The 1911, Ammo...and the wisdom of our fathers

[horge]

Feanaro,
Thanks.

 

[dsk]

I'm also pretty well convinced that if a 1911 won't feed any reasonable bullet profile...ball or hollowpoint...you should get it tweaked until it will. If the gun won't feed and function with Golden Sabers or Winchester Rangers or their "civilian" 230 HP, it'll eventually fail to feed ball reliably...and Murphy dictates that the failure will probably come when you least expect it.

I'm in complete agreement. If a pistol won't feed modern JHP's using a rounded bullet ogive with 100% reliability, then it WILL choke on a ball round eventually. You just never know when!

 

[orangeninja]

Well, even though this is a good discussion it may not apply to me any longer, my 1911 champion is going back to the factory because of terrible galling.....after 100 rounds it gave itself a pretty good internal shave.:banghead:

 

[flash5]

1911

there are two things i trust my honda, and my 45 with ball as long as it rattles it works 101 abn nam it took three rds with a 16, ONE with a trusty rusty 45

 

[johnmcl]

My Thoughts

Hi all,

I'm sorry for weighin in late, but the holidays got priority. The orginial questions still have my attention:

1.) Was ball ammo really that effective in a 1911, and would it still be a viable self defense round today? Yes, I think in the trenches of WWI were tremendously effective. The side arms were used when the Germans were on the wire or in the trench as a matter of last resort. At 10 feet, in the mud, a 1911 using hardball is a darn good choice. As I remember, Sgt. York was on his face in the mud before his 1911 was unholstered.

2.) Is this just more of that "well in my day" type of BS because people don't like change? One of the truisms of people is that they don't fear change, they fear the unknown. When you have something that works, one's loathe to change. I think that's part of the process here.

3.) The GI model that he carried has the little bitty sights, like mine, but he's an advocate of point shooting, like I am, but wouldn't it be smarter to carry a gun that has sights you can see clearly, or is that just more "new fangled clap trap" designed more to make money than make sense? I think it makes perfect sense to use robust sights that you can see. A shot using sights just is logically more sound than an instinctive shot.

4.) Would the gun/ammo package of our fathers serve us as well today as it did them. In the mud at 10 feet in the trenches, the answer is definitely yes. In a civilian self defense scenario, I'd certainly want to take advantage of what's been learned in the last hundred years of weapons technology. That means useable sights, improvements in manufacturing, and improvements in ammunition design. Isn't the alternative some version of, "well we've always done it that way..."?

John

 

[1911Tuner]

Point/Counterpoint

Howdy John, and welcome to the fray.

Good points and valid as can be. I don't think the question was a matter of
"Is hardball in an issue gun better...or even as good as...high-end pressured hollowpoints ad target-grade sights." It seemed to be more a question of:
"Will hardball and issue sights suffice?" "Am I well-armed with such a setup?"

The answer is, of course..."Why, yes! For a huge percentage of the shooting situations that a citizen, or even a LEO is likely to face, it'll do just fine.
It works just as well today at 10 feet on a dark street or alleyway as it did in the muddy trenches in 1918. Or...as Colonel Cooper once noted:
"Across a tabletop, one doesn't need to be a virtuoso." With a handgun of any caliber, it really ain't WHAT you hit'em with so much as WHERE you hit'em.

As for me, I'm not concerned with what ammo I carry as I am with havin' a gun and enough ammo so that...if it's my day to die, it ain't gonna be for lack of shootin' back.

The last point to consider is that...in also a large percentage of lethal encounters...assuming that you have enough light to see the sights...if you use up more time than it takes for just a flash sight picture, and concentrate on alinging the sights for a perfect X...those sights could well be the last thing that you ever see. Ditto for the orthodox stance...whichever you prefer...and the perfect 2-handed grip. In many encounters, you're pretty likely to be fending off a knife or baseball bat with one hand while you backpedal...while reaching for the gun with the other, and probably firing from the hip. These points will make more sense to those who have been there and done that.

 

[DHart]

"Across a tabletop, one doesn't need to be a virtuoso." With a handgun of any caliber, it really ain't WHAT you hit'em with so much as WHERE you hit'em. The last point to consider is that...in also a large percentage of lethal encounters...assuming that you have enough light to see the sights...if you use up more time than it takes for just a flash sight picture, and concentrate on alinging the sights for a perfect X...those sights could well be the last thing that you ever see. Ditto for the orthodox stance...whichever you prefer...and the perfect 2-handed grip. In many encounters, you're pretty likely to be fending off a knife or baseball bat with one hand while you backpedal...while reaching for the gun with the other, and probably firing from the hip. These points will make more sense to those who have been there and done that.

Totally agree... with adrenalin pumping, scurrying to stay alive, and trying to get the gun into action, careful alignment of sights is almost laughable. Civilian defense is a lot different than law enforcement offense/defense. As civilians, we're most likely to be firing at very close ranges under sudden duress, not carefully squeezing off micro-precision shots at longer distances... that would most likely be charged as murder. This is why the emphasis on 1" precision at 25 or 50 yards on a defense gun is absurd. For the bullseye pistolero who punches paper and is such a fine shooter that he NEEDS 1" precision at 25 yards, I can understand that. But for the guy who wants a reliable defense gun, I would suggest avoiding those 1" 1911's and go for a 1911 oriented for defense not paper punching.

 

[sm]

In many encounters, you're pretty likely to be fending off a knife or baseball bat with one hand while you backpedal...while reaching for the gun with the other, and probably firing from the hip. These points will make more sense to those who have been there and done that.

Or be too busy getting the muzzle out of your face when you unlocked the front door. BTDT I did not go for MY CCW instead too busy dropping my package to distract / free hand and get HIS muzzle elsewhere. Then...I concerned myself about the second BG and the whole mess. Last thing on my mind was doing a quick draw to a perfect stance and such.

I could not go back for distance, I could not go left or right...Any action was better than none - so I went forward hard and fast.

As the man said - after an encounter, the make and model of gun used and the ammo loaded is not so important, the important part is the fact you survived.

Rule of 3's. Well sounds about right. Less than 3 feet, only 1 shot, and even though seemed like an eternity, less than 3 seconds.

<shiver>

 

[roo_ster]

alduro:

Before I settled on Rem 230gr Golden Sabre as my carry load, I was content with hardball in my SW1911. Matter of fact, hardball is what my AMT DAO Backup always is stoked with.

I think of .45ACP hardball as "pre-expanded 9mm hollow point" and don't sweat it. If you can find a .45ACP hollow point that is reliable, so much the better.

The GS is about as smooth-feeding as any hardball I have used in my SW1911. Gold dots hung up once in a while. GS was 100% reliable in MY tests with MY gun.

I am impressed with my SW1911. If I ever want a lighter 1911 for carry, the scandium framed commander-sized version will be my choice.

 

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

So far, SWMBO has only run 230gr ball and 185gr Cor-Bons through her Micro. Both worked fine.

I'm going to pick her up some 230gr. Golden Sabres to play with this week, I think. I know if they don't work for her I can always use them in my P220. I think it'll chamber a spittoon.

I bet GS will work just fine for you. Sorry to hear about your galling problem. So far the Micro has been fine, as long as she'll quit limp-wristing the dang thing.

Regards,
Rabbit.

 

[texagun]

Unless they have recently changed, several of the better known "experts" carry 230 grain ball ammo in their carry guns....Jeff Cooper, Clint Smith, and Chuck Taylor have all expressed their preference for ball ammo, making the point that reliability and shot-placement are much more important than ammo selection.

 

[middy]

As far as those tiny sights, put a lick of flourescent orange paint on the front sight to help you get a quick acquisition of a snap sight picture. I actually prefer them (with the paint) for both fast-and-sloppy and slow-and-precise aim to all other open sights on a handgun (but then, I have 20/20 vision...)

 

[riverdog]

One advantage 230 gr JHP ammo has is that even if it doesn't expand, it still has a meplate defined by the circular edge of the hollowpoint cavity. That should cause more damage than the rounded from end of typical ball/FMJ ammo, even if the bullet fails to expand.

 

[1911Tuner]

Me-Who?

One advantage 230 gr JHP ammo has is that even if it doesn't expand, it still has a meplate defined by the circular edge of the hollowpoint cavity. That should cause more damage than the rounded from end of typical ball/FMJ ammo, even if the bullet fails to expand.

Yep.

 

[ryoushi]

Lately I've taken to shooting 185 grain bullets, they're cheaper, don't kick as much and my SA Milpec loves those 185 grain Silvertips. I used to shoot Winchester white box 230 grain ball and kept 230gr. hydra-shocs for defense untill I noticed they weren't expanding at all. A .45 caliber 185 gr. bullet at 1000 fps. easily makes major.

The only problem is they are harder to find than 230 grain stuff.

 

[Jammer Six]

So far the Micro has been fine, as long as she'll quit limp-wristing the dang thing.

Everyone has a limp wrist in the seconds after they've been shot.

A weapon that won't function with a "limp wrist" is a weapon that might not function when you need it most. It's an argument against tiny weapons. It's one of the big things (besides reliability) that tiny 1911s compromise.

Better to have that big, heavy, inconvenient chunk of steel that soaks up recoil and functions when you hold it with two fingers, in the one hand that is still working.

 

[1911Tuner]

Limpy Wristy

Everyone has a limp wrist in the seconds after they've been shot.

A weapon that won't function with a "limp wrist" is a weapon that might not function when you need it most. It's an argument against tiny weapons. It's one of the big things (besides reliability) that tiny 1911s compromise.

Better to have that big, heavy, inconvenient chunk of steel that soaks up recoil and functions when you hold it with two fingers, in the one hand that is still working.

Bravo! Bravo!