does anyone make a simpler 1911-type pistol?

[JAB]

The 1911 was originally intended to be carried in Condition Zero, cocked and unlocked, relying on the grip safety. Not at all a bad idea, but the thumb safety can be used without loss of time so most people have used it.

I stand corrected.

 

[David E]

...Unless you happen to be a "lefty" like me and don't add an ambidextrious thumb-safety.

If you're a lefty and favor the 1911 for serious use, why would you NOT add an ambidextrous safety ?

.

 

[jill jackson]

Cause then he wouldn't be "glockman99"

 

[glockman99]

If you're a lefty and favor the 1911 for serious use, why would you NOT add an ambidextrous safety ?

.

I did, back when I carried a Colt .45 (Enhanced Combat Commander)...Now I pack a Glock pistol, so I don't have to concern myself with a thumb-safety.

 

[David E]

Sounds like a good example of buying the gun that's best suited for YOU ! :thumbup:

I'm amazed how often people try to make a bad gun choice work for them when it clearly will not.

.

 

[Mike L.]

Although my 1911's and my Sig P220 will reliably feed hollow points, I don't have a problem with loading them with good ole 230 grain hardball.
230 grain hardball has been shown to be an extremely effective combat round.
I know that I certainly hope to never be struck by one of those big fat slugs!


--Mike L.

 

[tirod3]

The original design of the 1911 was in need of improvement - hence the A1 - and it goes to show that as a military firearm, the improvements were all to make it more ergonomic to shoot.

Hmmm.

Browning did a good job, but the 1911A1 didn't do that much in combat to begin with. If a real weapon was needed, it was issued. The M1 Carbine exists precisely to arm soldiers who would need to shoot at the enemy, yet would be burdened in their duties carrying a larger Garand.

I would expect that after 85 years of development, a 1911 that could handle hollow points would be available and function flawlessly. There are - but they are a lot different than the original. Just compare the pricing between an "issue" grade and most of the rest.

As for combat guns, I will venture to suggest Glocks have probably been shot far more often at an armed adversary than the 1911. There are more of them in the hands of LEO's than issue 1911's, and used every day, not stored in an armory. Military grade guns have a lot of unique requirements that don't always contribute to daily carry.

P.S. Pistols without mag disconnects have had far more "accidental discharges" than those with one - and can disable it in a gun grab. The feature has a place for those who understand it.

 

[BlackHills]

As for combat guns, I will venture to suggest Glocks have probably been shot far more often at an armed adversary than the 1911. There are more of them in the hands of LEO's than issue 1911's, and used every day, not stored in an armory.

I would suggest the 1911 was fired at armed adversaries more in one year in the Pacific during WWII than all the Glocks ever made. LEOs may carry them daily but they seldom use them.

 

[tirod3]

Considering that any combat officer would still be armed with a long gun, most 1911's were kept holstered by staff officers in the rear. Tunnel clearing was by dedicated teams - armed with explosives and flame throwers. It was easier to bury them than go in after them.

Even in Vietnam, lots of tunnel rats used .38's.

Like the mythology of the combat knife, lots of nonuse is the real record. Again, if there was an assessment that firepower was needed, the Army did not skimp and hand someone less. There's always plenty of long arms to go around, and pistols are more a status item than a combat weapon in war.

On the street, it's all you have. Ergo, much more use.

 

[b.c.molin]

I like several things about the 1911 pistol: The looks, barrel length, caliber, all steel, fits my hand nicely, points naturally, relatively thin.

Buy it, load it with your ammo of choice, check and ensure reliability and then practice, practice, practice and then do some more practice.

The best most reliable gun in the world wont do you much good if you can't hit your target.

 

[jdm61]

As an aside, when the U.S. military was doing the testing that would eventually lead to the adoption of the Beretta 92, the benchmark was the 1911A1. When it came to the functionality test, including being dumped in mud and then fired, the Beretta won. Anyone want to guess which pistol came in second? A 1911A1. Only problem was, all of the A1's used in the test were pulled out of the arms room, so they were likely WW2 vintage. That says a lot in my book. The one pistol that I would NOT recommend is the Walther P99. I am a Walther whore and owned a P99 (because I couldn't afford a used P88 at the time,) but that pistol does not deserve to have the hallowed Walther name stamped on its slide.

 

[SkinnyJoe]

The best most reliable gun in the world wont do you much good if you can't hit your target.

Who said I can't hit my target? Let's focus on the question I asked.

Thanks.

 

[Keyser Soze]

This is a good article on 1911's and answers some of your questions.

http://www.10-8performance.com/id8.html

 

[mack_t_knife]

Let's focus on the question I asked.

I've been waiting for that. I just haven't really figured out what that question was.

Literally, the answer to your question "does anyone make a simpler 1911 ?" Yes: a simpler mechanical look alike was made in Vietnam circa 1970.

Crude copies were produced that looked externally like 1911 pistols. As mentioned earlier, it filled the requirement of status ornament amongst various segments of the populace who wished to identify with our team. Internally, they were quite a bit simpler, but overall a bad bet to pull the trigger and survive.

Just a bit of 1911 trivia. There was also the Balister Molina, an Argentine cosmetic copy that wasn't much less complicated than the original patent.

Patent. That's the word. The "1911 Patent" is a defining term that stipulates all form and design. Form (dictating function) is precisely defined by all of those line drawings and numbers.

Does some manufacturer out there make a better 1911 Patent pistol out there than others? (Was that the question?) Again, by definition, most assuredly one is better than the other. Is that what you were asking? (Or did you want to hear about other alternatives including double action guns and polymer frames?)

Did you mean simpler as in avoiding the Browning patent linked barrel that lowers each time to meet the feed ramp? Someone suggested the HK P7.

I like several things about the 1911 pistol: The looks, barrel length, caliber, all steel, fits my hand nicely, points naturally, relatively thin.

You are absolutely defining the 1911 by its physical outward characteristics. The "caliber" we assume you refer to, is .45 ACP altho the pistol was manufactured in .22LR, 9 Largo, 9 Luger, 38 Super calibers in any real quantities.

Barrel lengths came on various 1911 (style) platforms from 2.5" to 18".

Other than steel, the only other material used to manufacture a 1911 has been alloy for weight reduction. They are pretty hard to find, comparatively, so steel was always the main choice.

"Fit hand, point naturally" are quite subjective.

"Relatively thin" is easily measured, but because of grip angle and actual overall circumference of the grip, the simple measurement of thickness is misleading. Maybe we are talking about single stack (.45?) versus the coke bottle feel (to some) of the double stack hi-cap clones.

Does anyone make a simpler 1911 type pistol?

You ask for a simpler 1911. Technically, we know you mean 1911a1 or whatever modern version you had in mind, but it's like asking for something that looks like Weber Grill that doesn't work the same way.

Either you want a 1911 single action or you don't. Someone brought up the report on the laborous military adoption of the M9 pistol. The 1911's that were utilized were indeed old frames because that's what would have been issued if they had been retained. Apples to apples.

What is worth considering is that they tested the old 1911 frames after installing double action retrofits and 9mm conversions. The other "requirement was an ambidextrous safety, and with all of that double action machinery installed, the additional safety lever was not happening. They were not used as a "standard", they were in the competition... if you call it that.

More trivia: Get a copy, at any gun show, of the Congressional Report in regards to the adoption of the M9 and compare it with a copy of the Army Luger Field Trials. A lot of similarities, but the M9 report shows what kind of elected idiots made this decision. Not saying it was a good or bad decision- just read it and confirm what kind of absolute dunderheads we have elected. The questions are spectacularly stupid and show no learning ability.

There are a number of other single action , single stack, steel .45's out there, all of which are arguably out of real production - the demand for polymer has eclipsed these expensively manufactured, but elegant & functional dinosaurs. Were you asking for a list of these? What's in your wallet?

Ahh, and "the looks". That's why I didn't respond earlier.

 

[SkinnyJoe]

This is a good article on 1911's and answers some of your questions.

http://www.10-8performance.com/id8.html

Thanks. :thumbup:

 

[SkinnyJoe]

I've been waiting for that. I just haven't really figured out what that question was.

.

Sorry about your wait.

Looking for something that looks and feels like the 1911. Don't care if it's SA, DA, or DAO, but it has to be as reliable as a Glock, Sig or a Beretta right out of the box.

I guess the feeding ramp and the external extractor are the key improvements, anything else?

Thanks.

 

[b.c.molin]

Who said I can't hit my target? Let's focus on the question I asked.

Thanks.

Generic advice Skinney.

Owning a racing bicycle doesn't make you Lance Armstrong.

Practice and gun familarisation are much overlooked factors in the gun ownership equation IMHO.

 

[STAGE 2]

Sorry about your wait.

Looking for something that looks and feels like the 1911. Don't care if it's SA, DA, or DAO, but it has to be as reliable as a Glock, Sig or a Beretta right out of the box.

I guess the feeding ramp and the external extractor are the key improvements, anything else?

Thanks.

Wrong. You don't want an external extractor. The internal extractor is perfectly fine. The problems with it arose from companies that used cheap parts rather than the design of the extractor itself.

If you want a 1911 that is just as reliable as any sig/glock/beretta, then get yourself a colt or springfield that is made to original specs. You see, back in the day when quality was important, 1911's were made out of properly heat treated parts and assembled according to specs. These pistols were incredibly accurate and would run flawlessly.

As time went on, folks tweaked the 1911 adding FLGR's, external extractors, choppping slides and barrels, etc. This destroyed the perfect balance and caused problems. Get yourself a Kuhnhausen manual (the bible on 1911's) read up about it and then buy yourself a colt (they are still made to proper specs). Don't add a buffer, or crappy MIM parts or anything else but quality ammo.

Do that and you'll have a fantastic pistol to give you fantastic practice.


EDIT: Most importantly don't believe the hype that every Sig, beretta or glock is reliable out of the box. They aren't. The first 500 rounds of any gun should be considered a break in period.