Why is the 1911 not a "beginner's gun"?

[Hangingrock]

1964 Marine recruits fired the 1911 (two magazines (14) rounds for familiarization at Parris Island MCRD.

 

[Slamfire]

I always assumed that the rumors that they were inaccurate and didnt shoot well, came mostly from all the old war stories from those coming out of the military, who probably never shot one in the first place.

I knew a couple of people who came out of the army in the late 70's, early 80's, who said they hadnt ever handled or shot a handgun while in the service.

The stock of WW2 1911's were on the average worn out by the 1970's. A gunclub bud was in the Army in 1970, he claimed the 1911 he was given to shoot, would not stay on the eraser board in his office. That board was around eight to ten feet wide.

The slide and receivers of those WW2 era 1911's were made from cheap, plain carbon materials.




One of my 1911 books states the slide was heat treated two inches back from the muzzle. The rest of the slide was dead soft. I assume there was a case, such as salt nitriding, but I don't remember. There was absolutely no expectation that military 1911's were to last more than 5000 rounds (which was the Garand and M14 endurance) before going back to Depot. At Depot anything or everything could be discarded based on wear.

The Program Manager who took the M9 program to downselect put up a chart showing the mean time to failure with issue 1911's. I don't remember the numbers, but it was low, maybe fa hundred rounds, maybe less. These were 1911's that were rebuilt to issuable standards, they were rebuilt with parts made by the low bidder, and they were absolutely unreliable. There was no way to know how many rebuilds each frame and receiver had been through.

A bud has a like new WW2 1911, it is surprisingly tight, and goes bang each and every round. But I do not want an old worn out military 1911, and that is why I decided to buy new 1911's in military configuration, something with 4140 slides and receivers.

 

[trackskippy]

This one is the one that gives me pause. Which step is the hard one?

Now, a P-08, that is a beast to get apart. Savage 1907 not a joy. P-38 could be easier as well.

Now, ok, a P-220 starts simple enough. You lock the slide back. Then spin the lever. And then, try to not launch the slide onto the floor. But, now, you have to pry the captive spring out, then wrestle the barrel out which absolutely want's to stay locked to the slide. SIG 365 not that much different, just smaller.

Ok, I will grant that you have to get the link lined up on reassembly of a 1911. But the rest? Once the spring tension is off, it's off.

What kind of P220's did you have?

A lot of the training was one handed point/instinct shooting back in the day...perhaps that is why the arched MSH is less relevant with today's techniques? The video calls the 1911 "light and easy to handle." Guess men were tougher back then?

I think a lot of the "old ways" have been lost to supposedly "better" things, or just to those who dont follow history, or haven't lived it. Just because time and techniques more on, doesn't mean the old ways dont still work, and in some cases, arent superior.

The smart person follows Bruce Lees philosophy, learn as much as you can, about as much as you can, and take whats useful to you from everything, and dont waste time on the things that arent.

Learning all the different "new" things as they come up and move on, and following Bruce's advice, makes one a better shooter, or better at pretty much everything in life.

I keep getting told I "have" to use the sights if I want to hit anything. I just dont understand why they cant hit without them! And in some cases, with them.

You include the link/pin in the 1911s parts count but not the 6 individual ones that make up the RSA? Interesting.

Doesn't matter if a 1911 has a cone barrel, bushing, FLGR or whatever. Pull the slide stop and they all come apart.

The RSA on many/most of the newer guns are a captured item, and requires disassembly or destruction.

A lot of people dont seem to be aware that you can take down a 1911 by removing the slide stop without first removing the guide rod and spring. Although, its doesnt tend to work too well with the original design plug, spring, and guide.

 

[trackskippy]

1964 Marine recruits fired the 1911 (two magazines (14) rounds for familiarization at Parris Island MCRD.

State of the art training! Youre good to go!

When you consider what the "actual" training and number of rounds fired in practice the average trooper, sailor, airman, ect gets, its really not very much. My kids had more rounds downrange by the time they were 6.

 

[.38 Special]

Comparatively, the 1911 is more difficult to field strip than a Glock.

Exactly.

 

[.38 Special]

This one is the one that gives me pause. Which step is the hard one?

Now, a P-08, that is a beast to get apart. Savage 1907 not a joy. P-38 could be easier as well.

Now, ok, a P-220 starts simple enough. You lock the slide back. Then spin the lever. And then, try to not launch the slide onto the floor. But, now, you have to pry the captive spring out, then wrestle the barrel out which absolutely want's to stay locked to the slide. SIG 365 not that much different, just smaller.

Ok, I will grant that you have to get the link lined up on reassembly of a 1911. But the rest? Once the spring tension is off, it's off.

Seems to me you've pretty much answered your own question.

Again, I'm not going to argue that the 1911 is only for "experts". And again, the 1911 is one of my favorite guns. But again, it just isn't as simple as either the new semi-autos or the old DA revolvers. I'm not completely sure why that's being argued about.

 

[Smaug]

I should not be surprised that firearms enthusiasts are getting so prickly about this, but I'm disappointed.

It may be hard, but try to look at this from the perspective of a new shooter.

On one hand, we have a gun (1911) whose design is now well over 100 years old. (not that it's bad!) It weighs more, holds half as much ammo, is harder to disassemble (compared to a modern design) and not always is reliable with common self defense ammo (hollow point) On the flip side, it can be very accurate if it is a more expensive model with a good trigger and People Who Know love them. A cir. 1944 GI-type model that won't feed hollow points and has hard-to-see sights can be had for around $450, or a nice one costs $700+.

On the other hand, we have a gun (Glock 21 gen 4) that weighs significantly less, has a lower bore axis for less snappy recoil, Its flush fitting magazine holds 13 rounds instead of 7. It breaks down for cleaning with no tools in less than half the time into fewer pieces, and will shoot any kind of self defense ammo reliably out of the box. Oh, and it costs $500. When you get good with it, you will ALMOST be able to have match grade accuracy.

Choosing the latter pistol doesn't make a person lazy. It's just that s/he has different priorities than gun nuts.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

A cir. 1944 GI-type model that won't feed hollow points and has hard-to-see sights can be had for around $450, or a nice one costs $700+.

Where are you getting 1944 GI models for $450-$700? Uh, asking for a friend. No need to say anything, just PM me.

 

[trackskippy]

Where are you getting 1944 GI models for $450-$700? Uh, asking for a friend. No need to say anything, just PM me.

I think hes referring to one of the current, cheaper clones.

One big issue with the 1911's is the "everybody and his brother makes one" thing going on, and they all seem to have their own idea as to what a 1911 is. And unfortunately, that has been very hit or miss too. Just because it "looks" like a 1911 of some sort, doesnt mean its the 1911 of myth and wonder.

In about 50 years or so now, Ive owned right around 40 1911's, and 10 or so of those were Colts and a couple of GI guns (and they all needed help too, if you wanted to shoot more than just hardball). Those two were the only ones I ever trusted to carry too. The rest, and most of those were well known names, were basically range toys that were often cussed at a lot.

Today, I still have three 1911's, two Colt Commanders, and a GM gun built with Colt parts on an Essex frame. One of the Colts and the Essex were both gone over by EGW back when they were still doing that work and all they did was give the guns a "reliability package", which allows the guns to shoot all types of ammo, without issue, and better sights. They did hard chrome the Commander, due to rust issues, and they did some work on the Essex's trigger too, as what came in the kit was really bad. Still, it feels like a typical 5-6 pound factory Colt trigger. The reliability package, and maybe the sights, are really all you usually need anyway, but that's just not as sexy as what seems to be the norm now.

If you have a 1911 that works like it should, they are great guns, albeit, a bit dated compared to other things these days, but still, nothing wrong with them if you're happy with it.

After about 25 years or so, I stopped carrying one back in the late 90's early 2000's, because even the Colts were getting a bit sketchy, and I was tired of dealing with dealing with them. I switched over to SIG's, and then on to Glocks. Both of which are great guns too.

The reason I settled on Glocks is really simply $$$, and because they seem to work without issue right from the box (the SIG's did too), and unlike the SIG's, they are a good bit cheaper and more readily available, as are their accessories. I just get more for my money. If I lose one for whatever reason, its no big deal, Im not out a lot of money, and I have another just like it in the safe as a backup.

 

[tarosean]

If you have a 1911 that works like it should, they are great guns, albeit, a bit dated compared to other things these days, but still, nothing wrong with them if you're happy with it.

Yep so old and outdated that they cannot keep up with the youngsters.

 

[trackskippy]

Good to go! Just dont use that mag.

 

[CapnMac]

What kind of P220's did you have?

Both kinds, US & West German.

 

[trackskippy]

I had both as well, as well as a number of other P series SIG's. Never had any issues or difficulty taking them apart, or putting them back together.

 

[Old Dog]

I had to qualify quarterly with the local USN base security forces (whose OIC was another LT and a friend of mine) and I also had to qualify quarterly with DOJ (USBP was part of INS/DOJ back then), so qualifications on two different courses, 8 times a year. I got plenty of training and practice on the 1911 in the military, as did all of the Security Forces I qualified with. Funny thing was that the USBP Agents were carrying revolvers or switching over to semi-autos at the time, and many envied me being able to carry a 1911, which was not approved for the USBP.

San Diego? We used to shoot at the Border Patrol range at Brown Field down near I.B.. That range, I believe, became a "superfund site."

While I will agree that most striker fired pistols are simpler to field strip and reassemble, the 1911 platform is not difficult to field strip or reassemble. As with most military units, we would get bored and have competitions on who could field strip and reassemble their weapons the fastest.

We've talked before on the forums about doing this blind-folded. Good way to find out just how far a recoil-spring plug can fly.

 

[DR505]

San Diego? We used to shoot at the Border Patrol range at Brown Field down near I.B.. That range, I believe, became a "superfund site."

We've talked before on the forums about doing this blind-folded. Good way to find out just how far a recoil-spring plug can fly.

Though I was stationed at NAS Miramar for many years, this time I was out at NAF El Centro, a garden spot. I was with the El Centro Sector working the border down by Mexicali over to Yuma’s territory, and up to Palm Desert and Riverside. Lot of desert in that Sector.

 

[Slamfire]

This one is the one that gives me pause. Which step is the hard one?

Now, a P-08, that is a beast to get apart. Savage 1907 not a joy. P-38 could be easier as well.

Now, ok, a P-220 starts simple enough. You lock the slide back. Then spin the lever. And then, try to not launch the slide onto the floor. But, now, you have to pry the captive spring out, then wrestle the barrel out which absolutely want's to stay locked to the slide. SIG 365 not that much different, just smaller.

Ok, I will grant that you have to get the link lined up on reassembly of a 1911. But the rest? Once the spring tension is off, it's off.

I hate the recoil spring plug on a 1911. Have had them eject forward of the firing line when removing the slide from the frame. I forget why, something had gone wrong. When I clean a 1911, I get close to a cabinet on the floor, aim the muzzle at it, and turn that barrel bushing. That way, then the plug takes off, it only goes a couple of feet and if it hits me, I can find it even faster. I have had the things launch, hear them hit the roof, and then disappear into the unknown. That is why I always have spares, so I can put my 1911 back together. Eventually, during some archealogical dig of the junk in that room, I find that recoil spring plug. I have not found all the springs that have warped into alternate dimensions.

I had one fun episode with my Les Baer Wadcutter. The Wadcutter has a special firing pin. The pin shaft is very thin and sharp shouldered.




It is very hard to get that firing pin all the way down when inserting the slide stop, the shoulder sticks somewhere in the channel. And then wiggling it around and trying to get the slide stop over it, my firing pin ejected! I heard a click, like the sound of it hitting the roof. I looked for that firing pin for weeks. Tore up all the storage space, vacuumed, etc. Luckily Les Baer still stocks the things so I ordered a couple of spares, put one in the pistol, and got it running again.

Months later I look up at the metal cabinet door just over my cleaning location and noticed on one of the magnetic dishes on the cabinet, the missing firing pin. It landed on a super magnet and stayed put.

 

[Zerodefect]

Yep so old and outdated that they cannot keep up with the youngsters.
View attachment 1098940

The "2011's aren't for noobs" thread is over there. ->

 

[Varminterror]

Choosing the latter pistol doesn't make a person lazy. It's just that s/he has different priorities than gun nuts.

A lot of us gun-nuts have grown to realize we benefit when we pick our firearms based on objective performance rather than nostalgic whimsy.

 

[JTQ]

On the other hand, we have a gun (Glock 21 gen 4) ... Its flush fitting magazine

Glock makes a nice gun, but for clarity, there is no gun in the entire Glock line up that has a flush fitting magazine.

 

[Old Dog]

A lot of us gun-nuts have grown to realize we benefit when we pick our firearms based on objective performance rather than nostalgic whimsy.

Just to clarify, the implication is that those of us who "pick" the 1911 as a gun we carry and use a lot, some even for serious purposes, and maybe it's the pistol we shoot the most -- do so out of "nostalgic whimsy."

Got it.

What does that say then, about those that favor bolt-action rifles, or lever-action rifles -- which have remained mostly unchanged (with the exception of stock material, methods of bedding barrels, not as many tweaks perhaps as 1911s have seen, and magnified optics) since, oh, the 1890s or so?

 

[Varminterror]

What does that say then, about those that favor bolt-action rifles, or lever-action rifles -- which have remained mostly unchanged (with the exception of stock material, methods of bedding barrels, not as many tweaks perhaps as 1911s have seen, and magnified optics) since, oh, the 1890s or so?

Bolt guns - see the text you quoted about objective performance.

Leverguns - yes. Nostalgic whimsy.

 

[12Bravo20]

None of it is false. You changed the wording to suit your rhetoric. For example, I said a 1911 "is harder to field strip than it needs to be" and you changed it to "...is not all that hard to field strip and then reassemble".

I will correct you on that. NO I did not change the wording to fit "my rhetoric". I stated facts based on years of personal experience in using a 1911 and training others to use the 1911. There was absolutely no opinions stated in my last post that you quoted. It was all based on experience,

Agree to disagree and move on.

 

[Old Dog]

Bolt guns - see the text you quoted about objective performance.

Leverguns - yes. Nostalgic whimsy.

Missed the .30-30 thread, eh?

Objective performance. This is the internet. Everything is subjective. Popular topics now, especially elsewhere, are how AR -- and other platform -- semi-autos are superior for hunting than bolt-actions.

And maybe even for PRS.

And I thought we were talking about the 1911 being an "expert's pistol," not whether or not it was capable of high performance. Of which, some of us still believe, it is.

Performance with mechanical devices, to include firearms, is most often in hands of the end-user.

 

[.38 Special]

For whatever it is worth, when I see a man with a polymer semiautomatic on his hip I just figure "There is a man with a gun". When I see a man with a cocked and locked 1911 on his hip, I think "There is a gun man".

 

[Varminterror]

Popular topics now, especially elsewhere, are how AR -- and other platform -- semi-autos are superior for hunting than bolt-actions.

Lots of folks have lots of agendas. What can be used for something doesn’t imply superiority, and only a fool would try to promote such here as a flimsy strawman.

And maybe [semi-autos are superior] even for PRS.

Ain’t that cute… Ridiculously incorrect, but it’s cute…