Handling the 45 ACP

We're arguing two different questions. One side is trying to argue to the other that not everyone can learn to shoot .45 well. The other side is arguing that a lot of people you wouldn't expect have done so.
Those two things are not mutually exclusive, so proving one does not disprove the other. You can't prove that "everyone" can learn to shoot .45 well by telling stories about people who did.

Personally, I love .45. It's the only centerfire handgun caliber I shoot except for .44 mag for deer. My wife has never learned to shoot it well for the simple reason that she dislikes shooting it and so it's hard to get her to practice with it. As soon as we have money for another gun, I'm getting a 9mm for her. Now, maybe she could learn to shoot it if she gritted her teeth hard enough, but she isn't going to and that's that.
On the other hand, I took a friend who'd never shot a handgun before to the range the other day. Small guy, maybe 6 ft and 160 or 170 pounds. He tried the .22, but the .45 was the one he really had fun with.

I guess my point is that I agree with both sides. No one should dismiss the .45 out of hand, because it's such a great shooting round and it's often surprising who can master it easily. But no one should go around saying that anyone can use it either, because some people are simply better served by other calibers.
 
One other note, I'm not exactly a big guy and I shoot the .45 almost extensively. There are bigger calibers I shoot too but the .45 is my choice for defense and target shoot'n.
 
Don,

Actually, I don't think we are arguing two different points.

Here's the original point:

As to opinions, my opinion is still that the .45 ACP is too much for an average person to use without a lot of training.
Click to expand...

I think just about every post here involves "average people" who have shot the .45 well without a lot of training.

Just what constitutes average? Well, that's always the big question.

But I know that I would consider my ex an average person, and I also consider my friend's wife an average person, and they both took to the .45 VERY well with virtually no instruction other than the basic safety & sight picture stuff.
 
I'm not sure where the idea that the .45ACP is some sort of awful arm-buster comes from. Personally, I'd rather shoot .45ACP than .40S&W, I find the recoil impulse of the .45 much easier to take. It's not a .22, but it's lighter recoiling than many other common rounds, like the .357Mag, the .44Mag, and even the .44Sp in similar loadings.
 
Guys & Gals, I missed the original argument. If we are discussing a '1911' style single action autoloader, then
yes, one would need more instruction/practice in it's safe handling/use. However, the 45ACP round is a pretty mild round to shoot. Also, please note that the Weaver stance offers more control of 'recoil'/muzzle-flip than that of the Isosceles due to the 'weak' elbow being "locked" to the ribcage along with the push/pull of the grip on the pistol.
Bob
 
Oh yeah? Then why is it that every time I see Sanow with a pistol, it's something based on a .45? So much for light and fast, eh?


(oops, wrong thread, right?)
 
This needs to be clarified

by 45 ACP I meant 45 Automatic Colt Pistol, not other pistols that are chambered for the round, however, I see that many want to prove the opposite by citing an exception.

My experience is that if somebody likes the 45 Colt Automatic Pistol, they will go the extra mile to learn to handle it well. But imo it is not a pistol that the casual shooter is well served by. Many who have served in the military and qualified with the 45 Model of 1911A1 US Army will tell you the thing kicks and you can't hit anything with it anyway. That's my experience and that of many pistol instructors (gunnies) of my acquaintance.

I would not call anybody who regularly posts to TFL an "average" person. You have self-selected yourself to be an above average shooter. Just the same, you should not impute your above average skills and knowledge to the "average" person. When I say average, I mean average in all ways. Thanks for reading! ;)
 
BigG said:

"Many who have served in the military and qualified with the 45 Model of 1911A1 US Army will tell you the thing kicks and you can't hit anything with it anyway. That's my experience and that of many pistol instructors (gunnies) of my acquaintance."

One of the things to remember is that, IIRC, the US military hasn't purchased a new M1911 frame since WWII. So by the 70s and 80s, many of the M1911s in the military stock had been pretty well shot out.

As I posted before, my experience as in informal training of novices and in teaching NRA Basic Pistol classes has not been the same. None of the folks I've taught had any problems with the M1911.

rmf33 said: " If we are discussing a '1911' style single action autoloader, then yes, one would need more instruction/practice in it's safe handling/use."

I'm going to have to disagree with this. Yes, with a 1911 they have to be trained how to use the safety. But with a DA/SA, they not only have to be trained to use the decocker, (and possibly an integrated safety as well), but they also have to be trained in the use of two different trigger pulls -- long hard DA pull and short easy SA pull. With the Glock, you don't have to teach them anything about a safety or decocker. But IMNSHO, the Glock's trigger is harder to master than a M1911.

M1911
 
Many who have served in the military and qualified with the 45 Model of 1911A1 US Army will tell you the thing kicks and you can't hit anything with it anyway. That's my experience and that of many pistol instructors (gunnies) of my acquaintance.
Click to expand...

If you are referring ONLY to 1911 .45s, then I must sort of agree with you. The 1911 is IMO a harder than average pistol for a NOVICE shooter to master. Isn't that more of the pistols fault (1911's) than the .45 ACP cartridge? I can't say I like 1911s much myself. I can hit well with them, but not as well as with more modern .45 designs. Yes, I know it is a "sin" for a shooter to dislike 1911s, but I am not about being politically correct to keep the peace. ;)
 
Well, BigG...

...on that, we'll have to "agree to disagree". With its low bore axis and heavy weight to mitigate felt recoil, allied with its slim grips and short trigger to make proper grip and trigger function easy, the 1911 is among the easiest centerfire pistols for novices to start scoring hits with as any I've used. The "M1911A1 is a hard-kicking brute" saw exists mostly in the mind of British weapons-fancier and author Ian Hogg, whose mother was apparently run over by a 1911. As for "not hitting the broadside of a barn", that's common among MTU guns or range rental guns or others that sound like a coffee can full of hardware rolling down stairs when shaken. I don't recommend SA handguns with manual safeties as defense or CCW guns to novices solely for the reason the manual safety.

My experiences, despite your recent qualification, remain oddly 180 degrees from yours. ;)
 
The first "big bore I ever owned was a Colt Commander 45 acp. I've learned to appreciate its hammerbite, sharp trigger and hard muzzle flip. That little gun kicks, when complared to a full sized steel 1911. But its too valuable in its stock trim to cut the frame for a beavertail.

As one famous guy said 'get tough or die' so thats what i did. I practiced more. The gun is nice but the ergonomics leave a lot to be desired. It still beats up my shooting hand, cuts the web of my thumb and leaves my trigger finger etched. Its sort of like a badge of honor.

I've had friends (even macho hairy chested knuckle dragging ones) who can't handle shooting my commander. Even Morgan commented "ouch" when he lit off a magazine and he's used to shooting mini khar 40's and 40 cal USP's.

I've taught a number of people to shoot pistols and I usually leave the 45 for 'last", mainly because the look of my 1991a1 is a bit intimidating to the unititiated, and the commader is too much gun for a lot of people, even the experienced.
 
I'm with Tamara on this. I have fired 1911's for a many years and I love them. They are easy to learn and master. The recoil is not severe.
My take on the military legend that they kick like a mule and are not accurate is that those statements are made by people who only fire them once a year and who never spent any time practicing.
In my own experience, anybody who has ever seriously spent some range time with ear and eye protection and some good instruction on grip, stance etc has been pleasantly surprised.

DrRob: I have never been bitten by a 1911. I have a Lightweight Commander and I love it. My only scar from years of 1911's is a significant callous on my right thumb from the safety. The secret to avoiding muzzle flip is in the grip. I really don't see much difference in the recoil between a full-size and a Commander.

Different opinions is one of the things that makes the world go around.
 
Actually, that's a misapprehension...

As for "not hitting the broadside of a barn", that's common among MTU guns or range rental guns or others that sound like a coffee can full of hardware rolling down stairs when shaken.
Click to expand...

I don't know what a MTU gun is, but I've seen plenty of military 1911A1s that sounded like a coffee can full of rocks, with lil nubby sights, plastic grips, and all that could fire a possible in the hands of a good shot. The idea that ol slabsides has to be tight to be accurate couldn't be further from the truth. That's an old wives tale that poor shots use to console themselves.

Then again, the idea that a beginner who has fired all of a magazine or two thru a Colt 45 Auto does not mean that they have become a good shot with the gun; haven't you ever heard of beginner's luck? ;)

About the low bore axis, I don't know where you got that? I don't think the Colt 45 has a low bore axis.
 
MTU=

Marksmanship Training Unit.

Oh, yeah, I forgot that Ole Slabsides legendary accuracy still applies when the gun is so worn that the barrel will wiggle in the bushing, and thus points in a different direction every time the slide comes into battery... :confused:

Re: Bore Axis
Checking what I have available here, the 1911 has a bore axis that sits lower in my hand than the *&* 411, HS2000, and from memory, the Browning P-35 and several other designs. My P7M8 and Glocks are the only ones I can choke up higher on...
 
"Then again, the idea that a beginner who has fired all of a magazine or two"....

Once again, those of us who teach novices would never condone a magazine or two as a training standard. My comments are based on over 20 years of teaching, both for Uncle Sam and for pleasure. I still hold that the 1911 in .45 ACP with 230 grain loads is not excessive or even bothersome for a new shooter.

If you want bothersome, try a .357 in a 4 inch or shorter revolver.

BTW, the points on a 1911 that need to be under consistent tension are the muzzle and the rear of the barrel. The slide tightening is part of the equation, but less than the other two.

I have seen several 1911a1's that would not group on a "E" style target at 25 yards. The heavy creepy triggers did not help either. IIRC, the last ones that the military purchased were delivered in 1945. We had many that were worn out and needed surgery to fix. This may be a factor in the "1911's are junk" urban legends.


Giz
 
The idea that ol slabsides has to be tight to be accurate couldn't be further from the truth. That's an old wives tale that poor shots use to console themselves.
Click to expand...

Wow! Thats quite a revelation. So, if the barrel/bushing/slide fit isn't required to be tight (barrel alignment in battery with consistency) for accuracy, exactly what does effect the accuracy in a 1911? Enquiring minds want to know, since what you say flys in the face of every 1911 gunsmithing guide I've ever read.
 
QUOTE from BigG

"Many who have served in the military and qualified with the 45 Model of 1911A1 US Army will tell you the thing kicks and you can't hit anything with it anyway. That's my experience and that of many pistol instructors (gunnies) of my acquaintance."

I usually stay out of these conversations but I have to say something here about the government issue .45 ACP. I served active duty in the USN from 77-81 and qualified yearly with the .45ACP onboard the ship. Being on the NIMITZ all that time it was like qualifying on the target range. I left the USN in '81 and didn't touch a rifle or handgun until I joined the USNR in '87. Duty station was aboard an FFG and we quaified on the fantail while underway at sea. After a 6 year layoff from any type of shooting, I requalified on my first try. Ultimately I put 50 out of 50 rounds in the chest area of a target using a government issue .45 ACP on the rolling and pitching fligh deck of an FFG 7 Class ship in the North Atlantic. I can beleive some people have a problem with the .45 ACP round, however in my personal experience with a government issue .45 ACP I had no problem. I hit everything I pointed the gun at and that was from the rolling deck of a boat steaming at sea. I did this every time I requalified always requalifying at sea. I have no accuracy or handling problems with a government issue .45 ACP pistol.
 
I used an Army issued 1911 that sounded like a coffee can full of rocks and with lil nubby sights... I shot it to good effect, and in my hour of extreme need the gun fired with 100% reliability. To say that I owe it my life is to understate that situation.
An old battle worn 1911 is something to be proud of and not something to scoff at. Battle worn is battle proven. You can take one of those old timers and give it a little TLC and its good as new.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top