I had no idea. I know they designed it to be smaller.
1911 9mm V 45 ACP
- Thread starter Mikef262
- Start date
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I was not involved in the EMP design, and I didn't mean to imply that I was. At the time, I was a new and pretty much unknown gun scribe, but that didn't stop me from expressing opinions. The word "on the street" at the time was that Springfield only sent out one prototype pistol, which made the rounds of the big name reviewers for all the major dead trees gun rags, and I believe there was a requirement that none of them were allowed to print their reviews until everyone had gotten a chance to play with the prototype.hammie said:
I wasn't in that elite group, I'm sorry to say, but I did get to test a prototype of the similar pistol that Para-Ordnance brought out in .45 GAP a year or two later. My exposure to an actual sample of a Springfield EMP was one of the early 9mm models. It was sweet -- the only reason I didn't purchase the test pistol was that the price was way out of my budget for a gun that I didn't need.
Considering the whole gun is proportioned for a .45 caliber cartridge, I never thought the gun made any sense in anything BUT .45 GAP. If I want a pistol chambered in a little cartridge, I want a little gun. If SIG would make a "P938+", holding an additional round or two, and with a 1/2" longer barrel, there's be no need for the EMP.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
But the EMP is not proportional to the .45 caliber cartridge. It was acaled down specifically for the shorter .45 GAP cartridge -- which was specifically engineered and developed to fit in a 9mm-sized package.RickB said:
Conversely, if you enlarge the 938 by a half inch in the barrel and add two rounds -- there's no need for the 938 when you already have the EMP.
EMP:
Barrel: 3"
Length: 6.63"
Height: 4.81"
938:
Barrel: 3"
Length: 5.9"
Height: 3.9"
938 Enlarged:
Barrel 3.5"
Length: 6.4"
Height: 4.7" (Estimated)
The P938 is considerably more compact than the EMP, in every dimension, and even lengthening the grip and barrel a half-inch, it would still be smaller and lighter, since it's dimensioned for a .36" round.
The EMP is .45-sized in all of its dimensions, weighing ten ounces more than the P938.
I'll measure the height and width of the respective slides and frame.
EDIT:
P938 slide is 7% narrower, 18% smaller in height. and frame is 25% narrower, than their .45-sized counterparts in the EMP.
The EMP is .45-sized in all of its dimensions, weighing ten ounces more than the P938.
I'll measure the height and width of the respective slides and frame.
EDIT:
P938 slide is 7% narrower, 18% smaller in height. and frame is 25% narrower, than their .45-sized counterparts in the EMP.
Last edited:
bamaranger
New member
9mm
I have seen 9mm 1911 type pistols do very well in IDPA shooting. The weight
of an all steel 1911 tames what recoil the 9mm has down to an extremely mild level. The great single action trigger on good 1911's and correspondingly good sights, make for a set up that is both fast and accurate in the right hands of course.
Mild recoil, good sights and great trigger make a very shootable package.
I have seen 9mm 1911 type pistols do very well in IDPA shooting. The weight
of an all steel 1911 tames what recoil the 9mm has down to an extremely mild level. The great single action trigger on good 1911's and correspondingly good sights, make for a set up that is both fast and accurate in the right hands of course.
Mild recoil, good sights and great trigger make a very shootable package.
rgerena@san.rr.com
Inactive
Got a 1911 in .45ACP. Don't need two.
Got one in 9mm, cause I wanted another 1911, but didn't feel the need for another one in .45ACP. Already had one.
Then built one in .40 S&W. Cause, why not.
Of the three, I prefer the .40 S&W. It's my USPSA Single Stack gun, works well, is super accurate, and brass is easier to find on the ground at matches than .45ACP, which almost nobody in the gun games out here shoots anymore.
At some point I bought a newer (2018) Colt GCNM in 9mm, still not sure why. It shoots ok, but has the old style grip safety and spur hammer. I'll probably give it a BTGS and proper hammer at some point. Or trade it for something. Or not, not really sure why I got it, or why I keep it.
I also built one in .22LR, on a Sig upper I got cheap years ago. Upper is junk, but shoots ok for what it is.
Got one in 9mm, cause I wanted another 1911, but didn't feel the need for another one in .45ACP. Already had one.
Then built one in .40 S&W. Cause, why not.
Of the three, I prefer the .40 S&W. It's my USPSA Single Stack gun, works well, is super accurate, and brass is easier to find on the ground at matches than .45ACP, which almost nobody in the gun games out here shoots anymore.
At some point I bought a newer (2018) Colt GCNM in 9mm, still not sure why. It shoots ok, but has the old style grip safety and spur hammer. I'll probably give it a BTGS and proper hammer at some point. Or trade it for something. Or not, not really sure why I got it, or why I keep it.
I also built one in .22LR, on a Sig upper I got cheap years ago. Upper is junk, but shoots ok for what it is.
I hold the 1911 in very high regard. I certainly CAN be carried EDC. Some do.
Frankly,I was not often carrying my 1911.
Someone mentioned the BHP. Great handgun. But the Shield Plus I just picked up has (IIRC) the same 12+1 mag capacity in the same 9mm ctg at only 20 oz,slim width,and an MSRP everyday price of $530. With spare 10 rd mag.
Certainly the Shield has some great competition. There are other good choices.
But,for a carry 9 mm.....Its hard for me to choose a 9mm 1911.
The 1911 is still a fine piece when the business at hand is SHOOTING rather than carrying. There ARE 9mm Major loads that show pretty zippy ballistics. The 9mm 1911 is very good for controllability. There IS the trigger. And even RIA is making a double stack.
Without sending any disrespect to the excellent Glock pistols,there are folks who will choose a 1911 because its not a Glock.
My mind does not crave a 9mm 1911,but its easier for me to make rational sense out of knocking over steel with a 9mm double stack 1911 than it is to carry near 3 lbs of single stack 8 round full size 1911 when I can carry a 20 oz 12+1 9mm.
Frankly,I was not often carrying my 1911.
Someone mentioned the BHP. Great handgun. But the Shield Plus I just picked up has (IIRC) the same 12+1 mag capacity in the same 9mm ctg at only 20 oz,slim width,and an MSRP everyday price of $530. With spare 10 rd mag.
Certainly the Shield has some great competition. There are other good choices.
But,for a carry 9 mm.....Its hard for me to choose a 9mm 1911.
The 1911 is still a fine piece when the business at hand is SHOOTING rather than carrying. There ARE 9mm Major loads that show pretty zippy ballistics. The 9mm 1911 is very good for controllability. There IS the trigger. And even RIA is making a double stack.
Without sending any disrespect to the excellent Glock pistols,there are folks who will choose a 1911 because its not a Glock.
My mind does not crave a 9mm 1911,but its easier for me to make rational sense out of knocking over steel with a 9mm double stack 1911 than it is to carry near 3 lbs of single stack 8 round full size 1911 when I can carry a 20 oz 12+1 9mm.
I'm not a 1911 collector and there are lots of other guns that need to be shot 
but i have had eight 1911s in .45 over time and two in 9mm. I did not think the first 9mm did anything particularly special, so I sold it. It didn't take long to realize a 9mm 1911 is simply a fun gun and I bought another one. A 1911 in .45 is also a hugely fun gun, but in a different way from the 9mm.
but i have had eight 1911s in .45 over time and two in 9mm. I did not think the first 9mm did anything particularly special, so I sold it. It didn't take long to realize a 9mm 1911 is simply a fun gun and I bought another one. A 1911 in .45 is also a hugely fun gun, but in a different way from the 9mm.1911's in .38 Super are "funner" still. And, the mags do not have that goofy spacer in the back.I'm not a 1911 collector and there are lots of other guns that need to be shot
Last edited:
I agree with your feeding comment, Tom Servo. Though I've never had much of a problem with either.
Nice piece, Dahermit. Can't tell, alloy or steel framed? I've built up two over the years: one a Combat Commander .45 that I fitted (minimally) a .38 Super & 9mm Luger Colt slide/bbl. to. The 2nd is still with me: a Ruger CMD in .45 that is dimensionally identical to my previous Colt. Both fed and fired 9mm & .38 Super with only a changed ejector being necessary. BTW, the .38/9mm ejector works just fine with the original .45 bbl./slide. Of the three, the .38 is the most accurate, and too, it's POI is within 1" of the 9mm POI at 15 yds. Pic of the Ruger/Colt .38 Super. IIRC, those two slide/bbl's, (9mm & .38 Super) cost me ~$100 back in the late 80's from ads in the Shotgun News!
I also have an all steel Commander in .38 Super, which makes more sense from my perspective...very high speed (1300 fps with a 124 gr bullet is no problem and doesn't stress the gun), and in my example, superb accuracy (sub 2" groups at 25 yds from a sitting position).
In my use, I reload only nickeled .38 Super cases...as they're flipped 7 ways from Sunday during ejection and the silver case is easier to find than brass in the long grass range. All in all, the Super's a better round than the 9mm Luger, more versatile. BTW, for those of you interested, .38 Super 1911 magazines will feed 9mm just as well, but not the reverse. And a .38 Super bbl. will (in most instances, a drop-in fit), will turn your ho-hum 9mm into a .38 Super tiger! YMMv, Rod
Nice piece, Dahermit. Can't tell, alloy or steel framed? I've built up two over the years: one a Combat Commander .45 that I fitted (minimally) a .38 Super & 9mm Luger Colt slide/bbl. to. The 2nd is still with me: a Ruger CMD in .45 that is dimensionally identical to my previous Colt. Both fed and fired 9mm & .38 Super with only a changed ejector being necessary. BTW, the .38/9mm ejector works just fine with the original .45 bbl./slide. Of the three, the .38 is the most accurate, and too, it's POI is within 1" of the 9mm POI at 15 yds. Pic of the Ruger/Colt .38 Super. IIRC, those two slide/bbl's, (9mm & .38 Super) cost me ~$100 back in the late 80's from ads in the Shotgun News!
That's my thought as well. I'm a .45 ACP advocate, but do own a Series 70 Colt 1911 as well. It's a heavy gun for the cartridge but very pleasant to shoot...but again, limited in capacity if that makes a difference. An alloy frame Commander (the original Colt offering), does cut the weight, but again, it comes down to capacity...and that rings many modern shooter's bell.
I also have an all steel Commander in .38 Super, which makes more sense from my perspective...very high speed (1300 fps with a 124 gr bullet is no problem and doesn't stress the gun), and in my example, superb accuracy (sub 2" groups at 25 yds from a sitting position).
In my use, I reload only nickeled .38 Super cases...as they're flipped 7 ways from Sunday during ejection and the silver case is easier to find than brass in the long grass range. All in all, the Super's a better round than the 9mm Luger, more versatile. BTW, for those of you interested, .38 Super 1911 magazines will feed 9mm just as well, but not the reverse. And a .38 Super bbl. will (in most instances, a drop-in fit), will turn your ho-hum 9mm into a .38 Super tiger! YMMv, Rod
Last edited:
Chadio,
My buddy has a Colt that looks identical to that, chambered in 45. It shoots wonderfully! I too am looking for a Colt but have had no luck finding the one I am after in stock anywhere. Hence my start of this thread. I understand CZ now owns Colt, as well as Dan Wesson. I have heard the Dan Wesson 1911's now being produced by CZ are still very good quality, hopefully that remains true when they begin pumping out the Colt products.
My buddy has a Colt that looks identical to that, chambered in 45. It shoots wonderfully! I too am looking for a Colt but have had no luck finding the one I am after in stock anywhere. Hence my start of this thread. I understand CZ now owns Colt, as well as Dan Wesson. I have heard the Dan Wesson 1911's now being produced by CZ are still very good quality, hopefully that remains true when they begin pumping out the Colt products.
trophyrider
New member
I just bought one, but mine is .38 Super.
I could never see the reasoning in 1911 in 9mm. If you are going to carry a gun that big why not 45? I also could never figure out why 38Super never caught on. I always wanted a GC in 38Super. I had a Spanish knock off of 1911 in 9mm Largo. I only had $50 in it so I put sights on it. I used 38Super brass that I thinned rims and loaded at 38Super levels. Gun shot very well. Traded it off. Now they want $350 -$400 for those Spanish Stars in 9 Largo.
corneileous
New member
I’ve never shot a 9mm Beretta 92 but being that I’ve heard a lot of people say it’s a very nice and smooth shooting pistol for being that small of cartridge in an all stainless steel handgun that I would assume that a full-size 1911 chambered in 9 mm would be about the same experience.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
> I recall the Colonel describing (paraphrasing) the 1911 [govt] as a large battle pistol
A steel 1911 is heavy, but by modern standards, it's only average-sized, particularly if you're figuring width as well as outline. With a Commander-length barrel, it compares favorably in size against newer "concealed carry" designs.
A steel 1911 is heavy, but by modern standards, it's only average-sized, particularly if you're figuring width as well as outline. With a Commander-length barrel, it compares favorably in size against newer "concealed carry" designs.