I knew I would step on toes with my comments.
Some people get emotional about the 1911. It's made of steel, chambered for the 45 acp, has been around.
I'll address a couple of comments.
When I say out of the box reliability I mean it works with various ammunition out of the box. I DO NOT mean I would simply load and carry it out of the box. We all know some 1911's will not feed certain HP ammunition or they may require throating. Any pistol I carry will have fired "plenty" of rounds of the ammunition I'll carry in it before it's used for self protection. My point was Glocks have the advantage in inherent feeding reliability.
I do go to the gym 2 or 3 days a week and a 18 mile bike (bicycle) ride is fun too. However, that doesn't mean I want to carry a pistol that weighs as much unloaded as another does with a full magazine.
Capacity: I did mention the Glock 38 which is 8 + 1 in my first reply. I also listed the 10 + 1 Glock 30. I should have included the excellent XD45 compact with a 10 + 1 capacity. All three of these fine pistols offer either the same capacity or +2 over a typical 1911. I never implied the extra bullets were needed due to inaccuracy on the part of the shooter. I never said they were essential. No need to ridicule someone whose magazine carries more rounds than yours as being inaccurate. The Browning HP holds 13 rounds, does that mean the folks who chose to carry it are going to spray & pray? My favorite carry pistol is a 9 + 1 Glock 27; that's one round above the 1911. However, if the pistol held 13, I would load 13. Want to load up the 1911 with "only" 5 rounds? Attempting to discredit someone because their magazine holds more ammunition is ridiculous.
1911 Tuner is right. I did shoot expert on the range both years I was a LE officer, with a Glock 45. Also, either pistol will work fine for SD. As he said, most people won't need to ever defend themself with a gun, and I hope I never need the seatbelt or fire extinguisher either.
The Glock and the XD have a plastic frame. So what. If the grip feels good and the pistol is durable what's it matter? No need to debate whether the 1911 or the Glock are durable, they both are.
The new Remington 1911 sums up what I'm talking about. It's got a dovetailed front sight and everything else is old school 1911; you won't get night sights, has a narrow beavertail, slick front strap. If the pistol sells for $600 and if we assume reliability with HP ammunition you will likely have to spend over $100 more for night sights. Some people can tolerate the narrow beavertail, but I can't; there is another expense, and those typically have to be fitted by a gunsmith. It's debateable whether the slick front strap needs fixing; you could just pull a piece of bicycle tube over it to add grip. I use the bicycle tube on Glocks, but not the XD (the XD has a grip safety).
Now I spent $600 for the basic 1911 pistol, added night sights for another $120 (estimate), and the beavertail plus installation cost $100 (estimate). We now have a $800 pistol
made of steel, with a soul
Like I said before, I can get a Glock 23 with night sights for $600. I can spend the $200 I saved on a case of ammunition (I bought a 500 round case of Federal 180 JHP for $200). I now have a bunch of ammo for practice and / or SD and have not spent any more money than the price of a basic 1911. I said the 1911 was outclassed, let me correct, I should have said overpriced.
My plastic frame Glock (or XD) will protect me just as well as the steel 1911, be easier to conceal, lighter to carry, last just as long, and I'll have those extra rounds available IF they are ever needed (of course they won't).
