Glocks and 1911s the most popular pistols in America

[IanS]

Just because they are the best selling pistols, and the most used in "competition" has totally nothing to do whether or not they are the best for another persons self defense needs.

Nothing.

Yes, I believe I tried to make that clear when I started this thread. Nor are they the piece of outmoded or cheap junk that some people want others to believe.


Let me be clear. Here's the Cliff Notes version of my original post:
a. 1911's and Glocks are the best selling guns in America among civilians and competition shooters.
b. They work well for a lot of people.
c. They are not necessarily the "Best" or "Perfection".


I'm hoping for less emotion about all this on all fronts. Period. At least for this thread. These are all inanimate objects folks. Its not a football team, favorite rock band or political pundit. Its entirely your fault if you choose to attribute some kind of stigma based on your narrow (sensitive) emotions. The object is utterly dumb to whatever good or bad feelings you may have about it.

Here's a novel concept:

Just because something either works for you or doesn't work for you doesn't mean others will have the same exact experience.

 

[mathman]

The problem is so many people base much of their own sense of self-esteem on the gun (or caliber) they choose

I think Silent Bob said it best (above).

The bottom line is that Glocks and 1911s work well for a lot of people. If there was another pistol that worked better for the majority of people - it would outsell Glocks and 1911s...you know, free market and all.

I really like my 1911 and my Glock...they are the only semi autos that I currently own. I am considering selling my 1911 only since I don't have a love affair with my handguns and I want to be really familiar with what I have...and since 1911s and Glocks are different in terms of operating, I think I'll probably ditch the 1911 in favor of the more reliable of the two. I am currently in a 'fewer platforms and fewer calibers is better' mode.

But that's just me.

 

[GojuBrian]

BTW, if you own a 1911 it simply MUST be in a .45!!!

Nah.... I don't care for glocks myself. I've shot the glock 17 and the glock 22 and they just don't fit me personally. If you want glocks, knock yourself out!

It's really not my concern to tell people what they should like or dislike. I will inform them of my personal preferences, but that's about it.

 

[jgcoastie]

BTW, if you own a 1911 it simply MUST be in a .45!!!

Or 10mm Auto... Think about the Colt Delta Elite...

 

[GojuBrian]

Yeah, at ammunition prices I could live with a 1911 in 9mm.

 

[Tamara]

BTW, if you own a 1911 it simply MUST be in a .45!!!

I've had 1911s in .38 Super and 10mm; I definitely prefer full-length cartridges that don't require a spacer in the rear of the mag.

That being said, it pains me to admit that my 9mm Para LTC has performed admirably.

 

[TMUSCLE1]

Was this thread posted in response to the other one entitled "what the 1911 did right that Glock got wrong" or something to that effect?

 

[trigger happy]

I thought rimfires would be by far and away more popular, notably Rugers and Browning Buckmarks

 

[jsimmons]

GojuBrian said:

Yeah, at ammunition prices I could live with a 1911 in 9mm.

If you want to practice with cheaper ammo, get a gun that uses cheaper ammo.

I have a 1911, but finding ammo locally is a royal pain in the anal pore. I've found exactly one store that always seems to have it in stock, and that store is a 17 mile drive.

I noticed that all of my local Wal-Marts have a huge stock of .40 ammo, but they are seriously inept at keeping enough 9mm in stock to last more than a couple of days at the very most. I wanted something lighter than the 1911 for daily carry, and because of the availability of the ammo, chose the XD40 Service model (I looked at Glock too, but the XD felt more comfortable for me). The only downside is that .40 costs almost as much as .45...

I'm in the process of ordering a 9mm barrel/recoil spring/extractor/magazine for the XD so I can practice with cheaper ammo. If I could find a used XD9 for sale at a reasonable price, I'd buy it, but buying the "conversion" parts costs a little more than half what I'd pay for a NIB XD9 Service.

 

[larryh1108]

I have a question about practicing with smaller caliber ammo on your daily carry or SD weapon. if you carry .40S&W and have a conversion to practice with 9mm ammo, aren't you throwing off your timing, aim and felt recoil? The .40S&W ammo has a definite kick over 9mm and for follow up shots and in shooting in general your gun handles totally differently. Does this help you or hurt you if the time comes when you need to use your gun?

 

[IanS]

Ideally one should practice with the same caliber as what you actually use for self defense. (Similar loads too since 155 grain .40 recoils differently than 180 grain .40 for instance) But if its cheaper to practice with 9mm you'll still be practicing the fundamentals of trigger control, follow through, managing recoil, tactics, etc. Its better than not practicing at all or seldom because .40 or .45 is too expensive. Dry firing helps but you gotta practice with live rounds too. I can't see how shooting a different caliber can hurt someone. Many people including myself practice with a .22 to engrain the fundamentals. I sometimes practice with a DA revolver to learn better trigger control as well. I believe both help to make me a better shooter with my 9mm Glock and .45 ACP 1911. And if you're gonna practice with 9mm I can't see why they shouldn't use 9mm for self defense. Unfortunately its the "larger" caliber or nothing mindset for some. So I can imagine a lot of people not practicing because they didn't want to fork out the money for a few boxes of .40. That can hurt them more in the long run.

Its not what you practice with its how you practice with.

 

[mathman]

This is exactly why I'm gonna ditch the 1911...for me, it's just a (small scale) logistics problem. I own a Glock 19...very simple to operate and shoot...and accurate enough. And I can buy twice the practice ammo for it than I can for a 45ACP.

I use 124 grain JHP for defense...so I practice with 124 grain Nato ammo for consistency.

I'm kind of following the old saying: "Beware the man with one gun, he probably knows how to use it."

Not that I only have one gun! LOL

 

[larryh1108]

I also shoot a lot of .22LRs for just the reason stated. I work my way up the ladder when I go to the range. 100 .22s, 50 .32ACPs, 50 .380ACPs, 50 9mm, 50 .40S&W and then 50 .45s. All different handguns. That is my ideal range visit. It gets expensive so that means once a month now versus every other week.

No matter which gun I carry or use on a particular day I am familiar with it in every way. My thought process was if you carry only a .40S&W for daily carry and/or self defense and shoot only 9mm practice rounds, the gun will handle totally different when you really need it. The conversions are nice for stretching the dollar these days but don't get lulled into a false sense of security by always shooting light caliber rounds and expect to produce under stress at the same capability. It mat take 2 or 3 shots to get your bearings and that may be too late.

 

[domininance]

both are amazing tools that serve different roles.

There is a reason so many 1911's are still in service, still being produced, still being purchased by defense/military/govt organizations. it is a incredibly design, badass piece of gun. it packs a punch, it is reliable, it is accurate, it is truly a work horse. with all of the modern variations of the 1911 available today it is more versatile of a gun platform than perhaps ever in its long history. for recreational shooting a 1911 is one of my top choices.

Glock has learned and grown and improved since it's original firearm offerings. for years they have gotten a bad rap from the purists who cant imagine a polymer handgun "ewwww" they say. well pish tosh i say! the Glock concept is one of function, end of discussion. in the most modern incarnations of glock handguns they have started to make them look nicer too. glock has a few things on other handguns. first it is easy as all hell to use. you load, you point, you shoot. done. no "magic" levers to futz with, no magazine safeties to get in the way, but it still has safety features such as that fancy trigger. Second, glock minimizes if not eliminates the need for a gun smith. essentially every part of that gun could be replaced with an off the shelf part using one tool to break the gun down. hell you could fix it on the hood of your car if you had the spare parts. that is a huge functional point for career security workers whose lives rely on their handgun, no matter how snobish of a purist you are. for professional work, if you couldn't tell i like my glock, and if my S&W MP didn't have that stupid magazine safety i would probably use it for professional work as well.

i know safeties save lives, supposedly, but so does being responsible with your gun and not being an idiot and letting kids or people unfamiliar/untrained with guns touch things they shouldn't be touching, unsupervised that is.

 

[Dr Raoul Duke]

I have several 1911s, one Glock (a G20), and a Springfield Armory XD40SC, as well as all kinds of other pistols and revolvers. I don't have an obsessive loyalty to any one. I don't think posturing about it does anyone any good at all. Just use what you like, you don't have to justify it, and let others use what they prefer without harassment. Live and let live.


Dr. Raoul Duke
Gonzo Forever

 

[Tamara]

And if you're gonna practice with 9mm I can't see why they shouldn't use 9mm for self defense. Unfortunately its the "larger" caliber or nothing mindset for some.

I'd have no problem carrying my 9mm 1911 if it wasn't a commander-size gun with big goofy FauxMar adjustable sights more suitable for a gamer gun than a serious CCW piece.

That being said, I think 1911s in their native caliber are more reliable than those in 9x19, .38 Super, or 10mm. (Just like the full-size G17 is probably the most reliable Glock.)

 

[OldMarksman]

Decades ago, Elmer Keith opined that fewer accidents would occur with the the DA/SA Smith & Wesson Model 39 than with the 1911. I bought a Model 39.

Last year, my CCW instructor, who is a long-time Model 1911 aficionado, strongly recommended long-trigger-pull (DAO or striker fired) pistols or DAO revolvers with consistent trigger pulls between shots for CCW or home defense. He usually carries a Glock and keeps one in the bedroom.

I bought a Smith M&P Compact. Not that different from a Glock in terms of function, it seems to me, but mine does have a safety. I happen to like that feature.

Recently, based on the advice of several forum members here and some LEO friends, I bought a Commander-size 1911. I can hit a lot more effectively and consistently with it than with either the M&P or a DAO revolver. And maybe it's entirely subjective, but I also think I trust it more than the newer design.

It's heavier, of course, and I cannot say which I will carry when--I'm still waiting for the holster.

I will say it took me a while to get over a forty-nine year aversion to having a 1911 in cocked and locked mode.

And if I were to put my mind to it, I could probably come to accept the idea of having a Glock without a safety. Heck, not really different from a revolver.

 

[Jon1911]

To me, the single action is like the manual transmission of the firearms world.

People who say:
"I want to be able to just pull the trigger and have it go bang."
sound just like people who say:

"I want to just hit the gas and have the car go, I don't want to mess with shifting gears."

In that line of thinking, Glocks are more of a mass produced fleet vehicle, like a Chevy Impala or Ford Crown Vic. They run great for lots of miles, but if you're really into cars, it's hard to enjoy the driving experience. Their design was catered to uninterrupted function rather than excellent balance and feel.

Maybe others don't see this parallel, but I do. I started modifying cars early with a CJ7, suspension, engine swap, etc. Then later I got into DSMs and started upgrading turbos, injectors, etc and making those faster. I think people who like to tinker are drawn to 1911s like I was.

Even so, it's nice to have a bone-stock reliable vehicle to drive your kids to school or take on a long road trip. I think that's why Glocks make good duty guns, they get the job done even if they aren't as sexy.

To each his own, personally I like tinkering with 1911s and don't mind the added "complexity" to operating them. To me, the "driving experience" makes it all worthwhile.

 

[IanS]

1911's are often reduced to finely tuned machines that need a specific environment to work. Its a serious misunderstanding of how its actually used by many of its users. On the same token reducing Glocks to a handgun that merely "works" is also a misunderstanding of its appeal and why people like them. I understand how they got such reputations. People want to simplify their understanding of various guns. But its no different than saying that one can't be "competitive" because they aren't shooting the two most "popular" or best selling handguns in America.

Did it have to take a Jerry Miculek to convince us that a S&W DA revolver can be shot like a full auto machine pistol? An Ernest Langdon with a DA/SA SIG Sauer P220ST to win the 2003 IDPA title against the usual suspects of shooters with their 1911's and Glocks? Most of us can't come anywhere close to that level of skill or gift. Some designs ARE preferable or more amenable to certain people. But too often we project our own limitations and accepted wisdom on these machines and limit our understanding of their true potential. In short, most of the handguns we discuss day to day are far more capable than we give them credit for.

 

[IanS]

That being said, I think 1911s in their native caliber are more reliable than those in 9x19, .38 Super, or 10mm. (Just like the full-size G17 is probably the most reliable Glock.)

No doubt all succesful designs are taken to the limits of its capabilities and are often made more because of "want" and not because they "should" be made. Most of the time they work to an acceptable level but not as well as it original iteration. As long as it sells X amount with a certain acceptable level of failures they'll keep making them. Glock seems to have worked the bugs out with the G21 but the G22 and G30 are having fits again (perhaps due to quality control, who knows but the 9mm Glocks keep chugging along). And 1911's with snub barrels, calibers other than .45, double stack mags, and aluminum frames do tend to be more problematic than the original all steel 5" single stack in .45 ACP. Modern designs seem to be a bit more forgiving to tweaking but older designs like the 1911 even less so.