Purchase question: Full sized 1911 v.s. a compact version

[MICHAEL T]

Alrighty then, that's 15,000 rounds divided by 27 years. 555.55 rounds per year. I've got twice that through a pistol I got back from the 'smith in October. Run hard means several thousand rounds in a few days, clean 'em at the end of the day. If you need to clean by lunchtime, it isn't reliable.

I sure everybody shoots they way you do I wouldn't have time to carry let alone afford the ammo. Most people that Carry a pistol , have a life other than shooting.They can be well served by a Compact . I to have a old Detonics and at present carry a Defender. Both of these serve me well and by my shooting approx a 1000 per year per pistol will last and my children Will enjoy them. I have a new Colt Agemt I will pick up 1st of Dec. I sure it will also be relieable by most peoples standerds Not yours of course.

 

[Big Boomer]

*chants*

"Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size"

Yeah, I'd go with a full size...knocking 2 inches off the barrel is not going to help you hide it any better! In addition the 45ACP really needs the extra 2 inches of barrel length for performance, as well...any pistol.

 

[DogBonz]

OK, Here we go....

I have a few full size 1911's and all run great. So did the S&W 1911PD that I had which I foolishly sold. Everyone here seems to concur that the full size 1911 is the most reliable, but no one has stated why. You see the shorter the barrel on a 1911 the steeper that angle that the barrel must pitch to unlock from the slide. The steeper the angle, the more abrupt the cycling and the more violent the chambering and extraction of cartridges/ cases. The 1911 was designed as a 5” barreled gun. When you deviate from the original plan, you are bound to increase the chance of malfunctions. Now, that said, I have seen commander size guns run just as well as their full size brethren, and in a few cases, even better. I personally would not go shorter than a commander, with the exception of the Wilson “commanders” which are 4.00 inches.

-Fred

 

[DHart]

Billy... if the gun is to be your primary concealed carry gun I strongly suggest you go directly to a bobtailed Commander. This is the best of all 1911 worlds as the gun takes full size/full capacity mags, but has an abbreviated butt for better concealment; it has a 4.25" barrel which makes for quicker clearing than a 5" model but gives up very little in terms of velocity and terminal ballistics. Commanders are noted for exceptional reliability (typically better than that with the shorter models). Recoil springs are super common and have a very long life in the Commander (vs. recoil springs in the 3" models, which are verrry short-lived). I honestly see no point in putting up with the compromises you have to suffer with the little 3" 1911's (reduced mag capacity, great loss of bullet velocity, short recoil spring life, tendency to reduced reliability) when you can have a bobtailed Commander with next-to-no compromises. For CCW, I think the bobtailed Commander is the ideal 1911. I have two Compact 1911's and have had two 3" Micro/Ultra style 1911's. I also have three bobtailed Commanders (two Colts and an Ed Brown) and they're the best choice by far among 1911 models for carry use, in my view!

Here are two of them:

I must admit that these days I believe higher capacity is increasingly important, with the likelihood of multiple assailants increasing. For that reason, my primary carry gun is (pardon me) my Glock 23 which carries 14 rounds of 180 gr. Gold Dots in a super reliable, compact, accurate, and all-around great gun platform. I abhorred Glocks for many years but have finally come to realize that the Glock 23 is one of the very finest carry guns a person can have. Don't love my 1911's any less, though!

 

[Big Boomer]

*chants*

"Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size"

Yeah, I'd go with a full size...knocking 2 inches off the barrel is not going to help you hide it any better! In addition the 45ACP really needs the extra 2 inches of barrel length for performance, as well...any pistol.

 

[Big Boomer]

*chants*

"Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size", "Full Size"

Yeah, I'd go with a full size...knocking 2 inches off the barrel is not going to help you hide it any better! In addition the 45ACP really needs the extra 2 inches of barrel length for performance, as well...any pistol.

 

[Dos]

Doesn't matter the size. Either your piece works or it doesn't. If it dont get one that do.

 

[bannockburn]

I have all three; Government, Commander, and Officers models. All three have been very reliable, over many years, and with just about any load that I can run through them. I have pretty much settled on 185 or 200 gr. bullets for the shorter barrel guns; it's just been my experience that they run better with those bullet weights than with a steady diet of 230 gr. hardball. For CCW work, I just prefer the Commander and Officers size guns for comfort and concealability.

 

[dmazur]

I like the Commander length barrel w/ full-size frame. I have an older Combat Commander and a 1991A1 Commander. Had quite a few problems with the older version, no trouble with the 1991A1.

I also have a Colt Officer's model and this thing has given me fits. After quite a bit of parts changing (mostly springs), it is finally reliable.

+1 to comments about being careful with the "compact" models (3" barrels), as the original Browning design just didn't include slides with that much less mass than the 5" slide. Stiffer springs, harder to rack the slide, things move faster -- magazine springs can be critical for proper feed. Can make a pistol into an ongoing maintenance nightmare instead of a reliable carry weapon. Some folks have good luck with them, but there can be problems...