"If 1911 was so good, why did cops use revolvers so long?"

[Dienekes]

Something barely touched on here was the FBI-Miami shootout in what--1983? That catastrophe was fundamentally a combination of VERY motivated and "not about to quit" bad guy (singular--the second BG was almost a non-player) combined with abyssmal FBI tactics. Nonetheless most of the subsequent analysis focussed on guns-and-bullets stuff. That eventually led to the S&W 1076 10mm nonsense...

But I do remember very well that it was a hell of a wake-up call for LEOs nationwide. There had been previous incidents (Newhall, CA) but this one really got people's attention. I had people who had previously been somewhat lackadaisical getting very serious about their shooting skills "the day after".

Glocks were just starting to hit the US at about that time and with one thing and another the dam had been breached. That has been twenty years now and agencies are still screwing around looking for the perfect gun. Truth be told what was (is) needed is street survival training, above average shooting skills, and a stone-reliable serious duty gun with good ammo that fits the user.

All in all a fairly messy story not unlike the adoption of the M16. It might make an interesting book...

 

[P-35/53]

When I went to the Police training scjool in 1978 we were shown pictures taken at crime scenes of 45 autos jammed laying next to corpses . It was also stressed what weapon the other participant had - usually a revolver. We were told - six for sure beats any percieved advantage an auto has.

 

[Hal]

Few other observations:

six for sure

<numerous references>

make that 12 for sure.

ie: you had 6 and you're partner had 6 = 12.

- I'm no student of law enforcement by any stretch. I've noticed though that the increase in individual capacity (side-arm) has been in direct proportion to the decrease in the number of individuals. Take away someone's partner, and you decrease their "firepower" by 50%.

 

[HankB]

The full manual of arms - loading, firing, clearing, cleaning, etc., - for a 1911 is more complex than for a revolver. The training budgets of many law enforcement agencies didn't allow for this. (Think of Barney Fife or Roscoe P. Coltrane with a cocked and locked 1911.)

NO gun type or style is absolutely perfect. BUT . . . revolvers, generally speaking ARE more reliable than 1911s. Pick a random sample of maybe 20 new, out of the box, S&W, Colt, and Ruger revolvers. Give them a cursory once-over for obvious problems and oil them, then shoot 100 rounds from each. Total up all the malfunctions.

Then take a random sample of 20 comparably-priced 1911's from Colt, Springfield, Kimber, and ParaOrdnance. Give them a cursory once-over and cleaning, then shoot 100 rounds from each. Total up the malfunctions.

I'd be willing to wager you'll get more malfunctions from the group of 1911's than you would from the group of revolvers, especially if JHP ammo is used.

1911's can be fine guns, and may indeed work better under extreme conditions - say, after being dropped on concrete - than some revolvers.

But "six for sure" still has a lot of merit.

 

[shep854]

HankB, If you but a gun designed and built for duty use, it should work, wheelgun or bottom-feeder. If you try a game gun, it will choke. All the raceguns and lookalikes have given the 1911 its bad rep. I'm not arguing with the simplicity of a revo; I like 'em too. BUT, there have been a lot of posts here and on other fora complaining of revolvers not working out of the box, including S&Ws, Colts and Rugers.

 

[gryphon]

This thread is a hoot!! I don't think that I've seen this much BS about the 1911 in a long time. There are some fallacies here that I thought people would be over by now.

 

[HankB]

shep854, you're right that some guns - INCLUDING revolvers - just don't work right out of the box. That's why I specified giving your hypothetical 20 random samples a once-over before running the test, to weed out things like missing firing pins, cross-threaded barrels, and such.

A good 1911 can be a fine gun - I have a Les Baer that works 100%.

But the factories DO turn out a lot of 1911s with less than sterling reliability out of the box - and it's NOT necessarily the game guns that choke, its regular "government model" 1911s from "name" companies that fail, and do so with disturbing frequency. I've experienced it myself, and have witnessed it in other's pistols OFTEN at the range, in CHL classes and at IDPA/USPSA matches.

Few other pistols seem to have created a cottage industry that thrives just on fixing guns right from the factory. (When was the last time you saw a revolversmith offering a "reliability package" for a revolver?)

 

[natedog]

I'm pretty sure that most of the problems with 1911s out-of-the-box comes from pistols that aren't built to the original design specification. Variances in materials, dimensions, tolerances, etc. contribute to the problem. Also, the stories of 1911s being poorly built, innacurate, or having too much recoil most likely come from the military, were pistols that had been used in several wars across several decades were still being issued, and issued to troops that were poorly trained in pistol marksmanship. The tiny sights probably didn't help.

 

[Penforhire]

You know how many fine six-shooters you can buy for the price of one Les Baer?

Someday we'll have to do a proper reliability test, with witnesses and say 50 rounds of your favorite load through everyone's duty/carry/HD gun with no cleaning. I'm betting the six-shooters have fewer failures but that the failure rates are very low for both. In neither case would I be interested in out-of-the-box but rather after break-in and before any gunsmithing.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Denver was one of the few major police forces to authorize the 1911 for street cops.. many other departments authorized them for "detectives".

You'll still occasionally see a DPD cop with a Colt cocked and locked.

Also, up until Kimber and Springfeild started making them... Colt was the ONLY civilian MFG, and they weren't cheap. Ever.

 

[Greybeard]

I know some that some WWII 1911s gave them a bad reputation with some old-timers. My Dad (now almost 80) went straight from the farm to the Army. He was an excellent shot. As a kid, I recall him consistently hitting jackrabbits at 50 yards with an old .22 revolver with a 6" barrel.

But, when Dad took nr CHL class in 1995 and had opportunity to shoot any handgun I owned, he shunned my Colt Gold Cup in favor of a Glock 23 that he had never fired before! He explained having had very poor experiences with 1911s in WWII. He said the 45s they had in basic training and Okinawa did go bang most of the time, but were very inaccuate. I suspect due to rushed mass manufacturing by various companies, sloppy tolerances and/or too many rounds with too little maintenance.

 

[natedog]

When I was in Houston, I saw a motorcycle cop with a blued steel, wood gripped 1911 cocked and locked. Also saw revolvers, USPs, Berettas, BHPs, Glocks, Sigs, and pretty much any major pistol you can think of. Perhaps HPD authorizes their officers to choose whatever gun they please.

 

[BigG]

Dr. Rob is right. The Colt 45 Automatic was never cheap. Probably 3 or 4 S&W Model 10s could be bought for 1 Colt GM.

 

[shep854]

HankB, isn't it great when the exception comes along that throws our neat, logical arguments right into the trashcan? That's what makes gun debates so entertaining/frustrating. So far, all the autos I've used have done their part, if I do mine. I have no doubt, though, that there is one lying in wait out there to make me look totally foolish.

When all's said and done, there is no denying that a 1911-style pistol requires much more training and practice to use at its fullest potential. Since I haven't given myself that much practice in a long time, I carry a wheelie.

 

[cracked butt]

I grew up un a small town that had maybe 5 or 6 cops total. They all carried a revolver except for one who was a marine Vietnam vet who carried a 1911- though I don't remember seeing it cocked and locked. I don't think the police had to drw their guns very often in my hometown.

 

[grendelbane]

The tides of history, and economic forces have joined together to colour our perspective on various weapons.

In WWI, the M1911 was highly regarded. For close work in the trenches it had mostly inferior competition. Which would you rather have? A 1911, or a long-barrelled bolt gun? Other pistols and revolvers were usually smaller caliber. Americans did use shotguns loaded with 00 buck during the Great War, but issued paper cased ammunition. The .45 did well when compared to other choices at the time. Also, 1917 was a generation closer to tthe frontier days of the westward expansion. Probably a higher per centage of soldiers, (such as McBride), had experience with firearms in general, and pistols specifically.

Fast forward to WWII. Now the 1911 has a little better competition. Armies are now issuing sub-machine guns, notably the Thompson and the M3 greasegun. Even the issue rifle is shorter, and now fires semi-automatic, with an 8 round capacity. The M1 carbine is also available, with its greater capacity and accuracy.

Also most of the soldiers had reached manhood during or after the Great Depression. Pistols, and ammunition were not an affordable luxury item for many of them. In both wars, the average infantry-man had little or no experience with pistols, (or firearms of any kind), but the per centage of competent pistol shooters was probably higher in WWI than WWII. Consequently, the 1911 gains a reputation for inaccuracy and uncontrollability.

Both my father and my uncle were WWII veterans. On watching me perforate 2 ft sq. targets at 100 yards with my series 70, my father admitted that he had seen a trick shot in the army shoot that well, plus this fellow would shoot tanks at 300 yards. He accepted that training and practice would enable one to use a .45 quite well. My uncle, on the other hand, insisted I was cheating. He did not know how I was cheating, but he knew that I was, because he was a WWII veteran, and KNEW that the .45 was not that accurate.

I would bet that my grandfathers would have had a higher opinion of the M1911 than either one of them would have had.

 

[Wanderer]

Think about it. Military experience with the 1911 in the fifties said that it rattled, was inaccurate, kicked like a mule, etc. Even if police departments had them available, I doubt they would have taken them based on after-action reports.

 

[Jim K]

Let's reverse the question. Why do police carry auto pistols NOW?

There are two answers. First, with the advent of high capacity magazines, more crooks started carrying auto pistols and the cops felt outgunned. Note I didn't say they were outgunned, only that they felt they were; it was a morale issue.

Second, Congress passed the Law Enforcement Assistance act, allowing the Federal government to provide ammo to local departments. The Feds decided that the only ammo they would provide would be that bought by the military in massive quantities, the 9mm Luger. Departments didn't have to go to 9mm, but those which chose another caliber had to buy ammo from their own budgets. The result was as expected. (If someone agreed to give you all the ammo you could shoot, but in only one caliber, what would you shoot?)

Jim

 

[shep854]

Jim, don't forget all that Federal money that allowed departments to buy all the gadgets and goodies (including autos) that they could only dreamof previously.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

If the 1911 was so good, why did depts stay with revolvers? A good question and one that has probably been answered in part by many of the answers already given. There may be no one correct answer.

Here are my thoughts...
The revolver became the traditional law enforcement gun, no doubt stemming from earlier times. As such, it was the 'norm' that became self perpetuating as those expecting revolvers in law enforcement also kept ordering revolvers for law enforcement.

I don't know that it had so much to do with the GI v. Cop mentality issue and one being smarter than the other or not. Probably part of the tradition of the revolver as a cop gun stemmed from being reliable and easy to use. It was also a nearly standardized standard across the board in that pretty much all revolvers essentially worked in the same manners. As such, a change in models didn't mean any real changes in training.

Law enforcement might not have perceived that changing to another platform or caliber would solve any particular problems. Why change if the change isn't going to solve problems? Here, I would guess that it wasn't that they didn't have problems, but didn't realize what sorts of issues that could be solved by changing platforms and calibers.

I can see this argument being brought up historically by those defending not going to another platform such as the 1911, "We aren't the army. We don't need military weapons." Of course, this may just be my modern day view of anti-gun opinions being applied to a hypothetical situation from the past.

Revolvers limited overblasting by cops, effectively limiting them to only 5-8 shots (depending on the model).

Revolvers allowed for second strikes of cartridges that didn't go BOOM on the first primer hit.

The .38 and especially the .38 Special calibers were perceived as being more than sufficient for the job required by law enforcement except in extreme cases. If you recall, when tracking down gangsters such as Dillinger and Bonnie & Clyde, officers often beefed up what they were carrying to deal with the increased lethality threat of their intended prey. Some switched over to guns like the 1911 and went further in going with the 1911 n .38 Super so as to defeat some of the body armor worn by bad guys at the time that could defeat .38 Special and .45 acp.

Something else to keep in mind is that while the revolver is a traditional US LEO weapon, the same was not the case in other parts of the world. You had the police in Hong Kong carrying the Colt model 1903 semi auto in .32 acp. You had cops in Europe carrying Walthers in calibers ranging from .25 to .380 (and maybe 9 mm?) and European cops and militaries going with the Luger in 9 mm and smaller.

In the words of John Candy's character in the movie, "Splash," "When you have got a good thing, you stick with it." No doubt most US law enforcement agencies figured the revolver to be a good thing.

So in the end, whether or not a 1911 might be a better platform, the reasons for not changing over probably probably didn't have anything to do with what was or was not the better platform...at least not until more recent years when the issue became significant.

 

[JohnKSa]

I think a few things went into the decision.

1. It was awhile before folks learned how to make autos work with anything other than FMJ.

2. Plain old resistance to change.

3. Lots of horror stories from ex-military folks about the kick & inaccuracy.

4. Remember that the perception of police has changed significantly. Go back a few decades and it was much less common for cops to be carrying what the military carried.

Revolvers allowed for second strikes of cartridges that didn't go BOOM on the first primer hit.

Ever tried that with a revolver? You have to be patient and keep clicking until the dud comes round again...

 

[444]

A little side note that has very little to do with the original topic.
My best friends grandfather was a cop in a medium sized Eastern Pennsylvania city. I don't know when exactly he worked there, but he has been dead for probably 25 years and was retired ever since I met my friend. My buddies dad has his fathers service revolver which is a Colt Offical Police in .38 Special. The last time I was back home, we were sitting out on the porch drinking beer and my buddies dad told the stories of 4-5 different shootings his father was involved in. One of which was very dramatic in which a foot persuit ended with his dad on his back with the felon standing over him getting ready to hit him with an axe. Anyway, every one of these shooting involved his dad firing multiple rounds and getting hits every time. In none of the stories did the person shot die on the spot. I asked my buddies dad if his father ever said anything about being dissatisfied with the .38 Special as his duty weapon. And he said, no, he never heard him complain about it.
So, based on this very limited amount of information, I have to conclude that at least one cop who had been there and done that was satisfied with the .38 Speical (I am sure using 158 grain round nosed lead bullets).

 

[L-Frame]

If any of you have read David Hackworth's book "About Face", it is one of the finest books about combat ever written. He is America's most decorated living soldier. In it he talks about a study he did in the 60's concerning whether the army should keep using the 1911 or switch to another pistol. He was a decorated Vietnam vet and had access to all the information necessary to deliver a valid opinion. His report to the army was that the average Vietnam soldier should not be carrying the 1911 for safety issues. Their level of training was insufficient to prevent dangerous accidental discharges both in and out of combat. In fact, he makes the statement that more of our guys were hurt with the 1911 than there guys. He may have been exaggerating but his point is obvious. (By the way, the army didn't listen, due to the number of usable pistols and millions of rounds of .45 ammo still available). I believe there is a direct correlation between the training (or lack of) of a typical infantryman and a typical police officer. Where proper training exists, (special ops, etc) the 1911 can be excellent, otherwise there are too many safety issues which police bigwigs have recognized (and still do).

 

[Majic]

By the way, the army didn't listen

I imagine the Army didn't listen to someone in the 1960's telling them that a pistol they have been using for over 50 years with good success has safety issues.

 

[Iron Mike]

I have a friend whose father was the chief of police in Jersey City N.J.,Many years ago (the 60's) we had this very same conversation.He said they issued .38's because they felt auto's were to unreliable and that many of the old timers hardly ever practiced with their revolvers and probably would never maintain an auto properly.He also told us about cops who've had the same cartridges in their belts for so long they turned green from corrosion.Probably wouldn't feed reliably in an auto.