All Apologies 1911 vs. Glock!

[TacMedic556]

I am not paid to speak on behalf of any company. My motivations and opinions are strictly my own, however you do have a right to my opinion.

First, before enraging the many mall ninjas who lurk on the web, waiting to pounce from their dorito filled chairs let me introduce myself while maintaining some anonymity.

I currently serve as a Tactical Paramedic and entry team member on a SRT (Special Response Team), also known in some municipalities as S.W.A.T.

I am 30 years old. Since I was 10 years old I was versed in all things 1911 from my father. I grew up shooting a Colt Government series 80 with extensive work done to it by gunsmiths from the Gunsite custom shop back in the early 90's. I can shoot it well, still. I qualify with the 1911 every 6 months in accordance with strict tactical shooting standards to maintain my position on the SRT team. I have been involved in multiple "call-outs" and continue to carry my 1911, for now that is.

A few years ago I purchased a work of art. I bought a Nighthawk Custom GRP II with an Ed Brown Bobtail. Crisp, clean, accurate and reliable, I was a satisfied customer and recommend their work to anyone who can afford it.

I was the spokesman for the 1911 and still am, to those who have the time to train on them and desire to shoot that particular platform. The thing is, I saw in black in white. I considered the 1911 the only platform, period. I never passed up the opportunity to slam on Glocks. Oh how I loved to tell guys that all a glock needs is a treble hook and some glitter to pull behind a boat. I despised and hated the, "tactical tupperware", the "crunch-tickers".
In life we constantly are given new experiences and data. We compute this information over the course of time and evolve our views and form new opinions. So was my case with Glocks vs. 1911s.

A few individuals on our tactical team carried Glocks and swore by them. I mocked them. I would rat-hole targets, and my 1911 functioned without failures. The thing is, their Glocks did the same. I began to question my hatred for these plastic blocky pistols.
I stared in Awe, as one officer literally out shot a line up of fellow SRT members with his Glock 21. We performed a myriad of drills everywhere from the 3 yard line to the 25 yard line. We did failure drills, speed re-loads, head shots, shooting on the move, oblique right, oblique left, kneeling, etc. Two officers held Nighthawk Custom GRPs, I had my Colt Series 80, a few had Kimbers, and one had a Wilson Combat CQB. All did well. At the end, with over 150 rounds of .45 ball fired and "0" failures, the officer with the Glock 21 had not dropped one single round. He had a 100%. I was shocked that the $400 gun had just competed well with the $2500 guns. My opinion began to shift slowly.

You see, a pistol is a secondary weapon. All operators carry a primary weapon; a rifle, carbine or shotgun. The moment you are forced to use your pistol, you probably are too close to the enemy, out of ammo in your long gun, had a failure of your primary weapon, or worse, found yourself without your long gun. I asked myself, can I justify having $2500 of my hard earned money tied up in a secondary weapon, when a $400 weapon would do the same thing?

I put the debate on the back burner. It remained a thought for the last two years and I continued to digest information and witness tactical team members succeed with their Glocks.

This year I bought a back up pistol. I wanted a small auto, easy to conceal, light, reliable, accurate, good trigger, and powerful calibur for defense that was readily available. Accuracy, Speed, Power. I chose the Glock 26 after discussing the issue with other officers as well as other research. I was impressed immediately with its simplicity, engineering, finish and fit. Accuracy was key. My wife, who never shoots, was lethal at 10 and 15 yards, hitting small letters on a police target.

Then I began reading about the development of the Glock here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock

The Torture tests:

http://www.theprepared.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=90
http://www.volny.cz/glock/html/tested.htm

The Glock has been able to prove itself.

Please do not consider anything here as a "Slam" on the 1911 and preaching for the Glock. I love 1911's. I really still do. This is a hard thread to write. It is like breaking up with the 1911 but I am not.

A combat pistol must be reliable. The Glock is without a doubt. A combat pistol must have a tremendous availability of parts and interchangability with others of its type. The Glock is. It must be easy to break down and clean, light weight, corrosion resistant, simple to handle and operate, and require little to no maintenance in times of hard use. A combat pistol should also have an increased capacity in its magazines.

My 1911s, are so highly customized and "tight" that even a new barrel has to be custom fit by a smith. If you take the many 1911 makes, the parts are NOT interchangeable. Where you can dump the parts of 100 Glock 21s on a table and re-assemble at random, you will have 100 functioning Glocks. Try this with 100 1911's.
Without fine oils and lube, or with the introduction of dirt or sand, a 1911 has its issues. 1911 Magazines carry only 7-8 rounds. Yes, "All you need is ONE". However put yourself in a downed Blackhawk surrounded by a seething, roaring crowd of people trying to kill you and tell my all you want is 7 round mags when you can have 13-15 round mags.

Where it takes me a good while to clean my 1911 and swab its rifled barrel, I can wipe down, clean, swab and oil my Glock in mere minutes. The best part. Because my Glock only cost me about $400 I beat it. I don't worry about it like I did my multi-$K pistols.

Brace yourselves. I have sold my Nighthawk Custom, and decided to purchase a Glock 19 and 21, both will be given heinie night sights. I will also buy some replacement springs for future maintenance. I look forward to a care free, abuse of these pistols. With all the cash left over, I am starting a new mid-length upper project M4.

I will continue to own my 1911, and care for it. Who knows, one day I may have a custom government built.

For now I will have to continue to eat bowl after bowl of Crow soup. For I am as they say, "EATING CROW". You would not believe the abuse I get now for having "converted" and "switched sides".
"Listend to this guy," colleagues rant. "Six months ago he couldn't hate Glocks enough!"

Well I am here to tell you, I was wrong. I apologize Glock, for any business I steered away. I will make it up to you somehow.

Please don't come after me all ye mall ninjas who hate so easily. Leave your pistol zealotry elsewhere.

[C-grunt]

Welcome to the dark side. ;)

[Littlelebowski]

Why two different calibers?

Great writeup! I enjoyed reading your thought progression.

[TacMedic556]

To answer the question about Calibers:

I am still a student of Col. Jeff Cooper. The .45 has knock down, and puts big holes in goblins. I like, and will never leave it. It IS my battle round.

Not too keen on the .40. It is my opinion. I like its ballistics, however I wanted a NATO round. 9mm is common, adopted world wide, and very cost affordable. The ballistics on 9mm work. There are many dead dudes with 9mm slugs in'em. I can buy lots of it for cheap. 9mm is reliable, low recoil and as I have witnessed, very accurate in the right hands and right guns. With modern powders, bullets etc. 9mm is very lethal. It is lightweight and allows for smaller frame pistols, with its low recoil allowing for splendid follow up shots. The Glock was originally designed in 9x19 so I figured, lets keep with that. I like the model 19 for its size. A dear friend of mine is a contractor in Iraq, as a convoy medic, and his entire unit was issued the model 19. The royals in England are protected by security who carry the model 19. In crowds, the 9mm round does not over penetrated and is a great PSD (Personal Security Detail) choice. I like it, so thats that. It is proven.

Triggers- I forgot to mention. The Glock trigger is NO 1911. No amount of work will make it so. However they have come a long way. With after market springs and such, you can reduce the trigger on a Glock to 3.5 lbs. One officer who allowed me to try his pistol out, has a crisp and clean trigger on his 21 sf that rivals some 1911s. They will never beat the 1911 trigger, however the other pros in my mind do.

Accuracy being the key and most important element in any firearm or defense gun is tied to the trigger. So I would recommend getting trigger work done by a Glock armorer. Don't get me wrong though. The 5.5 lb stock Glock trigger beats 99% of the other D/A guns out there. It is crisp and once you throw some lead with it, you will get used to it and love it. That sums that up.

Thanks for the feedback. I enjoy the conversation.

[Business_Casual]

Little - I hope he says "free .45" as the reason.

B_C

[5pins]

Unlike marriage, swapping guns is perfectly acceptable. I have a Glock 19 and a Colt GM and love them both.

[Jerm]

To answer the question about Calibers:

I am still a student of Col. Jeff Cooper. The .45 has knock down, and puts big holes in goblins. I like, and will never leave it. It IS my battle round.

Not too keen on the .40. It is my opinion. I like its ballistics, however I wanted a NATO round. 9mm is common, adopted world wide, and very cost affordable. The ballistics on 9mm work. There are many dead dudes with 9mm slugs in'em. I can buy lots of it for cheap. 9mm is reliable, low recoil and as I have witnessed, very accurate in the right hands and right guns. With modern powders, bullets etc. 9mm is very lethal. It is lightweight and allows for smaller frame pistols, with its low recoil allowing for splendid follow up shots. The Glock was originally designed in 9x19 so I figured, lets keep with that. I like the model 19 for its size. A dear friend of mine is a contractor in Iraq, as a convoy medic, and his entire unit was issued the model 19. The royals in England are protected by security who carry the model 19. In crowds, the 9mm round does not over penetrated and is a great PSD (Personal Security Detail) choice. I like it, so thats that. It is proven.

Triggers- I forgot to mention. The Glock trigger is NO 1911. No amount of work will make it so. However they have come a long way. With after market springs and such, you can reduce the trigger on a Glock to 3.5 lbs. One officer who allowed me to try his pistol out, has a crisp and clean trigger on his 21 sf that rivals some 1911s. They will never beat the 1911 trigger, however the other pros in my mind do.

Accuracy being the key and most important element in any firearm or defense gun is tied to the trigger. So I would recommend getting trigger work done by a Glock armorer. Don't get me wrong though. The 5.5 lb stock Glock trigger beats 99% of the other D/A guns out there. It is crisp and once you throw some lead with it, you will get used to it and love it. That sums that up.

Thanks for the feedback. I enjoy the conversation.


I don't think you'll need to defend the 9mm arround here.


The .45 has knock down, and puts big holes in goblins.

This on the other hand...

:p

[BWT]

I honestly, similar circumstance, and that's mainly why I'm posting here.

I decided at 16-17, I would have a 1911 as my first handgun, and I would carry it when old enough.

I'm 23 years old these days, I bought a Dan Wesson CBOB 1911 as my first handgun when I turned 21.

I loved the gun, still do, but honestly as time has progressed, issues have surfaced.

It has it's Pro's and it's Cons.

Pros are, it does feel great in the hand, people hate 1911 people for saying that, but the gun does, I put VZ Double Diamond grips on it and I'm happy with the texture/performance of those. The gun groups better than I do, etc.

But as time has gone on, I've found that, though it is a great weapon, there are weapons like you've found, that perform just as well, if not better than a 1911 in certain categories.

I'll tell ya now (I was emailing Raven Concealment to cancel my order for a holster today, actually, hospital bills, doctor bills, unrelated, not a good time to buy a pistol and holster, other obligations, etc, etc.) I plan on switching to a Smith and Wesson M&P9 with a Thumb safety, ASAP.

I loved the trigger on my 1911, again the feel.

But the capacity became a concern, since you're in LE you can probably appreciate that more than I can. I carry two spare mags, but I realized, I carry 8+1 in my gun, honestly, in a defensive shooting that probably means needing to reload the gun after an "incident" or during said incident depending on the amount of people.

I don't like that, it puts my mind at ease knowing I'll be carrying literally double the amount of bullets in the gun, and will be much less likely to have to reload under stress. (Not saying I don't practice reloads, but, I'd like to avoid them if possible during a defensive situation).

That concerned me, also, like you, I came to the same conclusion about .45 ACP, it's more expensive, slightly better performing, by .10 to .15'' of expansion, but, it has more recoil, you have fewer shots per magazine (Honestly with the weapons we're looking at, about double the capacity per magazine over the 1911) more expensive to shoot(so honestly, to get to the nitty gritty, you can't afford to shoot it as much, that's a fact, so inherently, you can't afford to practice as much).

So that's 1 benefit versus the 3 benefits the 9mm has over the .45 ACP in my mind.

I like you, will always keep my D&W, it was my first, I've got some history with it, that's a keeper for life for me.

But honestly, I don't think I'll ever carry a 1911 again after I make the switch.

I also have some issues with rust, but that's isolated to SS guns in general, so I don't think it's necessarily fair to put that on the 1911 alone. (I've looked for solutions, I'm just... I'm tired of messing with it, frankly.)

Also I've had some issue with magazines (quality ones) and spring tension, or if not that, the way the followers work in feeding rounds.

Also the weight savings on the polymer guns, etc.

There are other issues, but this isn't my thread.

I came to the same conclusion, and frankly, it just took carrying the gun and using the gun for over a year that I pretty much need to change a lot of things how I carry, and what I carry.

I also am thinking I'll switch to Appendix carry over small of the back.

Thanks for sharing.

1911's are great, but they like all weapons have their shortcomings. I will say this, they're a breeze to completely disassemble/reassemble, absolute breeze, if you do it once or twice.

Cleaning them is easy, at least IMHO. John Browning knew what he was doing.

[DireWulf]

To answer the question about Calibers:
The .45 has knock down


Some folks might take umbrage with this because it's a common term thrown about by the "energy transfer" crowd. I get what you mean though. All things being equal, most defensive pistol calibers are creating similar wounds, but since a handgun round only damages what it can touch a bigger hole can cause more bleeding. Accuracy is still paramount though and a platform that can be accurately fired is key. A hit from a 9mm is better than a miss with a .45 Auto. DocGKR has great sticky posts in the terminal ballistics section on this stuff.

Good choice, sir. The 1911 folks who refuse to acknowledge the capability of other handguns while holed up in the shrine they've built to John M. Browning really piss me off. 1911's are legendary and they are capable guns, but there are certainly alternatives.

[Cameron]

I don't understand what happened. Exactly 100 years ago, that's right, in the year 1910, the US Army conducted a test of the pistol that would soon be adopted by them the next year 1911. In that test several Colt (1911)s fed, fired and extracted 6,000 rounds without a failure. 6,000 rounds no failures a full century ago!?!?!?!

Now however, 100 years later no one can find a 1911 that is even moderately reliable?? I wonder if they used cleaner ammo then.

I just don't buy the premise of these arguments, 1911s are unreliable, or it take $2500 to get a reliable one and then it takes a crew for maintenance to keep it reliable.

I have several 1911s, three Colt's: Government, Commander, and New Agent, all internally factory stock and a stock M1911A1 made in 1943 by Remington Rand. All of these pistols have been as, or more, reliable than the plethora of Glocks, and H&K USPs I also own.

The two new Series 80s Colts cost $550 for the Government and $600 for the Commander, and have digested more than 25,000 rounds of .45ACP between the two of them without issue.

I just don't get how it is an either/or discussion when it comes the reliability of a pistol, both Glocks and 1911s work, champion shooters have won with both. Get whichever you like, or if you can get both.

My weird 1911s that actually run.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4139/4876086077_ff521d82d4_z.jpg

My Glocks that run too...
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4108/5185689152_bb5ff799e8_z.jpg

Cameron

[DaveR]

I have to disagree that the pistol is a secondary weapon for most of us. All of the people I know use a rifle for hunting and a pistol as daily carry.

I admit a love for the 1911 platform and still rent one at a range about once a month, but for daily carry I find a Glock 19 or M&P 9c loaded with +P ammo to be more realistic as far as function, capacity and concealability go.

Dave

[TacMedic556]

Thanks for the 1911 pics! It is amazing isn't it. The guns was designed over 100 years ago and still competes with all the modern tech. Browning was a visionary, a genius. I can only imagine what he would have invented today, with modern CAD, materials etc..... Think about it.

The debate and zealotry over which is better should be dead! Really, why the coarse arguments? It is like debating which is better Flap Jacks or French Toast!

Both feed you, both have different ingredients, both have their camp. 1911s are amazing. Glocks, I now admit with humility and grace, are amazing.

Thanks for all the feedback.

If you get a chance check this old man out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPvMJcmpVsQ

With a baby Glock! Nice shooting. I found him on here recently. Great videos! Go Hickok45!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVzSAm5VhfE THIS GUY SHOOTS WELL.

[300WM]

Some folks might take umbrage with this because it's a common term thrown about by the "energy transfer" crowd. I get what you mean though. All things being equal, most defensive pistol calibers are creating similar wounds, but since a handgun round only damages what it can touch a bigger hole can cause more bleeding. Accuracy is still paramount though and a platform that can be accurately fired is key. A hit from a 9mm is better than a miss with a .45 Auto. DocGKR has great sticky posts in the terminal ballistics section on this stuff.

Good choice, sir. The 1911 folks who refuse to acknowledge the capability of other handguns while holed up in the shrine they've built to John M. Browning really piss me off. 1911's are legendary and they are capable guns, but there are certainly alternatives.

I believe they are aware of the capabilities, but are of the understanding of the importance of the man named John M. Browning. The man was a genius to the point that Einstein would have been envious. Who can argue the fact the many of the things John Browning developed helped this country, by the courage and sacrifice of the men and women that used (and still use) these things, become what is is today. Many 1911's were used to defend Freedom. They are a tradition and maybe the most copied gun of all time. All of the alternatives are as good as they are largely due to John M Browning.

How can you get where you're going if you don't know where you came from?

[Littlelebowski]

I believe they are aware of the capabilities, but are of the understanding of the importance of the man named John M. Browning. The man was a genius to the point that Einstein would have been envious. Who can argue the fact the many of the things John Browning developed helped this country, by the courage and sacrifice of the men and women that used (and still use) these things, become what is is today. Many 1911's were used to defend Freedom. They are a tradition and maybe the most copied gun of all time. All of the alternatives are as good as they are largely due to John M Browning.

How can you get where you're going if you don't know where you came from?

What does that have to do with considering a defensive weapon?

[BWT]

I'm not a John Moses Browning Zealot, but I will say this.

The Dude engineered,
Browning Auto-5 (One of the first Semi-Auto Shotguns),
The Overposed (Over/Under Shotgun)
1893/1897 Winchester Pump Shotguns,
1898 Lever Action Shotgun,
1911,
BAR,
M2,
1919.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Browning

Gas Piston Operated Auto Rifles, Blow back recoiling MG's, Pretty much the majority of shotgun configurations as we know them.

It's insane the amount of progression that hasn't been achieved since his death.

Eugene Stoner (though I respect the man, and own a rifle of his design) designed maybe 3-5 major weapons platforms? (I'm not talking revisions, I'm talking types of firearms, the AR, AR-10 and Stoner LMG's are what I'm familiar with)

Kalashnikov designed what? One type rifle, that was revised, re-worked, etc into many different fashions.

Gaston Glock, one type of pistol that's been adopted to different calibers and tweaked but, one pistol.

John Browning, made many different type of actions of shotguns, pistols, Light Machine guns, heavy machine guns, single shot rifles (in his early years), he is probably the most influential person in firearms history, honestly.

I don't worship the guy, but he was a firearms Renaissance man.

ETA: I'm not trying to down play those other designer's accomplishments, but to look at what Browning did with nowhere near the resources, knowledge, of other guys, across the board of all firearms, the only thing he didn't touch was revolvers, which honestly, was/is a matured science, it really is.

He did that with a pencil and paper.

Truly astounding how far one individual took Weapons in his life time.

[Littlelebowski]

So much for this being an emotion free discussion on one officer's transition from 1911 to Glock.

How about the history lessons be taken to an appropriate thread?

[BWT]

So much for this being an emotion free discussion on one officer's transition from 1911 to Glock.

How about the history lessons be taken to an appropriate thread?

You missed the part where I was saying I was dumping the 1911 for an M&P ASAP didn't you?

:laugh:

I was just commenting on why I thought John Moses browning is so well respected.

[Littlelebowski]

Fair enough, I don't think the history part is relevant to this thread.

[Artos]

to the op...all i got is that glocks are & will always be ugly compared to the sexy 1911.:)

good write up...i have tried to like shooting glocks but just can't get there. They just don't float my boat, but I would certainly not hesitate to grab one if needed.

[300WM]

What does that have to do with considering a defensive weapon?

Nothing really. I was merely trying to politely say that a lot of these people whose be all/end all gun is the 1911 may be defending an idea as much as the gun, and we should cut them a little slack. Why lose sleep over it. Otherwise, it is a great thread.

[Cameron]

Nothing really. I was merely trying to politely say that a lot of these people whose be all/end all gun is the 1911 may be defending an idea as much as the gun, and we should cut them a little slack. Why lose sleep over it. Otherwise, it is a great thread.

That is really counter to my point. I don't shoot and carry a 1911 because a genius made it. I carry it because it is reliable, compact (my Commander conceals better than my Glock 19), very accurate and I shoot it well.

We have all seen the threads on the errornet about someone who has an Oly AR that had all kinds of problems and therefore they came to the conclusion that the AR16/M16 is unreliable and have decided to dump their Oly for a shiny new AK47.

Is the consensus on M4C that AR15s are unreliable, because of Oly and Shrubhampster? Or do we know that you can buy a correctly made AR from BCM, LMT, Noveske, Knight's, DD and the thing will run into the tens of throusands of rounds with zero issues.

It is my contention that the 1911 is the same way, a quality 1911 is not that expensive and will run for thousands and thousands of rounds with out issue.

We don't buy it about an AR, why do people buy it about a 1911?

Cameron

[legumeofterror]

The primary issue with the 1911 is that it is a very old design that does not lend itself well to modern low-cost manufacturing techniques. It comes from a time where everything was milled from a piece of steel and fitted together by hand with fairly tight tolerances. A properly made, reliable 1911 is going to be more expensive than more modern pistol designs, especially polymer framed ones, and be no more functional outside of the "I shoot them well" perception. There are simply better designs available today from just about every standpoint.

[Rosco Benson]

There are simply better designs available today from just about every standpoint.

Except for the trigger. A good 1911 trigger is easier to shoot well than any other on the market. There is a reason that the 1911 rules in USPSA/IPSC events (not that there aren't some exceptional shooters doing great work with Glocks in that arena). USPSA/IPSC isn't real-world combat, but fast and accurate hits are required to win and the 1911 wins--a lot. Hard to argue that slower and/or less accurate hits are somehow a good thing in combative use.

There are other considerations of course; price, out-of-the-box readiness, magazine capacity, tolerance for no preventative maintenance, and so forth. Some other designs shine in these areas and are more than adequate self-defense pistols. Still, the 1911's trigger is its raison d'etre.

As to the Glocks, the 9mm Glocks are great pistols. The >9mm ones are less so. Quite a bit less so in the .45/10mm models. One can check with LAV on this, if one cares to.

Rosco

[mark5pt56]

While this may be interesting to some, it is and will erode to justifying your beliefs, known facts, fantasies, etc.

Bottom line, there is no disputing the "out of the box" reliability of a modern service pistol, which includes the 1911 platform. Keep in mind as well, the 1911 was designed to shoot ball ammo. Interesting things had to be done decades after it's development to enable it to fire hollow point bullets. Other changes came through time as well which included making a match gun out of it which caused a host of problems to the "combat" pistol. Creature comfort things like beavertails, etc.
My issued US Switch and Signal/Singer mutt looked like it was dragged across the desert a few times, but it always worked never malfunctioned and gave me a perfect score everytime. So to me the fitted part didn't make any sense to me based on that experience. After that I purchased a Colt Combat Government Model and slowly ruined it by listened to "experts" on doing this and that to it. That was my last real run with a 1911 and when I wanted a .45 went the USP route to play with here and there, other than that--G17, 19 and 26 with some SXT+p+ does it for me out of the box.

Anyhow, these 1911 vs Glock Vs M&P threads end in the banter back and forth and generally serve no purpose other than to hurt feelings or defend positions.

We're done here for now:big_boss: