James Yeager: 1911's suck

[kawtech87]

Just an example of "hardnosed people who will push thier OPINIONS as fact then make fun of people and talk down to them for having a different one."

Sorry. I thought my response would be more apparent.

I figured as much.

Still though seriously Stop peeking in my windows! I somtimes OC and dont need my "short comings" posted all over the interwebz!

 

[kawtech87]

Man I hope you weren't serious. See avatar.......It would not turn like a Kaw, was not built to. It would outrun any kaw (street) through 3rd gear. Tested the theory regularly until I sent it on to the new owner. Never ever beat on the street, only once at the strip due to "catastrophic" failure. All brands suffer that.
As to 1911's and his rant.....Oh well, we all have our opinions. His is just wrong in my mind. I prefer an H&K USP over a Glock. Price is not a factor when buying a gun. JMHO

Definately was not serious. I am a motorcycle tech by trade and I love and respect all kinds of bikes and thier riders.

Nice ride! Now I am wondering if you would put your money where your mouth is against Ricky Gadson mounted on a STOCK 2012 kawasaki ZX-14R? 9.47 in the 1/4 @ 153mph.

 

[kawtech87]

Ahahahah. Yeah, I heard him calling a bunch of people out in that video, by name even. Purple.

EXPERIANCE.

He was calling out everyone who owns a 1911 or likes them for any reason, And for that hes a douche.

 

[kawtech87]

And a CZ is not a SIG
I own Sigs too!! 3 to be exact on my way to 4. Maybe even a Sig 1911

 

[Fordtough25]

He was calling out everyone who owns a 1911 or likes them for any reason, And for that hes a douche.

No doubt. He must think Larry Vickers is a douche too.

 

[churchmouse]

Definately was not serious. I am a motorcycle tech by trade and I love and respect all kinds of bikes and thier riders.

Nice ride! Now I am wondering if you would put your money where your mouth is against Ricky Gadson mounted on a STOCK 2012 kawasaki ZX-14R? 9.47 in the 1/4 @ 153mph.

As stated, it went on to a new owner and he totaled it shortly after putting N2O in the tank and finding the button.

I was running against the local (indy) street crowd and against Harley's at the strip. This was not the absolute fastest bike on the planet but it would launch full tilt on the street due to the electronics I removed from my drag bike, A Kawasaki. I would post a pic but someone would get offended and such. Using these electronic gizmo's I could stretch out on most every bike I faced off with until the 4 valve technology went past me at the top of 3rd. It was a lot of fun having a 850 pound bike with a 260 pound rider (fully geared) run low 10's. It is a Harley after all.
No thread jack intended but had to make a point. Kaws are a favotite. 1911's rule.....


10.96 on motor....10.29 with the juice spinning through 2nd off the air shifter. Had to use everything to my advantage.

 

[kawtech87]

Vickers vs Yeager, Vickers would kick his ass up one side and down the other then call him a nancy boy, light a cigar and blow somthing up!

 

[paddling_man]

There are mechanisms to test the soundness of a medical professional or lawyers experience, training and credentials before licensing / beginning practice.

There are no such requirements, testing nor peer boards for firearm / tactical trainers, though a quick search into the background of real-world experience and credentials of more than a few, reveal the same level of hang-up-a-tile-and-practice-medicine that we had in the wild west of the 1800s.

Without outside control, it's up to the student to put these folks' resume to the litmus test to determine if they are blowhards or a master who can impart information from a well of reality experience and wisdom. (NOT advocating government intervention into trainers and/or licensing requirements.)

It's been a while ago now but I once taught whitewater kayaking and swiftwater rescue. The classes were a controlled environment. I could put the students into safe situations but give them complex problems to learn from and test themselves. There was value in this and, once some fundamentals were in place, they were ready to gain real-world experience.

I had real world experience.

I remember other instructors. Those who were truly experienced, those who were good. Calm. Spoke with wisdom without lots of judgment. They knew in the real world that there were multiple approaches and the granular view of which boat/pfd/paddle were far less important than the skill to use that gear. Sure, you could make a RADICALLY unsuitable decision (a 12 gauge for a pocket pistol) but most gear choices were esoteric to the skill of the practitioner.

Then we had others.

Some instructors that taught basic classes who expounded on and on about the right gear choice and how accepted wisdom was wrong, blah, blah, blah.

(Best example: this one cat who could barely, effectively paddle more than class 3+. He lived in Michigan - hardly the whitewater capitol of the CONUS - so he got very few days on the water per year. He DELIGHTED in telling students how wrong the rest of us were in our approaches. He advocated some simply incorrect methodology. The rest of us were paddling up to class V and pushing 70-80 8-hour days on the water every year.)

Here's my personal test. The experienced folks (no, not TRAINING/SIMULATED EXPERIENCE ONLY) are typically understated and thoughtful in their approach. The guru on the mountain who you seek out. They know what really has worked for them and what didn't. They know that adaption is necessary. Life isn't a controlled classroom/range/training river. They teach tactics.

The others are businessmen first. Snake oil salesmen. The use LOUD sales tactics. They use DRAMA. The use GIMMICKS, BUZZWORDS and the newest solution/trick/device for a problem-that-doesn't-exist and is likely a crutch for inexperience.

There are many good instructors who don't possess the advantage of real experience but exist to impart fundamentals of accepted wisdom. They CAN do an adequate job by standing-on-the-shoulders-of-the-experienced who are the real fount of wisdom who created those fundamentals. They just need to stick with relaying those facts and keep their untested opinions to themselves.

Advanced techniques and wisdom are best learned from instructors who are the veterans of years spent in real-world, relevant experience.


Simple. Who possesses wisdom as opposed to relaying facts?

The professor in college who began teaching immediately after graduation *or* the one who began to teach after 30 years of practice post-graduation?

The 2nd LT, fresh from West Point, or the grizzled gunny?

The whitewater instructor who mastered the basics on the training river and never leaves that controlled environment or the one who has spent YEARS on whitewater of both high-vertical drops, high volume, narrow technical runs of radically different rivers - both in spring flooding and wintertime 20F icy flows?

The firearms tactics instructors who has spent years in different war zones, LE in different areas of the country, etc., or the one who graduated from training courses - returned to their white collar / tech job - and now teaches?

My opinion (ooh, there it is: "opinion") is that those possessing trained but no real-world, inexperienced skill can do an adequate job of teaching fundamentals when they keep their untested, inexperienced opinion to themselves. When the inexperienced and untested begin spouting opinions-as-fact in loud dramatic fashion they reveal their level of -------ness and do a disservice to the student.

The subject of this video? Meh, apply your own test and do some google research. Make your own judgment and opinion.

 

[kawtech87]

Churchmouse: No offense was intended I just couldnt help but

 

[wtfd661]

I've got 1911's and Glocks. If I want to have a sweet time shooting I take one of the 1911's, If I want to go slumming then I take one of the Glocks.
By the way I have never had to "tune" one of my 1911's they have all been great out of the box, NEVER have had a problem with them shooting. Must be one of the "lucky" ones .

 

[Sailor]

The guy is a grade A d-bag plain and simple. I cannot imagine why he would do this if he is trying to run a business. Pissing off potential customers is simply not good marketing. You can have an opinion and you can even be right, but being a jerk is never a good idea.

The number of students he teaches has gone up every year since he started. He must be doing something right.

 

[Jeremiah]

James yeager is remarkable, after all the bonehead things he has done people still listen to him.

 

[HICKMAN]

He was calling out everyone who owns a 1911 or likes them for any reason, And for that hes a douche.

no he wasn't... he was creating more controversy by stating what he's seen in his class.

For everyone who thinks he is a d-bag, several more will look more in to Tactical Response and some will go take Fighting Pistol, Fighting Rifle or one of his other classes.

I don't think he cares what you think of him, and he shouldn't. But those who've taken classes at Tactical Response speak highly of the training.

 

[kawtech87]

I agree with Paddling_man.

A wise teacher is not a loud mouth.

 

[Hookeye]

Another variety of douche

 

[Que]

Anybody want to buy a 1911?

 

[HICKMAN]

Anybody want to buy a 1911?

for the record, James said he'd carry an M&P if a Glock wasn't available

 

[Txlur]

The 411 on 1911: With patience and a budget, you can own the .45 of your dreams - Off Duty, Technology - Air Force Times

pistol-training.com » HK45 Interview with Ken Hackathorn and Larry Vickers

Similar messages from industry pros? I think maybe. Cost (time, materials, initial cost) just to high on the 1911? Yeah. Pretty much.

Glock, please.

 

[GunSlinger]

There are mechanisms to test the soundness of a medical professional or lawyers experience, training and credentials before licensing / beginning practice.

There are no such requirements, testing nor peer boards for firearm / tactical trainers, though a quick search into the background of real-world experience and credentials of more than a few, reveal the same level of hang-up-a-tile-and-practice-medicine that we had in the wild west of the 1800s.

Without outside control, it's up to the student to put these folks' resume to the litmus test to determine if they are blowhards or a master who can impart information from a well of reality experience and wisdom. (NOT advocating government intervention into trainers and/or licensing requirements.)

It's been a while ago now but I once taught whitewater kayaking and swiftwater rescue. The classes were a controlled environment. I could put the students into safe situations but give them complex problems to learn from and test themselves. There was value in this and, once some fundamentals were in place, they were ready to gain real-world experience.

I had real world experience.

I remember other instructors. Those who were truly experienced, those who were good. Calm. Spoke with wisdom without lots of judgment. They knew in the real world that there were multiple approaches and the granular view of which boat/pfd/paddle were far less important than the skill to use that gear. Sure, you could make a RADICALLY unsuitable decision (a 12 gauge for a pocket pistol) but most gear choices were esoteric to the skill of the practitioner.

Then we had others.

Some instructors that taught basic classes who expounded on and on about the right gear choice and how accepted wisdom was wrong, blah, blah, blah.

(Best example: this one cat who could barely, effectively paddle more than class 3+. He lived in Michigan - hardly the whitewater capitol of the CONUS - so he got very few days on the water per year. He DELIGHTED in telling students how wrong the rest of us were in our approaches. He advocated some simply incorrect methodology. The rest of us were paddling up to class V and pushing 70-80 8-hour days on the water every year.)

Here's my personal test. The experienced folks (no, not TRAINING/SIMULATED EXPERIENCE ONLY) are typically understated and thoughtful in their approach. The guru on the mountain who you seek out. They know what really has worked for them and what didn't. They know that adaption is necessary. Life isn't a controlled classroom/range/training river. They teach tactics.

The others are businessmen first. Snake oil salesmen. The use LOUD sales tactics. They use DRAMA. The use GIMMICKS, BUZZWORDS and the newest solution/trick/device for a problem-that-doesn't-exist and is likely a crutch for inexperience.

There are many good instructors who don't possess the advantage of real experience but exist to impart fundamentals of accepted wisdom. They CAN do an adequate job by standing-on-the-shoulders-of-the-experienced who are the real fount of wisdom who created those fundamentals. They just need to stick with relaying those facts and keep their untested opinions to themselves.

Advanced techniques and wisdom are best learned from instructors who are the veterans of years spent in real-world, relevant experience.


Simple. Who possesses wisdom as opposed to relaying facts?

The professor in college who began teaching immediately after graduation *or* the one who began to teach after 30 years of practice post-graduation?

The 2nd LT, fresh from West Point, or the grizzled gunny?

The whitewater instructor who mastered the basics on the training river and never leaves that controlled environment or the one who has spent YEARS on whitewater of both high-vertical drops, high volume, narrow technical runs of radically different rivers - both in spring flooding and wintertime 20F icy flows?

The firearms tactics instructors who has spent years in different war zones, LE in different areas of the country, etc., or the one who graduated from training courses - returned to their white collar / tech job - and now teaches?

My opinion (ooh, there it is: "opinion") is that those possessing trained but no real-world, inexperienced skill can do an adequate job of teaching fundamentals when they keep their untested, inexperienced opinion to themselves. When the inexperienced and untested begin spouting opinions-as-fact in loud dramatic fashion they reveal their level of -------ness and do a disservice to the student.

The subject of this video? Meh, apply your own test and do some google research. Make your own judgment and opinion.

This is spot on. A true master will teach his students how to deal with problems and unexpected events which the student WILL SURELY encounter in real world situations. In regard to this thread a true master will teach his student how to overcome a failure of the tool he uses regardless of which tool the student chooses to use. In my experience a true master doesn't stand on a soap box and shout to the world about his great knowledge...he doesn't have to as his students will quietly do that for him.

 

[Claddagh]

Gotta reserve any "judgements" until we finally get broadband next Tuesday and I can actually watch the video. Trying to do that on a dial-up connection takes, like, an hour to see 3 minutes of video.

All I can say from personal experience is that both my Springfield 1911A1's have run 100% with the factory, Mec-Gar and Chip Mc Cormick mags. And that I personally ran nearly 2300 rds of assorted ball and JHP 230 gr. .45 ACP ammo through my stainless Champion in one 5-day Defensive Pistol course at the Chapman Academy without a single malf which wasn't deliberately set up for a "clearance/emergency action" drill.

To each his own. Maybe someday I'll make the switch to some sort of "drastic plastic", but for now I'm just fine with my antique 1911.