1911Forum banner

81 - 100 of 399 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
Excuse me?!? A cocked 1911 with a manual safety and passive grip safety is somehow more dangerous than a loaded Glock that will fire if anything catches on the trigger? :hrm:
The OP was referring to a 1911. Glocks aren't the best thing to carry loaded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
522 Posts
A reliable 1911 can be a great carry gun. It is a good thing that some people realize their level of ability and experience is not up to the standard for them to carry one. People have a tendency to excuse any malfunction with their preferred guns as ammo or magazine problems but if someone elses gun malfunctions it's only a gun problem.

1911s are made by a lot of companies. When a Glock malfunctions a lot of them have been modified with aftermarket parts to improve them but it also increases the chance of malfunctions until adjustments are made. This is similar to what has occured with 1911s over the years.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
71,903 Posts
Just a little tidbit on 1911 reliability. During the US military's JSSAP tests in the early 1980s the M1911A1 was the control weapon, and it was shown that it had a mean rounds between failures (MRBF) of around 3,500 rounds. At the time that was considered excellent for an automatic pistol. Only the Browning Hi-Power, Walther P38 and Tokarev TT-33 were as good as the M1911A1 up to that point. But once the military started testing the various 9mm pistols during JSSAP they discovered the Beretta 92SB and the SIG P226 were easily going 6,000 rounds between failures. Of course as we know the Beretta 92SB-F eventually won that competition and thus the new military contract.

During the second round of tests in 1988 when S&W had contested the Beretta's selection the US military used off-the-shelf samples of the Beretta instead of factory-supplied samples. Those pistols proved reliable in excess of 10,000 rounds MRBF.

Modern-day pistols like the Glock and its clones all tend to have a similar MRBF, and because of that our expectations for reliability have increased. It's not that the 1911 is unreliable, it's just that military/LE no longer consider a 3,500 MRBF standard to be acceptable for a full-sized service pistol. It's kinda like the 1960s when a Dodge Charger could do the quarter mile in 14 seconds. Today we expect a fast car to be able to do it in under 12.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,217 Posts
Because most people have never seen a skilled 1911 user, I'm the only person locally who uses one and the only .45 shooter. It's not gonna be common for people to have a good opinion when they never encounter one outside of 70 year olds barely hitting paper at the range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,292 Posts
And how many civilians (non-competition shooters) will ever get to 3,500 rounds through each of their multiple carry guns? How often do you hear of which gun is currently in the "Carry Rotation"? How many people here only have ONE 1911?
I know many of us here have fired a lot more rounds than that - but all through only ONE gun? I have multiple 1911s - the only ones I know greatly exceeding that round count are my competition guns.

And that early 1980's test used well used M1911s - the newest of which dated to 1945. Is that a fair comparison to brand new, massaged, company provided test guns? As I recall, the original M1911s made 6,000 rounds without failure. Why did the stat change? Age and use.

More to the point, at what point does this cease to matter about the brand new Colt Competition or Defender you are wearing on your belt? Irrelevant govt. stats to 98% of owners. MRBF was simply a great justification for choosing otherwise inferior weapons whose only real virtue is "More Bullets of Inferior Caliber" and a clumsy manual of arms.....

Example: The M9's trigger/manual of arms SUCKS compared to handling a 1911. And yes, a manual safety is a huge safety advantage - unless you are hiring dummies who can't figure out how to operate a safety - who should not be in uniform and probably should not even be allowed to handle guns.....

Slim, handy, correct ergonomic grip angle, and unmatched trigger for a much more likely first round hit - the 1911 is still the best fighting handgun - unless you MISS A LOT..... Then you should consider a high cap 2011.... Those of you who are really concerned about crowds - keep an M4 at hand in the cabin - and you will notice at all of the riot shootings - when the first two or three rounds go off, everybody runs....CC
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
478 Posts
Example: The M9's trigger/manual of arms SUCKS compared to handling a 1911. [snip]
Slim, handy, correct ergonomic grip angle, and unmatched trigger for a much more likely first round hit - the 1911 is still the best fighting handgun - unless you MISS A LOT..... Then you should consider a high cap 2011.... Those of you who are really concerned about crowds - keep an M4 at hand in the cabin - and you will notice at all of the riot shootings - when the first two or three rounds go off, everybody runs....CC
If you're still talking about the military, the quality of the trigger is way, way, way down the list of priorities for a military.

What is easier for a unit armorer to maintain, a fleet of M9s or a fleet of 1911s?
What adds less weight to an already overburdened soldier, the M9 and its associated combat load, or the 1911 and its associated combat load?
What costs less to buy up front, and what costs less in parts and maintenance labor over its lifetime, the M9 or the 1911?
How much does the ammo weigh? What volume do X number of rounds take up of 9mm vs. .45 ACP? These are very important questions related to sustainment. Each vehicle can only carry so much weight so anything we can reduce the weight of helps with sustainment.
What weapons system is easier to achieve a basic minimum level of accuracy and proficiency with? We're not talking bullseye competition here, and almost all troops in the military who carry a pistol at all receive next to no training and even less practice with it. For all intents and purposes most military folks, unless they are also gun enthusiasts, are just a step or two above random folks off the street when it comes to shooting pistols. I'm not talking about special forces here.
These and many other issues are probably all more important to the military in making its decision about a sidearm than the quality of the trigger or most other comparisons of the individual weapons competing.

What I've said above applies to a military's choice in sidearm. Most of that is irrelevant in the context of an individual choice of CCW weapon, which the thread was started for. I've already previously stated that for a competent, experienced pistol afficionado who likes the 1911, has a good one, and wants to carry it, I won't argue with that at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,354 Posts
1. They have never shot one, therefore they don't know any better.
2. They can't afford a nice 1911, therefore bash it out of jealousy.
3. Newer generation likes plastic guns.
4. Newer generation can't shoot straight, therefore needs higher magazine capacity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
I guess I am getting to the party late as I just saw this thread, but my answer to the OP's question would be, the haters of Model 1911 pistols reason for bashing them is most likely because they have never fired or carried a quality produced model 1911 before. I have owned a couple of Mil Spec SA's back in the day and never had a problem with either one. They were not custom made pistols, but they performed great. However, I have owned, fired plenty and carried Ed Brown models for the past several years and they have been flawless. Any weapon can fail, but I still trust a well made 1911. They say, "plastic is fantastic", but I say "steel is real!" What ever cranks your tractor and the key to mine is Ed Brown 1911's.

Sincerely

PastorDW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,555 Posts
I think the biggest problem is generational. At 50 I'm at the tail end of the generations who remember when the .45 was still the standard-issue handgun of the US military. Guys half my age grew up in the Glock era, and remember the 1911 as something they saw in old war movies or what their dad or grandpa kept in a cigar box next to the bed. So naturally they're going to dismiss it as an old or outdated design, because to them it's as old as a Luger or Broomhandle is to us older guys.

A few years ago , I was at one of my favorite LGS with a few vintage 1911's on the counter , trying to decide , when a few youngsters , who look like they rode up on skateboards came in. They came up to the counter , l stepped back so they could see , when one looked at the 1911s , looked at me and said, "Dude , just get a Glock!" :dope:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
522 Posts
What is the highest confirmed round count in combat use of a 1911.? Even being generous and saying 100 rounds at what point of testing does a 3500 or 6000 rounds without failure become statistically insignificant or meaningless?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,555 Posts
What is the highest confirmed round count in combat use of a 1911.? Even being generous and saying 100 rounds at what point of testing does a 3500 or 6000 rounds without failure become statistically insignificant or meaningless?

The military LOVES statistics! And testing 5x the realm of possibility. Most small arms , especially pistols , fire far more rounds in training then combat.

I worked for a defense contractor and we tested avionics stuff at 10x the stresses and vibrations any combat aircraft would encounter.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
71,903 Posts
And that early 1980's test used well used M1911s - the newest of which dated to 1945. Is that a fair comparison to brand new, massaged, company provided test guns? As I recall, the original M1911s made 6,000 rounds without failure. Why did the stat change? Age and use.
3,500 MRBF meant the average number of rounds between malfunctions. The old 6,000 round figure that was reached during the original tests in March 1911 was the number of rounds it went without actually breaking down. Back then you were lucky if you could get any handgun to fire that many rounds without needing a trip back to the armorer's bench. Both the Colt and Savage pistols tested were cleaned and inspected every 100 rounds*. The Colt never failed, but the Savage failed numerous times and by the end of the tests it had suffered several cracked and broken parts and was no longer functioning well.

*Source: Colt .45 Service Pistols by Charles Clawson
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
I have copied only ONE of the problem posts about a 1911. Now everyone knows you get more complaints than compliments. But all the posts about buying a 1911 then making it "better", sending it to a gunsmith After paying big bucks all make a lot of people shy away.


Quote:


Originally Posted by Green Dragoon View Post

I won't trust a DW until 1000+ rounds. I had and have several. They all experienced issues until at least 1,000 rounds except for one, an A2. The A2 was good right out of the box. One, never cleared up so I dumped it.

I've copied and pasted text from the DW owners manual regarding the break-in process:

Break-in
1. Your Dan Wesson Handgun is built to tight tolerances. Lubrication and cleaning is key in the break-in process.
2. Only use generous amounts of the recommend lubricants on the rails of your Dan Wesson.
3. We recommend that you field strip, clean and re-oil every 50 rounds during break in.
4. We recommend a break-in period of 300-500 rounds before the gun is competition/combat ready.
5. Only use quality factory ball ammunition for the break-in process.
6. Generally what you will see during this breakin process is failure to go into battery and or sluggish slide operation. This is normal for tightly fitted 1911’s and will begin to work itself out during the break-in process.
7. If for some reason the handgun continues to have issues after this break-in process please contact Dan Wesson.
8. Once your Dan Wesson pistol is properly broken in only then is it recommended to use hollow points.
9. We do not recommend the use of +P ammunition to speed up the break-in process. This will usually cause more problems.

Again just one of many posts about problems. I will point out that in the few, for this forum, 8 1911's I have had only one gave me real problems. A Wiley Clapp Colt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,555 Posts
And how many civilians (non-competition shooters) will ever get to 3,500 rounds through each of their multiple carry guns? How often do you hear of which gun is currently in the "Carry Rotation"? How many people here only have ONE 1911?
I know many of us here have fired a lot more rounds than that - but all through only ONE gun? I have multiple 1911s - the only ones I know greatly exceeding that round count are my competition guns.

And that early 1980's test used well used M1911s - the newest of which dated to 1945. Is that a fair comparison to brand new, massaged, company provided test guns? As I recall, the original M1911s made 6,000 rounds without failure. Why did the stat change? Age and use.
:confused: Given the improvements in metallurgy and heat-treatment since 1945 , and adhering to original dimensions and tolerancing , I reckon that 6000rd figure should be bumped up a bit in a quality modern manufacture 1911 , no?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,430 Posts
Maybe it’s due to the increase in the gay population?
Sort-of.

Fee-Bee thinks it is the "premiere LE organization" in the country and tries to call the shots (pun intended) as to what the real Police should carry. They might actually be, but one thing they are decidedly not are "Police".

Unfortunately, the changing and lowering of their hiring standards and the retirement of military veterans from that organization lead to an increased PF (see message #62) in it, which means they moved from a 38SPl to the .357mag, then a 10mm to a .40S&W, and now the 9mm Punibellum, so all the women and girly-men can qualify w/ something they will never fire in-anger. I fully expect a future study by them to "prove" how the .380 is the best Police weapon out there (sound familiar?), once their women and girly-men complain about the 9mm's "heavy recoil" and inability to qualify w/ it.

Where does the 1911 in .45ACP fit into that organization? Its members who might actually have to defend themselves and shoot someone frequently got permission over the decades to carry a 1911. Why? Because it is a better defensive-handgun than anything else out there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,569 Posts
I guess this is a semi-rhetorical question. I know the major objections, which I have listed below with my thoughts on each. I just don't understand the hate towards the 1911 for CCW and how far people go to belittle anyone who does.

I recently posted in a regional forum looking for advice on the best carry 1911 that is compliant in my state. You can't imagine how many snarky replies I received. Why would you carry a 1911, bad choice, capacity, etc., etc.

Manual safety
Folks make a huge issue of the manual safety on the 1911. To me, it is a training issue. If you commit to only carry single action autos, this becomes fairly ingrained and automatic to a point. Now, I thankfully have never been in a situation where I have had to draw a firearm so I don't know what will happen under stress, but my hope is that with consistent training it wouldn't be an issue God forbid.

Capacity
This one, especially for me, is a non-issue. My state restricts us to 10 round magazines. I carry a commander 1911 in 9mm which gives me 10+1. I feel that this would be adequate for most people regardless of your state and local laws. None of us go looking for trouble or will likely be in a sustained gun fight. I can understand objections from LEO's or military personnel, but for civilians, I just don't think this is a big issue.

Reliability
Ok, I can understand this objection as I have owned a 1911 or two that wasn't 100%, but I think reliable models are out there or they can be made reliable with the help of a qualified 1911 smith. No, they will never be Glocks or M&P's in this regard, but I think with a little care and attention, they can be reliable enough for CCW.

What do you guys think?
The biggest demographic group for 1911s is gray hairs. Nobody under 50 watched John Wayne come over that burm with his 1911 in hand. Hell, maybe 60. Then you gotta spend a grand to get a decent one and they need some tuning. So you either have to get a custom or boutique $3k 1911 or have a gunsmith on retainer...or learn to work on 1911s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,555 Posts
The M9 adoption took many years before all had them. 1911's were still being used long after , especially in smaller Nat. Guard units. I got off active duty Navy in '83 , and my reserve base armory still had 1911s and A1's , till I got out for good in '88. Never saw a single M9.

I've read about some Reserve and Nat.Guard that deployed for the Gulf that had 1911s and didn't get M9's till they got where they were going.

It happened with rifles too. Some Nat. Guard units never got M-14s. Some still had Garands into the 70's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,555 Posts
I've been shooting 1911's for about 40yrs now. I've owned dozens of other make/model pistols thru the years , but it's the pistol I've handled most during those years so it just feels right.

One thing is no other pistol has felt so right when simply tucked into my waistband , aka Mexican-carry (before the term became politically incorrect , racially insensitive , etc). I often run out for a small , quick errand , and don't want to 'gear-up' with a holster , and simply tuck that big flat thing in my belt. Never have to constantly check and reposition as I've had to do with any revolver , my BHP or even my CZ-75. It just stays there. :)
 
81 - 100 of 399 Posts
Top