i just see it inconvenient to have a safety when there are so many reliable DAO semi autos these days.
The position of the thumb safety on the 1911 is pretty much the industry standard. It is the preferred position by many Americans, and we sometimes moan when other designs don't have it in the same place.
The reason for this is that it is a natural movement (with only minimal practice) to sweep the thumb safety off when presenting the gun. Even if you can't carry and only practice at an indoor range, make it a habit to engage the safety after you load the gun and chamber a round. Put the gun down. When you pick it up off the table, sweep the safety off, so this motion is ingrained in your head.
It really does become second nature.
DAO, safe-action, and DA revolvers don't even require this minimal training. But it is much harder to have an accurate first shot.
The 1911 trigger pulls straight back. Most other guns' triggers are hinged, and they pull back and up. Straight back is preferable, but not a huge deal to me. It is the same trigger pull every time, and a good one too. (Glocks and DAO guns also have the same pull every time, but it is not a GOOD pull.
)
I won't go out on a limb and suggest the 1911 is a superior design. To me, its main advantage is that it is SAO. For instance, the take-down procedure is more complex, and takes a bit more practice to get right than a modern design. Not a huge deal, but worth mentioning.
1911s are ammo finnicky. You might scratch your head when folks are so obsessive around here with testing carry ammo. Most modern pistol designs will feed anything without any problem, because the feed ramp is integral to the barrel, it is at a shallow angle, and polished pretty well. Not so with 1911s. Most of their feed ramp is on the gun's frame, and there's a beveled part of the chamber that kind of continues up from the frame. Without some work, they only feed round nosed ammo reliably. One has to test hollow point ammo, even the round-nosed type, to be sure on a 1911.
On a modern gun, say a Ruger P345 or Beretta Storm or Glock 21, one can shoot a couple magazines, and if there are no jams, he can be pretty confident that it is going to work when needed.
I bought a basic 1911 this year, 100th anniversary and all, bought into the hype. I'm a bit underwhelmed. I like the accuracy and the crisp SA trigger, but I sure don't like the ammo finnickiness. (I like flat point and semi-wadcutter bullets in my handloads. It feeds flat points maybe 90% reliably, and semi-wadcutters maybe 40% reliably.) Yeah, I can adjust. I can spend hundreds of dollars testing defense hollowpoint ammo, and buy only round nosed bullets for reloads, but I really shouldn't have to.
I also bought a CZ97. It seems, so far, to be just as accurate, if not more so, and a lot less finnicky. I haven't tried semi-wadcutters yet, but it feeds flat points 100%. It can be carried cocked & locked or be used as DA first shot, SA follow-ups. The magazines are flush fitting 10 rounders, instead of flush-fitting 7 or 8 rounders or 10 rounded extended mags. The ergonomics are better too.
On the flip side, when I managed to drive out to a match and realized I'd forgotten my holster and magazines, I was able to borrow them. No way this would have happened with a CZ.
I guess what I'm saying is that you should try one, but just go into it with your eyes wide open. It's like buying a vintage muscle car. The performance is there, but you have to realize there are drawbacks too.
