1911s suck (not my article)

[el Godfather]

I didnt use the term decocker intentionally. Instead i said hammer lowering device for folks want to carry round in pipe and hammer lowered- to avoid accidnent in manual lowering. Or perhaps a fast action like mechanism like dp51.

 

[Hacker15E]

And that is why so much money is wasted on such a routine basis still. Too many will blindly accept things.

I find it hilarious that you'd think that a Marine SOF unit, in selecting a sidearm, would be doing anything 'blindly'. They had a competition -- it's not like they sat back, thumbed through a gun rag, and selected what they thought looked coolish.

You're right -- next time we have a thread about LEOs and sidearms, I'll be listening to what you have to say on the matter.

 

[1911Tuner]

Touching upon the Marine's choice in picking the 1911. I must ask, what advantages does a 1911 have over other less expensive and "more modern" pistols? A match trigger isn't needed in a service sidearm for war and the accuracy that is found with poly service sidearms is enough.

And again...none of that has anything to do with it. If launching .45 caliber bullets at the bad guys was the only factor, any number of pistols would have fit the bill. There's more to it than that. Much more.

Suffice to say that it does not take 30000 rounds per year out of a pistol to become an expert. Anyone that thinks it does is just deluding itself.

Which has nothing to do with the Marine SOC training requirements. If that's what they demand, then that's what the Marines do.

Another way: "The amateur practices until he gets it right. The professional practices until he can't get it wrong."

This isn't preparation for a Sunday afternoon game of "Let's pretend we're in a gunfight." There are no Grand Masters or Distinguished Experts. There are only men fighting for their lives, and lives often depend on placing one shot...one...where it needs to go before it's too late. If these guys have determined that the 1911 gives them the best chance of that, then who are you or anyone else to argue with them?

 

[1911Tuner]

I didnt use the term decocker intentionally. Instead i said hammer lowering device for folks want to carry round in pipe and hammer lowered- to avoid accidnent in manual lowering.

Why would a decocking device be necessary on a pistol that can be maintained in Condition One indefinitely? The M16/M4 rifles are kept in Condition One whenever action is expected...no?

 

[powder]

Which still has nothing to do with the reasons that the Marine Special Ops units chose the 1911...and regardless of where the trainers have been and what they've done...they still won't be going into the hell that these Marines will. What works on the streets of Chicago or LA may not work so well in the mountains of Afghanistan.

As Jeff White so eloquently put it...They didn't make their choice based on the latest custom pistol on the cover of Guns and Ammo, and they didn't make it on any misplaced feelings of nostalgia.

Try try try to wrap your head around something. They tested and evaluated several pistols and they made their choice... carefully...because making the wrong choice increases their chances of coming home in a plastic bag. There was no fanboyism involved. There was no Mall Ninja/Tacticool or Jeff Cooper idolatry in the equation. These guys are carefully selected, and highly trained professionals. They don't have time for such silliness.

Uh yeah, and try try try to wrap your head around both of these guys still being active in LE and Mil Ops, going through doors here and abroad. They are not mall ninja wanna-bes, and most days the big black plastic bag is a baggage option for them too. Yes, they go into this imaginary hell that the Marines go into, you speak of, on a daily basis. They both have chosen polymer pistols for those duties, and for their aftermarket sales points, and IDPA/IPSC shooting comps..

As you mention correctly I believe, it comes down to training professionals, who have done lots of work. When my teams walk out the door to take care of business many of us would like to wear our 1911s, but command has decided otherwise. It's nothing personal.

 

[1911Tuner]

Uh yeah, and try try try to wrap your head around both of these guys still being active in LE and Mil Ops, going through doors here and abroad.

And again...what their training sessions center around are largely cops/civilians and what works on city streets. What is good enough there may not cut it in harsher environments, especially when routine maintenance like cleaning and inspection is often hit and miss.

I'd venture a bet that if they were charged with training the Marines or the SEALS, the classes would include their issue sidearms...not necessarily what the instructor prefers.

The class is adapted to the participants' needs...not vice-versa. An instructor who has scheduled a rifle class for Army Rangers isn't going to show up with a lever-action carbine. If he's scheduled a shotgun class for a major police department, he's not going to use an exposed hammer coach gun. He's going to use whatever shotgun that department issues, or as close as he can get to it.

Even Jeff Cooper understood that the 1911 wasn't the pistol for all reasons and all seasons. Gunsite had revolver-centered classes as well as other autopistol platforms specifically for those people who were limited in their choices. In a general pistol class, the students ran what they brought.

What I'm starting to pick up on is that you and a few others just don't like the Marine Spec-Ops choice. That's fine. You don't have to. They're the ones who have to live with it.

The SEALS picked the Sig P-226 after careful selection and elimination. They have different requirements for a sidearm than the Marines do. I'm not a huge fan of the 9mm cartridge, but I'm not about to stand in front of a SEAL team and explain to them that their choice was stupid. They know what they need better than you or I...or any high-speed/low-drag instructor, for that matter.

 

[18DAI]

I consider 1911's to be fun range toys and historical pieces, nothing more.

For a carry 45 I prefer the HK USP and my favorite 45 the S&W 4566. Unlike 1911's I've owned these two guns go bang every time, and cost less than a mortgage payment too!

 

[Skylerbone]

Also you pretty much killed any hopes of me taking you serious the second you admitted you were lumping in a gun you have no experience with because you feel it is a cheap Glock alternative.

Ahhh...I see. It's AOK for you to lump Cimmaron, RIA, Auto Ordnance, Para Ordnance, Regent, ATI and all the rest in with Colt but not ok for me to hang Diamondback and their reputation on Glock.

Speaking to that, I would assert now that polymer is not the issue. Striker fired is not the issue. Modern is not the issue. DAO is not the issue. The real issue for you is brand or weight savings or capacity. Well, tell the sniper with his Barrett he should ditch it for an M4. If he's a good shot, he'll be even better when he sprays and prays because volume makes him more effective.

Why Colt? Production capability. Answered the open call. Parts interchangeability (yes Brent from Colt's Custom Shop has confirmed this). Passed required trials. A Glock can go 100,000 rounds with the same slide? Ask Tuner what his commercial Colts have slung for numbers. If it's built right- and Colt does, it will run right without any undue fuss.

With regard to the Marine 1911 specifically, this is a military firearm. The military does not take pride (as some of you do) in firing 2,000 rounds and leaving them dirty for months. Frankly, that is ignorance on display. It does not run better covered in mud or soot or filled with sand but some boast of showing up unprepared to an actual gunfight? Because a Glock can. Well I suggest never cleaning or lubricating it if it's just as reliable because they aren't bought for looks. How'd that go for the original M16?

Take whatever position you like on the 1911 but I'll ask again: what does your xxx do that a 1911 does not? Weight? Is that a factor for LA SWAT? Ditto on capacity. If an 870 or a 700P is the best tool for the job do you pass based on weight and capacity? And which "reliable" pistol would you choose? H&K? Beretta? XD? S&W? Ruger? Hi Point? Should we like to argue that one next?

 

[Doc3402]

I loved the line about what other designs have been around for 100 years. How about the internal combustion engine, the lightbulb, bifocals, hot air balloons... ah the heck with it. Just another idiot with an over inflated ego thinking his opinion is worth a hoot.

 

[el Godfather]

Yes if you mean cocked and locked. However i meant for those situations where you manually lower the hammer.

 

[1911Tuner]

I would assert now that polymer is not the issue. Striker fired is it the issue. Modern is not the issue. DAO is not the issue.

Just this. The choice was made after considering several factors, and no one thing fueled it. After extensive testing and evaluation, including torturing the pistols far beyond any normal limits...they settled on the 1911. I don't pretend to know all the things were that came into consideration or the Marines' requirements, but you can bet that "Oh, yeah man! 1911s are way cool! Let's get those!" wasn't one of them...and neither did the pistol or caliber that a stateside combat school instructor happens to prefer.

Why Colt? Production capability. Answered the open call. Parts interchangeability (yes Brent from Colt's Custom Shop has confirmed this). Passed required trials.

And there ya have it. A comment was made regarding "Some sewing machine company" building 1911A1 pistols for the WW2 contracts. So did three other firms that had never built guns. So what? Not only did Union Switch & Signal, Remington Rand, and Singer meet or exceed specifications, from mid-1944 until the end of production in late 1945, Remington Rand was building a better pistol than Colt, and they were doing it a little cheaper. As a matter of fact, Remington Rand supplied more pistols to the Army than the other four combined. If the specs are satisfied, they're satisfied. It doesn't matter who builds it.

Could Glock have met the requirements? No doubt that they could have, but this was a contract for a few thousand pistols. They weren't about to tool up for such a small volume. If an order for a half-million pistols had been on the table, they very likely would have thrown their hat into the ring, and they possibly could have won it. But that's not how it went. Sorry.

 

[coalman]

Low road if I've ever seen it.

Gen 2 AD issues? The only AD issues I saw were those caused by shooters. Seen just as many from those handling a 1911 in an unsafe manner.

Gen2 40sw kb issue? That is actually the gun I have the most experience with. I doubt I will ever reach that kind of round count with a gun again. Not one kb. Never saw an issue other than those hot loading their own home brewed ammo.

Gen4 9mm fte/ftf issue? We have a whole department of officers that have not experience that during qualification or duty use yet.

I'm sure Glock has had issues. I'm sure anyone that has manafactured 20million guns has also. Let's not pretend that we are talking about anything other than 1911 fans not wanting to admit the obvious truth. I'm hardly a fan boy. I just like things that work for their intended purpose. If one thing is better than the other then I don't mind saying so either.

One thing about being a higher volume, long time shooter is remembering or experiencing things instead of needing to research them. This site, though having the reverse of your Glock pro-bias, documents many of said Glock issues. Glock has "upgraded" parts related to ADs (changed FP and FPB) and KBs (added chamber support at 6) in Gen2 guns and the light primer strikes (lengthened crucifirm) in .45acp guns. The Gen3 .40sw FTF light issue remains and was "fixed" with Gen4 .40sw guns. The Gen4 9mm FTF/FTE/Extraction issues (and some late Gen3 Glocks) remain for many (despite newer recoil spring assemblies, extractors, etc.) and the G30sf FTRTB appears resolved with a newer trigger assembly. I've experienced the light primer strike in .45acp Glock (needed "newer" trigger assembly), light issue in .40sw Glock (could not resolve with "newer" parts), mini-KB in .40sw (case failure 2x, factory new ammo), and extraction issue in late Gen3 Glock (needed "older" extractor).

I agree with the post that said:
Q. Help, having problems with my new Glock.
A. Must be cheap ammo, limpwristing, poor technique, modifications, reloads, imagination, troll ...
Q. Help, having problems with my new 1911.
A. Those aren't reliable. Get a Glock.

I still choose Glock. I still choose 1911. Both have presented problems. Once resolved, both remain comparably reliable for me. They are both tools. Nothing is perfect.

 

[Guillermo]

the obviously biased and poorly written article did have one point. 1911s seem to have more finicky magazines than many other guns.

I am not sure why.

My constant companion for many years was a Combat Commander. It would hardly run with any aftermarket magazine. With the Colt mag it was 100%.

Another thing that everyone has to admit, the fan-boys tend to have tunnel vision.

(BTW, I tease my daughter saying that I wanted to name her John Moses...so one could argue that I fall into that category. JMB was a genius and a great patriot for the way he took a huge financial hit to get the BAR into the hands of our soldiers more quickly)

 

[1911Tuner]

the obviously biased and poorly written article did have one point. 1911s seem to have more finicky magazines than many other guns.

I am not sure why.

I know why.

 

[Guillermo]

I know why.

do tell

 

[1911Tuner]

What? Again? *sigh*

 

[AethelstanAegen]

the obviously biased and poorly written article did have one point. 1911s seem to have more finicky magazines than many other guns.

I am not sure why.

We'll save 1911Tuner some grief. Simply put, there are a ton of aftermarket manufacturers of 1911 magazines. Those run the gambit from very high quality to total crap. With most other pistols, there's pretty much just the factory mags. Oobviously there are exceptions, ie Glocks have aftermarket mags available some of which are also crap and some of which work great, but I think it's still safe to say there are probably more aftermarket manufacturers of 1911 mags than for pretty much any other pistol type, thus there's a wide spectrum of qualities available.

 

[1911Tuner]

Thanks, Aethel...but it's not even that. Making a good magazine ain't exactly rocket science. During WW2, there were several contractors that did it. It's not adhering to the proper specs that starts the problems. So many people are unwilling to admit that Browning and his Dream Team really did have the answer, and they keep trying to prove that they're smarter than those guys were...so far without a lot of success.

 

[Skribs]

During WW2, there were several contractors that did it.

HEY! Are you implying that because contractors can do it, it's easy? As a contractor, I resent that! (Just kidding)

 

[1911Tuner]

See...here's the thing.

The 1911 was ultimately headed for war, where men could die if their weapon failed to function.

The 1911 was designed to function. If it's built to correct specs and fed halfway decent ammunition from a proper magazine, it will function. It doesn't have a choice. It's a machine.

I use proper magazines, and nothing else. I don't remember the last time that I had a feed-related malfunction in any of my pistols...even with my funky reloads made up of my home-cast SWCs...but it's been many years and many tens of thousands of rounds.

And, no. My pistols don't rattle like a beer can fulla rocks.

Neither do I remember the last time I had to adjust extractor tension, and that's related to magazine function, too.

I've also handed a few of my magazines to frustrated 1911 owners who were having many feed issues...and watched their faces light up when the problems disappeared.

I've also seen a few of those people go back to the magazines that were causing their problems, unwilling to admit that their highly recommended magazine was at the root of their problems. I've bought a few pistols from these people at a reduced price, only to discover that there wasn't a thing wrong with them...except the magazines.

 

[Skylerbone]

I sincerely hope that people can take something positive away from all of this verbal sparring and that is nothing can ever be optimized for every purpose.

Taking the brush as an example: one should not use their toothbrush to clean a toilet nor a toilet brush to brush their hair. While an old toothbrush can be used to apply shoe polish (and work well) that was never its intended purpose as manufactured.

I cannot know how all others use any given firearm only how I use them and what has worked for me. I own numerous handguns, 1911s, a Kahr, 3 M&Ps, a Beretta and several revolvers among others and I consider all capable and reliable for firing projectiles. Beyond that I decide what provides me the greatest advantage for the task at hand.

There is no better than all others. There is capable and incapable. That will apply to every product whether brush or tractor or lawnmower or belt or boat or even firearm.

 

[Ky Larry]

I've known many Marines and I can tell you, as a group, they ain't stupid. I don't now the parameters they used to choose the 1911 but I'm sure they had their reasons. If they want a 1911 to protect their backsides, then so be it. They are the people going in harms way, not a group of gunstore commandos or internet gurus. I haven't walked the walk, so I can't talk the talk.

Tuner, this has been pointed out dozens of times on this and other forums. The 1911 works as advertised when built to spec, is properly cleaned, lubed, and maintained, and is fed the ammo it was built for. Some people just can't, or won't, grasp this concept.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

It’s a 100-year old design. It needs tools to disassemble.

What tools?

It has unreliable magazines.

The magazines are as reliable as the maker -- I personally favor Chip McCormic 8-rounders, and they haven't failed in tens of thousands of rounds.

It is finicky about ammo.

Not mine -- and I have three of them.

And, as a single-action pistol, it is unsafe for 95% of its users to carry.

Pure BS!

 

[The Man With No Name]

Ahhh...I see. It's AOK for you to lump Cimmaron, RIA, Auto Ordnance, Para Ordnance, Regent, ATI and all the rest in with Colt but not ok for me to hang Diamondback and their reputation on Glock.

Speaking to that, I would assert now that polymer is not the issue. Striker fired is it the issue. Modern is not the issue. DAO is not the issue. The real issue for you is brand or weight savings or capacity. Well, tell the sniper with his Barrett he should ditch it for an M4. If he's a good shot, he'll be even better when he sprays and prays because volume makes him more effective.

Why Colt? Production capability. Answered the open call. Parts interchangeability (yes Brent from Colt's Custom Shop has confirmed this). Passed required trials. A Glock can go 100,000 rounds with the same slide? Ask Tuner what his commercial Colts have slung for numbers. If it's built right- and Colt does, it will run right without any undue fuss.

With regard to the Marine 1911 specifically, this is a military firearm. The military does not take pride (as some of you do) in firing 2,000 rounds and leaving them dirty for months. Frankly, that is ignorance on display. It does not run better covered in mud or soot or filled with sand but some boast of showing up unprepared to an actual gunfight? Because a Glock can. Well I suggest never cleaning or lubricating it if it's just as reliable because they aren't bought for looks. How'd that go for the original M16?

Take whatever position you like on the 1911 but I'll ask again: what does your xxx do that a 1911 does not? Weight? Is that a factor for LA SWAT? Ditto on capacity. If an 870 or a 700P is the best tool for the job do you pass based on weight and capacity? And which "reliable" pistol would you choose? H&K? Beretta? XD? S&W? Ruger? Hi Point? Should we like to argue that one next?

1. Actually I've only discussed specific models I have experience with. Glocks, Les Baer, and Colt. I don't know what a Diamondback is so I haven't brought it into this. You have admitting you don't really know anything about it. When I had a need for a 1911 style 45 I bought the one that I had seen work time and time again. I didn't go with Colt because yes they do get "shot out" meaning loose with extensive use requiring extensive mods to make reliable for said extensive use.
2. I have never said capacity or weight is the only issue. It is just plain silly also to compare and Barrett to an M4 and use them as proof of your point. The 1911 is not that far off from a Glock other than the fact that the Glock will outlast it and function far longer than it will without the need to order spare slides. I am still laughing that people think that is a reasonable thing.
3. Colt and production capability. Are you aware of the fact that Les Baer was famous long ago for being one of the first to adopt Haas 5 axis CNC milling machines as a manafacturer of a firearm? Haas sure made a big deal of it. Only the final fitting is done by hand. Once again my point is that if having the best tool available really is the issue and the 1911 platform is that tool Colt is still not the best choice.
4. I can ask tuner and I'm sure his answer will be an honest one. I've seen more than one Colt with my own eyes that just don't hold up to that kind of round count though.
5. One day I was leaving qualification and a call came out about a man with a shotgun threatening his neighbor. I had already been listening in and knew that at most 2 officers would respond as all the others were tied up with prisoners. I ran 10-18 traffic to respond instead of taking a dinner break before we did our night shooting. Was my gun dirty? Yes. Did I have a choice to stop and clean it before responding to that call? No. Should I have stopped to clean my Glock before responding letting those officers face a man with a shotgun that is not stable (I was already familiar with him)? The fact is situations can and do happen where you may have to respond with a dirty gun. Mine has gotten dirty and wet on more than one occasion during a shift. I'm bouncing from call to call over 12 hours. When the domestic with weapons involved call comes should I tell them to wait while I clean my gun? Operators in a desert or jungle environment will not face worse?
6. Now we are on to LA Swat? Shall we name all the Swat teams across the country that issues something other than any 1911 while we are at it? Every Swat team for me locally including my own for example?

Seems any points about the 1911 platform are getting lost in the clutter of what is best for one small Marine group. I think we can all agree that what may be best for them does not make a good example of why the platform is the modern best choice for many or all. Just the same as why we can use examples of elite units using Sigs, HKs, Berettas, Glocks, or (insert your favorite brand here) as a good example of what is the best modern platform. The telling thing is that the 1911 users always seem to feel a need to use some elite group buying a particular gun as proof while the "Glock fanboys" don't.

 

[1911Tuner]

The magazines are as reliable as the maker -- I personally favor Chip McCormic 8-rounders, and they haven't failed in tens of thousands of rounds.

You should play the lottery, Vern. I won't allow those things in the yard.