eh, im not saying spary and pray is perfered, that just what you got out of it, but it happens, not everyone is trained like others are. others get taken over by adreniline and go into "survival mode" so to speak. also dosent expain why a majority of law enforcement agencies and the military primarily use stuff other than 1911's
1911's, why so expensive?
- Thread starter BCPerry
- Start date
- Status
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
They use other guns than 1911s for a number of reasons, some of which are;
1) Cost -- as I said earlier, the 1911 is an old design, originating in an era when labor was cheaper. Most more modern designs use polymer frames, stamped components, cast frames, or other measures designed to reduce cost. The 1911 requires more machining than most more modern pistols.
2) Trigger -- most police departments and militaries want double action triggers. Militaries (apart from elite units) receive very little training time with the pistol, because it's just not a weapon they use much. Even police officers, whose pistol is usually their primary weapon, don't receive near enough training time on it (in my department, we only have to qualify once per year), and this is usually because of budgetary constraints -- ammo costs money. Because of this, and because police chiefs and city attorney's are terrified of liability, most departments shy away from single action triggers, in favor of a double action, which is regarded as more "idiot proof" and less prone to negligent discharges.
3) Magazine capacity -- this really is mostly a non-issue for civilian shooters, and, as statistics show, actually mostly a non-issue for police as well, but... it has to be said that for a pistol which will be carried openly, there's no reason not to have a double stack magazine (except possibly hand size, for some shooters) if you can.
4) NATO standardization -- this is the main reason the U.S. military changed from the M1911 to the Beretta 92.
And there are more reasons, as well, but these are the main ones. But none of these reasons apply to the elite units to which I have previously referred, who can often select any weapon they want, and who do it based on their mission requirements. And they have found that for them the 1911 works better than anything else. Once again, there is no other pistol that has a better trigger, and better ergonomics, and if you have invested the extra time in building your skills, no pistol that you will be able to fire accurate shots with faster than the 1911. Most people don't have this level of skill, and other pistols will serve their needs as well or better. But the guys that do have it, mostly shoot 1911s
HippieMagic
Member
I am willing to bet it is to avoid over saturation of weapons. If you sell them for really cheap you open the floodgates making it easier for criminals to get than it already is. I could see a problem if guns were $80 a piece...
Well, I think you are right about the labor involved... most of the $1000+ 1911s I've looked at involve at least some hand fitting or other manual labor... the really expensive ones ($2000+) are pretty much hand built...
I'd love to have a Nighthawk Custom in 10mm (hey, if it's custom I should get what I want, right?!) but I can't see myself ever paying those prices for one... It would make an amazing gift, though!
fatfreddiescat
Member
they fit my hand like no other weapon. First time I picked up my EMP, I thought, "hmmmmmm. Just like home!"
My you anger easily for a cop, hope I am never in Kennebunkport or Saskatchewan or where ever your a constable at. And why do you ass/u/me that I or any other are civilians, could it be short cops syndrome. That would explain the need for a 1911 .45 I guess.
By the way, I was having a good time with this thread till you went off like that. There is a difference between banter and rudeness. Don't be offended Brassy.
A gun is a tool and there are many different tools for the job but a $500.00 Glock is ten times the duty weapon than any $500.00 dollar 1911.
PS. As far as your last statement in your last post I seem to remember when E. Langdon took all those 1911 guys to the wood shed using a P-220. Now he did practice, a lot; A ridiculous amount to achieve that but that would mean, with enough time and practice any quality gun is as good as the next, if you do your part.
By the way, I was having a good time with this thread till you went off like that. There is a difference between banter and rudeness. Don't be offended Brassy.
A gun is a tool and there are many different tools for the job but a $500.00 Glock is ten times the duty weapon than any $500.00 dollar 1911.
PS. As far as your last statement in your last post I seem to remember when E. Langdon took all those 1911 guys to the wood shed using a P-220. Now he did practice, a lot; A ridiculous amount to achieve that but that would mean, with enough time and practice any quality gun is as good as the next, if you do your part.
Last edited:
KBintheSLC
Member
My revolver was machined, and it only cost me $450 brand new.
Ill give you that. I love revolvers and have several and have shot competitively with them with positive results. I also carry one, a lot. However, I shoot some of my Glocks with little regard to cleanliness or lubrication and have never been let down. I did have one (my son's, who never cleans his guns) start to malfunction after a while, a couple of thousand rounds of Wolf. Cleaned it, greased it and he shot it IDPA match last week end with out a hitch.
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
If you think this is angry, think again. It's just exasperation and low regard -- a reaction you can expect when you display juvenile behavior.
Still making insulting insinuations instead of discussing the topic I see. Keep it up; you're revealing a whole lot more that is negative about your character than mine.
"Went off"? How. Enlighten me.
In your opinion. Some people don't like Glocks. I would prefer a 1911 for duty, because I can shoot it better, and I like a gun with a manual safety, and I don't mind paying a couple of hundred dollars more.
Who cares what E. Langdon did? Jerry Miculek will take a revolver and shoot rings around 99.9% of the shooters out there too. So what? I don't care what some lone prodigy can do, and it's not a reliable guide to what the best pistol is. The shooter is always the more crucial part of the equation, and a highly skilled shooter with a mediocre gun will outshoot a mediocre shooter with highly tuned gun every time. But highly skilled shooters have the experience and knowledge to make informed choices about what guns meet their particular needs the best, and do so because they are looking for every advantage they can get, and the fact remains, that the 1911 is still chosen by a disproportionate number of such men. You think it's obsolete. We get it. Others, including some very highly skilled and experienced shooters disagree.
He said: If you think this is angry, think again. It's just exasperation and low regard -- a reaction you can expect when you display juvenile behavior.
Then I said: Sorry Officer.
Then he said: Still making insulting insinuations instead of discussing the topic I see. Keep it up; you're revealing a whole lot more that is negative about your character than mine.
So I said: Sorry Officer.
Then he said: "Went off"? How. Enlighten me.
So I said: For the most part I'm having fun while still speaking the truth. Just because the 1911 needs several hundred dollars more than other guns to be an acceptable combat weapon (fact) does not mean you need to go on a rampage.
He said: In your opinion. Some people don't like Glocks. I would prefer a 1911 for duty, because I can shoot it better, and I like a gun with a manual safety, and I don't mind paying a couple of hundred dollars more.
I said: XD's, S&W. Others have external safety's, I just choose Glocks.
Hey your agency lets you carry 1911's?
So then he said: Who cares what E. Langdon did? Jerry Miculek will take a revolver and shoot rings around 99.9% of the shooters out there too. So what? I don't care what some lone prodigy can do, and it's not a reliable guide to what the best pistol is. The shooter is always the more crucial part of the equation, and a highly skilled shooter with a mediocre gun will outshoot a mediocre shooter with highly tuned gun every time. But highly skilled shooters have the experience and knowledge to make informed choices about what guns meet their particular needs the best, and do so because they are looking for every advantage they can get, and the fact remains, that the 1911 is still chosen by a disproportionate number of such men. You think it's obsolete. We get it. Others, including some very highly skilled and experienced shooters disagree.
Then I replied: While Jerry is a prodigy Langdon is a cop, like you, who just wanted to see if it could be done, and It can.
So the superiority of the 1911 is in your opinion and like opinions......................
Then I said: Sorry Officer.
Then he said: Still making insulting insinuations instead of discussing the topic I see. Keep it up; you're revealing a whole lot more that is negative about your character than mine.
So I said: Sorry Officer.
Then he said: "Went off"? How. Enlighten me.
So I said: For the most part I'm having fun while still speaking the truth. Just because the 1911 needs several hundred dollars more than other guns to be an acceptable combat weapon (fact) does not mean you need to go on a rampage.
He said: In your opinion. Some people don't like Glocks. I would prefer a 1911 for duty, because I can shoot it better, and I like a gun with a manual safety, and I don't mind paying a couple of hundred dollars more.
I said: XD's, S&W. Others have external safety's, I just choose Glocks.
Hey your agency lets you carry 1911's?
So then he said: Who cares what E. Langdon did? Jerry Miculek will take a revolver and shoot rings around 99.9% of the shooters out there too. So what? I don't care what some lone prodigy can do, and it's not a reliable guide to what the best pistol is. The shooter is always the more crucial part of the equation, and a highly skilled shooter with a mediocre gun will outshoot a mediocre shooter with highly tuned gun every time. But highly skilled shooters have the experience and knowledge to make informed choices about what guns meet their particular needs the best, and do so because they are looking for every advantage they can get, and the fact remains, that the 1911 is still chosen by a disproportionate number of such men. You think it's obsolete. We get it. Others, including some very highly skilled and experienced shooters disagree.
Then I replied: While Jerry is a prodigy Langdon is a cop, like you, who just wanted to see if it could be done, and It can.
So the superiority of the 1911 is in your opinion and like opinions......................
Last edited:
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
There's nothing like spin is there? I can't see anything in your posts that looks remotely like an apology.
Two points:
1) You are hypersensitive if you think that was a "rampage." Let's not engage in unreasonable exaggeration, shall we?
2) when you can buy a very reliable, and quite accurate 1911 from reputable manufacturers like Kimber, Springfield Armory, Para Ordnance, et al, in the $600-$700 range, it is not a fact that the "1911 needs several hundred dollars more than other guns to be an acceptable combat weapon," it is merely something you have asserted (like your assertion that they have created a cure for the common cold), and is also demonstrably false.
The fact that he's a cop doesn't mean he's not also a prodigy. Some LEOs develop phenomenal levels of skill, far, far above 99% of other LEOs. The late Bill Jordan, for example, was a border patrolman, but that didn't mean that all border patrolmen could do the things he did, like draw and accurately fire an S&W Model 19 from a normal law enforcement duty holster in .28 seconds.
Sorry, it's not my opinion that a disproportionate level of top shooters select the 1911 in preference to other pistols. That is a fact.
And I also never asserted the 1911 was superior, period. I explicitly stated in my first post that the idea of a one, "best" pistol is a false concept, and different guns serve different needs better than others. And more than that. Look back at my posts; I have, not just once but twice, stated that for most shooters other handguns will work as well if not better than the 1911. But the 1911 is a design that still meets a certain requirement better than any other available pistol. You're the one arguing for absolutes, not I.
How can you even argue against my point when you clearly don't even understand what my point is?
eatont9999
Member
I like a hair-pin trigger for accuracy. A finger should not be on the trigger unless one is sure of the target and the trajectory of the bullet. If one cannot handle that basic rule, said person should not be in possession of a firearm. I prefer the short travel of a SA trigger over the long squeeze of a DA.
First of all, there was no attempt at an apology.
Second of all, I gave a possible answer to the original question of "why so expensive". It was you who jumped down my throat. All I did was use some analogies and then state a very pliable reason for why the high cost.
However, I seemed to have hurt your feelings on the 1911. If that's the case, grow up, its just a gun.
So if your willing to back down the force matrix I will also.
PS. Most LEO's are not so quick to say so.
Do we work the same shift?
Second of all, I gave a possible answer to the original question of "why so expensive". It was you who jumped down my throat. All I did was use some analogies and then state a very pliable reason for why the high cost.
However, I seemed to have hurt your feelings on the 1911. If that's the case, grow up, its just a gun.
So if your willing to back down the force matrix I will also.
PS. Most LEO's are not so quick to say so.
Do we work the same shift?
Last edited:
Gosh, would you two mind finding your way back to the topic or continue your private [begin air quotes] discussion [end air quotes], um, privately? Let's stay on point here...
... and no, nobody died and made me boss - I just like a little more signal with my noise... PMs are the perfect mechanism for disputes.
*ducks*
... and no, nobody died and made me boss - I just like a little more signal with my noise... PMs are the perfect mechanism for disputes.
*ducks*
Well, hug your brother and let's get on with it
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
I am not hugging another man. A handshake will have to suffice.Well, hug your brother and let's get on with it
mljdeckard
Member
A few years ago, I paid $620 for my Kimber Custom II, NIB, and I think it's the best money I ever spent on a gun.
I think a better conundrum is what it in a Glock that makes it worth more than $100?
I think a better conundrum is what it in a Glock that makes it worth more than $100?
If you had said "Hi-point" or "Jericho" instead of Glock I might have agreed, but seriously... $100 for a Glock?! You can barely get a decent airsoft or paintball gun for that...
Glocks are reliable and very simple to work on... They epitomize what I view as a modern combat pistol. They are more affordable than the pistols usually issued, require less in the way of maintenance, have fewer moving parts, are lightweight and are generally consistent across the model spectrum. The polymer frame and general design of the pistol also does a lot to reduce felt recoil.
I've gone hands on with several inexpensive pistols and they were toys, not tools... certainly not anything I'd trust my life to. A Glock may not be as sexy as a nice 1911 in your eyes, but they are dependable. You should at least give them credit for that...
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
I have to agree with s0nspark; the Glock's a damn good weapon. As I said, I'd prefer a gun with a manual safety, especially for law enforcement, and I'd rather have the 1911's grip angle, but I can't fault the Glock for reliability. My department switched over from that god-awful jamomatic (the S&W 5946TSW, ugh!), and after that horrible thing, the Glock was a dream come true.
And from a police armorer's standpoint, it's hard to argue with the Glock for an issue weapon. It's a very simple design which very seldom goes wrong, and that's absurdly easy to work on whenever it does. It's only real fault (more evident in the .40 version) is that the unsupported chamber makes the gun more prone to kabooms, and even that's not really an issue with factory ammo.
But I still like the 1911 better.
And from a police armorer's standpoint, it's hard to argue with the Glock for an issue weapon. It's a very simple design which very seldom goes wrong, and that's absurdly easy to work on whenever it does. It's only real fault (more evident in the .40 version) is that the unsupported chamber makes the gun more prone to kabooms, and even that's not really an issue with factory ammo.
But I still like the 1911 better.
mljdeckard
Member
Never said otherwise. I carried one for years. I still send people to them. Doesn't mean there is more than $100 worth of material and labor in one.
Well, I can't really argue THAT point... but then again that is more a function of the demand for their products and what people willingly pay for a good product.
Thank goodness for the GSSF pistol discount, in any case!
The 1911 certainly has a legacy - more history and emotion are tied to it... I tend to see them more as beautiful collectibles. I just can't see taking one I cherished out into the mud and what not...
I mean, I can always get another Glock just like the one I have. With a 1911 it might not be as easy... especially given the price tag on a really nice one.
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
Well, I haven't ever taken any gun I've owned into the mud and what not. I try to keep them out of the way of such things. If I had to crawl through the mud with one, it would only be in a dire emergency, and then worries over replacing it afterward would be rather far from my mind.
- Status
