What makes a "1911" a "1911"?

[Sox]

With all the talk out there about HK, GLock... "developing" a 1911, and the recent effort by Sig with the GSR, my curiosity is peaked. So, what makes it a 1911? The grip safety, linking design, grip angles, or the package as a whole? I know Sig did it, but lord I don't envision HK pulling a stunt like that. I perceive the USP an updated version of a 1911, except for the ability to decock. Now a single stack USP would be sweet, but who knows.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

"Developing" a 1911 is probably a little strong of words. "Designing" a 1911 for market is probably a better way to consider it. Really, any changes to form or function and it won't be a 1911, but a 1911-like gun. Para has their supposed double action 1911. It isn't a 1911, but a double action 1911-styled gun.

 

[Jim K]

Technically, the only "Model 1911" is the pistol adopted by the U.S. Army in 1911, and the only "Model 1911A1" is the modification of that pistol as specified by the U.S. Army in 1924.

A "1911 type" pistol may be an exact copy of the military pistol (e.g., the Colt Government Models made to the same specifications and on the same tooling as the military pistol) or some variant based on the Model 1911. Today, so many companies are making "1911 type" pistols with so many variations and differences that few if any would qualify as true copies of the M1911 or M1911A1. And some of their parts will not even fit the military pistol or vice versa.

So for a company to "develop a 1911" really means that they intend to make a pistol that somewhat resembles a M1911/A1 in outward form. It may be "better" or worse; it may have all sorts of bells and whistles, it may have many "improvements" from a beavertail grip safety to an external extractors to elimination of the grip safety. No matter, it can only be a "1911/A1 type". It can't be a M1911A1 since the last was made in 1945.

Jim

Jim

 

[BigG]

Jim Keenan nailed it down, imho. I will just add the following:

The so-called "1911" of today is built like a PC. Parts are produced all over the place by the lowest bidder and assembled by labor who have little interest in the product, other than to get it out the door. Customer No Service takes care of the returns, which don't happen that much since lots of buyers don't use the product much or at all.

 

[Boats]

Semantics aside, I'd say the true 1911 type pistols share these common characteristics at a minimum: Single action bow trigger. Grip safety. Thumb safety. Single stack magazine capacity. 1911-esqe profile.

Various Paras need not apply for their weird triggers and mucho extra parts.

 

[Correia]

Interesting question.

If you have a gun that is basically a 1911, but has a double stack magazine, is it still a 1911?

What about a 1911 with a double action trigger?

What about bull barrels, linkless barrels, ramped barrels, gas operated, polymer frame, etc?

I have a Kimber/Bul. I can pull my slide off and stick it onto any Kimber single stack frame. However my gun holds 14+1. 1911? I consider it so.

I think the LDA Paras are 1911s as well.

What makes something a 1911? It is kind of like porn. Hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

 

[Tamara]

BigG,

The so-called "1911" of today is built like a PC. Parts are produced all over the place by the lowest bidder and assembled by labor who have little interest in the product, other than to get it out the door. Customer No Service takes care of the returns, which don't happen that much since lots of buyers don't use the product much or at all.

"Dear Mister President,

There are too many states nowadays. Please eliminate three of them.



PS: I am not a crackpot."

 

[hube1236]

I think the semantics are important, the 1945 version maybe the absolute standard with the "improvements" adding to the function are still within the 1911 class of guns. When one company starts introducing the external extractor, the double stack, concealed hammer, and the double action with decocker it ceases to be a 1911 style gun.

Personally I could live with the extractor, and other improvements, the genius of the 1911 is that it can have a very light trigger and still be carried cocked and locked. It has been debated ad nauseum whether that was JB's intent. As soon as you start messing with the trigger and safety group, I think it becomes a new class of pistol.

Besides all metal guns are just cool.

 

[1911Tuner]

1911s

Jim nailed it again. Please bear in mind that Compact Mil-Spec is
a contradiction in terms. Even Colt's Commander isn't a true 1911,
but rather a variant. Though it shares many of the same parts, it's
still not a 1911/1911-A1.

Cheers!
Tuner

 

[BigG]

Tamara, I just object to the cavalier "throwing around" of an honored name that was hard won in a bunch of venues by less knowledgeable enthusiasts. Anybody can build something that looks like one but there is only the government pistol. The commercial models made by Colt's Pat FA Mfg Co. are the closest, just as the Colt AR15 is the real M16 civilian version. If we all could see each other face to face we could come to terms on our definitions in a minute but these impersonal writings with anybody in the universe free to chime in should make an extra effort to define their terms, else we have misunderstandings.

Just so we understand, I am not against generic as a concept but I do not like it in every possible circumstance. It is also different to buy a generic product labeled as such and a generic product pawned off as a real example. The second type is rightly known as a counterfeit.

 

[Albert Shear]

I think everyone is answering and not knowing the question. Did Sox mean the literal 1911 or the general design conept with variations?

 

[gvass]

"Technically, the only "Model 1911" is the pistol adopted by the U.S. Army in 1911, "

Or another one, which adopted by Austro-Hungarian Monarch in 1911)
A totally different gun, with the same designation))

 

[BigG]

Unique Features of the 1911-type Pistol

Albert Spear: I think we are trying to get the terms defined first.

As far as the original question, by Sox, if you want to go by features, dang near every popular self loading pistol is a clone of the Colt/Browning tilt barrel locking system which is the heart of the concept. There is only a couple viable locking systems out there and the C/B covers about 95% of the examples. The other one is the Walther P38 system that was pirated or <cough> "borrowed" by Beretta (Taurus) for the current M9 pistol.

The trigger is the rest of the package and many have strayed from the narrow path (of righteousness) there, including Browning himself.

The third component, if I may say so, is the 45 ACP cartridge itself, which was developed for the pistol.

 

[Tamara]

As far as the original question, by Sox, if you want to go by features, dang near every popular self loading pistol is a clone of the Colt/Browning tilt barrel locking system which is the heart of the concept.

...

The third component, if I may say so, is the 45 ACP cartridge itself, which was developed for the pistol.

Uh, wouldn't the tilting barrel and the .45 ACP cartridge make the 1911 a ripoff of the M1907?


Look, I am obviously way too darn lazy to type out "Sorta kinda a clone of the Government Model 1911" every time I wish to refer to a Lightweight Officer's Model or a .38 Super STI Racegun or a Para LDA. We can hem and haw about the proper government parts configurations all we want, but when our definitions cause a pistol that went ashore at Omaha Beach to no longer be a "1911" just because someone put a Seecamp trigger in it, then we kinda fall down on the authenticity test, nicht wahr?

Like Correia said, "I know one when I see one".

Personally, if it has a reasonable parts commonality with the GM, then it's a "Sorta kinda clone of the Government Model of 1911" in my book, which I will henceforth refer to in shorthand on this board as a "1911".

 

[cratz2]

I think it's kinda silly that some folks get all hyped up over the fact that one guy calls a Para LDA a 1911 but then that same person will say '1911' when he very specifically means '1911A1'.

To me, if it snugly fits in a 1911 holster and I can safely put a Marvel conversion slide on it, it's a 1911. A Springfield Loaded with target sights is a 1911 in my book. A Colt MilSpec is a 1911 in my book. A 9x23 Caspian racegun is a 1911 in my book. The Para LDA guns... I don't have an aversion to calling them 1911s but the very different trigger starts getting away from what I truly consider a 1911 to be.

 

[BigG]

We ain't reading outa the same book Cratz, sorry.

 

[cratz2]

After all, I said it's my book.

 

[ajacobs]

I don't think you can resort so much to names as being a goverment designation it isn't copywrited. Springfield calls theirs 1911's so they must be. What else are you going to call them.


Of course what do I know as I agree with cratz. I am not going to type or say 1911-type everytime I am refering to it. I think it is crazy to say say that calling a springfield milspec or colt series 80 a 1911 somehow detracts from the original model. Specifications are specifications. Does anyone know what the Muesoc pistol is designated a 1911 wouldn't that be a pickle or what about the modified ones that were used by the AMU.

 

[1911Tuner]

What's in a Name?

1911 "Pattern" works...but that's just me.

 

[Dave T]

After reading through this whole post, "1911 Pattern" is about as descriptive as any name I've seen. With Tuner's permission I believe I will adopt that phraseology.

 

[1911Tuner]

What's in a Pattern?

DaveT said:

With Tuner's permission I believe I will adopt that phraseology.

Absolutely! It's shortspeak for 1911 Colt-Browning Pattern.

Uh, if ya get an E-mail from Shania Twain about how cool it is, be
sure and mention my name.

Cheers!

Tuner

 

[Rival]

M1911-A1

Originally posted by Jim Keenan:
Technically, the only "Model 1911" is the pistol adopted by the U.S. Army in 1911, and the only "Model 1911A1" is the modification of that pistol as specified by the U.S. Army in 1924.
...
So for a company to "develop a 1911" really means that they intend to make a pistol that somewhat resembles a M1911/A1 in outward form. It may be "better" or worse; it may have all sorts of bells and whistles, it may have many "improvements" from a beavertail grip safety to an external extractors to elimination of the grip safety. No matter, it can only be a "1911/A1 type". It can't be a M1911A1 since the last was made in 1945.

Well, my Springfield clearly says on the left side of the slide:

MODEL 1911-A1
CAL.45

So mine is DEFINATELY model 1911-A1, all right?

 

[Rival]

Just my honest opinion, about what makes a "1911" a "1911"

I think that true 1911 pistol supposed to be able to interchange parts with a real GI gun, fair in square. If you can't interchange the parts freely - it is not true 1911.

 

[Jim K]

Springfield Armory, Inc. can call it anything they want, but their use fo the term "Model 1911A1" is like Dodge painting "F150" on their pickup trucks. Maybe they can get away with it, but the only purpose would be to pretend something is what it is not.

Jim