This may be the dumbest question ever asked here,but here goes anyways!
- Thread starter SocialAnarchist
- Start date
LockedBreech
New member
I'm a bit confused. Glocks aren't the only poly option but as far as I know 1911s are the only 1911 option.
Though there's a lot of difference between a GM all steel and an aluminum frame Commander so I think I see what you're saying.
Lost Sheep
New member
[/QUOTE]gyvel said:
Gyvel, you missed my point. The flex you are looking for (the location of flex that would most affect accuracy) would be in between the rails, slide and barrel lockup. My point is that no plastic parts are to found in the chain of lockup.
The flex you refer to is between the rails and the grip, yes? That flex is noting compared to the "flex" between the grip and the hand. In a properly held gun, both those flexions are fairly consistent, I think.
Lost Sheep
LockedBreech
New member
Right but it's the same fundamental design. Usually to the point that most parts interchange.
The only point I was trying to make is that these conversations seem to use "Glock" as a placeholder for every poly gun ever made.
Then H&Ks wouldn't cost so damn much and I could buy a bunch of them.No, I was thinking more around the area where the lower link pin (aka hold open) goes through the frame and that general area in front of the bridge where aluminum framed 1911s tend to crack. It's just a suspicion that I have, but, as I mentioned prior, EAA has just come out with a polymer framed 1911, so let's see how that does.
NateKirk said:
Yes that was the first shot after I installed nightsights, the next 4 joined it in the 10 ring, I decided they didn't need any adjustment. BTW that's 25 yards
LockedBreech said:
Most parts interchange between Para Ords, STI 2011s and BUL based high cap guns in addition to alloy framed commander/officer size guns.LockedBreech said:
+1 If I could get an aluminum-frame 1911A1 or Commander-sized .45 ACP for the same price as a polymer-frame one, I'd rather have the metal frame. Probably not based on any RATIONAL thought process, just my preference.
And yes, I AGREE that this was a good question, and an enjoyable mental exercise.
Last edited:
Big guy here... 6'4" 275 lbs (down from 315 btw 
)
[sarcasm] its all about balance, you just need to dual wield your steel 1911s, keep the weight centered
[/sarcasm]
Realistically though, whether or not your are "man enough" to carry a 1911 EDC... you can hardly criticize a guy for a carrying a polymer gun that can be just as, if not more, reliable than a 1911, more ammo than a 1911, and weigh a pound or more less than a 1911, and potentially be more concealable than a 1911.
TO THE TOPIC AT HAND... there are polymer 1911s, but for me it just doesn't do it. "Trusting the 1911 system" means the materials it was designed for. I haven't heard that the poly 1911s are as reliable as either steel 1911s, nor other poly guns. A poly 1911 is not the best of both worlds, at least from what I have seen, it is attempting to do so, but you just get a neat looking and less reliable weapon. I don't CCW for looks, and I need reliability!
)[sarcasm] its all about balance, you just need to dual wield your steel 1911s, keep the weight centered
[/sarcasm]Realistically though, whether or not your are "man enough" to carry a 1911 EDC... you can hardly criticize a guy for a carrying a polymer gun that can be just as, if not more, reliable than a 1911, more ammo than a 1911, and weigh a pound or more less than a 1911, and potentially be more concealable than a 1911.
TO THE TOPIC AT HAND... there are polymer 1911s, but for me it just doesn't do it. "Trusting the 1911 system" means the materials it was designed for. I haven't heard that the poly 1911s are as reliable as either steel 1911s, nor other poly guns. A poly 1911 is not the best of both worlds, at least from what I have seen, it is attempting to do so, but you just get a neat looking and less reliable weapon. I don't CCW for looks, and I need reliability!
Walt Sherrill
New member
James K said:
Circular reasoning.
If steel was the only material available, how can you claim that it was integral to the design? He didn't have any other option! If JMB was going to build a gun it had to be steel. Steel wasn't the best choice, it was the only choice. The first aluminum alloys that might be suitable for weapons use didn't appear until 1920 and those alloys were very expensive. It was only post-WWII that gun makers really started focusing on alloy frames -- and not until the '70s that polymer became an option.
Other materials HAVE been successful, but most alloy frames apparently can't take as many cycles as steel. For most of us, that's irrelevant. Alloy-framed guns can be much lighter than steel, and where weight is an issue, alloy may be more successful than steel.
As for the material being critical/integral to the design -- S&W, Colt, Beretta, and SIG all have designs that were first made in steel and later offered in alloy versions, or first designed in alloy and later offered in steel. I'm not sure that the material used in the frame is as critical or as integral to the design as you suggest.
.
Last edited:
Bill DeShivs
New member
If it were the only material available, it would HAVE to be integral to the design!
Aluminum alloys can be used in place of steel in some circumstances.
Aluminum alloys can be used in place of steel in some circumstances.
In my view H&K's and Sig Sauer ...are comparable in quality / and in cost...expensive, no not in my view. Are they more expensive than some mfg's -- sure.../ but in handguns, I think you get what you pay for. Besides, in the long run - the cost of the gun is the least expensive thing - when you consider at least 5 or 6 boxes a month minimum in my view for training and range practice ( call it $80 a month in ammo = $ 960 min a year) ...so its going to be close to $1,000 a year to train with the gun of your choice ...and many of us shoot more than 6 boxes a month with our primary guns / I average at least 6 boxes a week..
But the issue raised, by some, in the thread is whether the weight, mag capacity of the 1911 makes it an inferior option to carry or not.../ and my answer is no. I said capacity is irrelevent .../ I think it still is at some point / so in my view 6 rounds -- or 7 or 8 + 1 ...in a weapon like a Sig 239 ...or a 1911...is plenty for self defense / and yes I understand I can't forsee the scenario where I may need a gun ...so I do carry a couple of spare mags / but most of the reason I carry extra mags is because I think the weakest link in the gun is potential mag failure ( so I practice my speed reloads ( drop spent mag at slide lock - reload and fire 1 in under 3 sec )...not particularly fast - but a standard for competancy in my view.
But the OP asked about weight ...and are there any poly frame 1911's out there - and its been discussed.../ while my 5" all steel 1911 wilson weighs about 48 oz loaded...I could buy a 4" model that would be about 44 oz loaded / or a 3.6" model alloy frame that is about 31 oz loaded... --- so if I really thought weight was a factor, rather than consider something in a poly frame...I'd go with one of the Wilson's with shorter barrels and an alloy frame.
I think the market for 1911's in poly frame was tested by Wilson - and others ...and it wasn't there...so they moved on with other models. But Wilson's last poly frame was actually a double stack hybrid model in 9mm...called a spec ops - and I see its not in the online catalog anymore / and although I test fired one a little - I wasn't impressed - and opted to stay with my 5" all steel Wilson's.
Again off topic....but while I used to carry the Wilson 5" in .45 acp ....as I've gotten more arthritis in my hands ...and into my mid 60's I've begun carrying the all steel Wilson 5" in 9mm instead ( 48 oz loaded)...or once in a while I will carry a Sig 239... 31 oz loaded ( similar to a light weight compact 1911 in terms of weight).
So I don't want a 1911 in poly frame.../ and part of the reason I never bought a Wilson Spec Ops model...
But the issue raised, by some, in the thread is whether the weight, mag capacity of the 1911 makes it an inferior option to carry or not.../ and my answer is no. I said capacity is irrelevent .../ I think it still is at some point / so in my view 6 rounds -- or 7 or 8 + 1 ...in a weapon like a Sig 239 ...or a 1911...is plenty for self defense / and yes I understand I can't forsee the scenario where I may need a gun ...so I do carry a couple of spare mags / but most of the reason I carry extra mags is because I think the weakest link in the gun is potential mag failure ( so I practice my speed reloads ( drop spent mag at slide lock - reload and fire 1 in under 3 sec )...not particularly fast - but a standard for competancy in my view.
But the OP asked about weight ...and are there any poly frame 1911's out there - and its been discussed.../ while my 5" all steel 1911 wilson weighs about 48 oz loaded...I could buy a 4" model that would be about 44 oz loaded / or a 3.6" model alloy frame that is about 31 oz loaded... --- so if I really thought weight was a factor, rather than consider something in a poly frame...I'd go with one of the Wilson's with shorter barrels and an alloy frame.
I think the market for 1911's in poly frame was tested by Wilson - and others ...and it wasn't there...so they moved on with other models. But Wilson's last poly frame was actually a double stack hybrid model in 9mm...called a spec ops - and I see its not in the online catalog anymore / and although I test fired one a little - I wasn't impressed - and opted to stay with my 5" all steel Wilson's.
Again off topic....but while I used to carry the Wilson 5" in .45 acp ....as I've gotten more arthritis in my hands ...and into my mid 60's I've begun carrying the all steel Wilson 5" in 9mm instead ( 48 oz loaded)...or once in a while I will carry a Sig 239... 31 oz loaded ( similar to a light weight compact 1911 in terms of weight).
So I don't want a 1911 in poly frame.../ and part of the reason I never bought a Wilson Spec Ops model...
Walt Sherrill
New member
gyvel said:
Probably not. They don't build the guns, they simply import subtly different versions of the guns Tanfoglio guns makes for sales in Europe and the rest of the world. I think Tanfoglio and Bul pretty much have the market sewed up over there.
You'll notice that first 1911 EAA is offering is price-competitive with many of the other imports.
The traditional metal-framed 1911 is very popular in the US, probably because of it's long association the U.S. military. (Hundreds of thousands of GIs carried them over 5-6 decades, and many more trained with them.) This exposure and experience caused the the 1911 to be the standard against which all other .45 semi-autos were measured for a good portion of the the U.S. shooter's population -- and their children!
I suspect that HISTORY is why U.S. 1911 enthusiasts seem to feel they don't need no stinkin' polymer 1911s.
I won't be surprised to see the polymer 1911s take off, one of these days -- it just seems inevitable -- if only because all the folks who hold to the old standards are dying off. If we're still allowed, we'll see eventually more 1911s in polymer. I won't be surprised to see a double-stack in a year or two, if the Witness polymer gun finds a market -- along with some guns suitable for competition.