My m1911s likewise make me smile ... regardless of construction materials. So far I've had 1911s with frames made of: Al alloys unknown, Al-Sc alloy, carbon steels, polymers, pot metal, stainless steels ... may have missed something. Still have at least one example of each except Spring '21 I sold the only pot metal one, a .22, because its manual of arms was distorted with a magazine "safety". No use for it: I wasn't gonna use it teaching with a mag disconnect nor after disabling something the manufacturer called a "safety". My concerns are almost strictly functional; somewhat aesthetic.All I’ll say is that shooting my 1911(s) definitely makes me smile and my plastic stuff just leaves me feeling “meh”.
suprisingly about a week ago my 43yr old son asked me for advice on buying a 1911 which surprised me because about 2yrs ago he wanted to buy his first gun ( He lives a 1000mi from me) and was looking for guidance, I suggested a 1911 and he explained to me that some of the guy’s he works with told him that 1911’s are obsolete & unreliable even though he’s shot mine a lot. They pushed glocks 🙄.
Anyway he ended up buying a Sig M17which is a nice piece but no 1911, so anyway he made me smile because he now wants a 1911. Makes me smile !
I agree 100%. It amazes me people will spend as much ad they can afford on a carry gun then buy the cheapest belt and holster they can find. Spend a little extra and buy a gun belt and spend some time do some research and spend the money on a holster that fits your needs and body style. With the proper set up a full size all steel 1911 won't even be noticeable after just a few minutes. There are several times a day I have to check and make sure I still have it.This is your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to.
In my opinion and in my world of carry and duty guns, any handgun not made of steel and in a minor caliber is a disadvantage. I am not currently on-duty, but tomorrow nite I will be, and it will be w/ a steel, 5" 1911 in .45ACP that gets 200+ rounds fired thru it each week in training. And I consider myself to have a distinct advantage over anyone I come up against. I also carry a Commander-size 1911 off-duty, but do not notice any "extra weight" w/ either weapon.
Do good belts and holsters make it any lighter?
Didn't think so.
- Today did a 4 3/4 hour hike, about 700 feet elevation. My Fitbit says 24,309 steps, 10.9 miles. Carried a Glock 26 with 15 round mag, as always concealed close to a center of a body on a Wilderness belt.
- Yesterday did a USPSA match, took about 5 hours, flat range14,061 steps, 6.35 miles, all steel CZ in a strong side OWB holster, dual DAA belt setup.
I took four 1911 pistols to the range today; RIA 9mm, RIA 40 S&W, Fusion Firearms 10mm and a Kimber .45 ACP. Function of all four was perfect while accuracy was fine. Couldn't ask for a better day on the range and for what some think to be "obsolete" pistols - I don't - they worked exactly the way they are supposed to work. I can't ask for more than that.Shot my 1911 today and let me tell you, it didn't feel obsolete at all.
Thank you, that's a nicest thing anybody told me since last Thursday. No, Friday, but still, thank you. See, when there are 118 participants in a thread and you're one of three debating against the remainder 115, you do have to flex a little. Hopefully my awesomeness didn't get me rent-free with you; if yes, I am happy to send a couple of boxes of ammo or something.You are everything everybody else who posts in this thread only wishes they could be. You're more active, more fit, more perceptive, more intelligent, more knowledgeable about handguns, more accurate and capable with handguns, have only the most superior handguns and gear, and you're more than willing to share in those facts. All we all gotta do is read all about it here for you've said so.
Lemme take a stab in a multiple choice format:And yet, some of us are still willing to go about both clueless and lopsided, toting our 1911s and not accepting that they are obsolete. Why is that?
The most inspirational shooter in my USPSA club is a D class. Walks from target to target. If they are close, plugs in two close holes next to letter A, and walks to the next one. If they are far, might miss one here and there.My guess is old and stubborn.
No-no, the hike was about 700 feet vertical gain although my altimeter may have been off. The elevation is about 6000 ft. Utah.yvk, beautiful country! only 700ft? and snow on the mts. must be ak. thanks!
Your math is rather complicated for me. Like many very handsome people, I am a little dumb. I simply see it that way: it is either 29 oz that are pulling my pants to the side and make belt dig into the opposite side, or 42 oz. Your logarithmic ratios totally got me out of my element.From m1911 to Glock*1:
An increase of trigger pressure by up to 3 1/4 lbs ( 52oz ), a 45 - 100%*2 increase, born by one finger is nothing ...
... if you cannot handle that, you have inadequate skills.
A decrease of 6.5oz. mass / weight, a .3% decrease*3, born by the legs is essential ...
... [ not sure what goes here ... "else you must be abusing diuretics." maybe? ]
So far that's the bulk of my take-aways for the argument. Some allusions to the one argument with which I agree ... though do not take very seriously: capacity. To that argument I've written: high-cap 1911s. My 1st 1911-derived CCW is a Bul M-5, 13rds of .45ACP. The M-5 is also polymer frame ... but I cannot feel the weight of a steel government-length in my holster, thus cannot feel the weight of the Bul any less. Prefer reduced recoil of modern 9mm? Even more choices available to me there: P-O P189S ( steel alas ); Staccato-XC ... wow ...; and W.C. "EDC X9" ... likewise wow*4.
*1- Both of which, BTW, I like.
*2- Based upon 3.25 - 4.5lb vs. 6.5lb
*3- Based upon a 140lb person. Much less for me.
*4- Holster arrived yesterday, but family visiting ... tonight after music lessons, tried some draws ... oh mercy.