Is The 1911 Dead?
BY Herschel Smith
8 years, 3 months ago
Back to the second portion my original point: What constitutes an effective defensive handgun? A firearm designed for self-defense (either military, law enforcement or civilian) needs to meet a minimum of four criteria to be considered effective:
- Function reliability even without lubrication or regular maintenance
- Able to consistently hit a 6-inch target within self-defense range (typically within 25 feet)
- Fire a round proven to reliably stop an attacker with reasonable shot placement
- Carry at least five rounds of ammo and be easily reloadable
The 1911 barely meets the first criteria. Not because the design isn’t capable – I’ve seen 1911s that rattle like an old toolbox that run like a scalded dog – but because its magazines can be a total crap shoot. The overwhelming majority of 1911s that suffer from reliability issues can be traced back to faulty magazines.
Shooters should stick with new-production magazines from companies with solid reputations like Chip McCormick Customs. These guys have been working on, running and building 1911 magazines for 3 decades. So I called the owner, Chip, and asked him about the importance of magazines.
“Magazines lie at the heart of (the M1911’s) reliability,” Chip explained. “Browning never intended 1911 magazines to be extended, or be run as hard as competitors tend to these days.”
[ … ]
Because the 1911 meets or exceeds all the aforementioned criteria, it’s not only a solid choice for serious self-defense use, but also on par with more modern designs, right?
Yes and no.
[ … ]
The 1911’s design could certainly benefit from higher magazine capacity, like something on par with the Springfield XDm in .45 ACP or the Glock 21 in the same caliber. Higher capacity frames like those from Infinity and STI exist, but are vastly more expensive than standard capacity 1911s. But it’s safe to say, as the 1911 continues to evolve, it’s far from obsolete.
No, the 1911 couldn’t benefit from a lot more rounds in the magazine if that means giving up the single stack design. And as for what Chip McCormick said, while I have been intending on purchasing some of his higher capacity magazines for the 1911 (I have not yet), the ones I have work just fine, and I have never had a FTF or FTE with my 1911. Not even once. I don’t know what they’re talking about.
I’ve said it before, but I like the grip angle (11 degrees), the slim single stack design (and resulting narrow frame profile), and the push of the .45 compared to the snap of the 9 mm. What’s works best for you is the best choice for you. What doesn’t is not. There is also an article at Cheaper Than Dirt entitled Every Man’s Defensive Caliber – The 9 mm.
The only legitimate point the author makes, in my opinion, is that the 9 mm is cheaper than the .45. True that. But you get what you pay for. The 9 mm isn’t every man’s defensive round if every man doesn’t like it and use it. I don’t use 9 mm. I use .45 because I like it. If you use 9 mm, do so because you like it and shoot it well, not because somebody said something on the internet about it.
These debates are stupid, and anyway, why would someone feel that it’s necessary to talk someone else into liking something he doesn’t use well? The only time this debate becomes important is for something like an entire department that issues a standard service weapon. I guess in this case if you don’t like what they issue, you need to practice with it until you do or find another job.
Finally, I wonder what it would have been like for John Basilone if he used had the 9 mm instead of the .45? I wonder if perchance we would have been able to win at Guadalcanal if John hadn’t lost the battle for Henderson Field? Oh, wait. Nevermind.
On September 19, 2016 at 7:37 am, BobSykes said:
You might wish to read and comment on this,
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/alternate-look-handgun-stopping-power
The author studied reports of over 3,000 shootings, and he concluded that if deterrence only were the criterion that all calibers from the 22lr up were equally effective.
Of course, people wounded with 22s or 25s or 32s are still usually mobile, but the author says that unless the wounded person is drugged or extremely motivated they will tend to go away rather than continue the assault.
Your opinion is respected and desired.
On September 19, 2016 at 3:35 pm, Herschel Smith said:
What would be a good rule of thumb? Carry the most powerful cartridge that (a) can be concealed if that’s how you’re carrying, and (b) with which you are comfortable.
For instance, I have thought about getting a S&W air weight .22 magnum revolver for my wife. Small, concealable, powerful enough, not too intimidating, simple to operate.
What’s not to like?
On September 19, 2016 at 4:40 pm, Fred said:
“What’s works best for you is the best choice for you.”
Right. What’s the best weapon or, in this case caliber? It’s the one that you are comfortable with, understand, will train with and therefor carry, always. The best weapon is the one that you will carry, always.
I’ve had world class, high quality names that ran like crud and $400 dollar plastic that ran like butter. But, guns that run like crud don’t make me comfortable and I don’t care how “good” it is or what caliber it shoots.
On September 20, 2016 at 6:45 pm, chad said:
I own 2 1911s in 10mm. Colt Deltas. One Gold Cup, one leftovers but pretty. Neither is anywhere approaching dead. I carry the Gold Cup sometimes, but tend to favor the Glock 20 and 29. Having shot 10mm for 20 years it’s my caliber of choice. But I know I can rely on my Colts.