Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Perspective and opinion.....

Discussion in '1911 Forums' started by chuckman, Dec 25, 2011.

  1. chuckman


    Nov 9, 2006
    Durham, NC
    I love perspective; this on the 1911:

    "On a unit level, meaning a 1911 issued to each man, I believe it is not an ideal choice in this day and age. Simply put the maintanence and logistics tail that comes with issuing 1911 pistols makes it less than ideal in today's world. It is a pistol that requires hand fitting of many, if not most, components and that is not comparable with the way service grade firearms are maintained today.

    Now armorers swap or change parts not 'fit' them - and that is the key difference. In addition it is a pistol that works best with end users with a higher than average skill level that understand the performance benefits a 1911 gives you come with a price. That is a trait that can be found in individuals but not in a department or a unit.

    Great gun and a wonderful piece of American history but now it's time as a front line fighting tool in a fighting unit has past - if it was all we had we could make it work but there are better choices for that task."

    Merry Christmas!!
  2. Two Guns

    Two Guns VIP MEMBER

    Nov 4, 2004
    I still think the 1911 is the greatest fighting gun of all time. If I was heading up a unit it would be my first choice. The H&K USP would be my second choice.

  3. MajorD


    Aug 16, 2010
    as much as I enjoy the 1911 I have to agree chuck. The biggest barrier in my view is the military unwillingness to carry cocked and locked- I honestly wouldn't bother carrying a pistol that had to be racked after draw to get into action. The irony is the ar type rifle is carried cocked and locked all the time- the only difference is you can't see the cocked ahmmer like you can on the 1911.
  4. SpringerTGO


    Jul 30, 2011
    I have mixed feelings about the modern 1911's. No doubt they are easy to shoot, but I think they have some disadvantages to modern handguns.
    For some reason, a lot of the new "high end" 1911's are not reliable. "Extractor tuning, feed ramp polishing", etc. often required on brand new guns. On top of that, some companies (ok... Kimber) won't even look at warrantying a 1911 until 400 rounds have been fired. And other manufacturers do talk about "break-in". They also have a relatively small capacity.
    Imagine what people would say about Glock if they weren't reliable for 400 rounds, and if they had they typical issues common to new 1911's.

    I have more money in my 1911's than all my other handguns combined, so it's not like I hate them. In the case of my Springfield, it's been a very reliable and accurate handgun. But my Nighthawk has been way less than stellar.
  5. GJ1981

    GJ1981 Pitying Fools

    Feb 10, 2008
    Seeing as the quote is from Larry Vickers, it carries weight and is something I've come to agree with. I tried to like 1911's but I got sick of dealing with the BS. When you spend a fair chunk of change and get a pistol that won't run, you reconsider your CCW pistol.

    I had 3 turds from the SA Custom Shop, including the high and mighty Professional. It is pretty sad when you drop over $2500 and get pistols that couldn't get 100 rounds without a feeding failure out of the box, an improperly fit slide stop that prematurely locked on a loaded mag, which was sent back only to have them screw that up and get a pistol that wouldn't lock open, and then a piss poor barrel fit with lugs rounding and being told "that's normal."

    I could add how they used several incorrect parts on my pistols and wouldn't even acknowledge their error or fix it.

    There are better choices for what you like for anyone else.
    Last edited: Dec 25, 2011
  6. glockarmor


    Oct 18, 2011
    Central Indiana
    I guess I'm just lucky.. I've got a couple of Nighthawks and a Wilson that run flawlessly. I've also never had an issue with any Kimber that's had a place in the safe. Having said that I've also never had a problem with a Glock.. To each his own but a properly built 1911 with good ammo is a great pistol. It's all a matter of how you want to spend your $$$$.. Just my .02
  7. SpringerTGO


    Jul 30, 2011
    Never fails on the 'net.
    My***'s have been flawless, so you guys are wrong. No doubt a properly built 1911 with good ammunition is a great pistol. But how many people spend the kind of money Wilson and Nighthawk charge? And for that matter, my Nighthawk has been anything but a great pistol.
    Go to any Kimber or Nighthawk forum, and you will find all the posts you can handle with reliability issues. Off the top of my head, the only company I don't recall reading negatives about is Wilson, but considering the price and availability, I don't consider Wilson the norm for 1911's.

    Basic 1911's need ramping, polishing, and throating right out of the box. Does anyone need to touch a new Glock? And even the high end 1911 manufacturers recommend replacing recoil springs after a relatively low round count. Does anyone ever replace recoil springs on a Glock?
    And then there are the "magazine" issues. How many Glock owners have to toss their brand new magazines to get replacements? Read up on the Kimber forums, as well as several others, and that seems to be the rule of thumb.

    I enjoy shooting my Springfield more than any handgun I own, and I presently only own 1 Glock. But if it came down to only being able to have 1 handgun for the rest of my life, with no aftermarket parts, and no ability to repair it, there are lots of handguns I would own before a 1911. As far as reliability is concerned for a CCW, I'd take my S&W 340 or my Glock 26 long before my $3k Nighthawk T3.
  8. chuckman


    Nov 9, 2006
    Durham, NC
    Yes, Larry Vickers said this, and what I find refreshingly honest is that he is one of the foremost 1911 authorities and he recognizes that for all the awesomeness of the 1911 there are better choices. And for most of his classes, he runs a Glock.


    Dec 19, 2007
    LV just saying it like it is...

    However, certain government agencies and military units use them as their only sidearm.

    Kinda depends on the environment, use, ect
  10. GJ1981

    GJ1981 Pitying Fools

    Feb 10, 2008
    There have been other well respected 1911 guys who have echoed the same, Hackathorn and Yam come to mind.

    I like a 1911 for what it is, but have lost all faith for using one for anything outside the range. The only serious malfunctions in the last pistol class I was in was a 1911, a $2800 Volkmann at that. All the Glocks and M&P's ran...sad really.
  11. Jason D

    Jason D INFRINGED Silver Member Millennium Member

    Jun 16, 1999
    Mivonks, MI
    One thing to consider when you talk of a military gun, is that being Milspec means that the tolerances are such that you can swap parts around very easily.

    A small group of Armorers from WWI or WWII would have a quick time maintaining guns of the era. It's only the modern guns that everyone needs to be super tight and shooting an inch at 25 yards.

    A M1911 from back in the day that could shoot a 4-5" group at 25 yards was completely acceptable.
  12. majette


    May 1, 2008
    Norfolk, VA
    didn't one of your pistols run fine with factory loaded ammo but not handloads? i have had a few thousand rounds through my pro without issue but i do not shoot handloads.
  13. GJ1981

    GJ1981 Pitying Fools

    Feb 10, 2008
    My Pro had issues with any ammo less than 230gr, which included handloads that functioned in other 1911's I had. It didn't like WWB and some Federal FMJ despite it being 230gr loads, but some have claimed issues with those brands though I never had issues before in other pistols. I spent out of pocket for repairs after two returns failed to fix the problem.

    My Custom Carry choked on HST and Gold Dot's until the first trip back to SA, which is when more problems began after being returned.
  14. esh325


    Sep 28, 2011
    I would agree with that quote. The 1911 is a fantastic design, but I think there are better choices today for pistols. Not that the 1911 is unreliable, but I haven't found them to be as reliable other pistols, new and old. Pictures like these kind of tell you why they went with DA's.

    The first manual for the 1911 recommened carrying it unchambered I believe. In the WW2 manual, they said cocked and locked. The AR15 is not drawn from the holster though. Different dynamics between the two.
  15. glock2740

    glock2740 Gun lover.

    Jun 19, 2008
    NW Ark.
    1911's would be issued to Spec-Ops, if they so desired. Glocks issued to the rest of the troops. :thumbsup:
  16. MajorD


    Aug 16, 2010
    esh- the VERY first manual the gun was to be carried hammer down on a live round- which is why they designed the grip safety to allow you to pull the hammer back far enough to disengage it and lower the hammer,and why it was the first colt full size design to have a springon the firing pin and inertia firing pin. As originally designed the 1911 did not have a thumb safety but was added due to concerns by cavalry about handling the cocked ready to fire gun while mounted on an out of control horse.
    Most subsequent manuals advised carry hammer down on an empty- to carry cocked and locked only when enemy contact imminent.
    for most of it's service life the average joe carried hammer down on an empty chamber.
    remember the 1911 was adopted during the time the revolver was king- they were carried hammer down and cocked for firing most of the time-even after we transitioned to a double action wheel gun.
  17. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson

    Jul 10, 2001
    They cancelled contracts for thousands and thousands of 1911s in 1919 when it turned out not to be necessary to chase Germans through the trenches for another year.
    Apparently the Army trusted privates to carry, shoot, and maintain pistols in those days.

    MajorD, my book says Mr Browning and Colt went to inertial firing pins in the 1902 guns, and took the full length firing pin and odd rear sight safety out of every 1900 that came in for any repair. From the 1902 Military instructions: "It is impossible for the firing pin to discharge or even touch the primer except under the full blow of the hammer." A period gunzine article said you could carry it hammer down but would probably prefer to carry it with empty chamber, moving the slide to charge the chamber and cock the hammer.
  18. JK-linux


    Mar 5, 2009
    It's basically an economics argument, which has credence...
    Maintenance and logistics tail = time and money. We're broke so that makes sense.
    High skill level = training = time and money. Again, makes sense.
    No arguments from me that there are economical pistols out there today that require less time, training and money to ship with people going into harm's way. From a financial standpoint, it is a sound conclusion.
    I still love my 1911 though and were one to weigh financial concerns differently, I'd say it can still pull it's weight in uniformed service. Small units that have more resources in time and money behind them seem to do just fine with them.
  19. fnfalman

    fnfalman Chicks Dig It

    Oct 23, 2000
    California & New Mexico, US
    What is this "handfitting" are you talking about? When I was an armorer in the US Army, the parts swapped in and out. The only fitting some of the better armorers did was for the target pistols the MTU used.

    As far as the M1911 platform requires some sort of advanced degree to operate...lest you forget that most GIs back in 1911 couldn't even spell their names much less being rocket scientists.

    Where did this mentality come from? That the M1911 and M16 are somehow "sophisticated devices" that only the most devout, most educated, most intellectual shooters can learn how to operate and maintain?

    It's a gun. A damn decent gun, but it ain't no magic.
  20. GVFlyer

    GVFlyer Senior Member

    Sep 9, 2008
    Somewhere in the air.
    My experience may be exceptional, but I have 1911s from Colt, Dan Wesson, Ed Brown, Les Baer, Remington, Sig Sauer and Wilson Combat and all have functioned perfectly since round 1.