What is so wonderful about an 1911?

[Semper Fi]

How could you not have to own this?

[Semper Fi]

Without the eye candy

[jim brady]

Johnlivesforchrist - I gotta take exception to the 'not any more reliable than a Glock or Ruger'. Like I wrote earlier, I have the replacement for the M1911 - the Beretta 92, and it is a great pistol - just not as reliable as the Colt under adverse conditions.

These other pistols are fine with the modern 'bells and whistles' and light wieght frames, hi-cap mags, double actions and so forth. If you want a reliable, rugged pistol that goes "bang" under almost any condition, its a M1911.

Both Ruger and Glock are fine pistols. They are just not up to the same standard that the M1911 has provided all these years. I personally like the Walther P-38 as a design, but I'm just not that crazy about the 9mm caliber. It also is not as rugged as the old Browning design, and I'm positive that it would gunk-up and not function the same as my Beretta under the same circumstances.

But these are just my opinions, and I'm sure your's are equally valid. Same goes fir the .45ACP caliber. There are rounds that equal, and surpass the .45ACP, but the M1911 offers both a great stopper caliber and a rugged, time proven design.

[johnlives4christ]

dont get me wrong, i do think the 1911 is a great gun. but i dont see that it is much, if any better than some other designs.

i use the glock for my example because it is most widely considered the 1911 nemesis. the two seem to always be in comparison. and without a doubt i think the glock and the 1911 are the 2 finest examples of semiautomatic handgunnery there is.

you cannot customize a glock to the degree a 1911 can be. while a pretty gun is nice, a gun should not be measured on this.

i think that the glock in most ways is equal to the 1911, but in some ways the glock is better. the 1911 is better in some ways over the glock.

•grip angle. the grip angle of a 1911 is better to my hand than a glock. however the glock's angle is acceptable, manageable, and does not reduce performance when using the sights.
•ease of maintenance. the glock is easier to field strip, with less parts to keep track of. it requires less lubrication. less lubrication means less dirt to get accumulated.
•more than field stripping. the glock has 34 parts, while the 1911 has 52. the glock is easier to detail strip in my opinion.
•magazine. 1911s have to have a good magazine. glocks only have to have a glock magazine that has not been abused. with so many 1911 magazine out there you have to be cautious of what you put in your gun, but a glock magazine is a glock magazine. the magazine capacity is not an issue. some argue about it, but it doesnt make the gun any better or worse performing.
•glocks can be had in all caliber assortments. 9mm, 357 sig, 40, 45, 10mm. just like a 1911, you could change the slide/barrel/magazine and have a different caliber. but doing so is expensive on any gun. just like a 1911, a glock in one caliber will feel the same as a glock from another caliber.
•longevity of the platform is excellent with a glock. i do not know the number of rounds it takes to wear out either a 1911 or a glock. but i have heard that the glock factory has a test model with over a million rounds through it. this is hearsay though.
•maintenance. honestly you can subject a glock or a 1911 to just about any amount of dirt you want and both will work fine. however i wouldnt abuse a pistol as a pretty as a 1911.
•trigger. this is a touchy subject. (pun intended) lol. a 1911 does not have the best trigger out of the box. it has an okay trigger out of the box. some might have a great trigger. but some dont until they are worked on. glocks have a consistent trigger from gun to gun. trigger jobs are easy to perform yourself on a glock if you know how. all you do is polish a few parts. the trigger never gets much lighter though and is never as crisp as a good 1911 trigger. so a 1911 does have a better platform for a good trigger. but the glock has an acceptable trigger.
•accuracy, a 1911 can be modified to be extremely accurate. so can a glock. but out of the box a standard 1911, or even a mid grade is not any more accurate than a glock.

i guess my point is that if you see a gun as an artistic platform you wont like the glock. but if you see them all as tools then the glock will hold it's own against a 1911.

i like both pistols. and i do think the 1911 is beautiful in design. but i am not biased one way or the other. i desire to have both a 1911 and a glock again.

~john

[hogger129]

i think that the glock in most ways is equal to the 1911, but in some ways the glock is better. the 1911 is better in some ways over the glock.

Glock vs. 1911

Glock fans seem obsessed with comparing their pistols to the 1911, with the overall thrust of the argument being an attempt to prove that the Glock is superior to the 1911 in every way. They will most often point to reliability, durability, capacity, weight, and the simplicity of the Glock design to demonstrate the point. My biases are as follows: I'm a 1911 fanatic and I'm not wild about Glocks. But is the Glock superior to the 1911? The two systems are so different that I have questions about the validity of any comparison beyond the fact that they're both pistols and choices need to be made. Here are some areas of comparison which lead me to prefer the 1911-pattern guns:

Reliability - I have seen more feed failures on 1911-pattern guns than I have with Glocks (or Smith & Wessons and Berettas, for that matter). My personal 1911's, a Springfield and a Kimber, don't experience feed failures, although the Springfield did have a couple when it was new. At a recent IDPA match, I witnessed a Les Baer Custom and Colt Gold Cup experience failure to feed. The original mil-spec 1911A1 is a very reliable gun when using the mil-spec ammo around which it was designed, and contemporary 1911's which are properly throated and broken in are also extremely reliable. The original 1911's which were issued to the Army were built with very liberal tolerances–you could call them loose–because the Army valued reliability under adverse conditions above pinpoint accuracy. Many of the feed reliability problems with 1911 pistols arise from efforts to tighten up the frame, slide, barrel and bushing in order to achieve "match grade" accuracy. Glocks don't tend to suffer feed failures, but in order to achieve this reliability, they have more of their chambers cut away, leaving more of the case unsupported. This design feature has led to some blown Glock .40 S&W pistols. For more on this, see Dean Speir's Glock KaBoom FAQ. One reliability issue which I've seen more with Glocks than other pistols is their occasional failure to detonate primers. While Glock advocates will say that other pistols have the same problem, I've only seen it happen on Glocks. While Glock true-believers are driven to proclaim their guns as the ultimate in reliability, the NYPD has been experiencing extractor problems and double feeds on their Glock 9mms.

The Eye of the Beholder - I am one of those people for whom the appearance of a gun matters. I like beautiful guns made of high grade metals with fine finishes. I don't like black plastic. To me, the Glock is one of the ugliest designs every conceived by the mind of man. Although some custom finishes can be applied to the slide, the options for dressing up the Glock are very limited. In contrast, 1911-pattern guns can accept a wide variety of finishes, grip panels, custom components, engraving, and other modifications which enhance the appearance of the gun. Glocks are made by one manufacturer whereas 1911-pattern guns have been made by scores of manufacturers since World War I, adding a great deal of interest, variety, and individuality to the type.

Uniformity vs. Individuality - With 1911's you deal with a particular gun, the one you're holding at that moment. Glocks are, for the most part, homogenous within model types. Each 1911 has a personality of its own, even among examples of the same model and production run from the same manufacturer. Whether this annoys or delights is a matter of personal preference. Those who like personality and individuality in a pistol will find the Glock uninteresting, and those who value absolute consistency will find their confidence undermined by a fussy 1911 which refuses to feed their favorite load. Any new-in-the-box 1911 is really a custom kit. The 1911 is to handguns what the `57 Chevy is to hotrods or the P-51 Mustang to air racers, the ultimate platform for customization. Pistoleros inclined to tinkering eventually find their way to the 1911. Aftermarket parts abound for this pistol, and you can make it into almost anything your heart desires. The design requirements for the pistol specified a gun which could be serviced in the field with a minimum number of tools, and it can be completely disassembled using only its own parts. Consequently, the 1911 is very accessible from a mechanical point of view. It is relatively easy to install custom parts or modify existing ones. Few 1911s remain completely stock for very long, unless they are those models which include the custom features usually added to the mil-spec guns, such as extended beavertails, custom triggers and hammers, full length guide rods, and decorative grips. For those who seek a personalized sidearm, the 1911 is one of the best platforms from which to begin.

Durability - I have heard claims that Glocks have launched as many as 300,000 rounds from a single pistol without a failure. I've never seen any documentation which would substantiate these claims, and I remain a bit skeptical about it. I'd like to see the gun, the round, and the test conditions. The FBI tests did document 50,000 rounds through the Glock .40 S&W without a breakdown, and that's an impressive performance. The original Army endurance test for the 1911 was 6,000 rounds. A well-built 1911 can be expected to have a service life of 150,000 rounds, although a part may break here or there during its lifetime. Only time will tell if the first Glocks will still be serviceable seventy five years from now. We know that many of the early 1911's are still functional and greatly desired by collectors.

Accuracy - In my opinion, an average government model 1911 is likely to be more accurate than the best Glock. In addition to that, 1911's can be tuned for greater accuracy whereas the Glock can't be. Between a really outstanding match grade 1911 and a Glock there is no contest in terms of accuracy. Glocks have acceptable accuracy for their intended mission, that being close range combat, but they are not tack-drivers. I haven't had opportunity to test one of the new long slide Glocks, but my initial impression is that they are an answer in search of a question.

Trigger - The one thing the Glock and the 1911 have in common is that their triggers are their greatest strength and weakness. The "revolutionary" design of the Glock centers on the trigger, the so-called "Safe Action Trigger." The Glock pre-cocks with the cycling of the slide so it can have a much lighter trigger than a true double action gun. In order to increase safety, the Glock was given a very long trigger pull and a little safety flange on the trigger which supposedly functions as a safety–if it isn't depressed the gun won't go off. But given the fact that it's on the trigger, it strikes me as largely superfluous. Aside from this, there are no external safeties on the Glock. If the trigger is pulled, the gun will go off, period. Personally, I find the Glock "Safe Action" scary, and lacking in the backup safety features that I prefer to see on an autoloader. Fans of the "Safe Action" point to the fact that there are no levers with which to fumble in a crisis and compare the Glock to a double action revolver (although very few revolvers have 3 lb. double action triggers). For a combat gun, these are valid points–simplicity translates into speed and keeps Murphy at bay, and light triggers give greater accuracy.

The single action trigger of the 1911 is light, crisp, and short. Since little muscle action is required to break the trigger, trigger control is less of a problem on the 1911 than any double action or "Safe Action" system. Since the trigger pull is so short, rapid fire is easy and fast. And then there's the dark side: for a single action 1911 to be ready for action, it must be carried "cocked and locked," which means hammer cocked and and manual safety on. More than anything else, this looks scary. People have come up with several strategies to avoid the cock and lock, also known as "Condition One." There is the "Israeli Draw" which means the pistol is carried with an empty chamber and charged magazine ("Condition Three"), and is drawn and the slide racked as the gun comes up to fire. Some choose to carry with the hammer down with a round in the chamber (Condition Two). Condition Two is just a bad idea for several reasons, but all of them have to do with the gun going off when you don't expect it to. Some choose simply not to carry the 1911 at all due to their discomfort with Condition One.

In my opinion, the Glock carries in Condition Zero, that is, hammer cocked with no real external safety applied. I don't acknowledge the trigger flange to be a fully functional external safety, and the number of accidental discharges reported on the Glocks tends to bear this out.

My own preference is for the 1911 trigger with its double safety system (manual thumb safety and grip safety). Even if one were to forget to apply the manual safety, the grip safety must be depressed and the trigger pulled for the gun to fire. With that said, the 1911 requires training and practice to be a safe and effective personal defense weapon. The Glock trigger seems long and mushy, and since there are no external safeties other than the trigger flange, it strikes me as being more prone to accidental discharge than the 1911. For target and competitive shooting, the 1911 trigger is my favorite.

Weight and Capacity - In this category, the Glock has the clear advantage. The Glock with its polymer frame is lighter and uses double stack magazines. Even the compact Glock 30 carries 10 rounds in its magazine. Compact 1911's such as the Colt Officer's model and the Kimber Compact can carry seven in the magazine. Government models can carry eight rounds or ten with an aftermarket magazine which extends beyond the base of the grip. A number of manufacturers such as Para-Ordnance, Springfield, and Kimber have introduced "widebody" 1911-pattern guns which can accept 10-14 round double stack magazines. To me, a true 1911 is a single stack gun. One of the strongest features of the 1911 is that wonderful, single stack grip.

Touchy-Feely - One of the greatest features of the 1911 is the narrow grip and short trigger configuration of the pistol. The grip of the 1911 remains the best feeling grip of any pistol I know of. The narrowness of the handle allows the hand to really wrap around the pistol and get a solid grip. The narrowness also benefits those with smaller hands, since the grip is narrow and the trigger relatively close to the handle. Also, within the configuration is a design feature which has been copied by the builders of most autoloaders since–the magazine release button located where the trigger guard meets the handle. Last, but very important, is the overall narrowness of the 1911 pistol which allows even the relatively large government model to be surprisingly easy to conceal. By way of contrast, Glock handles tend to be fat since they use double-stack magazine, and are more difficult to conceal due to their width. To me, a 1911 feels like a pistol ought to feel, whereas the Glock feels like a water gun.

Conclusion - Well, I warned you of my biases up front. Give me a 1911 any day. Nevertheless, the Glock design has proven to be a watershed event in the development of handguns. I really enjoy 1911's and practice regularly with them. My mode of carry is always concealed, so I'm not in the position of scaring the public with a cocked pistol on my hip. Patrol officers who may not be gun enthusiasts or enjoy a regular practice schedule may be better served by a Glock-type pistol with its long trigger and greater capacity.

"The police establishment is now properly devoted to the Glock, and this seems to be a good choice. The Glock is a difficult piece to shoot well, and its safety problem has been solved by issuing it with a trigger that only a gorilla would love, but it has been generally admitted that the police today cannot be trained to shoot well - not so much because of time and ammunition expenditures, but because of motivation. A man will do well only at things he enjoys doing, and today's police departments are reluctant to hire a recruit who enjoys shooting. Thus the Glock's "shootability" is irrelevant. The piece is relatively cheap, it is usually reliable, and the company's service policies are outstanding."
- Jeff Cooper, Cooper Commentaries, Volume V, Number 11.

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/other/Glock_vs_1911.htm

[hogger129]

without a doubt i think the glock and the 1911 are the 2 finest examples of semiautomatic handgunnery there is.

I would disagree that the Glock is one of the finest examples of handgunnery there is. I mean take the Glock's biggest competitor - Springfield XD. It centers around the same idea. Lightweight, high-cap, polymer pistol with the Safe-Action trigger. And it throws in an added grip safety. It's more safe in the hands of an untrained person compared to a Glock. No worries about reholstering and shooting a hole in your foot. XD also never experienced the "exploding" issues that Glock had in the past.

You're also forgetting about a lot of other very competent handguns. The H&K Mark 23 for example. The Mark 23 is one of the most accurate out-of-the-box handguns I've ever seen fired (besides various .22 target pistols), plus it's tough as nails. The H&K USP is another really tough, out-of-the-box accurate pistol. I just don't like the trigger on them because they feel like a staple gun where the Mark 23 has a much better trigger. What about some of Sig Sauer's guns? Ruger's guns? Smith & Wesson's guns?

To each his own, but I view the Glock like the Beretta 92. It's a competent gun, but it's hard to shoot it well.

[johnlives4christ]

nice post hogger.

as to the beretta not shooting well, i've never shot one. but i have shot a few different models of hanguns. i've never found one (yet) that i cannot shoot well. even the first time i shot a 44 magnum i shot well. i had only shot 357 up until that point.
the 1911 took me longer to get used to than any other gun i've owned. not that there is anything wrong with it, but it took longer to get where i could hit anything with it for some reason.

what we need to do is get some guns and go to the range and finish the discussion with some fun shooting
~john

[Teejay9]

While the 1911 is a contemporary of the Luger, C.96, and a myriad of other designs, famous, infamous, and not so famous, it' still in use and being produced. The design is simple, it has been gruelingly tested by the US Army, and served through 4 or 5 wars. It is battle hardened, thoroughly tested and remains a reliable safe and powerful. So many add ons and after market gizmos, but the basic design is tried and true.
I don't consider Springfield's, Kimber's, Taurus, S&W 1911s to be copies. They are 1911s. While not built in the "Golden Age" of the war years, they are bonifide 1911s, not "copies," or "knock-offs." They are modern built 1911s, and are as viable as my 1942 Colt. They feel natural in the hand, are quite reliable and, all in all, just exactly the same as JMB's design. I prefer mine to be closest to military as possible. I don't mind switching materials, better sights, etc., but it is a classic that has yet to be eclipsed. TJ

[honus]

Originally Posted by OldEagle

Everything I see or read compares all handguns to the 1911. What makes them remain as the standard by which all others are judged? It just seems to be THE GUN.

Old Eagle,

JMB must have been inspired when he designed the 1911.

Spend a day at the range with a 1911 and all your other handguns and your question will be answered.

1911s are like Harley Davidsons; they have a soul.

[USMCSpeedy]

Originally Posted by honus

1911s are like Harley Davidsons; they have a soul.

AMEN! I love em both!

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by johnlives4christ

nice post hogger.

as to the beretta not shooting well, i've never shot one. but i have shot a few different models of hanguns. i've never found one (yet) that i cannot shoot well. even the first time i shot a 44 magnum i shot well. i had only shot 357 up until that point.
the 1911 took me longer to get used to than any other gun i've owned. not that there is anything wrong with it, but it took longer to get where i could hit anything with it for some reason.

what we need to do is get some guns and go to the range and finish the discussion with some fun shooting
~john

I've never tried the M9. I've tried the 92FS (which I am pretty sure is the same gun except the M9 has slight differences and is US-manufactured where the 92FS is Italian-manufactured). And the Taurus PT92 (which is basically the same gun). The 92FS is a cool gun to try out. One thing I can say about it is that it racks very smoothly. You can tell it's a quality piece when you cock it. Another thing I like about it is that it can be carried cocked and locked like a 1911. It has a high ammo capacity also.

Among the problems I have with it... It has a long, heavy trigger pull. But I am biased because I am used to the short, crisp, single-action trigger on a 1911. The DA/SA trigger on the 92FS is tougher to control. Whereas a 1911 trigger requires less muscle movement to pull and you can stay on target better. Basically, trigger control is harder on the Beretta.

The gun is large in size. Big grip. Again, I am used to a 1911 which is a pretty decently sized gun. Not too big, not too small. I also think the gun is more prone to jamming issues than 1911s or other guns. The gun is also known for a spotty reliability (on the first models that came out). The infamous saying - "You aren't a SEAL, til you've been hit by Italian steel." I don't think the newer ones are bad. The gun has been out for a long time so I think they've worked most of the bugs out by now.

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by Teejay9

While the 1911 is a contemporary of the Luger, C.96, and a myriad of other designs, famous, infamous, and not so famous, it' still in use and being produced. The design is simple, it has been gruelingly tested by the US Army, and served through 4 or 5 wars. It is battle hardened, thoroughly tested and remains a reliable safe and powerful. So many add ons and after market gizmos, but the basic design is tried and true.
I don't consider Springfield's, Kimber's, Taurus, S&W 1911s to be copies. They are 1911s. While not built in the "Golden Age" of the war years, they are bonifide 1911s, not "copies," or "knock-offs." They are modern built 1911s, and are as viable as my 1942 Colt. They feel natural in the hand, are quite reliable and, all in all, just exactly the same as JMB's design. I prefer mine to be closest to military as possible. I don't mind switching materials, better sights, etc., but it is a classic that has yet to be eclipsed. TJ

Well said.

Although I am more partial to the ones without the FPB.

The nice thing about them being closer to military-style as possible is that - in my experience - the ones that are closer to military-style (like the original M1911A1 that Browning designed) tend to be the most reliable ones.

[jim brady]

Hogger129 - the Beretta 92FS I have is stamped Made In The USA - ACCK. Maryland. I think they are made in the same plant as the M9. Could be wrong, but I think so.

I guess to me the bottom line id that the 1911 is a simpler design. When you make something more complex, Murphy's Law of "If it can go wrong, it will go wrong" comes into play. I personally often wonder how the kids in Iraq and Afghanistan keep those M9s functioning with all that sand and dust.

[TheGunClinger]

Wow Hogger! In the last year or so you have become quite the expert on firearms. I congratulate you. I have about 30 and I dont know squat.
You must spend most of your time at the range. No wonder you cant get a date. Not alot of women there.

[mikld]

I don't think there can be a viable "answer" to this question as SO many shooters have their favorites, and no consensis can be reached. I have a friend who I consider a 1911 "expert" He has studied the history, built his own, been to Gunsite a few times, shot in competition, and shoots several thousands of rounds through his 1911s. We've discussed the merits of the 1911 and he is able to break down each "system" of the firearm and explain why it is as good as it is. His opinion of the Glock is that it was designed as a "throw away". If it quits working, instead of fixing it just throw it away. I've only shot one Glock (45 ACP of course) and wasn't impressed; just no opinion good or bad. But I am tickled every time I fire my 1911, and proud to be a member of the 1911fraternity...

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by jim brady

Hogger129 - the Beretta 92FS I have is stamped Made In The USA - ACCK. Maryland. I think they are made in the same plant as the M9. Could be wrong, but I think so.

I guess to me the bottom line id that the 1911 is a simpler design. When you make something more complex, Murphy's Law of "If it can go wrong, it will go wrong" comes into play. I personally often wonder how the kids in Iraq and Afghanistan keep those M9s functioning with all that sand and dust.

The sand and dust problems that the military had were from the magazines getting clogged. I've heard the guns function much better with the factory Beretta magazines.

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by TheGunClinger

Wow Hogger! In the last year or so you have become quite the expert on firearms. I congratulate you. I have about 30 and I dont know squat.
You must spend most of your time at the range. No wonder you cant get a date. Not alot of women there.

Lol!

I go to the range quite a bit and try out different guns when I can. Most of the stuff I shoot are range rentals when I'm not shooting my Springfield so alot of their guns are old police issue stuff like Berettas, Glocks, Taurus, Smith & Wessons.

I've always wanted to try out the Model 19. I didn't ask if they had it last time. I thought I saw one in their display case.

Never tried .357 Magnum OR .38 Special yet. I've handled an old Smith & Wesson Model 36 they had at Gander Mountain. I believe it's a .38 Special and the one they had was a snub nose. But it just felt weird in my hand.

I like to read a lot too. About guns, or cars, or whatever. I have lots and lots of books.

I go on Sundays though when everybody is still recovering from Saturday night and I'm not up to anything important.

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by TheGunClinger

Wow Hogger! In the last year or so you have become quite the expert on firearms. I congratulate you. I have about 30 and I dont know squat.
You must spend most of your time at the range. No wonder you cant get a date. Not alot of women there.

By the way, how do you like that Springfield TRP? I am thinking about buying one. But I'm not totally sure yet.

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by TheGunClinger

Wow Hogger! In the last year or so you have become quite the expert on firearms. I congratulate you. I have about 30 and I dont know squat.
You must spend most of your time at the range. No wonder you cant get a date. Not alot of women there.

I'm far from an expert.

[TheGunClinger]

Originally Posted by hogger129

I'm far from an expert.

But you is learning quick!

[zb338]

During WW2 whenever the Germans had the chance they grabbed
a 1911 and used it if they could get ammo. It was better than
any other gun out there. I have a few 1911's but if I had my choice
I would carry a Model 19 S&W chambered in .357. From 0 yds. to
200 yds. an enemy better be moving or they have been had.
Zeke

[patrol]

Originally Posted by OldEagle

Everything I see or read compares all handguns to the 1911. What makes them remain as the standard by which all others are judged? It just seems to be THE GUN.

For me it's the way it feels in my hand and the way the single action trigger resets between rounds. I think I can shoot this gun faster than any other handgun I own and with greater accuracy. To me that's the name of the game in self preservation. Fast but accurate shots.

[glocknut]

I think the main reason these old farts like the 1911 so much is that its like an old carburated car... it needs ALOT of tinkering and the old farts on this forum LOVE to tinker with things. They love to tinker even "if" it ain't broke...

Seriously... its design is solid and they can be made to be very accurate. They can also be made to be less accurate but more reliable as was the case with my Colt 1911s.
Another thing... 1911s come in all sizes AND weights. If you think one is to heavy then look at a lightweight version of the same gun. Different metal but lighter. There really is a variety of choices when it comes to 1911s.
Single stack mags are one of the downsides though. I hate being limited to 8 round mags that you cannot load up with more than 7 rounds without risking a feeding problem....

1911s are good to have in the collection...but not the "only" thing you should have in your collection...in my opinion.

mike
gn

[hogger129]

Originally Posted by glocknut

I think the main reason these old farts like the 1911 so much is that its like an old carburated car... it needs ALOT of tinkering and the old farts on this forum LOVE to tinker with things. They love to tinker even "if" it ain't broke...

Seriously... its design is solid and they can be made to be very accurate. They can also be made to be less accurate but more reliable as was the case with my Colt 1911s.
Another thing... 1911s come in all sizes AND weights. If you think one is to heavy then look at a lightweight version of the same gun. Different metal but lighter. There really is a variety of choices when it comes to 1911s.
Single stack mags are one of the downsides though. I hate being limited to 8 round mags that you cannot load up with more than 7 rounds without risking a feeding problem....

1911s are good to have in the collection...but not the "only" thing you should have in your collection...in my opinion.

mike
gn

There are double-stack 1911s. Para makes a few of them.

They are easier to conceal that probably any other gun out there thanks to their slim profile.

Yes, weight and ammo capacity are downfalls of this gun. But really?

As the saying goes ".45ACP. Because shooting twice is silly."

The 1911 is also one of the most accurate autoloaders to date. Even the old warhorse Colts are reasonably accurate compared to many handguns today. And even the old rattleboxes the military had were more accurate than the brand new Berettas the military rolled out in '85.

Not just old farts like em. I'm 23 and I love 1911s.

[TheGunClinger]

Originally Posted by hogger129

By the way, how do you like that Springfield TRP? I am thinking about buying one. But I'm not totally sure yet.

My TRP is dead nuts accurate, unfortunately I am not. Out of all my guns, I can hit more accurately with the TRP than any of them. When I take it to the range I make myself look good! They are hard to come by but if you ever get a chance to fire one, you will want one.