mis-alignment of the 1911

D

Darxus

Inactive
I have a Kimber Compact 1911, which I like, and carry regularly. I am assuming that its general shape is typical for a 1911.









I am very fond of much about the 1911 - the caliber, the single action trigger, and the frame that is slim and rounded and therefore comfortable to wear, especially. But I am rather upset about its lack of alignment, basically between the sights and the slide. Basically, if you aim along the slide, you will hit low. This makes reflexive pointing.. inaccurate, and makes sight alignment take longer or require more practice, to force yourself to physically memorize appropriate grip angle. I've had people argue that this could not possibly be true on the grounds that it would be rediculous. But check for yourself. Aim at a target along the slide, and then without moving the gun, look at where the sights are pointing. Or set the gun on a table, on its sights. The muzzle end will be closer to the table. My guess is that in his original design, John Browning assumed that the alignment of the barrel after it pivited down would affect the trajectory of the bullet more, or he didn't think that the alignment of the barrel with the bullet trajectory was important.



















I've heard of people referring to some semi-autos as hiving "tip up" barrels. I'm guessing they're referring to guns that have a barrel that is actually alligned with the slide (and therefore the sights) when it is closed, so when the slide is opened and the barrel pivots, the barrel tips up. I'm guessing this looks odd to them because they're used to things like the 1911, which have a barrel which is basically pointing straight when it is open, and the barrel pointing down when the gun is closed and ready to fire.

















So I guess my question is, does anybody make a good .45acp auto with a good single action trigger, that is as comfortable to carry as a 1911 compact ? Or why, since 1911, has this flaw (as I percieve it) in the 1911 design not been corrected ?

















While I'm at it... double-stack .45acp mags are, I believe, significantly thinner than the grip on my single stack 1911 compact. So why can't I get a gun with the same dimensions (not a fatter grip) and double the magazine capacity ?
 
All 1911 barrels I've seen are pointing straight with the slide when the slide is closed with barrel locked ready to fire. :eek:
 
Darxus, "tip up" barrels refer to some models of Berettas. The fixed barrel is hinged at the front and the barrel can be tipped up so that it can be loaded with out racking the slide. As for the rest of your post, I don't have any idea what your talking about.
 
If you are referring to point shooting with the kimber and you shoot low you could try installing an arched mainspring housing. That might help for you to point a little higher naturally. Personally I like the flat mainspring housings better. They fit my hand better. Mark
 
OK,

Any handgun, resting on a table upside down on it's sights will have the muzzle pointing upward (in relation to the table top) to one degree of another (the front sight is taller than the rear in relation to the top of the slide/barrel). This forces you to lower the muzzle from dead level for proper sight alignment when hand held.

The reason is... recoil!

With your hand around the grip acting as a fulcrum, when the cartridge ignites, the gun actually starts to rotate up before the bullet exits the barrel. It's a miniscule amount but it does happen.

The sights are "off" in relation to the slide, or topstrap/barrel for revolvers, to account for that initial movement. If the sights were in dead alignment, the bullet would not strike the target at point of aim, but hit high. The amount the sights are "off" varies with the length of the barrel and mass of the gun.

FWIW
 
Double stack .45 mags are thinner than the grip on your single stack 1911, so why can't you get a gun with the same dimensions in either single or double stack?

Assuming what you say is correct, that is a good question. One of the biggest drawbacks to double stack 1911s is their excessive width on the grip area of the gun.

The single stack 1911 frame is very thin without the side panels that are actually called stocks and not grips. The absolute smallest size you could get would be the width of the double stack magazine plus with additional thickness of the frame around the magazine and no stocks over that area. As far as I know, nobody makes this configuration such that it is no larger than the width of a standard 1911.
 
I'M SORRY

But after reading this I'm drooling (and laughing).

My 1911 "points" perfectly.
Some manufacturer (Caspian?) has a wide-body frame with smaller dimensions than a 'standard' 45.

And heaven forbid you might need more practice!

ROTFLMAO.....whilst drooling..........Stop please you're killing me LOL.....
 
9x19,



I recognize that for reasons including gravity and recoil, the barrel and sights should not be aligned. But there is no reason the top of the slide cannot be aligned with the sights instead of the barrel, and if the top of the slide is aligned with the sights, you will be able to more quickly aim the gun accurately.





WESHOOT2,



There is a target on my wall with 6 rounds in a centered 3" group shot at 25 yards with my kimber compact, offhand. I don't know if that's wonderful, and I can never have too much practice, but I believe that's better than average.





Some guns can be aimed more naturally than others. I think the 1911 is poor in this area, because the top of the slide is not aligned with the sights. I heard, I believe, Steyr's pistols have the top of the frame very precisely aligned for this purpose. But the one I had the opportunity to try was not .45acp, and was more bulky than my 1911 compact.
 
Darxus

I'll get serious: in MY hand NOTHING points easier or more naturally than a 1911.
I don't really like them, but I shoot mine better (than all my other guns).

Hence my laughter, as I am not the only shooter who's noticed this 1911-function.
You, however, are the first to state the opposite (and in such a car-wreck fashion!).

Fun first; no nastiness intended (but print your post and reread it in ten or fifteen years......)
 
Eslewhere someone commented that the sighs on my kimber are set for 25 yards (sounds right), and the slide is aligned for shorter ranges, say closer to 7 yards. I am hoping this is true, and intend to test it at the range soon. It would ease my mind significantly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top