[1saxman]

Interesting concept about Browning doing a 1911. The only way it could ever happen would be for them to have the gun made, probably by Twin Pines. Who would want it? Just a cast gun with Browning on it. That's the way everybody is going now - assembling, not making. That's okay - just makes our old forged steel Colts more valuable.

 

[DPris]

This is wandering a bit from the truth regarding JMB.
He was never a Colt employee, and the current Browning company was started after his death. He died in his office at FN in Belgium in 1926.
Browning sold his first patents to Winchester for a flat fee on each one. That included many that Winchester never produced & bought just to keep the basic ideas from being produced anywhere else in the US. The reasoning was that since there were only so many "ideas" & operating principles that could exist, somebody other than Browning would probably come up with them sooner or later and if Browning thunk 'em up first & Winchester already owned 'em, there'd be much less competition.
After several years of that the relationship ended when Browning decided he was shorting himself & offered a design to Winchester with an ongoing royalty attached, instead of a flat fee. Winchester said no, Browning said goodby.
He worked loosely with Colt on several handgun designs & had an office there, but never was employed by Colt. Patents sold or assigned to Colt involved royalties on all designs produced by Colt.
Browning had an office at FN in Belgium & developed several pistols for European sales produced by them. He was never an employee of anybody but John Moses Browning.
Denis

 

[Robert Hairless]

This is wandering a bit from the truth regarding JMB.
He was never a Colt employee, and the current Browning company was started after his death. He died in his office at FN in Belgium in 1926.
Browning sold his first patents to Winchester for a flat fee on each one. That included many that Winchester never produced & bought just to keep the basic ideas from being produced anywhere else in the US. The reasoning was that since there were only so many "ideas" & operating principles that could exist, somebody other than Browning would probably come up with them sooner or later and if Browning thunk 'em up first & Winchester already owned 'em, there'd be much less competition.
After several years of that the relationship ended when Browning decided he was shorting himself & offered a design to Winchester with an ongoing royalty attached, instead of a flat fee. Winchester said no, Browning said goodby.
He worked loosely with Colt on several handgun designs & had an office there, but never was employed by Colt. Patents sold or assigned to Colt involved royalties on all designs produced by Colt.
Browning had an office at FN in Belgium & developed several pistols for European sales produced by them. He was never an employee of anybody but John Moses Browning.
Denis

That's more in line with what I thought, Denis. My impression is that Browning and Winchester didn't get along well, but that FN appreciated Browning much.

 

[Jim Watson]

"I have never been a fan of the High Power and wonder what kind of pistol JMB would have designed had he been able to draw upon the fruits of his previous labors."

Mr Browning did not design the G.P. as manufactured, he did not live long enough. D. Saive gets and deserves a lot of credit for converting the Browning concept and the unsold G.R. into a salable gun. But one thing he did was to plow Browning design features back into the FN guns after the Colt-Browning patents expired. Things like the frame-side thumb safety, the slide stop holding the halves together, and the barrel bushing. (Yes, a G.P. has a barrel bushing although permanently installed in production guns.)

 

[DPris]

Browning & Winchester actually got along great, till the day Browning pitched royalties along with the latest gun he took to New Haven. After that, it was over.
FN loved him from the start & had no problem either recognizing that he was largely responsible for their early growth & success, or in paying him for it. His European patents & designs were so popular that "Browning" became synonymous with "autopistol" in most of Europe, and FN was the only European company he worked with. Throughout the FN plant he was known as "Le Maitre", "The Master", and was widely mourned there when he died.
To get back to the original question- Browning would have to contract with some maker for a special run of Browning-marked 1911s, and there really wouldn't be much point in them contracting for an on-going series in a really over-crowded 1911 market. They wouldn't have any interest in coming up with anything radically new, they don't offer custom work, and there's already enough variation in quality & modifications to cover most needs. The only thing they'd have to offer would be a pretty pistol that said "Browning" on it, and that's not enough to carry longterm production.
Denis

 

[Gammon]

Although the Philippine-American War officially ended in 1902 after the capture of Emilio Aguinaldo, the Muslim Moros in the southern islands continued their uprisings for another decade. The U.S. retained the Philippine Islands as its territory until July 4, 1946, when it granted independence to the Philippine nation. I didn't intend to argue that the Model 1911 had any significant influence on the conflict, and I'm sorry if it seemed that I was. My point was that the conflict stimulated the U.S. Army specifications for what became the Model of 1911, which is true. I don't think that the U.S. Army ever "solved the Muslim problem" in the Philippines or elsewhere.

I wasn't aware that Browning worked as a Colt employee when he designed the 1911. He entered into many business relationships after designing his first firearm in 1879, most notably with Winchester and FN, but I hadn't known that he was a salaried employee of any company. Is it possible, do you think, that the relationship with Colt was of a kind that today might be called a "consultant" rather than an "employee"? I'm surprised that an independent firearms designer like Browning would become an employee of any company, in part because the company could claim ownership of any and all other work he did while he was a salaried employee.

No great matter, either of those things, in the context of the question that began this thread.

My choice of the word "employee" was a poor one. I meant to say that JMB designed the 1911 for Colt and thus they owned the patents. "Consultant" would have been a better choice.

 

[DPris]

How about "designer"?
He was not a consultant, he was the originator, designer and developer who sold it to Colt. He approached them with the gun (and several other designs), Colt provided an office, they provided input occasionally, and they had the manufacturing facilities and distribution network to market the gun.
"Consultant" sort of implies that Colt came up with the idea & paid Browning to work on it for (or with) them. He did not design the gun "for" Colt, he chose Colt to produce it.
Denis

 

[Robert Hairless]

How about "designer"?
He was not a consultant, he was the originator, designer and developer who sold it to Colt. He approached them with the gun (and several other designs), Colt provided an office, they provided input occasionally, and they had the manufacturing facilities and distribution network to market the gun.
"Consultant" sort of implies that Colt came up with the idea & paid Browning to work on it for (or with) them. He did not design the gun "for" Colt, he chose Colt to produce it.
Denis

Okay. That's the kind of relationship I tried to suggest in my brief impressionistic sketch, Denis, so I'm glad that my old memory wasn't too bad. I wouldn't have been troubled if it were: it's much better to have things put right.

Gammon, no criticism of you was intended--none at all. It has been a good conversation. Thank you.

 

[DPris]

Denis

 

[kevinmitnick]

Original Poster: Maybe this???

I cannot answer as to why they don't but I can at least back up your question. A lot of people jumped in here to correct you and actually they are incorrect in their statements. (if we just use the word "browning" and not the full proper JMB.)


So I was at the store and in the case they had a "Browning 1911."
Yes. The brand Browning. A MANUFACTURER who's DBA is "Browning"

Don't believe me? Here's your sign:
http://www.browning.com/products/firearms/pistols/1911-22.html

Notice it is BROWNING dot com not Colt. hmmmmm......


So they DO make a 1911.

The real question should have been
"All I can find with Browning in a 1911 is the 1911-22 and the 1911-380. WHY DOESN'T BROWNING MAKE A 1911-45??"

So I post THAT question to all of the history buffs who chimed in.

Colt doesn't even come into play in this thread if you really took his question at face value.

Incidentally, I held and inspected the 1911-22 pictured in my posted link. It was a GREAT pistol but I have no use for a 22 pistol especially an automatic.

I thought in my head and asked the clerk too exactly what this poster asked.

I said "Do you have this in a .45??" he said "No just the .22 and the .380. Browning doesn't make a .45 version of this pistol."

I then asked "WHY?"

So the challenge stands... WHY DON'T THEY MAKE IT?! They would put all of the other manf. out of business at least for that model. They would have a dominant market share for the 1911-45 (their presumed designation based on the other two)

I know that the M1911 is synonymous with Colt rather than Browning in regards to manf. Typically if Browning was brought into the sentence it would probably be like "The tried model was Browning's Colt 45" or something like that....

Either way a huge amount of info in this thread!!
:rock: