There's no doubt that the 1911 has become a legend in the firearm world. I was just wondering if this was because of the design or because it used the .45acp. Which acted more heavily when swaying opinions---the functioning of the pistol or the performance of the round? Was the 1911 just a darn good gun or did it piggyback on the .45acp?
1911 design or ammo
- Thread starter mole
- Start date
- Status
Technosavant
Member
I'm not sure what you mean by "was."
I would also say it was both things together. Effective round, good design. Its popularity today is a testament to the ergonomics, reliability, and accuracy of the basic design. Even to those who do not personally like the 1911, they must admit that its popularity is not a fluke.
Crappy designs don't last long, let alone near the century mark in constant production.
I would also say it was both things together. Effective round, good design. Its popularity today is a testament to the ergonomics, reliability, and accuracy of the basic design. Even to those who do not personally like the 1911, they must admit that its popularity is not a fluke.
Crappy designs don't last long, let alone near the century mark in constant production.
I agree its a combination. A great round in an inferior pistol is passed over quickly, as is a great pistol in a crummy round.
The 1911 was designed around the .45ACP, so they are obviously a great combination.
Just like the Glock 17 (not trying to start that old debate...) and 9mm.
The 1911 was designed around the .45ACP, so they are obviously a great combination.
Just like the Glock 17 (not trying to start that old debate...) and 9mm.
MrAcheson
Member
It is a good design and a significant design in historical terms. Many specific points of the gun have been surpassed, but as a whole it still soldiers on remarkably. They're out there in 10mm, .40S&W, 9mm, super .38, and lots of wildcats. It isn't just a .45acp thing.
Personally I think the key to it's future will be as an enthusiasts gun. The 1911 is like a chevy small block, there is a massive aftermarket and if you can change almost anything if you so desire it. You can tweak and play with the 1911 in a way that is pretty unique to handguns.
But I don't think we're going to see a widespread switch back to the 1911 as a service pistol even if the military returns to .45s. If they write contracts that say "we want a .45acp semiautomatic pistol" something else will win, if only because the 1911 can't compete with guns like Glocks that shoot good enough and cost a lot less. Of course if the military writes the contracts so that only 1911s qualify (as the Marines probably did), then maybe.
Personally I think the key to it's future will be as an enthusiasts gun. The 1911 is like a chevy small block, there is a massive aftermarket and if you can change almost anything if you so desire it. You can tweak and play with the 1911 in a way that is pretty unique to handguns.
But I don't think we're going to see a widespread switch back to the 1911 as a service pistol even if the military returns to .45s. If they write contracts that say "we want a .45acp semiautomatic pistol" something else will win, if only because the 1911 can't compete with guns like Glocks that shoot good enough and cost a lot less. Of course if the military writes the contracts so that only 1911s qualify (as the Marines probably did), then maybe.
Lawmen and bad guys alike held the .38 Super 1911's in extremely high regard before and after WW2. For some reason however the 1911 was always more associated with the .45ACP cartridge, and so the .38 Super would've languished into obscurity had it not been for IPSC.
I think it has always been a matter of the 1911 and the .45ACP being the right gun for the right cartridge at the right time in history.
I think it has always been a matter of the 1911 and the .45ACP being the right gun for the right cartridge at the right time in history.
MrAcheson said:
Problem is, you guys in the military have a bad habit of trashing everything Uncle Sam gives you.
I think all-steel construction is still the best for true combat arms, unless we're talking about the needs of aircrewmen. For them I think a Glock or HK USPc is about ideal.Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
I have a few 1911's, and all are chambered for the .45 ACP. I guess that
grew out of my ownership of my first 1911, a blue Colt Combat Commander
from the early 70's~?
grew out of my ownership of my first 1911, a blue Colt Combat Commander
from the early 70's~?
Technosavant
Member
Rob1035 said:
There is no need for a Glock vs. 1911 debate; I can never see why people launch into them. The Glock 17 is another good example of matching a decent round to a fundamentally sound design. I would expect to see the Glock eventually have the same very long track record as the 1911 (however, the 1911 will forever have a 70ish year head start). I would expect the only thing to cause them to never be sold again would be some sort of beam weapon (think Star Trek phaser, should that ever be a reality); until that comes around, either of those handguns can be used as great examples of the top of the heap of handgun development.
MrAcheson
Member
Nope. Weight matters for the ground pounders too, probably more so because they have to carry it on their own two feet. This is doubly important when we are talking handguns that are never going to be their primary weapon.dsk said:Problem is, you guys in the military have a bad habit of trashing everything Uncle Sam gives you.
Besides aluminum and polymer guns have proven themselves pretty well. They are mature technology and more than tough enough. Although all my centerfire pistols are steel framed now that I think of it.
I'm not saying that the 1911 is no longer a good option if you get one that works. If Taurus ever comes out with their version, I probably will get one. I used "was" because I was talking past tense in that it "was" generally accepted as a great gun decades ago.
Colt beat Savage for the .45 cal auto pistol contract. The 1911's design was very important, firing 6000 rounds without a jam. The cartridge was good, the Colt made it better.
No doubt its 'legend' has very much to do with it being used in the hands of America's fighting men.
The Colt "45" has been described as 'too much gun' by our allies and enemies alike... it carries with it a 'cowboy' mentality etc etc etc... after all a European 'gentleman' Officer only needed a .32 to show he was the boss.
The idea of a cigar chomping American corporal in dugarees with a .45 on his hip was enough to make 'civilized' upper crust types faint dead away.
No doubt its 'legend' has very much to do with it being used in the hands of America's fighting men.
The Colt "45" has been described as 'too much gun' by our allies and enemies alike... it carries with it a 'cowboy' mentality etc etc etc... after all a European 'gentleman' Officer only needed a .32 to show he was the boss.
The idea of a cigar chomping American corporal in dugarees with a .45 on his hip was enough to make 'civilized' upper crust types faint dead away.
hank327
Member
I too say it is a combination of both design and caliber that earned the reputation. My favorite 1911 is in .38 Super however.
Smythe77
Member
I agree that it is the combination. While 9X19 might be the caliber now, many are going back to the 45ACP. I have two Custom made 45s by a pistolsmith here in B.C. Cdn. Lovely guns to fire & accuracy is there without question.
- Status
