1911 Colt .45 question.

[ironglow]

OK; not being a handgun aficionado, I have a question concerning the legendary 1911 model..  Let me frame it first..

  To my knowledge, there were 4 great designs that came about during the first half of the 20th century.
  They include Luger, the Walther P38, the Browning Hi Power and the Colt 1911.

  All except the Browning, has been chambered for the .45 APC, and since the Hi Power is now chambered in the .40,
  it could obviously handle the .45..

   Question...  So why does the 1911 continue to be so popular, produced by so many makers and seem to be first
   choice over the other models mentioned?

[Dee]

Search me? I've built dozens of them over the years for folks, and done accuracy, and reliability tunes for others. They can be finicky regarding magazines, ammo, grip technique, and various other little glitches. They're hazardous to the safety of the untrained, and possibly lead all others in accidental discharge.

To the well trained, and competent, a well tuned 1911 is formidable. But today there are far more reliable, accurate, and safer pistols to choose from.

I think that many buy them for the "historical mystic" they seem to possess. It's considered "a mans' gun", by many.
Why does anybody want a pitbull, when there are far more predictable dog breeds out there?

[Mule 11]

Because “it’s not the breed butt how it is raised”, and “ya know they were actually bred as baby sitters for small children”

Right up until the point they eat them or their or neighbors pets or kids.

[gene_225]

My dad always said the 1911 was the best of the military handguns because you could loose it in a muddy river, and when you found it again all you needed to do is slosh it around to clean out the mud and start shooting again.

[Dixie-Dude]

The 1911 was chambered mostly in the 45 acp.  All others were chambered in the 9mm.  The 45 made a bigger hole and usually knocked an enemy down with one shot.  Thus the popularity over the last 100 years.  Today 9mm can be chambered in stronger more penetrating bullets with +p performance.  Also a 9mm can carry 12-18 rounds while the 45 can only handle 8 rounds.  Most military and police are trained to double tap a 9mm, or shoot 2 rounds at a perpetrator.  You still have more rounds. 

The US obtained the Philippines from Spain in 1898.  The 38 specials they were using would not stop the Mora tribesmen when they attacked.  They could be shot and still keep coming.  So, John Moses Browning invented the 45 acp based on the 45 long colt but shorter to fit in his newly designed 1911 pistol.  The 45 Colt revolvers could knock down the Mora tribesmen, but being single action and slower to reload than the 38 special double action swing out cylinders.  The 1911 at that time solved the quick reloading with magazines and gave enough knock down power to stop the Moras.  Oh, and 9mm Lugers wouldn't do it either at their power was on par with the 38 special.   

[ironglow]

  Thanks for the informative replies, Guys.  My introduction to handguns was at 18 when I went into the army in 1955.

  I have to admit, I wasn't very impressed with it!  First off, I was not familiar with handguns, but more importantly,
   the 1911s we were using, were WW2 veterans. More likely, that contributed to disappointing scores at the range.

  Then, the sights were little more than bumps on the slide. SOP in our tanks then, was M1 or M2 Carbine,  M3 "grease gun" and Colt .45..3 weapons for each man.

  As a young, 'stomping tanker', I never expected to be 'smoked out' of my tank..but, I decided if I ever were, I would carry the carbine for later use, 9leave the tank firing the grease gun...and throw the Colt at the nearest enemy...
 
   While overseas, I had opportunity to try all 4 above mentioned handguns, and was most impressed with the Walther P38 !  .%...Probably just me though, since it seemed to fit my hand and eye so well.

[Dee]

  Thanks for the informative replies, Guys.  My introduction to handguns was at 18 when I went into the army in 1955.

  I have to admit, I wasn't very impressed with it!  First off, I was not familiar with handguns, but more importantly,
   the 1911s we were using, were WW2 veterans. More likely, that contributed to disappointing scores at the range.

  Then, the sights were little more than bumps on the slide. SOP in our tanks then, was M1 or M2 Carbine,  M3 "grease gun" and Colt .45..3 weapons for each man.



  As a young, 'stomping tanker', I never expected to be 'smoked out' of my tank..but, I decided if I ever were, I would carry the carbine for later use, 9leave the tank firing the grease gun...and throw the Colt at the nearest enemy...
 
   While overseas, I had opportunity to try all 4 above mentioned handguns, and was most impressed with the Walther P38 !  .%...Probably just me though, since it seemed to fit my hand and eye so well.

P38 was a reliable pistol, but all military ammo was ball ammo, including the 45acp. WWII 1911s were purposely sloppy fitted hopefully for better reliability. The old man that taught me the art of tuning a 1911 was a WWII armored specifically for the 1911. He taught me how to quickly diagnose a problem when working on a 1911, and was an amazing pistol smith.

The real advantage of the 45acp was magazine capacity as "knock down power" in pistols, rifles and  shotguns is a myth. 
On the other hand, if you hit somebody with a Ford, or Chevy, it will knock them down.

[Bob Riebe]

My gunsmith school teacher was a former armorer for the FBI, and had his own shop for awhile.

He said the best thing about the 1911 or those based off of it , Hi-Power , Sig Sauer pistols is they are in comparison to most others, easy/ier to work on.
When they had some Glocks, now this was twenty years ago, he if a Glock broke, getting parts was near impossible, and it was you sent the gun to Glock and they would send back a new gun.

We took apart Glocks and there is/was a composit piece of which a small arm would snap; that was the most common problem.
The early Ruger semi-auto 45 were a bitch to work on due to a spring in the system, instructor said it was cheaper to buy a new gun than fix one.

[Lloyd Smale]

I agree with everything but accuracy. After all that time its still the most used competitive semi auto handgun when accuracy counts. Self defense? I dont use one for carry much anymore but a good proven reliable one is a very lethal unit. Most gun fights are over in one or two rounds and if I knew it was going to happen id much rather mine be 45 then 9. But like deed said you have to be well trained and practice regularly. I just use mine enough anymore to be on top of my game. 

Search me? I've built dozens of them over the years for folks, and done accuracy, and reliability tunes for others. They can be finicky regarding magazines, ammo, grip technique, and various other little glitches. They're hazardous to the safety of the untrained, and possibly lead all others in accidental discharge.

To the well trained, and competent, a well tuned 1911 is formidable. But today there are far more reliable, accurate, and safer pistols to choose from.

I think that many buy them for the "historical mystic" they seem to possess. It's considered "a mans' gun", by many.
Why does anybody want a pitbull, when there are far more predictable dog breeds out there?

[ironglow]

  Thanks for the informative replies, Guys.  My introduction to handguns was at 18 when I went into the army in 1955.

  I have to admit, I wasn't very impressed with it!  First off, I was not familiar with handguns, but more importantly,
   the 1911s we were using, were WW2 veterans. More likely, that contributed to disappointing scores at the range.

  Then, the sights were little more than bumps on the slide. SOP in our tanks then, was M1 or M2 Carbine,  M3 "grease gun" and Colt .45..3 weapons for each man.



  As a young, 'stomping tanker', I never expected to be 'smoked out' of my tank..but, I decided if I ever were, I would carry the carbine for later use, 9leave the tank firing the grease gun...and throw the Colt at the nearest enemy...
 
   While overseas, I had opportunity to try all 4 above mentioned handguns, and was most impressed with the Walther P38 !  .%...Probably just me though, since it seemed to fit my hand and eye so well.

P38 was a reliable pistol, but all military ammo was ball ammo, including the 45acp. WWII 1911s were purposely sloppy fitted hopefully for better reliability. The old man that taught me the art of tuning a 1911 was a WWII armored specifically for the 1911. He taught me how to quickly diagnose a problem when working on a 1911, and was an amazing pistol smith.

The real advantage of the 45acp was magazine capacity as "knock down power" in pistols, rifles and  shotguns is a myth. 
On the other hand, if you hit somebody with a Ford, or Chevy, it will knock them down.

   That old man who shared his skills with the 1911, gave you a very nice gift.. A great skill to acquire..

[gene_225]

P38 was a reliable pistol, but all military ammo was ball ammo, including the 45acp. WWII 1911s were purposely sloppy fitted hopefully for better reliability. The old man that taught me the art of tuning a 1911 was a WWII armored specifically for the 1911. He taught me how to quickly diagnose a problem when working on a 1911, and was an amazing pistol smith.

The real advantage of the 45acp was magazine capacity as "knock down power" in pistols, rifles and  shotguns is a myth. 
On the other hand, if you hit somebody with a Ford, or Chevy, it will knock them down.

Even the WWI 1911s were sloppy, at least the one we had was. Our 1911 was made in 1917.

[darkgael]

pistols that are more accurate? please name a few. 
PRECISION shooting aka Bullseye is dominated by the 1911. Nothing else comes close.

[Lloyd Smale]

other then maybe a smith 52 or 952 or one of those high dollar sig comp guns. Even those are only equal. I shot ppc and wanted a semi auto 9 to compete with. First one was a 952 i didnt have much experience with accurate 9s and really though i had something. Then a guy i know asked if i had any ar15s id trade or sell. Asked him what he had and he said a 1911 sti trojan in 9mm. I figured what the hell. He was willing to take an AR that wasnt worth close to what that sti cost so i did the trade. That sti made the 952 seem like a glock. Most accurate handgun ive ever owned at 25 yards. Quit ppc shooting and got talked out of it. Dont even remember what I got in trade so it must not have been great. Ive had a couple high dollar 1911s. One a les baer and one wilson but this sti out shot both of those.

pistols that are more accurate? please name a few. 
PRECISION shooting aka Bullseye is dominated by the 1911. Nothing else comes close.

[Dee]

Years ago when you could buy the old military surplus 10911s cheap, I would tearoom down, peen the receiver rails, squeeze the slide a little, and coat both with a little valve grinding compound. Put the receiver in a padded vice, and tap the slide on. After working it back and forth ir was a perfect fit. If I didn't have a new barrel, I'd smack the old barrel bushing with a hammer, put a new link on the barrel, throat the barrel so it would feed wadcutters, replace the slide spring, and do a trigger job.
All that tightened the pistol up, and it would shoot closer than most were capable of holding it.

New sights were a pretty easy chore depending on what they wanted.

The pistols had to be tuned, for reliability after all that, but the point is "tolerances" were tighter, and accuracy is dependent on the pistol going into battery and cycling the same everytime.

I've seen stock Model 10 Smiths out shoot a Gold Cup National Match.

The single action in the 1911 when done right, combined with close tolerances, and a good tune are why they a good match pistol. If a match pistol is what you want.

[ironglow]

  Sounds like you have the 1911 Colt .45 "aced" Dee !  It sure sounds like that would do much to "tighten" the action.
 
  In blacksmithing and bladesmithing, we often use just that manner of "gaining" material to work with.  We don't actually gain..but just re-arrange it !

  Generally speaking, some military weapons are left with sloppy tolerances, and That is for two reasons,

 1) They are far cheaper to produce, and thus easier to sell in numbers, to terrorists and 'irregulars' of the world.

 2) Since they are going to users who are inclined to neglect proper maintenance, they still function when dirty.

      So we see some AK owners boasting how their AK can get much dirtier than an AR and "keep on ticking".

  This is probably true..but the cost of that 'advantage', as with the stock 1911....is ACCURACY.. 

   Probably why we see few AKs in the hands of coyote and varmint hunters..
    On the other hand, the AK may be just the thing for close in hog hunting. ..But then I have no experience hog
   hunting. 
      ...Not that I haven't wanted to..

  OK Ak owners..go ahead and throw your brickbats !     

[Lloyd Smale]

good point. IF im going into a gun fight reliability is a hell of alot more important then accuracy. Shooting a ppc match if you gun chokes you just pay your 10  bucks and shoot again. When the first springfields hit the market they were about what dee talked about. Tightened up guns but that werent tuned. I have 4 of them and swore off springfields forever. But ive found they have improved and are every bit as good as a colt or kimber today. But even today if you want one inch 50 yards groups in a battle reliable 1911 your talking guns like my wilson that will easily set you back over 3k today. You might get lucky and find one for a grand but you then should go to the store and buy lottery tickets. I do like my kimbers but have them both ways. Tight target guns and looser combat guns. For a 1911 to sit in my holster for carry it needs to pass my test. That is 500 rounds of the ammo im going to carry in it with one cleaning inbetween. Some will say to shoot it 500 rounds dirty but how often do you stick a gun in your holster and head outside where you might have to protect your family with a gun shot 500 times without cleaning.. Ive done those 1000 round torture tests on glocks and m&ps but im not beating up my 1200 dollar kimber let alone my wilson. by the time i got into 1911s they were to expensive to beat on slides or bushings. Heck id love to have an old loose as a goose real government colt. Never owned one. Only colts ive owned were a gold cup match and trophy. Good guns but not great guns.

Years ago when you could buy the old military surplus 10911s cheap, I would tearoom down, peen the receiver rails, squeeze the slide a little, and coat both with a little valve grinding compound. Put the receiver in a padded vice, and tap the slide on. After working it back and forth ir was a perfect fit. If I didn't have a new barrel, I'd smack the old barrel bushing with a hammer, put a new link on the barrel, throat the barrel so it would feed wadcutters, replace the slide spring, and do a trigger job.
All that tightened the pistol up, and it would shoot closer than most were capable of holding it.

New sights were a pretty easy chore depending on what they wanted.

The pistols had to be tuned, for reliability after all that, but the point is "tolerances" were tighter, and accuracy is dependent on the pistol going into battery and cycling the same everytime.

I've seen stock Model 10 Smiths out shoot a Gold Cup National Match.

The single action in the 1911 when done right, combined with close tolerances, and a good tune are why they a good match pistol. If a match pistol is what you want.

[Dee]

I've had a couple of Kimber TLEIIs. Nice pistols, both needed some tuning.
I could carry any 1911 setup I could dream up, but in 1978 a lightweight commander I built showed me in real time what a hot 200 grain 45acp couldn't do.
The pistol performed flawlessly. The round? Not so much.

I went back to serious power, and near 100% reliability.

[Lloyd Smale]

I went back to serious power, and near 100% reliability

Glock 22?? The gun im grabbing if someone comes for me or my family to fight my way to a long gun.

[Dee]

I went back to serious power, and near 100% reliability

Glock 22?? The gun im grabbing if someone comes for me or my family to fight my way to a long gun.

If I ever went back to an automatic it "might be" a Glock 23, or a Sig in 40. More likely a Sig.

[Lloyd Smale]

i like the old steel sigs. Not to crazy about the new polymer ones. Problem with those old sigs is they were an expensive gun. More then a glock and especially an m&p and both of those run every bit as good as the sig. I will say the sigs ive owned and shot did a bit better in accuracy but none of them are guns your going to win any accuracy type competition.  I like the 19/23 sized guns too but they dont conceal much better then the full sized guns and the full sized guns just feel better in the hand to me and hold a couple more rounds. In a true shtf situation i see no advantage to the 23 over a 22. That said ill die with my 19 and 23 still in this house.  Only glock i have two of is the 22. Like i said i think youd be hard pressed to dream up a better battle pistol if concealment isnt in the criteria. If i have to hide it then id grab either my 26 27 or 30 and probably the 27. For civilian every day carry none of those big guns are needed. A shield, glock 43, hellcat or any small 9 will do. I shoot more 9s then anything hands down. I may be wrong and lots of smarter people then me say so but if i was going somewhere that i was actually nervous about id take my 45 shield over any 9. Or a shield 40 but my son in law snagged my shield 40 from me a few years back. The 40 being shelved by our police was a big mistake if you ask me. Just part of the woke sissy upbringing of this generation. If you cant handle the recoil of a 40 then you should be a cop. Whats going to happen if someone grabs you and throws you to the ground and you have to actually use some muscle. A 44 mag kicks. A 40 just jumps a little.

[Dee]

I'm not chasing bad guys anymore, so a "battle pistol" ain't on my purchase list. My daily walkin around carry is bigger, and heavier, than a Glock 22, and it only holds 6 rounds. But I know through  experience it works. I don't think about double taps, or spray and pray, or getting caught in a bad neighborhood, cause I don't go to bad neighborhoods.

The way things are getting steadily worse down here in Texas, I turn the Eotech on before I walk out the door.

I always wear my EDC, but don't try to take my pickup, and hope I'm not home if you try to break into my house. I've got a treatment for that to.

[Lloyd Smale]

i think if i lived where you do there would be a 22 on my hip right out in the open everywhere i went. Good chance of multiple targets where you are. Up here the chance that youd even need a gun within a 150 miles of my house are about as good as getting hit the same day twice by lightning in the same exact spot. Maybe home invasion with all this meth crap but not much of a chance in public so i dont have qualms about carrying a small 9 or even a 380 at times. To me its enough to get me back to the truck or jeep where theres a carbine.

[darkgael]

Years ago when you could buy the old military surplus 10911s cheap, I would tearoom down, peen the receiver rails, squeeze the slide a little, and coat both with a little valve grinding compound. Put the receiver in a padded vice, and tap the slide on. After working it back and forth ir was a perfect fit. If I didn't have a new barrel, I'd smack the old barrel bushing with a hammer, put a new link on the barrel, throat the barrel so it would feed wadcutters, replace the slide spring, and do a trigger job.
All that tightened the pistol up, and it would shoot closer than most were capable of holding it.

New sights were a pretty easy chore depending on what they wanted.

The pistols had to be tuned, for reliability after all that, but the point is "tolerances" were tighter, and accuracy is dependent on the pistol going into battery and cycling the same everytime.

I've seen stock Model 10 Smiths out shoot a Gold Cup National Match.

The single action in the 1911 when done right, combined with close tolerances, and a good tune are why they a good match pistol. If a match pistol is what you want.

I much enjoyed that post. I wish that I knew more about the “smacking” the old barrel bushing part.
Model 10 Smiths outshoot a Gold Cup. OK. I am guessing that has more to do with the shooter than the gun.

[Dee]

Years ago when you could buy the old military surplus 10911s cheap, I would tearoom down, peen the receiver rails, squeeze the slide a little, and coat both with a little valve grinding compound. Put the receiver in a padded vice, and tap the slide on. After working it back and forth ir was a perfect fit. If I didn't have a new barrel, I'd smack the old barrel bushing with a hammer, put a new link on the barrel, throat the barrel so it would feed wadcutters, replace the slide spring, and do a trigger job.
All that tightened the pistol up, and it would shoot closer than most were capable of holding it.

New sights were a pretty easy chore depending on what they wanted.

The pistols had to be tuned, for reliability after all that, but the point is "tolerances" were tighter, and accuracy is dependent on the pistol going into battery and cycling the same everytime.

I've seen stock Model 10 Smiths out shoot a Gold Cup National Match.

The single action in the 1911 when done right, combined with close tolerances, and a good tune are why they a good match pistol. If a match pistol is what you want.

I much enjoyed that post. I wish that I knew more about the “smacking” the old barrel bushing part.
Model 10 Smiths outshoot a Gold Cup. OK. I am guessing that has more to do with the shooter than the gun.

You put a very slight warp in the barrel bushing so that the barrel cannot wallow around in the perfectly round, but lose fitting bushing.

Like I said, accuracy is getting the 1911 to go back into battery exactly the same every time. Consistency!

No I didn't mean dependence on the  shooter. Both the Model 10, and the Gold Cup in a  Ransom Rest.

[darkgael]

“ No I didn't mean dependence on the  shooter. Both the Model 10, and the Gold Cup in a  Ransom Rest.”
Understood, thanks. Did you ever have the opportunity to check the M.10 against a M.52 or a Sig P210?
Just curious. I have a M.10. I have not shot either of the other two, only seen them used. They have a good reputation.

[Dee]

No, but the Model 10 has been used for target shooting for years. I've never been into shooting targets.

[Bob Riebe]

In a revolver , free-bore, cylinder gap and forcing cone are the main concerns affecting accuracy; in a semi-auto pistol there is no free bore but as Dee said how the cartridge is affected and aligns after the slide and links finish their job is what matters most.

Because of the jar the slide imparts on the mechanics of the firearm, there more things can go wrong with a semi-auto pistol than a revolver.
For a revolver to be accurate is less of a problem.

[gypsyman]

For me it was what fit my hand the best. Short fingers, the 1911 always felt better, a more confident grip. A friend of mine let me shoot his glock 17 when they first came out, and it just didn't feel right. Like holding the fat end of a baseball bat. When Smith came out with the M&P with the adjustable backstrap, was the first hi-cap pistol that felt comfortable. Still got my 1911, shot a lot of pin matchs 40+ years ago, never get rid of it.