1911a1 and the 21st century?

ArmySon wrote:

It's the opposite for me, I shoot the 1911 better then any other 'modern' handgun. In addition, it feels the best in my hand.

Field stripping a 1911 for cleaning should only take 1 minute or less
Click to expand...

I agree 110%, except for if it takes longer than 20 seconds to strip it, you don't know what the h@ll you're doing.

I'm no expert marksman, but I can keep all shots within one foot at 50 yards with my 1911 Springfield, yet I couldn't hit a barn from the INSIDE with a damn glock I tried.


Blue Duck wrote:
Kinda sounds like a Glock doesn't it.
Click to expand...

THANK GOD, NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Never, ever, ever, use "glock" (Austrian for POS) in the same sentence or thought with 1911.


Rick B wrote:
I can't really understand anyone's irrational attraction to the 1911 design, either. If my gun jammed all the time, and was very finicky about magazines, recoil springs, extractor tension, and all the other things that people complain about on their 1911's, it would drive me crazy - and I certainly wouldn't trust my life to a gun like that.
Click to expand...

I tried to see it your way, but I couldn't shove my head that far up my a$$. Not to mention that in this case he doesn't have a clue as to what he's saying.


CSAY's original question:
Is this prudent?
Click to expand...

Just as sane and prudent as its' been for 90 - odd years.


Tim W.
 
CountryBoy: I thought the same thing recently while watching a rerun of "Star Wars". It occurs to me that the 1911A1 and the Light Saber have much in common. Both are "simple" weapons that serve their purpose well in the hands of someone who knows how to wield them. Since I'm in my 50's, I feel a bit more comfortable with my 1911 and my Browning HP, both older designs as am I. While I own other modern semi-autos, my "Light Saber" 1911 is my most trusted weapon. If I could keep only one handgun, it would be the 1911.
 
I have always been attracted to the 1911 because of the many ways you can customize it and make it a part of you (if you know what I mean). Kind of like a tattoo. Other reasons would include reliability, accuracy and history.
 
Blue Duck357 wrote:
"The 1911 used to be the example of how a automatic pistol could be reliable, now it's considered unreliable? I think people are building dedicated target pistols out of them then claiming their not a combat weapon (well it was before you got messing with it)."


Exactly right!!!! I want to see a Glock function with the slide to frame fit as tight as some of these $1k "target" or "match" 1911s. Not exactly comparing apples to apples are they?

As has been discussed to death on 1911forum.com, that overly tight slide/frame fit is not necessary for best of class accuracy.....or should I say class by itself. It just seems to be the gun companies catering to the masses. How many people have you seen in a gun shop checking out a new Kimber or Colt or Springfield and their most important test is the slide/frame tightness? They wouldn't even notice if there wasn't a bushing at the other end or not. My rattling Colt Officers shoots tiny little groups all day long and hasn't choked on anything I've put in it.
 
For the unknowledgeable, i.e., most buyers, slide frame fit is a sign of "quality". For the cognoscenti, bbl/bushing/hood fit is the sign of quality.
 
C'mon Tim, how do you really feel? I was playing something of the devil's advocate with my post. There are some people who love the 1911 even though theirs doesn't work. I truthfully cannot understand why anyone would be strongly attracted to a gun that isn't dependable. The reason that I love the 1911 so, is precisely because mine are powerful, reliable, durable, easy to shoot - everything a handgun should be. If they were finicky, breaking parts, dangerous(?), etc., I'd probably have a Glock, too (not that Glocks don't occasionally malfunction and break just like every other gun). The 1911 will probably become more popular in the 21st Century, because handgun design is going to become increasingly specialized, while the 1911 will continue as the ultimate for service, competition and collecting; all at the same time.
 
My current interests are Makarovs and a CZ-75B.
However I own and have owned many 1911s over the years.
Mostly Colts. My favorite is a very reliable customized Colt
Officers ACP. I customized it because I wanted to, not because I had to or because it wasn't already reliable.
The only problem I have with it is the dual crimp fronts keep shooting loose. I am considering getting that fixed permanently.

1911s will always be my favorite design. My first true love in guns.
They just feel right in my hand.
I am also very fond of my Kimber SS Custom Gold Match. That is regardless of all the B.S. over the molded parts. I have been shooting the heck out of it for a year now. Guess what no parts failures , yet. I only shoot full patch hard ball through it. That seems to be what it likes best.
 
I just purchased my first 1911, a Springfield parkerized full-size. After shooting it for the first time, I quickly put an identical pistol on layaway for fear that I wouldn't be able to get anymore without the new lock (really just an excuse - I wanted a matched pair ;) ). It shoots great. Very accurate. Totally reliable (just like my Glocks, except it doesn't hit me in the head with brass like my G17). It doesn't have those stupid finger grooves, which is why I didn't buy a Glock 21. And it is MUCH better looking than the G21. I love the wood grips - I had the salesman swap grips with another Spingfield to get the best wood grain.

My only complaint is that the manual was missing the first 3 steps to field strip. So I had to figure it out myself. It is a little harder than a Glock to field strip, but I can live with that. I'm sure I'll be able to field strip it withing 20-60 seconds with some practice.

In short, I love 'em both. But I can see myself collecting more 1911s in the future.
 
In all seriousness, having been in a few gunfights, and winning - I can honestly say that the 1911 is the KING of handguns. Robust, Accurate and Reliable - Period.

It takes effort to screw one up. There are other designs that are very good - but not BETTER than old slabsides.

In the history of TFL there have been those that say that the AR-15 is a great rifle and "If you take care of it - is reliable." Not to start any debate on that issue... The same thing can be said of a 1911. Like any pistol - you do have to take care of it. Simply wiping it down with an oily rag can, did, and often does constitute "taking care of it".
 
Well, after 90 plus years of service, I believe the M1911A1 will last another 90 years. It is just one of those designs that are classic and are proven. I've carried a M1911A1 for over 35 years, 20 in the Corps and 15 as a cop. I like it, now there are other excellent handguns and more power to them and the users, but I'll take the M1911A1 anytime, anyplace over the others.
Clem
 
as it is now, people who own guns are a bit older. Most have been around for the 90 years of service the 1911 provided. Memories are closely tied in with this gun, therefore the mass appeal. The 1911 was a military issue during WWI and WWII. The gun even saw action in Vietnam. In the armed forces, the 1911 gave way for the newer Berettas. This came about during the '80s. The government opted for the Berettas because they are cheaper to make than Sig Sauers. In the '90s, elite forces are using Sigs as their weapon of choice. Seldom do you see 1911s as issue handguns, if any at all. Maybe to older officers who are accustomed to the gun. With the next generation of handgunners, there are more choices to choose from. Maybe, it used to be that the 1911 was the only gun in the gun store, that is why so many have them. Nothing wrong with that. Again, now there are more quality guns to choose from, Glock, H&K, Sig Sauer, Steyr, to name a few. It is also more than likely that most TFLers are a tad older, I suspect.
 
I think it is important that shooters,especially the young ones, know the 1911 and the history behind it. Face it,the 1911 reminds us of better times,red blooded Americans,and all the other stuff we remeniss about as we get older.

And since most of us grew up shooting the 1911,we shot it more than anything else,so it became comfortable and we had confidence in it.

Somewhere along the way we got all screwed up with this notion that the minute we got a 1911 we had to tear it down,rebuild it,and spend a grand or so on it to "make it work". I guess we figured all these guys that make all the aftermarket stuff were a lot smarter than ole JMB was. And then, of course, why, "everything that Colt made/makes was/is junk!".

Did you ever stop and think for a second who might have started all of that? Could it have been the other gunmakers who had nothing to offer but me too designs? Or could it have been all the aftermarket people who had a vested interest in replacing parts that came on a Colt? Nah, course not.

All a 1911 (Colt,Springfield) needs is a simple tune up,and different sights,if you want them. Personally I think the 3 dot sights on Colts are fine. For every one of these "improvements" guide rods,beavertails,extended safties, and so on, I can give you a reason why they are of no real benefit. That money is much better spent on a few cases of 230g hardball and range fees.

It is a true classic,but it also was designed as a sidearm for the calvary,before the days of automobiles or airplanes.

In this day and age I dont reccomend them at all for carry,as I think cocked and locked is a bad idea for the average guy,and I think the gun is useless in conditions 2 or 3. I know lots of you disagree with that, but I think there are now better choices,certainly for the novice.

As far as the 21st century goes?

Who knows if we will ever see any more American firearms inventors?
 
JMB: still the greatest

Browning is the Mohammed Ali of firearms. If he worked with the Wright bros, they would have made jets. Saying the 1911 is obsolete is like saying an old Pontiac GTO is too slow. Gaston Glock made one gun, JMB made hundreds. He still holds the record for number of firearms patents.(Look, now you've gone and got me started. Sorry about the rant.)
 
I'm yet to hear how the 1911 is obsolete.

(Okay I might have gone on and on about this on another thread but. . . )

Double-action capability is looking like a handicap to me. Its upsides are political, and perceptual to the inexperienced/people scared of guns.

Point is, double-action, or double-action built into the design, is a compromise away from the ease of firing an aimed shot with a single-action trigger.

Where am I going with this?

Well, from the point of view of making aimed shots, many guns/gun manufacturers are going AWAY from optimal trigger control (rather than improving). The 1911 looks to me to be more obsolete from a "PC" point of view than from a shooting-tool point of view.

Locally to me there is a group that takes advanced gun training - you often see the same faces at the classes. It's all pretty much Glocks and 1911s - usually 100% - the Glocks I see are < 45ACP, the 1911s (save one 10mm) are 45acp.

1911 Obsolete? I will certainly not argue that the Glock guns are great (I'd own them all if I could, alas I only have one). But in skilled hands, the 1911s can do the same as the gun designed >70 years after it. Both as pistols, a reactive tool, can perform the same essential pistol task - draw and hit the target a couple of times with a good round. At least in my hands, the 1911 trigger makes this a little easier - in the quest for safety the Glock is a little harder to shoot to a certain degree of speed/accuracy.

1911's capacity? While stock it has fat grips, the 1911's grips can be reduced through slim grips into a kahr-width gun. The magazine is a single-stack, the Glocks etc. have large grips to accomodate the double-stack mags, the capacity of which is their claim to fame. Though those extra rounds may be worth a trade-off in grip flexibility (esp. those for which the Glock works best ergonomically anyway).

(IMHO) the 1911 isn't yet obsolete as nothing has really come along that can fully retire it. Look at those ipsc guys with (admittedly heavily modified) 1911s - that trigger, the ergonomics - that gun seems pretty inherently fast when compared to modern guns that can shoot in 45.


Part of what keeps it around is that its design (along with its advantages) are too politically incorrect, and maybe too unpopular with the majority, to replicate.

(This may sound like blasphemy but) the 1911 could be utterly and uncategorically put in its grave if someone really wanted to. The 1911 was designed to a certain material availability (i.e. steel). With plastics, titanium, computer-aided modelling, someone could design a better trigger that is safe at lower trigger pull weights, shift weight around the design for perfect balance, pointing and low recoil with high caliber ammunition. . . .


Until then, there are reasons the 1911 is in the hands of the competitors. . . . the self-defense minded. . . . . and the nostalgic.


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