Marine Corp New 1911

[Guest 10mm4me]

Everyone here is forgetting that the pistol is the most insignificant weapon out there. IMO, it's just another thing to carry around and clean. I'd rather lug my M4 or SAW around any day.

[G27]

Pretty sure the .mil requires an external safety as part of their designs, no? Seems like I heard that's why Glocks are never part of the testing, but that info is worth what you paid for it...

[Seaslug]

...They’re equipped with a popular night sight made by Novak of Parkers burg, W.Va. It utilizes tritium, a radioactive form of hydrogen,

to power the optic, which is mounted on a Picatinny rail...

Umm...what? Am I the only one to whom this doesn't make any sense? Are we talking about night sights or an optic (almost assuredly the former), and how would you mount either on the picatinny rail of a 1911? Wow...just, wow...

[Guest 5Legion]

Everyone here is forgetting that the pistol is the most insignificant weapon out there. IMO, it's just another thing to carry around and clean. I'd rather lug my M4 or SAW around any day.

+1, it's a back-up, which is why 9mm is generally fine (gasp!)

Check it out - most SOF has gone to the G19. Those HKs never materialized for the SEALS and the MARSOC is very small so they can spend the bucks on a cool guy 1911.

5L

[TGO David]

Yeah, it's almost like they were paid consultants and were intimately involved in its design or something. Sorry I couldn't resist.

Do you think John Moses Browning wouldn't have been a little proud of his creation back in 1915 as well? I don't think there is any room to question LAV's integrity on this matter regardless of the role he played in the creation of the HK45. Clearly you can see from that article that he still feels that HK dropped the ball on several aspects of the HK45 and was not shy on pointing it out.

As for competition... unless you're shooting at targets that return fire, I'm not sure I can see that much of a correlation to how a 1911 runs in a game versus how it runs in the hostile environments of modern battlefields where there is no such thing as a time-out because your gun stopped running.

[TGO David]

Umm...what? Am I the only one to whom this doesn't make any sense? Are we talking about night sights or an optic (almost assuredly the former), and how would you mount either on the picatinny rail of a 1911? Wow...just, wow...

It's pretty clear that the person who wrote the article was not very well versed in the weapons platform about which they were writing.

[Garufa]

So, other than the single-action mechanism and relatively low mag capacity how is the 1911 "out dated". Because it's not plastic? Beause the firing pin is not a striker?

There is no other handgun on this planet that has been through four very serious, brutal and deadly confrontations and is still widely produced and used.

I don't have a dog in this hunt, the military can use whatever they please.

Do we have any members here that have used a 1911 in combat that might shed the light of experience on the issue?

[TGO David]

So, other than the single-action mechanism and relatively low mag capacity how is the 1911 "out dated". Because it's not plastic? Beause the firing pin is not a striker?

How has it evolved and been improved upon?

[titan14]

Of all the platforms that are out there, the 1911/2011 is still by far the one that has the best interface. Plus you can get really high on the gun getting the bore axis more in line with your arm so that recoil management is much better.

It is not a mistake that they completely dominant in USPSA competition either. In the divisions that you can shoot glocks, xd's, M&Ps and JMB's design, The old work horse is overwhelmingly the choice above all others by a huge margin. Among the top shooters who are not endorsed by gun companies and therefore can choose what they want, they choose the "antiquated" 100 year old design almost 100% of the time. Bullseye competitors prefer the platform as well since you can get a great roll trigger and unsurpassed accuracy.

Yes, there are a few big dogs like Dave, Bob and Jessie who have/do run a glock...........But, Jessie switched to the 2011 the moment she became a free agent and I'm certain that Dave would do the same if he left glock, Bob is the only one at the top of the games that actually prefers the glock. Rob Leatham certainly could use an XD in Limited but of course he has never and I'm sure would never do that. And he slaps the trigger.

This year at the Nationals there was only one gun other than JMB's design in the top 20 in the Limited division and zero in open. It's the same year after year.

It's the trigger! The better you get the more it matters! So it makes complete sense to me that our special forces for the most part will sometimes "get it". They train and shoot more.

So until someone invents a better interface that is as manageable and user friendly, you will always see the old gun around. As far as being cost effective.....I have yet to see a plastic gun that has been re-barreled 2 or 3 times. 100 or 200K rounds out of a 1911 is not that special. Jerry Barnhart has a 2011 with over 300K on it and is still going strong.

Hmmm...I really like the info in this post...

Has anyone else "read" this post??

With that being said...I think OUR Military should have the best damn thing available PERIOD.

I love 1911's...but...I think there should be EXTENSIVE testing, in real world scenarios, to find the very best pistol for our boys.

Is this that hard to do? I just don't get it...test EVERY freakin pistol on the market...its for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!

If it's a Glock....so be it...

It it's a 1911...so be it...

If it's a freakin Chinese/Japanese/Taiwanese knock off of the old red ryder BB gun....so be it...

If it's the best....USE IT!!!!

Edited January 27, 2011 by titan14

[Guest Papabear]

Pretty sure the .mil requires an external safety as part of their designs, no? Seems like I heard that's why Glocks are never part of the testing, but that info is worth what you paid for it...

The requirement if I remember right is external hammer for second strike capability and a manual safety

[Guest Papabear]

Yeah, it's almost like they were paid consultants and were intimately involved in its design or something. Sorry I couldn't resist.

This article has been brought up many times and I of course will not seriously attack Larry's intent or integrity. So, I can only speak to my experience with the platform (1911 that is). I'm just not sure how any gun on the planet can be as reliable as any one of the 6 1911/2011 I own. I will routinely run them 2-3k between cleanings during the shooting season (running black bullets and titegroup and if you are in the know, you know how filthy that combo is) with never a fear of a single hiccup. Granted they are full customs, built correctly, and tight as a drum everywhere. However, I've owned many factory guns that would do the same.

I would want nothing else in the field or in competition. Just my opinion. OMV

There are alot of factory guns of different makes that can run 2-3K rounds of dirty ammo through them. That has nothing to do with the 1911's design.

[Guest CK1]

Anyone who knows me knows I'm no 1911 fanboy and I've got more than my fair share of rounds through plastic fantastics... that said, there's just so much good going for them that it's not hard to see why they'll maybe always be in the running: none of the pistols mentioned are near as easy to shoot well (most enlisted men don't exactly get to see too much handgun practice) or blessed with near as good of a trigger, and were the others to wear out they'd need to be thrown away and replaced, a 1911 is worth the time and energy to rebuild.

Other than the Glocks (which lack a manual safety), none of the other options fit IMHO, the H&K's are more expensive than the 1911's and their triggers are crap in comparison, M&P's break too much to be seriously considered, etc., so 1911's still have their place. Yeah, they jam from time to time, so do AR's.

Because of their triggers, just happens that the choice of enthusiasts is also probably the best choice for a novice to score a quality hit, when most of the training goes into the primary long-gun, and the handgun is plan-b, a 1911 as a side-arm makes sense IMO.

Edited January 27, 2011 by CK1

[timcalhoun]

Anyone who knows me knows I'm no 1911 fanboy and I've got more than my fair share of rounds through plastic fantastics... that said, there's just so much good going for them that it's not hard to see why they'll maybe always be in the running: none of the pistols mentioned are near as easy to shoot well (most enlisted men don't exactly get to see too much handgun practice) or blessed with near as good of a trigger, and were the others to wear out they'd need to be thrown away and replaced, a 1911 is worth the time and energy to rebuild.

Other than the Glocks (which lack a manual safety), none of the other options fit IMHO, the H&K's are more expensive than the 1911's and their triggers are crap in comparison, M&P's break too much to be seriously considered, etc., so 1911's still have their place. Yeah, they jam from time to time, so do AR's.

Because of their triggers, just happens that the choice of enthusiasts is also probably the best choice for a novice to score a quality hit, when most of the training goes into the primary long-gun, and the handgun is plan-b, a 1911 as a side-arm makes sense IMO.

I'd say this is a very level headed post.

[USMCJG]

How has it evolved and been improved upon?

Why would it need to be? Messing with perfection makes no sense. Edited January 27, 2011 by USMCJG

[Seaslug]

It's pretty clear that the person who wrote the article was not very well versed in the weapons platform about which they were writing.

No doubt. I would have expected a little more from a website called "Marine Corps Times"...lol. I had to look twice to make sure the article wasn't written by Carolyn McCarthy...

[TGO David]

M&P's break too much to be seriously considered

That's idiotic. You really need to try floating that on M4C and see what sort of responses you get.

I'd say this is a very level headed post.

Because it supports your opinion?

Why would it need to be? Messing with perfection makes no sense.

C'mon... do you really think that the model 1911 is really state of the art for a fighting pistol?

Look, I'm a 1911 fanboy but I also don't think they are the best gear that we can be supplying our troops. And our troops deserve the best gear they can get! But honestly, sometimes I think if I posted that the sky was blue outside, some folks on this forum would argue with me just because it was me who said it.

[mav]

But honestly, sometimes I think if I posted that the sky was blue outside, some folks on this forum would argue with me just because it was me who said it.

Well, I might argue with you on that point because it is cloudy outside.

[G27]

Well, I might argue with you on that point because it is cloudy outside.

*ahem*

[Punisher84]

That's idiotic. You really need to try floating that on M4C and see what sort of responses you get.

Because it supports your opinion?

C'mon... do you really think that the model 1911 is really state of the art for a fighting pistol?

Look, I'm a 1911 fanboy but I also don't think they are the best gear that we can be supplying our troops. And our troops deserve the best gear they can get! But honestly, sometimes I think if I posted that the sky was blue outside, some folks on this forum would argue with me just because it was me who said it.

Lol David come on man. M&P's aren't good enough to get that much love. I saw several break in just 3 years at a range. And we all look favorably upon people who agree with us.

Is the 1911 the best for our troops? Hard to say really. I know I carry a 1911 because I shoot well with it and it conceals well. Now open carry in a combat situation...I could dig a Glock 22.

[mav]

*ahem*

Nice pic. I liked it so much I put it on as wallpaper on my work computer.

[TGO David]

Lol David come on man. M&P's aren't good enough to get that much love. I saw several break in just 3 years at a range. And we all look favorably upon people who agree with us.

Broke, how? I've seen some high end 1911's choke and die on the range too. Does that mean they are crap?

[Punisher84]

Broke, how? I've seen some high end 1911's choke and die on the range too. Does that mean they are crap?

I go by how many I've seen have issues. I don't think M&Ps are complete crap, but I'd buy several other guns before I'd buy one.

Keep in mind the general distaste for Kimber on here and yet I carry one that has been flawless for about 2000 rounds. It's all personal experience.

[TGO David]

Keep in mind the general distaste for Kimber on here and yet I carry one that has been flawless for about 2000 rounds. It's all personal experience.

Respectfully, personal experience shouldn't be the metric by which a service pistol is chosen for an entire branch of the armed forces. I'd rather they use unbiased data resulting from brutal testing. If the M&P fails that, so be it. I've personally witnessed all sorts of fluke **** in my life, but that doesn't mean that those instances were typical.

[Guest CK1]

That's idiotic. You really need to try floating that on M4C and see what sort of responses you get.

Idiotic? Really? Think you're being a little verbose do to the fact that you're the big-administrator-head-honcho throwing around comments like that. There's no need to be rude.

That said, so if it's cool on M4C it's GTG? I spend a fair amount of time on that board and have taken a few classes from/with some of the senior members over there, and figuratively, according to most of that bunch of guys we all MUST do nearly everything exactly the same as what is recommended at a Magpul Dynamics class or on one of their DVDs or lest we admit to the world that we are truly meek and not "real operators" like they are (not to mention that the better part of most of the "tactical community" on M4C or anywhere else can hardly do a single push-up or pull-up).

M&P's fail often, it's well-documented all over the web and if you were to attend many IDPA or USPSA/IPSC matches you too would see them failing more than similar-type guns, I've had 3 different examples fail on myself and have witnessed 3 others fail in my presence. Your argument for a polymer service pistol is cogent, but not for the M&P IMHO.

[TGO David]

Idiotic? Really? Think you're being a little verbose do to the fact that you're the big-administrator-head-honcho throwing around comments like that. There's no need to be rude.

You know, I stopped reading your post after I made it one sentence into it and saw that you were being a whiney-ass about my position as owner of this forum. I refuse to discuss anything with anyone who can't handle the fact that I have an opinion and that it has nothing to do with my position on staff.