Why all of the 1911 hatred lately?

[ChalupaCabras]

Why all of the any of this crap lately?

Glock and 1911 are BOTH overrated. There are many fabulous platforms out there now that have a lot to offer.

A pistol has currently been offered now for years, and selling for $430, that has a match grade barrel, world class trigger, and survived ONE MILLION rounds of test fire as a factory prototype... The previous importer had to stop offering it because the sales were so slow.

Stop being such xenophobes, and try something new.

 

[indiucky]

What does the cost to manufacture a Glock have to do with it's ability as a self defense weapon? You're simply taking the long way around the barn to argue against the common sense fact, that less ammunition is not an advantage in ANY self defense scenario, regardless of how much you like trying to point out that it's insignificant, by posting more data than a NASA Moon shot generates.

If you're comfortable having fewer rounds, don't let me stop you. Just don't try to sell me on the concept.

I am not trying to sell you on the concept of anything...Lots of people over pay for things and that is their right.....I didn't say less ammunition is not an advantage...I just said that stats show it really doesn't matter what the capacity of the weapon is in most self defense situations.....If it takes that much ammo in your gun to make you feel safe then good for you....I believe the individual mind set is way more important than magazine capacity...Statistics show that to be the case...There is no argument....

You feel more ammo in the magazine is important and I think it does not matter....Statistics bear that out but many people go by how they "feel" rather than what stats or history show to be the case...I can't judge you because you "feel" you need more ammo than the average person does to defend themself...Only YOU know what makes you "feel" safer...Not I....

 

[indiucky]

Always worthy of a repost. Covers everything you need to know.

[video=youtube;HfJj90eNIfE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfJj90eNIfE[/video]

1:05 to 1:13 says it all.

[video=youtube;dYEd-3iy4QM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYEd-3iy4QM[/video]

[video=youtube;9lsA4KVPbew]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lsA4KVPbew[/video]

I have got to say that guy has the coolest torso tatoo I have ever seen...At first I thought it was a T Shirt.....

 

[billt]

Statistics bear that out but many people go by how they "feel" rather than what stats or history show to be the case.

Statistics also bear that 1911's are a far less reliable weapon out of the box, than any Glock is. It's proven in every self defense class, every day of the week. So you like a less reliable gun, which costs more, that holds less ammunition. Hey, what's not to like?

 

[Hookeye]

IMHO too many think that brand/model/price can make up for a lack of ability/skill.


Funny, know a guy with a Wilson 1911 who shoots like total crap.
And another with a Glock 23 that is pretty lousy.

 

[88E30M50]

What does the cost to manufacture a Glock have to do with it's ability as a self defense weapon? You're simply taking the long way around the barn to argue against the common sense fact, that less ammunition is not an advantage in ANY self defense scenario, regardless of how much you like trying to point out that it's insignificant, by posting more data than a NASA Moon shot generates.

If you're comfortable having fewer rounds, don't let me stop you. Just don't try to sell me on the concept.

You can also argue that more ammunition is realistically not an advantage either. The fact remains that in the vast majority of gun fights, had the person defending themselves used a 1911 instead of a different gun, the outcome would not have changed. You could argue that the gun that has the better trigger, the one that is more accurate due to the shorter, lighter trigger, does give an advantage.

As I've mentioned before, many of the advantages of a Glock exist only in the fantasy of the carriers mind. Will it run 10,000 rounds without cleaning? Sure, but that does not matter if you clean and maintain your gun regularly. Does it carry 17+1? Yes but how many shootings have ever needed that? Do not include police action shootings since the dynamic is different between police and civilian gun fights. In a civilian gun fight, there is a strong incentive for both parties to flee. The attacker flees before there is a police response and the defender flees when possible if it ends the fight and saves their life. There are good reasons to carry a Glock, but capacity is not the best of them.

 

[88E30M50]

Statistics also bear that 1911's are a far less reliable weapon out of the box, than any Glock is. It's proven in every self defense class, every day of the week. So you like a less reliable gun, which costs more, that holds less ammunition. Hey, what's not to like?

My experience has been the reverse. I've bought many brand new 1911s and 5 brand new Glocks and the worst out of box gun in all of them was the G19. The second worse was a G29. The vast majority of 1911 issues I've had has been around crappy reloads that had bulged brass, light loads or other issues.

The class reliability argument does not really mean anything. You could argue that you can bake a 1911 in a 500 degree oven for an hour and it will still work where as the Glock will either melt or at least, deform. Does it matter? No because nobody bakes their guns before use just as nobody gets in 500 round gun fights without a chance to lube or clean a weapon.

 

[Hookeye]

My Commander has about 10K through it, zero malfunctions, right from the box.
I did swap out the guide rod, mainspring housing and grips though.

It puts 'em right where I want 'em.

I kinda like that. And I trust it.


BTW if dirty Glocks were the best things ever, then why don't LE's get 100% hit rates?
Because they clean their guns too often?




If it runs, and puts em where you want, just shoot it. Who gives a flying flip what it is?

If you or your gun sucks, sell it and play golf (chances are you'll wear a better looking shirt).

 

[churchmouse]

If it runs, and puts em where you want, just shoot it. Who gives a flying flip what it is?

If you or your gun sucks, sell it and play golf (chances are you'll wear a better looking shirt).

And shoes......such cool shoes.....with cleats

 

[indiucky]

Statistics also bear that 1911's are a far less reliable weapon out of the box, than any Glock is. Hey, what's not to like?

Source? (just kidding, I have always wanted to do that....)

But seriously...I have never heard of that... My 1911's and my Revolvers have never failed me....I just point them and pull the trigger and they go bang.....

I never heard of anyone having trouble with a 1911 they pulled out of their box before but I heard here on INGO of one young lady had a NAA mini revolver up hers and I could see how that may affect reliablilty....(depending on one's personal hygiene ofcourse)....

 

[nakinate]

What if you own and shoot many examples of both, and you can accept the fact a 1911 is a 102 year old design? And because of that, there just might be something out there, that has come after indoor plumbing and telephones, that just might be a little better suited for the task. Then what "category" do you fit into?

Then how about a history lesson to go along with it.

"The Browning-designed 1911 pistol was first tested in combat in Mexico in 1916."

The History of the 1911 Pistol. - Browning Article

Okay. Reading comprehension is today's lesson. You said it was a 102 year old design. If you read the article you posted it says that the design was first adopted by the US military on March 29, 1911. Also, even if we go with your 1916 date your math is still wrong. That would be 98 years instead of 102.

 

[Hookeye]

Guns/parts do break.
Broke my Smith 629 (Smith fixed it)
Pops had 4 or 5 rigs go down in a short span of time (extractors, screws, broken firing pin etc).
Shoot enough and stuff will happen.

I think the big question is..............how fast can your rig be back up and running?

Custom rig of tight tolerances has a part break...............can you slap in a mass produced factory part and be up? Or does it need to go back to the custom builder?

"Bomb proof" parts............."if it ever breaks, we'll fix it for free" isn't the same as "it will never break".

It is good to hedge one's bet though.

 

[billt]

My experience has been the reverse. I've bought many brand new 1911s and 5 brand new Glocks and the worst out of box gun in all of them was the G19. The second worse was a G29. The vast majority of 1911 issues I've had has been around crappy reloads that had bulged brass, light loads or other issues.

The class reliability argument does not really mean anything. You could argue that you can bake a 1911 in a 500 degree oven for an hour and it will still work where as the Glock will either melt or at least, deform. Does it matter? No because nobody bakes their guns before use just as nobody gets in 500 round gun fights without a chance to lube or clean a weapon.

If you took 100, 1911's of various brands, and 100 Glock's out of the box, there is no question the 1911's would be far less reliable. While your five guns may have given you skewed results, ask any firearms trainer and you will get the same answer. The fact is 1911's are not that reliable, period.

Yes, they can be made to run reliably, but so can anything if one wishes to invest the time, money, and effort to do so. But it doesn't change the fact 1911 pistols are not as reliable from the box as many other guns are, especially Glock's. Regardless if you cook them or praise them. I don't care how much ammo the gun holds or doesn't hold, if it doesn't run reliably, it doesn't matter. A Glock holds more ammunition, AND delivers it far more reliabily than any out of the box 1911. That isn't my opinion, but rather fact based opinion of countless trainers who have trained tens of thousands of students over a period of years.

Here is a trainer who has had a less than 10% success rate with FULL SIZED 1911's, and a ZERO success rate with the chopped models in over a decade in his classes. He has even issued a challenge to anyone who finishes a class with ANY 1911, without any malfunctions for just 2 days. They will receive free tuition to his class, as well as free ammunition. That was in May of 2012. So far no takers. You guys who have all of these great running 1911's should take him up on it. You'll get free classes and ammunition out of the deal.

No matter how you try to cut it, they're just not that reliable of a gun. Especially out of the box today. That may not mean much in a range gun. But it sure as hell does to me in a self defense weapon. I won't let my ego get me killed. YMMV.

[video=youtube;2P0edDYdqXU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2P0edDYdqXU[/video]

 

[billt]

Okay. Reading comprehension is today's lesson. You said it was a 102 year old design. If you read the article you posted it says that the design was first adopted by the US military on March 29, 1911. Also, even if we go with your 1916 date your math is still wrong. That would be 98 years instead of 102.

Well Jesus H. Christ, go ahead and flog me with a stick!

 

[billt]

As far as the "all mine run fine", argument. As I mentioned in another post, I own and shoot 12, 1911's, and 6 Glock's. All of my 1911's run well, as do my Glock's. That in itself proves nothing. When you have people far more experienced than myself, or anyone else on this board say otherwise, and base that on facts gathered over a decade of observations of tens of thousands of students, and millions of rounds sent downrange. I tend to value their observations more than what I've seen with my personal collection . Especially if it's on something that could involve my own personal safety.

 

[billt]

Guns/parts do break. I think the big question is..............how fast can your rig be back up and running? Custom rig of tight tolerances has a part break...............can you slap in a mass produced factory part and be up? Or does it need to go back to the custom builder?

You bring up a very good point. Glock's are much like AR-15 rifles in that regard. Most all 34 parts in them will interchange with zero fitting. That includes the slide. Not 1911's, no way. Another is look at how long it takes to become a Glock armorer. Now compare that to becoming a competent 1911 pistol smith. Those 34 parts in a Glock take little hands on training to replace on a kitchen table. A 1911 damn near requires a machine shop. As Mikhail Kalashnikov said, "All that is complex is not useful, and all that is useful is simple". He proved it with the AK-47, just as Gaston Glock did with the Glock pistol.

 

[churchmouse]

You bring up a very good point. Glock's are much like AR-15 rifles in that regard. Most all 34 parts in them will interchange with zero fitting. That includes the slide. Not 1911's, no way. Another is look at how long it takes to become a Glock armorer. Now compare that to becoming a competent 1911 pistol smith. Those 34 parts in a Glock take little hands on training to replace on a kitchen table. A 1911 damn near requires a machine shop. As Mikhail Kalashnikov said, "All that is complex is not useful, and all that is useful is simple". He proved it with the AK-47, just as Gaston Glock did with the Glock pistol.

I find that if you stay with one manf. of 1911's say Springfield, that you stand a chance of interchanging parts as they run spec.
Change manuf. and try cross breeding and that usually will not work. So many companys cranking out 1911's. Spec is all over the place.
If I am not mistaken only Glock makes Glock so yeah, you can most likely go gun to gun for drop in parts.

 

[88E30M50]

If you took 100, 1911's of various brands, and 100 Glock's out of the box, there is no question the 1911's would be far less reliable. While your five guns may have given you skewed results, ask any firearms trainer and you will get the same answer. The fact is 1911's are not that reliable, period.

Yes, they can be made to run reliably, but so can anything if one wishes to invest the time, money, and effort to do so. But it doesn't change the fact 1911 pistols are not as reliable from the box as many other guns are, especially Glock's. Regardless if you cook them or praise them. I don't care how much ammo the gun holds or doesn't hold, if it doesn't run reliably, it doesn't matter. A Glock holds more ammunition, AND delivers it far more reliabily than any out of the box 1911. That isn't my opinion, but rather fact based opinion of countless trainers who have trained tens of thousands of students over a period of years.

Here is a trainer who has had a less than 10% success rate with FULL SIZED 1911's, and a ZERO success rate with the chopped models in over a decade in his classes. He has even issued a challenge to anyone who finishes a class with ANY 1911, without any malfunctions for just 2 days. They will receive free tuition to his class, as well as free ammunition. That was in May of 2012. So far no takers. You guys who have all of these great running 1911's should take him up on it. You'll get free classes and ammunition out of the deal.

No matter how you try to cut it, they're just not that reliable of a gun. Especially out of the box today. That may not mean much in a range gun. But it sure as hell does to me in a self defense weapon. I won't let my ego get me killed. YMMV.

[video=youtube;2P0edDYdqXU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2P0edDYdqXU[/video]

Part of his beef with the 1911 is the manual safety. If you have a perfectly running 1911 and fail to release the safety once, you don't get your free tuition and he chalks it up as another 1911 that failed. It's no wonder he's never had one complete a course successfully. You cannot lump a failure of a firearm in with a failure to use it correctly. Sure, it makes for good video but it does not amount to credible evidence.

Here's the test to determine if a gun is usable: Once you have gotten through the clean 200 rounds every gun needs before you trust it for carry, take your carry gun to the range and shoot it using the same ammo you have been carrying. Don't swap mags or ammo, just take it as you carry it and shoot it. Reload with your spare and shoot those too. Then repeat until you've burned through 100 rounds. Did it function well? If so, you are good to go. If not, you have issues to figure out. A well built 1911 will do that without an issue. My G19 struggled to get a single mag run through it without failure until it got past 150 rounds but was fine after that (except it still ejects brass into my face).

 

[billt]

Here's the test to determine if a gun is usable: Once you have gotten through the clean 200 rounds every gun needs before you trust it for carry, take your carry gun to the range and shoot it using the same ammo you have been carrying. Don't swap mags or ammo, just take it as you carry it and shoot it. Reload with your spare and shoot those too. Then repeat until you've burned through 100 rounds. Did it function well? If so, you are good to go. If not, you have issues to figure out. A well built 1911 will do that without an issue. My G19 struggled to get a single mag run through it without failure until it got past 150 rounds but was fine after that (except it still ejects brass into my face).

I'll buy that. The question is, how many out of the box 1911's will pass?

 

[88E30M50]

You bring up a very good point. Glock's are much like AR-15 rifles in that regard. Most all 34 parts in them will interchange with zero fitting. That includes the slide. Not 1911's, no way. Another is look at how long it takes to become a Glock armorer. Now compare that to becoming a competent 1911 pistol smith. Those 34 parts in a Glock take little hands on training to replace on a kitchen table. A 1911 damn near requires a machine shop. As Mikhail Kalashnikov said, "All that is complex is not useful, and all that is useful is simple". He proved it with the AK-47, just as Gaston Glock did with the Glock pistol.

I'm with you on the beauty of the Glock being its simplicity. That's why I like them and often carry them. They are a simple tool that works well. My only issue with what you've been posting is the idea that the 1911 cannot be trusted. A 1911 is a very effective sidearm for today's world and is every bit as viable for carry as the Glock. It's all just in what works best for each of us and in some cases, it's the old faithful 1911. Others feel better with a Glock of some other poly-wonder and that's fine too if that's what works for them.