View Full Version : Lookin at gettin another 1911
Mr.Goodtimes
09-04-09, 09:04
I've been bitten by the 1911 bug... my dad bought a 1991a1 a while ago that we shoot a lot but, i want one for my self now.
I like the 1991a1 that he has but, its really a very basic gun, im lookin for something maybe a step up. also, im open to looking at other brands. I dont need a match quality $2400 dollar custom 1911. I just want one that will run right from the factory or with very little tuning.
Right now im looking at the colt xse series, a springfield Loaded and the kimber raptor II.
of these, which is honestly the best pistol for the money? has kimber gotten their qc shit together yet or are their pistols still hit or miss? also, ive read on here of problems with kimbers finish wearing off, is this still the case?
Of those three, I would get the Springfield Loaded.
But outside, I would strongly consider a Baer TRS from John at ProLoad, or a used Wilson CQB. I own both of these and they are outstanding. Did I mention that Wilson now offers their guns in a lovely blue finish?
If you're getting a Kimber, I wouldn't look farther than the Custom II, TLE II or TLE/RL II if you want a rail. Or the stainless versions of the above, if you so desire.
Above that in the Kimber line, you're paying more and not really getting much.
Here was my Custom II after almost 3 years, about 8,000 rounds and several pistol courses. The finish on the frame was much tougher than the finish on the slide. The finish on the slide sucked ass, lots of wear, lots of rust when IWB carrying in the heat. The finish on the frame hardly wore at all and never rusted.
http://www.545ar.com/notpretty.jpg
JiMfraRED1911
09-04-09, 10:50
IMHO, Springfield.
If you want a Kimber, I'd look for a used Series I platform. DO NOT fall for the newer Warrior just because it says it's a S1 layout. If you ask me, the actual USMC Det. 1 ICQB blasters were the last proper guns Kimber made.
As mentioned before, keep a good eye out for a used Wilson Combat CQB.
I'd stay away from the Kimber. I've had two. The first one had to be exchanged for the second one and I ended up trading the second one to a friend. Unfortunately, it later became a problem child for him. I've heard and read various things about Kimber that discuss the situation with their pistols, but from my point of view I had two and both turned out to be disappointing.
Also, if you get a Kimber, make sure to read the manual. The Kimber pistols use the Schwartz safety system. It has never happened to me, but it is possible to shear off the part of during reassembly if one is holding the grip safety. If one does it, the part can no longer make contact with the firing pin block (to move it out of the way) and the gun will not work properly.
I know the Springfield is a popular option but I think a lightly used Wilson CQB is really the best way to go.
Ofthose listed Springfield loaded, Me I would look at Cylinder and Slide R&D 1911. C&S use a Springfield Milspec as the platform and replace all of the firing control parts with their tool steel parts (NO MIM parts on pistol period), perform trigger job, lower ejection port, throat barrel, add NM bushing (fitted), fit bevertail grip safety, C&S extended thumb safety, Novak front, and rear sights, stipple front and back straps, and refinish. all of this for $1800 nothing you dont need.
Springer Loaded, or lightly used Springer TRP
Thomas M-4
09-04-09, 12:33
The Kimber Warrior does not use the Schwartz safety system.
It does have MIM parts as do all Kimbers.
Dan Wesson has all forged parts and Ed Brown beaver tail which allows the highest grip angle out of all beaver tail grips.
Springfield uses a priority beaver tail grip radius cut.
IMHO a Dan Wesson pointman7 would fit your requirements the best .
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 13:15
From a practical stand point, why a 1911? I'm a big fan of them, but don't own one. I may get a custom job one day, just to have one on board for nostalgic reasons, since that was the first auto I learned to fire.
It takes too much to keep it reliable and running. There's an excellent trainer (LAV) who's famous at saying "The 1911 is an enthusiast's gun". He also doesn't have any love for the compacts. Too unreliable. This is from an individual that's probably fired more .45 ammo being a Delta Operator and Firearms instructor for them, than anyone alive, and he used to make custom 1911 builds for members of that unit and for sale to the general public.
IMHO, you'd be better served with an M&P midsized. It has the full sized grip, with 10 round cap mags. It will be cheaper and way more reliable. Out of my M&Ps, the .40 and full sized .45 are my favorites. I have shot the crap out of them. The .45 has over 5K rounds through it and only gets cleaned ever 2K rounds fired or so. Just lubed. It's a very durable, accurate, mild shooting and inexpensive option. Bud's gunshop has them on sale this month for around $500.00 and change, with night sights. Try to compare the M&P45 and the 1911. Shoot them both, side by side, then decide.
Business_Casual
09-04-09, 13:25
I've been bitten by the 1911 bug.
I hope you weren't planning to retire anytime soon.
Good luck!
M_P
Dan Wesson has all forged parts and Ed Brown beaver tail which allows the highest grip angle out of all beaver tail grips.
IMHO a Dan Wesson pointman7 would fit your requirements the best .
Actually, I believe Dan Wesson uses an STI thumb safety, which is a MIM part. They're easy enough to replace if that's needed.
Anyway, of the three 1911's originally listed I would go with the Springfield Loaded.
I'd get a Colt. I have a Kimber TLE II and not had any problems but if you can find a Colt get a Colt.
It takes too much to keep it reliable and running.What is the continual upkeep of a 1911?
They are a little more complicated to clean, but they are the finest pistols in the world to shoot. They have great feel, balance and history. Do not let anyone talk you out of a 1911. Many things really nice cost a little more to service, but we make that conscious decision everyday, and rarely do we regret buying higher priced quality. I do not regret buying my M&P or my TRP. Its all good.
nogoodnamesleft
09-04-09, 16:06
It takes too much to keep it reliable and running. There's an excellent trainer (LAV) who's famous at saying "The 1911 is an enthusiast's gun". He also doesn't have any love for the compacts. Too unreliable. This is from an individual that's probably fired more .45 ammo being a Delta Operator and Firearms instructor for them, than anyone alive, and he used to make custom 1911 builds for members of that unit and for sale to the general public.
I have to disagree with this. I have 4 and they are all reliable without any undue upkeep. In fact -- God's honest truth -- I have my father's 1941 Colt 1911A1 Commercial (which has a Swartz safety in it!) and it sat on a shelf in his closet for literally 20+ years with a loaded clip in it in condition 3 and the remainder of the box of ammo sitting next to it. When my dad passed away, I inherited the gun and with only an oiling, I took it to the range and fired that clip and the remainder of the box in that gun without single malfunction.
I have since learned that gun is worth $2500+ as a collectible and won't be shooting it again.
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 16:29
I have to disagree with this. I have 4 and they are all reliable without any undue upkeep. In fact -- God's honest truth -- I have my father's 1941 Colt 1911A1 Commercial (which has a Swartz safety in it!) and it sat on a shelf in his closet for literally 20+ years with a loaded clip in it in condition 3 and the remainder of the box of ammo sitting next to it. When my dad passed away, I inherited the gun and with only an oiling, I took it to the range and fired that clip and the remainder of the box in that gun without single malfunction.
I have since learned that gun is worth $2500+ as a collectible and won't be shooting it again.
Well which part do you disagree with? The first sentence I assume?
When you go to the range, how often do you go?
How many rounds do you fire?
What's the total round count on each of your weapons?
How many rounds have your father fired through his 1911 since it's been in his possession? Note, I had a neighbor who was a WWII vet who had a 1911 from Singer, in his bed stand when he died. Despite the mold throughout the innards, as well as the ammo in the mag, when his son and I, cleaned it and went to the range, it was totally tight fitting, and very accurate. From the condition of the parts and rifling, when I broke it down to clean it, pretty much new, but I doubt he ever fired a few mags through it the entire time he owned it, approximately 60 years. My grand father, same story. The part in blue above, suggest that since the ammo in the mag is from the original box of ammo next to it. It hasn't been fired in over 20 years.
I average 12K rounds a year through my weapons. Around 14K in the last 12 months.
My point being is a gun that sets in a trunk of a vehicle, in a bed stand or closet shelf, for 20 years+, will be totally reliable if never fired or hardly used. With the amount of shooting and training I do, as well as others on this forum, I'd be hard pressed to keep a 1911 in a constant state of reliability and accuracy for my needs. Hell the US military has warehouses of surplus weapons, through out every war we have fought, that will kill you dead right out the box, in every condition from battle field issued, rack grade, hardly used, to pristine new mint condition. M-14s that were made in the 50's and 60's are serving in both theaters of war today. So...that means, we will have to agree to disagree. ;)
What is the continual upkeep on a 1911?
nogoodnamesleft
09-04-09, 16:55
I disagree that a 1911 requires anything more in terms of upkeep (cleaning, repair, etc.) than other handguns. C'mon, most other hand guns are based on many of the same Browning design principles, like the tilting barrel.
As to the round count of my personal firearms as compared to yours, I don't see how that matters. Quite frankly, it is a non sequitur. But I will indulge you for the momemnt; of the three 1911's I shoot (two Kimbers and a Springfield longslide) I run between 2 and 4 thousand rounds of .45acp through them a year -- a little less this past year as I don't like paying $20+ a box for .45acp. My oldest is a Kimber Stainless II bought back in the early 1990's and probably (I don't keep exact round counts) in the neighborhood of 20,000 rounds through it.
If your point is that, somehow, the 1911 design can't stand up to the round count of your uber tactical/competitive usage, then I merely point you to the professional shooters that perpetually use 1911's in their competitions.
And yes, I do own other firearms (SA XD, Sig, etc.) and it takes no more or less time keeping the 1911 running as they do. YMMV.
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 17:25
I disagree that a 1911 requires anything more in terms of upkeep (cleaning, repair, etc.) than other handguns. C'mon, most other hand guns are based on many of the same Browning design principles, like the tilting barrel. Agreed to a point, but not if you run them hard. Mine, I hardly ever clean, just lube and shoot, to include my ARs. Another member has 10K on his M&P, never or rarely cleaned, just lubed. Mine only has 2-3K on them before cleaning and it's just as accurate and reliable.
As to the round count of my personal firearms as compared to yours, I don't see how that matters. Quite frankly, it is a non sequitur.
Oh it does sir. How much you use that weapon, or what ever weapon it is, vets the weapon as being reliable. If you fired only one mag through it a year for 20 years, I wouldn't label and tout it as being reliable to me. I wouldn't train with it or bet my life on it, unless I put 1K through it in a very short time frame, like in a weekend. Same with any new AR I get to ensure none of the internals break, thus being "proved" as being reliable. But that's just me.
But I will indulge you for the momemnt; of the three 1911's I shoot (two Kimbers and a Springfield longslide) I run between 2 and 4 thousand rounds of .45acp through them a year -- a little less this past year as I don't like paying $20+ a box for .45acp. My oldest is a Kimber Stainless II bought back in the early 1990's and probably (I don't keep exact round counts) in the neighborhood of 20,000 rounds through it.
The questions were more rhetorical. To demonstrate light vs heavy vs non usage in arguing that a weapon hardly or never used, as being "reliable". 20K rounds without a failure or parts breakage? That's impressive, but highly doubtful, since you really don't know what the actual round count is (Please:rolleyes:).
If your point is that, somehow, the 1911 design can't stand up to the round count of your uber tactical/competitive usage, then I merely point you to the professional shooters that perpetually use 1911's in their competitions.
Not at all. It's a proven design. I doubt most people, (the average shooter/gun owner) who owns a 1911, will not be able to keep it within the tight tolerances it has been designed for, if put into hard use or possess the gun smithing knowledge to do so. Bed stand duty or the occasional plinking, you're GTG. The cost of doing so, would be impractical. Like LAV said, it's an enthusiast's gun.
And yes, I do own other firearms (SA XD, Sig, etc.) and it takes no more or less time keeping the 1911 running as they do. YMMV.
Good on you, but I disagree.;)
Agreed to a point, but not if you run them hard. What evidence are you pointing to? I have 9 1911s, and they range from a Norinco to an Ed Brown, and in between. I have two with over 60 K. Please tell me where you are getting your information.
Edit:
I doubt most people who owns a 1911, will not be able to keep it within the tight tolerances it has been designed for, if put into hard use or possess the gun smithing knowledge to do so.I need an explanation of this.
I've been shooting 1911's, P35's for decades and Glocks since they came out. I've put over 500K thru various .....1911's perhaps 100+K thru P35's..... and maybe a 100K thru various Glocks, so perhaps I might be unbiased, perhaps not, that said
I've had 1911's that wouldn't feed ball, and have had 1911's that would feed anything ( Thanks Jim Hoag, Bill Wilson and Les)...........The ones that ran , did just that, no extra maintenance, etc.
the P35's well I've never had one that didn't run, same with glocks.
They are machines and as such require at least some maintenance, some perhaps slightly more than others.
To the Poster do one of two things either get a bare bones Springer and have it built or save up for a Wilson or Baer.
To the anti 1911 guys......my family carried them in WW1, WW2, Korea, myself the SE Asian wargames, they are still going strong. Why do SWAT and tactical teams still favor the 1911 over said tupperware guns?? Yeah I know 1911's are jam-o-matics, and dinosaurs,:rolleyes: and what kept many of us alive :)...............
Quite the bashing carry what you like , what you have confidence in, what you can hit fast and accurately with.
nogoodnamesleft
09-04-09, 17:50
I'm always leery of taking a thread off track; it seems to insult the OP in my opinion. I will leave it with these points to ponder:
Any gun, a 1911 or Glock or M&P, are made of the very same materials: polymer, carbon steel, stainless steel, etc. The only real differences between them are how the designers brought those materials together to give function. Many of the important design principles are shared between the designs and, really, a user's preference for one is just that, the user's preference. But what is it intrinsically in the design of the 1911 that, in your opinion, makes it unable to sustain usage? And why does history seem to contradict your experience?
In my experience, the 1911 is very reliable. If I recall correctly, you do not actually own a 1911. So what is it again, in your experience, that makes you believe that the design of the 1911 is unreliable?
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 17:53
What evidence are you pointing to? I have 9 1911s, and they range from a Norinco to an Ed Brown, and in between. I have two with over 60 K. Please tell me where you are getting your information.
Please read my above statement in it's entirety. Particularly the second to the last statement. If your round count is that high, and you have no problems with your weapons, then you obviously are not the average gun owner and posses the knowledge to keep them running. Most are not like you.
[QUOTE]Edit: I need an explanation of this.[/QUOTE
It's explained in my previous statement.
And I will ask you again. What is the continual maintenance to which you are refering?
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 17:59
I'm always leery of taking a thread off track; it seems to insult the OP in my opinion. I will leave it with these points to ponder:
Any gun, a 1911 or Glock or M&P, are made of the very same materials: polymer, carbon steel, stainless steel, etc. The only real differences between them are how the designers brought those materials together to give function. Many of the important design principles are shared between the designs and, really, a user's preference for one is just that, the user's preference. But what is it intrinsically in the design of the 1911 that, in your opinion, makes it unable to sustain usage? And why does history seem to contradict your experience?
In my experience, the 1911 is very reliable. If I recall correctly, you do not actually own a 1911. So what is it again, in your experience, that makes you believe that the design of the 1911 is unreliable?
I never said anything about the 1911 as being unreliable. Reread my posts please. I am saying, for the average gun owner, they would be hard pressed to KEEP IT RELIABLE under hard usage, lacking the gun smithing knowledge to keep it there. The same can be said for any weapon, if you are not very knowledgeable of that particular firearm.
I never said anything about the 1911 as being unreliable. Reread my posts please. I am saying, for the average gun owner, they would be hard pressed to KEEP IT RELIABLE under hard usage, lacking the gun smithing knowledge to keep it there.My friend, I am not trying to pick a fight. I am curious what maintenance do you think is required to keep a 1911 running? Why do you believe gunsmithing is required for a functioning 1911?
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 18:02
And I will ask you again. What is the continual maintenance to which you are refering?
The replacement of parts, intricate internal parts that break that are beyond owner maintenance, that requires smith knowledge to repair, which will add up the $, every time you send it to a smith. Unless of course you are willing to spend an enormous amount of hours learning on your own, then it's your time and money, to learn and keep it within the tolerances where it should be. Again, an enthusiasts level of attention, that doesn't need to be addressed if an alternative weapon is selected. YMMV.
The replacement of parts, intricate internal parts that break that are beyond owner maintenance, that requires smith knowledge to repair, which will add up the $, every time you send it to a smith.Thanks. Now, why would these parts break on a 1911, and not any other handgun? With all of the 1911 manufacturers out there, surely someone makes a 1911 with decent parts.
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 18:27
Thanks. Now, why would these parts break on a 1911, and not any other handgun? With all of the 1911 manufacturers out there, surely someone makes a 1911 with decent parts.
Never said any other weapon wouldn't break.
Some are more reliable than others. Not all of them are created equal. Why does an OLY/DPMS/Vulan AR break more that a Colt, Noveske or DD M-4? Quality.
To the OP, If you want a 1911, go for it.
nogoodnamesleft
09-04-09, 20:40
The replacement of parts, intricate internal parts that break that are beyond owner maintenance, that requires smith knowledge to repair, which will add up the $, every time you send it to a smith. Unless of course you are willing to spend an enormous amount of hours learning on your own, then it's your time and money, to learn and keep it within the tolerances where it should be. Again, an enthusiasts level of attention, that doesn't need to be addressed if an alternative weapon is selected. YMMV.
Nonsense, under this definition there is then no difference between a 1911 and the other designs you compare them to. There are intricate parts on all these designs that would require professional gunsmithing given their need for replacement. Whether you are working on a 1911, Glock, or a Model T under an apple tree, if you don't know what you're doing then nothing good will follow.
One final note, you seem to think 1911's have incredibly tight tolerances by design; you clearly don't understand the 1911.
Many 1911's maybe reliable, but they will not be durable, or stay reliable for long.
Why. What makes a 1911 become less reliable over time?
Sure, it was used and carried in a lot of wars, but that should be put into perspective, in reality, it was carried far more then it was shot. What handgun isn't, war or not?
When a part breaks, and it will, thru abuse, wear, bad materials/QC, whatever, it most likely requires a trip to a smith, for most of us, if you can do it yourself, great, but it is still time and money.
True, but you could just about say the same for an HK.
RogerinTPA
09-04-09, 21:57
One final note, you seem to think 1911's have incredibly tight tolerances by design; you clearly don't understand the 1911.
If you really think that, then you truly don't know about the 1911. Even the standard USGI 1911, WWII era, had tighter tolerances than some of the crap 1911 being produced today. ;) The parts used were to the TDP for the 1911. Like crap AR manufacturers VS quality manufacturers that choose to follow the TDP.
I first qual'd on them back in the 80's. The rattled like hell, but still shot pretty accurate. I asked the question about the rattle in the gun to the armorer. He stated they were basically were not getting OEM parts and there were only a few guys on post that knew how to keep them running. The rest were just thrown together from parts and not OEM parts.
The age of hand fitting production 1911s is over. CNC has changed the need for this, and has also increased the reliability of the modern 1911.
There are three production 1911s that have a high QC. (I'm sure there are others, but I am more familiar with the following)
Colt, now using CNC
Dan Wesson, as good as Colt
Springfield, good quality and warranty.
I have a variety of handguns that I trust. I'm not married to the 1911, but I do recognize it as a very good platform.
FromMyColdDeadHand
09-04-09, 22:22
There was a great blog by a guy who built an 1911 from a crappy parts kit. It should have been a gunsmithing class since everything was out of spec and he learned how it seems everything in a 1911 affects something else.
I think the key is that the 1911 can be tuned to such a wide envelope of operation. I think 1911s are easier to 'work' on than my Sigs, but harder to perfect. What do you need to strip down a 1911, a screwdriver for the grips and a punch for the MSH pin? I wish the safety on my Sig X-five was a simple as my STI Edge.
I've heard people complain about Sig extractors and ejectors breaking, but I've never heard of people tuning them.
Sure you can make a 1911 that will run everytime, but I can't shoot my buddies USPSA Open gun- he has the gun and load tailored to how hard he holds the gun.
Thomas M-4
09-04-09, 22:26
I am confident this is not the OP first handgun.
The title says "Looking at getting another.." Guess not.
Why. What makes a 1911 become less reliable over time?
Cheaper 1911's, either use poor quality parts, that will not last long, or skip manufacturing and fitting steps, that will result in parts battering each other, and eventually causing trouble. Again, it may be reliable in the short run, but not in the long run.
What handgun isn't, war or not?
Exactly my point, Exclaiming how many wars a 1911 has been thru, really has no bearing on anything in my mind, or very minimal. How often was it shot, and how was it most often used. Pistols only really started to see hard use, on a "larger" scale in the military, when CT type units were developed in the 70's. Custom tuned 1911's were the best choice back then, and they got shot a lot. Guys like LAV saw the issues with them. That was a long time ago, things change.
True, but you could just about say the same for an HK.
Not a gunsmith, & I don't own any HK's, so I wouldn't know, but, I never said it was exclusive to the 1911. But for the most part, most modern guns do not require fitting of the parts, at least factory parts, to operate correctly.
The 1911 market is so large with numerous manufacturers of guns, mags, and parts, that the chance of drop in parts, are slim. Even among a CNC built gun, I'd be leary of it.
LIke I said good guns, feel good, but they aint a lightsaber.
BTW, if you do it right, you do not need the screwdriver or punch to detail disassemble a 1911.
Bob
QuickStrike
09-05-09, 05:45
The replacement of parts, intricate internal parts that break that are beyond owner maintenance, that requires smith knowledge to repair, which will add up the $, every time you send it to a smith. Unless of course you are willing to spend an enormous amount of hours learning on your own, then it's your time and money, to learn and keep it within the tolerances where it should be. Again, an enthusiasts level of attention, that doesn't need to be addressed if an alternative weapon is selected. YMMV.
But honestly though, a properly put together 1911 does not break parts THAT often. If anything in my polymer framed pistols broke, I'd send it off to a gunsmith too.
Currently, I'm of the thought that a well executed 1911 with good parts only really needs the following to run long-term:
a couple of extra extractors (tuned)
springs
lube
Not that much more IMO.
I wonder what other small parts are prone to frequent breakage? Not trying to be argumentative, just curious on how I should stock up...
To 1oldgrunt, I've read every word I can find about Vickers and his training and doctrine in open sources. As far as I have seen, he not anti-1911 now. He is cautionary. Notice as of this morning he still offers three different classes on the 1911.
And if you are limited to open source information, I am pretty certain you don't know when LAV reviewed and approved of platforms other than the 1911 for his work.
I don't know where everyone went off track, I think the OP got a good rundown until halfway through the first page then it was all bitchy swill. I know some people are VERY opinionated about what they like and many people are closed minded about their likes and dislikes. I dont understand some of the comments by posters such as 1911s becoming less relaible over time, and requiring an owner with gunsmithing knowledge, there were others but these two stand out to me. I have owned several 1911s and plan to own another very soon. On the reliability it has been my experience aside from retensioning or replacing the extractor that 1911s become more reliable after being shot, hell the standard issue 1911 to the military for decades was loose as all get out and was designed so. But they more often than not went bang. It is the tighter "match grade" (I hate that term) guns that take a while to shoot in because of tolerances. On the topic of gunsmithing knowledge I also dont see how this is a requirement in 1911 ownership. I purchased a Kuhnhausen 1911 shop manual several years ago and I used it to completely dis assemble my first 1911 so that I could see the inner workings and become familiar with them. I then began replacing parts that I wanted such as the thumb safety and after a few failure to ejects I replace the extractor. I did this with no more knowledge than the manual. I think it is a misnomer that gunsmithing is "required" are there things to do to the 1911 thant many "normal" owners cannot do sure but are those modifications nessissary? Not ususlly. If an individual buys a quality 1911 from a reputable company he/she should have little to no problems. For the record I own and have owned pistols from many companies I know what I like and what works for me but I do NOT discount or bash other guns because they are not for me. I make it a point to learn my chosen arms what ever they may be and I take care of them like my life depends on it.
I am sorry I went on a rant but I think none of these arguments helps the OP.
NCPatrolAR
09-05-09, 11:27
I've known LAV for several years and his views on 1911s are the same now as they were then. He is far from "anti 1911"
I've been shooting 1911's, P35's for decades and Glocks since they came out. I've put over 500K thru various .....1911's perhaps 100+K thru P35's..... and maybe a 100K thru various Glocks, so perhaps I might be unbiased, perhaps not, that said
I've had 1911's that wouldn't feed ball, and have had 1911's that would feed anything ( Thanks Jim Hoag, Bill Wilson and Les)...........The ones that ran , did just that, no extra maintenance, etc.
the P35's well I've never had one that didn't run, same with glocks.
They are machines and as such require at least some maintenance, some perhaps slightly more than others.
To the Poster do one of two things either get a bare bones Springer and have it built or save up for a Wilson or Baer.
To the anti 1911 guys......my family carried them in WW1, WW2, Korea, myself the SE Asian wargames, they are still going strong. Why do SWAT and tactical teams still favor the 1911 over said tupperware guns?? Yeah I know 1911's are jam-o-matics, and dinosaurs,:rolleyes: and what kept many of us alive :)...............
Quite the bashing carry what you like , what you have confidence in, what you can hit fast and accurately with.
JiMfraRED1911
09-05-09, 14:02
The Kimber Warrior does not use the Schwartz safety system.
I know the Warrior doesn't utilize the Schwartz safety, but granted I did word that pretty vaguely. What I really meant was that the Warrior still has fleas despite the fact of it not having the Schwartz layout. My mistake.
Jp0319,
Like I said, this info comes directly from taking 1911 specific classes with LAV, Yam, and Hackathorn. I went to the LAV one twice, and even though the 1911 has taken a backseat with me these days, I may go to another.
He puts out a lot of info, and it takes a few classes to get it all.
Many of the cheaper 1911's, skip manufacturing steps, like pinning the ejector, cutting the barrel bed relief(?), and some other minor parts fitting. When he shows you how so many parts interact with one another, and effect things you would not think they did, you begin to see it. So will the cheaper 1911 be reliable, sure, but not after the ejector works loose, or the barrel lugs get beat up on the frame, or recoil spring guide. Not to mention the poor quality parts, to begin with.
If you are mechanically inclined, or gifted, I am not, I'm sure you could do a reasonable job of fitting some parts, but, myself, I prefer the knowledge of competent, recognised 1911 smiths, who fully understand the gun, and not just read a book. But, that's just me.
Much of this, also does not apply to the better 1911's, like the Colts, high end SA's, and semi customs like Wilson, Brown, etc. But then they all cost substantially more then, say, a Glock.
Another thing to keep in mind, is actual round count and conditions. Guys like the above named instructors, fire an incredible amount of ammo, much more then what many of us shoot. I think the quoted figure from LAV, was shooting or observing over 1 million rounds a year, and that unit is not all that big.
So, again, as LAV pointed out, it may be GTG for 1,2,3 or even 5000 rounds, but what about 10,000, 20,000, etc.? Of, course you could get lucky and your RIA may last 50,000 rounds with no issues, I wouldn't bet on that though.
Much of it, is just perspective.
Me, I decided that after 20 years I'll give something else a try, rather then continue down the road, w/o trying anything else for long.
Again, with all the above BS aside, if you could buy a top quality, reliable, durable, 1911 for the price of a Glock or M&P, you'd still have a heavy gun with only 7 rounds.
And, believe me, I am not anti 1911, just anti "1911 guy", as my bud puts it.
MP,
Yea sure, if you wanna sticky it, I guess, go ahead. Does that mean I finally made the big time?
Bob
springfield mc operator.....
R Moran,
I got what your saying, and I too shoot and carry other hand guns Maybe I like the 1911 for the history or because it fits my hand well but my Glocks get carried and used more for whatever reason. I was just getting annoyed by all the BS discussion which didnt really assist the OP IMHO. Thanks for your input it was well explained.
Matt Edwards
09-07-09, 19:22
Your bud must be GTG.
Good poop.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.