OT: Fiddlebacks & Firearms

I concur with what emoney2277 recommends. Specifically, the M&P Shield. I like that little gun and carry one as a backup occasionally. I carry a .45 regularly and have a lot of experience with 1911s. I have a 3" 1911 I love. That said, I've never seen a 3" 1911 that was reliable out of the box - too many liberties were taken with the design to make it that compact. Getting one to run can be costly. My personal reliability standard is 500 rounds of the ammo you intend to carry without a failure. I won't bet my life on something that won't do that. This little beauty has had about everything but the slide and frame replaced and worked on:

_DSC2098.JPG


Which brings me to my second (soap box) comment. ;) Which pistol you buy and carry doesn't mean squat of you don't train with it. Train. Train. Train. It will need to be second nature if you do have to use it. To do that, you will quickly realize the gun is the cheap part and a wear item. Think about .45 ACP +P 200 gr. Gold Dots for the test I mention above and starting over every time there is a failure. Even nice 1911s $ quickly pale in comparison if you are shooting enough to maintain proficiency. That proficiency is what will save your life, not a particular brand of pistol. It just needs to be reliable and point naturally. If a choice to allocate available funds towards the gun or practice ammo needs to be made - practice ammo wins every time in my book.

My .10
 
emoney2277 said:
Michael, I'll put my .02 in if you would like. If you refer back to post 20 my Beretta PX4 sub compact is a fine CC option. 13 rounds of 9mm or 11 of .40. It has a thumb safety which I love for CC as Glocks and other striker fire pistols have never made me feel comfortable. I may be over cautious but it is what it is. It also a "chunky" gun which makes it manageable to shoot, you can take it to the range and shoot a couple boxes through it without any discomfort. It's heft makes it a little more difficult to carry all day, and it's not a pocket gun, but it is very manageable. I carry at 6oclock.
I currently carry a commander size 1911 in 45, mostly because I just think they are awesome and they supply a little style and novelty with their incredible function and stopping power. I don't carry every single day and am never really in questionable environments so comfort never really is a concern of mine.
You may also like the M&P sub compact shield, I believe they have a thumb safety as well and an optional mag extension that makes range shooting more fun.
I don't have a lot of firearms because I don't have the money, otherwise I would own dozens, so when buying I want the gun to fill as many roles as possible. I want a gun I can carry, will do its job and has the firepower to stop a man (this is why I don't carry small calibers like 380) and I can take to the range and enjoy shooting it.
If you like 380s the Bersa is another fine option and very manageable to shoot, cost is right too.
If I was buying a new CC piece right now I would likely be looking at the M&P shield, Beretta Nano, or possibly a 3" 1911. Springfield makes a sub compact 45 that looks great but I'm not sure how comfortable it would be to shoot at the range after several rounds. Hope this helps.
Click to expand...


I love the recommendations emoney, especially the PX 4 sub compact. Its a great piece, a bit chunky like you said, but great to shoot and an awesome looking firearm to boot!
 
Thanks Johnny1111. M4 is right about practice and I echo his comments. Sometimes having a small amount of guns is a blessing because that's all you have to shoot so they stay in the rotation!
 
M4Super90 said:
I concur with what emoney2277 recommends. Specifically, the M&P Shield. I like that little gun and carry one as a backup occasionally. I carry a .45 regularly and have a lot of experience with 1911s. I have a 3" 1911 I love. That said, I've never seen a 3" 1911 that was reliable out of the box - too many liberties were taken with the design to make it that compact. Getting one to run can be costly. My personal reliability standard is 500 rounds of the ammo you intend to carry without a failure. I won't bet my life on something that won't do that. This little beauty has had about everything but the slide and frame replaced and worked on:

_DSC2098.JPG


Which brings me to my second (soap box) comment. ;) Which pistol you buy and carry doesn't mean squat of you don't train with it. Train. Train. Train. It will need to be second nature if you do have to use it. To do that, you will quickly realize the gun is the cheap part and a wear item. Think about .45 ACP +P 200 gr. Gold Dots for the test I mention above and starting over every time there is a failure. Even nice 1911s $ quickly pale in comparison if you are shooting enough to maintain proficiency. That proficiency is what will save your life, not a particular brand of pistol. It just needs to be reliable and point naturally. If a choice to allocate available funds towards the gun or practice ammo needs to be made - practice ammo wins every time in my book.

My .10
Click to expand...

And that's part of the reason that I left the 1911 family and switched to the Sig P220. I have run in excess of 1000 rounds without a cleaning with zero issues. That's not typical. I am not a fan of Speer ammo either. I bought a case of Lawman because it was priced low. That ammo blows huge clouds of smoke and fouls worse than Remington UMC which is pretty bad.

I have a buddy who bought a P220C and it have run flawlessly right out of the box.

BTW, I agree completely that training is crucial. Training is not going to the range and standing at the 7 yard mark and trying to shoot bulls. There's nothing wrong with target practice, but that's not training. Get professional instruction; train for scenarios; learn challenging drills; add stress; add failure drills; get more professional training; rinse repeat!
 
Cimarron56 said:
And that's part of the reason that I left the 1911 family and switched to the Sig P220.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the 1911 platform, but a tuned one will cost more. They were never designed to be 3". Commander and Govt models are fine. My primary is on its second slide and the frame still has around 75K on it.

Obviously, I'm a fan of the 220 also and I've broken my share of SIGs. If you shoot any platform enough it will break even with proper maintenance. The rails go at around 35-40K on the aluminum frames and I actually prefer the older rolled slides with the aluminum frames. The stainless models are heavy pigs and it has taken SIG several years to correct some of the QA issues they were having. The models between the early 2000s and just a few years ago were nothing like the quality they produced in the mid 90s and earlier. I'm glad they are starting to swing back from seeing how many bling versions of each model they could crank out.
 
Last edited:
You guys are awesome. Some fantastic advice, all born from experience. The training mandate is something that has already been drilled I to me, which is part of why I am not interested in something "ultralight."I don't want to be punished for trying to become proficient with a sidearm.


Michael
 
M4Super90 said:
Nothing wrong with the 1911 platform, but a tuned one will cost more. They were never designed to be 3". Commander and Govt models are fine. My primary is on its second slide and the frame still has around 75K on it.

Obviously, I'm a fan of the 220 also and I've broken my share of SIGs. If you shoot any platform enough it will break even with proper maintenance. The rails go at around 35-40K on the aluminum frames and I actually prefer the older rolled slides with the aluminum frames. The stainless models are heavy pigs and it has taken SIG several years to correct some of the QA issues they were having. The models between the early 2000s and just a few years ago were nothing like the quality they produced in the mid 90s and earlier. I'm glad they are starting to swing back from seeing how many bling versions of each model they could crank out.
Click to expand...

I have only used up one so far. Overall, however, I have been very satisfied with the reliability and durability of Sig's P Series. I am fairly sure that you have a good deal more experience than I do. I feel fortunate to shoot 20-25k round per year; I only wish that I had the time and $$$ to get more training and practice time.

I am glad to see the shift back to higher quality as well. I like to keep things simple and sound (thus my affinity for FF Knives). I tend to focus on core models with a few improved features. I have had only limited experience with their AR platforms, but I have heard that they initially had some QC issues.
 
Cimarron56 said:
I have only used up one so far. Overall, however, I have been very satisfied with the reliability and durability of Sig's P Series. I am fairly sure that you have a good deal more experience than I do. I feel fortunate to shoot 20-25k round per year; I only wish that I had the time and $$$ to get more training and practice time.

I am glad to see the shift back to higher quality as well. I like to keep things simple and sound (thus my affinity for FF Knives). I tend to focus on core models with a few improved features. I have had only limited experience with their AR platforms, but I have heard that they initially had some QC issues.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that. That's a ton of shooting. There's only a few years I broke 30k and that was when I was training for nationals, shooting several matches a week, and doing classes on top of all that. The time is the killer for me these days. Just not enough of it!
 
Cimarron56 said:
I have only used up one so far. Overall, however, I have been very satisfied with the reliability and durability of Sig's P Series. I am fairly sure that you have a good deal more experience than I do. I feel fortunate to shoot 20-25k round per year; I only wish that I had the time and $$$ to get more training and practice time.

I am glad to see the shift back to higher quality as well. I like to keep things simple and sound (thus my affinity for FF Knives). I tend to focus on core models with a few improved features. I have had only limited experience with their AR platforms, but I have heard that they initially had some QC issues.
Click to expand...

Prob with the Sig ARs are their older models tended not to be as modular as others. No flip flopping receivers and uppers, other parts, that kind of stuff. Gave them a bit of a bad name. Not sure if they changed that at all over time, but thats the way it used to be.
 
Does anyone have recommendations for a decent 1911? I'm turning 21 soon and I'm thinking either Dan Wesson or Les Baer but idk if I'll be able to afford it. All help is welcomed!
 
Brendanruch said:
Does anyone have recommendations for a decent 1911? I'm turning 21 soon and I'm thinking either Dan Wesson or Les Baer but idk if I'll be able to afford it. All help is welcomed!
Click to expand...

If you are considering the higher end makers then you may also want to take a look at Ed Brown. I have a stainless Special Forces model and it is the crown jewel of my collection.
 
I love 1911's. I recently got a Colt Lightweight Govt, then that spurred another ligtweight, so I got a Springfield RO Compact, it has an aluminum frame, lots of bells and whistles. It is an amazing gun for the price! I would not hesitate to pick up another Springfield!

-Will
 
The Springfield Range Officer is a great suggestion. Well under you budget and it is an excellent platform to add upgrades as you understand what you want. Several of the smiths I use prefer them as a base gun.

Dan Wesson is not a bad choice either. You might also look at Fusion. Bob Serva sold DW to CZ and started Fusion afterwards. They are more semi custom, but a great gun for the money. I think several of his base models would be under $1500. Although you'd get to pick some options, there will be quite a wait for the build.

I agree with the ED Brown suggestion as well, but that won't even be remotely close to your budget.
 
M4Super90 said:
The Springfield Range Officer is a great suggestion. Well under you budget and it is an excellent platform to add upgrades as you understand what you want. Several of the smiths I use prefer them as a base gun.

Dan Wesson is not a bad choice either. You might also look at Fusion. Bob Serva sold DW to CZ and started Fusion afterwards. They are more semi custom, but a great gun for the money. I think several of his base models would be under $1500. Although you'd get to pick some options, there will be quite a wait for the build.

I agree with the ED Brown suggestion as well, but that won't even be remotely close to your budget.
Click to expand...

I have used Fusion parts and they are WAY better than the average... WAY!
 
Thanks guys! I'll look more into Springfield and Fusion. I don't think I'd be able to swing an Ed Brown at the moment but these other platforms should be a good intro into 1911s for me.

I really appreciate the input
 
I picked up a stainless Springfield Loaded for about $1000. It is packed with features you would normally find on a "custom" 1911. I've pined over Ed Browns/Nighthawks/Wilson Combats but haven't been able to bring myself to spend $2000-$3000 for one. I think the next step for me may be a Dan Wesson as I heard they were as close as you could get to a true "custom" while spending under $2000. Also, as you get into more "custom" 1911s you will notice improved accuracy though you may notice less reliability(drop in the sand/brush off/fire) which is what the 1911 was really designed for. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the tight tolerances and custom fitting on those other models and I'm sure someday I will buy one, just not right now. If you've never owned a 1911 I would suggest getting something middle of the road, like a Springfield, so you can learn about how it functions, take it apart, put it back together, then move onto some of the more "grail" models. Good luck! Its always fun buying guns!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top