"Modern" auto's pro's/cons
- Thread starter sb350hp
- Start date
- Status
Hypnogator
Member
Perhaps because in grand-daddy's day, they didn't even have plastic, much less plastic guns!
The 1911 was, and is, a good design, but it has been superseded in all but limited utility by more modern designs, including the cursed "combat tupperware."
and look at the even larger catalog of 1911 clones. and the 1911/bhp are viewed as the all time combat pistols. matter of fact that very large list of excellent JMB firearms. i believe only the 1903 Hammer
FN1910 and M1895 are the only ones not STILL being made. the BAR and m1917/1919 are being made in SA form due to NFA/86
even the 1903 hammerless has a following that includes a guy out in CA i think who makes 1,000$ CCW versions/modifications.
the idea of a striker firing a gun isnt new. bolt action rifles have done it for a long long time. the only differance in the wide view of the "safe action" is its only partialy cocked, the operation of the trigger pushes it back those few extra centimeters and then lets it go.. the irony in this is if you ask me "safe action" is much less safe then a plain old mechanical DA.
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
OK, the 4 most important pistols of the 20th century were:
The P08 (Luger) adopted by the German Navy in that year with the new 9mm cartridge. The first pistol adopted by a major power as a service sidearm.
The 1911.
The Walther P38, the first da/sa pistol adopted by a major power as a service sidearm it set the stage for all those that followed including the Berretta M9 (which closely resembles the Walther design) and made the passing of the revolver as sidearms for law enforcement the order of the day.
The Glock. While the most innovative thing about the Glock was it's trigger (striker fired pistols had been around since the French developed them prior to the Second World War and HK developed the first polymer framed guns) the overall package of the Glock, it's reliability and ruggedness, set the stage for all other polymer framed guns to follow. There are polymer framed 1911s out there now.
When the 1911 was first introduced, and made by Colt, parts interchangeability was a requirement. It was the first pistol adopted by a major power that you could take any 10 of them, completely strip them, mix up the parts and reassemble them and have 10 reliable working pistols. For it's day it was unsurpassed for reliability. This is not hype, just a statement of fact.
The large industry for custom and aftermarket parts for the 1911 is not because it is an unreliable design. Instead it's because it is a popular design and there is a good deal of money to be made by offering custom parts. There is a smaller aftermarket industry for the Glock, Springfield, etc. that sells sights, mag releases, slide stops, finishes, etc. not because it is unreliable, but because they are popular.
tipoc
The P08 (Luger) adopted by the German Navy in that year with the new 9mm cartridge. The first pistol adopted by a major power as a service sidearm.
The 1911.
The Walther P38, the first da/sa pistol adopted by a major power as a service sidearm it set the stage for all those that followed including the Berretta M9 (which closely resembles the Walther design) and made the passing of the revolver as sidearms for law enforcement the order of the day.
The Glock. While the most innovative thing about the Glock was it's trigger (striker fired pistols had been around since the French developed them prior to the Second World War and HK developed the first polymer framed guns) the overall package of the Glock, it's reliability and ruggedness, set the stage for all other polymer framed guns to follow. There are polymer framed 1911s out there now.
When the 1911 was first introduced, and made by Colt, parts interchangeability was a requirement. It was the first pistol adopted by a major power that you could take any 10 of them, completely strip them, mix up the parts and reassemble them and have 10 reliable working pistols. For it's day it was unsurpassed for reliability. This is not hype, just a statement of fact.
The large industry for custom and aftermarket parts for the 1911 is not because it is an unreliable design. Instead it's because it is a popular design and there is a good deal of money to be made by offering custom parts. There is a smaller aftermarket industry for the Glock, Springfield, etc. that sells sights, mag releases, slide stops, finishes, etc. not because it is unreliable, but because they are popular.
tipoc
Geronimo45
Member
The Glock 17 was so-called because it was Gaston's 17th patent.
JM Browning was around in a pivotal time for firearms changes. Metallurgy had significantly improved at that time, and good smokeless powder had come into being. The fairly traditional Gatlings had been supplanted with the more modern Maxim gun. Browning had the chance to take brand-new technology - new metals, new operating systems, new cartridges, new powders. Glock didn't come at a turning point of technology - he didn't really invent anything new, he simply refined what was already there. He took the high-cap 9mm and he took the not-so-successful polymer frame. He comined 'em into a very simplistic setup that turned out to be very popular and pretty widely copied. Obviously not as much as the 1911, since that's been through two world wars and innumerable movies. It's been around over 90 years... while Glock is about 25 years old.
sm
member
Modern Modern Autoloaders today come in a Plastic Box.
This requires a degree in Engineering to Open, as the Research & Design folks - really goofed this all up... and
This Modern Autoloader gun also requires a First Aid kit to repair all the damage done to the human body in trying to open, and in just handling the thing.
I predict we will see more folks get into De-Horning these Plastic Boxes and stay pretty busy with this new niche market related to guns.
These Modern Semi-Autos:
They come with pretty cable locks for kids to use on tricycles, and to lock kitchen cabinets with, so parents cannot get to the Dishwasher Detergent.
Kids have to protect Parents from Evil Cascades ya know?
We never had a problem with the Cardboard Boxes, with the brown paper and cleaning rod, brush, mop , screwdriver, little bottle of oil and other neat accessories back in the day.
This requires a degree in Engineering to Open, as the Research & Design folks - really goofed this all up... and
This Modern Autoloader gun also requires a First Aid kit to repair all the damage done to the human body in trying to open, and in just handling the thing.
I predict we will see more folks get into De-Horning these Plastic Boxes and stay pretty busy with this new niche market related to guns.
These Modern Semi-Autos:
They come with pretty cable locks for kids to use on tricycles, and to lock kitchen cabinets with, so parents cannot get to the Dishwasher Detergent.
Kids have to protect Parents from Evil Cascades ya know?
We never had a problem with the Cardboard Boxes, with the brown paper and cleaning rod, brush, mop , screwdriver, little bottle of oil and other neat accessories back in the day.
ok homer its a Glock 17 refers to its capacity acording to the Glock websight.I don't know why they changed nomenclature.
you got that backward it was a pivotal time for firearms changes because JM Browning was around.
that you got right.
I do not own a 1911, but have wanted one. Would I carry it cocked and locked? Probably.
I have been around handguns all my life and I have owned revolvers and autos. I prefer an auto for carry, but for some reason can never do without a .38.
I know this is in tha auto forum, so enough talk about revolvers.
What I really posted for was to say that when one really THINKS about it; a 1911 carried with round chambers, hammer back is not that much different than carrying a Glock with a round chambered.
Think about this: How many of you have hunted with an automatic shotgun? You carry it ready to go with the safety on. Think about walking through the woods and moving the gun around and, hopefully with the muzzle pointed in a safe direction at all times. But, the gun is not secured in a holster and in a still position.
Ok, with the above in mind, how many have actually had a ND with a shotgun?
As far as remembering to get the safety off quickly before the shot; think about a bird flushing or a rabbit jumping up in front of you. I know that if you miss a shot at game it is not life threatening like it would be with a BG. But, you take that safety off the shotgun and down the game very quickly. The same could be done with a pistol in a defensive situation.
As far as a better designed pistol: Time will tell. So far, the 1911 has been around a very long time. Will a Sig, or Glock, or any other pistol make it that long. Oh, yeah, there is the Hi Power. I think that it has been around a while and copied a good bit. Why wasn't it in the discussion?
I have been around handguns all my life and I have owned revolvers and autos. I prefer an auto for carry, but for some reason can never do without a .38.
I know this is in tha auto forum, so enough talk about revolvers.
What I really posted for was to say that when one really THINKS about it; a 1911 carried with round chambers, hammer back is not that much different than carrying a Glock with a round chambered.
Think about this: How many of you have hunted with an automatic shotgun? You carry it ready to go with the safety on. Think about walking through the woods and moving the gun around and, hopefully with the muzzle pointed in a safe direction at all times. But, the gun is not secured in a holster and in a still position.
Ok, with the above in mind, how many have actually had a ND with a shotgun?
As far as remembering to get the safety off quickly before the shot; think about a bird flushing or a rabbit jumping up in front of you. I know that if you miss a shot at game it is not life threatening like it would be with a BG. But, you take that safety off the shotgun and down the game very quickly. The same could be done with a pistol in a defensive situation.
As far as a better designed pistol: Time will tell. So far, the 1911 has been around a very long time. Will a Sig, or Glock, or any other pistol make it that long. Oh, yeah, there is the Hi Power. I think that it has been around a while and copied a good bit. Why wasn't it in the discussion?
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
This is the main reason I no longer carry one. I did carry one daily, most of my adult life, until about three or four years ago.
I sold off all but three of my Colts, the only make 1911 I was comfortable enough with to carry, and switched to SIG's. I havent been disappointed with my choice. They have all worked 100%, right out of the box.
Out of the last five 1911's I bought, all Springfields, four required some work to be somewhat reliable, and the most expensive, a Loaded model, was nothing more than a boat anchor, and had troubles with hardball out of the box and never was reliable, even after work.
I think the biggest issue is there are to many makers out there who have their own idea of what a 1911 is. If they stayed to the basic Colt/GI specs, especially the slide to frame fit, and the proper frame dimensions, I think you wouldnt see the many problems you see today. You dont need, and I know I never wanted, all the gimmicky add ons the games people seem to want. Good sights and a good trigger are all thats needed.
The difference between the 1911's, and even Colt 1911's, and the SIG's are, the SIG comes out of the box the way I want it, and works like I want it, and I dont have to fiddle with it at all to get what I want. Even with Colt, I usually have to spend more money for something else to get it the way I want it.
Nothing wrong with a good, working 1911, but even some of us old fogies have moved on without regret.
Autolycus
Member
First off there is no need for the personal attacks. It makes you look childish.
Can you post a link that says it was called the Glock 17 because of its 17 round capacity? I have read that it was called the Model 17 because it was his 17th patent as well.
I know its from a site that allows anyone to post but I think it is somewhat valid as I dont think most people care to edit it for trivial matters such as this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_17
I went and checked the Glock website and it does not say it is the model 17 because of its capacity on the Glock 17 page. Why then isnt the Glock 22 called the Model 15? Or the Glock 19 capable of holding 19 rounds, according to your theory?
I must say I started this thread and have enjoyed the discussion although it seems as of some of the latest posts have disolved into attacks. Each weapon of choice has it's inherent weaknesses most of which are seemingly personal preferences. Very very few new firearms these days are "junk" as the market has demanded better quality. One must be cautious at gun shows but a NIB of just about anything these days seems to function nearly flawlessy if "fit and accuracy" are not considered. Longevity is another issue. Will a new in box poly last as long as a "steel" firearm of equal cost/value? Time will tell.
Anyway I have enjoyed all of the bantering about and I must confess I naturally lean toward the 1911 style but the new SAO sig and the 24/7 styles have peaked my interest.
Anyway I have enjoyed all of the bantering about and I must confess I naturally lean toward the 1911 style but the new SAO sig and the 24/7 styles have peaked my interest.
quickcanary
Member
Some people need to come to the realization that JMB wasn't God, and that the fact that the 1911 came first doesn't make it the best. It IS the best to a lot of people, and that's fine, but it's so common to see Glock get put down just because Gaston wasn't born earlier...a lot had already been done by the time he was ready to design a pistol, so I don't think it's fair to criticize him for not having a firearm that's been around for a century or that doesn't mimic the 1911. What he did was revolutionary in its own right, as evidenced by the amount of Glock sales, the number of Glock followers, and the number of polymer pistols produced today that use parts of Glock's design.
I'm sure glad he decided to make what he did rather than another 1911 clone. Things would be a lot more boring had he decided that it wouldn't be in his best interests to produce something different.
The 1911 is a great design, but it shouldn't be considered blasphemous to compare it to modern semiauto pistols. They're all designed to do the same thing and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. There are people who vehemently defend the 1911 (and for good reason) but that doesn't mean that anything newer or that strays from the 1911 design is automatically inferior.
I'm sure glad he decided to make what he did rather than another 1911 clone. Things would be a lot more boring had he decided that it wouldn't be in his best interests to produce something different.
The 1911 is a great design, but it shouldn't be considered blasphemous to compare it to modern semiauto pistols. They're all designed to do the same thing and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. There are people who vehemently defend the 1911 (and for good reason) but that doesn't mean that anything newer or that strays from the 1911 design is automatically inferior.
sm
member
1911 as I was exposed to, was the Gov't Model of 1911 as a kid, born in the mid 50's.
A tool unto itself.
This fascinated then, and always has. Here is a gun, that can be taken down, inspected, maintained, and requires no tools.
Spend brass will undo grip screws if need.
Spend brass will work as a GI Plug on the recoil spring.
JMB thought this out, really well. Folks share about guns for various conditions, and here is one Older gun, with all this taken into consideration for Combat Conditions, and proven.
New 1911s are often "Clones" of what I grew up with, holds true for others around here as well.
Guess that is why we replace FLGR with GI set up, and use flat-head grip screws instead of torx.
Sentimental bunch of old farts we are.
A tool unto itself.
This fascinated then, and always has. Here is a gun, that can be taken down, inspected, maintained, and requires no tools.
Spend brass will undo grip screws if need.
Spend brass will work as a GI Plug on the recoil spring.
JMB thought this out, really well. Folks share about guns for various conditions, and here is one Older gun, with all this taken into consideration for Combat Conditions, and proven.
New 1911s are often "Clones" of what I grew up with, holds true for others around here as well.
Guess that is why we replace FLGR with GI set up, and use flat-head grip screws instead of torx.
Sentimental bunch of old farts we are.
HammerBite
Member
sm said:
Funny you should mention that. This morning I pinched my finger while latching closed a blue SIG box.
I guess I must be a klutz.Maybe I should fluff and buff all my boxes before I really hurt myself bad.
HammerBite
Member
He didn't need to be God. All he needed was to be the first one to do it right. Once you've done it right it's hard for anyone to make any serious improvement. Browning showed us how to make reliable and uncomplicated SA recoil-operated hammer-fired pistols. Adding doo-dads to them doesn't change that fact.
rdrancher
Member
Don't mean to hijack, but do you have more info on this?
rd
If you are really seeking an answer, it might be worth trying to understand how/why 1911's went from being a more or less common military weapon to be being a niche "sport" weapon.
I know 1911 fanatics tell me that every supra ultra secret Delta Black Death squad they know of uses 1911s - but the reality is that it's not issued much any more for military/police forces. I know there are always rumors about some new test where a 1911 design is just about to be re-adopted by the Army , or Navy, or somebody - and then it doesn't happen.
The 1911 has been a mainly a "sport"weapon for quite a while. I don't know the numbers, but I imagine that non-1911s are bought by army/police forces a thousand times as frequently as 1911s.
If you assume that he buyers are acting rationally, and in the general case making a reasonably good decision for their troops/officers, I think that you will be able to uncover for yourself the strengths/weaknesses of modern designs compared to 1911 weapons.
My guess is that low maintenance, reliability, cost of manufacture are some of the reasons - but I may be wrong. However, I think that it's unlikely that nearly all of the armed forces/police forces in the world are consistently making the same wrong decision.
Note that that may have nothing to do with the 1911's attraction as a sporting weapon. For example, it may be that a really sweet trigger may just not be that important to armed forces/police forces.
My general impression is that a few folks get a reliable out of the box 1911, but that most folks don't. An awful lot of folks seem to be willing/able to fiddle with a 1911 until it become very reliable - but in general I think if you randomly selected 1000 new Glocks or Berettas, or SIGs, you find fewer out of the box reliability issues than if you did the same with 1911s.
So maybe the difference is that people who use 1911's for sport accept a higher initial failure rate, because they are not using a 1911 out of the box in a life and death situation.
But I think that if you assume that the folks who buy the vast number of service weapons are making reasonably rational decisions, and try to understand why next to none of them are buying 1911s, then you will understand the strengths/weaknesses of the designs.
Mike
I know 1911 fanatics tell me that every supra ultra secret Delta Black Death squad they know of uses 1911s - but the reality is that it's not issued much any more for military/police forces. I know there are always rumors about some new test where a 1911 design is just about to be re-adopted by the Army , or Navy, or somebody - and then it doesn't happen.
The 1911 has been a mainly a "sport"weapon for quite a while. I don't know the numbers, but I imagine that non-1911s are bought by army/police forces a thousand times as frequently as 1911s.
If you assume that he buyers are acting rationally, and in the general case making a reasonably good decision for their troops/officers, I think that you will be able to uncover for yourself the strengths/weaknesses of modern designs compared to 1911 weapons.
My guess is that low maintenance, reliability, cost of manufacture are some of the reasons - but I may be wrong. However, I think that it's unlikely that nearly all of the armed forces/police forces in the world are consistently making the same wrong decision.
Note that that may have nothing to do with the 1911's attraction as a sporting weapon. For example, it may be that a really sweet trigger may just not be that important to armed forces/police forces.
My general impression is that a few folks get a reliable out of the box 1911, but that most folks don't. An awful lot of folks seem to be willing/able to fiddle with a 1911 until it become very reliable - but in general I think if you randomly selected 1000 new Glocks or Berettas, or SIGs, you find fewer out of the box reliability issues than if you did the same with 1911s.
So maybe the difference is that people who use 1911's for sport accept a higher initial failure rate, because they are not using a 1911 out of the box in a life and death situation.
But I think that if you assume that the folks who buy the vast number of service weapons are making reasonably rational decisions, and try to understand why next to none of them are buying 1911s, then you will understand the strengths/weaknesses of the designs.
Mike
HammerBite
Member
And after Browning did his magic some people were uncomfortable with cocked-and-locked and still wanted the benefit of a quick first shot. The Walther brothers showed us how to do that. Military services went to DA/SA pistols in the hope that they would be more idiot proof.
Glock did for striker-fired pistols what Walther did for hammer-fired pistols, along with showing that polymer is a viable option.
Glock did for striker-fired pistols what Walther did for hammer-fired pistols, along with showing that polymer is a viable option.
HammerBite
Member
Oops!!
rdrancher
give me a day or two to find it. i found an article about it when searching for a new barrel for my 1903. i later found the shops site and they were selling 1903's with new sites, front slide serations, new barrels for a very premium price
give me a day or two to find it. i found an article about it when searching for a new barrel for my 1903. i later found the shops site and they were selling 1903's with new sites, front slide serations, new barrels for a very premium price
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Actually striker fired pistols were in use before the Glock. The Nambu was one, Browning's early designs for the P35 also employed a striker mechanism, between 1925 and 36 the Soviets employed the striker fireing Korovin pistol, etc., etc.
The most unique thing about the Glock was the trigger.
tipoc
- Status