1911s suck (not my article)

[1911Tuner]

it does need tuning, a lot of the time, tuning that joe blow can't do.

That hasn't been my experience...unless you feel that needing to adjust tension every 50,000 rounds or so is a lot.

We tend to hear about the ones that need attention, while the ones that never do quietly chug along...the squeaky wheel/grease thing...and about as often as not, the guy who has a bit of trouble loudly announces that all (insert brand name) pistols are junk.

Imagine his surprise when handing him a proper magazine or bending the extractor a little causes all his problems to disappear...and it's usually the magazine at a 10:1 ratio. Trust me. The look on his face is priceless.

You made my point for me.

Well...If that's how you read it, I can't do anything about that.

A poorly tensioned extractor isn't the fault of the gun. Look to the guy who installed it and sent it on down the line without proper adjustment. Neither is the low-quality magazine the fault of the gun. Look to the corporate bean counter who insisted on saving 50 cents per unit. You'd think that after a hundred years, the manufacturers would understand that good magazines and proper extractor adjustment are vitally important to the pistol's reliable function...but I guess that's too much to expect in this day and age.

Way back in 1910, John Browning and a team of Colt's top engineers had it all worked out. I have it on good authority that those people really did know what they were doing. That so few people these days seem to be willing to believe and accept that is curious...but what're ya gonna do. *shrug*

I've tried for lo these many years to make the horse drink water, so far with limited success.

 

[smalls]

Why are you all complaining about the Marine's decision?

Very select portions of the Marines are replacing what they already had. Meaning they shot them well, and they worked before.

 

[Snag]

their full of crap like a Christmas tree.

???

The link bds provided puts things a bit more into perspective. Whereas the TTAG (the truth about guns) article read more like a p***ed off consumer that got lied to and couldn't get his money back. That 10-8 article reads more professionally. Both convey the same points.

You do get the expression yes?

Those two articles, the TTAG and the 10-8, do not covey the same points. The first one the guy is basically stating, as he did in the first paragraph, that "the 1911 an old design that is more trouble than it is worth". It's all opinion. The 10-8 article is talking about how "If you really want a 1911, prepare to jump into the deep end of the pool". Then he goes on to explain how the "deep end" of the pool is a Springfield GI model for 5-600 bucks? He also states "For about $100 with smart shopping, you can also get one of the new manufacture Colt 1991A1 Government Models". I'm assuming that's a typo.

So really, all respect given, both articles suck.

 

[RmB]

That article is full of logic..... HOW??

 

[PabloJ]

Why are you all complaining about the Marine's decision?

Very select portions of the Marines are replacing what they already had. Meaning they shot them well, and they worked before.

In time when everyone is tightening their belt cost effective contracts should be pursued. If Marines needed steel .45 Ruger P series or SR1911 would have been less expensive then the overpriced Colt.

 

[Tex4426]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/12/patrick-carrube/why-the-1911-doesn’t-suck…/


O look i 1911 doesnt suck article


I have a bought used rock island that i bought a drop in trigger job ,wilson beaver tail ,hogue grip, and a barrel compensator.. o and fobus double mag and fobus cun holster...total comes 450 bucks..and its been dead nut reliable since i got it...not as nice as my brothers SR 1911 that cost 700 but a nice pistol for what i got in it

 

[1911Tuner]

If Marines needed steel .45 Ruger P series or SR1911 would have been less expensive then the overpriced Colt.

And maybe somebody didn't feel that the investment cast frames would have met their longevity standards under the conditions that the guns would be used. As in 1911, every part of the gun...including the slide...was an expendable service part that would need to be replaced at some point. Along with other various parts and assemblies, a couple dozen slides were ordered by the US Army for every complete pistol that was delivered...because they understood then, as now that the slide and barrel assembly is the gun. The frame is essentially no more than the gun mount and a housing for the controls. The frames had to outlast the slides because replacing the slide is cheaper than replacing the whole gun.

While a good investment cast frame is fine for normal use and abuse...it may not fare as well under the hard use that the Marines' contract pistols will be expected to hold up under. These guys are reported to burn up about 30,000 rounds a year in practice...and that's per Marine.

 

[mljdeckard]

My Kimber Custom II was $630 NIB. It's the most reliable handgun I have ever owned. I'm not sure what it is supposed to do that it hasn't.

 

[Skylerbone]

I would love to see a response from someone who agreed with the article that can turn the author's assertions into fact. Rather than claiming 1911 owners are defensive and obtuse how about some statistics and data to back it up?

I nearly halted my reading at the mention of Mr. Norris as he presents a paradox: how does one prove that Chuck Norris' tears cure cancer when the man has never cried?

I do find it sad that so many disbelievers find fault with what they have never witnessed, even sadder when 1911 owners cave to pressure and believe their pistol is more prone to failure than some modern design. There's a lightbulb glowing in a fire station right now that is testament to the laughability of modern "extended life" bulbs. There is a bridge in New York that does the same.

The Marines? Send them the best there is! A new, spaceage polymer pistol that saves a ton of money. One designed this century not way back when. I hear Diamondback meets those criteria...same as Glocks but better 'cause they're newer and all.

 

[Skribs]

I was waiting for one of the mods with 1911 in their name to speak up in this thread...

1911Tuner, while I agree with you that maybe the article doesn't present the 1911 accurately, I disagree with you that the 1911 is the best tool for the job. I agree with others in this thread that the Marines could have saved money and gotten a tool just as good (if not better) for combat in the form of a modern .45 handgun. I also think it is a waste of money to give Marines a pistol, when they already carry a rifle on their excursions. That's just my personal opinion.

I do believe the 1911 is an outdated design, and it's not because it is old. It is because I believe polymer, double stack, and rails are advancements that the 1911 predated. That being said, I understand 1911s are coming out with those features, and those modernized 1911s are making use of modern technology. I do not believe the 1911 is useless...although it would be in my hands because I haven't trained to take the safety off on the draw (training issue, not gun issue). The biggest issues I have are simply with the weight, capacity, and price - issues that are resolved by going with a Glock or similar.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

I figure the first and most important flaw in the "article" is:

Are we gonna talk about 1911s (production ceased in 1945)?

Are we gonna talk about Colt commercial?

Are we gonna talk about the raft of alternative clones? Products that we have no right to force onto the reputation of JMB or the fellas behind the 1911 & 1911A1 service pistols.

I figure between showing a service pistol with a commercial round and that "finger in the eye" second paragraph that either;

The clown knows not of what he speaks.

Is shopping scenarios to support a "hate" thing.

Is deliberately mixing apples and oranges to build a complaint to the green grocer.

-or-

The black light in his basement bedroom in his mom's house doesn't work and he's been banned from all the on-line commando games.

Another: "If every Clone won't feed every round from every mag that I select regardless of attention to original design parameters, my cheapness or my enslavement to trends and ninjaness, it must be crap!"

 

[76shuvlinoff]

I'm really disappointed in he Marines decision. It seems they are now more interested on looking like Mall Ninjas than using the best available.

I would like to see that statement made in front of said Marines to get their honest responses... whatever they may be.

 

[Fiv3r]

I don't put a lot of stock in an article with a few typos within the first couple of sentences.

I'm not a big fan of the 1911 platform, but it has nothing to do with gun being "junk". Quite the contrary, I find the history, style, and sex appeal of the 1911 to be very, very tempting. However, at the end of the day, it just doesn't suit my needs (mainly that most are not ambidextrous as I am a lefty who has a hard time sweeping the safety, the weight of the gun for carry, and the size of the round).

I have never understood the "Us 'r Them" line in the sand that certain platform users draw. I like 1911's. I don't own one or carry one because it doesn't fit my needs or budget, but I enjoy shooting them as much as any other hand gun. I love the design but not enough to work around the limiting factors for my criteria in a carry piece.

I generally carry a Glock, but it has nothing to do with perfection. I simply like the weight of the gun, the passive safety that is lefty friendly, and that the exterior of the gun requires very little maintenance to keep clean and functional (no debris getting behind the hammer or rust spots on the steel from sweat).

That said, I find the 1911 to be a fine design, and if it works for you shoot it and carry it It's not my cup of tea right now. For me, a 1911 is like a really fine watch that I can't afford presently. The Glock is a cell phone. They both "tell time". One is just more of an investment grade item. A quality 1911 (for me) would be brought out on special occasions and passed down. A Glock is a defense tool that will more than likely get rotated in and out of daily carry service.

 

[TAKtical]

I love glocks. I always have. In my experience they are the most reliable pistols in the world. That being said, I also love my 1911's. There is nothing in the world like a 1911 trigger. I have put $300 into every glock I have, just to get a trigger that is almost, sorta, kinda like a 1911 trigger.

 

[skywalkrNCSU]

I don't exactly agree with the article in the OP but I do not exactly see where a 1911 excels that others fall short.

The only thing I could guess is you just like how it shoots or you want a gun you can easily customize.

I had one 1911 (Springfield Loaded) and it had more FTF's than any other gun I have used, and I was using Wilson mags. I likes how it shot alright but it wasn't exactly a religious experience by any means. I am in the market for another 45 and can't even think of a valid reason as to why I should try another 1911.

 

[Skribs]

There is nothing in the world like a 1911 trigger.

I find it amazing that this is the pistol's only real redeeming quality compared with any modern design. The amazing part is that this trigger is so great, but nobody else uses it. It's kinda like some specific calibers that fill a special niche (5.7x28mm, 7.62x25mm, .50 GI) that nobody else makes, and the one isn't even in a modern design.

Actually, in a sci-fi I'm writing, someone from a different universe where they have access to energy-powered weapons uses a 1911 as his pistol of choice. When asked why, with all the alien technology available, he chooses that, his answer is "nothing we have has that trigger."

That doesn't change my opinion on the overall design, however.

 

[Pilot]

^^^^^^^^^

You do realize that most of today's "modern designs" operating systems are based on the one used in the 1911. Right?

 

[Skribs]

Yes, I do. I also know that more people use Windows 7 than Windows 3.1, and that people are buying bagless vacuum cleaners over bag ones anymore. What separates the modern designs from the traditional 1911 is advancements in technology. Some newer models use those advancements, but the majority do not.

 

[Skylerbone]

Barrett M99 Sniper Rifles Suck (Not my assertion)

but I understand the sentiment. They big. They heavy. They loud. They ugly. Let's face it, what use could there be in slowing down some of our most elite military operators with a 25 lb., 50" hunk of metal that costs $4,500? All that and it's a single-shot and needs a scope? Why I hear R.B. thought it up and built the first prototypes in his garage! Charlatan I tell you! It don't serve my purposes or those of 95% of gun owners and facts is facts...right?

 

[The Man With No Name]

Uh...no. This time I do believe that they gave the bleeding/dying grunts some input, and a lot of the decision was based on the experiences that the first MEU-SOC personnel had with the pistol. Remember that this wasn't to be a general issue sidearm. It was to be a life taker and a widow maker issued to an elite group. They were involved in the process.

Link? The fact that I see Colt was chosen tells me even more of this decision and how poor it was for the simple fact that if cost is no object to get them the best tool available then Les Baer (among others) may not be the cool sounding investment grade choice but definitely the better weapon.

The Marines? Send them the best there is! A new, spaceage polymer pistol that saves a ton of money. One designed this century not way back when. I hear Diamondback meets those criteria...same as Glocks but better 'cause they're newer and all.

No experience with a Diamondback so I can't comment. I'm wondering from your comments if you have experience with any of the guns being mentioned. People that use Glocks and are religious about them tend to be that way because they have high round count guns that are still 100% reliable. Or they carry them on duty in exposed holsters. They get rained on, they get dirty, they work 100% of the time. They don't weigh you down like a the typical 1911 and when your daily carry consists of a vest, baton, 2 pair of cuffs, 2 loaded spare mags, 1-2 flashlights, very heavy radio with shoulder mic, audio remote for the in car camera, small seperate video recorder, and whatever assorted gear the weight of the gun is a concern. Imagine the ton of stuff that has to be carried in combat. Personally if I thought I was going to be in a fight and had a choice none of these guns would be my first choice as my sidearm or primary fighting pistol. But given what we are discussing I would choose the more durable tool.

While a good investment cast frame is fine for normal use and abuse...it may not fare as well under the hard use that the Marines' contract pistols will be expected to hold up under. These guys are reported to burn up about 30,000 rounds a year in practice...and that's per Marine.

Through their sidearms? That has got to be wrong. If it is correct then it is a joke. I doubt anyone here would even try to justify that as a necessary expense. Nothing wrong with heavy practice but 30 thousand a year is recreational shooting.

 

[Tex4426]

U can have the best of both world..rock river has a poly 1911

 

[Auto426]

Through their sidearms? That has got to be wrong. If it is correct then it is a joke. I doubt anyone here would even try to justify that as a necessary expense. Nothing wrong with heavy practice but 30 thousand a year is recreational shooting.

The information is readily available on the Internet. It's very common for the MARSOC guys to shoot upwards of 10,000 rounds in a training cycle and the deployment that follows it. And they've been doing that for years now with 1911's. You can complain about the cost of the gun, but when you look at the amount of rounds they see in their lifetime it seems sort of insignificant.

 

[tipoc]

On the Marine Corps decision. You can read a little about it here...

http://www.shootingwire.com/story/264958

Note that the order for 12,000 Colt made 1911s with rails called by Colt the Close Quarters Battle Pistol...

The CQBP contract is for a five-year period and has a potential value of up to $22.5 million. The CQBP expands on a long history of MARCORSYSCOM re-building original Government-issue 1911s, primarily for use by Force Recon and MARSOC units.

This tells you a few things if you are aware of some background on special forces units in the U.S. military.

First-These guns do not replace all standard issue sidearms throughout the Corp. Only those already in use in some units.

Second- the order replaces a good many Colt made 1911s that go back to the last time the Marines received new 1911s from any source-which was during the Second World War- they have been rebuilding their last order since 1948 and keeping those guns running. This is true. If the new guns run half as long under the conditions under which the old ones were subjected that means their last order has been running for over 60 years. You replace parts as needed and they keep going. Seems a wise economic choice.

Third, the rank and file Marine in these units, Force Recon and others, do have a say. Obviously, at some point, a committee approved the request. Understand that special forces units often have access to a variety of sidearms. The special forces units often get what they request. The suggestion that the requisition was made by a bureaucratic committee somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon is an uninformed assumption.

Kimber and Springfield have also produced limited runs of guns for other special forces units in the military. Those units also have H&Ks, Sigs, and other guns. The Seals have a reputation for using a variety of guns including 1911s. This does not mean that the M9 will be replaced anytime soon. It does mean that the 1911 soldiers on and is fit for that in the experience of many Seals, Deltas, Marines and others.

tipoc

 

[neviander]

I also know that more people use Windows 7 than Windows 3.1, and that people are buying bagless vacuum cleaners over bag ones anymore. What separates the modern designs from the traditional 1911 is advancements in technology.

Yep. A '68 Chevelle is a bad a** ride, but next to a new, say, Intrepid, (or whatever, pick a model) is a maintenance --deleted--, (I have no idea if --deleted-- is no no language on THR anymore, it's in the bible, delete if "offensive") not because the original Chevelle design was flawed, because time has passed, technology has developed. There are even family sedans that will spank any O.E. Chevelle, in every area...except looks, and will go way past 100,000 miles with no more than oil and filters changed.

That's my point. I'd love to have a '68 Chevelle, and a 5 thousand dollar 1911, that doesn't mean I'm going to make either my daily driver

 

[Skribs]

Kimber and Springfield have also produced limited runs of guns for other special forces units in the military. Those units also have H&Ks, Sigs, and other guns. The Seals have a reputation for using a variety of guns including 1911s. This does not mean that the M9 will be replaced anytime soon. It does mean that the 1911 soldiers on and is fit for that in the experience of many Seals, Deltas, Marines and others.

I wonder how much of the reason why they want 1911s is because they already use 1911s. I may not serve, but I've worked with enough Army folk to know that they don't consider change to be a good thing. But I wonder if they were started on a Glock, if they would look at the 1911 and think "no way you're putting that rust-prone old thing in my holster."

That said, even with my reservations about the 1911 being the optimal tool, I will say that within 100 yards one Force Recon or SEAL with a 1911 is probably better than a whole squad of grunts with M4s.