Time to trade in your 1911s?

[titan2k10]

Invariably almost all threads on ODT end up with 2 guys going back and forth.

Im not trying to be all high and mighty I was just asking some simple questions....trying to make a simple point.

I LOVE 1911's but would still not carry one if it weighed as much as a polymer pistol had the capacity of a double stack 9mm and wasn't absurdly expensive for a "quality" 1911 simply because of the reliability.........

 

[Kornbread01]

Umm why would I reply to your inquiries when mine were posed first? Thanks. They moved away from revolvers simply because of the single action trigger? You really think thats all it was?

Youre right the notorious history as a great firearm in its heydey but there are without a doubt better and more reliable firearms out there now. Are you disputing this?

Once again my questions stand and I will wait for you to answer them but it seems as if you are too ashamed to do so.

To summarize:
I asked questions first you can answer first.
1911 or polymer for our boys in wwi and wwii which would you pick? You seem to enjoy skirting this question.
You are still denying that 1911's are NOTORIOUS for reliability problems compared to modern day firearms.
By telling me that I am wrong you are trying to tell me to convince me simply from YOUR experiences while dismissing the other thousands as anecdotal....

>>>Seems like you have an inability to read & comprehend. I stated they switched away from the 1911's ( not the revolvers as you stated) after the switch to the 1911's on account of younger , inexperienced cops hitting the single action trigger on the 1911 trigger too quick. Or perhaps with this line of mess here, you don't know that the 1911 has a single action trigger & most modern revolvers are DA. And FYI, polymer wasn't; around for pistol manufacture in WW1 or WW2; so it's a moot point. And where in the hell did I ever say you are wrong in whatever you like? This ain't nothing but trolling................. go get a slingshot, like David used to slay the big guy for all I care..............

 

[albatros43]

And FYI, polymer wasn't; around for pistol manufacture in WW1 or WW2; so it's a moot point.

Everyone knows that. The question posed was, given the choice, would you had outfitted troups in WW1/WW2 with 1911s or say Glock 21s/HK45s, etc? You're arguing that the move away from 1911s in LEO/MIL has more to do with a lack of training (i.e. trigger pull) rather than reliability issues. I'm not saying you're right or wrong by the way.

 

[titan2k10]

>>>Seems like you have an inability to read & comprehend. I stated they switched away from the 1911's ( not the revolvers as you stated) after the switch to the 1911's on account of younger , inexperienced cops hitting the single action trigger on the 1911 trigger too quick. Or perhaps with this line of mess here, you don't know that the 1911 has a single action trigger & most modern revolvers are DA. And FYI, polymer wasn't; around for pistol manufacture in WW1 or WW2; so it's a moot point. And where in the hell did I ever say you are wrong in whatever you like? This ain't nothing but trolling................. go get a slingshot, like David used to slay the big guy for all I care..............

Of course polymer wasn't used in production for pistols during WW1 or WW2 and thats not even what I asked. It was a theoretical question but that seemed to, and continues to, elude you or you are simply skirting the question as previously stated.

Also, your statement about my ability to read and comprehend comes from where? Did I make a statement about the switch on firearms revolver 1911 because that doesnt appear in any of my previous posts....

I guess I should quit because you and I both know that either way you answer you will have egg on your face.

 

[VHinch]

First of all, that article is written from the perspective of outfitting a department/unit with 1911's. In that regard, yes the 1911 is past it's prime. It simply doesn't make sense to issue a weapon on any kind of scale that requires as much end user maintenance as a 1911 does. Hilton Yam is as good of a 1911 smith as there is, and he's also carried a 1911 extensively as a duty weapon, as well as being responsible for his department's weapons, so keep that perspective in mind when reading it. He clearly states in the post that it's one thing to maintain your personal weapons, and another thing entirely to keep a department's weapons running.

Secondly, every firearm platform on planet Earth can and will fail. Anyone suggesting that any particular platform can't or won't needs a piss test. In both actual field use and in numerous training classes as both a student and instructor over the years, I've seen literally everything fail at one point or another, the funniest example being the genius that showed up to a high intensity 3 day out of town class with a Glock 17 and no back up gun and had his gun go down on the warmup string on day one.

Yes, 1911's are a pain in the ass if you want to carry one. You have to be willing to essentially be your own armorer and do the necessary maintenance to keep them running properly, and yes the level of maintenance required is going to be more than a Glock or an M&P. However - a quality 1911, properly set up and maintained can certainly meet the reliability standard required of a daily carry weapon. A $500 Filipino POS 1911 without being setup correctly, not maintained, and running **** magazines on the other hand can and will be a nightmare from a reliability standpoint. It's really a matter of what you're willing to put into it both in terms of quality up front and ongoing maintenance.

I'm a 1911 guy and not likely to change anytime soon. Including my USGI collection, I have somewhere just north of 60 total 1911's, I carry one daily, and I probably shoot more rounds through my 1911's in an average year than most guys do in a lifetime. With that though, I'm also willing to accept what it takes to get a good one and keep it running. For what it's worth, the guns I keep in the console of my truck and in my get home bag are Glock 19's. As the saying goes - 1911's are like Ferrari's: nothing runs better or faster, but you better have a good mechanic and lot of money. On the other hand, if you treat your guns like you treat your lawnmower, you should probably stick to Glocks.

 

[titan2k10]

First of all, that article is written from the perspective of outfitting a department/unit with 1911's. In that regard, yes the 1911 is past it's prime. It simply doesn't make sense to issue a weapon on any kind of scale that requires as much end user maintenance as a 1911 does. Hilton Yam is as good of a 1911 smith as there is, and he's also carried a 1911 extensively as a duty weapon, as well as being responsible for his department's weapons, so keep that perspective in mind when reading it. He clearly states in the post that it's one thing to maintain your personal weapons, and another thing entirely to keep a department's weapons running.

Secondly, every firearm platform on planet Earth can and will fail. Anyone suggesting that any particular platform can't or won't needs a piss test. In both actual field use and in numerous training classes as both a student and instructor over the years, I've seen literally everything fail at one point or another, the funniest example being the genius that showed up to a high intensity 3 day out of town class with a Glock 17 and no back up gun and had his gun go down on the warmup string on day one.

Yes, 1911's are a pain in the ass if you want to carry one. You have to be willing to essentially be your own armorer and do the necessary maintenance to keep them running properly, and yes the level of maintenance required is going to be more than a Glock or an M&P. However - a quality 1911, properly set up and maintained can certainly meet the reliability standard required of a daily carry weapon. A $500 Filipino POS 1911 without being setup correctly, not maintained, and running **** magazines on the other hand can and will be a nightmare from a reliability standpoint. It's really a matter of what you're willing to put into it both in terms of quality up front and ongoing maintenance.

I'm a 1911 guy and not likely to change anytime soon. Including my USGI collection, I have somewhere just north of 60 total 1911's, I carry one daily, and I probably shoot more rounds through my 1911's in an average year than most guys do in a lifetime. With that though, I'm also willing to accept what it takes to get a good one and keep it running. For what it's worth, the guns I keep in the console of my truck and in my get home bag are Glock 19's. As the saying goes - 1911's are like Ferrari's: nothing runs better or faster, but you better have a good mechanic and lot of money. On the other hand, if you treat your guns like you treat your lawnmower, you should probably stick to Glocks.

I dont know if this was directed at me but one point I want to verify that I was not making the assumption that polymer pistols, Glock etc, don't have a propensity to fail just that they do so less frequently if treated equally to any 1911.

I have several 1911's and love them all and can most certainly agree with the mechanic/money analogy.

#respect whoops I just gave away my age.....or did I?

 

[NGIB]

Dang Vance, didn't know you were a Mod! Hope you're doing well pardner...

 

[Jled]

While I admit that modern polymer pistols have many advantages over 1911s, to me it is telling that the marines are returning to the 1911 platform. For many reasons, the military likes to stipulate active safeties....making pistols such as glock immediately ineligible. The military also likes metal frame pistols, probably for the durability (perceived or real, it doesn't matter), this is why pistols like the beretta m9 and the sigs come into play. Since the military is barred from using hollow point ammo because of the stupid Hague convention, there is a ample evidence that hardball 9mm is ineffective in quickly stopping combatants over the last few desert wars.

Most people can agree that with modern defense ammo, there are minimal differences between 9mm and .45acp....but you will not convince me that .45 hardball isn't superior to 9mm hardball. Now using all of what I've mentioned, list all of the metal framed service guns with active and passive safeties and are chambered for .45.....not a whole heck of a lot of models thst people argue against 1911s with. Oh there are the HK and FNH models that fit the bill but usually require someone with bear pas hands to hold comfortably. Remember that the military has to equip folks of all shapes and sizes.

All that to say that the 1911 platform has an undeniable track record and remains an extremely effective fighting gun for the 21st century. Now for everyone who can use hollow points and isn't arming themselves to fight doped up insurgents....quit your *****ing and carry whatever you shoot best. I love my 1911 but I carry my Kahr and glock daily. I'm not a soldier, I'm a civilian like most of you who has different needs.

End rant.

 

[VHinch]

Dang Vance, didn't know you were a Mod! Hope you're doing well pardner...

You too pal. Long time no see.

 

[NGIB]

You too pal. Long time no see.

I miss the weekly trades...