New Browning 1911/380

Clark, I think you lost me on your anology since I never built an airplane but did see a 777 being built in Renton. I also normally carry a Sig P 238 or 938, very reliable and easily concealed on the person for the incident I wish never to happen. The Browning, if the size of the now gone Llama series of pistols in .22, .32 and .380 and Colt Gov 380, is going to need to find that hole you were talking about. As you indicated the ultra small is popular today so I wish browning and others success in new introductions.
 
The Browning 1911 series pistols are actually a lot smaller than most of you think. No, they aren't the size/weight of a P3AT, but they are a very handy size. Until you have handled one, you won't understand.
Not all guns are designed for ultra-concealment.
 
When Browning bought out the 1911-22 I put in an order with my dealer right away. It was almost a year later before it came out. Nice gun but still if they say Jan/15, I won't even look for it until fall of 15 at best.

The problem with the 22 version is that it is mostly aluminum and I am seeing a bit of wear on things already. Like the slide stop, mag lock etc. Also the trigger is at best "poor".

Putting a 380 on the same 22LR frame? For once I will say pass. I will let others go for it like I did on the 22LR version and see how it holds up.
 
Peter M. Eick said:
The problem with the 22 version is that it is mostly aluminum and I am seeing a bit of wear on things already... Putting a 380 on the same 22LR frame? For once I will say pass.
Click to expand...
Did you note that the 1911-380 frame is some sort of composite?

I would expect it to wear in a similar fashion to a polymer pistol like a Glock or M&P- IOW wear isn't obvious because there's no finish per se; the material is the same color all the way through.

OTOH since I don't think anyone on this forum has actually seen a 1911-380 in the wild yet, I'll reserve judgement.
 
It is not the frame that I would worry about.

Like I said below, slide stop, mag stop, mag catch, other small aluminum parts are wearing which is what I would worry about.

While I don't know, from an economic perspective, it would make sense to try and use as many of those parts as they could from the 22LR version to the 380 version to save production costs.

That is what I believe we should watch for.

You are correct though, we have not seen them (and I doubt we will soon based upon the 1911-22 history), so lets wait and see how they hold up.

The one good news will be that if they do use the same parts, we 22LR owners should be able to get some spare parts finally.
 
I am interested to see who is actually making the gun. I do not shoot 380 auto anymore so I won't be buying one but will keep an eye on this one.
 
Beautiful 1911. All steel, then I'd want one. With the weight of steel and the scale-down, the minimal felt recoil would make one helluva accurate semi-auto. I've got the old fhart sydrome. My 1911's are allergic to polymers AND alloy. ;)
 
I was VERY excited about the upcoming Browning 1911-380 (yay, locked breach 380 ACP!)... until I bought a 1911-22 for my wife.

Wow, that "composite" (plastic) frame feels very cheap and thin. Not robust and thick-feeling like that of, say, Glock. Also, my wife's slide-to-frame fit is very poor, as is the rough and heavy trigger. And the sight is beyond primitive with zero availability of any alternative to date.

The whole gun just feels extremely cheap unlike her old Browning Buck Mark Micro. And if the new 1911-380 is anything like the 22 version in terms of fit, finish, and materials, I'd have to pass.
 
The Al framed 1911-22 is the polar opposite of your above experience (same sights though), and why I'd be more interested in a metal framed version of the .380.
 
Umm yeah, I realize that.

and why I'd be more interested in a metal framed version of the .380
Click to expand...

This is wishful thinking, hoping that they eventually make a metal framed version in addition to the poly frame.
 
I wish as well. A version (22 or 380) made with steel slide with aluminum frame wouldn't be that much heavier and would probably have much better fit and finish and likely accuracy as well.
 
Interesting, the once nearly forgotten 380acp had a resurgence in popularity with the introduction of the Kel Tec P3AT in 2003. Then the Ruger LCP, and other "mouse guns" followed. The tiny little pocket pistols being the perfect match for the little 9MM round. Then came the Walther PK380, and a growing trend in size for 380 pistols. Ruger LC380, Bersa Thunder, now a 1911 only reduced in size by 15%. What's next, Full sized Glock 380?. A 380 Beretta 92fs? Maybe a full size Desert Eagle in 9X17!:eek:
Great pocket gun caliber, but if I carry something as big as a 9MM Luger, it's gonna be a 9MM....Or 40S&W!
 
The .380 is not just a pocket gun caliber. It's a medium caliber gun very much like the .38 Spl. and can be used as a primary gun.
Unless you have actually held the Browning gun, you really have no idea about it. It's just a neat size. It's not the smallest, or the lightest. It's just nice.
 
It's not as big as a 9mm luger gun. Not only is the Browning gun smaller, it's slimmer. After you have handled one then complain. I own the Browning in .22.
 
Not really complaining. It looks like a pretty cool gun. Just not for me in a mouse gun caliber. The 22's are fun. I have shot one quite a bit.
Personally, why shoot ammo that costs 50% more than 9MM (generally, based on date from ammosek.com) for recreation? Or carry a lower powered 380 (which I do in a pocket carried LCP) that is bigger than many 9MM or even 45acp autos. A little hard to compare exactly because I haven't found the actual specs. Just that it is 15% smaller than a Government Model 1911.

My original post was simply stating that it is interesting how the size of guns chambered in 380acp keeps increasing after the mouse guns resurrected the cartridge for personal defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top