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/handguns/1287660261.jpg

Gen IV Glock:

http://www.handgunsforsale.net/files/handgunsforsale/images/58.jpg

In both cases, the evolution is extremely obvious. The Glock's outward appearance changed less, but it did change.

R.W.Dale
April 15, 2012, 02:12 AM
The glocks mechanics didn't change though.

The 1900 doesn't have a grip safety, has a different manual safety, a different grip angle, no bushing, no slide stop, has a heel mag release and the slide removes to the rear. Aside from the general outline its as different from a 1911 as any other handgun is. No matter how much for this discussion you want it to be a 1900 is NOT a 1911

Glock added a finger groove, rails and now some different backstraps. Everything still operates the same.

Just admit it. The 1911 didn't introduced anything new!

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 08:08 AM
The glocks mechanics didn't change though.

The 1900 doesn't have a grip safety, has a different manual safety, a different grip angle, no bushing, no slide stop, has a heel mag release and the slide removes to the rear. Aside from the general outline its as different from a 1911 as any other handgun is. No matter how much for this discussion you want it to be a 1900 is NOT a 1911

Glock added a finger groove, rails and now some different backstraps. Everything still operates the same.

Just admit it. The 1911 didn't introduced anything new!
You just listed six differences between the two designs. I'd call that improved upon, wouldn't you?
With Glock changing really nothing of importance to me, as their grips suck, I'd still never own one nor call it REVOLUTIONARY ever. They both evolved, however when the 1911 has seen 3 wars and numerous smaller conflicts, and has been copied, improved on, modified, and had millions sold I would call it revolutionary. When Glock has been put through it's 100 year paces, maybe I'll bat an eye at it. Maybe.

All this coming from a fella that prefers CZ75s to both of them, so I am unbiased in regards to personal feelings and fanboyism.

R.W.Dale
April 15, 2012, 11:03 AM
You just listed six differences between the two designs. I'd call that improved upon, wouldn't you?
.


No I call that a different pistol. That's as less in common with a 1911 than a glock does. As far as you're willing to stretch logic to make a 1900 a 1911 you might as well just say the glock is a 1911 refinement since the only thing either has in common with the 1900 is their tilting barrel.

But hey I'm one of those weirdos who still call a duck a duck.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 11:25 AM
No I call that a different pistol. That's as less in common with a 1911 than a glock does. As far as you're willing to stretch logic to make a 1900 a 1911 you might as well just say the glock is a 1911 refinement since the only thing either has in common with the 1900 is their tilting barrel.

But hey I'm one of those weirdos who still call a duck a duck.
That's my point. The evolution from one pistol to another is clearer in the 1911s case. What's the difference between the Glock Gen1 and Gen 4? Removable backstraps? Hoopty damn doo! The topic is Revolutionary, not Evolution from one gun to another. But, if it was, the Glock is not a whole lot different in any of it's reincarnations. The 1911 had to start as something, and it's obvious at least by MachIVshooter's pictures of several very chronologically close firearms. The 1900 didn't become a 1911 overnight, duh! But, to lump the Glock in as a revolutionary firearm and compare it's grip
change to the evolution of the JMB design of a tried and true battle pistol is ludicrous at best. The Glad Ware Pistol is here to stay, but will most likely live in the 1911s shadow.

MachIVshooter
April 15, 2012, 11:41 AM
The 1900 doesn't have a grip safety, has a different manual safety, a different grip angle, no bushing, no slide stop, has a heel mag release and the slide removes to the rear. Aside from the general outline its as different from a 1911 as any other handgun is. No matter how much for this discussion you want it to be a 1900 is NOT a 1911

Evolution.

We don't claim a modern, gas piston uppered, Mag pul'd out AR isn't an AR because it has numerous changes as compared to the original Colt sporter.

Glock's "revolutionary" trigger system is nothing more than the 1881-patented Iver-Johnson safety trigger adapted to an autoloader:

http://www.dongutheryauctions.com/Guthery%20Website%20New/nextauction/weapons/images/Iver%20Johnson%20Hammerless%20Revolver.JPG

The Glock is a darn good pistol, and I even own one of the ugly suckers. But it is not revolutionary. It is built using 70-100 year old designs incorporated with a polymer chassis pioneered a decade earlier by a another gunmaker. Every feature of the Glock pistol is owed to another design. It was marketing, not ingenuity, that made the Glock.

The 1911 gets it's credit because it was developed by the same man who created it's predecessors, and incorporates everything he learned designing the previous pistols, plus a couple of military-mandated features.

The Glock may be the inexpensive pocket calculator of guns, but the 1911 is the solid state transistor. The 1900 would be the thermionic triode.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 11:44 AM
Evolution.

We don't claim a modern, gas piston uppered, Mag pul'd out AR isn't an AR because it has numerous changes as compared to the original Colt sporter.

Glock's "revolutionary" trigger system is nothing more than the 1881-patented Iver-Johnson safety trigger adapted to an autoloader.

http://www.dongutheryauctions.com/Guthery%20Website%20New/nextauction/weapons/images/Iver%20Johnson%20Hammerless%20Revolver.JPG

The "revolutionary" polymer frame was actually pioneered by HK a decade earlier, and, of course, we all know how much Browning design exists in the gun.

The Glock may be the inexpensive pocket calculator of guns, but the 1911 is the solid state transistor. The 1900 would be the thermionic triode.
Ha! That's probably the wildest yet true statement yet. I agree 100% with your observation.

R.W.Dale
April 15, 2012, 11:45 AM
I'm sorry I thought this thread was about what gun brought more change to the autoloading handgun. Not which had more small changes from previous models!


The fact still remains that once you strip away the FALSE assumption that many base their votes on here that the 1911 was the first tilting barrel handgun then there's really nothing to base an assertion that its more revolutionary than the glock on.

InkEd
April 15, 2012, 11:47 AM
I don't know about equally influential in terms of their usage and outcome of history but both designs have set the standard for their respected type of pistol. Both became the standard for a rugged functional pistol and spawned many similar designs. I think the biggest thing about each is the 1911 proved that semiautos can be very reliable pistols and the Glock proved that polymers are durable enough for use in pistols.

MachIVshooter
April 15, 2012, 12:02 PM
The fact still remains that once you strip away the FALSE assumption that many base their votes on here that the 1911 was the first tilting barrel handgun then there's really nothing to base an assertion that its more revolutionary than the glock on

How about that it was the first gun to combine that system with a button mag release, an intuitive manual safety, an effective passive safety and a previously-unheard of reliability, and do so at a time when horse and buggy were still the common mode of individual transit and most homes were still illuminated with whale oil?

JohnBT
April 15, 2012, 12:26 PM
John Browning patented the basic idea of a tilting barrel locking system in automatic pistols in 1895. It took him a few years to develop the idea and after working through some preliminary models he arrived at the gun that became the Model 1911. Look at all of the different makes that used, and still use, that idea.

Gaston Glock used the tilting barrel idea many decades later, but no matter how you look at it, Mr. Glock didn't invent the idea of a tilting barrel locking system. That's no false assumption.

John

This article lists the patent numbers:
http://unblinkingeye.com/Guns/1900ACP/1900acp.html

SatCong
April 15, 2012, 12:38 PM
The Colt Model 1911 was the product of a very capable person, namely John Moses Browning, father of several modern firearms.

The pistol was designed to comply with the requirements of the U.S. Army, which, during its campaign against the Moros in Philippines, had seen its trusty .38 revolver to be incapable of stopping attackers. An Ordnance Board headed by Col. John T. Thompson (inventor of the Thompson sub-machine-gun) and Col. Louis A. La Garde, had reached the conclusion that the army needed a .45" caliber cartridge, to provide adequate stopping power. In the mean time, J. Browning who was working for Colt, had already designed an autoloader pistol, around a cartridge similar to contemporary .38 Super (dimension-wise). When the Army announced its interest in a new handgun, Browning re-engineered this handgun to accommodate a .45" diameter cartridge of his own design (with a 230 gr. FMJ bullet), and submitted the pistol to the Army for evaluation.

In the selection process, which started at 1906 with firearms submitted by Colt, Luger, Savage, Knoble, Bergmann, White-Merrill and Smith & Wesson, Browning's design was selected, together with the Savage design in 1907. However, the U.S. Army pressed for some service tests, which revealed that neither pistol (Colt's or Savage's) had reached the desired perfection. The Ordnance Department instituted a series of further tests and experiments, which eventually resulted in the appointment of a selection committee, in 1911.

Browning was determined to prove the superiority of his handgun, so he went to Hartford to personally supervise the production of the gun. There he met Fred Moore, a young Colt employee with whom he worked in close cooperation trying to make sure that each part that was produced for the test guns was simply the best possible. The guns produced were submitted again for evaluation, to the committee. A torture test was conducted, on March 3rd, 1911. The test consisted of having each gun fire 6000 rounds. One hundred shots would be fired and the pistol would be allowed to cool for 5 minutes. After every 1000 rounds, the pistol would be cleaned and oiled. After firing those 6000 rounds, the pistol would be tested with deformed cartridges, some seated too deeply, some not seated enough, etc. The gun would then be rusted in acid or submerged in sand and mud and some more tests would then be conducted.

Browning's pistols passed the whole test series with flying colors. It was the first firearm to undergo such a test, firing continuously 6000 cartridges, a record broken only in 1917 when Browning's recoil-operated machine gun fired a 40000 rounds test.

The report of the evaluation committee (taken from 'The .45 Automatic, An American Rifleman Reprint', published by the National Rifle Association of America) released on the 20th of March 1911 stated :


"Of the two pistols, the board was of the opinion
that the Colt is superior, because it is more
reliable, more enduring, more easily disassembled
when there are broken parts to be replaced, and
more accurate."


On March 29th, 1911, the Browning-designed, Colt-produced .45 Automatic pistol, was selected as the official sidearm of the Armed Forces of U.S.A., and named Model 1911.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 12:39 PM
I'm sorry I thought this thread was about what gun brought more change to the autoloading handgun. Not which had more small changes from previous models!


The fact still remains that once you strip away the FALSE assumption that many base their votes on here that the 1911 was the first tilting barrel handgun then there's really nothing to base an assertion that its more revolutionary than the glock on.
It is a thread about such things. The Glock brought nothing in full or combination that hasn't been done before. Whether or not the Glock does it better is subjective, even though it is a reliable weapon to some. Several instances of what the 1911 brings to the table and it's track record over it's 100 years in existence have been given. Like you said, a duck is a duck.

HKGuns
April 15, 2012, 02:19 PM
Far more 1911's have been used to shoot people in movies than in real life. Real people, who depend on real guns to protect themselves from real bad guys choose Glock by a very wide margin.

Yeah right. WWI, WWII, Korean War and Vietnam were minor conflicts for the US. -Try to get somewhat of a clue. There was ZERO new or revolutionary about gLoCk, regardless of what the ignorant continue to believe.

Nushif
April 15, 2012, 02:27 PM
Reading this thread I have seen maybe three posts that don't appeal to some sort of emotional argument, showing nothing more than preferences.

el Godfather
April 15, 2012, 02:32 PM
Nushif, this is the way of internet forums. You get lots of information, and then you have to comb out the less important stuff.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 02:34 PM
Reading this thread I have seen maybe three posts that don't appeal to some sort of emotional argument, showing nothing more than preferences.
Speculated.

There will be biases, of course, but there are more than three posts here with objectified, fact based statements on this thread. I myself know each weapons history, shot several models of each, in different calibers. I own, currently, neither. I like to think I'm unbiased in that sense, and looking at the question asked by the OP, I hope more will be unbiased as well. But, there's more than three.

tuj
April 15, 2012, 02:39 PM
Its funny, when I see a cut-away of a Glock or other modern tilt-barrel pistol, all I can ever think is 1911. JMB was genius as of yet unsurpassed in firearms design.

Cosmoline
April 15, 2012, 02:42 PM
John Browning patented the basic idea of a tilting barrel locking system in automatic pistols in 1895.

Nobody is disputing JMB's enormous and revolutionary impact on firearm design. But just because he laid His Hands upon the 1911 doesn't mean the 1911 itself was revolutionary. It was one step in a long process and Browning himself continued to come up with new ideas and designs after that. JMB should be given credit for his revolutionary actions. But we're looking at one particular model that never caught on much beyond the USA, or in any law enforcement circles.

How about that it was the first gun to combine that system with a button mag release, an intuitive manual safety, an effective passive safety and a previously-unheard of reliability, and do so at a time when horse and buggy were still the common mode of individual transit and most homes were still illuminated with whale oil?

That particular combination of single action/toggle safety/grip safety and mag release, combined with the action, is what makes a 1911 a 1911. Not many copied it. That's why you don't see the great powers of Europe and Asia rushing to make their own 1911's by WWII. The simpler, smaller-caliber pistols remained predominant before and after the advent of the 1911. A fine handgun? Certainly. Revolutionary? Nope. Maybe evolutionary, but with few offspring.

JRH6856
April 15, 2012, 03:19 PM
That particular combination of single action/toggle safety/grip safety and mag release, combined with the action, is what makes a 1911 a 1911. Not many copied it. That's why you don't see the great powers of Europe and Asia rushing to make their own 1911's by WWII.

Different times, different places. In the very early 20th century, very few countries equipped their military with weapons made in another country. But after WWI many countries did adopt the improved 1911 design represented by the FN P-35. And patent laws kept most patented designs from being copied, except in countries that ignored those laws (such as Spain where the 1911 was copied by several manufacturers). Also, very few countries other than the USA allowed civilian ownership of firearms and especially firearms in "military" calibers which substantially limited the civilian market outside of the US.

Bio-Chem
April 15, 2012, 04:08 PM
If Glocks are still alive and kicking with the same basic design in 2082 when they've had their 100th anniversary then maybe we can start this conversation. That is unless the 1911 is still around as well making any discussion moot.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 05:45 PM
The one thing I know is that you just can't stupid scratch a Glock and to the best of my knowledge no military has ever junked them for being obsolete and unreliable. I also think that lock breach thing was a Luger design with the knee action long before JMB used it.
What military of warrant is issued a Glock? Austria?

Both the 1911 and the BHP were used in WW2, the latter popular with the British. What does a flaw mean...aren't there four variances of Glock, the fourth having recalls for recoil springs. I imagine they'll change that and call it a Gen5.

gunnutery
April 15, 2012, 06:23 PM
What military of warrant is issued a Glock? Austria?

French Special Forces
Denmark
Finland
Israel
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Sweden
Switzerland
Venezuela

Just to name a few, some of those are in Afganistan as we speak.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock

MachIVshooter
April 15, 2012, 06:40 PM
Not many copied it. That's why you don't see the great powers of Europe and Asia rushing to make their own 1911's by WWII.

Ummmm........The 1911 has been used by military and police all over the world. Whether captured, supplied by the US, or in the form of licensed/unlicensed copies, they've been in continuous official service for a century. MEUSOC still uses them, too; They weren't completely abandoned by the US military.

I also think that lock breach thing was a Luger design with the knee action long before JMB used it.

You think wrong. Aside from the fact that they're completely different systems, the Browning system was patented 5 years before the Luger came to be. The Luger was based on the C93 action, which in turn was based on the Maxim machine gun. Incidentally, this seemingly-German design came from an American.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 06:52 PM
French Special Forces
Denmark
Finland
Israel
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Sweden
Switzerland
Venezuela

Just to name a few, some of those are in Afganistan as we speak.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock


I asked for those of warrant, as in importance, or a super power, or a fighting force of elitism. I apologize if the mention of the Romanian army does not strike fear or awe in my heart. Also, who is
or is not in Afghanistan is not of importance in this discussion.

We do not issue it, and I would ask why. The 1911 saw a half century of use by our military before it was retired. That says something.

There is no revolution in the Glock that was not already achieved by some other weapon, or the 1911 specifically. To say a Glock does it better, you might be right, but it would be in vain.

Ps...didn't anyone tell you that Wikipedia isn't the most reliable of sources? Also, you mustn't forget Thailand...

gunnutery
April 15, 2012, 08:33 PM
I asked for those of warrant, as in importance, or a super power, or a fighting force of elitism. I apologize if the mention of the Romanian army does not strike fear or awe in my heart. Also, who is
or is not in Afghanistan is not of importance in this discussion.


Any of the forces I mentioned are more elite than you are. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not stare down a Glock (or any other gun for that matter) in the hands of even the most incompitent soldier of the Romanian army. It doesn't strike fear in your heart because you're not opposing them.

Just because those countries aren't super powers doesn't mean their not important. I merely mentioned Afghanistan to show that the Glock has seen actual combat beyond law enforcement shooting incidents.

We do not issue it, and I would ask why. The 1911 saw a half century of use by our military before it was retired. That says something.

I'll tell you why; Because we can't afford to at this time for one. The other is that the people in charge of appropriations are still clinging onto manual safteys and second strike capabiility. I'm not discounting the 1911's service, but just because the U.S. doesn't issue this or that gun doesn't discount it's ablilities.

Ps...didn't anyone tell you that Wikipedia isn't the most reliable of sources?

I have heard that, but it also doesn't mean that every piece of info within wikipedia is invalid or wrong. It's a good source to get a general concept or idea of what you want to look at.

/rant

Pete D.
April 15, 2012, 08:45 PM
AH! I stopped reading after the halfway mark on page three.
There is a lot of information that is just wrong....not necessarily about the guns either.
"never was a 1911 that was reliable right from the box?" You've gotta be kidding. I have two 1911s, a SA and a Colt Gold Cup, both have been as reliable as the Glock that I also own. The GC has run pretty much trouble free for 60K rounds plus.
There are any number of "if this had occurred then the 1911 would be...something/unimportant." Statements like that are all fallacious - Hypotheses Contrary to Fact. In each case the reasoning is illogical because we have no way of knowing what would have happened. You cannot logically base a statement about the present on something which did not occur.
Early on a poster described the 1911 as an "antiquated relic". I have read similar comments lately here and on other fora. What, exactly, is antiquated about the 1911? I don't see it.
BTW....as I write this, there is a Glock sitting about ten inches from my right hand. I like and use them both.
I do believe the comment made earlier by another poster to the effect that the 1911 design is more popular and in demand today than ever is testament to the influence of and durability of the design.
Pete

Armed012002
April 15, 2012, 09:09 PM
Other than y'all lusting over the 1911, what about it is so revolutionary?

Are you sure you're not describing "legendary" or some other more appropriate adjective?

Other handguns of the era did the same thing. The 1911 didn't completely and dramatically change how we use handguns.

It was and still is a very good design, but we would still have semiautomatic handguns without it.

MachIVshooter
April 15, 2012, 09:14 PM
but we would still have semiautomatic handguns without it.

Nobody is debating that. What we are saying is that the 1911 is the embodiment of JMB's 15-year quest to create a great combat handgun, and that just about everything made today uses the same operating principle he pioneered.

Other handguns of the era did the same thing.

well, no, they really didn't. The 1911 and .45 ACP cartridge bested every contemporary autoloading design in reliability and performance. It is also far simpler than the other locked breech designs of the day.

meanmrmustard
April 15, 2012, 10:11 PM
Any of the forces I mentioned are more elite than you are. I don't know about you, but I'd rather not stare down a Glock (or any other gun for that matter) in the hands of even the most incompitent soldier of the Romanian army. It doesn't strike fear in your heart because you're not opposing them.

Just because those countries aren't super powers doesn't mean their not important. I merely mentioned Afghanistan to show that the Glock has seen actual combat beyond law enforcement shooting incidents.



I'll tell you why; Because we can't afford to at this time for one. The other is that the people in
charge of appropriations are still clinging onto manual safteys and second strike capabiility. I'm not discounting the 1911's service, but just because the U.S. doesn't issue this or that gun doesn't discount it's ablilities.


I have heard that, but it also doesn't mean that every piece of info within wikipedia is invalid or
wrong. It's a good source to get a general concept or idea of what you want to look at.

/rant
I hope that's not the extent of what you have to add to this thread, as there has been nothing said
in it that gives logical data as to the comparison between the two weapons. I won't stand against a Romanian, they have vampires there (sorry attempt to lighten the mood, sorry)!
I hope that the countries currently exercising the Glock have good luck, mainly those who fight side by side with our forces. But their weapon is not revolutionary, as per the OPs question. I apologize for offense, I'm sure the Thai army is much more elite than I. I'm just not interested in other countries really, just the one I live in. Britain supplies Glocks, I'd call them a super power, but I could care less about the limeys. I'm interested in how anyone can call the Fantastic Plastic more revolutionary than the 1911.
The 1911 has seen Africa, Asia, Phillipines, South Pacific, Germany, Normandy, beaches, rocks,
deserts, sand, rain, mud, and blood. Over 50 years worth in major conflicts all over this rock, starting as a flawed design and ending in a battle pistol with revolutionary features for it's time. It will be here when Glock hits it's 100th BDay, and our grandkids may be having this same argument...er...discussion!

baylorattorney
April 16, 2012, 12:58 AM
Not for nothing but, if the 1911 was so good just why did our military junk it and go to the 9 mm Beretta? No military of any country has ever junked the Glock superior design that has proven itself to be virtually indestructible and rock solid reliable.

For the year 1911 JMB design was unique and maybe even revolutionary for it's time. That said, in the year 2012 the Glock auto loading pistol is a quantum leap ahead of the 1911 antique in design. Not to get involved in a heated debate full of angst and hyped rhetoric, just what can any 1911 do that my Glock 36 can not do? They both shoot 230 grain ball ammo and my Glock shoots hollow points flawlessly and does not need to be soaked in oil or broken in for 600 rounds like my Kimber. The Glock carries like a dream, light weight and no sharp edges to get caught when it is drawn from concealment. To me that is a big improvement over my Kimber. I would not drive a Model T Ford as a Nascar machine either......just saying!

Is that really the analysis: why the military picks or doesn't pick a certain handgun? Really we need to wait a hundred years and see if Glock is as prevalent as the 1911 STILL WILL BE. To answer your question as to what 1911 can do that glock can't or hadn't glock hadn't been time tested.

SatCong
April 16, 2012, 01:02 AM
Gee, Wonder why the Marine Corp order another 4,000 1911's if their junk!That goes along with the other 1911's they have.

SatCong
April 16, 2012, 01:41 AM
Oh...... I would be willing to bet that the United States Marines have many more Beretta 92FS pistols than they do 1911 antiques. But Why would they buy JUNK? Or antiques. Just don't understand.

MachIVshooter
April 16, 2012, 02:58 AM
They only problem is that our military junked it for a 9 mm Italian designed side arm many years ago.

Do you seriously believe that our military selects equipment based solely on merit?

There are several combat pistols that are light years ahead of it's very primitive design.

Yeah, all those fancy HK's, Sig's, GLocks, XD's that use a totally diffe.......wait a sec, they use the same short recoil system, button mag release, recoil spring under the barrel, homogenous slide enclosing the barrel......

Come to think of it, it's almost like they were kinda based on the Browning design, isn't it?

Light years? Please. More like a frog leap, and that's stretching it.

JMB himself came to the same conclusion and that is why the 9mm Browning High Power was created.

No, he created the HP for the French military, who specifically comissioned him to build a gun to their specifications, and he had already sold the 1911 patent to Colt. That is why the HP is different; It has nothing to do with Browning's personal opinion of his creation and everything to do with not infringing the patent that he sold to Colt.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 16, 2012, 03:46 AM
Yeah, all those fancy HK's, Sig's, GLocks, XD's that use a totally diffe.......wait a sec, they use the same short recoil system, button mag release, recoil spring under the barrel, homogenous slide enclosing the barrel......

Less parts, more durable, drop in parts, higher capacity magazines, lighter weight. 1911s are nice but for duty/combat use, there are pistols that are much better then the 1911. You don't need a pistol with match accuracy or a target trigger as a Police officer and the accuracy or trigger wouldn't be a factor in military use because it would be drawn because your rifle ran empty or malfunctioned. a 1911 for duty or combat use seems like nostalgia to me.

MachIVshooter
April 16, 2012, 03:58 AM
Less parts

Generally correct.

more durable

Speculative. We'll know more in a century or so.

drop in parts

Some are, some aren't-in the 1911 and other guns. A loose mil-spec 1911 is going to have more drop-in parts than a tight custom, and the same is true of any other design.

higher capacity magazines.

Yeah, you're right. There are no hi cap 1911s...........except for those from Para, Kimber, STI, SV, Wilson Combat, Springfield Armory, Detonics, RIA, Llama...............

Armed012002
April 16, 2012, 08:03 AM
There's a lot of emotion in this thread and for good reason.

The 1911 is a timeless design thanks to its long storied service. It's faithfully served countless servicemen, peace officers, and citizens for over 100 years. The 1911 is legendary because of the legendary heros that have carried it.

However, I disagree with the opinion that the 1911 is revolutionary. Most certainly it's legendary, but I don't see how this design fits the definition of revolutionary. For example, a double action revolver serves the same purpose. In fact, for many decades, many police agencies in America preferred double action revolvers over the 1911 and semiautomatic pistols in general.

As I said before, there have been very few truly revolutionary changes in firearms.

In my opinion, the change to self contained metallic cartridges is an example of a revolutionary change. Without this development, the 1911 and Glock would not exist. The 1911 and Glock are both evolutionary changes in firearms that fire those cartridges.

We won't have another revolutionary change until someone comes up with something different than a self contained metallic cartridge. Perhaps caseless ammo will be the next revolution?

Armed012002
April 16, 2012, 08:22 AM
I would not use any decision the government or Department of Defense has made as an argument for or against a firearm.

There's just too many variables in those decisions. Many of those are political in nature.

meanmrmustard
April 16, 2012, 08:49 AM
Not for nothing but, if the 1911 was so good just why did our military junk it and go to the 9 mm Beretta? No military of any country has ever junked the Glock superior design that has proven itself to be virtually indestructible and rock solid reliable.

For the year 1911 JMB design was unique and maybe even revolutionary for it's time. That said, in the year 2012 the Glock auto loading pistol is a quantum leap ahead of the 1911 antique in design. Not to get involved in a heated debate full of angst and hyped rhetoric, just what can any 1911 do that my Glock 36 can not do? They both shoot 230 grain ball ammo and my Glock shoots hollow points flawlessly and does not need to be soaked in oil or broken in for 600 rounds like my Kimber. The Glock carries like a dream, light weight and no sharp edges to get caught when it is drawn from concealment. To me that is a big improvement over my Kimber. I would not drive a Model T Ford as a Nascar machine either......just saying!

NATO, NATO, NATO. That's why.

As for what a 1911 can do that a Glock can't? Nothing, but that's off topic anyway. I firmly believe, like a few others here that the 1911 was revolutionary, the Glock not so much.

Please do not use a Kimber for comparison, that's just plain not right.

If Eisenhower ceased orders for 1911s, why were they still being used up to the mid 80s, when they were replaced by a NATO compliant sidearm that wasn't a Glock?

45_auto
April 16, 2012, 08:55 AM
just what can any 1911 do that my Glock 36 can not do?

Hide'm both in your oven, turn it on to "broil" for about 15 minutes, then see which one will still shoot! :neener:

fatcat4620
April 16, 2012, 09:00 AM
All right so we can put thus one to bed. The 1911 was more revolutionary but the glock is a better gun.

Armed012002
April 16, 2012, 09:05 AM
Hide'm both in your oven, turn it on to "broil" for about 15 minutes, then see which one will still shoot!

Statements like this are absurd. Frequently used on both sides of the "Glock vs 1911" debate to "prove" one is better than the other.

It would be like me suggesting someone drop their 1911 and Glock in salt water for 30 days then see which one will still shoot. The Glock will, most 1911s probably will not.

Neither is a real world example of durability and doesn't add much, if anything, to the discussion.

Armed012002
April 16, 2012, 09:06 AM
All right so we can put thus one to bed. The 1911 was more revolutionary but the glock is a better gun.

Or perhaps neither is revolutionary and both are good guns ;)

wickedsprint
April 16, 2012, 09:10 AM
Hide'm both in your oven, turn it on to "broil" for about 15 minutes, then see which one will still shoot! :neener:

While funny, this should not be the sole discriminator.

huntsman
April 16, 2012, 11:24 AM
A 1911 is representative of what America used to be

A Glock is representative of what America is now

$600. for a pile of plastic, sure they work but to make the 1911 like it was made makes it unaffordable to most shooters so the Glock wins because at least it keeps guns in the hands of shooters.

MachIVshooter
April 16, 2012, 12:41 PM
Seems like Colt and our military got the worst end of that deal until Eisenhower got smart and stopped all orders for 1911 platform pistols and adopted the proven 9 mm format that had proven itself extremely effective in the European combat theaters for years.

Adopted? lol. Those trials were abandoned.

The 9mm didn't officially enter service with the US armed forces until 1990, and it's been griped about ever since. Forces that actually use their handguns often choose the .45 ACP: MEUSOC pistol (a 1911) and HK Mk23

But since this thread has absolutely nothing to do with cartridges, let's shy away from that right now.

to make the 1911 like it was made makes it unaffordable to most shooters so the Glock wins because at least it keeps guns in the hands of shooters.

Ummmm............to make it as it was made gives you anything from the $400 RIA GI model to the $900 Colt Government model series 70, and a bunch in between. I wouldn't call the $400-$900 market out of reach for the average American handgunner; Just about everything falls into that range.

RickMD
April 16, 2012, 12:52 PM
A Chevy Volt is revolutionary compared to a '66 Jaguar XKE but which one would you like to have in your garage?

huntsman
April 16, 2012, 03:04 PM
$400 RIA GI model to the $900 Colt Government model series 70, and a bunch in between. I wouldn't call the $400-$900 market out of reach for the average American handgunner; Just about everything falls into that range.


All US made? all made the same way as the production Colt or are you sighting MIM and cast frame guns?

http://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/listings/details/index.cfm?itemnum=1017783756

one from the good old days ;)

JohnBT
April 16, 2012, 03:04 PM
"But just because he laid His Hands upon the 1911 doesn't mean the 1911 itself was revolutionary."

And just because he laid his hands on it doesn't mean it wasn't revolutiontary. I see what you tried to do there with your fast talk.

John

P.S. - I had a friend in college in the early '70s with an XKE rag top. I'll only take the car if it comes with a mechanic. Then his roomate got a new '72 454 Corvette. Oh dear me. He'd let me drive him to class 2x a week and keep the car on the road for an hour until class was over. Wheeeeeeeeee.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 16, 2012, 03:16 PM
Speculative. We'll know more in a century or so.

Less parts generally means more durable especially in something like a Glock.


Some are, some aren't-in the 1911 and other guns. A loose mil-spec 1911 is going to have more drop-in parts than a tight custom, and the same is true of any other design.
Is there a 1911 made today that is actually mil spec with drop in parts? That's what I'm getting at. Not the original military 1911s that were issued 30 years ago.

Yeah, you're right. There are no hi cap 1911s...........except for those from Para, Kimber, STI, SV, Wilson Combat, Springfield Armory, Detonics, RIA, Llama...............

You are right but why would the military take a 1911 over something more modern?


The 9mm didn't officially enter service with the US armed forces until 1990, and it's been griped about ever since. Forces that actually use their handguns often choose the .45 ACP: MEUSOC pistol (a 1911) and HK Mk23

So the Army just has the M9 for looks? The MEUSOC is issued to the MEU Marines only and they aren't that big either. The Navy SEALs pretty much all used the P226 9mm and swore by it instead of the large and largely unused MK23. SOCOM replaced the MK23 with the HK45CT if you didn't know.

Also, 5.56 NATO has been griped about since it's adoption too despite being proven that it's effective.

Cosmoline
April 16, 2012, 03:30 PM
A Chevy Volt is revolutionary compared to a '66 Jaguar XKE but which one would you like to have in your garage?

That's a very good point. Consider a few really revolutionary firearms. The Lebel 1886. The Hall rifle. The MAS 40. Collector value aside, these all have their share of bugs and limitations which were resolved in subsequent variations on the ideas they introduced. Revolutionary arms are rarely the best.

GunnyUSMC
April 16, 2012, 03:43 PM
I first shot the 1911A1 in 1982 while going through Marine Corps boot camp. I was impressed with the gun then and still love them today. I was on active duty wgen the military switched over to the Beretta, What a sad day.
I remember when the Glock first hit the market. I worked for a large sporting goods store and sold Glocks for $229. Boy did you have to work to sell then back in the day.
The 1911 has left it's mark on the world and is still being built today.
Glock is making it's mark. Will it still be around in 100 years, that is to be seen.
My 94 year old US 1911 built in August of 1918 is still functional.
Will a Glock built in 2012 still be functional in 2106? That is yet to be seen.
All in all both guns have had a large impact on how guns are looked at today.

MachIVshooter
April 16, 2012, 05:14 PM
All US made? all made the same way as the production Colt or are you sighting MIM and cast frame guns?

Some are cast, some forged, some US made, some not. However, I've never seen a MIM frame.

Less parts generally means more durable especially in something like a Glock.

Parts count and durability are unrelated. There are a lot of very simple guns that aren't durable, and there are very complex designs that have stood the test of time. Lower parts count just makes it cheaper to produce at the same quality level, which the Glock certainly is.

Is there a 1911 made today that is actually mil spec with drop in parts?

Several. Of course, they aren't going to be nice and tight like the semi-customs, and won't boast the same level of accuracy as a hand-fitted gun.

There seems to be this misconception that all 1911s require careful hand fitting of every part by an expert gunsmith. It simply isn't so, especially if you're not trying to build a bullseye gun.

You are right but why would the military take a 1911 over something more modern?

They wouldn't, because double action became requisite.

So the Army just has the M9 for looks?

Did I say that? There were a lot of factors that went into that decision, and it was more than just one trial.

Let's digress, though. This thread is not about the current military standards, pistol trials of the '50s and 80s, the 9mm cartridge, drop in parts, the quality of various current production 1911s or the Beretta 92FS pistol.

Pete D.
April 16, 2012, 05:27 PM
. You don't need a pistol with match accuracy....
WOW. Maybe the effect was unintended.....it is hard to believe that the accuracy of a gun and the quality of its trigger can be dismissed in such a cavalier fashion.
Actually, the accuracy of 1911s is the answer to the question "what can a 1911 do that my Glock can't?"
Don't get me wrong....I like Glocks. I own and carry one and it is accurate - despite its trigger; when I go to a match, when accuracy is paramount, I take the Gold Cup, the Glock stays home.
At the matches, shooters can use any of many guns...I have never seen a Glock on the line.
Pete

meanmrmustard
April 16, 2012, 06:47 PM
This isn't about who is best. Both arms have there pros and cons. But, rather, which was revolutionary. We've been given information from folks here supporting both sides. No one has given a concrete example of Glock reshaping anything in terms of firearms design or usage. It's done nothing that hasn't been done before. Albeit, the Glock may do things better than other pistols in it's stable, but best the 1911 in terms of revolutionary it does not. I see the Glock design as a smattering of copied designs that have come together to make a formidable arm. It's just not on any forefront design wise. To close, Glock likes to promote it's perfection, and my unbiased thought on that is when we begin to see less people having problems (recoil spring, sticky mag release, trigger pinch, sights crooked or loose) with them, they would be indeed perfect. Maybe a perfect Glock is revolutionary, they've not achieved it though. Those are easy fixes, so we may see a Gen 5 super-pistol and the Glock will rise to a glory it currently does not have. 1911s have the revolution crown so to speak.

meanmrmustard
April 16, 2012, 06:55 PM
All right so we can put thus one to bed. The 1911 was more revolutionary but the glock is a better gun.
Subjective.

JRH6856
April 16, 2012, 07:15 PM
In my opinion, the change to self contained metallic cartridges is an example of a revolutionary change. Without this development, the 1911 and Glock would not exist. The 1911 and Glock are both evolutionary changes in firearms that fire those cartridges.

We won't have another revolutionary change until someone comes up with something different than a self contained metallic cartridge. Perhaps caseless ammo will be the next revolution?

That may be the most sensible and accurate assessment to appear in this thread.

But caseless ammo would still just be an evolution in ammunition. A truly revolutionary change would eliminate cartridges in favor of pure energy. Phasers, anyone?

meanmrmustard
April 16, 2012, 07:33 PM
That may be the most sensible and accurate assessment to appear in this thread.

But caseless ammo would still just be an evolution in ammunition. A truly revolutionary change would eliminate cartridges in favor of pure energy. Phasers, anyone?
That is the most awesomemest statement. I'd love a laser gun. Although, the lack of cartridges means no jobs for ammo manufacturing, thus a massive unemployment situation. Bummer.

huntsman
April 16, 2012, 08:19 PM
Some are cast, some forged, some US made, some not. However, I've never seen a MIM frame.

MIM parts cast frames an attempt to keep production costs down.

the_skunk
April 16, 2012, 10:44 PM
A Chevy Volt is revolutionary compared to a '66 Jaguar XKE but which one would you like to have in your garage?

Now, that's a cruel thing to say.

meanmrmustard
April 16, 2012, 11:38 PM
Generally correct.



Speculative. We'll know more in a century or so.



Some are, some aren't-in the 1911 and other guns. A loose mil-spec 1911 is going to have more drop-in parts than a tight custom, and the same is true of any other design.



Yeah, you're right. There are no hi cap 1911s...........except for those from Para, Kimber, STI, SV, Wilson Combat, Springfield Armory, Detonics, RIA, Llama...............
To add to this, Glock also states that not all of it's parts are compatible between different generations of it's handguns of similar model. Bummer.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 16, 2012, 11:41 PM
Several. Of course, they aren't going to be nice and tight like the semi-customs, and won't boast the same level of accuracy as a hand-fitted gun.

There seems to be this misconception that all 1911s require careful hand fitting of every part by an expert gunsmith. It simply isn't so, especially if you're not trying to build a bullseye gun.

I already know about the older 1911s. I said, what 1911s are made today that have drop in parts.


Did I say that? There were a lot of factors that went into that decision, and it was more than just one trial.

You did, you said that those that use their handguns go for .45s (which isn't true either way) which implies that the Army doesn't use their handguns at all.

WOW. Maybe the effect was unintended.....it is hard to believe that the accuracy of a gun and the quality of its trigger can be dismissed in such a cavalier fashion.

Because you aren't shooting small targets at a distance, you are shooting another human being within I would say 20 yards. A match trigger and 2" accuracy wouldn't be a factor. Countless people seem to get by these days with a handgun with inferior accuracy and trigger.

To add to this, Glock also states that not all of it's parts are compatible between different generations of it's handguns of similar model. Bummer.

That's why you issue the same generation handgun across the board. I was making a point that most if not all 1911s don't have drop in parts. You wouldn't be able to interchange parts from one gun to another of the same model. Not one from a different Generation. BIG difference there.

MachIVshooter
April 16, 2012, 11:47 PM
I said, what 1911s are made today that have drop in parts.

I already told you. All of them to a certain extent, and some to a much greater degree.

How about a Kimber slide & link pin on a Colt frame with colt barrel bushing? Those aren't just two different guns of the same model, but two very different models from very different manufacturers.

http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n117/Hunter2506/101_1318.jpg

The barrels wont interchange, of course, because one is a fully ramped 10mm, the other a conventional .45 barrel. If the Kimber were a .45, it would work. As for other parts, well, I'm just not willing to tear these guns down any further to show you what I already know.

The only part of a 1911 that really needs to be hand-fitted is the sear & hammer for proper engagement. Parts made oversize with the intent of being tightly fitted are a different story, but you could take a pile of parts from two Colt Government models and make two whole guns without any trouble, only really paying attention to the sear engagement.

When it comes to aftermarket parts, some are drop-in (MSH and such), but others, like barrels, may require fitting because they are made oversize so that they can be fit to many different 1911s from many different makers who don't all have the exact same specs. This is not a design problem; It is a result of market saturation creating a logistical nightmare for a company trying to make truly direct-fit parts. This is also a situation that does not plague the Glock (yet). But it is not unique to the 1911; Any oft-copied design will have this situation with aftermarket parts, whether it's a 1911, an AR-15 or something completely different, like an MSD or Accel V8 spark plug wire set that has to be cut to fit, because it would be silly for the manufacturer to make 50 different sets to be OEM fit on each engine when they can just make one set and supply a crimping tool.

You did

Please, PLEASE, show me where I said the military chose the M9 for aesthetic reasons :rolleyes:

I was making a point that most if not all 1911s don't have drop in parts. You wouldn't be able to interchange parts from one gun to another of the same model.

You don't have the slightest clue what your talking about here. You've made that abundantly, painfully clear.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 17, 2012, 01:42 AM
Please, PLEASE, show me where I said the military chose the M9 for aesthetic reasons

Here but I misread what you said.
The 9mm didn't officially enter service with the US armed forces until 1990, and it's been griped about ever since. Forces that actually use their handguns often choose the .45 ACP: MEUSOC pistol (a 1911) and HK Mk23

Often is the keyword I missed, sorry. I thought you said that those that use their handguns in combat only picked .45s.


You don't have the slightest clue what your talking about here. You've made that abundantly, painfully clear.

Should have clarified and said all parts. I'm going by what nearly everyone says and that is that you can't interchange parts between 1911s reliably unless it's a original GI 1911.

JRH6856
April 17, 2012, 02:26 AM
I'm going by what nearly everyone says and that is that you can't interchange parts between 1911s reliably unless it's a original GI 1911.

Are you then saying that you can reliably exchange parts between original Glocks and later copies of Glocks made by other manufacturers?

Feanor
April 17, 2012, 02:47 AM
Yeah right. WWI, WWII, Korean War and Vietnam were minor conflicts for the US. -Try to get somewhat of a clue. There was ZERO new or revolutionary about gLoCk, regardless of what the ignorant continue to believe.
I notice that you do this same thing in every other gun forum on the web, which essentially is bashing other folks who have differing opinions then your own, and definitely bashing anything Glock. I've dealt with you more then once before, especially at M4carbine where you've made other ridiculous statements, such as the one quoted above, usually you then run to the mods when someone such as myself, steps in and corrects your hyperbolic rhetoric.

Honestly, when is it that you find the time to actually experience a real firearm, as opposed to simply posting in every gun forum on the www, and bashing away, "ignorantly," at that which you very obviously, have little understanding of?

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 17, 2012, 03:14 AM
Are you then saying that you can reliably exchange parts between original Glocks and later copies of Glocks made by other manufacturers?

More so then a 1911 to my knowledge.

MachIVshooter
April 17, 2012, 03:43 AM
I'm going by what nearly everyone says and that is that you can't interchange parts between 1911s reliably unless it's a original GI 1911.

Don't believe everything you hear (or read), especially on the errornet. More misinformation exists about the 1911 than probably any other gun.

As well, no other handgun has been as copied and tinkered with-sometimes done right, but often not. When it does come to accurizing and fitting custom parts to a 1911, it's not something a guy who just finished assembling his first AR should do. Just like building an engine, when you start doing things to increase performance, you have to have a good understanding of how the parts interrelate. Anyone with a Chilton's manual and a torque wrench can bolt together a bone-stock 350 chevy, but when you start porting heads, installing stroker cranks, bumping compression, running chromoly rings, etc., you'd better know a thing or five about engines. The same is true of 1911s (or any other gun you modify substantially).

Right now, the Glock is only made by Glock, so there is only one specification for parts, and even the aftermarket companies can churn out drop-in everything. If, 30 years from now, you have two dozen companies producing knock-offs with all kinds of different materials and alterations, the game will change drastically.

el Godfather
April 17, 2012, 04:10 AM
There is a reason why 1911 is copied by so many companies.

Is it a coincident that after Glock's plastic gun, we saw a boom in polymer gun industry, when HK had already built one decade back?

May be a good third option in this poll would have been a CZ, which is copied by many other companies, although there is debate that CZ was copied from p210?

meanmrmustard
April 17, 2012, 04:43 AM
There is a reason why 1911 is copied by so many companies.

Is it a coincident that after Glock's plastic gun, we saw a boom in polymer gun industry, when HK had already built one decade back?

May be a good third option in this poll would have been a CZ, which is copied by many other companies, although there is debate that CZ was copied from p210?
CZs are my pistol of choice, but they are about as revolutionary as the Glock is, which is not at all. Put it up against the 1911 based on your OP, and it too would be drastically behind in the polls, such as the Glock is now. It hasn't done anything new, or added a yet unseen design that's changed firearms history. If you'd asked which of the three was BETTER, then this becomes a subjective
thread full of fanboyism and bashing. Having shot or owned any combination of two of them minus the Glock, the 1911 and CZ are a cut above in my book. Accuracy is mainly up to the shooter, but these two are inheritely so, I can't hit jack with a Glock.

Plus, you answered your own question. 1911s are copied. Manufacturers making plastic guns are trying to cut in on that market, not making Glock copies, but designs of their own with polymer frames. Big difference there.

Armed012002
April 17, 2012, 05:40 AM
It appears that the word "revolutionary" has the same meaning as "influential" in this thread.

In that case, the Glock is just as "revolutionary" as the 1911. However, I still hold the opinion that neither design is truly "revolutionary." I do hold the opinion that both are very influential in the continued evolution of handguns.

Browning changed the way a lot of handguns operate and made a huge impact on the industry. After Browning designed the 1911 and Hi-Power, many handguns that came after operate the same.

Glock changed the way a lot of handguns are built and made a huge impact on the industry After the Glock was introduced, many manufacturers began building handguns the same way Glock builds his.

The Glock is to manufacturing what the 1911 is to design.

Teachu2 sums it up quite well:

Glock built on what came before it, using modern technology to revolutionize the production of handguns. Then, at least in the U.S., they engaged in marketing to LE in a way that bordered on predatory (you can make your own decision as to which side of the border!) in order to get Glocks adopted by many agencies, which led to widespread public acceptance. The quality of Glock products has built on that initial market penetration, and forced a number of other manufacturers to compete - much like Ford's assembly line revolutionized the auto industry. Ford, like Glock, used technology to revolutionize the production of a product that was pretty similar to others. Ford, like Glock, simplified the product as much as possible, standardized parts so that they were interchangable and could be mass produced, and initially produced one model - in any color you wanted, as long as it was black.

The 1911 was a design breakthrough, the Glock a manufacturing breakthrough. Both have had, and will continue to have, a large impact on the industry.

meanmrmustard
April 17, 2012, 08:24 AM
Definition of revolution: Marked by or resulting in radical change.

It doesn't SEEM that revolutionary means influential, the two are synonymous. Other than simplifying his manufacturing process, where's Gaston's influence? Their parts may be interchangeable amongst same generations, But not all Glocks have interchanging parts. Seems if we would have stood by ole Eli Whitney, most of what we used would interchange. But there isn't just one model of Glock or 1911. Different Gens, series 70 or 80, different calibers. The 1911, first and foremost in this discussion, has been influential. I no longer see any feasible argument that the Glockophiles can muster that would unseat the current a**whooping the polls here are showing. Since this is a one sided ping pong match with no real informative value any longer, I'm retiring from this one. Good luck Glockies, you're gonna need it.

wickedsprint
April 17, 2012, 08:30 AM
It wasn't the 1911 that was revolutionary, it was JMB.

Nushif
April 17, 2012, 08:43 AM
The 1911, first and foremost in this discussion, has been influential. I no longer see any feasible argument that the Glockophiles can muster that would unseat the current a**whooping the polls here are showing. Since this is a one sided ping pong match with no real informative value any longer, I'm retiring from this one. Good luck Glockies, you're gonna need it.


Truly objective, highroad and utterly unemotionally argued. A breakthrough in logical argument. No doubt.
[edit]
And pretty much the picture perfect summary of this thread.

GunnyUSMC
April 17, 2012, 09:04 AM
Looks like this thread is turning into another pot hole in the Highroad.
Looks like more bashing and ego stroking is going on and staying on topic is very hard for some.
This thread is really starting to get funny.:rolleyes:

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 17, 2012, 09:45 AM
Right now, the Glock is only made by Glock,

Actually you can buy all the parts and make a 100% aftermarket Glock including the frame and slide.

MachIVshooter
April 17, 2012, 11:39 AM
Actually you can buy all the parts and make a 100% aftermarket Glock including the frame and slide.

You can, but you cannot buy an assembled pistol from LW or CCF to my knowledge. Those are the only two aftermarket Glock frames I'm aware of. And, of course, both are specifically designed and produced on modern CNC equipment to work with factory Glock parts (though they do have some proprietary parts).

The 1911 is a whole 'nother ball game.

I sangged this list of current and past 1911 makers from DSK over at the 1911 forums:

A.J. Savage (US gov't contract slides only)
American Classic
American Tactical
A&R Sales
AMT
Armi Dallera Custom (ADC)
Armscor
Astra
ATI
Australian Precision Arms
Auto Ordnance
Briley
Brolin Arms
Cabot
Caspian (slides and frames only)
Charles Daly
Cimarron
Citadel
CO Arms
Colt (commercial and US/foreign gov't contract)
Chiappa (.22LR 1911 copy)
Crown City
Cylinder & Slide
Dan Wesson
Detonics
Devel
Dlask Arms
D&L Sports
Double Star
Ed Brown
EMF
Essex (slides and frames only)
Federal Ordnance
Falcon
Firestorm
Freedom Arms
Fusion
Gemini Custom
Griffon Combat
GSG (.22LR 1911 copy)
Guncrafter Industries
Hero Guns
High Standard
Imbel
Imperial Defense
Infinity
Interstate Arms (Regent)
Irwindale Arms Industries (IAI)
Israeli Arms Industries (also called IAI)
Ithaca (current resurrected company)
Ithaca (US gov't contract only)
Iver Johnson
Karl Lippard
Kimber
Kongsberg (M/1914 pistol manufactured in Norway under Colt license)
LAR
Les Baer
Llama
Lone Star
Magnum Research
Maximus Custom
Metro Arms
Mitchell
MP Express
Nighthawk
Norinco
North American Arms Co. Ltd.
Nowlin
Para Ordnance
Pistol Dynamics
Olympic Arms
Omega Defense
Peter Stahl
Randall
Ranger
Reeder Custom
Regent
Remington Arms (current)
Remington Rand (US gov't contract only)
Remington-UMC (US gov't contract only)
Rock Island Armory
Rock River Arms
Ruger
Safari Arms
S.A.M
Sarco
Sig Sauer
Singer (US gov't contract only)
Sistema (aka D.G.F.M.-F.M.A.P.) (M1927 pistol manufactured in Argentina under Colt license)
Smith & Wesson
South Fork Arms/Perkins Custom
Springfield Armory (former military arsenal in MA, made 1911s from 1914-1917 under US gov't contract)
Springfield Armory (commercial business established in 1974, not associated with above)
STI
SVI
Tanfoglio
Taurus
Taylor & Co.
TİSAŞ
Turnbull Mfg.
Unertl
Union Switch & Signal (US gov't contract only)
Uselton Arms
USFA
Walther/Umarex (.22LR 1911 copy)
Wilson Combat
Vega (frames only)
Valtro
Victory Arms
Volkman

dogtown tom
April 17, 2012, 12:00 PM
MachIVshooter.....I sangged this list of current and past 1911 makers....
Many of those "manufacturers" were only importers of someone elses 1911.:rolleyes:

Loosedhorse
April 17, 2012, 12:12 PM
A turning around.

The 1911 was not a "turning around", only because it was introduced too early for anyone to have strong pre-conceived notions about pistols. Only six candidates could be produced for the 1906 Army trials, and only three of those made it past even the first cut. Competing designers from Savage and DWM, looking at the 1911, didn't think "that'll never work"---more like: "Man, why did I think of that!"

In contrast, the Glock started with everyone's mind against it. It did and it continues to change minds, 180 degrees. To turn them right around.

Just not everyone's. :D

MachIVshooter
April 17, 2012, 01:06 PM
Many of those "manufacturers" were only importers of someone elses 1911.

I didn't create or edit the list. Take your gripe up with DSK over there.

And "many" is not quite accurate; I see about 6 (out of more than 100).

Even if 3/4 of the list were the same gun by a different importer, the point remains.

Feanor
April 17, 2012, 04:29 PM
A turning around.

The 1911 was not a "turning around", only because it was introduced too early for anyone to have strong pre-conceived notions about pistols. Only six candidates could be produced for the 1906 Army trials, and only three of those made it past even the first cut. Competing designers from Savage and DWM, looking at the 1911, didn't think "that'll never work"---more like: "Man, why did I think of that!"

In contrast, the Glock started with everyone's mind against it. It did and it continues to change minds, 180 degrees. To turn them right around.

Just not everyone's. :D
It's been my experience that the most voiciferous opposition to the "Glock" brand, emerges from those with either the least practical shooting experience(marginal skills), older but skilled shooters who just will never be able to get past the idea of plastic, or young males much more concerned with fashion than function!

In my circle its virtually universal, all the experienced 1911 guys shoot Glocks, and they shoot them very well.

GunnyUSMC
April 17, 2012, 05:01 PM
I have been carrying a Glock 22 4th Gen. as my duty weapon for the past year and a half. I carried a Glock 22 3rd Gen. for 8 1/2 years before that. I like the Glock but have never been able to shoot it as well as my 1911s.
I also have a S&W M&P and shoot it a hell of a lot better then my Glock.

Revolutionary impact? I say that the 1911 had more the the Glock.
Innovation? I give that one to Glock.

I think that some need to look at the definitions of these two words to understand what they are talking about.

Revolutionary new and different: so new and different as to cause a major change in something.

Innovation is the creation of better or more effective products, processes, services, technologies, or ideas that are accepted by markets, governments, and society.

I know that many have strong Opinions but there is no need to be rude just because someone does not agree with your Opinion.

And for those that have trouble with words here is the definition for the word Opinion:
In general, an opinion is a subjective belief, and is the result of emotion or interpretation of facts. An opinion may be supported by an argument, although people may draw opposing opinions from the same set of facts. Opinions rarely change without new arguments being presented. However, it can be reasoned that one opinion is better supported by the facts than another by analysing the supporting arguments.[1] In casual use, the term opinion may be the result of a person's perspective, understanding, particular feelings, beliefs, and desires. It may refer to unsubstantiated information, in contrast to knowledge and fact-based beliefs.

meanmrmustard
April 17, 2012, 07:09 PM
Truly objective, highroad and utterly unemotionally argued. A breakthrough in logical argument. No doubt.
[edit]
And pretty much the picture perfect summary of this thread.
Pm sent

XxBulletBendeRXx
April 17, 2012, 07:18 PM
This is hilarious. To seriously compare a 1911 to a Glock is about like comparing a 69 Z-28 to a Yugo.
How do you compare a compact muscle car to an ak variant..?. :)

XxBulletBendeRXx
April 17, 2012, 07:30 PM
Glock.... face it to all the 1911 fanboys, Glock is superior firepower Today. More rounds per magazine in factory form.
But gLock would probably not exist if 1911 wasnt around to begin with. I like them both, but I carry and trust my GLOCKsssss, much more than ANY 1911... Sorry you paid to much for that custom 1911, I can shoot the same bullet with my 500 dollar GLock.. How you like them apples?

allaroundhunter
April 17, 2012, 07:45 PM
Glock.... face it to all the 1911 fanboys, Glock is superior firepower Today. More rounds per magazine in factory form.

So Glock introduced the high(er) capacity magazine??.....

But gLock would probably not exist if 1911 wasnt around to begin with.

You also said this^, BulletBendeR.....which is the actual answer to the original question. Now, it is obvious that you are trying to justify your Glock over high-dollar 1911's......and you are calling everyone else here "fanboys"?....

MachIVshooter
April 17, 2012, 08:34 PM
How do you compare a compact muscle car to an ak variant..?.

Not a car guy, huh?

Or maybe you're just too young to know about the infamous (and not in a good way) Yugo GV:

http://img.timeinc.net/time/2007/50_cars/yugo.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_Koral

JRH6856
April 17, 2012, 09:35 PM
Geeez! The question is not which design is better, the question is which had more revolutionary impact. That impact can only be measured in the appropriate context.

The 1911 made its impact in 1911. It made another in the 1970's when IPSC started gaining popularity and raising interest and standards in combat pistolcraft.

The Glock made its impact in 1982 and took advantage of the growing trend towards semi-autos coming out of IPSC competitions.

When the 1911 was introduced, is was the only reliable alternative to the revolver.

When the Glock 17 was introduced, this was still the case. The Glock offered an alternative to the alternative, and the reduced weight and increased magazine capacity along with the simplified manual of arms made it an attractive alternative for American police departments. When US police departments went to Glocks, civilians followed suit.

30 years ago, revolvers were a major part of every manufacturers product line. Semi-autos had a presence but not a large one, and they were more expensive. Today, the semi-auto is the major portion of most manufacturers lines and revolvers are higher priced niche market items. This major sea-change coincided with the growing popularity of the Glock pistols and today the semi-auto, not the revolver, is usually the first consideration for anyone buying a SD handgun.

I may not like it one bit, but if you measure it by the impact on the handgun market, the Glock had the most revolutionary impact.

This has nothing to do with which design is better. Design wise, the 1911 is the direct ancestor of the Glock and you could just as easily say that one started the revolution and the other finished it.

wickedsprint
April 17, 2012, 10:00 PM
Not a car guy, huh?

Or maybe you're just too young to know about the infamous (and not in a good way) Yugo GV:

http://img.timeinc.net/time/2007/50_cars/yugo.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zastava_Koral

More appropriate would be an older Z28 to a Modern V6 sedan.

MachIVshooter
April 17, 2012, 10:09 PM
More appropriate would be an older Z28 to a Modern V6 sedan.

Probably. I didn't make the Yugo comparison.

Mine would be more like:

Roll Royce Phantom (Beautifully hand crafted, good performance) = H&H Double rifle

Dodge Challenger (stylish, hi-performance, many customizing options, reliability inversely proportionate to increases in performance) = M1911

Toyota Camry (Boring, Ugly, Economical, Reliable) = Glock

Kia Rio (OK, but very entry-level, every emphasis on low cost) = Hi-Point

Yugo GV (just plain junk) = Davis/Lorcin/Etc.

bbuddtec
April 17, 2012, 10:27 PM
I'll forego all the obvious, and maybe someone already said this, as I just skipped to my answer...

the 1911.

Based on the same scale we have used for years...

Money.

I can't imagine that the Glock industry profits come anywhere near the 1911 industry profits, of course that is a few companies vs maybe hundreds, but Madison Ave will easily overlook such trifles :D

MachIVshooter
April 17, 2012, 10:51 PM
I can't imagine that the Glock industry profits come anywhere near the 1911 industry profits,

Aggregate? No

Percentages? Much higher.

FIVETWOSEVEN
April 17, 2012, 10:58 PM
Sorry you paid to much for that custom 1911, I can shoot the same bullet with my 500 dollar GLock.. How you like them apples?

By your logic, those with High Points are the smartest ones because they bought a $150 handgun that fires the same bullet as your $500 Glock.

Can't get as nice of a trigger, accuracy, or ergonomics. It looks better to top it all off.

Roverboy
April 17, 2012, 11:12 PM
I enjoy shooting my 1911 but carry my Glock 19. No I do not have any problem with the Clock's grip angle.

bbuddtec
April 18, 2012, 07:43 AM
We should all have 1911's...



...hey, waitaminit..

wickedsprint
April 18, 2012, 11:27 AM
We should all have 1911's...



...hey, waitaminit..

Agree. I have a 1911 and a Glock. They can live in harmony.

fatcat4620
April 18, 2012, 01:04 PM
The only real answer to this is that glock needs to produce a polymer frame 1911. Then we can have our cake and eat it too.

ny32182
April 18, 2012, 02:00 PM
Probably depends on how you define "revolutionary impact", but for my money I'd have to say the Glock.

There are of course many many successive designs that use many of the same basic design concepts as the 1911, but to what degree was the 1911-specific formula adopted worldwide or even within the US following its introduction? It was big in the US military, but neither the gun nor the cartridge really took off outside the US, and domestic civilian use (police, etc) the revolver still dominated until, what, the 1980s? While it was (obviously) a tremendously significant presense and influence, the Glock initiated a worldwide paradigm shift of epic proportions. Since the time the Glock came out, what new design can be taken seriously that does NOT mimic the Glock exactly in terms of the polymer frame, light weight, striker fired/light DAO consistent type trigger, double stack...

With the Glock you can say it caused a near-instant worldwide shift in the definition of a "combat/carry" handgun. Don't know that you can say the same for the 1911, revolutionary as it might have been. "Instant" and "worldwide" being the two key words.

Tcruse
April 18, 2012, 06:48 PM
Probably depends on how you define "revolutionary impact", but for my money I'd have to say the Glock.

There are of course many many successive designs that use many of the same basic design concepts as the 1911, but to what degree was the 1911-specific formula adopted worldwide or even within the US following its introduction? It was big in the US military, but neither the gun nor the cartridge really took off outside the US, and domestic civilian use (police, etc) the revolver still dominated until, what, the 1980s? While it was (obviously) a tremendously significant presense and influence, the Glock initiated a worldwide paradigm shift of epic proportions. Since the time the Glock came out, what new design can be taken seriously that does NOT mimic the Glock exactly in terms of the polymer frame, light weight, striker fired/light DAO consistent type trigger, double stack...

With the Glock you can say it caused a near-instant worldwide shift in the definition of a "combat/carry" handgun. Don't know that you can say the same for the 1911, revolutionary as it might have been. "Instant" and "worldwide" being the two key words.
ny32182 - very good post

dogtown tom
April 18, 2012, 07:43 PM
Marketing....not design.
The most "revolutionary" thing about Glock is how they captured market share among US law enforcement. The 1911 never came close.


Until the early 1980's the great majority of US police departments issued .38 revolvers. Glock helped change that.

Both are great guns, but neither is a "revolutionary" design.

19-3Ben
April 18, 2012, 08:08 PM
Probably depends on how you define "revolutionary impact", but for my money I'd have to say the Glock.

There are of course many many successive designs that use many of the same basic design concepts as the 1911, but to what degree was the 1911-specific formula adopted worldwide or even within the US following its introduction? It was big in the US military, but neither the gun nor the cartridge really took off outside the US, and domestic civilian use (police, etc) the revolver still dominated until, what, the 1980s? While it was (obviously) a tremendously significant presense and influence, the Glock initiated a worldwide paradigm shift of epic proportions. Since the time the Glock came out, what new design can be taken seriously that does NOT mimic the Glock exactly in terms of the polymer frame, light weight, striker fired/light DAO consistent type trigger, double stack...

With the Glock you can say it caused a near-instant worldwide shift in the definition of a "combat/carry" handgun. Don't know that you can say the same for the 1911, revolutionary as it might have been. "Instant" and "worldwide" being the two key words.

Very well said.

jimbo555
April 18, 2012, 09:32 PM
I think it was s&w with the model39 and 59 that started law enforcement on the path of semi autos long before the glock was ever made!

Usertag
April 18, 2012, 09:40 PM
The Glock is great in all, but there aren't many guns out there that are inspired by the Glock. Just look at the 1911 though, you can't find a gun company that doesn't make its own version of the 1911. Also when a company makes a 1911 knock off, they call it a 1911. While when there is a Glock knock off they give it a whole new name. Also the 1911 has seen more military action. Even though almost every Police Department uses a Glock Model 22.

fatcat4620
April 18, 2012, 10:17 PM
The Glock is great in all, but there aren't many guns out there that are inspired by the Glock. Just look at the 1911 though, you can't find a gun company that doesn't make its own version of the 1911. Also when a company makes a 1911 knock off, they call it a 1911. While when there is a Glock knock off they give it a whole new name. Also the 1911 has seen more military action. Even though almost every Police Department uses a Glock Model 22.
For the first part Glock is one of the biggest handgun manufacturers in the world andthey dont make a 1911. For the second part the patents on the 1911 have long expired and I'm sure glock would sure your pants off if you copied them and called it a glock (think s&w). If you wanted to you could build a glock and only use 3 or 4 factory parts.

JRH6856
April 18, 2012, 10:40 PM
For the first part Glock is one of the biggest handgun manufacturers in the world andthey dont make a 1911.

No, they make their version of the 1911. It's called a Glock. ;)

If you enjoyed reading about "Which had more revolutionary impact: Glock or Colt 1911?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!