1911- The Harley-Davidson of handguns

[Michael Zeleny]

No wonder 1911Tuner won’t accept the ridiculous terms of your “challenge.” When he can use a more accurate gun than your 210, you’ll demand mud (while keeping your 210 clean, of course). When he can use a cheaper and more accurate gun than your 210, you’ll demand a far cheaper, standard, 1911 (to be “fair,” no less). When he can use a more reliable handgun than your 210, you’ll demand an accuracy test only. And when he can use a more balanced, reliable yet reasonably accurate gun than your 210, you’ll refuse.

I call for measuring the accuracy of a military service spec handgun against its like. To ensure parity of military specification, I propose to control for reliability. The ensuing standard of battleworthiness is objective, uniform, and consistent across the board.

My prediction is that an M1911 tuned to shoot as precisely as a P210 will choke up on a variety of ammunition an order of magnitude more often than its challenger.

 

[Michael Zeleny]

When the P210 is tried in the fire like the 1911A1 then I'll listen to some of this talk, but I doubt that'll ever happen.

The XXth century military record of U.S. arms pales into insignificance when measured against that of Germans and Russians.

If you want the handgun that killed the most men, get a Luger. If you want the handgun that won the biggest war, get a Tokarev. The M1911 is a sideshow, neither here nor there.

For my part, as a civilian, I prefer to arm myself with the defensive handgun that has the least record of being fired in anger.

 

[ugaarguy]

The P210 is like Hawaii Quarterback Colt Brennan. The P210 looks good in controlled laboratory conditions, just as Brennan looked good against WAC and PAC-10 competition who lacked any real defense. Stick the P210 in a hostile environment and push it hard, and I predict that it'll crumble just as Brennan crumbled under the pressure of an SEC defense in the hostile confines of the Super Dome in January.

 

[45auto]

The M1911 is a sideshow, neither here nor there.

Odd statement given the two pistols you mentioned.

Actually, you can build the 1911 using a 9mm and get smaller groups than with the 45 ACP at 50 yards. But I doubt the reliability would be there given the 1911 was designed for the ACP.

 

[Redhat]

The XXth century military record of U.S. arms pales into insignificance when measured against that of Germans and Russians.

If you want the handgun that killed the most men, get a Luger. If you want the handgun that won the biggest war, get a Tokarev. The M1911 is a sideshow, neither here nor there.

For my part, as a civilian, I prefer to arm myself with the defensive handgun that has the least record of being fired in anger.
__________________

That's funny...in a silly sort of way

 

[Keepmvng]

For my part, as a civilian, I prefer to arm myself with the defensive handgun that has the least record of being fired in anger.

That's even better than the "Coke can at 50+ yards".

 

[Dobe]

And on that note, IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII'm out-a-here.

My Daddy tried to tell me that if you wallow with the pigs, well, you get the picture.

 

[1911Tuner]

The M1911 is a sideshow, neither here nor there.

Musta been some sideshow, with over 1,844,000 produced for the US government between December 1941 and September 1945...and that's not counting the pre-A1s made for the Army and Navy between 1912 and 1919...not to mention the commercial Government Models and all the clones and variants that have been made over the last 30 years.

That's compared to...what...350,000 210s including all variants?

Yessir...Musta been one helluva show.

 

[Michael Zeleny]

The M1911 is a sideshow, neither here nor there.

Musta been some sideshow, with over 1,844,000 produced for the US government between December 1941 and September 1945...and that's not counting the pre-A1s made for the Army and Navy between 1912 and 1919...not to mention the commercial Government Models and all the clones and variants that have been made over the last 30 years.

That's compared to...what...350,000 210s including all variants?

Yessir...Musta been one helluva show.

The number of casualties inflicted and suffered by the U.S. military in the XXth century is an order of magnitude below those of Germany and two orders of magnitude below those of Russia.

The figures are available: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Do the math.

 

[Jim Watson]

Well, lessee, now. If the Germans suffered casualties, I figure the USA was inflicting a lot of them. Maybe some with sidearms, eh?

 

[Michael Zeleny]

Well, lessee, now. If the Germans suffered casualties, I figure the USA was inflicting a lot of them. Maybe some with sidearms, eh?

Fewer than 300,000 U.S. battle deaths occurred in WWII. By contrast, Germany lost over 5 million soldiers. Over 80% of them were killed in the Eastern front, where the Soviet Union lost over 8.6 million soldiers. Unless you believe that the U.S. kill rate was a lot higher than the German one, your statement cannot be supported. On the contrary, all published research shows that man for man and unit for unit, the Wehrmacht was by far the most efficient killing machine in military history.

 

[Keepmvng]

On the subject of the P-210, I find a reliable source:

On the negative side is the hammerbite, less then optimum mag catch, and the frames isn't the most durable (except for the improved versions released in later years). Shooting hard swedish surplus ammo will crack the frames fast, but with soft loaded US (non +p or +p+) that shouldn't be a problem.
Swiss RUAG 9x19 ammunition for which the P210 is designed, is loaded at or above SAAMI +P specs. I have no first-hand basis for speculating about the hardness of Swedish surplus ammunition, which has been banned from importation to the U.S., though the Bofors M39B round propelling its 6.80 gram bullet at 480 m/s to achieve a .357 S&W Magnum rating of 783.4 joules or 577.8 foot-pounds and penetrate 50 layers of Kevlar at 50 meters, would inflict a beating on any handgun. However, the P210 appears to be hard to wear out with NATO-spec ammunition. Going by Swiss target shooter reports, its life cycle is over 60,000 rounds, at least twice that of comparable handguns like HK P7 or CZ-75. Håkan Spuhr, a gunsmith in Malmö, Sweden, used to claim on his web page at http://www.vapensmedjan.com/, that all P210 pistols will eventually develop frame cracks, for which his welding provides a permanent cure. If you have objective information supporting these claims, please share it.

The hammer bite can be easily prevented on the existing P210-6 or P210-5 models by retrofitting either the factory bobbed hammer made to be used with the adjustable sight version of the .22LR conversion kit, or an aftermarket tang extension that attaches with the screw retaining the hammer assembly in these target models of the P210. Bear in mind that the current heavy frame P210-6S and P210-5LS models both come from the factory equipped with a lateral magazine catch and an extended tang.

In summary:

all P210 pistols will eventually develop frame cracks

On the negative side is the hammerbite

its life cycle is over 60,000 rounds

less then optimum mag catch

 

[ugaarguy]

MZ, if the 1911 caused fewer casualties than the Luger pistol that would be a valid point if arguing 1911 vs. Luger. However, it says nothing of the P210 which you claim to be superior. The fact is that the M1911 has seen combat in significant numbers, and continues to do so today; while your beloved P210 has seen very little if any actual combat. The M1911 may not have inflicted the highest number of casualties, mostly because Americans were armed with a far superior standard issue rifle in WWII. However, the M1911 was there, and there in significant numbers. The M1911 continues to arm specialized US units in actual combat, in ever increasing numbers, to this day.

In contrast, the P210 continues to ride around on hip holsters in tiny European countries never seeing any use in combat.

The M1911 has been there. The P210 hasn't. The M1911 is an active player. The P210 is the sideshow.

 

[Jim Watson]

the Wehrmacht was by far the most efficient killing machine in military history.

In modern times, no doubt. But terribly unlucky in their top management, wouldn't you say?

 

[Michael Zeleny]

The M1911 has been there. The P210 hasn't. The M1911 is an active player. The P210 is the sideshow.

You are mistaking my response to a distraction for the main thrust of my argument.

If you want to measure the merits of a military sidearm by its battle record, the M1911 is a distant third to the Luger and the Tokarev.

So much for armchair warfare. I use other criteria. There is no military failure more dismal than that of the Polish army in the Blitzkrieg. Yet from the standpoint of design and construction, the Radom Vis is by far the best handgun of WWII. The P210 is, among other things, designed and constructed as an improved Radom. If you want to stay in topic, I suggest focusing on the question of whether or not the M1911 is a dated design. I have cited several reasons whereby it has been rendered obsolete by subsequent designs of Tokarev, Browning and Saive, Petter, Wilniewczyc and Skrzypinski, and a team of SIG engineers, never mind the minions of Gaston Glock. To recap, its main deficiencies have to do with the slide construction that involves a separate barrel bushing, the locked breech action that depends on a swinging link, the compromises in feeding and chamber support caused by the interrupted barrel ramp, and the long trigger creep inherent in the single stage design.

 

[Michael Zeleny]

the Wehrmacht was by far the most efficient killing machine in military history.

In modern times, no doubt. But terribly unlucky in their top management, wouldn't you say?

Thankfully so.

 

[Sven]

This thread has way too much squabbling, and not enough photos.



I feel better now.

 

[Michael Zeleny]

On the subject of the P-210, I find a reliable source

Thanks for your kind words.

In summary:

all P210 pistols will eventually develop frame cracks

On the negative side is the hammerbite

its life cycle is over 60,000 rounds

less then optimum mag catch

All short recoil, Browning-type handguns will eventually develop frame cracks, owing to the frame absorbing the recoil momentum in the barrel bed. Their longevity varies with the strength of materials and chamberings. Late production M1911 frames might withstand 100,000 round counts, whereas P210 frames can rack up over a quarter million. As an aside, unlike the M1911, the P210 tends to crack its frame in the rear, where it can be readily repaired by welding.

 

[ugaarguy]

Let me put it this way. You can't take your bench press number out on the field. It's a good indicator of strength in the weight room, but it says nothing of your ability to apply that strength on the field of play.

Laboratory testing shows potential. Field testing shows capability. You want us to accept the P210 as a combat pistol? Show us what it'll do in a field test.

 

[Michael Zeleny]

Laboratory testing shows potential. Field testing shows capability. You want us to accept the P210 as a combat pistol? Show us what it'll do in a field test.

I don't care to tout my second favorite piece of jewelry in this context. None of the design improvements that I have cited above are particular to the SIG P210. All of them can be found in a variety of other post-WWII military handgun designs. By contrast, few if any of the flaws I find in the M1911 have been carried over in handguns subsequently adopted into military service. Go figure.

 

[1911Tuner]

All short recoil, Browning-type handguns will eventually develop frame cracks, owing to the frame absorbing the recoil momentum in the barrel bed.

That's not what cracks'em...and it can be prevented in about 30 seconds...but I'll let you figure it out. Shock buffs not required.

Oh...One other thing.

The recoil momentum isn't absorbed by the barrel bed.

I'll let you figure that one out, too.

Luck!

 

[ugaarguy]

Other designs theoretical improvements do nothing to diminish the proven capability of the M1911.

 

[Dobe]

Tuner if you correct him, you run the risk of taking away our source of humor.

So far, its been a lot of chuckles.

 

[Michael Zeleny]

All short recoil, Browning-type handguns will eventually develop frame cracks, owing to the frame absorbing the recoil momentum in the barrel bed.

That's not what cracks'em...and it can be prevented in about 30 seconds...but I'll let you figure it out.

Why would I try to second-guess your 30 second fix for the breakage that stymied U.S. armorers?

Oh...One other thing.

The recoil momentum isn't absorbed by the barrel bed.

I'll let you figure that one out, too.

Not all of it, to be sure. The spring is there for a reason.

 

[Lonestar49]

I'mM the GREAT oZ

Quote: Tuner if you correct him, you run the risk of taking away our source of humor.

So far, its been a lot of chuckles.
-------------
...

Don't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain..


Ls