Do you guys like grip safeties ?

With all of us knowing that the main thing that makes the "best" in firearms is the person behind that firearm. That being said, I concur that the tool itself needs to also be of good tested reliable quality,................ with all of the guns you mentioned fitting that required criteria................ IMO ;)
 
the only competitor in my book is the 9mm HiPower (AHA! - another Browning design innit!!?) i'd still rather have the .45 (& a few spare mags) if the scat hits the rotary cooling device.
 
Yeah, I guess Browning did have a part in the making of the Hi-Power, though it was really mostly his apprentice/protege at "Fabrique National" in Belgium that finalized most of that weapon design (Mr. Browning passing away before it took any real final specifications).

Was the guy's name "Saive", or something like that?
 
Just looked it up, it was John Browning who started the work on the design, with "Dieudonne Saive" finishing it (since Mr. Browning had passed away).

Some readings give Browning most of the credit, while others lean towards Saive being the true workhorse behind the final design.

In any case, it makes sense that the gun would be brought out as "John Browning's last pistol design", no matter how much effort he actually had invested in the project. It was smart then, as it's smart today, to ride on the magic carpet that John Browning rode on. He was simply a genius and almost a Rockstar (then and now) amongst gun circles. Every military, police department, and civilian gun enthusiast knew who John Moses Browning was, and it made a whole lot of sense to promote it as his last design, eclipsing any amount of work that Saive may have put into it ;)

Browning surely was the "MAN" as far as firearms are concerned! :)

PS.
There are those that did not/do not like the P-35/Hi-Power magazine safety (where the gun will not fire, even if it has a round in the chamber, when it's box magazine is not in place).

Smith & Wesson had incorporated this into most of their semi autos (most 1st, 2nd, and 3rd generation pistols)

I personally do not like this safety system, though I would not disable it from a gun that has it factory installed. Kinda like the way I feel about a grip safety......... I won't disable it from an exsisting weapon, but would not allow one to be put in if I were involved in designing a new weapon ;)
 
If I can ride upon those coattails... Love it or not. Blame it's rep upon poor training, communication, or academics the M-16 is America's longest serving rifle, and more I grow more fond of daily.

We might have to add Eugene Stoner to the list of Legends soon...

Browning...
Garand...
Stoner...
 
munk said:
Does not the 1911 still maintain peerage with the best semiauto handguns?
Is there any validity that a Sig 220, or the HK is BETTER than the 1911?

That the design implementation have improved so much that a entire new leap in productivity and function has been achieved?

I think not, but many would disagree.
I don't agree with all the silly things Jeff Cooper says, but he does say a lot of wise and funny things, and one of them was like the ball peen hammer, the 1911 remains the top tool, very difficult to improve upon.

Browning was a genius. In my munk brain, there are some writers, poets, rock in roll stars, song writer singers, and friends, who are 'heros'. John Browning is also listed in my archives, burned into my organic circuits as a heroic figure. God Bless him. Isn't that crazy? But he was an amazing man. He gave the US government the patent design for the machine gun in WWll, I think gave them the BAR also, though I disremember.
munk
Click to expand...
SIG's, H&K's Berettas and such are quality designs, and believe it or not, all have at one time or another been issued to basic agent classes in DEA (the idea being not to have one make of gun associated in the criminal mind with the DEA). Having said that, after a couple years many switch over to one variation or another of the 1911. In my opinion (my bias is strictly based on what has worked well for me and those who worked for me) for pure slap 'em down and stomp 'em results, I've put my money on the 1911. Rather than carry any of the other pistols listed, I would revert to the S&W Model 29, which I carried happily for seventeen years.

John Moses Browning did indeed give us the BAR.
 
An answer from a voice I respect.


And from a man with field experience. I've shot a lot, but not at people- that's two different worlds.

That is what it boiled down to, after all the ads, ballistics examined, claims for new systems, and cousins of cousins, I thought if I owned just ONE semi auto pistol, it should be the 1911. I've sold dozens of the others, I've handled them all, shot them.... I'm not interested in saying the 1911 is the 'best'; but it is a tool that works at the top of the game, and until we qualitatively advance ballistics forward, there it will rest for some time.

I do like them all, though, or most of them.

But when you want to get serious, you need a revolver.


munk
 
Just another point to ponder....How many of y'all know a top of the line gunsmith who spends all day every day modifying or refining Glocks, or SIG's, or Berettas, or H&K's regardless of caliber??? There are literally 2 dozen or more of the very best who put their entire reputation into refining the 1911 platform (the basic Colt 1911 un-reworked will kill you very dead... the refinements just make it easier to put a slug in the eye, rather than just in the head). All of these gentlemen have a "reliability package" of ?necessary? refinements that are just guilding the lily....but until you pull back a slide that feels as smooth as an old Krag, of fire at a couple bullseyes with a trigger like an icicle breaking....I admit it's tough to understand why someone drops two grand on a pistol. I wish for you the pleasure of just one really exceptional pistol in your lifetime.....take care of it and your greatgrand children will still be enjoying it.
 
You got me there . "A trigger pull like an icicle breaking . " It sounds very clean to me . I have to admit trigger control on handguns is a major issue with me . I shot a Smith and Wesson double action only 9 mm and my grouping would have taken out a whole bar room of perpetrators at twenty feet . Personally and to salve my wounded pride I think it is small hand syndrome all over again . Thank goodness for rifles .
 
jurassicnarc44 said:
Just another point to ponder....How many of y'all know a top of the line gunsmith who spends all day every day modifying or refining Glocks, or SIG's, or Berettas, or H&K's regardless of caliber???
Click to expand...

There aren't many.

Be careful how you argue this point, though; it's very easy to make a counterpoint that such improvements aren't done because they're simply not needed, which puts the 1911 camp in a somewhat tricky position.

Which is better? I think it merely comes down to one's opinion at this point.
 
Leave it to a Tenifer fanboy like me to crap on a 1911 thread. Someone has to be the bad guy. :cool: :)

Single stack magazines: critical design flaw or nostalgic anachronism?

(Don't answer that. I'm trolling now.)
 
LOL

Yeah, that's right, single stack aint supposed to work...

Life is so funny.




munk
 
I always listen to these discusions and think it boils down to personal preference. I remember when I started in Law Enforcment and was issued the S&W .357 4". It shot great, easy to clean and I liked it. Years later we transitioned to the 9mm Glock. Lots of rounds, could fire it like a full auto, seemed great. Then we went to the 40cal Glock, less ammo, a little better balistics, a little more recoil, I still liked it.
We could carry anything we wanted as a backup, so when we had the .357, I carried a 9mm Baretta also and a 38 stainless snub. After we got the Glock, I just carried the .38.
I think I've shot just about everything and most of them I like. I carried a Colt 45 for years and still think it's a fine handgun. Now that Glock has a .45, I think it would give the 1911 a run for it's money based on it's reliability and toughness. It's like a 62 Corvette, how can you not still want one!
 
Dave Rishar said:
There aren't many.

Be careful how you argue this point, though; it's very easy to make a counterpoint that such improvements aren't done because they're simply not needed, which puts the 1911 camp in a somewhat tricky position.

Which is better? I think it merely comes down to one's opinion at this point.
Click to expand...
This doesn't have to be an argument, because I think we're talking apples and oranges. To wit: Is the frame and/or the slide carefully machined from bar stock, or a flat piece of metal bent at right angles and welded for mass production? Are you happy getting the smoothness in cycling from metal against polymer until the polymer wears smooth, or do you prefer proper hand fitting of steel against steel until there is no rattle or play between them? Can you accept the long, goosey double action pull in order to take advantage of those double stack magazines, or does the 1911 just fit you like John Moses intended it to? Certainly I could enjoy one each Glock, H&K, and Beretta for the cost of my Wilson Professional, but (now my opinion) I would rather have one work of art that works, than have a drawer full when I only carry one gun at a time. We need not argue.....pick what you like and be happy.....I grin every damn time I pick mine up. :D
 
The original 1911 had the desired wide military tolerances in key spots so that the mechanism would work under more conditions. My friend Ian Kagahara showed me the Colt reissue not all that long ago and we laughed when we saw the slide to reciever fit.
There is another 1911 that is 'tight'. Seems like it's come into its own in the last 30 years.
I know modern CNC machinery make possible a tight fit, and yet still be reliable. There isn't an answer to the question of which is better for war, is there? The rattle prone 1911 or today's bullseye striker?
Jurrasic, Dave Rishar?? Does this question achieve escape velocity for usual munk insanity?

munk
 
Okay, this is one you don't have to take on my authority...In Jan/Feb 2006 Guns&Ammo Mag put out a 'Revised' Issue of "The Complete Book of the 1911" in which Patrick Sweeney ran a piece titled "Abusing 1911's for Fun". For top end models he selected a Wilson CQB and a Kimber Warrior, and for entry level guns he grabbed a Charles Daly and a Rock Island Armory (incidently Rock Island has the contract for AR-15's for DEA). He buried these guns in the mud, drove over them with a truck, and stirred them with sand and gravel. ALL functioned exactly as they should....mine with the tight tolerances was not at a disadvantage. They even fired them underwater!!! Draw your own conclusions! You owe it to yourself to see the photos.
 
JN, very interesting.

On the other hand, Tight AR's have been known to jam, right?

There's probably a difference between a CNC machined tight 1911 and a CNC tight 1911 customized by the people you listed, JN.


munk
 
FACT: As Munk already pointed out, high end 1911's are not gummint 1911's. I would go so far as to consider this apples and oranges.
FACT: Glock slides ride on metal inserts, not plastic. (You'll also notice that the barrel locks into a metal insert as well. Gaston may very well be a deity, but even He cannot do the impossible.)
FACT: The H&K, Beretta, and SIG all offer single action and are not strictly loosy-goosy double action. The Glock is something else entirely...let's call it a very good double action for the sake of argument.
FACT: I trust gunwriters about as far as I can throw them -- let's say, six feet if they're not too heavy and they're wearing a gi. I trust gunsmiths who moonlight as gunwriters even less, especially when they're discussing weapons that they work on.
SPECULATION: None of the pistols mentioned above utilize bent sheet metal for slide nor frame.
FACT: If sheet metal was the work of the devil as applied to weapons, why did JMB choose it for an extractor, a fairly critical part? (I'm guessing that it has to do with lowering production costs and the parts count, but still...)
SPECULATION: If the Beretta 92 was chambered in .45 ACP, I don't think anyone would be trashing the design.
FACT: My arguments walk a fine line between debate and trolling.

I will never argue that the 1911 is not a good design. I will argue, however, that things have progressed since 1906. I will also argue that there's a bit of a cult mentality surrounding the 1911. (Moreso than other pistols, anyway, although the Glockophiles are very close.) I am not pointing my finger at anyone here in particular, but it can't easily be denied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top