You might want to research the Springfield Armory TRP. It's a popular law enforcement handgun and military handgun.
And popular with range commandoes and Mall security personnel too.
That said, I have no issues generally with the 1911/TRP platform, but the .45acp cartridge itself is a poor choice for a general 'woods/outdoor gun' when you can get pretty much the same gun chambered for the more versatile and more penetrative
10mm AUTO.
Plus, the 10mm gives you one or two more rounds of additional capacity in a similar single-stack mag (depending on the mag maker).
Chris Kyle carried one in Iraq.
Saw 'American Sniper.' Great movie, Kyle is/was a hero and patriot. But personal sidearms don't when wars. Never have. Watch the movie again. The SEAL operators portrayed in it all used rifles.
The TRP is Springfield Armory's factory production of its Professional Model (FBI HRT gun)
Yep ... Still waiting to see something I didn't know.
By the way, very, very few FBI agents are actually issued the HRT gun. The balance of field agents still carry Glocks and spend a good amount of time at a desk making phone calls and investigating stuff, or hanging around the coffee stand gossiping about the fate of Strozk and Page.
There are a lot of variables in a wilderness handgun.
True.
A .44 Mag is a formidable revolver. To get the most out of a .44 Mag, a 6" barrel is required. With a 6" barrel, mag rounds fired from a Model 29 aren't fun. I've yet to meet anyone who was able to rapid fire with any degree of accuracy a 6" Model 29.
Now that right there touches on a pet peeve of mine for years ...
Big-Bore wheelgun guys all seem to have drunk the advertising cool-aid about how these Mega-Magnum revolvers with the 2.5"-3" barrels make for the 'perfect' Mountain Gun, or the perfect 'high-country wilderness gun,' or are the ideal gun 'for Alaskan carry,' due to their easier
portability.
The problem's not only the horrendous, flench-inducing recoil that results from firing one of these short-barreled Mega-magnums. It's the fact that the ammo-companies marketing the ammo to feed these behemoths (e.g., the 454 Casull) advertise ballistics (fps/fpe values) derived from 6"
or longer test barrels,
not the 2.5"-3" guns that guys are actually carrying into the boonies.
Those short tubes sacrifice a huge amount of the velocity that's supposed to be driving that Big Bullet into the Big Bad critter with the snapping jaws and claws.
A 6" Model 29 is not easy to carry. It's not fast and easy to get its muzzle on a target.
True, which is why gun-makers have been chopping down .44 Mags (and other chamberings) to the aforesaid 2.5"-3" range, and re-branding them with geographically-impressive monikers - e.g., 'The Alaskan.'
Maybe they should call one of these shorties, 'The Brooks Range Beast.'
More kool-aid for the wheelgun crowd.
A 1911-A1 is extremely easy to carry all day. It's very quick to get its muzzle on target. Recoil does not take its muzzle off target. It can be reloaded within seconds.
'Extremely easy to carry all day'
in the right holster. Otherwise, we're in agreement here.
Having briefly carried a Model 29 in very remote wildness areas, I've sold it. I'd much rather carry a TRP .45 ACP loaded with 230 grain +P rounds. I'm good if you have a different take on it.
Between those two, the TRP - but chambered in the aforesaid
10mm. Much more effective cartridge in an autoloader across a wider range of possible uses.
While you're researching the TRP .45 ACP, delve in to actual battlefield use of the 1911-A1, especially during WWII's Pacific Campaign.
Dude, don't even go there.
Family members fought and died in the So. Pacific.
By the way, the title of this thread is, '
Woods Gun' - not 'War Gun.' Be advised there are no bears of any kind on Iwo Jima.
The reality is handguns have become obsolete for most battlefield applications. I'd rather carry more mags for an M4 than any handgun. However, the 1911-A1 has remained popular for specialized military units. Springfield Armory has filled huge military orders for its Professional Model.
Well, at least you agree with my comments above where you first referenced Chris Kyle. Pistols don't win conflicts, and arguably the rifles of individual soldiers don't either, although they do, or can, impact battlefield events.
If a wilderness gun would be defense against mean critters smaller than bear, a 2" Chief Special would be hard to beat.
Huh?
Obviously, proof-reading is becoming a lost skill with the rise of the internet. That said, I *think* I sorta understand the point you're struggling to make here.
