What's With 1911s?

[earlthegoat2]

I don't care for the original 1911 design for several reasons:

It's heavy,
It has a low magazine capacity for its size and weight,
I don't like a manual safety that I must disengage in order to fire a pistol,
It is a big and bulky pistol,
The tiny stock military sights suck.

You imply that a 1911 based pistol with a high capacity magazine, no manual safety, that is smaller in size with better sights that was lighter weight would be OK.

There are solutions to the capacity and sights but if you took away the manual safety and made it smaller and less bulky it would no longer be a 1911. There are alloy frame 1911s out there too but I suppose those are also too heavy. There have been attempts at a polymer framed gun too which I think is still viable if they make it single stack instead of the awful Kimber double stack.

It is not the same gun as a Glock and its Springfield and S&W clones.

 

[The Bushmaster]

The design has been around for 100 years and I don't foresee it going by the wayside anytime soon. A design that has lasted for so long and been copied by almost every gun manufacturer in the world can not be that bad.

You need to go "flame" some of the present "Johnny-come-lately" designs. A lot of them will not be here in 20 to 25 years. (let alone 100+)

 

[Billy Shears]

I have never seen a picture of Patton, Roosevelt, or Al Capone carrying a 1911.

Roosevelt (TR that is) carried a Colt .38 in the Spanish American War. I don't know what Capone carried. Patton, I recall reading, did carry a 1911 as a young officer, and got a little aggressive in his attempt at a do-it-yourself trigger job, and later suffered an accidental discharge as a result. After that, he favored revolvers, and used a Colt SAA to kill two Villistas in Mexico in 1917. However there is a picture of him in his tank turret on the July 7, 1941 issue of Life magazine, wearing what looks like an ivory stocked 1911 in a shoulder holster. Only the butt is visible though, and it's hard to tell. It may be a Colt Model M, which he was known to have owned.

 

[Harvey]

We could reasonably compare the design of the 1911 'machine' to the design of internal combustion engine. Both are indeed revolutionary 'machines' developed during the twentieth century industrial revolution.

Just as the IC engine dismissed the horse, the 1911 dismissed the revolver. Just as there are myriad gasoline engines now produced based upon the original piston and crankshaft design concept, there are a number of 1911 clones, all adhering strictly to John Brown's most brilliant locking breach, automatic feed concept.

To scoff at the 1911 is to scoff at a remarkable piece of machinery - a timeless piece of American ingenuity.

 

[rklessdriver]

See this is why we have so many competing gun desgins.

One 1911 basher thinks the 1911 is unsafe becasue after you dis-engage the saftey, push the grip saftey and pull the trigger it will fire....

Our Second 1911 basher thinks the 1911 is not a good weapon becasue your required to dis-engage a saftey before it will fire....

1911 fan boy number one thinks the 1911 is a gift from god himself for the reason's basher number 2 hates the 1911....

Different strokes for different folks.

The fact is that a weapon that first entered military service in 1911 is still being mfgr'd by over 10 companies to varying degrees of quality. Aparantly they are still pretty popular with the gun buying public. Add to that that the FBI hostage rescue team, about every elite police SWAT Team in the USA, and the Marine Corps MEU's and Force Recon still use it....

It might not be the gift from god himself but outdated and over the hill it ain't either. Everything that makes Brand X better than Brand XX is opinion based and the sales and current use of 1911 pistols is probally not even reached it's pinnical yet.

When people quit making them and using them, then it's outdated collector toys. Until then it's a viable and acceptable weapon platform.
Will

 

[MacTech]

My Kimber Custom II (bought used) has been utterly, boringly reliable, just as reliable as the Glock 21 I had previously, I know Kimbers generally don't have the best reputation here on THR, especially the Custom II series, but all I can say is that *MY* KCII, when used with Wilson or CMC mags has been completely, boringly reliable, feeds anything and everything, ball, HP, LSWC, it has, so far, never jammed, stovepiped, FTE, or had any other stoppages that were not caused directly by me (not slapping the mag in all the way, for example)

I've put well over 2,000 rounds through it, a mix of WWB ball, Speer Gold Dot defensive ammo, and my handloads, my Kimber has been incredibly, boringly reliable, and it's essentially bone stock, aside from a curved mainspring housing, and to top it off, it's still the most accurate pistol I have shot

It took me a while to arrive at my choice of a 1911 as my main pistol, and I can't see going back

Previous guns I have owned and gotten rid of to end up at the 1911;

Taurus PT-99AF; initially okay, but began stovepiping after around 500 rounds, traded off
Glock 21 (standard, non-SF); a decent gun, boringly reliable, but the grip was a hair too wide for my hands (wide palms, stubby fingers), so it was traded off
CZ-75B; I *LOVED* that gun, most accurate 9mm I have shot, and still kick myself for selling it, but money was tight, I had recently purchased the KCII, and since I reload for .45, shooting .45 in the KCII was actually *cheaper* than shooting factory WWB 9mm (I couldn't afford reloading gear for the 9mm or I would have reloaded that as well), if I did reload for 9mm, I would have to have stocked small pistol primers and bullets for that caliber too, and that was in the depths of the ammo/component shortage of '08-'09, I had plenty of components for .45 ACP though....

At some point, I *will* own another CZ-75, as it's just a brilliant gun, ideally, I'd get a CZ-75SA, to keep the manual of arms consistent between the two guns

So, my experience with the 1911 has been overwhelmengly positive, as reliable as the Glock, plus, I can shoot lead and reloads without having to drop in a conventionally rifled barrel, the 1911 fits my hand better and points more naturally than the Glock as well

Now bear in mind here that I'm *NOT* bashing Glock, they are excellent guns, reliable, sturdy, accurate, and with a nice high capacity, they just don't fit my hand, that is all, if the Glock grip fit my hand, I'd have no problem owning one

That said, for my purposes, the 1911 fits me well, I shoot it well, and my particular 1911 just works, I'd have no problem trusting my life to it

 

[ForumSurfer]

Different strokes for different folks.

Amen. This appears to be another "I hate design X" thread.

Am I the only guy who likes, owns and carries different types of guns? They all have their strengths and weaknesses, no one design is overall superior.

 

[MacTech]

I wonder how much of the "I Hate <brand/design x>" comes from inexperience...

For example, "John Smith" gets into pistol shooting and buys an "Acme Blast-O-Matic" pistol in their preferred caliber, they want to be sure they made the "right" decision, so they go online to a shooting forum, and ask how the shooting community likes the Blast-O-Matic

John Smith gets honest feedback from both sides of the coin, decides he doesn't agree with those who dislike "his" pistol, and starts getting defensive, the more negative reviews he reads, the stronger his opinion of the Blast-O-Matic line gets, soon, the Blast-O-Matic gets elevated to "perfect" status in his mind, due to his defensiveness, he then starts lashing out verbally at owners of GoBang Systems "Mr. Blasty" guns and others....

Now, let's take the example of John Doe, someone who's been into shooting sports a long time, and has used and owns a variety of guns, he owns Blast-O-Matics, Mr. Blasties, Redneck-o-matics, Spinny Wheelies, and even old fashioned Smokey-polies, he's done enough shooting to realize that what works for him may not work for someone else, and that basically, as long as the gun itself is structurally sound (unlike SaturdayNight Industries "Mr. Grenade" series of cheap pot-metal guns), it all comes down to personal preference.

after all, the only purpose of the gun is to launch a small metal projectile accurately at high speeds, so they're basically all the same at their core, and the minor squabbling and infighting between the camps is nothing more than an annoyance that detracts from the shooting industry

 

[mgmorden]

Personally, I don't see anything particularly wrong with them, but will admit that a lot of their appeal at this point is nostalgic in nature.

At the time when it was introduced, it was a good design, as is evidenced by it's service life. Handguns in particular have also reached the same sort of parity as cars - IE, a good example past a certain point will get all the same tasks done as a brand new one. Maybe a tad less efficiently, and maybe without the comfort, but the same basic things can be done with all of them. In that regard, a 1911 still works and works well, and will likely continue to be a perfectly serviceable weapon for as long as we throw little chunks of lead from handheld firearms.

That said, IMHO, just as someone else mentioned, it's a dated design (in it's original configuration). It's big. It's heavy. It's single stack. It's single action + manual safety. It's got the extractor on the inside and the plunger tube on the outside (both opposite of where they really should be). The sights are terrible. Takedown procedure is more complex compared to a modern gun.

All in all, just a lot of little things that don't really make it a bad gun - just stuff that could be improved on. Even Browning himself would have likely continued to make better designs (as he was already doing - later work resulting in the Browning Hi Power, which is itself now a bit dated but is starting to show some more modern features).

I personally wouldn't feel undergunned if I had a 1911 (I did own one previously but ended up selling it off. I'll likely look at getting another sometime or another), but if I was buying a gun for pure utility work, I'd look at the newer S&W M&P, a Glock, etc before really looking at a 1911.

 

[mcdonl]

OP, you just desribed Harley Davidson. Enough people buy them because of the history and status of owning one. Old technology, high cost, finicky, needs a lot of tinkering and more fluff than function.

All that said, I would love me a Norinco 1911... they seem to be the only ones worth the money. Why spend $2,000 for a gun that functions like a $500 gun when you can spend $400 on a gun that functions like a $500 gun

 

[earlthegoat2]

Lets face it, not much revolutionary has come along in gun technology since 1911 or earlier actually.

Yeah, you have polymer and high capacity. Nothing functionally different. Interchangable backstraps are a joke as far as innovation is concerned. DAO striker fired guns are about as blah as tools get yet they are all the rage.

One will say 1911s are obsolete and outdated and in a way they are right but 1911s and most other old designs still cut the mustard just as well as the latest and greatest. Sure the trend in guns has been to make them smaller and smaller but that is just to capitalize on the CCW market which did not really exist 10 years ago. 10 years ago all gun manufacturers were looking for is a big LEO or government contract do drive their designs. I hate to inform everyone but LEO and Gov't contract guns are not ideal for everyday citizens and CCW. Times change and you know what dictates that change?

Money.

 

[mothermopar]

The 1911 was created at a time in history when people's gun smithing skills were used to build and put a weapon together, hand fitted, hand crafted. Tools were hand held and not controlled by robots. Today, guns are mass produced, like cars. The 1911 wasn't designed for mass production, but today many are mass produced. That's why SOME 1911's are hit and miss and may require the hand crafting that they were originally designed to have anyway.

Needless to say, a tuned 1911 (like they were designed to be fitted) is as good as any modern pistol in function.

The 1911 platform is SAFER than modern designs. To AD a 1911, you need to grip the grip safety enough to disengage it, then consciously disengage the thumb safety before the gun will fire.

Single stack outdated? Tell that to nearly all gun producers who are making/introducing "slim" handguns with single stacks.

Durability... Try pounding in a long nail with a glock, then with a 1911... then fire both... see which one is more damaged.

The 1911 is not only a time-tested weapon that still is used today, but its an individual firearm. No two are EXACTLY alike... they are individual pieces of art that can shoot as well as anything else.

 

[Billy Shears]

OP, you just desribed Harley Davidson. Enough people buy them because of the history and status of owning one. Old technology, high cost, finicky, needs a lot of tinkering and more fluff than function.

That might describe a Harley, it doesn't describe a 1911. The "old technology" uses the same tilting barrel operating method as modern guns, they aren't finicky and don't need a lot of tinkering; they run just fine out of the box. When they don't run fine, it's usually because they've been gunsmithed to death. And sorry, but "more fluff than function" is ballocks. LAPD SWAT, FBI HRT, Marine recon, Army Delta Force, etc. don't use them for "fluff."

 

[earlthegoat2]

Single stack outdated? Tell that to nearly all gun producers who are making/introducing "slim" handguns with single stacks

That is why I made the stipulation about single stack being outdated only pertaining to full sized pistols. But you know what, if it works, why fix it?

 

[mgmorden]

The 1911 platform is SAFER than modern designs. To AD a 1911, you need to grip the grip safety enough to disengage it, then consciously disengage the thumb safety before the gun will fire.

OR drop it from sufficient height and let the momentum of the firing pin do it's thing. Except for the Series 80 modifications (which is really changing the design), 1911's weren't designed with firing pin blocks.

Now, a firing pin block isn't the end all and be all safety feature. It's a minor feature that's nice to have. Doesn't make or break anything. I'm just saying that the 1911 design lacks enough of these "nice to have, but not necessary" features to make the design show it's age. It's certainly not bad, and as I said, it gets the job done. HOWEVER, outside of nostalgia factor, there are better designs out now.

Put it this way - lets assume that the 1911 had NEVER been invented. Browning discounted the idea before it got started. The rest of firearms history marched on unaffected (not realistic given the influence the 1911 has had, but this is hypothetical). I'd wager that if the 1911 were introduced as a NEW design, right now, people all over the world would be asking "What the heck were they thinking?", and the gun would flop on the market. Nothing would be WRONG with it directly - it'd just have a lot of design ideas that seemed downright quirky and outdated in today's market.

As to LAPD SWAT, FBI HRT, Marine recon, Army Delta Force, etc., it's an impressive list, but it's a short one. Start listing the number of military and/or police forces using something more modern, and you'll be typing a lot longer.

 

[rklessdriver]

As to LAPD SWAT, FBI HRT, Marine recon, Army Delta Force, etc., it's an impressive list, but it's a short one. Start listing the number of military and/or police forces using something more modern, and you'll be typing a lot longer.

It's not a comprehensive list of the Elite but, yes it is impressive. There are indeed other good sidearms out there and some Elite units choose to use them. Still with all the good options out there a good number of the Elite choose to utlize the 1911.

General Issue for sidearms means nothing. You cannot draw any conclusion because General Issue for police depts and the military is purely driven by Politics and Money. The vast majority of partol police NEVER have to use their sidearm and police administrators know that. They balance the possible chance of it malfunctioning against the possible chance of actual use.... Same thing with use of sidearms in the military (my Beretta never left it's holster during a fire fight thru 2 deployments).... Administrators buy and issue what is in their best intrest from political stand point and roll the dice with the men that actually carry these weapons. Mfgr's like Glock, H&K and S&W court these penny pinching, power driven scoundrels like no body's business, offering new firearms at prices that would make the casual public buyer like us cry... Luckily these mfgrs actually build good weapons that work if maintained properly (mostly) but trying to say Brand X is better than Brand XX is a bunch of crap.

I bring up the Elite police and Marine Units because those people have the clout and $$$ to cut thru the BS politics and get what they think is the best weapon for their people. They have the possibility to use their weapons more frequently than the average joe blow patrolman. Many of these folks use the 1911 and I'm sure that many choose to use something else.

The fact remains that since many still use the 1911 and on that point alone how could it be any worse than any other weapon? More modern??? What difference does it make as long as the end user is proficient with his manual of arms?? The difference in any weapon system is the training of the persons utilizing it, NOT the weapon itself.

Like I said before "Different strokes for different folks".
Will

 

[Still 2 Many Choices!?]

I usually either carry a Glock 23, or a Colt Commander 1911(depending weather/dress). Both are carried with a round chambered. I prefer the Glock when weather permits, mostly for it's capacity, and because it was my first concealed carry firearm. The safety issue is just a non-starter with me, again because it's what I learned on. I don't FEEL like I need to carry an extra magazine either. If 13+1, or 12+1, won't get it done, I should never have joined hat fight, or I should have run like hell sooner! I do sometimes carry an extra 15rnd mag.

When I carry the 1911, I almost always FEEL like I should have an extra magazine, just because I'm used to 12+rnds in my carry gun. Not a big deal, 1911 mags are small. I was a little worried about carrying the 1911 cocked and locked for a while, and so carried cocked and locked on an empty chamber for a few days until I was comfortable all the safeties would keep that hammer from dropping(it was my first exposed hammer firearm)!
I originally had a bad holster(safety would rub my skin) and I had been carrying all day when I returned home and realized at some point I had been carrying cocked and unlocked, as the safety had rubbed itself to off against my side. That's when I realized that the grip safety was a real good thing to have!

I find myself checking the condition of the 1911 way more than that of the Glock when carried. I do love the 1911's trigger though!

Still 2 Many Choices!?

 

[Fastcast]

I don't care for the original 1911 design for several reasons:

It's heavy,
It has a low magazine capacity for its size and weight,
I don't like a manual safety that I must disengage in order to fire a pistol,
It is a big and bulky pistol,
The tiny stock military sights suck.

LOL ..... How many ways can you say it's heavy?.......BaaaaaWaaaaa

The "real" men of that generation didn't seem to whine about the things you find unlikeable about the 1911. They got the job done regardless.

I can't recall every hearing a vet from WWII, Korea or Vietnam that didn't adore the 1911. I'd bet most of 'em would roll over in their grave and spit on the sissy Fisher Price pistols of today.

 

[Billy Shears]

As to LAPD SWAT, FBI HRT, Marine recon, Army Delta Force, etc., it's an impressive list, but it's a short one. Start listing the number of military and/or police forces using something more modern, and you'll be typing a lot longer.

General Issue for sidearms means nothing. You cannot draw any conclusion because General Issue for police depts and the military is purely driven by Politics and Money.

Exactly. The police and military (aside from the elite units that is) have to take what they are mandated to carry, and that decision is made partly by bean counters and administrators on the basis of lowest bidder, and out of fear of liability -- not giving the end users the very best tool for the job. The elite units, on the other hand, can carry what they themselves want, not what higher brass imposes on them, and since they use handguns vastly more often than regular patrolmen or grunts, they have more motivation to choose the best tool for the job -- and a large percentage choose the 1911.

 

[easyg]

LOL ..... How many ways can you say it's heavy?.......BaaaaaWaaaaa

The "real" men of that generation didn't seem to whine about the things you find unlikeable about the 1911. They got the job done regardless.

I can't recall every hearing a vet from WWII, Korea or Vietnam that didn't adore the 1911. I'd bet most of 'em would roll over in their grave and spit on the sissy Fisher Price pistols of today.

If you really believe that bit of nonsense, then I would say that you don't know much about military personnel.

NOBODY in the military likes to carry even an ounce more weight than absolutely necessary.
Military personnel have been complaining about carrying heavy equipment since the beginning of recorded history.
This I know from serving six years in the U.S. Army.
And yes, when I joined we still had the 1911.
And no, it was not adored by everyone.
You might find this hard to believe but lots of guys in the military actually WANTED to ditch the 1911 in favor of a high capacity 9mm pistol.
Soldiers and Marines always bitch about their equipment and they always want what they can't have....that's just the nature of the military.

 

[Fastcast]

If you really believe that bit of nonsense, then I would say that you don't know much about military personnel.

NOBODY in the military likes to carry even an ounce more weight than absolutely necessary.
Military personnel have been complaining about carrying heavy equipment since the beginning of recorded history.
This I know from serving six years in the U.S. Army.
And yes, when I joined we still had the 1911.
And no, it was not adored by everyone.
You might find this hard to believe but lots of guys in the military actually WANTED to ditch the 1911 in favor of a high capacity 9mm pistol.
Soldiers and Marines always bitch about their equipment and they always want what they can't have....that's just the nature of the military.

Sure they bitch about heavy equipment but I never heard any old time vets bitching about their 1911. Maybe the younger generations. LOL

 

[mgmorden]

Sure they bitch about heavy equipment but I never heard any old time vets bitching about their 1911. Maybe the younger generations. LOL

Maybe - just maybe mind you - it was because at the time these "old time vets" were carrying the gun it was the best available? And maybe, just maybe, that's no longer the case 60-70 years later?

If I was going into war in 1942 you can be darned sure I'd want a 1911. Today, not so much. As I've alluded to in my previous posts, if that's what I happened to be given, it would still get the job done. HOWEVER, if I was choosing myself, it wouldn't be my first choice.

 

[mothermopar]

I use 'modern' guns at work... M4, Sig, S&W 340M&P (sort of modern)... but there's just something about the 1911 (Colt, in particular) that brings a sense of nostalgia, durability, shootability and overall history into the mix. The dang thing works fine. Shoots whatever you throw in it. So to me, why not own a weapon that does it all and carries with it all of the historical evidence of its successes?! Even if it requires a little tweaking?!?! They're the epitomy of a semi-auto handgun. No one can mistake a Colt 1911 for a Glock or a Sig 22(whatever). Any time I've been at the range for 'pleasure' shooting, I've never had someone (of any age) approach me and ask about my duty weapons... its always: "nice 1911... you like it? A Colt? Nice!!!".

I take the approach of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'... and the 1911 has been 'doing it' for 100 years and counting... they may be more popular now than ever before, as a matter of fact.

To each their own. I respect the modern and the old. I just choose to purchase, enjoy and rely upon the old when using my own money. I'll let the taxpayers pay for the tactical tupperware and other black guns. If I could carry my Colt 1911 for work, you bet your butt I would.

As for being heavy... please. A government model 1911 is not a concealed carry piece. Although being so slim, its easily concealed. With the proper rig, you won't notice the difference between a 1911 or another full size auto.

 

[Correia]

Yeah. That 1911 sure is an outdated piece of crap, what with it being designed around the same time as the Ford Model T, yet still being one of the most popular handguns in the world, with variants being produced by most of the major manufacturers...

Oh... Wait. They're inaccurate. It must be a failure since it absolutely dominated competition shooting... And continues to do so, with the vast majority of race guns and bullseye guns being built on descendants of the 1911. Hmmm...

No. That's not it. It must be because it is heavy... Except you can get 1911 variants with polymer or alloy frames that weigh about the same as comparable designs.

Nope... They must suck because they're so HUGE! Like the ones with 3" barrels and grips that your pinky falls off of.

Crap. I'm running out of complaints. 1911s suck because of their capacity! But wait... (checks hip), I'm currently wearing a 1911 descendant that has 14 rounds of .45. I've got a 9mm version that holds 18 in the flush fits and 22 in the mags with base pads.

They UNRELIABLE!!!!! Yet, when I taught pistol classes, and I saw everything come through my classes, 1911s from quality manufacturers ran about the same as everything else. And I saw pretty much everything malfunction at some point. (shhh... don't tell the internet. You might scare it)

They're a failure because select military units and bad mamba jambas don't use them still... Oh, wait, never mind that either. Jeez.

Uhm... Help me out here guys. They've got internal extractors? (that don't fly out the side of the gun like a secondary projectile when your gun explodes) They take more than three seconds to take apart? (Oh, the humanity!!!!) They have barrel lugs instead of a giant square barrel hood for locking purposes? (so they're thinner through the slide but cost more to make, I guess that's a negative). They've got the best trigger of any pistol design in history (wait a second, that's not a negative.) They're not the #1 choice of police bureaucrats! (whew, and if you've ever worked with those guys you know that is damning with faint praise. "Yay, Quals are over and nobody shot themselves in the foot!") It has a manual safety! ("Dur... I can'ts flip this here little lever down under stress, dur." -- though I can still make shoot/no shoot decisions, line up the sights, and manipulate the trigger)

They cost a billion zillion dollars! Yeah. I suppose paying $800 for a nice pistol is just insane. I don't know how you can handle that level of abuse and still look yourself in the mirror. The bastards. My favorite 1911 cost me around $1,200 (though I did pay dealer cost) and it had never had a malfuntion until I broke the ejector at around 10,000 rounds. (though it kept functioning, and stove piped only when trying to eject the last round in the magazine). Yep. That's some serious garbage there.

So what is up with these darn 1911s?

Well, I suppose you could "fix" them by making them boxy, or make them fatter, or maybe sticking crappy small parts in them. Am I missing anything? Interesting. Most of those modern improvements have nothing to do with performance, and everything to do with changes in manufacturing to make them cheaper to make. Damn you John Browning for designing your gun in an era where people actually built stuff with tools!

Good thing us 1911 guys only buy these archaic pieces of crap because we're stupid and bound by tradition! That leaves more uber guns for the discerning buyer!

 

[Fastcast]

Damn you John Browning for designing your gun in an era where people actually built stuff with tools!

and sweat, blood & tears......Yea, the polymer fanboys who poopoo all the old classics just don't get it.

My 1926 A.H. FOX, double barrel, SxS shotgun puts all the new, mass produced shotties to shame in the fit, finish & handling department. Every single part (externally & internally) is serial numbered and was hand fitted by a real human being. That's where the soul comes from on these old classics. I have newer Beretta, Benelli, Browning & Winchester shotguns and they are nice but they just don't have the spirit that the old Fox has.

When that old Fox goes to the grouse woods, it comes alive, like a magic wand.....Grouse beware.....I just can't peg a grouse as reliably with the newer auto loaders and O/Us.

("Dur... I can'ts flip this here little lever down under stress, dur." -- though I can still make shoot/no shoot decisions, line up the sights, and manipulate the trigger)

That's classic!....You should put that on your sig line! ....... Nerds!