Kreyzhorse
New member
Yep....... I still get flogged over my TRP purchase. I do not however regret it. The finest and best shooting gun I've ever owned.
why do 1911s call to me?
- Thread starter bigghoss
- Start date
Yep....... I still get flogged over my TRP purchase. I do not however regret it. The finest and best shooting gun I've ever owned.
I don't know what it is about them either but I finally succumbed to the 1911 siren song and have acquired several over the last year. In fact, I picked up my most recent addition yesterday, a NIB AMT Hardballer Longslide, it's a very early gun built in AMT's Arcadia factory.
Here's some pics-
Here's some pics-
Amin Parker
New member
That AMT will make one crazy bowling pin killer
They have classic lines and many of us 'older' folk used them in the Army before the 9mm switch abortion. I've got a warm place in my heart for the one I carried back in 68/69 as a Tank Commander in RVN. Like the Glocks of today, the US Army Colt 45 had a loose slide to receiver fit for reliability. In that configuration, it was reasonably reliable, however, not as good as the current crop of 'combat tupperware' autos.
Also, for the average soldier, it was a difficult weapon to shoot accurately at any distance longer than arms reach. It suffered from a slick, slim grip and stout recoil due to the inflexibility of the frame. As a US Army trained Armorer along with my status as a Tank Commander, I was trained to both understand and work on the 1911's and they were made loose for reliability.
That said, the current 1911's are mere 'pretty boy' copies of the original US Army Colts. Modern manufacturers has tightened up the tolerances to 'accurize' them to the point where they are mostly unreliable shooters from the factory. The majority require tuning to achieve acceptable reliability.
While beautiful to look at, 1911's like many other old weapon designs, have been surpassed by the more functional, yet not as pretty, modern versions. Look to the M1 Garand vs M16 / M4, the M-4 Sherman vs M1 Abrams, the Willys MB 'Jeep' vs the Humvee, the P-51 vs F-16 for other examples of beautiful, classic designs that can't hold a candle to their more modern counterparts.
Also, for the average soldier, it was a difficult weapon to shoot accurately at any distance longer than arms reach. It suffered from a slick, slim grip and stout recoil due to the inflexibility of the frame. As a US Army trained Armorer along with my status as a Tank Commander, I was trained to both understand and work on the 1911's and they were made loose for reliability.
That said, the current 1911's are mere 'pretty boy' copies of the original US Army Colts. Modern manufacturers has tightened up the tolerances to 'accurize' them to the point where they are mostly unreliable shooters from the factory. The majority require tuning to achieve acceptable reliability.
While beautiful to look at, 1911's like many other old weapon designs, have been surpassed by the more functional, yet not as pretty, modern versions. Look to the M1 Garand vs M16 / M4, the M-4 Sherman vs M1 Abrams, the Willys MB 'Jeep' vs the Humvee, the P-51 vs F-16 for other examples of beautiful, classic designs that can't hold a candle to their more modern counterparts.
the springer I just picked up is so tight it doesn't rattle at all with the hammer cocked back and it ran through 100 rounds without any trouble. one of my shooting star mags failed to lock the slide back but that is probably because of the mag. seven others all locked it back.
I am certainly no expert on military 1911s but it is my understanding that those used in the Vietnam War were the same guns used during WWII and the Korean War and were essentially worn out. When produced before WWII, the military 1911s were reasonably tight and reasonably accurate. During WWII, tolerances were loosened up because several manufacturers made them and they needed to simply slap the parts together or replace them regardless of manufacturer. Again, not based on personal experience.
I hope that longslide works better than mine did. It was horrible. It did look great though!
Mine didn't have a single straight part in it, without the recoil spring, you could feel the slide bind and release, repeatedly as it traveled. A little checking with a straightedge showed major issues. The factory advised me to "Wait till it's broken in before sending it in for service", and I put several boxes of ammo through it, and sent it back after seeing all it did was make a series of shiny spots along the rails from the slide moving back and forth, even though it was oiled and then greased up to try to get it working. It had problems both in feeding and not going into battery. A stronger recoil spring actually solved the out of battery issue, but made the FTF issues worse.
I gave up and sold it, and then bought a Colt Combat Commander. It made the AMT look good!
Mine didn't have a single straight part in it, without the recoil spring, you could feel the slide bind and release, repeatedly as it traveled. A little checking with a straightedge showed major issues. The factory advised me to "Wait till it's broken in before sending it in for service", and I put several boxes of ammo through it, and sent it back after seeing all it did was make a series of shiny spots along the rails from the slide moving back and forth, even though it was oiled and then greased up to try to get it working. It had problems both in feeding and not going into battery. A stronger recoil spring actually solved the out of battery issue, but made the FTF issues worse.
I gave up and sold it, and then bought a Colt Combat Commander. It made the AMT look good!
I agree with KyJim
Although I desire to take nothing away from personal experiences like Steve's the military issue M1911A1s in use by the '70s were still original contract pistols, made before 1946. Some of them were not M1911A1s at all and were original Models of 1911, refinished for WWII! I think this was one of the biggest reasons the US went to a new sidearm- it was prohibitively expensive to keep restoring old pistols that couldn't do the job adequately any more. not that the 1911 as a design couldn't, but that the ones they had were worn out
I talk to, and overhear, many vets commenting on the military 1911. Most of them flat out state you couldn't hit anything with one. If you were in a barn, you might hit the barn, maybe. I have family members who served in the '50s who could barely hit the paper with them. Awful stories of pistols completely inadequate for the job
When originally made, Colt Models of 1911 were very well made and pretty accurate. They actually had to reduce the number of polishing steps; they were turning out pistols with the high sheen of pretty civilian models and it was too reflective!
They were also 'sloppy'. But 'sloppy' doesn't equal 'inaccurate', the barrel and slide need to lock up right, and then the slide can have slop.
I have a 'US Property' marked Model of 1911, made by Colt in 1918. It went to Springfield Armory in may of 1918, and that's the last of its history that I know until I bought it in early 2010.
It will rattle if you shake it. It's all original based on parts and stamps except for the barrel, which was made in 1918, but a few months after my pistol, and the front sight. The slide was lightly machine by some pro, as it's a nice job, and a wider target sight was installed, with an orange blaze in the center. It's the pistol in the photo I posted earlier. The barrel is dark and pitted, the pistol rattles like a pocketful of loose change. The pistol shoots well; the only thing I've done when shooting it is put new grips on it as the originals are too slick now.
I strongly feel that some of the US issued pistols are still good because they didn't have the long military service the worn out ones have seen. Mine made some escape or other before WWII, because it's not parkerized. If you can find an old military issued one that wasn't abused you can be surprised, I think. When I bought this, based on the barrel I was going to be happy if I could hit the paper- I just wanted an original Model of 1911 before the year 2011 made the prices double, just wanted it to have it. I took it to the range just to see if it would work. It does
barrel:
offhand at 33 feet, eight rounds:
Although I desire to take nothing away from personal experiences like Steve's the military issue M1911A1s in use by the '70s were still original contract pistols, made before 1946. Some of them were not M1911A1s at all and were original Models of 1911, refinished for WWII! I think this was one of the biggest reasons the US went to a new sidearm- it was prohibitively expensive to keep restoring old pistols that couldn't do the job adequately any more. not that the 1911 as a design couldn't, but that the ones they had were worn out
I talk to, and overhear, many vets commenting on the military 1911. Most of them flat out state you couldn't hit anything with one. If you were in a barn, you might hit the barn, maybe. I have family members who served in the '50s who could barely hit the paper with them. Awful stories of pistols completely inadequate for the job
When originally made, Colt Models of 1911 were very well made and pretty accurate. They actually had to reduce the number of polishing steps; they were turning out pistols with the high sheen of pretty civilian models and it was too reflective!
They were also 'sloppy'. But 'sloppy' doesn't equal 'inaccurate', the barrel and slide need to lock up right, and then the slide can have slop.
I have a 'US Property' marked Model of 1911, made by Colt in 1918. It went to Springfield Armory in may of 1918, and that's the last of its history that I know until I bought it in early 2010.
It will rattle if you shake it. It's all original based on parts and stamps except for the barrel, which was made in 1918, but a few months after my pistol, and the front sight. The slide was lightly machine by some pro, as it's a nice job, and a wider target sight was installed, with an orange blaze in the center. It's the pistol in the photo I posted earlier. The barrel is dark and pitted, the pistol rattles like a pocketful of loose change. The pistol shoots well; the only thing I've done when shooting it is put new grips on it as the originals are too slick now.
I strongly feel that some of the US issued pistols are still good because they didn't have the long military service the worn out ones have seen. Mine made some escape or other before WWII, because it's not parkerized. If you can find an old military issued one that wasn't abused you can be surprised, I think. When I bought this, based on the barrel I was going to be happy if I could hit the paper- I just wanted an original Model of 1911 before the year 2011 made the prices double, just wanted it to have it. I took it to the range just to see if it would work. It does
barrel:
offhand at 33 feet, eight rounds:
I think the often heard "you cant hit anything with them" quote from vets is kind of a misnomer. Most of the people I know that were in the military werent trained to shoot one, or if they actually did get some hands on time with one, they werent trained realistically.
Just because you were in the service doesnt mean you know how to shoot, and I've seen some pretty awful shooting from vets, time and again. If you think handguns are bad, you should see what some of the "experienced" vets do with full auto!
Ive owned a couple of run of the mill USGI 1911's, and they all shot acceptably as they came in capable hands. Like most other things, its generally not the guns fault if you cant shoot it.
Just because you were in the service doesnt mean you know how to shoot, and I've seen some pretty awful shooting from vets, time and again. If you think handguns are bad, you should see what some of the "experienced" vets do with full auto!
Ive owned a couple of run of the mill USGI 1911's, and they all shot acceptably as they came in capable hands. Like most other things, its generally not the guns fault if you cant shoot it.
Back to the original topic -- why does the 1911 call to me? For me, it is a combination of things.
Let's start with ergonomics --- great fit in the hand, good balance, and the trigger reach is good for me. I'll note my hands are a bit smallish so that some pistols just don't work for me.
Moving to the trigger -- it can be tuned to a nice crisp 4 pounds for carry to three pounds or less for a range/target pistol. Even fairly pedestrian 1911s out of the box have triggers that are quite good compared with most guns out there. Combined with the ergonomics of the gun, it allows for a good, consistent pull straight back, enhancing accuracy. Quick reset if you need to fire rapidly.
Accuracy -- They can be made extremely accurate, much more accurate than I shoot. Some models are built with only average accuracy but they typically serve their purpose.
Caliber -- This varies, of course, but the original .45 acp is an excellent defensive round with very controllable recoil.
Looks and intangibles -- I did a poll a couple of years ago here and a large majority of those responding said the looks of a gun played at least some part in their decision to purchase a handgun. The 1911 has that rare combination -- mean business looks combined with rugged "sexiness" for lack of a better term.
Do I like 1911s? You bet! I own several and they are my handgun of choice for carry. Of all those I have owned, I have only found one that was inherently unreliable and it had a three inch barrel.
Let's start with ergonomics --- great fit in the hand, good balance, and the trigger reach is good for me. I'll note my hands are a bit smallish so that some pistols just don't work for me.
Moving to the trigger -- it can be tuned to a nice crisp 4 pounds for carry to three pounds or less for a range/target pistol. Even fairly pedestrian 1911s out of the box have triggers that are quite good compared with most guns out there. Combined with the ergonomics of the gun, it allows for a good, consistent pull straight back, enhancing accuracy. Quick reset if you need to fire rapidly.
Accuracy -- They can be made extremely accurate, much more accurate than I shoot. Some models are built with only average accuracy but they typically serve their purpose.
Caliber -- This varies, of course, but the original .45 acp is an excellent defensive round with very controllable recoil.
Looks and intangibles -- I did a poll a couple of years ago here and a large majority of those responding said the looks of a gun played at least some part in their decision to purchase a handgun. The 1911 has that rare combination -- mean business looks combined with rugged "sexiness" for lack of a better term.
Do I like 1911s? You bet! I own several and they are my handgun of choice for carry. Of all those I have owned, I have only found one that was inherently unreliable and it had a three inch barrel.
Why?
Many reasons - for me
1. Man made art
2. History
3. Classy
4. Parts & mags everywhere
5. Pride in ownership
6. Somthing patriotic about it
7. When properly built - accurate, reliable and about as effective handgun as you can buy
8. Sings to your soul in a way plastic never can
Many reasons - for me
1. Man made art
2. History
3. Classy
4. Parts & mags everywhere
5. Pride in ownership
6. Somthing patriotic about it
7. When properly built - accurate, reliable and about as effective handgun as you can buy
8. Sings to your soul in a way plastic never can
As others have noted, it is really hard to beat a 1911 trigger. Could I carry 5 more rounds in a Glock 21? Yes. Could I score good hits as rapidly and instinctively as I could with the 1911? In my case, no, but that isn't a knock on the Glock - it is an excellent pistol; I just don't shoot it as well.
After the 1911, the pistols I shoot best are the Browning HiPower and the CZ75B (go figure, Amin Parker).
When my BHP returns from Novak, it is possible the pecking order could get rearranged.
After the 1911, the pistols I shoot best are the Browning HiPower and the CZ75B (go figure, Amin Parker).
When my BHP returns from Novak, it is possible the pecking order could get rearranged.