Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

1911- still a war worthy?

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by el Godfather, Sep 18, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. el Godfather

    el Godfather Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    1,686
    Dear THR:
    How many of you still believe that a 1911 is worthy candidate as side arm for troops landing on the hostile soil? Or the new higher capacity guns have outdated 1911 for that specific purpose?

    Note that we are not talking about officers walking about in the army barracks rather actual combat soldiers in the harms way in stiff gun fight scenarios.

    Thanks
     
  2. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    How many actual combat soldiers are going into actual combat with handguns anyway? How many ever have? Apart from the tunnel rats and aviators I can't think of many. For the purposes a sidearm actually has in the military, a 1911 would be fine. But to rely on any handgun in an actual fight against rifles or worse? That would be bold.
     
  3. Deaf Smith

    Deaf Smith Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    4,708
    Location:
    TEXAS!
    Oh yea.

    Just ask SOCOM and all the Delta people. Ask the FBI HURT teams to.

    Now I am a Glock man but I see no reason a good well maintained 1911 won't do for war as good as any... and better than most.

    Deaf
     
  4. Girodin

    Girodin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Messages:
    5,570
    The marines seem to think so.
    coltmarinesmall.jpg


    I don't see why a properly built one would not still be as viable a weapon as it was in WWII. However, I think that other guns probably make more sense to outfit a large number of troops with. Say, the HK 45 for example. They probably make more sense for a number of reasons, maintenance, durability, etc.
     
  5. 1911Tuner

    1911Tuner Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Messages:
    18,550
    Location:
    Lexington,North Carolina...or thereabouts
    I don't see why not. It worked well enough in two world wars and a dozen lesser conflicts. As noted, battles aren't fought with pistols, except sometimes on a personal level when things get...really personal. A 1911 should serve the purpose.
     
  6. grubbylabs

    grubbylabs Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,856
    Location:
    Hansen Idaho
    The only reason I can see for not using the 1911 is the ability to carry more ammo. 1911 is 8 almost everything else is double that or close to it.
     
  7. kwguy

    kwguy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2012
    Messages:
    792
    Sure, why not? It's just at a disadvantage in terms of firepower when compared to more 'late model' designs, and it's less forgiving of dirt / grime etc. But if maintained reasonably well, within those limitations, it'll do.
     
  8. psyopspec

    psyopspec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Messages:
    4,204
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    I don't believe it would be viable candidate. In modern combat most soldiers won't be carrying a sidearm. Among those who do, a miniscule amount will actually pull the trigger on that sidearm. While it would may matter greatly to the individual's personal preference, handguns themselves don't win wars. So given how little it matters in the scheme of battle a 1911 would suffice in that it's a handgun. But as a veteran and now fiscally concerned civilian, I see no reason to go that route when a military could be served by hardware that was lighter, higher in capacity, less prone to rust, contained less parts, and offer all that at a lesser expense.
     
  9. jimbo555

    jimbo555 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,143
    Location:
    Statesboro,Georgia
    It's all about the trigger. The high capacity whatevers out there all have crappy triggers out of the box.
     
  10. tarosean

    tarosean Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    5,528
    Location:
    TX
    Soldiers still carry them despite their perceived lack of capacity...
     
  11. jjones45

    jjones45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    627
    Location:
    Ohio
    in a combat situation as a sidearm id rather have a hk45 or fnx45. capacity and probably more reliable out the box. not to mention less weight


    Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
     
  12. tuj

    tuj Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,983
    Location:
    Houston
    Maybe a 2011-style large frame in .38 super would work. Good combination of power and ammo with that. Something like an STI Edge.
     
  13. psyopspec

    psyopspec Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Messages:
    4,204
    Location:
    Cape Cod
    A very few do indeed. Again, the vast majority don't get to allow personal preference determine that. And a minuscule percentage do.

    The times I was issued a handgun in the military, it happened to be a Beretta. My personal preference had zero to do with that, and even if I'd had the chance to choose, would my choice constitute proof of combat effectiveness?
     
  14. TestPilot

    TestPilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    976
    1911 is viable, but I do not agree with your reasoning that it is okay only because it is rarely used.

    A soldier having a pistol does not mean the soldier would always use a pistol to fight enemeis with rifles.

    The military used to, and to a great extent still does, have the attitude that line soldiers ony be issed a primary long gun only.
    That line of thinking has started to change after the current war in Middle East.

    Having a pistol is a good thing. Special Forces carrying pistols is a reflection of that rather obvious finding.
     
  15. TestPilot

    TestPilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    976
    Is 1911 viable? Yes.

    Would it be generally the best choice? No.

    The caliber, 45ACP, is a good choice, since the military is stuck with the ridiculous Hague Convention.
     
  16. wow6599

    wow6599 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,417
    Location:
    Wildwood, MO
    Then make mine a 1911 in 10mm :)
     
  17. Drail

    Drail Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,378
    I can't think of any reason why a 1911 would suddenly not be a good choice for combat use. A lot of people went to a lot of trouble to come up with the gun. Never heard any complaints from anyone who carried one into battle.
     
  18. weblance

    weblance Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    859
    Oh really? Do they? In your mis-guided opinion, maybe. I have two 45s. a High Capacity Whatever, and a 1911. If I was going into battle, I would take the High Capacity Whatever, over my nice 1911.
     
  19. Hurryin' Hoosier

    Hurryin' Hoosier Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    622
    I'm sure that the Marine Corps' zippity-do-da khaki finish (and real mall-ninja grips) more than make up for all of the 1911's shortcomings.
     
  20. Jenrick

    Jenrick Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,750
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    War worthy? Sure. Best choice for general issue, probably not.

    -Jenrick
     
  21. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    Building on the knowledge and experience of the SOF community, the Big Army has somewhat recognized that -- at least for people who are expected to do CQC -- having a back up gun on your person can be indispensable. On the MTOE for the unit I deployed with last time, I think there were probably a half dozen or less pistols in the whole company. By the time we actually got boots on the ground, about 75% of us were issued M9s along with our assigned long guns.

    That said, I would have been happier carrying the 1911 I carried as a cop than with a Beretta, for the simple reason that it has better ergonomics and that trigger (and I had the training such that the reduced mag capacity wouldn't be a significant issue).
     
  22. HOOfan_1

    HOOfan_1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,698
    Location:
    Virginia
    My FNP has a nicer single action trigger than most of the 1911s I've shot.

    Besides, I don't think the military selected the 1911 for its trigger...
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2013
  23. saitek

    saitek Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    231
    1911

    the 1911 has been kicking ass and taking name's for 100 plus year's , if it aint broke don't fix it ! it served my dad well for four tour's in vieitnam and he still prefer's in the same shoulder holster he used . :)
     
  24. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    48,344
    Location:
    Alabama
    No reason it would not do the job.
     
  25. GLOOB

    GLOOB Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,941
    Combat soldiers would be required to leave the chamber empty. Except when an imminent threat was expected. Then they'd rack one in. And some would lower the hammer, and some would use the safety. And there would be ND's and AD's and clicks when there should be bangs. Just like there have always been. Par for the course. And it would cost too much. Again, par for the course. It is definitely still war worthy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page