1911s vs the World

I've been agonizing over this for a bit, because I think Lady Tam has a valid point about gear arguments on the internet, but Phlegmy's first soliloquy during the VC new years show convinced me to share.

GunNutmegger wrote a bit on why the 1911 sucks, and on the whole missed the point. He's got a couple things right on technical issues with the platform: many of them ship with shitty magazines, and there are boatloads of the same for sale in the after market; on the gun-smithing issue I'm unconvinced that most 1911s are less reliable or require more worth to get right than other auto-loaders. That said, the cheaply made guns, and the very top end highly tuned guns are exactly as reliable as you'd expect. My experience running a couple thousand shooters through IDPA stages is that Wheel guns are the most reliable (only ever have ammo or speed loader related issues) followed by the Glock or XD (rare mechanical issues, but average for ammo and magazine related issues) followed by all other auto-loaders.

Far and away the most common failure is Magazine related, usually either they break into multiple parts or just jam up from dirt and filth. No auto-loader is immune from this. Maintenance is the only solution here.

Those are the averages, some people just had either bad luck, or too much time to monkey with their guns. Every club has that guy, and no matter what gun he has it doesn't work, and design doesn't seem to matter.

One clear advantage of the Glock or XD design is the lack of cleaning required, but a 1911 with proper tolerances (see highly tuned or cheap above) is probably good enough for the casual gun owner who cleans the peace after shooting. Personally, the Kimber I carry every day gets cleaned every month, or every 1000 rounds.

And yes, it feeds hollow point or any other ammo you can find, with out issue, after more then 1000 rounds of my reloads (230gr at 950 FPS).

Now for the area's where I disagree with GunNutmegger:

Single action is no more or less safe then any other. NDs happen when people pull the trigger and heavy trigger pulls don't seem to make that much difference. I've yet to see any study done but from all the stories I've seen its across all designs. The 1911 itself doesn't seem any more or less safe, and if 95% of owners were unsafe we'd see it on CNN.

As for the thumb safety being too hard to operate: the folks who get confused by the thumb safety also get confused by the slide locking back on an empty gun. Practice with the platform corrects this issue fairly quickly. The amount of practice needed to properly operate the 1911 is the same as the amount needed to operate any other semi-auto.

The bottom line, and why the 1911 pattern still sells, is that it fits allot of shooters. The combination of a big steel frame, and the slow .45 bullet make for very manageable recoil. The single stack grip and the short trigger make it easy to hold for normal sized hands. The grip angle works for a lot of people. These are not universal statements, I've had several students who said all the same things about the glock and hated them about the 1911.

It seems more about what works for you then about there being a single right answer. To paraphrase Lady Tam: "The best gun is one you'll practice with and carry". And thats where I'll leave it: the right gun is the one that works for you.

AE

Which Gun should you shoot?

PBD has been ragging on 1911s in a series of posts.

He makes a very good point: your choice of guns matters less (with in reason*) then your choice of training. Spending money on a 'better' gun will not get you as much as spending that money to learn more about shooting**.

*The difference between a 50$ pistol and a 400$ pistol is hugely different then the difference between a 400$ pistol and a 750$ pistol. I would be suspicious of a gun costing less then 200$ or so. It might be great, it might be crap, but there is a reason its so cheap. That said: any modern production pistol from a Named manufacturer is probably going to meet the basic 'goes bang when I press the trigger' test just as well as any other.

**Once again not all trainers are created equal, and each style has strong and weak points. My feeling is that you will get more for your training dollar if you study with multiple instructors then if you spend all that money to become a 'master' in any one instructor's style. This is based on my background in open hand and edged weapons, I haven't had the time and money to confirm it in the realm of shooting instructors.

There is one great big but coming after all that, and its not what Opra sits on: you must like to shoot your gun. If you don't enjoy shooting your defensive gun you wont practice. If you don't practice regularly all the training classes in the world are waisted. You're not going to perfect the techniques in a class during the 3 or 4 days of the class, your going to perfect them over the next 3 or 4 months on your range.

This is why choice of gun is so important: its not the technical .45ACP is better then 9mm, or JMB's guns are better then Mr. Glock's (both are true, but I don't expect any 9mm Glock toting heathens to take it from me:). Its pure preference.

Does the gun fit your hand comfortably?

Does the trigger feel good when you press it? Does it at least not hurt when you press it?

Can you actually conceal the bloody thing on your person? And then carry it around all day?

Can you afford the gun, holster, and ammo to feed it?

Those are the questions that determine which gun you should carry, not the opinion of some crazy guy on the internet.

AE

In the spirit of full disclosure: I carry a 1911, not a Glock, because of the questions listed above, when I'm teaching I suggest students answer those questions, not follow either I or Co-Instructor (the glock toting heathen) into one gun or the other. So far we have had an even split between 1911s, Glocks, and S&W Revolvers.
AE