What if I'm not a 1911 kinda guy?

[toocool]

Will I be banished forever to the outer reaches of Canada?

Here's the thing. I recently decided I needed to have a 1911-style pistol, so I got a Springfield Armory Loaded .45 with Parkerized finish. When I took it to the range I didn't like how it shot (about 2" low at 10 yards) and the thing was heavy as all get out (after years of polymer pistols.) I've also never been very fond of a 5" barrel length (always felt the Commander length balanced better.) So, I traded the Loaded to a buddy for a M&P .45 (used to be mine, sold it to him, now have it back.) and I went with a Springfield LW Champion Operator in .45. I MUCH prefer the feel of the Champion, even though it has the accessory rail that I absolutely DESPISE. I don't have a need for the rail, and I don't care for how it makes the gun look. If I could have found a Champion near me without the rail, I'd have picked it up.

Where this all leads is, I'm not sure if I'm that fond of the 1911 platform. I like the size and balance of the Champion, and although I haven't shot it yet, it seems to have a better trigger than the full size loaded. I am a big fan of the Smith & Wesson M&P series, of which I now have a 9, .40 and .45, all full size. I also like the S&W so called third generation pistols, especially the DAO versions, specifically the 5946.

I'm sure I sound confused to you by now, and I guess I am. I don't know what it is about 1911's that just doesn't do it for me. I have a friend who got a SA Loaded stainless a couple of years ago and she let me shoot it...it was dead on accurate, and at 10 yards I put a full magazine into one ragged hole, so I know I can shoot the thing OK. Maybe it's because I can't find one I like that I can afford. I think my ideal would be a 4", standard barrel (GI guide rod and bushing vs ramped bull barrel), night sights, checkered front strap, non-ambi safety, and NO RAIL, all at a price that I can afford. Does such an animal exist? I suppose I can have my Champion's grip checkered, but that still leaves me with the rail.

Anyway, enough ranting...just wanted to vent a little and see if anyone else has ever felt as I do about the 1911?

 

[jdc1244]

No, there’s noting wrong with not liking the 1911 platform, just as there’s nothing wrong with me not liking polymer pistols.

 

[Jimmie]

You're not alone. Close, but not entirely. There are a few out there with mutant tastes in handguns.

 

[RogersPrecision]

One of the Best in the world, suggests that a Glock 17 is the Ultimate Handgun.
No one EVER said anyone has to like the 1911.

 

[socaldan]

I agree...I like the Smith M&P and glock 19 &22...but not the Springfield XD.
I like Smith automatics(all steel!) but not High Powers.
I like Springfield 1911 and Kimber 1911...but not Colts.

STRANGE...HUH?

 

[Big Boomer]

Well it's sorta like the Opera you either love it or hate it!

But if it's not the feel but just the accuracy thing, 1 you should try different ammo and 2 if its truly is you and not the gun then find something else. But, you did say you shot another 1911 and had great results.

My Springfield TRP shoots low with 230 plinkers but dead ass on with hopped up +P anything and best results are with 185gr for some weird reason. This is not the case with my other 1911's.

I have no idea of why that is though. Perhaps someone else can chime in. I know certain guns are set up for certain bullet weights for best accuracy. As far as the barrel length its about what feels best to you.

I won't by one shorter than a 5" mainly because of the ballistics. The slow fat 45 needs all the barrel it can get to move that big ole hunk of lead to decent speeds. Yes, a 4" will still poke a hole in you, but to be honest I also like working with the lighter springs.

Have you considered talking to Springfield about this issue? If others have shot it and it works just fine then you have your answer. If you lock it down and a vise (gun one) and shoot it to see how it truly groups?

Let us know what happens

 

[CWL]

Sounds like you like the M1911 design, you just haven't found the right one for yourself yet.

Perhaps a bit of skateboard tape can fix-up your SA.

I like the Dan Wesson Commander Bobtail, but at ~$900, you may or may not like the price -even though it fits what you want and then some.

 

[Eightball]

Sounds like you like the M1911 design, you just haven't found the right one for yourself yet.

This here is my bet. I like 5" models, you like 4", we both don't like the rail, etc.

Mix and match to your likings.

 

[Confederate]

Don't feel guilty for not liking the old 1911 guns. They were great in their day, but they don't compare with today's modern pistols, at least without them costing you upwards of a grand.

In the military trials, the Beretta 92 malfunctioned on an average of about once every 2,000 rounds, which was incredible. The Smith 459 came in second with a malfunction rate of one in every 950 rounds, if memory serves. That also was incredible. All the other guns, including the venerable 1911, fell flat on their faces.

Now a 1911 can be made to be as reliable as today's top designs, but I wonder how such an old design can command the extra $$$ today that greatly exceeds the cost of a better designed gun.

If you were to buy a Beretta 92 and an expensive Kimber 1911, clean both of them, and shot them side-by-side...and if you were to be given 1,000 rounds for each pistol and just two people to shoot them, I think the Kimber would fail first every time.

If I had to depend on any given 1911 design, I'd probably go with the Smith & Wessons. I don't think they'd match the Beretta or the Glocks necessarily, but Smith has gotten quite good at making automatics. Colt only got good at raising its prices.

So don't feel bad. When they start selling 1911s for $300, I might get one for historic reasons.

BTW, as a young Army officer, Douglas MacArthur and his driver were ambushed by three terrorists in the Philippines. Using only his issue 1911, he managed to kill all three. His driver was so impressed with this that he told MacArthur that the rest of his live was sure to be "gravy."

 

[outerlimit]

Now a 1911 can be made to be as reliable as today's top designs, but I wonder how such an old design can command the extra $$$ today that greatly exceeds the cost of a better designed gun.

Old does not mean bad. The 1911 has had many improvements over the years!

"Better designed" is quite a stretch. Please elaborate!

 

[MTMilitiaman]

Don't like 1911s? Eh, nobody's perfect...

Don't feel guilty for not liking the old 1911 guns. They were great in their day, but they don't compare with today's modern pistols, at least without them costing you upwards of a grand.

In the military trials, the Beretta 92 malfunctioned on an average of about once every 2,000 rounds, which was incredible. The Smith 459 came in second with a malfunction rate of one in every 950 rounds, if memory serves. That also was incredible. All the other guns, including the venerable 1911, fell flat on their faces.

Now a 1911 can be made to be as reliable as today's top designs, but I wonder how such an old design can command the extra $$$ today that greatly exceeds the cost of a better designed gun.

If you were to buy a Beretta 92 and an expensive Kimber 1911, clean both of them, and shot them side-by-side...and if you were to be given 1,000 rounds for each pistol and just two people to shoot them, I think the Kimber would fail first every time.

If I had to depend on any given 1911 design, I'd probably go with the Smith & Wessons. I don't think they'd match the Beretta or the Glocks necessarily, but Smith has gotten quite good at making automatics. Colt only got good at raising its prices.

So don't feel bad. When they start selling 1911s for $300, I might get one for historic reasons.

BTW, as a young Army officer, Douglas MacArthur and his driver were ambushed by three terrorists in the Philippines. Using only his issue 1911, he managed to kill all three. His driver was so impressed with this that he told MacArthur that the rest of his live was sure to be "gravy."

I used to feel this way in my younger days. I was sure modern technology could beat a hundred year old antiquated design. Surely the ol warhorse had its day and could be retired, right? I saved for years and bought myself an HK USP Tactical 45 for my 21st birthday. This, by most anyone's opinion, is one of the newer designs standing by to replace the venerable 1911. Here's the thing though, my brother bought a $450 Springfield MilSpec that has been twice the pistol the HK is, at half the cost. The HK is more accurate, but the 1911 has proven more reliable, and is easier to obtain rapid hits with due to having less muzzle flip. The more experience I garner with the 1911, the more I love them. I bought a Glock after the HK, still trying to find a more modern pistol that could beat the 1911 in any significant way. Guess what? I am still searching. The Glock is reliable, but not as comfortable to shoot as the 1911.

No pistol on the market combines the shootability and effectiveness of the 1911 for the majority of people. The 1911 may not feel the best to some, but to most, it will feel good. It still gets you on target fast, and keeps you there, and no other pistol on the market has the instinctive control placement or the quality of sights and trigger that the 1911 has. Most people can shoot the 1911 well, even if it isn't there favorite, for whatever reason. Sooner or later, everyone begins to realize that hitting the target is what matters--and that is usually about the time they start appreciating the 1911.

And if you are going to bring up the military pistol trials, you should also make sure people know that the 1911s that were being tested had nearly half a million rounds on their frames. Some of them had been in service even then for over 50 years. They were quite worn, by anybody's standards. Try putting 500,000 rounds on a Beretta frame then see if it does as well against the 1911

It should also be noted that according to Crane, the 1911 has a mean rounds before depot level maintenance is required of 15,000 rounds. This is compared to 5,000 for the M9, and that Kimber makes brand new 1911s for certain members of our armed services, who are very pleased with them.

In fact, wherever you look, be it defensive pistol competition, tactical entry teams, or special forces, the 1911 continues to be well liked and popular. Ask yourself if these modern designs were so much better, wouldn't people with a choice, like FBI HRT, Delta, Force RECON, LAPD SWAT, ect, be using them? Simple answer, yes, they would be.

The Beretta was adopted not because it was the best, but because they underbid the competition, and bribed politicians with access to airbases in Italy they could land heavy bombers in. That is it.

So today, I still like the Glock, it's a decent handgun. Not too fond of the HK. Talk about being overpriced...

You are much better off spending $800+ on a 1911 than that polymer-framed German monstrosity. 1911s cost so much because their frames are forged and machined, not poured into a mold.

SO sure, you don't have to like 1911s, but it sure doesn't show good taste

 

[CWL]

In the military trials, the Beretta 92 malfunctioned on an average of about once every 2,000 rounds, which was incredible. The Smith 459 came in second with a malfunction rate of one in every 950 rounds, if memory serves. That also was incredible. All the other guns, including the venerable 1911, fell flat on their faces.

Don't feel guilty for not liking the old 1911 guns. They were great in their day, but they don't compare with today's modern pistols

Yeah, well in 1911 the original Browning model went thru 6,000 rounds without failures. It then went on to fire deformed, setback and long cartridges, as well perform after acid, sand and mud baths.

M1911s cost more than plastic guns because they usually require American labor and American parts -if you look at M1911s manufactured outside of the USA, then pricing is equal or less than plastic pistols.

 

[ugaarguy]

In the military trials, the Beretta 92 malfunctioned on an average of about once every 2,000 rounds, which was incredible. The Smith 459 came in second with a malfunction rate of one in every 950 rounds, if memory serves. That also was incredible. All the other guns, including the venerable 1911, fell flat on their faces.

The folks who quote this always neglect to note that at the time of the trials the US Government had not purchased new 1911s since WWII. So 35 year old shot out 1911s lost to new off the assembly line Berettas, SIGs, and S&Ws. Yep that proves it, that old design is inferior.

Also, the S&W offering did not pass the XM9 trials. The SIG Sauer P226 was the only other pistol which performed satisfactorily.

Don't feel guilty for not liking the old 1911 guns. They were great in their day, but they don't compare with today's modern pistols, at least without them costing you upwards of a grand.

 

[Wildfire]

Advancements.

Hey There:
Sorry about that. Hope you feel better some day. I am a 1911 guy . No other pistol has had as many advancements made as the 1911.
Nothing Old about them. Their shape remains the same, but most all other parts have hade many improvements over the last 1oo plus years. That is Ok that it did not fit you . Most new 1911 shooters do tend to shoot low and left. That all changes with time on the gun.

As far as reliability. The 1911 can be made to feed and fuction flawlessly.
That may mean working on it some to improve performance to match the ammo and type of shooting that you do. My OLD Colt has had over 100,000 rounds put down the tube and still shoots flawlessly.
Hope you find what you really want. Have fun with it.

 

[tkkr]

1911s are like old japanese samurai swords.. where as glocks are like 3 boxes and a cylinder glued together with a few springs tossed in.

 

[blitzen]

toocool, I'm with ya. I like the idea of a 1911 but I don't like the idea of ploping down 2 or 3 grand to have one that works. I've seen enough malf drills at IDPA matches to say, no thanks. I'll remove the mag saftey and put a C&S saftey on a Hi Power at a fraction of the cost and have 16 rnds in a similar pistol with not a hiccup ever.(that can be done with a lot of pistols nowadays) Nothing wrong with the .45 at all, I just want to be the first one to put the most metal on target every time.

 

[Tom Fury]

1911

There's a reason they're still out there.

They can be had for less than $2-3000, and they do work out of the box.

If you like the Champion, you'll love the Commander. Colt LW or S&W sc/PD.

Most of the bells and whistles in your original post will be there, including reliability. Checkering will be extra.

Reliability is there in shorter barrel lengths; loss of mv is addressed by lighter, hotter loads (185, 165, 200). At gunfight ranges, (FBI says 7 yds) I wonder if that really matters; 1911 has always done the job at that range, it seems...

Cheers, TF

 

[combatantr2]

Confederate; I'll wager that my cheapo 1911 will outshoot any firearm in 1000 round reliability test.

Loose 1911s are boringly reliable. 1911s that are finicky are those that have been matched tuned for competitions.

 

[Murdock]

All the other guns, including the venerable 1911, fell flat on their faces.

The trials didn't quite go that way. The Sig and HK entries also did well, but were not selected due to greater vulnerability to corrosion, relative expense, and the political need to keep the Italians happy. As far as 1911 was concerned, I don't believe a 1911 design was even in the running for the M9 trials, although I may be mistaken on that point.

 

[Disaster]

Not alone. I grew up shooting revolvers. The first centerfire auto I shot was an Army issue 1911. I hated it. It jumped around in my hand like it was possessed. The recoil almost seemed like it came in two stages...first it fired, than the slide came screaming back.

To be fair, recently I fired a friend's 1911...can't recall the brand...and it was pretty nice. Recoil didn't seem alarming...trigger was nice. However, I'm still not enamored by it.

Do like the M&P....though it isn't as sexy looking as a two tone 1911. It fits my hand better, and hits what I'm aiming at better than most recent guns I have shot.

 

[loop]

I have quite a few .45s. I love my 1911s and wouldn't trade them for anything.

But, when it comes down to a match I shoot a CZ or a Tanfoglio - big, heavy guns that I can hold on target for a followup shot.

For carry, um, well, any .45 I have. I lean toward a Para P12-45. I have ultimate faith in my Kimber Custom (not II). I prefer my Tanfoglio poly compact for weight and accuracy combined. For utter reliability I like my SIG P200.

There are a lot of choices in .45. Each has its own merits.

All of my .45s have custom work and have had some lesser or greater degree of tuning. If I had to pick a favorite right now it would be my Tanfoglio Elite Match. It's big, it's heavy and it shoots where I point it. I don't even feel like I have to use the sights.

I'm not fond of Glocks. They are reliable, but lack personality and of the many I've owned I've never had one that really stood out in terms of accuracy.

I let several IDPA shooters shoot my Tanfoglio after our last match and one quit shooting at COM and proceeded to write his name on the target after his first three shots formed a tight cloverleaf.

Of interest to me is that the guy who usually wins the overall at our IDPA matches shoots a CZ75B in 9mm. I've won the big bore five matches in a row with a TZ97L. Followup shots out of a .45 take a tad longer than out of 9. And, I have to reload more often than the 9 shooter...

Truth is I'm a big fan of the caliber, but not really loyal to any format. Personally, though, I'm not fond of striker-fired weapons except as backup guns. They just don't feel right.

And, BTW, a good 1911 may still be had for under 1K. Despite my tendency to spend more on upgrades than I do on the gun, I have several 1911s that wouldn't command more than $700 to $800.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

That's what's great about freedom. You can like whatever you want and so can everyone else. I'm not saying that 1911s are the best and everything else is inferior. I'm saying the 1911 platform is best FOR ME. You find what is best for you.

 

[easyg]

The old 1911 is a great gun....in fact, it's a classic.

Has it been surpassed by more modern guns?
It depends upon how the pistol is to be used....

As a home defense handgun (or a truck/car handgun) for the guy who prefers autos over revolvers but is'nt concerned with high magazine capacity, the 1911 is just fine.

Personally, I don't care much for a 40 oz. 7-shot pistol as an all-day-carry handgun.
If I were going to carry that much weight on my side, I would probably just carry a 7-shot revolver for greater reliability.


Easy.

 

[distra]

Will I be banished forever to the outer reaches of Canada?

Yes, you are destine to be lost in the wilderness for a 1000 yrs. Not liking a 1911 is...is...well blastphamy! Just kidding. In all seriousness, I know several shooters who do not like the 1911 platform and can not shoot them near as well as their Glocks (insert favorite pistol here). Nothing wrong with not liking the platform, but do give it a fair chance. If you have been shooting tuperware for several years, give the 1911 at least 6 months of shooting before giving up on it.

 

[VHinch]

This thread is quickly degenerating from a guy asking questions and trying to determine what fits him best to a 1911 hate thread. If you don't like 1911's, fine. That's why more than one type of handgun exists.

As far as reliability, I own a 1911 from just about every production maker (Taurus and S&W being the notable exceptions), and in most cases several examples of each. These run the gamut from a RIA that I paid $269 for to a Les Baer that was right at $1500. The only reliability issues I have ever had were in match guns that were tuned to a specific load and spring weight and would choke on anything else. A 1911 built as designed that hasn't been screwed with is as reliable as anything else out there, and usually the guys telling you otherwise have little or no actual trigger time on one and are just repeating the same old tired wive's tales that have been around forever.

Bottom line, shoot what you like and what fit's you best and don't worry about anyone else's opinion.