Can Someone Explain Why 1911s Are So Concealable?

[Lonestar49]

Not much at all..

...

True, only about an 1/8" difference favoring the 1911..


Ls

 

[easyg]

I guess it depends on who's doing the measuring....

According to Sig's site, their 1911 pistols are 1.37" in width.
http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogProductDetails.aspx?categoryid=25&productid=99

I can't find the width specs of the XD, but the Glock G21 (which feels fat in my grip) is actually only 1.27" in width, per Glock's site.
And the G36 is even smaller in width....1.13".

 

[Billy Shears]

According to Sig's site, the stainless Revolution series 1911 is 1.37" in width.
http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/Sho...5&productid=99

I can't find the width specs of the XD, but the Glock G21 is actually only 1.27" in width, per Glock's site.
And the G36 is even smaller in width....1.13".

Bear a couple of things in mind. First, the width of the 1911 grip is increased by the grip panels, which are usually close to a quarter inch thick at their thickest point. You can get thinner, flatter ones that will decrease this. Second, the grip panels have an arched contour, so that thickest point is a very narrow part of the exact center of the grip. The panels arch downward toward the front and back of the grip frame to make a convex surface. The grips of the XD and Glock, however, have to house fat double column magazines, so the sides of the grip are not convex, but flat, and that thickest part of the grip extends almost all the way out to the front and rear edges of the grip. As a result, you may find that while the 1911 with standard grip panels may be thicker in absolute width, it's smaller in overall circumference.

 

[easyg]

As a result, you may find that while the 1911 with standard grip panels may be thicker in absolute width, it's smaller in overall circumference.

I understand what you're saying, but when it comes to concealment, it's really about the thickness and not the circumference.

Don't get me wrong....I think the 1911 feels like heaven in my grip.....but it just doesn't conceal any better than most similar sized pistols from my experience.

 

[Billy Shears]

I understand what you're saying, but when it comes to concealment, it's really about the thickness and not the circumference.

I haven't found this to be the case. The blockier grips of the Glock or XD have as much or more tendency to print through a concealing garment, and the thicker, blockier slides definitely tend to be less amenable to concealment, especially inside the waistband. I have concealed a full-size 5" bbl Les Baer Premeir II Super Tac under a t-shirt in a Milt Sparks versa max IWB holster, which is something I haven't been able to do with a Glock, and certainly not with the XD, which has an even bulkier slide.

 

[briansp82593]

 

[jmr40]

I own both 1911's and a glock 21. The measurements listed are for the thickness at the grips. Depending on the grips on your 1911 they are about the same thickness but the 1911 is more concealable because the slide is considerably thinner. This allows the gun to be held closer to the body, thus bringing the grips closer as well.

 

[easyg]

Depending on the grips on your 1911 they are about the same thickness but the 1911 is more concealable because the slide is considerably thinner.

How much thinner?
Can you give us a measurement?

 

[jmr40]

Not really a precision measuring tool, but according to my ruler my 1911's are 7/8" wide. A Glock 17 was 1" and my Glock 20 and 21 came in at 1 1/8". That is 1/4" thinner.

Also, because the top of the slide on a 1911 is rounded instead of square this also helps in concealment.

 

[Polish_Pounder]

I just took a set of calipers to my 5" Sig GSR earlier this week, and the slide is under .92" (~0.917). Sig 1911s are no different from any others, as all of my holsters have been for Colts, not special made. The slide looks a little less rounded, but fits standard government holsters perfectly. BTW, with my Wilson slim grips the grips are only 1.1" across at the widest part. A 1911 is much thinner than a Glock. 1.37" is the measurement across the controls, which is just a small protrusion.

I am 6'1" 165 lbs and I carry with an HBE Com3 IWB or a Fobus Paddle. I am at work on lunch right now, and I am carrying the GSR under a T-shirt in the IWB. It isn't even baggy, just my normal size. I used to carry a S&W 4013TSW, which was much harder to conceal due to its width, though a good deal lighter. I was a little bothered by the weight at first, but after a week or 2 of carrying 10+ hours a day, you actually start to feel self-conscious without the gun on. If you would like me to post more dimensions let me know.

-Polish

 

[FranklyTodd]

My earlier post got lost in a flurry of comments on the picture posted right after... (or maybe nobody cared - I can accept that ) However, let me quote my earlier post to try one more time:

I'm a j-frame pocket-carrier usually ... but want[] a full-size ....

I've decided (tentatively) that the S&W M&P45 is for me. Thin with great ergonomics like a 1911, optional external safety in the same place as a 1911, reliable as heck, and very light compared to a 1911.

Any takers or bashers of my conclusion?

Seems to me many agree the 1911 is great to carry, but heavy (and some non-1911 lovers would say they aren't as reliable without spending major $$$). M&P45, anyone? Beuhler?

 

[MCgunner]

Quote:
1911s are very concealable because of their thinness but they are also very difficult to carry because of their weight.





I've never understood this complaint. Truly I haven't. For the past eight years I've been a cop, and my department actually requires its personnel to carry off duty at all times. These days I carry a .40 S&W FN Hi-Power with the SFS trigger, because my department refuses to authorize any single action auto, and FN technically considers the SFS a double action (even though it's not), so I got it approved. I'd carry a 1911 if they'd allow it, and I used to do just that when I had a concealed weapons permit before I joined the department.

Both of these guns are steel frame guns, and the weight is not the slightest bit of a bother at all. They're both flat and concealable, and carry very comfortably with the right holster and belt.

Seriously, how heavy is 3-4 pounds total of weapon and ammo? How can that possibly be fatiguing? If it's the weight of the pistol and ammo pulling down your pants, then you almost certainly don't have a proper belt and holster. With the right belt and holster, you'll get minimal sag.

Well, I could also lose some gut, too, but I enjoy food too much.

I just see no need to walk around with a friggin' cannon. I'm not a cop and I'm not obligated to get into any gunfghts I can avoid. My handgun is purely defensive and my 9mm Kel Tec is a reliable, accurate weapon that I shoot very well and that I put in my pocket and disappears and I forget it's even there until I might need it. Walking around with my .45 in my Sparks Summer Special just seems stupid to me. The P90 isn't as flat as a 1911, but only weighs 33 ounces. It's easy on the hip, but just seems like overkill for civilian self defense. If I knew that I might be forced to get into a gunfight to stop a crime rather than draw, get behind cover, and call 911 so they'll send YOU to come get in the gun fight, well, I'd probably carry my 12 gauge. But, purely for self defense, the little subcompact 9s and snubby .38s like the Smith 642 are plenty of gun IMHO, at least if you're good enough with them to make them effective. That takes practice, but if you don't practice, you ain't gonna be much with a 1911, either.

I've noticed that most CCW types start out carrying 1911s and 686s and HK USPs and such and after a few years, they wind up with a P3AT in their pockets. ROFL! Such is the reality of life, when you think about it. But, I came at this CCW thing from another angle. I'm a reformed criminal. Yeah, I used to carry when carry was illegal. I never considered a big gun, cause I didn't wanna have to fight a class A misdemeanor. With the CCW laws in the 90s, we got a whole bunch of FANTASTIC carry/PDWs we never had a choice of before. I used to tote a .25 auto that was nearly as big as a P3AT! Thank GOD for CCW laws and the guns they helped create!

Hey, but if I ever have to call ya, I'll back ya up.

 

[rjohnson4405]

MDeViney - you could sag your pants enough so that when you draw your belt catches the lower side of your hips on the way up and don't go any higher

 

[Billy Shears]

But, purely for self defense, the little subcompact 9s and snubby .38s like the Smith 642 are plenty of gun IMHO, at least if you're good enough with them to make them effective. That takes practice, but if you don't practice, you ain't gonna be much with a 1911, either.

I've noticed that most CCW types start out carrying 1911s and 686s and HK USPs and such and after a few years, they wind up with a P3AT in their pockets. ROFL! Such is the reality of life, when you think about it.

I have a P3AT, but I've only carried on those few occasions when deep concealment was the primary consideration. The rest of the time, it's either my Hi-Power, or in warm weather when minimal clothing is worn, a Kahr TP40 (and you'll note I chose the all steel gun over the polymer framed PM40, which is the same size -- all steel gun is just a tiny bit easier to shoot, and as I said, the weight's not a factor for me; it's only a few extra ounces).

I've never looked at it as having a gun that's "good enough", I want the most gun I can have. Sure, for those up close and personal encounters, which is what most gunfights are, the compact will probably do the job 9 times out of 10, but what if you are unlucky enough to be that 10th out of 10? The way I look at it, if you ever need to use a gun in self defense, you'll need it like you have never needed anything in your entire life before. I don't mind a measly few ounces more of weight in order to have a gun with more rounds in the magazine, a larger grip for better control, more stopping power, and better practical accuracy if it's needed. So I always carry the largest, most powerful gun my clothing enables me to carry. In fall, winter, and part of spring (and even sometimes in summer) that allows me a full size pistol. With the right belt, holster, and clothes, this is not at all difficult. For hot weather and light summer clothes, I have the compact Kahr. For those rare occasions when something really tiny is all you can get by with, well... a puny .380 is better than no gun at all, so I have the Kel-Tec.

 

[MCgunner]

I've never looked at it as having a gun that's "good enough", I want the most gun I can have.

Well, that can be sorta tough. Everyone has their own idea of how much is the most they're willing to put up with. This would be pretty close to adequate for some, I reckon. Try hiding and getting comfortable with it, though.

BTW, this is south Texas where it's 80 degrees in winter and 110 in summer. I don't wear a coat in winter unless I'm riding my motorcycle at night.

I know I'm not a lot slower shooting IDPA with my KT than a bigger gun. I shot slow expert normally and managed high sharpshooter finishes with the KT the couple of times I tried it. The short sight radius slows sight acquisition, though. That's just the compromise to carrying something 24/7 in South Texas, way I look at it. If I could wear a desert eagle, I don't know that I would, though, even in Fairbanks in February. Well, maybe for the bears up there when I wanted to go out. Of course, I probably wouldn't go out in February and I reckon all the bears are hibernating.