They aren't as reliable for the same reason that a 1960's muscle car isn't as reliable and requires more maintenance than most modern designs. Sure it may look cooler, have more soul and a better feel, but damn, we sure have learned a lot about making them better over the decades. I love 1911's and own two, but they are strictly range queens for me. Both are made by reputable companies (Colt and Sig) but neither ran 100% out of the box and required some "tuning" or "breaking in" to run reliably. Two of my friends bought Para 1911's within the last 2 years and if you want a manufacturing disaster try buying one of those. Most equipment malfunctions I see at my local range are usually at the hands of someone shooting a 1911. The unreliability label that 1911's have is usually "written off" as a result of a million different things (ammo, magazines, shooting technique, manufacturer inconsistencies, antiquated design features etc...) but the end result is usually a gun that is much more sensitive than other designs. In my experience they are indeed less reliable as a whole, despite the legion of followers who swear they have never had a malfunction ever. For self defense purposes that really matter, I rely on my H&K which has a grand total of one malfunction that was caused by a broken spring that needed to be replaced after firing countless thousands of rounds. For having fun at the range or target practice I turn to 1911's. They are definitely good at that.
Last edited: