Metal or Plastic battle handgun

[Baron357]

I love the 1911 but am torn as to if it should be next to my AK when and if the battle begins.

After getting rid of my last plastic gun (Glock 23) I vowed never to buy another plastic gun but the M&P .45 is starting to change my mind. In a battle situation the extreme reliability, ease of maintenance, ability to eat any ammo is all very important and I am not sure the 1911 can handle all that. Like for instance if I was to get a great deal on Wolf .45acp would I have to turn it down b/c the 1911 does not like it where as the plastic guns will eat it up no problem…

AND what about crawling on the ground, mud, snow, rain, dirt and all the other crap you would encounter?

Metal or Plastic……

 

[fletcher]

I don't think metal or plastic really affects the performance in the ways you mention, but moreso the gun design.

My old 1911 went through hundreds of rounds of Wolf with no problems, and would take anything I fed it, much like the one I have now. However, different models (or even different guns of the same model) may have differences.

I do like the large weight reduction from a polymer frame, and if I HAD to carry a gun around all the time with gear, I might start leaning toward something like an XD or USP over my all-steel 1911 because of this.

If you feel that the M&P serves a need you have, by all means, get one and try it out.

 

[ID_shooting]

I am not a fan of plastic gun, although I do own two. Besides the amazing deal I got on it, I bought my G17 for the sole purpose of a SHTF/TEFTWAWKI gon to be a companion to my AK. Both require the same amount of maintenance and allow for lack of it as the case may be and will performe in just about any adverse condition with as much variety of ammo as I can think of.

Plastic guns may not be the most accurate but parts kits, mags, and the guns themselves are very afforadable and reliable.

 

[1911 guy]

AND what about crawling on the ground, mud, snow, rain, dirt and all the other crap you would encounter?

I don't know. WW1, WW11, Korea, Vietnam, Panama, and a hundred other skirmishes weren't quite enough. We'd better wait out this 1911 thing and see if it passes over.

 

[jwr_747]

me too,the John Browning designed 1911 is hard to beat.I'm not talking " Rob Latham" race gun,I'm talking good old military issue 45 ACP.coming up on 100 years old,like your trusty Timex "takes a licking and keeps on ticking" or the more modern " Energizer Bunny" just keeps going and going and going. jwr

 

[Baron357]

1911 guy, everyone knows the accomplishments of the 1911 but why have just about all police, military and private security firms, abandoned it? There must be a reason other then they are wrong.

Don't get me wrong the 1911 is my fav. gun and the one I trust my life to daily.

 

[wally]

if I was to get a great deal on Wolf .45acp would I have to turn it down b/c the 1911 does not like it where as the plastic guns will eat it up no problem…

None of my 1911s has had any issues with Wolf or any other factory ammo. Few of my plastic guns will feed the 200gr hard cast lead SWC reloads my 1911s love so well.

--wally.

 

[Chipperman]

1911 guy, everyone knows the accomplishments of the 1911 but why have just about all police, military and private security firms, abandoned it?

Two big reasons:
1. They abandoned the .45 ACP round
2. Cocked and Locked guns require a lot of training to be safe and proficient. Most of the guns carried by Police, security, etc are DA/SA, DAO, or "Safe-Action".

It has much less to do with steel vs plastic.

 

[ID_shooting]

I agree that a good mil spec 1911 is very reliable, nothing wrong with that choice. Franlkly though, nost modern 1911's have varried so far from the original that they are not as relable and much more maintenance frickle than modern plastic combat sidearms.

 

[S&Wfan]

1911 guy, everyone knows the accomplishments of the 1911 but why have just about all police, military and private security firms, abandoned it? There must be a reason other then they are wrong.

Don't get me wrong the 1911 is my fav. gun and the one I trust my life to daily.

Yep, the 1911 is an incredible gun in the hands of a man or woman who knows how to use it well.

Why do police, miltary and private security firms avoid a 1911?

1. For our military . . . it was NATO politics at the time. We abandoned the .45ACP to go to the common NATO standard of a hot 9mm round.

Why an Italian bottom feeder? Geez, I don't know. I was talking with a friend who just returned from "playin' in the sand" (in Iraq AND Afganistan). He's an E-8 and he hates the M9 like I do. When you've got a determined suicide attacker comin' at you and you've only got access to a handgun, why in the hell would you want it to be a 9 millimeter? (On a side note, some of our guys who have to kick the doors in over there have gone to AK-47s for that down and dirty duty. Same issue . . . more knockdown power, vs. our .22 caliber rifles.) When you have an enemy who won't "lay down" and quit when hit . . . you'd better have something that will "plant" 'em before they can shoot your too!

The danged M9 pistol is HUGE for such a tiny cartridge and measley recoil levels too . . . plus the big grip makes it hard for some of today's military's members with small hands to point and shoot it accurately.

Why this choice will always baffle me. I'd rather be totin' a plastic framed pistol (such as a Glock) over there in the heat if I had to use a 9mm anyway, rather than a huge, metal-framed 9mm.

2. Why Police? Politics again. Cocked and Locked carry scares some folks, plus not all officers are any better at handling a gun than ol' Barney Fife. Thus, all officers in some jurisdictions who are wonderful handgunners are denyed the best automatic fighting handgun on the planet simply to lower the standard so the chosen handgun is "safe" in the hand of folks who REALLY shouldn't be carrying a gun anyway. Ditto with Security Firms.

Frankly, I'm in agreement on this one . . . when some folks simply cannot shoot worth a crapola, it is very wise to shoot a firearm that will be more idiot-proof than a 1911.

John Browning didn't design guns for folks who couldn't shoot . . . he designed the ultimate fighting handgun. Sgt. York shot his 21 times (3x7 rnd. clips) when capturing well over 100 German soldiers in WWI. He testified later that he doesn't believe he wasted a single shot from his rifle OR his 1911. Each round dropped another scared enemy soldier . . . fired by a country boy who knew how to hunt and shoot accurately. Would an M9 have done better? Would an M9 POSSIBLY have done worse by failing to incapacitate those Germans who were so well done in by York's 230 grain bullets?

In any event, John Browning knew how to build the perfect, single action fighting handgun.

Yep . . . I tote a 1911 too . . .

 

[.357 magnum]

Love the 1911's but...

It comes down to Mag Capacity, you are better off in a defensive situation with a Springfield XD and its 13-RD mag or the SW-MP .45 is going to have a 14-RD Mag in October. I have had three XD .45's [still own two] Really are very nice guns, very accurate, totally reliable and easy to clean. I own an MP .40 and I Love this gun too. The grip is the best I have come across, and it is another smooth shooter like the XD. The MP is also easy to clean. I like the MP so much I am going to get a 9mm and .45 version of it eventually. I have also had very good luck with the Taurus line of 24/7's. I am just not quite as accurate with them as the XD or MP. I like the three dot sights better then the Heine sights. Glocks are dependable, but I totally dislike the feel and angle of the gun. You just cannot go wrong with the way they make the better Polymer guns these days. The Mag Capacity is great.

The Best to You and Yours!

Frank

 

[Hauptmann]

Polymer is actually a pretty good material for a pistol frame. The real problem that a lot of ppl have with polymer pistols is the level of workmanship associated with polymer firearms. Not to bash any particular pistol design, but most polymer firearms are cheaply made and don't attract the metal alloy framed crowd. Metal framed pistols are usually very well made and good looking in appearance. There is also the problem with the flexing of polymer which can throw off accuracy in some designs.

The best overall polymer pistols out there if you like metal framed pistols are are probably the H&K USPs, Walther P99s, and Steyr M-series pistols.

Back to your question, I recommend that you use 9mm in one of the great 9mm pistols. Examples would be the Glock 17, Sig P226, CZ 75b, Beretta 92, or H&K USP. These pistols are light in weight and have proven their reliability over the years. As far as picking the 9mm, if there is ever civil unrest you may or may not be on foot most of the time. Your pistol will be secondary to your rifle and unless you've been a grunt in the military you can't appreciate the benefit of lighter weight equipment. .45acp ammo weighs twice as much as 9mm ammo and ever ounch of weight you have to hike around with makes you more physically tired, more mentally tired, use more food, use more water, and travel less distance. You also run a higher risk of injuring yourself with more weight on you if you have to run or move quickly over uneven terrain. Shot per shot the .45acp will be more effective especially if you are using only hard ball ammo, but the same arguement can be said for using a .44magnum over the .45acp. Plus, 9mm ammunition will be MUCH easier to get ahold of in such a situation since all of the major powers use it now. Even China and Russian have switched over the the 9mm.

 

[1911 guy]

Mag capacity? Nope.

Our military and U.S. law enforcement didn't go away from the .45acp and the 1911 due to anything but 1) politics and 2) training. Politics drove the military and money for training drove police forces to abandon any firearm that required more than minimal training. Look at the highly touted SWAT and Marine Force Recon, Army Rangers, etc. They're all scarfing up quality 1911's. Magazine capacity has little impact on a pistol fight. Sure, more is better, except when you've got a rifle or ten guys with rifles to back you up. Handguns are for close quarters where you need a "thump", not a "poke". If you KNOW you're walking into it, you shoulda' brung a 12 guage.

The phrase I use, and it ticks some people off, is "lowest common denominator". Weapons, along with everything else, gets chosen based on the capability of the least capable person who might use it. Thus, 1911s' are out for general issue now, we might actually have to train people to use them. It's a sad state of affairs when a friend from Howland, Oh., asked me to get his son up to speed on a handgun because the U.S.M.C. hadn't done it yet and he was going to the sandbox in a few weeks. Oh, he'd qualified, but realistic gunhandling skills were nearly non-existant.

 

[Hauptmann]

1911guy,

I'm not suprised that the USMC would put off pistol training. Now days we focus on utilizing our technological advantage which usually translates into a ranged advantage. The Russians did the same thing in Afghanistan and avoided getting down in the trenches with the enemy. It all depends on the theater of combat and the enemy's capabilities. Someday we may be faced with an enemy that can equal or exceed us in conventional battle and we will have to resort to getting our hands dirty like we did in the first and second world wars and Vietnam.

The 1911 is a great pistol design, but every design can be improved. Some areas I'd like to see improvement in are weight reduction, DA/SA capability, and magazine capacity. There are several pistols out there that look promising such as the H&K 45 and the FNP 45. Personally, I prefer the Sig 220 over the 1911. Never really liked manual safeties and I prefer a double action safe condition.

 

[S&Wfan]

Hi,

I love manual safeties! They keep untrained folks from being able to make my 1911 fire immediately if I was ever jumped and lost retention of my primary firearm.

While they are trying to figure it out, maybe I can give 'em a Model 36 double tap of .38spl. from my BUG. I guarantee you if I don't, it won't be from not trying!

Automatics without manual safeties scare the crap out of me. Safe-action? I never thought of picking up a centerfire pistol and being able to make it fire by stroking the trigger a "safe-action" firearm.

What handgun would you rather get snagged on the trigger with a branch as you walked throught the woods . . . a 1911 or a Glock? Which one would fire when the branch snagged hard as you walked by?

Even if the 1911 safety got wiped off (and thus put in the ready to fire mode) the grip safety ain't depressed so it can't go off. Not so on a Glock, as many have found out . . . including the idiot DEA agent caught on tape bragging to kindergardeners that he was the "only one professional enough to carry his Glock 40," only to crank a round into his leg as he tried to reholster while his finger caught on the trigger.

If the SHTF, which firearm would you rather have under your pillow . . . a chambered Glock or a cocked and locked, chambered .45?

I'll take the .45 . . . it is a much safer design for those who are familiar with firearms. The single action trigger also allows better accuracy, all other things being equal, over a spongy double action auto.

However, if others feel more comforted by fat magazines but spongy long trigger pulls (or a crunch/tick pull of a double action first pull followed by single action pulls) be my guest.

Ain't life great in the US . . . where we have such a great choice of weapons to spend our hard-earned money on!

I wish you all a wonderful weekend and . . . let's all go shoot up some targets!!!

T.

PS: Ditto on the 12 guage! Any handgun should be considered a "last resort" weapon, and no handgun is as effective as a scattergun when it hits a perp at a close distance.

 

[Elm Creek Smith]

My next autoloader purchase will be an XD Tactical in .357 Sig. I'm not sure when that will be, 'cause I carry a revolver everywhere.

ECS

 

[Old Fuff]

Browning designed his 1911 pistol so that it could be detail stripped if necessary without any tools - other then provided by the parts in the gun itself. Try to do that with any of the new guns. The pistol's reliability under adverse conditions has been well proven, but keep in mind that the guns being made today are not the same as the ones that made the 1911's reputation.

The ones made today do not match up to the original blueprints, and are made much tighter without the "calculated clearences" that the USGI gun had. Material specifications have been degraded, as has the quality control procedures and inspections the guns Uncle Sam bought went through. So called match chambers are more fussy about what ammunition they like, especially when they get fouled.

To answer your question about polymer vs steel and the 1911 pistol - it depends on if you mean a real 1911 or one of the current big-boy toys.

To their credit, Glock H&K, Smith & Wesson's new M&P line, Ruger, SIG and the others like them are still making weapons.

 

[pogo2]

I'd pick a polymer H&K

I generally carry an aluminum frame 1911 for CCW (Kimber Pro or Colt Defender), but in the situation you describe - going into a military battle environment - I'd pick my H&K USP 45. I think it would hold up better in the dirt and grime and give me more rounds on tap (12+1). And I have found that I can shoot it as accurately as any of my 1911s, even the 5 inch all steel target 1911s.

I think there is a big difference in conditions between civilian CCW and military use.

 

[rbernie]

I never thought of picking up a centerfire pistol and being able to make it fire by stroking the trigger a "safe-action" firearm.

I guess you don't have much stick time around revolvers?

Metal or Plastic……

I reach for an M&P first, every day. Most days don't involved low crawling thru mud, but still - the CZs and Sigs and such are fine pistols that I'm glad I have, but the M&P is my field gun.

We'd better wait out this 1911 thing and see if it passes over.

Or at least make sure that you have a unit armorer in tow.

 

[Ala Dan]

I don't shoot any Wolf or Silver Bear ammo in any of my guns; as I'm a long
time handloader, so I tailor my loads to a particular weapon~!

 

[Rexster]

I have used duty autopistols over the years, that had frames of steel, aluminum, and polymer. All materials can be just fine, if the design is good. The only good thing about double-stack mags is that my duty belt is crowded, with all sorts of gee-gaws mandated to be on it, while I don't like anything mounted behind my back. My SIG P229 is very size-efficient, and its two 12-round mags, one in gun and one spare, are more ammo than I formerly had with a 1911 and two spare mags, while taking up less real estate. (I do carry more firepower off the belt.) In principle, I like single-stack just fine, because I plan to reload at the first opportunity, regardless of how many rounds I think I have expended. If I fumble the reload, and drop a partially expended double-column mag, I am possibly losing a larger portion of my available ammo reserve, and perhaps leaving myself with only one magazine handy. Fumbling a single-stack mag is less of a personal disaster. It's largely a matter of the advantages of each type of mag canceling themselves out.

 

[Shipwreck]

My Walther P99 A/S in 9mm is my all time fav gun. I gave up on 1911s because after spending tons of cash on them, I still shot better with my P99.