Why the hatred for 1911s?

Status
Not open for further replies.
TunnelRat said:
I'd ask why there is so much love for a firearm that while popular is more of an American phenomenon. Yes it was used and copied by other countries, but really the cult following it enjoys stateside isn't replicated nearly as much elsewhere. It seems to me that the current situation is more of a turning away from that cult than an actual hate.
Click to expand...
I respectfully submit that one of the primary reasons people from other countries don't care more for the 1911 is that it's generally associated with the .45 Automatic Colt Pistol (ACP) cartridge, which is VERY expensive in many other countries. Yes, I know they make 1911s in other calibers (I own a 9mm 1911 and a .40 1911), but it has always been associated with .45 ACP.

I know people in Europe who shoot 1911s. One always wanted one in .45 ACP, but when he had one custom made, it was in 9mm. The other shoots IPSC and, for reasons entirely due to ammo cost, his competition pistol is a Para-Ordnance P18.9 (in, of course, 9mm).

I've also corresponded with the head of IPSC for Chile, and he has sent me videos of regional matches at his club. I saw a lot of 1911s (but I don't know what caliber they were).
 
Most of the troops who used it during WW-2 didn't particularly like the pistol nor the 45 cartridge. Almost all felt the Browning in 9mm was the better pistol. The army did too.
Click to expand...

So, you've spoken to most of the troops who used it during WW-2 and got their opinions? :rolleyes: Or, you read somewhere someone said that?

I've only personally known a couple dozen WWII vets and NONE of them disliked the 1911A1 or the .45 cartridge. A few were ambivalent, and the rest were either positive or enthusiastic. "It saved my ass" and "I wouldn't be here today if it hadn't been for that gun" were fairly common feelings.
I'm sure there were a number of guys who didn't LIKE the 1911A1, but I think saying "most of the troops" is a baseless inflation of a vocal minority.

A LOT of the troops preferred the M1 carbine to the M1 Garand. Why? Because it weighed about half as much and held about twice as much ammo. The Hi Power was held to be the better pistol, primarily because it held more shots. (and they were good guns too..)

Always remember that the desires and priorities of the military and the police are not always the same as the civilian shooter. Some things overlap, others do not. Don't forget that until the later 1960s handgun ammo basically came in only two flavors, FMJ in semi auto pistol rounds and lead bullets for revolver rounds.

If you care to look, you can find decades of articles espousing how the lead bullet .38 Special was superior to the FMJ 9mm Luger round. "Modern hollowpoints" didn't show up on the market until the late 60s and early 70s, and were notoriously inconsistent. It took nearly another couple decades for them to get a reputation for consistent performance.

People looked at a design made to shoot 230gr FMJ ammo and found fault with it when many didn't gobble up every other bullet, (particularly hollowpoints) without a bobble. They can be modified to run JHPs quite well, and today, they are made to, but the original design, wasn't.

Yeah, parts is parts, so they should all work just perfect, right? Well, that's a yes and no thing. Yes, when all the parts are GI spec, and you're making a GI spec gun. But when there are no govt inspectors, when the designs are "tweeked" and "improved" in different ways, by literally dozens of makers, each with their own idea of what is best, then yes, you get stuff that doesn't maintain the quality of earlier years.

No, the 1911A1 doesn't measure up to more modern designs in some ways, so what? If you want something else, get it. More modern designs have had over half a century or considerably longer of watching what the 1911 does and doesn't do well, so I'd think they damn well OUGHT to be better performing. Oddly enough, in several ways, they aren't.

Yes, I'm a 1911 fan, and yes, I detest GLocks. That's me. I'm sure "fanboy" attitudes have played a part in my opinion. I also don't like Chevys. or Coconut flavor, or a lot of other things.

Not going to tell you that you're wrong if you like them, please do me the same favor.
 
I read and hear all the time how 1911s are unreliable and a poor choice for CCW
Click to expand...

No idea about reliability, the one I shot had 2 malfunctions out of 50r of 45acp BUT..CCW?
Big, heavy gun..think there are 'better' choices if you want to carry it CONCEALED.
 
I had some reliability issues with a Colt .45 1991A1 made, supposedly, during a period when Colt quality control was not at it's best (mid-90s)...I say supposedly because I don't have any proof of this assertion.

I also had just a couple malfunctions with a current Colt .45 LW Commander.....

I tried different magazines with these pistols and the problem was solved. There are obviously other factors that can cause problems with any firearm, but I believe a main factor in good, reliable 1911 functioning is finding magazines that the pistol likes.
 
If you stick with the full sized 5 inch 1911's and quality 230 grain ball Ammo, you will have less fail to feed problems.

I have owned the small and mid sized 1911's and can say that the full sized 1911's are the best for most people.

Not implying the smaller 1911's can't be made to work well, just that for most buyers that have never owned a 1911 the larger 5 inch will give less problems.

Now let the game begin. :rolleyes:
 
TunnelRat said:
How should they "run" it? I own a 1911 still and have owned a few in the past. I haven't really had to change how I "run" a firearm when I've used them.
Click to expand...

Long time Glock owner here, read all the same scary things about 1911s and their “unreliability” and stayed well away from them. Then one day fired one and it was a game changer. I couldn’t get it out of my mind, but still hesitant, so figured a Dan Wesson was the best option to make sure I didn’t run across all those stated reliability issues. My first time at the range with the Valor was flawless, what a great shooter and I couldn’t have been happier. The second time, total regrets. The second or third shot every time would fail!!!

Cleaned the gun thoroughly, tried it again, cleaned it, tried it and the same thing over and over. I had contacted DW and was about to send the POS back, when The range officer at my last frustrating time at the range noticed me struggling with it and asked...I let him fire it and it ran perfectly. I picked it up and it up and fail! He watched me very closely, took out his camera and shot in slow motion and there was the issue. While you don’t have to cover the safety and I wasn’t, after the shot, my thumb was coming up and tapping the safety enough to disable the trigger. That was it. I had always shot Glocks or DA/SA triggers with decockers, so hadn’t discovered the issue with my grip.

I can cover the safety, not cover the safety...it doesn’t make any difference now, the Valor has been flawless. As some of us morons have learned, there are ways to “run” them. By that same token, a family member could get my Glock to misfeed every time. Took us a while to figure that one out too.

That damn 1911 has cost me a fortune! I just couldn’t stand shooting polymers anymore! Yup, total junk and all should stay away. Same thing with those stupid CZ75s. Just garbage!!!
 
If you like your 1911's and they work, who cares what anybody else says or thinks. I've read/heard negative things about 75% of the firearms I own, but I like them and they've worked very well for me. To each their own.
 
First time i saw someone with a Dan Wesson was at the range shooting i can't remember what but sure was not doing well, there was a man shooting this 1911 and watched his targets as he pulled them back, and saw his tight groups.

I walked over and asked him what type of 1911 it was, he said a Dan Wesson and would i like to shoot it, i said sure would and even as i am a rotten shot i quickly noticed that the Dan Wesson sure improved my shooting that day.;)
 
Back when I shot more pistol, I had 1911s. Unreliable isn't a very precise description.

A 1911 may be the model for pistol reliability, but if it is an older, pre-CNC example not set up for bullseye, other pistols may be more accurate. New moderately priced 1911s strike me as pretty tight and smooth, and feed and fire without fault in my limited experience.

I recall that the 1911s I had required maintenance and attention. One required some extractor tuning to feed and eject correctly. Some people have a problem with the grip safety interfering with function. I never had that problem and liked the grip safety.

Does "unreliable" mean that it won't function properly if maintenance and tuning are ignored? I've had a Glock and some SIGs, each working out of the box perfectly. The Glock tolerated infrequent cleaning too.

I wouldn't attribute that worry free utility to the 1911s I had, but I wouldn't describe that as a lack of reliability.

The new and expensive 1911s are amazingly tight, smooth and accurate, but if you are dropping $2,000-$3,000 on a pistol, it should be amazing.
 
The funniest sort of 1911 haters are the ones who actually like one particular brand of 1911 yet insist that all others are junk, or better yet, the sort who only hates one particular manufacturer of 1911 and spends more time ranting about how terrible that brand of 1911 is than they do speaking positively of any/all other 1911s.

It reminds me of the Walther PPK. Over the several decades since the firearm was invented, it has been produced under license by a variety of different manufacturers, much like the 1911. In addition, the Walther PPK has many clones and derivatives, many of which are actually of very good quality, despite being cheaper to produce. (You'll se a lot of folks who swear by old Eastern Blok military surplus clones/derivatives such as the Makarov PM or FEG PA-63.)
However, Walther aficionados tend to have their own ideas of which models are best, and tend to be snobs towards anything but Walther manufactured PPKs. Some are treated with a bit more respect than others like the French-made Manurhin PPKs, but for the most part they don't consider anything other than a Walther to be a "true PPK" and consider Walthers to be the best of the best, including the notoriously poorly made wartime examples.
I've always liked the PPK because my grandfather was a big fan of the James Bond films and Bond always carried a Walther PPK. So later on in life when I decided to get a pistol for self-defense, I ultimately happened upon the PPK while trying to figure out which one to buy, and given its reputation it seemed like the perfect gun, especially when I learned that PPKs of the time were being manufactured under license by Smith & Wesson. Obviously, a firearm as fine as a PPK being manufactured by one of the oldest American firearms manufacturers seemed perfect, but not according to Walther aficionados who had nothing but bad things to say about them. "They don't work, they jam, they're unreliable, they're not true PPKs, etc." I couldn't believe that Smith & Wesson would make a firearm as poor as they were saying, and I couldn't find any consistent first-hand reports of any such issues, so ultimately I ended up buying a used model LNIB, but I'm glad that I didn't listen, because it turned out to be great. It has never malfunctioned on me, fed every sort of ammo I loaded into the magazine, and is extremely accurate.
Nowadays those same Walther aficionados have by and large turned on the brand itself, claiming that only PPKs manufactured up to a specific point in time are true Walthers. Newer models apparently don't count because Walther USA isn't really Walther and only Walthers made in Germany before 1993 are true Walthers. Also, the new PPKs made in the USA are just as bad as the S&W models because they are built using the same tooling/equipment.

Haters are ridiculous like that. They'll even hate on the things they claim to love if it isn't made by a company they approve of.
 
IN 2012 i traded my three Kimber 1911 3 inch 4 inch and 5 inch, 5 inch was the best of the three, but i wanted the new Colt 1991 and XSE 45s, Colt had just returned from years of problems and were now making quality 1911s again.
Both were under $1000 and i got a really good trade in on Kimbers as my dealer really wanted them but had problems getting them from Kimber.
Both the Colts have shot out of the box with not any problems, no FTF or FTE and they both have great triggers i like the cheaper 1991 the best but thats just me.:)
 
There's no way that I would consider carrying -- and trying to conceal -- a full-size 1911. Over the past fifteen (or so) years I have owned and carried:
  • Colt M1991A1 Compact (budget Officers ACP)
  • Colt M1991A1 Compact (yes, a second one)
  • Colt Mark IV Officers ACP
  • Colt Lightweight Officers ACP
  • Para-Ordnance Slim Hawg
  • Para-Ordnance P12.45 (Officers size double stack)
  • Para-Ordnance P10.45

All of the above had 3-1/2" barrels except the Slim Hawg and P10.45, which have 3" barrels. They have all been boringly reliable. IMHO, based on my fifteen years of experience with these small 1911s, the stories of how unreliable short 1911s are are vastly exaggerated. Colt has sold a boatload of 3" Defenders, and you almost never hear of anyone with an unreliable Defender.
 
Just one experience with my 2 newest centerfire pistols. One 9mm Commander size pistol, the other a new Glock 19 G5. The Commander has ran 100%, the Glock has ran 100% except the trigger pull was screwed up and I had to take it to a Glock armorer, he got it to work by swapping the trigger out of his display pistol.
The claim that 1911 pistols are unreliable is from a bunch of people who are trying to justify why they chose a different pistol. I think the real reason is that 1911 guns cost more unless you buy a Citadel or other cheap gun.
 
I bought the Para-Ordnance LDA CCO an all stainless steel 3-1/2 inch 1911 .45.
Been a good shooting small 45 has a strange D/A type hammer, just a flat thing you can't use it to cock the CCO and you might think it does not strike hard enough to fire but trust me it works and it makes for a great trigger.
The manual safety can get set while shooting if you don't keep your finger off it.
I remember it costing in 2008 $875 and the jerk working at the store would not let me dry fire it the first time i was looking at it, later i returned that guy got fired a new sales guy let me dry fire it and i bought it and still have it.:)
 
Last edited:
There's no way that I would consider carrying -- and trying to conceal -- a full-size 1911.
Click to expand...

That's fine. What moron suggested you should?

"1911s are unreliable!" I've heard this. Trouble is no one ever seems to define what that is. Got news for you, if it is a repeater it can jam. Say something like that to a fanboy and right away someone will spout off how they've run 8 billion rounds through theirs and it never jammed!

To them, I say, congratulations, you haven't had a jam, YET.

Saying all 1911s are unreliable because you found one, or 3 that were is like saying all Chevy trucks are unreliable because you have one that won't start.

It is childishly simplistic (and a bit petulant sounding) to claim a design is flawed because the execution of that design in an individual gun is flawed. I've had Glocks JAM :eek:, I've had AKs JAM! :eek::eek: Are those designs flawed because some individual guns have jammed when there are literally millions of others with that same design that do not?

I've seem people jam semis, pumps, levers, bolt actions, and even revolvers.
Doesn't mean the design is unreliable. Just the operator. :D

Some people have a strong tendency to take a piece of machinery, put it to a use that it was not built for, operate it ways it was not designed for, and then BASH It because THEY couldn't get it to do what they wanted.

Then there are the people who think everything in the world that isn't their chosen favorite is crap. And those people can be on Utube as often as they want.
 
Forte S+W said:
The funniest sort of 1911 haters are the ones who actually like one particular brand of 1911 yet insist that all others are junk, or better yet, the sort who only hates one particular manufacturer of 1911 and spends more time ranting about how terrible that brand of 1911 is than they do speaking positively of any/all other 1911s.

It reminds me of the Walther PPK. Over the several decades since the firearm was invented, it has been produced under license by a variety of different manufacturers, much like the 1911. In addition, the Walther PPK has many clones and derivatives, many of which are actually of very good quality, despite being cheaper to produce. (You'll se a lot of folks who swear by old Eastern Blok military surplus clones/derivatives such as the Makarov PM or FEG PA-63.)
However, Walther aficionados tend to have their own ideas of which models are best, and tend to be snobs towards anything but Walther manufactured PPKs. Some are treated with a bit more respect than others like the French-made Manurhin PPKs, but for the most part they don't consider anything other than a Walther to be a "true PPK" and consider Walthers to be the best of the best, including the notoriously poorly made wartime examples.
I've always liked the PPK because my grandfather was a big fan of the James Bond films and Bond always carried a Walther PPK. So later on in life when I decided to get a pistol for self-defense, I ultimately happened upon the PPK while trying to figure out which one to buy, and given its reputation it seemed like the perfect gun, especially when I learned that PPKs of the time were being manufactured under license by Smith & Wesson. Obviously, a firearm as fine as a PPK being manufactured by one of the oldest American firearms manufacturers seemed perfect, but not according to Walther aficionados who had nothing but bad things to say about them. "They don't work, they jam, they're unreliable, they're not true PPKs, etc." I couldn't believe that Smith & Wesson would make a firearm as poor as they were saying, and I couldn't find any consistent first-hand reports of any such issues, so ultimately I ended up buying a used model LNIB, but I'm glad that I didn't listen, because it turned out to be great. It has never malfunctioned on me, fed every sort of ammo I loaded into the magazine, and is extremely accurate.
Nowadays those same Walther aficionados have by and large turned on the brand itself, claiming that only PPKs manufactured up to a specific point in time are true Walthers. Newer models apparently don't count because Walther USA isn't really Walther and only Walthers made in Germany before 1993 are true Walthers. Also, the new PPKs made in the USA are just as bad as the S&W models because they are built using the same tooling/equipment.

Haters are ridiculous like that. They'll even hate on the things they claim to love if it isn't made by a company they approve of.
Click to expand...
Just because the Makarov has the same general outline as the PP (Not PPk) doesn't make it a copy of the PP.

The Mak has a toggle-linked extractor. It will move aside in case of a cartridge blow out (out of the way). If a rupture occued in the PP the extractor would be blown away and the pistol would be inoperable.

Mak has a leaf type mainspring, the PP a coil type
Mak mag catch is a heel clip external spring type, the Walther is an internal button type
Mak ejector is the back end of the slide stop bar.
The safety of the Mak pushes down to de-activate, the PPs pushes up.

There are other difference I can't think of but most striking is the Mak has only 17 parts, the PP has 42!... the Mak is more easily produced, more reliable, more fool proof and slightly more powerful.

The PP is a fine pistol and I have a pre-war specimen but I have four PM Makarovs :)
 
Why the hatred for [enter brand/make/model here] ? I don't like Glocks, anything with an aluminum/titanium/anything other than steel frame.
 
Seems like someone is always looking for an opportunity for attention by criticizing. All too often they criticize without knowledge. I like a 1911, they feel good in the hand and are mostly quite accurate. I have only owned three 1911’s, two .45’s from Springfield Armory and a RIA 10mm. All three have been 100% reliable so far and I keep them cleaned and properly lubed to help them stay reliable. My RO Compact was my EDC for a couple of years and it concealed just fine on my skinny frame. I have since opted for a lighter weight pistol (P365), but that was partly driven by my run in with cancer and a temporary weakened condition. My RO Elite Target is a wonderfully accurate pistol. And the Rock 10mm is a really sweet shooting 10mm, even if it isn’t quite as pretty as the others.

There are some guns that I could heap criticism on because they performed so poorly for me, but I know others who have the same model and love it. What is to gain by criticizing what they enjoy? Better to look for the good and point that out more often...
 
Love it, here we have the mid-winter blues 1911 click bait post , and everyone falls for it and feels the need to construct a 2 page long 1911 justification reply. All's one needs to know is the 1911 (over 100 years later ) is still respected and loved by most. The haters are just donkeys. Nothing to see here , just move along.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top