Back when I lived in Los Angeles, on this very forum I offered to bring out one of my dysfunctional 1911 rattletraps along with a pocket full of money. I told you I would shoot against one of your uber-Swiss machines crafted from unobtanium and lubricated with the tears of angels. You declined.
What is wrong with the 1911 design?
- Thread starter SuperNaut
- Start date
- Status
Back when I lived in Los Angeles, on this very forum I offered to bring out one of my dysfunctional 1911 rattletraps along with a pocket full of money. I told you I would shoot against one of your uber-Swiss machines crafted from unobtanium and lubricated with the tears of angels. You declined.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Michael...I think you've been reading too many gun magazines. While that may be true for a precisely-built pistol meant to win bullseye matches with...it's a myth as far as ordnance-spec pistols go.
In the early years, there was some hand-fitting at Colt and Springfield Arsenal. That came to an abrupt end when, a few years before the outset of WW2 Colt's engineers revamped the blueprints and created standardized gauges to select-fit nearly every part on the gun. Basically, a GO/NO-GO setup that worked pretty well, given that 5 different contractors...three of which had never manufactured arms before...were able to produce hundreds of thousands of pistols that were not only functionally reliable under adverse conditions and more accurate than they needed to be for their intended use...but all parts manufactured by those and other contractors would freely interchange.
The criteria was that 2 guns from each contractor were to be chosen at random...completely disassembled with all parts tossed into a common bin...and 10 functional pistols reassembled without regard to what part went to what frame or slide. Test to be repeated 10 times. There were no failures.
Zero.
If these pistols required hand-fitting of every single part...Remington Rand would still be struggling to fill its order.
Tuner--
Don't let facts get in the way of a sort of well written diatribe. It's patently unfair.
Not even SIGARMS considers the P210 as anything more than a historical curiosity, let alone the improved version of those 1911A1s they sell.
Besides, the P210 had an easier time as it fired an anemic cartridge and never served on a front line anywhere.
Don't let facts get in the way of a sort of well written diatribe. It's patently unfair.
Not even SIGARMS considers the P210 as anything more than a historical curiosity, let alone the improved version of those 1911A1s they sell.
Besides, the P210 had an easier time as it fired an anemic cartridge and never served on a front line anywhere.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
More myth and MYTH-information afoot here.
The tube is relatively fragile. Now, remember what the gun was designed for, and where it was inevitably headed. (Hint: It wasn't the local Sunday afternoon IDPA match.)
If the gun is dropped...which does happen, believe it or not...and the integral tube damaged, the whole frame is compromised. With the stake-on tube, replacement is a matter of a few minutes...in the field...with a tool that can be carried in a pocket.
Michael Zeleny
member
There are other places to comment on character flaws evidenced in writing styles. Here we discuss guns.Just tryin' to help a brother out!
chrlefxtrt
Member
The P210 had an extremely shorter service life than the 1911 (P210- 26yrs, 1911- 95+). Is that why it is better?
Quote:
"Being a fit model for dysfunctional knockoffs is not a good thing in my book"
Imitaion is the most sincere form of flattery.
You spout off a lot of nonsense. My mom has a PhD and can be quite the idiot, all the while thinking she is the smartest person in the room. Don't let your self importance get to your head. Most of what you said is a lot of "gobbiltygoop". I could care less My SA 1911 GI has performed flawlessly ever since I first took it to the range.
The reason the 1911 is still produced and by varying qualities is because all kinds of people still want them. Not everyone can afford a Kimber, so some people get a Llama etc. Not everyone wants to carry a pistol in 9x19 or .30Luger when they can carry .45acp or 10mm or 38spr, especially when there is no difference in the magazine capacity. You are trying to convince a vegetarian to eat a steak.
Quote:
"Being a fit model for dysfunctional knockoffs is not a good thing in my book"
Imitaion is the most sincere form of flattery.
You spout off a lot of nonsense. My mom has a PhD and can be quite the idiot, all the while thinking she is the smartest person in the room. Don't let your self importance get to your head. Most of what you said is a lot of "gobbiltygoop". I could care less My SA 1911 GI has performed flawlessly ever since I first took it to the range.
The reason the 1911 is still produced and by varying qualities is because all kinds of people still want them. Not everyone can afford a Kimber, so some people get a Llama etc. Not everyone wants to carry a pistol in 9x19 or .30Luger when they can carry .45acp or 10mm or 38spr, especially when there is no difference in the magazine capacity. You are trying to convince a vegetarian to eat a steak.
chrlefxtrt
Member
Quote:There are other places to comment on character flaws evidenced in writing styles. Here we discuss guns
There are other places where people try to insult intelligence when they lose an argument. It is called congress. That comment was obviously in jest. Being a "Harvard" man you should be able to tell that when someone writes in a particular way not like their normal style, they are being light hearted.
Your fancy alumni email impresses no one here. I stopped using my college email address when I graduated. I know it is only the University of Oklahoma, but when I was in college I learned how to move on.
You are obviously an Eruophile as anything manufactured and designed in the old world is better than what is manufactured in the USA.
Please get over your self, for the sake of the children. "Just tryin' to help a brother out"
There are other places where people try to insult intelligence when they lose an argument. It is called congress. That comment was obviously in jest. Being a "Harvard" man you should be able to tell that when someone writes in a particular way not like their normal style, they are being light hearted.
Your fancy alumni email impresses no one here. I stopped using my college email address when I graduated. I know it is only the University of Oklahoma, but when I was in college I learned how to move on.
You are obviously an Eruophile as anything manufactured and designed in the old world is better than what is manufactured in the USA.
Please get over your self, for the sake of the children. "Just tryin' to help a brother out"
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Guys...Let's not let it go down in flames. We've got a chance to educate some folks on this one....including Mr. Zeleny. Let's keep it in the road, please.
Michael Zeleny
member
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
I'll take that bet. Bring about 25 magazines, plenty ammo, and whatever money you can afford to lose. I'll lead. You follow. First one to make it to 5,000 rounds wins. First one to stop or back off buys the ammo...and you get to pick which gun I use from any of a dozen.
Let me know when you're comin'. We'll leave the light on for ya.
And, I don't believe in machine rests. Too impersonal.
Michael Zeleny
member
JMB's plunger tube is relatively fragile because it is designed to be staked in. The SVI plunger tube is much stronger, with thicker walls. I cannot claim any special insights into Browning's mindset, but looking at these two solutions side by side suggests a cost-cutting design compromise on his part.
outerlimit
Member
The only thing I don't like about the 1911 is the grip safety and guns with beavertails.
Other than that, everything else is great.
Other than that, everything else is great.
Michael Zeleny
member
If you want to take my bet, you must do it on my terms. I stipulate 5,000 rounds out of a machine rest at 50 yards, fired at an NRA bullseye target, with mutually agreed upon score penalties for failures to fire or cycle. The loser pays for all testing expenses.
Lonestar49
Member
Be honest now..
Quote:
Being a fit model for dysfunctional knockoffs is not a good thing in my book.Back when I lived in Los Angeles I offered to bring out one of my dysfunctional 1911 rattletraps along with a pocket full of money.
I told you I would shoot against one of your uber-Swiss machines crafted from unobtanium and lubricated with the tears of angels. You declined.
----------
Quote:
As before, I will gladly stake a P210 for accuracy and reliability against any M1911, out of a machine rest. It's only fair to rule out the human factor.
---------
...
Just a "human thought here" but, in the real world of guns and who "really" shoots them, don't you think that the human element should be included, since in reality, they are the ones that are gonna count on them in a time of need?
Not (on) a machine rest..
And I've got to know where I can get some Angels tears of lubrication..
I love that..
Ls
Quote:
Being a fit model for dysfunctional knockoffs is not a good thing in my book.Back when I lived in Los Angeles I offered to bring out one of my dysfunctional 1911 rattletraps along with a pocket full of money.
I told you I would shoot against one of your uber-Swiss machines crafted from unobtanium and lubricated with the tears of angels. You declined.
----------
Quote:
As before, I will gladly stake a P210 for accuracy and reliability against any M1911, out of a machine rest. It's only fair to rule out the human factor.
---------
...
Just a "human thought here" but, in the real world of guns and who "really" shoots them, don't you think that the human element should be included, since in reality, they are the ones that are gonna count on them in a time of need?
Not (on) a machine rest..
And I've got to know where I can get some Angels tears of lubrication..
I love that..
Ls
Michael Zeleny
member
On a purely sentimental level, I prefer my prewar Colt National Match Government Model to every other handgun I own. As regards the quality of design and its execution, as evidenced in precision, strength, and reliability, SIG P210 wins hands down.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Lemme try again, Michael...in case you missed the point.
The 1911 was designed for men to carry to war...mounted cavalry in the beginning. War can get pretty rough. Men who run dry are subject to use their weapons as makeshift bludgeons. I don't care how sturdy STI's integral tube is. If you whack somebody upside the head with the gun and the tube gets involved with the whackin'...it's dead meat, and so goes the frame.
War can get rough in other ways, too, what with all the runnin' and jumpin' and duckin' enemy fire. Things have a way of being damaged. Again...STI's wunder-tube gets between a big rock and a grunt divin' for his life...scratch one frame. Frames are expensive compared to steel tubes.
And, as far as their being "fragile" and "subject to breakage"...I can't really argue with the new ones that are made of recycled beer cans...but the ones that were made of the right stuff and correctly staked didn't give much problem. I have a few pistols that are approaching the century mark. They have what appear to be the original plunger tubes in place. They're not loose and they're not broken. They work fine, in fact.
Now, ask yourself...Is it possible that a man of Browning's genius for design probably considered a machined, integral tube on the pistol...and decided against it because if the tube was damaged, the frame was scrap...
You really believe that he...along with a team of Colt's top engineers... could have overlooked that little detail?
Michael Zeleny
member
That is why we have ergonomic studies. But precise measurement comes first.
Michael Zeleny
member
All engineering is a matter of compromising. In the matter at hand, field reliability of the plunger tube is compromised for the sake of cost-effective repair.
As far as I am concerned, the perfect single action safety remains to be invented. In this regard the M1911 rates A- for its thumb safety ergonomics, C for its grip safety gewgaws, and anywhere between B- and D+ for plunger tube construction. Your priorities may differ.
HisSoldier
Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,330
One really superior design detail of the 1911 is it's symmetrical trigger group that doesn't pivot at the top like most designs. The forces go to each side of the trigger clear back to the sear. That's a big part (I think) of why the 1911 trigger is so great. John Browning designed the gun in just a few years, and tried to think of everything that the Government would ever need, and made a gun that is still hugely popular 100 years later!,,,,,,,,,oh,,yeah, I was supposed to say bad things about it.
In other words, you want to eliminate any and all of the tangential qualities of shooting a 1911 that made it famous. You want to take away the renowned "shootability" factor of the 1911, and implement a mechanical device that isolates the shooter from the gun. This is where your logic is fatally flawed. There are many things that go into putting lead on target, much more so than the absolute mechanical accuracy of the pistol. Once again, if the P-210 is such a good platform, why isn't it still being used by a modern day army as the 1911 still is?
There are many commercial 1911s made in the same vein as the P-210 with ultra tight tolerances. Fortunately for the Swiss, in the P-210 they had the luxury of issuing what amounts to target pistols produced at their leisure between cheese and wine breaks that would never see combat. The United States has not been so fortunate. We on the other hand, have to make pistols that put lead on target in a variety of inclement conditions.
However, if ultimate accuracy is your game, there are many commercial or military modified 1911s that will make your P-210 bow down and sing God Bless America.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Now, hold on just a minute there, pardner. That just ain't cricket. You issued the challenge. The man who is challenged gets to dictate the terms...choose the weapons and all. It's the way that men conduct such things on the field of honor.
But...I'm open to a compromise. Accuracy testing from a machine rest. Reliability testing from the human hand. You follow my lead, and do what I do. You refuse, and you forfeit. If we're gonna stack the deck, we're both gonna do a little stackin'.
Say when. I've got yuh Huckleberry out in the safe.
- Status
