-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Why all of the 1911 hatred lately?
- Thread starter Vanguard.45
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Add Sig 2022 in that price range.
Gritty trigger like the S&W M&P but perfectly functional.
Easy peasy to fix the trigger.
The only way he can be seeing a 90% failure rate is if he counts failure to disengage the safety as a gun failure. Either that or he is requiring students to complete the class without any type of lube or maintenance done during the 500 - 1000 round course. If that's the case, then he is intentionally trying to bring failure about.
As to the why: Some guys just get an idea in their head and they become zealots. I have a neighbor that thinks my dog barks too much. The fact is, when any dog barks, he attributes it to my dog and it reinforces his idea. If Pincus believes 1911s fail 90% of the time, that is what he will see whether or not it's accurate. If he has a class with 10 people and 3 have 1911s and the class as a whole has reliability issues, in his mind, he attributes it to having 3 1911s in the class whether or not they were responsible for most of the failures. Some people don't like some things and will find fault where fault does not exist. When Pincus lumps user error in with handgun failure, it makes me believe he is reinforcing his mindset by broadening his definition of failure for one platform.
After spending the day thinking about this, I've changed my mind. I've come to the conclusion that 1911s are every bit as reliable as a Glock or any other weapon. I base that on my belief in the 4 rules of engineering I learned decades ago when getting my A&P license. Those are simply:
If an item is correctly designed,
if it is correctly manufactured,
if it is correctly maintained
and if it is correctly used within its designed lifespan:
It cannot fail
Just like in the 4 rules of firearm safety, one of more of those rules must be broken to bring a failure about. As for the 1911, I think the design stood the test of time and has proven to be correct. Correct manufacture is a bit more iffy but most manufacturers are putting a good 1911 together. Maintenance probably comes into play in the class failures as could correct use or lifespan.
When I think of the failure I experienced in my G19, I think that would most likely be attributable to either a failure in design, a failure in manufacturing but most likely a combo of both. The failure of design comes in with Glocks taking a shortcut by using the same recoil spring for both the G19 and G23. The result is that the G19 is oversprung from the factory for a wide variety of loads, but works well enough for mid range ammo to get by. The video produced by Tim, of Military Arms Channel, showing how easy it is to induce a limp wrist failure in a G19, supports this theory. James Yeager states his belief that a G23 will never last 50K rounds due to the beating the gun takes with each shot. This also supports the idea that the spring is too heavy for a G19 and too light for a G23.
If you argue that the G19 is designed for commercial ammo only and will not work with lighter loads without replacing the recoil spring, you then have to admit that the G19 is designed for a narrow range of ammunition. That's a criticism of many guns, such as the Kimber Solo, which in turn gives it a reputation of being a poor design. So, Glock took the cheap route and used the same spring for both the G19 and G23 and it's not the best for either. For the G23, it contrubutes to a shorter life and in the G19, it contributes to a less reliable gun if held with a weak grip (which can happen if wounded in a gun fight).
The 1911, on the other hand, seems to work well if built, maintained and used correctly.
As to the why: Some guys just get an idea in their head and they become zealots. I have a neighbor that thinks my dog barks too much. The fact is, when any dog barks, he attributes it to my dog and it reinforces his idea. If Pincus believes 1911s fail 90% of the time, that is what he will see whether or not it's accurate. If he has a class with 10 people and 3 have 1911s and the class as a whole has reliability issues, in his mind, he attributes it to having 3 1911s in the class whether or not they were responsible for most of the failures. Some people don't like some things and will find fault where fault does not exist. When Pincus lumps user error in with handgun failure, it makes me believe he is reinforcing his mindset by broadening his definition of failure for one platform.
After spending the day thinking about this, I've changed my mind. I've come to the conclusion that 1911s are every bit as reliable as a Glock or any other weapon. I base that on my belief in the 4 rules of engineering I learned decades ago when getting my A&P license. Those are simply:
If an item is correctly designed,
if it is correctly manufactured,
if it is correctly maintained
and if it is correctly used within its designed lifespan:
It cannot fail
Just like in the 4 rules of firearm safety, one of more of those rules must be broken to bring a failure about. As for the 1911, I think the design stood the test of time and has proven to be correct. Correct manufacture is a bit more iffy but most manufacturers are putting a good 1911 together. Maintenance probably comes into play in the class failures as could correct use or lifespan.
When I think of the failure I experienced in my G19, I think that would most likely be attributable to either a failure in design, a failure in manufacturing but most likely a combo of both. The failure of design comes in with Glocks taking a shortcut by using the same recoil spring for both the G19 and G23. The result is that the G19 is oversprung from the factory for a wide variety of loads, but works well enough for mid range ammo to get by. The video produced by Tim, of Military Arms Channel, showing how easy it is to induce a limp wrist failure in a G19, supports this theory. James Yeager states his belief that a G23 will never last 50K rounds due to the beating the gun takes with each shot. This also supports the idea that the spring is too heavy for a G19 and too light for a G23.
If you argue that the G19 is designed for commercial ammo only and will not work with lighter loads without replacing the recoil spring, you then have to admit that the G19 is designed for a narrow range of ammunition. That's a criticism of many guns, such as the Kimber Solo, which in turn gives it a reputation of being a poor design. So, Glock took the cheap route and used the same spring for both the G19 and G23 and it's not the best for either. For the G23, it contrubutes to a shorter life and in the G19, it contributes to a less reliable gun if held with a weak grip (which can happen if wounded in a gun fight).
The 1911, on the other hand, seems to work well if built, maintained and used correctly.
roadrunner681
Expert
unless your a mechanic i love the 1911 most people that have issues with them want them to work like a polymer wonder gun there just not that way. i would say comparinga 1911 to a modern wonder gun is like comparing a race car to a street car.
Race cars don't run very far either.
Thats just cold man....cold.
My race cars ran every weekend.
roadrunner681
Expert
dont need to just make it pass the last lapRace cars don't run very far either.
. ether way i mean its not a gun to own if you just want a gun to shoot if you like tinkering its for you.
How often do you run your guns by comparison.....HHhhmmmmmmmm
I should add that a lot of 1911 problems can be traced to magazines. Not "bad" magazines, just magazines that don't run well in a particular gun. They might in another. I've found Springfield Armory factory magazines seem to run all of my 1911's the best. It least they seem to give the fewest problems overall. Wilson Combat runs my Colts the best.
I think with most 1911's, once you get the magazine situation sorted out, (and on some guns that can take some doing), you're pretty much good to go. That is assuming you're feeding it the ammo it likes.
I think with most 1911's, once you get the magazine situation sorted out, (and on some guns that can take some doing), you're pretty much good to go. That is assuming you're feeding it the ammo it likes.
I agree. Nut N' Fancy could do a 45 minute video on a scope base.
Site Supporter
Members online
- ftbstrd
- cedarhillfarms11
- Dirtebiker
- thunderchicken
- ZachJ03
- BR8818
- dw.watts
- jdadkins87
- rdbs505
- abraham743
- duff
- Aggar
- singlesix
- 15kiserc
- morve80
- tmschuller
- Sc1873
- tca1352
- jsharmon7
- steif
- Leo
- Twade94
- erasure
- mike8170
- Demoderb1989
- Sdiersing
- bwframe
- ChooterMcGavin1973
- cbhausen
- wildcatfan
- Jay40
- indyblue
- SolidDragon74
- vitamink
- 1775usmarine
- grillak
- Nickbau5
- jbombelli
- loudgroove
- maceace
- JoeSig
- ancjr
- markiemark
- squeals99