1911 draw by Chic Gaylord

D

Doug.38PR

Moderator
Looking at Chic Gaylords demonstration (using is army sergent demo) of how to draw the 1911 (apparently nobody back then liked cocked and locked) quickly and have it ready to go I am wondering how exactly the sergent did this? I tried it against the side of my pants (with the gun unloaded and without the mag obviously:D ) and it doesn't work. If you do it against the rear sights as Gaylord says, seems to me you could hurt the sights, maybe even the gun...maybe even blow your own foot off.
1911draw.jpg


There is another method he shows where the sergent is fanning back a gloved hand against the sights. Seems that isn't possible for the same reasons. Be easier to just grab the slide with your fingers and let go rather than fan the sight.
 
Yes you use the rear sights,Yes it would be hard on adj sights(and the finish of all sights) and YES it is UNSAFE:eek: technique likely to shoot a hole in your leg !
It was one of those things good to know back then. Jeff Cooper also practised this technique but by the middle 70's was NOT advocating it as too many negligent discharges were occuring! And you better believe if you practice this tech nique with a real gun, sooner or later YOU WILL have a negligent discharge!:(
 
You have to remember that when the book was published, we were in the middle of the Western fast-draw craze and a lot of gun writing and trick shooting centered around fast draw. There was some distinction made at the time between quick draw and fast draw. It seems that one was with blanks and the other with either wax bullets or live ammuntion. Either way, it drew a lot of interest and attention at the time.

Some real life gunmen, all lawmen, went in for trick shooting and shooting demonstrations for citizens, and that is certainly a thing of the past. Its hard to imagine any law enforcement agency wanting to advertise that their policemen were actually good with firearms nowadays. Bill Jordan was probably the best known of the lot and I remember reading a lot about him. He was a real fast draw. There was also Bill Toney, if I remember the name correctly. Funny, practically all of them were from the Southwest and most were in the Border Patrol.

Gaylord also illustrated, I think, a reverse draw with a .45 auto carried hammer down on a live round with the pistol just behind the right hipbone. To be fair, he pointed out the dangers of these things and evidently preferred revolvers.
 
Its hard to imagine any law enforcement agency wanting to advertise that their policemen were actually good with firearms nowadays.
Click to expand...

Why not? Sounds like 1) a good incentive to produce officers more proficient in firearms (might cut down on spray and pray panic tactics), 2) Draw public interest in law enforcement and law inforcement interest in public 3) would give criminals a visible reason to fear LEOs (If they get into a gunfight with these guys, we will lose)

Edit: Of course I remember a Polk County Sheriff's deputy telling me a few years ago that police don't generally like any kind of detailed evaluation of their officers proficiency in firearms. One dirty word: LAWYERS! His example was that if it was evaluated in any way that he was a marksman or something like that that could "hit the bullseye 25 out of 25 shots at 50 yards and then a guy with a gun ran into the building and started shooting up the place , he shoots him in between the eyes, and some scoundrel attorney sues claiming that this deputies record with a handgun is so good that he should have been able to shoot the guy in the arm instead of killing him. As he put it, it's not about bad guy gets killed, bad guy got what he deserved anymore it's bad guy gets killed he is somehow a victim and deserves justice. Such as the twisted world in which we live :p
 
Manipulating the slide via the rear sight is a standard one-hand drill....for most all weapons...general safety rules still apply

Newer low-drag style sites often make it difficult/impossible
 
The book describes the draw in considerable detail. It depended on a modified USGI holster. Rubbing the gun against your pants isn't going to work.
Racking an auto against the sights is now considered a severe emergency move.
Gaylord was no fan of the automatic pistol and doesn't discuss them extensively or favorably.
 
I also remember a gun magazine article from the late 1950's about firearms training for the L.A. Police Department. It showed them on the range and that particular photo showed them using a one-handed point method from a crouch. They all appeared to be using S&W K-38's. It stated that officers received additional pay for a high score.

Much later, another gun magazine used to have a regular series about different police departments. The editor said they were discontinued because they were pretty much all the same (and didn't make for interesting articles).
 
If you want to carry a 1911 for self defense have a round in the chamber and carry it cocked and locked. Do not trust your life to uneccesary tricks.
 
I've never tried this with a 1911, but it's pretty much standard in our semi-annual qualifications (Glock 17's). It's called the "Wounded man shoot", but the difference is that the front of the slide is used rather than the rear sight. It's pushed against either the edge of the holster or the edge of the shoe. It's done both strong hand and weak with the other hand in the back pocket. A magazine is loaded with random live/dummy rounds so that you have to do it several times for each mag, and the targets are scored. I confess that I'm the world's lousiest shot in the weak side, one-handed shot :o , and the first couple of times I tried this, I was as nervous as a thief in church :D , but it's pretty much ho-hum today.

Its hard to imagine any law enforcement agency wanting to advertise that their policemen were actually good with firearms nowadays.
Click to expand...
Sadly, that's the truth. A decade ago, we kept records of scores and officers sported expert medals with pride. Today, the only record that's kept is pass / fail, and medals are out. The reason? It's been brought up in court in deadly force cases that those qualifying master or expert should be able to effectively disable (wound) a BG without killing him :rolleyes: :( .
 
The 1911 is going on 100 years old soon and until the last 2 to 3 decades it was not carried c/l.

The gun was designed for mounted calvary troops and meant to carried in a full flap military holster and carried hammer down on an empty chamber. When drawn the slide was racked and the safety put on till you needed to fire. Once done firing the safety was put back on. The safetys were small compared to what most often shows up on 1911s today. When you wanted to reholster the safety was taken off, the hammer lowered with the off hand, or the thumb of the shooting hand, and the piece reholstered. When introduced most soldiers were used to either Colt SAAs or da revolvers and lowering the hammer on a loaded round was a matter of no special concern.

Many soldiers soon found it saved time to simply keep the hammer down on a live round and thumb cock the piece after the draw.

If you have ever run around the coutryside with a 1911 cocked and locked in a full flap GI holster you will see that it don't stay C/L for long. The piece jostles in the rig when jogging or on horseback. Troops did not carry it this way.

The gun was often carried on the half cock notch to keep thumb cocking, or racking the slide easier.

In two world wars and a lot of other wars troops taught themselves other methods of using the 1911 for both strong hand and weak hand: racking the slide one handed, using the rear sights to rack the slide against a boot heel or table edge, thumb cocking or cocking with the heel of the off hand, etc. (There were no FLGRs to impare this in fighting .45s)

The 1911 is a versatile gun.

tipoc
 
I have a 1911 holster from the late 70's/early 80's. It is made by Seldeen Leathersmiths. The holster is designed kind of like a modern fast-draw type with a thumbreak. The difference is that it has a leather stop inside for the front of the slide and the spring plug. The gun is carried in this holster in Condition 3. Grasp the gun as if drawing, but push down. The slide stays put, but the grip/barrel goes down and chambers a round as it comes back up. The thumbreak is also released at his time, and the gun comes out of the holster ready to fire. Very quick in practice, once you get used to it. Obviously, it won't work with a full-lrnght guide rod.

I've never carried this holster for serious use, just to play with at the range. It was once advertised as "the answer" for those who didn't like C&L carry.
 
Read the whole book!

It's hilarious! No kidding.

Chic Gaylord was a holster maker of some reknown. It seems (I've never seen an example of his work) he made a pretty solid holster in terms of construction (the designs were not impressive).

A shootist, he was not.

F'rinstance, in his commentary on being a sucessful gunfighter, part of the requiement is a '...steely eyed glare...' or somesuch nonsense.

F'rinstance, he demonstrated 'fast draw' as if for serious use, with a tied down holster and a High-Standard double action revolver in .22 long rifle.

F'rinstance, his notation that a Colt .38 Special revolver would handle heavy reloads that would turn a Smith & Wesson revolver into a hand grenade.

F'rinstance, he didn't know diddly squat about carrying or using any sort of semi-automatic pistol.

And my favorite, his description of a New York police detective's personal revolver; a Colt New Service in .45 ACP; shooting a reload of a huge bullet, near 300 grains of lead SWC at over 900 feet per second. The revolver was cut down on both ends (which really did happen) and carried as a hideout.

Chic Gaylord really didn't know what he was talking about. (Except maybe for holster construction; the designs he shows are rather primitive.) And he took himself way too seriously.

But I'll buy a copy of the book if I can find one. It's too funny for words and a perfect bad example of how to do things.
 
There are those who think Chic Gaylord advanced the art of holstermaking.

I'd be hard pressed to decide between Chic Gaylord and Bruce Nelson.
Click to expand...
Gary Brommeland

I would have to agree that Gaylord, and Nelson were probably the most influential of the modern day holster makers.
Click to expand...
Louis F. Alessi

There are some who think Chic Gaylord advanced the art of holstermaking.

Granted that Gaylord's musings about early gunfighters don't match his discussion of their holsters there are those who have seen the elephant and won competitions at the world level who have gone on the record with more than a little respect and admiration for Mr. Gaylord.
 
Rubbing the gun against your pants isn't going to work.
Click to expand...
I dunno. I have practiced it as a one-handed drill. Doesn't work well on dress pants, or pants with a high polyester content. But seems to work fine on jeans. Just gotta use enough force. Sights dig in pretty well. Leaves a nasty bruise.
 
While it certainly is dated technique wise. Chic was the real deal! He taught me to crouch and point shoot (Fairbarn method used by OSS ect.) with that High Standard when I was 14 or so!

"his description of a New York police detective's personal revolver; a Colt New Service in .45 ACP; shooting a reload of a huge bullet, near 300 grains of lead SWC at over 900 feet per second. "

I don't know about the bullet, it IS possible as I get 800+ fps with a 286 cast .45 AR load in my new Services.

And that NYPD detective was my Uncle Gil I believe , as he left me his Real Fitz New Service in the early 70's (complete with lead weighted butt!!!!) which I sold for a couple thousand bucks 20 years ago as it was getting worn out on the cylinder restraining lug on the left side of the frame and there was no real easy repair, and this rich guy HAD to have a real 'Fitz'!

I really think the couple Gaylord ,signed, holster I STILL have since the early 60's are VERY comparable to anything available today. He was the only show in town,to my knowledge, for a REAL concealment holster. All the 'princes of the city' from across the country and most of the spooks ect. of the time paid homeage to his NY city store front(!!!!:eek: ).

So before you go dissing somebody who has been there and done that way more than you are EVER gonna do:p I'd think about the slapjack that these ole boys would have upside your internet bred head!:D
 
If you want to carry a 1911 for self defense have a round in the chamber and carry it cocked and locked. Do not trust your life to uneccesary tricks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've walked several friends through their first CCW purchases and I never advocate a 1911 as a carry weapon unless you're _very_ comfortable with your handgun and know what you're doing.
It's sexy as hell, but not the safest choice for the untrained.
 
Get um Gordo

I never had the chance to meet Gayloard, but the people that we knew in common had nothing but respect for him as a man and a holster maker. I was at a handgunner's convention put on by Super Vel (as I remember) and a lot of the big names were there. As the dinner passed into the distance and the serious libations came to hand the stories erupted. He was very well thought of by Bill Jordan, Charlie Russell and everyone else under the cigar and cigarette smoke. I (as the resident greenhorn) nodded, sipped and kept my mouth shut...;)
 
I have to disagree with tipoc's ideas about the intentions for the .45 automatic.

First of all, it was designed to be used by everyone, not just the cavalry. It is true that the U.S.Cavalry used more handguns than any other cavalry but it was not just for them. The early holsters had straps to keep it from swinging up and down, the later one had leather thongs.

Secondly, I believe the original intention was the the .45 automatic to be carried hammer down on a loaded chamber. It so states that in a US Army manual I have dated 1917. However, to be fair, it says that under a part about preparing to go on to the range. That only implies that it was understood that it should be carried that way all the time. I'll have to go back and read it again. In any event, I don't think it can be carried hammer back in the issue holster. This whole part bears re-reading when I get a chance.

Although it was later that other handguns were also adopted, not counting the 1917 revolvers, it was also apparent that older revolvers were still in use at the time because the same instructions state that the revolver should be loaded with an empty chamber under the hammer, in other words, with only five rounds. I'm sure that wouldn't not have applied to the 1917 revolvers but here I am assuming that they were being accurate and consistent in the manual. The only other revolvers still in use would have been the .38 Colt and the .45 Colt (1909?) as I think the single actions had finally been retired.

Although I said the .45 was not just for the cavalry, the army was still mainly a horsed army in 1911 and it wasn't just the cavalry that rode horses.

One more thing, what are "unnecessary tricks" involving a .45 auto? There are those who dismiss hollowpoints as "trick bullets."
 
Last edited:
Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that every weapon has a manual, and every service has a manual about its weapons and weapon safety. The thing is, 90% of the stuff like this does not apply to a normal combat situation...meaning that nobody is going to expect a soldier (or anyone, for that matter) to carry a condition 3 pistol in a non-permissive environment.
Most of the stuff in the manuals is just to provide one more layer of training, one more brick in the foundation. Manuals are a great place to learn, a great place to start, but I would doubt that the writers ever intended for their scenarios to be the end-all/be-all.
You gotta think; if it doesn't make sense to carry a certain way in a certain situation, then you probably won't be carrying that way. There's a way that people are expected (especially LEO/military) to carry their weapons on during peacetime/training, and a way that people are expected to carry their weapons when they have to be ready for anything.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top