What Can a Glock Do That a 1911 or BHP Cannot?

[GlenD65]

I don't own either a 1911 or a Glock so I have no opinion of either. I would like to know who has seen a melted Glock since its been mentioned here several times.

 

[XtremeVel]

I don't own either a 1911 or a Glock so I have no opinion of either. I would like to know who has seen a melted Glock since its been mentioned here several times.

Have never seen one melt, but will remember it in case ever of a kaboom. Maybe a heat iron can mend one back together and keep me running.

 

[Mr. Habib]

Have never seen one melt, but will remember it in case ever of a kaboom. Maybe a heat iron can mend one back together and keep me running.

You might want to test that idea with some old Tupperware first.

 

[Hoosier45]

Start a fight on INGO. But I guess 1911's do that, too.

 

[Jack Ryan]

Drop onto concrete without the owner crying a little bit?

I've got a Jennings that can do that with any Glock ever made, all day long. Bring on your Glocks and we'll test them if you think that's a real attribute.

 

[Mudcat]

A steel framed gun will melt just have to get it hotter. Both will melt at a higher temp than your hand will take. Seen a G19 fire through 1000 rounds in 14 minutes melted the guide rod which is only used for assembly and serves no purpose once assembled. But the frame was nice and cool.

As far as the failure rate we had 1 XD, 2 1911s, 1 H&K and 21 Glocks of various calibers last weekend in a 700 round class. Both 1911s had issues one a Springfield GI just had a few and probably was mag related he was running a couple cheap mags. But the Kimber 4" was constantly having issues he even tried a different ammo on sunday. I don't recall any of the Glocks having any issues. I did have one fail to fire but it dented the primer nice and deep guy next to me put it is his H&K and it still didn't fire. Cheap Blazer aluminum cased ammo.
Of the 6 1911s that I have had only one was even somewhat reliable after 200 rounds, none were reliable to 500. For me that is not good enough. I will take boringly reliable any day over a sexy gun. My last one to go was my Delta Elite. Soooo Long.

I reload nearly all my ammo and have never had one of those kabooms you speak of. Never actually seen one in person or known anyone who has.

I will agree that a 1911 is a sexy pistol with great ergonomics and most have great triggers with a little work. But a great trigger is just a crutch for poor trigger control. If you can shoot a crappy trigger you will be a better shooter with anything that you pick up. If all you shoot is nice light crisp triggers you will suck at anything else you pick up.

 

[HICKMAN]

"What can a Glock do that a 1911 cant?"

Start a fight...

 

[Jack Ryan]

But a great trigger is just a crutch for poor trigger control. If you can shoot a crappy trigger you will be a better shooter with anything that you pick up. If all you shoot is nice light crisp triggers you will suck at anything else you pick up.

I can't wait to see that one in the gun magazine ads.

Just think of the decades gun manufactures have wasted trying to improve and perfect trigger pull. All they ever really needed was a slick ad man. Now that's funny, I don't care who you are. Mossberg, NEF, and Glock must have all gottong their heads together to come up with that one.

I can see the Weatherby ads now, "Those slick candy cheeds triggers are just crutches. Our new barn nail and gravel fire control will make a man of you way faster than those cheap NEF guns." LOL

 

[Mr. Habib]

You guys must live on a different planet from me. My experience with 1911s has been absolutely flawless, I have never owned one that has ever experienced a malfunction of any kind. You all talk about the reliability of Glocks, but the one that I owned was the most undependable gun that I have ever owned.

 

[MAHamlin]

So buy an alloy framed 1911. At 24 to 27 ounces (depending on model/size), its only a few ounces heavier than a Glock but much more comfortable to carry, to grasp and more natural to point.

That is a matter of opinion. I think people miss the point sometimes... Just because a Glock feels weird in your hand doesn't mean it doesn't feel perfect in someone else's. Like a few others have said, it's really just a matter of preference. If a Glock feels comfortable to you and you shoot well with it, so much the better for you. If a 1911 or BHP serves you better, grab one an enjoy it.

What baffles me about this whole argument is why people compare these two brands specifically... I mean, Glocks and 1911's are fundamentally different enough that I wouldn't think they would step on each other's toes so much. Different trigger, different composition, striker v. hammer, grip angle, etc. If I was looking for a pistol that met one set of criteria why would I care about the pistol that meets all the opposite? Doesn't mean the other pistol is any worse, it just means it's not the pistol I prefer to shoot. That's all.

For the record, I've shot both Glocks and 1911's and found they both shot well for me. The 1911 I shot did have a few FTF's, but I suspect that was due to the owner's poor maintenance. The Glock performed flawlessly. Despite that, if you asked me today which I would prefer it would be that 1911... why? It felt good in my hand, it pointed more naturally for me, and I prefer a hammer. I still believe the Glock to be a fine pistol though, and I would never scoff at any person who owned one. They do just what they're supposed to, and I applaud them for that.

 

[22lr]

The 1911 has been killing Nazis, Commies, Japs, Terrorists, Jihadists, and all the other enemies of America for 100 years.

Glocks have been carried by cops into donuts shops for only a few short year in comparison.

 

[HICKMAN]

You guys must live on a different planet from me. My experience with 1911s has been absolutely flawless, I have never owned one that has ever experienced a malfunction of any kind. You all talk about the reliability of Glocks, but the one that I owned was the most undependable gun that I have ever owned.

Shooting matches every weekend, we see a lot of what works and what doesn't.

My Glock runs, and when it doesn't (rare), it's generally my fault do to reloads or the non-Glock barrel I ran for awhile because it's too tight.

I get through around 200-500 rounds almost every weekend, depending on the number of matches I shoot.

and I don't have to "tune" my mags to run either...

 

[HICKMAN]

The 1911 has been killing Nazis, Commies, Japs, Terrorists, Jihadists, and all the other enemies of America for 100 years.

Glocks have been carried by cops into donuts shops for only a few short year in comparison.

uh huh... and every single guy that had to kill one with his pistol would have rather had a rifle in his hand...

nice try though, it was almost funny

 

[XtremeVel]

You guys must live on a different planet from me. My experience with 1911s has been absolutely flawless, I have never owned one that has ever experienced a malfunction of any kind. You all talk about the reliability of Glocks, but the one that I owned was the most undependable gun that I have ever owned.

I was commenting on longevity issues, not reliability. Unfortunately due to the longevity issue I saw with my Delta Elite, I didn't keep it long enough to form an opinion on what I thought about it's reliabilty.

But a serious question... I assume you 1911 fans are talking about .45 ACP ? A low pressure round ! Out of curiosity, would you still stand by the longevity of the 1911 if we were talking higher pressure rounds developing much higher slide speeds ? I ask because I personaly have seen Glocks eat high pressure rounds such as .357 sig ( have shot THOUSANDS of FULL power loads) and 10 mm. Now, I know the 1911 fared well with the 38 super, but that was not running 40,000 PSI and if slide speed is relative to bullet velocity, does not compare to the either 10mm or the .357 which the Glock handle extremely well.

 

[Joe Williams]

Shooting matches every weekend, we see a lot of what works and what doesn't.

My Glock runs, and when it doesn't (rare), it's generally my fault do to reloads or the non-Glock barrel I ran for awhile because it's too tight.

I get through around 200-500 rounds almost every weekend, depending on the number of matches I shoot.

and I don't have to "tune" my mags to run either...

Never "tuned the mags" (whatever that is) on Cathy's Rock, either. It just kept working. More than I can say for the jammamatic that was my Glock 23. Phooey, thing was a piece of crap, in the hands of multiple shooters.

 

[kingnereli]

The polymer vs. steel quandary is still relatively fresh for me. For a long time I was a 1911 ONLY guy. I took interest in the XD platform when a cousin of mine bought one. I researched them thoroughly and decided I would try them. A few months ago I picked up a XD45 tactical and have been very pleased. I particularly like how similar they are to the 1911.

As to the topic of this thread I still don't see any clear advantage to polymer. Polymer guns are mostly metal so they will still rust with neglect. In fact, early XD's and M&P's had rust issues until they went to the current melonite finish (identical to glock's tenifer finish.) Polymer guns are lighter then steel guns but that isn't always a good thing. Some of us prefer heavy guns. Heavy is shootable. Unless a 1911 creates some kind of back or sciatic nerve problem for you stressing over the roughly 10-14 ounce difference (That's less then a pound, BTW) just means you're a sissy. I've done everything I can to make my XD as heavy as possible. Fully loaded it is heavier then a government 1911. Which brings up another point. All those tiny bullets some polymer guns hold decreases the weight disparity when loaded. You know, they condition that you carry it in. Capacity is a wash as well. If I get in a situation that I can't handle with 25 rounds I would likely need something belt fed to have a chance of getting out of it.

Well, come to think of it, there is one thing that modern polymer guns do better then a 1911. The design do not require any excessive amount of fitting to replace parts. With the exception of grip, sights and some main spring housings 1911 parts come oversized and require fitting to instal. So there it is. That, to my knowledge, is the only thing a glock, XD, or M&P can do that a 1911 can not.

You guys are always talking about the near 100% failure rate of 1911's, and I have to wonder: Are we talking about stock 1911A1 with 230gr FMJ? I've been around 1911A1s all my life, and I've never seen the sort of failure rate you guys always talk about. In fact, failures have been so rare for myself and everyone I know, that I can remember them, because they stand out for their rarity.

In fact, if they failed at the rate you guys always claim, I'm amazed that they managed to bandage one together long enough to make the military trials in 1911!!

I've often wondered about this as well. The "finicky" claim seems to be the most common complaint leveled against the 1911. I've never witnessed an unreliable out of the box 1911 and don't know anyone who has. It seems the claims usually come from people who just don't shoot them very often. Sadly, it comes down to a single personal experience that taints any particular platform. If someone has a bad experience with a single gun of any particular make they are likely to dub every gun of that make with the same description that fits that single "lemon" they encountered.

Guns are machines. They are likely to fail at some point. If you spend enough time at the range you're likely to see a malfunction or two in any gun out there. A few weeks ago I saw two glocks malfunction on the same day. I would hardly be justified in labeling all glocks unreliable because of that experience. The same goes for 1911's.

Also, at one time, a lot of 1911's on the market were old shot out military workhorses that had seen better days. That and the fact the feed ramps used to be made specifically to shoot ball ammo. People got ahold of them, didn't replace worn out parts and tried to shoot self defense hollow points out of them and they got a reputation for being unreliable. Those same people spread that rumor and it is still the case to those who don't know any better. Modern 1911's aren't that way. They are set up for hollow points and take advantage of the same modern manufacturing techniques as polymer guns.

*snip*
The worst experience I have ever had was in a early Colt Delta Elite. Now, with the factory springs, that gun battered itself and I would of bet it's life would of been short. IMO, there is no comparison to that steel frame gun and a Glock 20 on the issue of longevity (barring any kaboom of course). The Glock 20 would handle any load with ease without any signs of battering.
*snip*

This is the what I'm talking about. The early Delta's had a serious issue with battering. The 1911 was not made to shoot 10mm. Early Delta's used standard 1911 frames that couldn't handle the load. That's precisely why they stopped producing them for awhile. It would be an utter shame for someone to read that post and be turned off to buying a new Delta because they were lead to believe that this is still the case. The new Delta's have beefed up frames that can handle 10mm. The poster didn't include that information because, most likely, that one bad experience tainted him so much that he has not looked into the new Delta's to see if there was still a battering issue.

eh... WRONG

There are MANY of us who compete in USPSA matches with Glocks and reloaded ammo all year long. Several of us shooting lead through the standard Glock barrel too.

Please stick with facts and not rumors.

Even Glock says that's a bad idea. The fact that some do it anyway and haven't had problems yet isn't proof otherwise. I'm sure you know the most common kaboom combination is reloads and factory barrels. Glocks have introduced an entirely new term into the gun hobby (kaboom) with the issue. Two new ones if you count "glock bulge" that is common in .40 brass fired out of a glock.

 

[TiminMishawaka]

I'm just not getting what a Glock or XD can really do that a pistol designed 75 to 100 years ago cannot.

Realistically - Hold twice as many bullets. Fire ammunition that wasn't made 75-100 years ago. And cost $400 less than a pistol modified to reliably fire ammunition that wasn't made 75-100 years ago.

Doesn't matter to me personally though. I carry a revolver which is a basic design that is even older

 

[XtremeVel]

This is the what I'm talking about. The early Delta's had a serious issue with battering. The 1911 was not made to shoot 10mm. Early Delta's used standard 1911 frames that couldn't handle the load. That's precisely why they stopped producing them for awhile. It would be an utter shame for someone to read that post and be turned off to buying a new Delta because they were lead to believe that this is still the case. The new Delta's have beefed up frames that can handle 10mm. The poster didn't include that information because, most likely, that one bad experience tainted them so much that they have not looked into the new Delta's to see if there was still a battering issue.

Are the new ones beefed up frames or did they change the recoil assy, or both ? Either way, still doesn't change the fact it is still steel to polymer impact vs steel to steel impact. I am a tool maker that has worked with hard metals for 20+ years. I see everyday the failure of hard metals from impact. I was not saying the NEW Delta's are junk. I was saying the Glocks will hold up to the battering better. Until a 1911 comes out and holds up to a caliber such as .357 sig running 40,000 PSI and again, if slide velocity is relative to bullet velocity, a velocity of 1500 fps, I would bet on the Glock every time.

And I also have seen too many people using the nylon shock buffers. They get smashed up too fast to claim there still isn't a battering issue.

 

[mammynun]

If I could find a Glock that "fit" me I'd buy it in a heartbeat. I'm actually kind of pissed that of all the semi auto's I've every held, none feels worse in MY hand than a Glock. The subcompact ones feel better than the full sized to me, but worse than an XD/M&P/1911/Sig. BTW, my 1911 is the only pistol that I own that I've never CC'd.

 

[kingnereli]

Are the new ones beefed up frames or did they change the recoil assy, or both ? Either way, still doesn't change the fact it is still steel to polymer impact vs steel to steel impact. I am a tool maker that has worked with hard metals for 20+ years. I see everyday the failure of hard metals from impact. I was not saying the NEW Delta's are junk. I was saying the Glocks will hold up to the battering better. Until a 1911 comes out and holds up to a caliber such as .357 sig running 40,000 PSI and again, if slide velocity is relative to bullet velocity, I would bet on the Glock every time.

And I also have seen too many people using the nylon shock buffers. They get smashed up too fast to claim there still isn't a battering issue.

The frames are beefed up. The only change in the recoil system is they come with a full length guide rod. It is still highly recommended that the Delta Elite owner be religious with spring changes.

I know you weren't trying to degrade the Delta's. Your post was just a good example of the point I was trying to make.

How do you know a 1911 couldn't handle a .357 sig? I'm sure someone, somewhere has done it but it isn't a common chambering for a 1911. I haven't seen an example of a .357 sig chambered 1911 with tens of thousands of rounds through it and I doubt you have either. Neither of us can say assuredly if there would be batter issues. If you know something I don't please share.