Why the 1911 sucks.

[Maryland_Shooter]

Opinions and assholes, everybody has one.

And some stink worse than others.

It’s a 100-year old design. It needs tools to disassemble. It has unreliable magazines. It is finicky about ammo. And, as a single-action pistol, it is unsafe for 95% of its users to carry.

That statement is just full of epic fail.

If you have a thumb, you can take apart a 1911.
I have several 1911s and they all eat everything I feed them.
Unsafe for 95% of users to carry?

Where does the 95% figure come from? I read that 50% of statistics are made up.

Listen: you don't like the 1911 platform, don't buy one; but don't make up bullshit to knock the design.

To each their own. For instance, I don't own a Glock. I think as far as a firearm, they are as dull as dishwater. Holding one, looking at one or shooting one doesn't excite me - not even a little. It has no soul, no craftsmanship . . .

OK, so I hope you feel better getting that off your chest, but

[Valorius]

And since that article, the FBI adopted the GLOCK as their issue sidearm. I wonder how that would play out if an FBI agent had an accidental shooting.


Another thing about the article that was disturbing is the number of accidental discharges. Even pre GLOCK, they mention 13 with the revolvers... in one year!

What do you mean "if?" FBI agents do have ND's, just like everyone else.

The main thing the article illustrated was that police firearms training in DC was woefully, woefully inadequate. I rather suspect that is still the case in most big city departments.

[Noah_Zark]

I spent 14 years in the USMC and USMCR as a 2111 (Small Arms Repairman) and worked on hundreds of 1911A1s and a few 1911s converted to 1911A1 configuration. I also used to shoot the 1911 in the National Pistol course (.22 LR, Any centerfire handgun, and the Government Service Pistol) in the late 60s and into the 80s. So WTF do I know?

More than the opinionated author of the comments quoted in the OP; my responses are in red text, below:

It’s a 100-year old design. True; but shovels are centuries-old in design and we still use them. "New" doesn't necessarily mean "better." The Hi-Point pistol is about 30-35 years old; does that make it 40 years "better" than a 1911? It needs tools to disassemble. NOT TRUE, except for the grip screws and mainspring housing pin.It has unreliable magazines. Only if cheap Asian-made knockoff mags are used. Stick with CMC, Wilson, Mecgar, etc, NO PROBLEM. I have a known bad no-name magazine that won't run in any 1911 I've tried, and I keep it as a known "no go" gauge. I could take that magazine and any of my reliable 1911s and create a You Toob video illustrating for all to see what a POS the 1911 is. But if I switch to CMC, Wilson, or Mecgar mags, that same 1911 will burn through the ammo like a hot knife through butter. It is finicky about ammo. I have five box-stock 1911s that feed FMJ and JHP without issue, using either CMC Shooting Stars or Wilson 47BsAnd, as a single-action pistol, it is unsafe for 95% of its users to carry. False. One of the safest pistols made; cocked and locked with the grip safety not depressed.

In my original complaint, I forgot to mention the issue with slide-stop failures, A function of low-cost parts subbed out to vendors with manufacturing processes not in control. We had few and far between slide stop failures in the Marines, in my experience. and the whole internal extractor/external extractor situation. Again, substandard components from incapable vendors in commercial guns are the main issue. That said, the 1911 IS sensitive to proper extractor tension and claw geometry. Very well known, as are the remedies, and ANYONE with any mechanical skill can adjust a 1911 internal extractor for reliable functionality. Either of which would be serious enough to kill any other design’s reputation in the shooting world. O-tay.

In response to some knee-jerk defenses of the 1911 from fanboys who drank too much John M. Browning Kool-Aid, who told me how all that I needed to do was buy a bunch of aftermarket parts and send the gun to a gunsmith, I added: Why does a reliable 1911 cost so much, and need so much gunsmithing? It doesn't, on both counts. This is the fault of the fanboys who read parroted bullshit in gun rags and on the Interwebz, not the fault of the 1911 design.

To be fair, I have some of the same complaints with the Walther PPK. Which is also a very old design, one which has been eclipsed by more modern designs which can do everything it does better.

I mean, is it unreasonable to expect an affordably-priced pistol for defense to reliably feed hollowpoints out of the box? What Smith&Wesson pistol of recent manufacture won’t feed hollowpoints? What about Glock? SiG? Beretta? (I know Kahrs need to have some rounds through them before they are reliable, but it says that right in the owners manual). The shooting public would not accept an unreliable gun of a more modern design. But for some reason, the 1911 gets a pass for all of its flaws. “Just use hardball” is not a valid defense of the 1911 design, nor is it a valid strategy for selecting ammunition to defend yourself. As above, I have five box-stock 1911s that feed FMJ and JHP without issue, using either CMC Shooting Stars or Wilson 47Bs; they are: Colt Series 80 Govt Model, 45 ACP; Norinco Model of 1911A1, 45 ACP; Colt Series 70 Govt Model, 45 ACP; RIA 5" Govt Model, 45 ACP; RIA 5" Govt Model, 9mm.

And God help anyone who buys a used 1911. Everyone and their brother seems to think they are qualified to take a Dremel to their 1911. Guys who can’t change their own flat tire somehow have no reservations about playing doctor on their 1911. Personally, I feel the same about some owners and their ARs and AKs. That's an owner capability issue, not one of the design of the 1911, AR, or AK.Who knows what wacky “custom” parts have been put into the gun because someone read about it on the interweb tubes? Again, true of ANY used firearm, particularly those which lend themselves to modification, like 1911s, ARs, and AKs.

It was the best military sidearm of its day, and for a long time afterward. I do not dispute that. But its time has long passed. And a military sidearm is not the same thing as a handgun for personal defense. Why not?

Leave aside the lack of reliability with hollowpoints, and the other problems. The 1911 is too big to conceal. And the smaller versions are less reliable due to the shorter slide-travel and a tendency to limp-wrist the gun. The Commander and Officers style 1911s are reliable when properly set up. Limp-wristing is operator error, not a design issue of the firearm being held.

Some people protest by saying that the 1911 is the best gun for defense, because the most “realistic” shooting sports are heavily populated with 1911 users. And everyone knows that you should train like you fight, so that you will fight like you train, right? Well, that would be a more convincing argument if those “realistic” shooting sports didn’t have intricate rules that somehow disqualify most non-1911 designs. Purely by coincidence, right? Sure, they come up with semi-plausible rationales for some of those rules, but there is no way to disguise the overall bias towards the 1911. The intricate rules alluded to are the evolutionary result of the 1911 having been the government service pistol from 1911 to the late 1980s. The same can be said of the M1 Rifle -- back in the 1960s, you could not shoot the National Match without using an M1903, M1903A3 or M1 Rifle. The 1911 simply had a 75 year head start and legacy. Those "intricate rules" do not exist to accommodate the 1911 because it is substandard.

I don’t hate 1911 fans. I merely pity them, because they are victims of marketing hype and groupthink, the lemmings of the gun world. And some people are inexperienced victims of bullshit that's been parroted for decades in the gun rags and now the Interwebz. And if someone sinks thousands of dollars into a 1911 (and isn’t using it to compete for money), well they are just gullible. Like the kind of people who pay money for tapwater in a bottle.

So what if Jeff Cooper liked the only handgun in use when he was in the military? It’s not like he had a choice of other handguns to use. And, on a related note, Jeff Cooper has a reputation that exceeds his accomplishments. The best information that I can find shows that he spent the battle of Guadalcanal as the training officer on Gen. Vandegrift’s staff. Not leading a platoon. Not on the line, pulling a trigger. And his coy evasions when asked about his real-world experience with gunfighting are revealing, if one cares to view them objectively. (If you have documentation about Cooper’s real-world experience, please drop me a line. I am happy to revise my opinion.) I have no doubt that he was qualified to teach people how to shoot on a range. Beyond that, a grain of salt is required. I prefer to get my advice on defense & gunfighting from men who have actually been there & done that; Massad Ayoob, Jim Cirillo, etc. Attack the late Colonel Cooper all you want; my interest and preference in the 1911 platform has everything to do with my own 40+ years of experience with 1911s, and not the opinionated writings of a deceased gun writer. Other gun writer contemporaries of Col Cooper liked the 1911, too, and you're not attacking them.

In closing, if the 1911 is such an outdated, substandard, incapable design, then why do so many domestic and foreign manufacturers go to the expense of tooling up and cranking them out by the thousands? Didn't get the memo, or have the benefit of the quoted individual's opinion in the original post?

Noah

[Pvandunk]

Neat read. So as usual Opinion has become Fact . Noah_Zark i could not agree with you more . It is the Right of every man, woman and child to have a opinion i prefer to base my opinions on Fact and first hand Knowledge.



To OP:
You know you are allowed to dislike them all you want i know plenty of ppl that dislike them. And there are many other options out there .