you guys gotta talk me down

[Pulp]

Every once in awhile I start getting the urge to go out and buy a Jeep. So I go take a ride in someone else's Jeep. That kills the urge for several years. So go out and shoot some different 1911s. It will either kill the urge to own one, or you'll buy one ASAP.

BTW, I like my Springfield 1911 MilSpec. Not bad at all to carry concealed in a CrossBreed Super Tuck.

 

[OKCShooter]

I have owned literally DOZENS of 1911s, mainly because of their history, accuracy and because they look so dang SEXY!

I've owned:2 Wilson CQBs, Delta Elite, 2 Volkmanns, 4 Baers, 3 Kimbers, Coonan, 10+ Colts, SW...etc, you get the point.

I now own NONE.

I never really trusted them 100% even though some never had a failure the problem is that some did (Baers were too tight, Kimber sucks (IMO), FTE with 1 of the Wilsons...etc) Add that to the fact that they were heavy and only carried 8 rounds I just never could justify them (especially at the $$$ amounts). My CC guns get dirty with lint and dust and the 1911 failures I had were always with range guns - clean and oiled, so I was "scared" that if I ever had to call on my 1911 and it was dirty it would only make reliability worse. And in a true SHTF scenario where I have carry a weapon as a true defensive tool, I want capacity and reliablity - so if the World came crashing down and I had to go to a drug store to get antibiotics for my daughter along with other crazy Parents I'll have a 21 round capacity Beretta 92A1 on my hip. Daily I'm very happy with my cheapo Gen II Glock 19, NEVER had a failure and it's lighter - Oh, and it carries 16rounds of 124 GD.

For a CC 1911 I'd actually want a loose non custom, those tight tolerances give great accuracy but sure can make them finicky.

And don't even get me started on the reliability of an Officers model - those never seem to run right.


So, for CC, I decided that carrying a heavy, low capacity (relative) and not 100% reliable in my mind gun wasn't what I wanted.


But damn, they're SEXY!

 

[flatwins]

I've only had one 1911 and it was a Rock Island Officers model (nothing special though it was cool) and currently don't even have a .45acp handgun. I've kicked around the idea of picking up a Ruger 1911 but it would just be a range gun with no plans to carry it. Lately I've been getting into 10mm more and figure that with one of those, I don't need a .45.

But I agree: 1911s are classic and pretty.

 

[JD8]

A little pocket lint won't foul up a well built 1911.



The notion that "tight" guns affect reliability significantly is false. A properly fit "tight" gun will be less likely to have "grit" impede slide velocity due to it being more difficult to to get into the slide rails. Either way, reliability will have less to do with slides being "loose" or "tight" but much more with the timing of the gun.

 

[twoguns?]

I have a 4" Springfield Light Weight Champion Operator (LWCO)

It shoots great , no problems , better than me.

I would welcome Any instructions, tips , tricks.

It's lightweight and comfy in a Crossbreed , I do actually carry it some.

My other 2 carry guns ,a G30 and a M&P40 are of course different platforms, but I practice the thumbs up for the 1911 safety..

When I do carry 2 ...one is a small j frame....

Oh and the one in the back seat, and the one in the toolbox + ammo....well sometimes... LOL

 

[OKCShooter]

The notion that "tight" guns affect reliability significantly is false. A properly fit "tight" gun will be less likely to have "grit" impede slide velocity due to it being more difficult to to get into the slide rails. Either way, reliability will have less to do with slides being "loose" or "tight" but much more with the timing of the gun.

I know you're a self appointed expert, but even Wilson Combat has stated " A little play (slide to frame fit) is essential for high round count reliability". That's a direct quote from their newsletter. Heck, Wilson and Baer both recommend running $200+ in ammo just to start breaking it in before you clean it!

I had a Baer Monolith that was so tight it was actually difficult to manipulate the slide.

Can you HONESTLY say that a tight 1911 makes an optimum choice for a combat weapon...?

 

[JD8]

I know you're a self appointed expert, but even Wilson Combat has stated " A little play (slide to frame fit) is essential for high round count reliability". That's a direct quote from their newsletter. Heck, Wilson and Baer both recommend running $200+ in ammo just to start breaking it in before you clean it!

I had a Baer Monolith that was so tight it was actually difficult to manipulate the slide.

Can you HONESTLY say that a tight 1911 makes an optimum choice for a combat weapon...?

I guess anyone that sees differently than you deserves a personal attack? I'm far from an expert..... just pointing out how things work and dispelling myths. Like or not, the timing has more to do with reliability than loose or tight as a majority of problems lie with mags or extractor issues, not slide velocity due to obstruction.
My Baer TRS, still won't break down by hand but it has at least 5-6K rounds through it and I've yet to experience a gun related failure.

Not really worried about "combat" or "EOTW" scenarios....my priority lies with a rifle there. I DO have several 1911s that I have used as CCW, and any gun I carry I put ~1K rounds through it before I will carry it.

 

[dennishoddy]

I shoot a Kimber Stainless Target II in limited 10 competition. Never a gun failure in 3 years now after many thousands of rounds. Ammo/reloading issues have caused some problems.

I'm guessing the request of the military, including spec ops groups to go back to the 1911 platform vs the 9mm has a lot to say about the caliber and the platform in general. They seem to be worried a lot less about round count when ball ammo is all they can use.

If the 1911 is so unreliable, why would they choose to have it back?

 

[Spec ops Grunt]

I shoot a Kimber Stainless Target II in limited 10 competition. Never a gun failure in 3 years now after many thousands of rounds. Ammo/reloading issues have caused some problems.

I'm guessing the request of the military, including spec ops groups to go back to the 1911 platform vs the 9mm has a lot to say about the caliber and the platform in general. They seem to be worried a lot less about round count when ball ammo is all they can use.

If the 1911 is so unreliable, why would they choose to have it back?

Nostalgia and appeal to tradition.


The 1911, properly made, is a reliable platform, but it does show its age.

Field stripping it is complicated compared to modern pistols, with a high number of parts. Capacity is limited, and weight is significantly higher than modern polymer pistol designs.

If you are a soldier carrying 100 lbs of crap, would you rather carry a polymer or a steel sidearm that statistically, you won't ever use?


I think going back to the 45 wouldn't be a bad thing, but if they did I'd prefer it to be something like an S&W M&P or an FN pistol. These are modern ergonomic pistols, that are plenty accurate and soldierproof. I'm sure nowadays with the popularity of the 1911 as a racecar platform, there might be a few amateur gunsmiths giving headaches for armorers trying to mod their 1911. The 1911 is too antiquated with the 8+1 being a significant disadvantage in combat.

Just my 2 cents. I'm all for going back to the 45 though, its just 'Murrican.

 

[JD8]

I think going back to the 45 wouldn't be a bad thing, but if they did I'd prefer it to be something like an S&W M&P or an FN pistol. These are modern ergonomic pistols, that are plenty accurate and soldierproof. I'm sure nowadays with the popularity of the 1911 as a racecar platform, there might be a few amateur gunsmiths giving headaches for armorers trying to mod their 1911. The 1911 is too antiquated with the 8+1 being a significant disadvantage in combat.

I don't own an M&P, but I do own a FN 45 and it is HEAVY fully loaded. Excellent platform though, and no doubt well suited for combat.