Marines looking at the 1911 again

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • OH IT'S KINO

    Southerner
    Feb 16, 2011
    1,662
    Ameritopia
    I have no doubt that a true GI Spec 1911 can go toe to toe with today's best modern pistols (any 1911 I mention in this post refers to true GI Spec or customized 1911’s with quality parts, NOT mass produced POS’s). However, I don't think it's as simple as Trbon8r's apparent (to me) platform that a 1911 is the end all, be all of handguns. And I think his assertion that 10 rounds vs 15 rounds in a combat pistol is a moot point is absurd. However, I do have to say that he definitely has more experience than I do with probably ALL types of handguns, and I definitely respect his and Clandestine’s opinions. BUT, you will never be able to convince me that 8, 9, or 10 rounds in a secondary firearm is just as good as 12, 13, 14, or 15. In battle, if I’m relying on ANY firearm, be it my primary or secondary, I want as many rounds as possible. Period.

    Also, sure, taking down and cleaning a 1911 isn't hard, but I can do it on my GLOCK a helluva lot faster. I think that would be true for 95% of gun owners, not to mention military who may not be as familiar with a firearm. You can't tell me the 1911 is the best in this area, either. Not as big of an issue to me as capacity, but still a factor.

    I think simply the fact that it doesn’t have as much capacity renders it less capable than a more modern, higher capacity gun. Just stating my opinion and, like I said, I can’t argue reliability with the more experienced gun owners. So I’m not trying to. But if you tell me you’d rather have a 1911 than a proven modern handgun with high capacity, then I say you are a fool. You can give me that “you should be able to hit your target” nonsense all you want, but if we both have 11 targets to hit, and we both hit each target on the first shot, guess what… you have to reload and I have 3 rounds to spare. I think it’s as simple as that.

    I don’t mean this to be argumentative or put down any gun or person. I like both 1911’s and modern handguns, polymer and not, and think it’s been proven that BOTH can be more reliable than anyone would need them to be. I also like Trbon8r and Clandestine, and respect their opinions and knowledge. I don't think reliability is the issue. I also don't think that a 1911 isn't "good" enough. I LOVE 1911's, and as a gun enthusiest, I think they're my favorite handgun overall. But for modern combat, I just don't think it's the best gun suited for the job. And I don't understand why that has to read "1911's suck and if you like them then you have a small penis."

    All that said, Chad, I would interested in your response to this question: Based on your previous post, you obviously believe that 1911’s are not handicapped verses any modern gun as far as reliability is concerned, but I know that you don’t carry one (don’t you carry and HK?). I’d be interested in hearing why? (For no other reason than I value your opinion.)
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,376
    Westminster USA
    Wonder why the Marine Corps does not seem overly concerned with capacity or maintenance as far as other pistols are concerned? They seem to have settled those 2 issues.
     

    clandestine

    AR-15 Savant
    Oct 13, 2008
    37,029
    Elkton, MD
    I have no doubt that a true GI Spec 1911 can go toe to toe with today's best modern pistols (any 1911 I mention in this post refers to true GI Spec or customized 1911’s with quality parts, NOT mass produced POS’s). However, I don't think it's as simple as Trbon8r's apparent (to me) platform that a 1911 is the end all, be all of handguns. And I think his assertion that 10 rounds vs 15 rounds in a combat pistol is a moot point is absurd. However, I do have to say that he definitely has more experience than I do with probably ALL types of handguns, and I definitely respect his and Clandestine’s opinions. BUT, you will never be able to convince me that 8, 9, or 10 rounds in a secondary firearm is just as good as 12, 13, 14, or 15. In battle, if I’m relying on ANY firearm, be it my primary or secondary, I want as many rounds as possible. Period.

    Also, sure, taking down and cleaning a 1911 isn't hard, but I can do it on my GLOCK a helluva lot faster. I think that would be true for 95% of gun owners, not to mention military who may not be as familiar with a firearm. You can't tell me the 1911 is the best in this area, either. Not as big of an issue to me as capacity, but still a factor.

    I think simply the fact that it doesn’t have as much capacity renders it less capable than a more modern, higher capacity gun. Just stating my opinion and, like I said, I can’t argue reliability with the more experienced gun owners. So I’m not trying to. But if you tell me you’d rather have a 1911 than a proven modern handgun with high capacity, then I say you are a fool. You can give me that “you should be able to hit your target” nonsense all you want, but if we both have 11 targets to hit, and we both hit each target on the first shot, guess what… you have to reload and I have 3 rounds to spare. I think it’s as simple as that.

    I don’t mean this to be argumentative or put down any gun or person. I like both 1911’s and modern handguns, polymer and not, and think it’s been proven that BOTH can be more reliable than anyone would need them to be. I also like Trbon8r and Clandestine, and respect their opinions and knowledge. I don't think reliability is the issue. I also don't think that a 1911 isn't "good" enough. I LOVE 1911's, and as a gun enthusiest, I think they're my favorite handgun overall. But for modern combat, I just don't think it's the best gun suited for the job. And I don't understand why that has to read "1911's suck and if you like them then you have a small penis."

    All that said, Chad, I would interested in your response to this question: Based on your previous post, you obviously believe that 1911’s are not handicapped verses any modern gun as far as reliability is concerned, but I know that you don’t carry one (don’t you carry and HK?). I’d be interested in hearing why? (For no other reason than I value your opinion.)

    The main reasons I carry a HK is not because its better than a 1911. I carry it because it has a slightly higher capacity and it suppresses easy. Truth be told if there was a True Milspec 1911 made today that I didnt have to change any parts on and came with a threaded barrel under 1500 I would carry it as well, and it would likely replace my preferred HK for daily carry.

    This is the main argumant Im trying to make. People make judgements about how unreliable Modern 1911's are because they are judging the platorm by the current junk being produced thats called a 1911, but is only one in looks and name. The quality isnt there unless you custom build one off a Colt or premium parts.

    I work on so many crap modern 1911's I just dont have time to build a nice one for myself, so I chose an HK.

    I can shoot my USP Tactical HK as good as most Les Baer 1911s can group, if it couldnt do this I wouldnt carry it. I refuse to own any handgun I can make accurate shots with. I dont like "combat" accuracy, I like 2" at 25 yards. If I ever need that precision its at my disposal, will I ever likely use it? Probably not, but its there is need be.
     

    Darkemp

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 18, 2009
    7,801
    Marylandistan
    jsonkimz said:
    All that said, Chad, I would interested in your response to this question: Based on your previous post, you obviously believe that 1911’s are not handicapped verses any modern gun as far as reliability is concerned, but I know that you don’t carry one (don’t you carry and HK?). I’d be interested in hearing why? (For no other reason than I value your opinion.)

    Just throwing my .02 in again...I have a variety of handguns in my collection, but the only one that sits loaded and ready at all times is a USP9. It does nothing special except it shoots every time and hits targets. If you haven't taken down and cleaned an H&K before you just don't know the level of quality and simplicity that lies within. I can't blame anyone for choosing them over any other brand.
     

    clandestine

    AR-15 Savant
    Oct 13, 2008
    37,029
    Elkton, MD
    WOW, .... you made the ignore list, check.

    Havt0.gif

    Truth hurts dosent it?

    Back at you!



    Now Im off to go pee on some Terrorists.
     
    Last edited:

    Indiana Jones

    Wolverine
    Mar 18, 2011
    19,480
    CCN
    Im as critical of modern 1911's as anyone can get but a true Milspec 1911 (Made with quality parts) will outlast any modern wondergun. Trbon8 is correct.

    You guys saying the modern polymer guns are better sound just like the fools who say guns like the ACR, SCAR, ect...........are better than the AR/M16 because they read some torture test in a magazine, on the internet or a friend of a friend who is a SEAL. :lol2:

    Yeah, when you compare your S.A. 1911 to a TRUE G.I. SPEC 1911 its definately NOT THE SAME THING.

    When you compare your Bushmaster M4 to a Colt MILSPEC M4 its NOT THE SAME THING.

    Quality of parts mean something, having a SPEC means something. Maintenance means something as well, so comparing a shot out Colt M4 that was abused by overcleaning to a NIB factory SCAR its not the same thing. Its not a tru test when you give a weapon low marks when the magazine is the failure point in a test. It means it time to adopt a better mag and leave the evolved gun alone.

    Im sure people will also will claim "Their M4" was a POS, well It may have been, using suspect mags, past poor maintenance and the slew of idiots using an unauthorized lube like Miltec will cause unintended function.

    I love how people who likely need a book or youtube video to put together their "Wonder" poly gun, or even a 1911 are "experts".

    See how well your favored SUV runs when you pour bleach in the gas tank. Oh, but dont complain when it dont run or say "Its Unreliable".

    A 1911 built to the Govt or better standards can meet or beat every modern polymer handgun out there when proper materials and quality are utilized. They will be as reliable if not more, and outlast any competitor in round count.

    If capacity is important then the 1911 does lose that battle, but it makes up for it with a long service record. The 1911 does also not suppress well either but that can be resolved with a kit (Taller sights, Recoil Assy, and Threaded Barrel/Bushing).

    There are examples of 1911's that have an excess of 500,000 rounds. I wouldnt bet money a Glock or HK would last that long, the frame rails would have broken off or worn so badly lockup would be effected.

    Easy on the bushmaster cracks jerkoff! Just kidding. You make good points. It seems you have to give to get with any gun and there's no one solution. Anyone who wants to gift me an Hk and mil spec 1911, I'll conduct proper tests and report back. Purely in the name of science of course.....

    Chad are you talking about a full size USP tactical .45? That's a big bitch! Rob (nitro600r) has one. How do you carry it cause you're not fat, im surprised it doesn't stick out.
     

    trbon8r

    Ultimate Member
    Thanks for the invite goneshootin, but we are going to do this test at Delmarva in front of the masses and put it on video, win, lose, or draw for old slab sides.

    This whole thing is a circular argument that has been done over and over. It is boring. That is why I propose a test. Is it scientific? No. Will it give some people a chance to get off the computer and put their gun to a test instead of just repeating what they read from Larry Vickers? Yes.

    Oh no, I made Carl the grounds keepers ignore list. :lol2: Honestly I'm disappointed it took this long. He effectively made my ignore list when he first showed up here and started with that tripe about how the Remington 700 is a dangerous and bad design subject to accidental discharge.
     

    clandestine

    AR-15 Savant
    Oct 13, 2008
    37,029
    Elkton, MD
    Thanks for the invite goneshootin, but we are going to do this test at Delmarva in front of the masses and put it on video, win, lose, or draw for old slab sides.

    This whole thing is a circular argument that has been done over and over. It is boring. That is why I propose a test. Is it scientific? No. Will it give some people a chance to put their gun to a test instead of just repeating what they read from Larry Vickers? Yes.

    Oh no, I made Schwabe's ignore list. :lol2: Honestly I'm disappointed it took this long. He effectively made my ignore list when he first showed up here and started with that tripe about how the Remington 700 is a dangerous and bad design subject to accidental discharge.


    Oh Schwabe is one of those experts? He saw a documantary on the 700 and that means it MUST be dangerous. :lol2:


    For those wondering, the ONLY flaw in the 700's Trigger is them allowing it to be adjustable by the end user. Adjustable means idiots adjust things they dont understand. Improper adjustments will cause the gun not to fire when the trigger is pulled, will cause it to fire when the safety is disengaged and will cause it to fire when the bolt handle is lifted when IMPROPERLY adjusted. ALso not locking the adjuster screws with nail polish or loctite will allow the adjustments to change which is BAD.

    Bad lubricants will also gum up the 700 Trigger Box as well. ALmost any weapon will malfunction when you let gummed up WD40 into the FCG, even the AK47 (Yes, I have seen it).:D
     

    clandestine

    AR-15 Savant
    Oct 13, 2008
    37,029
    Elkton, MD
    Easy on the bushmaster cracks jerkoff! Just kidding. You make good points. It seems you have to give to get with any gun and there's no one solution. Anyone who wants to gift me an Hk and mil spec 1911, I'll conduct proper tests and report back. Purely in the name of science of course.....

    Chad are you talking about a full size USP tactical .45? That's a big bitch! Rob (nitro600r) has one. How do you carry it cause you're not fat, im surprised it doesn't stick out.

    Yup, thats the one. I carry the HK USP Tactical .45 in a belt holster and 2 spare mags. When I carry it concealed you would never know it was there unless I exposed it. Ive been carrying it for about 8 years now and have never been spoted to my knowledge when concealing.

    Concealing isnt about the size of the gun, its about the quality of the holster and the gun belt your using.

    This one isnt mine, but you get the idea.
    thumbnail.aspx
     

    Indiana Jones

    Wolverine
    Mar 18, 2011
    19,480
    CCN
    Yup, thats the one. I carry the HK USP Tactical .45 in a belt holster and 2 spare mags. When I carry it concealed you would never know it was there unless I exposed it. Ive been carrying it for about 8 years now and have never been spoted to my knowledge when concealing.

    Concealing isnt about the size of the gun, its about the quality of the holster and the gun belt your using.

    This one isnt mine, but you get the idea.
    thumbnail.aspx

    I love those guns, we shoot his all the time. He's got a gemtech can for it. I'm gonna get one eventually but I have some other things in line first. He still hasn't ordered the raised night sights you told him about.
     

    Semper Noctem

    Desk Rabbit
    Aug 9, 2011
    4,029
    Fairfax, VA
    Yup, thats the one. I carry the HK USP Tactical .45 in a belt holster and 2 spare mags. When I carry it concealed you would never know it was there unless I exposed it. Ive been carrying it for about 8 years now and have never been spoted to my knowledge when concealing.

    Concealing isnt about the size of the gun, its about the quality of the holster and the gun belt your using.

    This one isnt mine, but you get the idea.
    thumbnail.aspx

    WANT!
     

    XxNitr0xX

    Tacticool
    Apr 11, 2011
    480
    My computer
    I love those guns, we shoot his all the time. He's got a gemtech can for it. I'm gonna get one eventually but I have some other things in line first. He still hasn't ordered the raised night sights you told him about.

    Mmmmhmmm. Chad and myself's aren't small, either ;) They don't have a crazy weight, though. I wish I could carry mine. One day. I forgot if Chad said Meprolite or Trijicon..or something else...

    6926076021_83b82abb6b_z.jpg


    Sent from my SGS2 via Tapatalk
     

    OH IT'S KINO

    Southerner
    Feb 16, 2011
    1,662
    Ameritopia
    The main reasons I carry a HK is not because its better than a 1911. I carry it because it has a slightly higher capacity and it suppresses easy. Truth be told if there was a True Milspec 1911 made today that I didnt have to change any parts on and came with a threaded barrel under 1500 I would carry it as well, and it would likely replace my preferred HK for daily carry.

    This is the main argumant Im trying to make. People make judgements about how unreliable Modern 1911's are because they are judging the platorm by the current junk being produced thats called a 1911, but is only one in looks and name. The quality isnt there unless you custom build one off a Colt or premium parts.

    I work on so many crap modern 1911's I just dont have time to build a nice one for myself, so I chose an HK.

    I can shoot my USP Tactical HK as good as most Les Baer 1911s can group, if it couldnt do this I wouldnt carry it. I refuse to own any handgun I can make accurate shots with. I dont like "combat" accuracy, I like 2" at 25 yards. If I ever need that precision its at my disposal, will I ever likely use it? Probably not, but its there is need be.

    Thanks, Chad. That's perfect and I agree 100%. My problem with this thread is that it was arguing that a true milspec 1911 was as good or better than an equally reliable high-capacity modern gun. I just don't think it's true and to argue otherwise is ignorant.

    For the record, if it came down to a scenario where I needed a handgun and I could have a choice between a true milspec 1911 and a modern gun with equal capacity, I would probably choose the 1911. There's no arguing that the design is brilliant to even be partially relevent 100 years later. But if you introduce even one additional round then my opinion changes.
     

    frozencesium

    BBQ Czar
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 5, 2008
    3,428
    Tampa, FL
    My $0.02:

    Those who think the 1911 is perfect for the modern military might as well say we should switch off the M4 and go back to the M1. The M1 is more powerful and (like the 1911) is a marvel of engineering.

    Look, the 1911 is a wonderful gun just like the M1 is a wonderful rifle. The world has changed, deal with it. You want to carry one for protection? Fine, nothing wrong with that. To say that it's the end all be all and nothing will ever be better is just dumb.

    Let me also say that the M9 has issues as well and I certainly would prefer a 1911 over a M9. The problem is there are much better pistols than both for the modern battlefield.

    If I had my way, I'd carry my XD-45 tactical, but that's me. I certainly won't say it's for everyone.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,704
    Messages
    7,249,041
    Members
    33,310
    Latest member
    Skarface

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom