Not enough rounds, double standard?

T

Tactical Jackalope

New member
Just a quick in and out thread.

There's a camp of:

"1911s are obsolete because they only hold 8+1 rounds, there are so much better options out there!"


And these same people carry things like a Smith and Wesson Shield, Glock 43, or Kahr XYZ.

So, is there something I'm missing here?

Could it be in correlation to the size? What if someone is okay to carry a full-sized handgun with the same capacity?


Maybe someone could break this down for me. I'm trying to understand this method of thinking and why it is how it is.
 
Makes no sense to me. I carry a SIG P239 in 9mm that is 8+1 and have no concerns. If I need more than that I have somehow gotten myself into a very bad situation.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
 
I think it's really only an excuse to buy another gun, some people need justification to sell their wives on the idea.lol

Sent from my XT1635-01 using Tapatalk
 
To me, it's correlated to size. If I'm going to carry something as large as a 1911, I'd rather carry a G19, 23, 17, or 22. Have about double the amount of ammo. For me, the 1911 just doesn't work in the size:capacity ratio.

But I also carry the G43 on hot days with a light t-shirt on. Sure, it's only 7+1 with an extension, but it's much, much smaller than a 1911 with 7+1 capacity.

In the end though, it's what you like and feel comfortable with. No one else's opinions matter much.
 
I carry(ied still waiting for new permit) a small single stack because it is just that: small. And lightweight. I always thought the 1911 was a really cool/historical piece, but I don't think I'd every carry one. Not because it's a single stack, but because (1) I don't have one and (2) it's a big hunk of steel.

So I guess I'm not really your audience, but I carry a small single stack because it's small.
 
The 1911 isn't considered outdated as much due to capacity as it is due to weight and design. It's a pistol that was developed back when guns were built by craftsmen and not on an assembly line. It's a design that field strips into 8 pieces in most cases. On top of that, outside of high end customs like Wilson, the 1911 can be pretty hit or miss. It's a great gun when you have one that works but a lot of people have 1911s that just aren't reliable. This leads many to consider the design outdated. Others prefer to think of it as an "experts gun" or a collectors piece. There are a lot of opinions on the 1911. I personally love them, but they aren't my primary carry choice as I prefer a lighter gun with more ammo, preferably a Compact with about 15 rounds in the magazine.
 
I agree with both of the above.
While I wouldn't have anything else but a 1911 for match shooting, it's too heavy for carrying.
Lots of other suitable choices.
The right choice for the job varies with the job and the person.
 
They make double-stack 1911s, and I suspect you could hunt around and find one with an alloy frame... so the weight would be somewhat less.

A person can always find an excuse for doing what he or she wants, whether it's NOT buying a 1911, buying a Glock, just sticking with revolvers, or chasing after the newest technological gimmick of the day.
 
For the cost of a quality 1911, I can buy both a subcompact with 6 or 7 + 1 and a full size with 15 or 17+1 capacities, with a total weight of less than your 1911.

For the cost of an alloy double stack "1911", I could add a nice revolver and rifle to the mix. The Wilson Combat version lists for almost $3000.

Add the other things already mentioned and it is not hard to understand why a 1911 is not a popular choice for a carry gun. I love 1911s and if I had the money I would have a nice collection. While I am ok with carrying a full sized pistol, I would not carry a 1911. I am ok if you do though!:cool:
 
I can buy both a subcompact with 6 or 7 + 1 and a full size with 15 or 17+1 capacities, with a total weight of less than your 1911.
Click to expand...
Curious what sub compact and full size you're going to get that weigh less than 39 oz's combined. And that's for a full size all steel 1911. Start talking commander size and alloy frames and we're down to 30 oz's.

Jim
 
Last edited:
DubC-Hicks said:
To me, it's correlated to size. If I'm going to carry something as large as a 1911, I'd rather carry a G19, 23, 17, or 22. Have about double the amount of ammo. For me, the 1911 just doesn't work in the size:capacity ratio.
Click to expand...

:cough, cough:

"Para-Ordnance"
 
I feel like it's pretty straight forward. For the size and weight of a 1911 holding 7+1 or 8+1 rds I could have a double stack 9mm holding 15/17 +1 rds. I personally prefer the latter. I typically carry a Glock 26 but for some folks a single stack subcompact or pocket pistol is what works for them. There is no 1911 that is going to approach the Glock 43 in size and weight.

The argument basically boils down to it being about more than just capacity. That said there are a number of folks on this forum and many more in the general public that carry a full size 1911.
 
An LCP and an SR9 or Glock 17 would come in a few ounces less. With an SR45 or Glock 21 you would be right at 40 ounces. Even if you exchanged the LCP for an LC9 or Glock 43 you wouldn't break the weight budget by much.
 
Ruger SR9 is 26.5 oz. LCP is 9.6 oz. both without a mag, 36.1 combined. Take the mag out of the all steel mil spec 1911 and it's just under 37 oz. So, I'll give you that.
Although, I just saw the weight of a Colt government is listed as 35 oz.;)

Anyway, while I have several 1911's, I carry a Glock 19

Jim
 
Thanks for the replies!

I carry a Glock 19 Gen 4 with a Surefire X300U at 4 o'clock. But I'm really flirting with the idea of carry a 1911 for its precision.

You know, that super amazing trigger and all? Just gotta work out the kinks with my muscle memory and that safety before I do so.

I have had a 4.25 Scandium Framed Smith and Wesson 1911PD that I've been in love with since forever and a day ago.


So I decided to upgrade and trade into a Smith and Wesson 1911 SC E-Series, also commander sized. Which will get to me on Monday.


Time to give the PD a rest anyways.


But anyways, just a conversation with the guys at work is what brought this thread on. :)

Please continue.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
I carry a Glock 19 Gen 4 with a Surefire X300U at 4 o'clock. But I'm really flirting with the idea of carry a 1911 for its precision.
Click to expand...

A few weeks ago I did a half day Long Range Pistol class where we walked back to the 100 yd line over the duration of the class (the course was in part inspired by the Peach House RV Park shooting). With a Glock 19 with a stock trigger and KKM Precision barrel I was surprised at how easy it was to get hits on a half sized IPSC plate even out to 100 yds. And I am admittedly not as good of a pistol shooter as I would like.

If you want a 1911 I see no issue with that. I've actually owned that exact pistol too, though in my case I had some unfortunate luck on the QC end of things. I'm just not sure I'd agree a Glock or any duty/service weapon is really lacking in the accuracy/precision area from a practical standpoint.
 
Last edited:
"1911s are obsolete because they only hold 8+1 rounds, there are so much better options out there!"


And these same people carry things like a Smith and Wesson Shield, Glock 43, or Kahr XYZ.
Click to expand...
1. 1911's may be obsolete, but if they are, it's not because they only hold 8+1 rounds. There are modern full-sized guns out there that aren't high-capacity. Capacity is probably a determining issue for many when making a purchasing decision, but it's not really a factor in determining obsolescence.

2. If someone decides there are better options for carry out there, the primary factor in making that decision probably isn't how old the design is or even just what the capacity is. My guess is that weight, size, capacity, and manual of arms all figure pretty heavily into the decision.

3. Size makes a difference when capacity is concerned. I'm willing to carry a very small and light 6+1 capacity pistol when I'm very limited in what I can conceal for one reason or another. But I'm not picking that pistol for capacity, I'm picking it because it's very small, very light and therefore very concealable. So while I might be willing to carry a very low capacity gun (that's also very small and light) in some circumstances because weight and concealability are critical, I wouldn't be at all interested in carrying a full-sized, full-weight pistol that had similar capacity.

If I'm going to carry a full-sized, full-weight gun then I'm going to make the most of the size and weight by insuring that those penalties are repaid in capacity and shootability.
 
John, I totally agree with you. I just bought a Glock 43 & this holds 6 +1. It's summer & I'm in Florida so I have to carry concealed. I might carry an extra mag
but I fully understand your reasoning. When the circumstances change then I can carry my G 19.
 
I think obsolete is a strong word considering people still buy and shoot black powder rifles, cap and ball revolvers, and Flint locks, not to mention crossbows. 1911 parts are readily available and many many models are still being produced.

I don't believe anything that launches or fires a projectile will ever become completely obsolete.

I think size and weight vs capacity is probably the main issue. Same reason I didn't buy a hi-point pistol. Wasn't because it's ugly or made of pot metal, it was because it's too big of a gun to only hold 7or 8 rounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top