Andrew Wyatt
Member
show me another .45 that'll fit my hand and i'll consider changing my mind.
1911s, what's the big deal?
- Thread starter HBK
- Start date
- Status
David Wile
Member
Hey folks,
I have to admit that I prefer my 10mm Megastar over my Plain Jane 1911 since it has even more punch than the 1911 and the big grip does fill my hand quite nicely, but... If Mike Hammer's 1911 Betsy was good enough for him, it certainly is good enough for me. As far as function and reliability of both guns, I have no complaints about either one. They will both shoot as long as you are willing to keep feeding them and pulling the trigger. I have never continuously shot enough ammo in either gun to have either gun refuse to fire because of powder fouling. I have on several occasions shot four or five hundred rounds in one session without cleaning and without fouling jams. That is probably because of the slop built into them, but, then again, I'm not shooting at 50 yard targets either. Both the old 45 and the modern 10 are hard hitters. The 45 has stood the test of time, and I believe the 10 would do likewise if more good guns like the Megastar were made for it.
I also like 9s, 38s, 32s, 25s, and 22s, but I will always have a special fondness for the memory of Mike and his Betsy - and, oh yes, lovely Velma.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
I have to admit that I prefer my 10mm Megastar over my Plain Jane 1911 since it has even more punch than the 1911 and the big grip does fill my hand quite nicely, but... If Mike Hammer's 1911 Betsy was good enough for him, it certainly is good enough for me. As far as function and reliability of both guns, I have no complaints about either one. They will both shoot as long as you are willing to keep feeding them and pulling the trigger. I have never continuously shot enough ammo in either gun to have either gun refuse to fire because of powder fouling. I have on several occasions shot four or five hundred rounds in one session without cleaning and without fouling jams. That is probably because of the slop built into them, but, then again, I'm not shooting at 50 yard targets either. Both the old 45 and the modern 10 are hard hitters. The 45 has stood the test of time, and I believe the 10 would do likewise if more good guns like the Megastar were made for it.
I also like 9s, 38s, 32s, 25s, and 22s, but I will always have a special fondness for the memory of Mike and his Betsy - and, oh yes, lovely Velma.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
For an opposing thought to Ian11's comment, most 1911 fans are tolerant of the "it's old, it doesn't hold enough rounds, it breaks all the time, it's too heavy, the bullets are to slow, or you can't controll it rapid fire" comments we hear all the time. I have noticed that my personal experiences with people making those comments usually are not experienced and not very good shooters.
The one and only way to find out the virtues of any handgun is to handle and fire it yourself and draw your own conclusions.
The 1911 is not for everyone, but we have a vast market of other models that may please someone.
The one and only way to find out the virtues of any handgun is to handle and fire it yourself and draw your own conclusions.
The 1911 is not for everyone, but we have a vast market of other models that may please someone.
David,
I like Raymond Chandler's character Philip Marlowe and his trusty Luger cruising the Sunset Strip. And a girl next to him with a body that feels like a slap across the face
And Majic,
I'm not sure how its an opposing thought to what I've said but I tend to agree with your last post.
I like Raymond Chandler's character Philip Marlowe and his trusty Luger cruising the Sunset Strip. And a girl next to him with a body that feels like a slap across the face
And Majic,
I'm not sure how its an opposing thought to what I've said but I tend to agree with your last post.
Last edited:
So long !
Two items to clear up...
Quote #1
--------------
Here's to large, slow bullets! A 230 grain .45 slug is twice as massive as the typical 9mm. 115 grain slug. Momentum is directly proportional to mass and velocity..
The velocity of the 9mm. slug (about 1200 ft/sec.) is certainly not twice as fast as the velocity of the .45 slug (about 850 ft./sec.), ergo the .45 has significantly better momentum (knock-down power). M x Vsquared is Energy, but what counts is Momentum, which is just M x V.
---------------
Speed kills. Little bullets moving fast seems to work pretty well for the military. Do hunters use large, slow bullets? I can throw a rock pretty slow but it will bouce off. I see what you're saying and appreciate it, though. How much momentum is being taken up the equal and opposite reaction aspect of recoil?
Quote #2
----------------
Isn't this what it really boils down to? You haven't had any trouble with a particular example of a Kel-Tec, and I have had two FTEs on my latest 1911, both occurring in the first 50 rounds, one of which was because a Blazer rim gave way, and never since through the next 5500+. If that is "unreliable" I will take it and the 1911's reputation for choking.
------------------
Off the mark. Boats, nobody is pointing just at you. Look, multiple postings in this thread have cited the 1911 as having occasional reliability issues and not being reliable out of the box. Look and read. They also have dispelled many myths, good and bad. No need to defend your purchase to me.
No way am I comparing a cheap Kel-Tec to a fine weapon like a 1911. Just commenting on how people will forgive issues when they are clouded by non-objectivity. I love my wife too and she is far from perfect. :]
Online forums are for discussion, folks. When we all sit around and nod with, "Well, I just think people should shoot what they like and if they do it's fine with me"- type postings it gets very boring. The original poster has received very good evidence as have I why the 1911 has been around for so long. I've learned a lot in the process and have softened my position on this firearm and its cartridge because of it. Still don't want either but I see why you guys do.
Life is too short to not voice your opinion even if people would like to use you as a target holder at the range. I urge everyone to always voice it without fear, even when you know you are in the minority. I respect everyone on this forum very highly and have enjoyed the intellectual sparring but I'm not coming back in because I'm done in general with all online forums for guns, computers, or anthing else.
Later,
Pico
Two items to clear up...
Quote #1
--------------
Here's to large, slow bullets! A 230 grain .45 slug is twice as massive as the typical 9mm. 115 grain slug. Momentum is directly proportional to mass and velocity..
The velocity of the 9mm. slug (about 1200 ft/sec.) is certainly not twice as fast as the velocity of the .45 slug (about 850 ft./sec.), ergo the .45 has significantly better momentum (knock-down power). M x Vsquared is Energy, but what counts is Momentum, which is just M x V.
---------------
Speed kills. Little bullets moving fast seems to work pretty well for the military. Do hunters use large, slow bullets? I can throw a rock pretty slow but it will bouce off. I see what you're saying and appreciate it, though. How much momentum is being taken up the equal and opposite reaction aspect of recoil?
Quote #2
----------------
Isn't this what it really boils down to? You haven't had any trouble with a particular example of a Kel-Tec, and I have had two FTEs on my latest 1911, both occurring in the first 50 rounds, one of which was because a Blazer rim gave way, and never since through the next 5500+. If that is "unreliable" I will take it and the 1911's reputation for choking.
------------------
Off the mark. Boats, nobody is pointing just at you. Look, multiple postings in this thread have cited the 1911 as having occasional reliability issues and not being reliable out of the box. Look and read. They also have dispelled many myths, good and bad. No need to defend your purchase to me.
No way am I comparing a cheap Kel-Tec to a fine weapon like a 1911. Just commenting on how people will forgive issues when they are clouded by non-objectivity. I love my wife too and she is far from perfect. :]
Online forums are for discussion, folks. When we all sit around and nod with, "Well, I just think people should shoot what they like and if they do it's fine with me"- type postings it gets very boring. The original poster has received very good evidence as have I why the 1911 has been around for so long. I've learned a lot in the process and have softened my position on this firearm and its cartridge because of it. Still don't want either but I see why you guys do.
Life is too short to not voice your opinion even if people would like to use you as a target holder at the range. I urge everyone to always voice it without fear, even when you know you are in the minority. I respect everyone on this forum very highly and have enjoyed the intellectual sparring but I'm not coming back in because I'm done in general with all online forums for guns, computers, or anthing else.
Later,
Pico
Rob96
Member
That has got to be one of the biggest pieces of misinformation out there. You throw your slow rocks, I'll throw my slow 230gr bullets. Compare the lite fast 45 loads to the 230gr loads, the 230's win out.
Not being reliable out of the box? Have you tried a new Colt lately, they are anything but unreliable.
Rob96
Member
Training issue not a hardware issue.
Again, have you looked at the new Colts?
And again, look at the new Colts. Yes the slide to frame fit isn't as tight as a Les Baer, but is not too loose. Slide to frame tightness is maybe 5% of the guns accuracy. Lockup of the barrel is where it's at.
Byron Quick
Moderator In Memoriam
F=mv.
Equation means that a 115 grain 9mm has to be moving TWICE as fast to deliver the same energy as a 230 grain .45ACP. This, of course, is ignoring variable such as delivery of energy. Any projectile which exits a body has not delivered all of its energy to the target. Which of the above bullets will deliver more of the available energy to the target? Which is more likely to exit the target with undelivered energy? Which is more likely to exit at a higher velocity and thus, a higher percentage of undelivered energy?
Equation means that a 115 grain 9mm has to be moving TWICE as fast to deliver the same energy as a 230 grain .45ACP. This, of course, is ignoring variable such as delivery of energy. Any projectile which exits a body has not delivered all of its energy to the target. Which of the above bullets will deliver more of the available energy to the target? Which is more likely to exit the target with undelivered energy? Which is more likely to exit at a higher velocity and thus, a higher percentage of undelivered energy?
Ian,
Who usually starts these threads? It is usually someone, who wishes to find fault with the .45 and/or 1911. Personally, I think the more guns you own the better. I myself have shot and owned a variety of handguns. My favorite is the 1911 for a variety of reasons. People that really like this handgun do so, because of what it offers the shooter, not for cult reasons.
True story:
After Colorado passed a "shall-issue" CCW law earlier this year, a woman I work with became interested in getting a handgun and a permit, but had no experience whatsover. Naturally, she asked me for help.
I let her handle several of my handguns: Glocks, Sigs, CZs, Berettas, 1911s, Browning Hi Powers, and maybe one or two more that slip my mind right now. Because she had so much trouble with the slide and controls, I suggested she start off with a revolver. So we went to the gun store, and she ended up with a Ruger SP-101 (3" barrel, with Hougue grips), for reasons I have described elsewhere. We took it out, and she was pretty happy with it.
She enrolled in CCW course from DFUSE. While most of what I heard about the training is excellent, two things frustrated her.
1. She did not want to use her revolver for the shooting test. At first, I didn't understand why, but several parts of the course required shooting timed strings of 6 rounds (3 IDPA targets x 2 shots each), and some required 12 (shoot twice at the 3 targets, reload, do again). Obviously difficult to do with a 5 shot revolver.
2. After having her go through my handguns again, I loaned her my Walther P-5, because it was the easiest for her to manipulate. However, the instructor (whose name I do not remember) would not let her use it, supposedly because the European-style magazine release on the heel did not meet his criteria for fast reloads. Instead, he loaned her/made her use a 1911 (in .40, I think). She ended up having to re-do part of the test, but eventually passed.
Afterwards, he insisted that she should get a 1911.
It was after hearing her tell me all of this that I really begun to get upset with the cult-of-the-1911 mentality. Espeically since I remember when I felt the same way about Glocks -- until I actually started taking people out shooting, and learning (much to my surprise) that different guns worked for different people.
Now, this woman seems dedicated enough that a semi-auto might work for her. She wants to go shoot some more of my guns, to see what works for her before making a decision. She wants to get into IDPA. And maybe a 1911 might be a good choice, although I think she's leaning toward the CZ. (While she can shoot a semi-auto just fine, I think a semi-auto would be a bad choice because of maintenance, but that's another story).
Anyway, Ian's original point about "1911 true believers" trying to force their choice upon others seems valid to me. While the 1911 is a good gun (I own 5, including one I had custom built for me), it seem seems that the whole belief has more to do with the meme being a self-reinforcing feedback loop, rather than anything to do with the merits of the gun itself.
Yeah, the 1911 is a good handgun, but so are many others.
varoadking
Member
the cult-of-the-1911 mentality
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Or something like that. There seems to be a stong anti-1911 "cult" as well. As with many things, these anti-opinions appear to have been developed without any experience with what it is someone professes to dislike...
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Or something like that. There seems to be a stong anti-1911 "cult" as well. As with many things, these anti-opinions appear to have been developed without any experience with what it is someone professes to dislike...
NoVaGator
Member
Actually, it's energy=mass x velocity squared
A 230 gr .45 @ ~875 fps muzzle velocity delivers 391 ft-lbs (at the muzzle)
A 115 gr. 9mm @ ~1100 fps results in 383 ft-lbs.
Pretty darn close. This doesn't measure stopping power - I don't know if anyone has a accurate measure of that, other than to say that, all other things being equal, speed kills.
FWIW, I own a HK USP in .45, which I feel is a far superior pistol to any comparably-priced 1911 - I've owned a few 1911's.
BTW, first post here. I post under the same name on AR15.com. You have a great board here.
Maybe, just maybe, the idea that 1911 dominance is the"whole belief [which] has more to do with the meme being a self-reinforcing feedback loop, rather than anything to do with the merits of the gun itself," is really a reflection of the fear of suffering cognitive dissonance.
You see, many people purposely avoid the 1911 experience because doing so is going to harm their insular little worldview [this is not really applicable to Sven]. The internet is replete with testimonials of "seeing the light" and going with the 1911 after shooters had futzed with every other platform under the sun. I know what this type of phenomenon is like, having dismissed revolvers without a second thought for many years, I eventually found my dislike for them had really boiled down to two things: a six-inch Python I inherited felt muzzle heavy to me and I hate the S&W style cylinder catch. I could see why revolvers were popular, but I hated every one I had ever owned or tried.
Then again, I had never tried a Ruger. Once I had fired three and four inch GP-100s with their push button cylinder catch, I started putting away my pennies for one or both a GP and an SP. Every conception I had of the revolver as obsolete and next to useless has been laid aside. Wheelguns don't suck. I merely hadn't been using the right one yet. I am also thinking of getting a 4" Python as long as I can find one made before 1983 or so.
Many people confront the primacy of the 1911 in autopistols the same way I approached revolvers during my ignorant phase. The more honest among them have actually tried or owned one and for whatever personal reasons cannot abide by them. These folks can still see why they might be popular with others and content themselves by simply saying the 1911 is not their cup of tea.
Then there are those who automatically view the 1911 as obsolete and think that whatever it is that they own has obviously supplanted it in terms of effectiveness, utility, and modernity. They are loud and mostly uninformed about the pistol. They most likely have never handled one on the range, or those that have were so jaundiced by prejudice that they could never give it a fair shake even when they tried it. These people are mostly self-certain fools and many are active denziens of Glock Talk. A small percentage of them get an embarrassing comeuppance when they actually find they can, like many people, shoot the 1911 better after a short day with it than they can the object of their misplaced devotion they spent years "mastering."
Of course the phenomenon works the other way with a hitch. After the 1911 trigger most other autopistols really do feel like crap.
Perhaps your girlfriend should shoot a 1911? How'd she shoot with one? My wife started with a steel Colt's Officer's Model when she had no preconceptions of what was politically correct for a "girlie" to shoot. She has never looked back. Some people just don't know what's best for them until they are exposed to it.
I am buying my first Ruger revolver in August.
You see, many people purposely avoid the 1911 experience because doing so is going to harm their insular little worldview [this is not really applicable to Sven]. The internet is replete with testimonials of "seeing the light" and going with the 1911 after shooters had futzed with every other platform under the sun. I know what this type of phenomenon is like, having dismissed revolvers without a second thought for many years, I eventually found my dislike for them had really boiled down to two things: a six-inch Python I inherited felt muzzle heavy to me and I hate the S&W style cylinder catch. I could see why revolvers were popular, but I hated every one I had ever owned or tried.
Then again, I had never tried a Ruger. Once I had fired three and four inch GP-100s with their push button cylinder catch, I started putting away my pennies for one or both a GP and an SP. Every conception I had of the revolver as obsolete and next to useless has been laid aside. Wheelguns don't suck. I merely hadn't been using the right one yet. I am also thinking of getting a 4" Python as long as I can find one made before 1983 or so.
Many people confront the primacy of the 1911 in autopistols the same way I approached revolvers during my ignorant phase. The more honest among them have actually tried or owned one and for whatever personal reasons cannot abide by them. These folks can still see why they might be popular with others and content themselves by simply saying the 1911 is not their cup of tea.
Then there are those who automatically view the 1911 as obsolete and think that whatever it is that they own has obviously supplanted it in terms of effectiveness, utility, and modernity. They are loud and mostly uninformed about the pistol. They most likely have never handled one on the range, or those that have were so jaundiced by prejudice that they could never give it a fair shake even when they tried it. These people are mostly self-certain fools and many are active denziens of Glock Talk. A small percentage of them get an embarrassing comeuppance when they actually find they can, like many people, shoot the 1911 better after a short day with it than they can the object of their misplaced devotion they spent years "mastering."
Of course the phenomenon works the other way with a hitch. After the 1911 trigger most other autopistols really do feel like crap.
Perhaps your girlfriend should shoot a 1911? How'd she shoot with one? My wife started with a steel Colt's Officer's Model when she had no preconceptions of what was politically correct for a "girlie" to shoot. She has never looked back. Some people just don't know what's best for them until they are exposed to it.
I am buying my first Ruger revolver in August.
NoVaGator
Member
Got ahead of myself. Need to add that energy, not momentum, is what matters.
Boats,
I never said she was my girlfriend; she's my co-worker. Read more carefully, and please don't upset my actual girlfriend.
And as I also stated, in addition to being able to shoot a gun (which most people can do), I think a person should be able to maintain the gun they own, which includes the ability to disassemble it.
A person who can barely rack the slide (regardless of sex) is going to have a lot of trouble trying to take any semi-automatic pistol apart. This applies to 1911s, Glocks, Sigs, etc.
I wrote what I did as the owner of 5 1911s, one of them being a custom pistol that I spent $1,600 to have built for me from the ground up.
So I have nothing against the 1911. I actually like them a lot; but it doesn't prevent me from seeing the cult-of-personality that surrounds it.
That's how I felt about every BM I hever had to deal with...
And this is based on what? It sounds like another example of cognitive dissonance.
My personal experience is that when letting people try out a variety of guns from my collection, most people shoot the CZ-75 better than anything else.
Sorry for erroneously stating your co-worker was your girlfriend. Also, I wasn't implying that you were closed minded about the 1911, but many people, including a lot of women in my experience, cannot adequately grip a double stacker like your CZ-75, which isn't exactly a gem to field strip either.
The conversion eye-opener has not only happened at shooting matches at my favorite gun club, frequently newbies on 1911forum will tell variations of the tale. I am sure that it happens everywhere else too.
"I used to hate Glocks until my friend went overseas and loaned me his G23. . . ."
"For years I was telling myself the recoil of the .45 wasn't so bad, then I finally tried a BHP, how stupid was I. . .?"
Blah, blah, blah, that is all any of this board stuff is, please don't take it personally.
The conversion eye-opener has not only happened at shooting matches at my favorite gun club, frequently newbies on 1911forum will tell variations of the tale. I am sure that it happens everywhere else too.
"I used to hate Glocks until my friend went overseas and loaned me his G23. . . ."
"For years I was telling myself the recoil of the .45 wasn't so bad, then I finally tried a BHP, how stupid was I. . .?"
Blah, blah, blah, that is all any of this board stuff is, please don't take it personally.
The 1911 is my choice for carry gun. I feel confident in my pistol and in my ability
When I first got interested in handguns the extent of my knowledge was that a revolver looked different than a semiautomatic pistol. So, starting with complete ignorance, I set about to learn about the features, peculiarities and attributes of various types, makes and models of handguns.
Once my study was accomplished, I bought a number of different types of handguns and trained in their use. It took concentration and lots of practice before I became a safe, proficient and accurate shooter of a specific gun.
I appreciate the design of handguns. Some guns are simple and pedestrian. Others are finely and precisely crafted. In time, I came to favor the type 1911 over all others. I believe its appeal to me is both esthetic and mechanical.
The visual impact of the 1911 design is quite stunning to me. I find its lines, curves and overall picture more pleasing than a revolver or say another semiautomatic pistol such as a Beretta, Glock or Walther. Then too, the overall configuration of the 1911 better fits my hand and allows for a more sensitive tactile feel by my fingers then any other type of handgun.
I have read what some have written about the mechanical failures of the 1911. It is my opinion that the failures experienced by those who have complained were caused by either a poorly made pistol, the failure of the gun owner to properly maintain his/her gun or simply the fact that the gun owner was not rightfully trained in the use of his/her handgun.
IMO, the mechanical working together of the 1911’s components is a masterful design characteristic. It is complex yet provides a gun owner with a product that is durable, reliable and accurate.
The 1911 is my choice for carry gun. I feel confident in my pistol and in my ability to use it. I trust that there are many who feel the same as I do.
When I first got interested in handguns the extent of my knowledge was that a revolver looked different than a semiautomatic pistol. So, starting with complete ignorance, I set about to learn about the features, peculiarities and attributes of various types, makes and models of handguns.
Once my study was accomplished, I bought a number of different types of handguns and trained in their use. It took concentration and lots of practice before I became a safe, proficient and accurate shooter of a specific gun.
I appreciate the design of handguns. Some guns are simple and pedestrian. Others are finely and precisely crafted. In time, I came to favor the type 1911 over all others. I believe its appeal to me is both esthetic and mechanical.
The visual impact of the 1911 design is quite stunning to me. I find its lines, curves and overall picture more pleasing than a revolver or say another semiautomatic pistol such as a Beretta, Glock or Walther. Then too, the overall configuration of the 1911 better fits my hand and allows for a more sensitive tactile feel by my fingers then any other type of handgun.
I have read what some have written about the mechanical failures of the 1911. It is my opinion that the failures experienced by those who have complained were caused by either a poorly made pistol, the failure of the gun owner to properly maintain his/her gun or simply the fact that the gun owner was not rightfully trained in the use of his/her handgun.
IMO, the mechanical working together of the 1911’s components is a masterful design characteristic. It is complex yet provides a gun owner with a product that is durable, reliable and accurate.
The 1911 is my choice for carry gun. I feel confident in my pistol and in my ability to use it. I trust that there are many who feel the same as I do.
Last edited:
NoVaGator
Member
Someting to do with vectors.
I'm new to the 1911 and until last year, never imagined that I would want one. Started going for power and magazine capacity. That got me some glocks & Sig in .357 Sig and .40. I discovered that no matter what was said, I always was a bit concerned about errant finger on the trigger. Like my Glocks. I soon realized that high-caps were not the issue, but what I could shoot well was of prime concern. I bought and tried many top guns and ended up preferring the P7's, especially the M10. Then Sven and others made me aware of the Valtro. I decided to try it. I found out that I shot it better and faster than any of my other guns. It just simply points better in my hand. I spent a couple of hours with John Jardine last week. He has a shooting bag full of various manufacturers magazines (15+) and many types of ammunition. He actually takes them up to the hills and shoots all the stuff..with all the magazines. I infer from this that the 1911 can be a problem with some magazines and ammunition. I also would guess that once he finishes shooting, you can pretty much depend on the guns ability to feed from your magazine. Anyway, I now view the 1911 in a new light. This will be an expensive realization.
Every shot fired delivers 100% of the bullet's energy to the shooter. Equal and opposite reaction, right?
Granted, the energy is spread out and not being used to punch a little hole in the shooter, just trying to show that energy is not and never has been the be-all, end-all of wounding potential.
As for me, if we're talking about handguns (of which, ALL common calibers are extremely slow), I'll take big ugly holes over little ones any day.
Mad Man,
While it is certainly true that some 1911 shooters have this mentality, I ask that you look in the past at the originators of the the post concerning the 1911 or the .45 ACP. It is usually someone, who is not an advocate of either.
And I do agree with you. There are many guns out there for many people. I have never stated that the 1911 is the gun for everyone, but rather that it is a wonderful design coupled with a proven caliber that has transended time.
- Status
