1911 .45's

[Logicman]

And, as a 'sidekick' to my Springfield 1911, I'll be carrying the Fallkniven A2. Sharper than a step-mother's tongue.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

If you have a favorite 1911 .45 sidearm then I'd love to see it. The 1911's have been in service in the U.S. military since WWI, and even though the Beretta 92 replaced it in the 80's, the 1911's are still used by various military agencies. Kimber has the Warrior SOC modeled after the MARSOC Kimber Warrior. And 'American Sniper' Chris Kyle reportedly carried a Springfield TRP Operator when he was in Iraq.

I have several Springfield TRP Operators and so far they're both 100% reliable with zero FFT, stovepipes, or FTE's, etc. They have adjustable night sights, extended magazine well, and match grade components. The two I have are real nail drivers - very accurate.

Here's a stock photo of the TRP Operator with a full-length rail.

View attachment 67204950

I got out of the 1911 pattern pistols some time ago. I had some nice ones too: Les Baer, Wilson Combat, multiple Kimbers including the Gold Combat and Super Match. That's just to name a few. It makes me almost want to cry when I think about it.

 

[TurtleDude]

Bull. You wouldn't need 15 rounds if you had a .45 .



Comparing a .45 to a 300wm now? LOL. Compare your 9mm to a 300wm and see how you like it.

One lawman reported that the .45 ACP has a 90% kill ratio compared to 75% with the 9mm. While I don't have his original source for that I do have a chart of the stopping power of a .45 JHP to a 9mm JHP, and the .45 wins.

THE STOPPING POWER OF DIFFERENT HANDGUN CARTRIDGES

There's plenty of stories about how bad guys took one 9mm round after another and still kept fighting. I believe the FBI "Dade County Shootout" was just one example. And that's why they pushed for 40mm instead of 9's.

And one other thing - war is hell, and your polymer Glock is not going to hold up, in the long run, better than a steel framed 1911. And when that happens you won't have to like it.

So you take your Glock to war, I'm taking my 1911 .45.

That's crap. no standard pistol has above a 65% first shot stopping ratio. Not in the Evan Marshall study, not in the FBI's multiple studies. Where the 45 ACP has an advantage over the 9mm is when one is limited to FMJ and dealing with adversaries who aren't wearing body armor or heavily padded clothing. The best stopping pistol cartridge (no, I am not including stuff found only in heavy hunting revolvers like the 460 or 500) in the Marshall studies was the hot 357 125 grain JHP. but in more current studies with more modern ammo shows almost no difference between 9, 40 and 45. and as someone who shot Distinguished expert on the US Marshals' Service qualification course with several handguns including an M9, A Sig 226, CZ 75, Glock 17 and 22 (then the FBI issue, the 17 was the USMS issue) and a 1911 (as well as a SW 686 revolver), the GLOCK is probably the easiest to shoot accurately by most people since it doesnt have that long heavy first shot trigger pull that the M9 and the SIG have, and it has less recoil than the 1911. The CZ is the best of the lot for accuracy though.

and GLOCKS last a long time . I have two that have over 30,000 rounds through them and no parts have been replaced save the barrel so I can shoot lead hand Loads.

 

[TurtleDude]

And, as a 'sidekick' to my Springfield 1911, I'll be carrying the Fallkniven A2. Sharper than a step-mother's tongue.

View attachment 67204977

Good brand, Personally I prefer the Randall made knives and for Factory, some of the Cold Steel or SOG blades. but that is a top brand.

 

[Vox]

I got out of the 1911 pattern pistols some time ago. I had some nice ones too: Les Baer, Wilson Combat, multiple Kimbers including the Gold Combat and Super Match. That's just to name a few. It makes me almost want to cry when I think about it.

You can always buy now. They're out there.

 

[Vox]

...no standard pistol has above a 65% first shot stopping ratio. Not in the Evan Marshall study, not in the FBI's multiple studies. Where the 45 ACP has an advantage over the 9mm is when one is limited to FMJ and dealing with adversaries who aren't wearing body armor or heavily padded clothing. The best stopping pistol cartridge (no, I am not including stuff found only in heavy hunting revolvers like the 460 or 500) in the Marshall studies was the hot 357 125 grain JHP. but in more current studies with more modern ammo shows almost no difference between 9, 40 and 45. and as someone who shot Distinguished expert on the US Marshals' Service qualification course with several handguns including an M9, A Sig 226, CZ 75, Glock 17 and 22 (then the FBI issue, the 17 was the USMS issue) and a 1911 (as well as a SW 686 revolver), the GLOCK is probably the easiest to shoot accurately by most people since it doesnt have that long heavy first shot trigger pull that the M9 and the SIG have, and it has less recoil than the 1911. The CZ is the best of the lot for accuracy though. and GLOCKS last a long time . I have two that have over 30,000 rounds through them and no parts have been replaced save the barrel so I can shoot lead hand Loads.

First off...... http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Cbesmsmfk...wyk/s1600/Best+choices+for+defensive+ammo.jpg

Study those pics and ask yourself what you want to use.

Second, you said:

more current studies with more modern ammo shows almost no difference between 9, 40 and 45.

But those photos in the above link tell me there IS a difference......a big one.

And you said:

the GLOCK is probably the easiest to shoot accurately by most people since it doesnt have that long heavy first shot trigger pull that the M9 and the SIG have, and it has less recoil than the 1911.

But the 1911 has the best trigger pull by far.......shot after shot after shot--and recoil is not a problem for the seasoned shooter.

You are correct, though, when you say Glocks last a long time. A long, long, long time.

And life is too precious and enjoyable to spend such a LONG time with an ugly gun.

:mrgreen:

 

[TurtleDude]

First off...... http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Cbesmsmfk...wyk/s1600/Best+choices+for+defensive+ammo.jpg

Study those pics and ask yourself what you want to use.

Second, you said:



But those photos in the above link tell me there IS a difference......a big one.

And you said:



But the 1911 has the best trigger pull by far.......shot after shot after shot--and recoil is not a problem for the seasoned shooter.

You are correct, though, when you say Glocks last a long time. A long, long, long time.

And life is too precious and enjoyable to spend such a LONG time with an ugly gun.

:mrgreen:

uh well I am into winning and surviving depending on why I own weapons. I am blessed to be able to afford all sorts of guns including an original Bill Wilson LE-Compgun (I shot what is now GM levels on the USPSA qualifiers 30 years ago with this gun) and a bunch of other nice 1911s like the top of the line Kimber, RR, and Les Baers. Probably going to get a Dan Wesson since I am running CZ USA and CZ custom rigs in Stock, Custom and 22 divisions of our steel leagues and might as well run the DW in the 1911 division (using a SW Performance Center now). and I spent a couple decades as the firearms instructor for our DOJ component in cases where the attorneys had to be deputized (federal prosecutors who have a need to pack are deputized as US Marshals' service deputies) and issued firearms. And I spent many hours-both on the clock and on my own time reading all those ballistics studies as well as spending a lot of range time with our local FBI office's firearms instructors as well.

The ballistic gelatin is a poor second to actually studies of actual shootings. and the FBI has the greatest library of facts concerning actual studies which is one reason why the FBI has gone back to the 9mm and in ten years the 40 is going to be popular only among USPSA "Limited division" shooters because you can put more rounds in a 40 than a 45 and you cannot load a 9mm or a 38 super etc to "major" power factors in the Limited Division. . I am curious, have any of you on this thread other than me actually shot anyone in self defense with a handgun (or in a military setting).

You also note recoil is not a problem with a seasoned shooter. I disagree. if you have had any joint issues (my left elbow has been surgically repaired twice-some of the damage came from a traumatic injury and half a million arrows shot out of a 45-51 pound olympic bow over the last twenty years but a lot came from the half million pistol rounds I have shot over the last 38 or so years) a 45 is tough on you. and if YOU shoot a ton you often develop a flinch. I know, I was once a world class ISU skeet shooter and I developed a flinch. Took two years to get rid of it. And I have seen it happen to high volume pistol shooters as well. so recoil does become an issue-and experience is no cure for that

at a facility I have trained at for 30 years, all the instructors have gone back to 9mm because 45s and especially 40s were hard on their joints. I love shooting 1911's as I noted I was a Class A IPSC shooter back when that was the top class and I was pure hell in the once hugely popular "bowling pin" events. But I don't keep a 45 ACP for self defense anymore nor carry one

 

[Vox]

I am curious, have any of you on this thread other than me actually shot anyone in self defense with a handgun (or in a military setting).

I don't know about anybody else, but I shot three at Perkins today.

They were looking at my Eggs Benedict with evil intent.

:mrgreen:

Actually, I have learned never to boast about my exploits on forums......it doesn't really translate into credibility.

I do know this, though. You don't have to shoot many thousands of rounds to be a darn good shot and you don't have to be able to shoot four inch groups at 25 yards to defend your life.

You need to be calm in the face of extreme danger and be able to hit center mass reliably at 25 feet and fairly reliably while moving your own body from place to place and shooting at the same time.

You can master that without shooting many, many thousands of rounds. Keep practice fun and healthy.

So if you shoot so much in practice that you wear out your body.......that's just wasteful.

Better to take it easy and stay healthy and flinchless.

 

[braindrain]

Here's a link that will give you a rough idea of what we're talking about.

http://emptormaven.com/img/Pistol_Round_Terminal_Ballistics.jpg




How about you give me a link to prove that?

The link I showed you graphically portrays the actual tissue damage that would result from the various rounds.

I think anyone who looks at those pictures will note the moderate damage done by the 9mm as compared to the massive damage done by the .45 ACP used in the 1911.

Now ask that person which they want in a face to face life or death confrontation.

The link you showed is what billets do in ballistic gelatin. Not human body's. So not actual tissue damage.

The link I gave you talks about the study conducted by the FBI with real humans being shot and the actual effects.
Sorry but I will take real world over lab test results all day long.

 

[TurtleDude]

I don't know about anybody else, but I shot three at Perkins today.

They were looking at my Eggs Benedict with evil intent.

:mrgreen:

Actually, I have learned never to boast about my exploits on forums......it doesn't really translate into credibility.

I do know this, though. You don't have to shoot many thousands of rounds to be a darn good shot and you don't have to be able to shoot four inch groups at 25 yards to defend your life.

You need to be calm in the face of extreme danger and be able to hit center mass reliably at 25 feet and fairly reliably while moving your own body from place to place and shooting at the same time.

You can master that without shooting many, many thousands of rounds. Keep practice fun and healthy.

So if you shoot so much in practice that you wear out your body.......that's just wasteful.

Better to take it easy and stay healthy and flinchless.

UH I was worried about being a pro level USPSA shooter-which I once was. most of the GMs average 50K rounds a year. some more

 

[braindrain]

Bull. You wouldn't need 15 rounds if you had a .45 .

As you yourself said the vast majority of folks in the military are not marksman therefore the more rounds available to get hits on the central nervous system the better.

Comparing a .45 to a 300wm now? LOL. Compare your 9mm to a 300wm and see how you like it.

You quite obviously missed the point. If a 300wm with the massive amount of energy it has fails to stop a small male with a non central nervous zone hit what exactly do you think the effects are with a 45.

One lawman reported that the .45 ACP has a 90% kill ratio compared to 75% with the 9mm. While I don't have his original source for that I do have a chart of the stopping power of a .45 JHP to a 9mm JHP, and the .45 wins.

THE STOPPING POWER OF DIFFERENT HANDGUN CARTRIDGES

Sorry but I don't but near as much stock in one unsourced law man as I do with an official study conducted by the FBI.

There's plenty of stories about how bad guys took one 9mm round after another and still kept fighting. I believe the FBI "Dade County Shootout" was just one example. And that's why they pushed for 40mm instead of 9's.

And I have seen not heard stories of multiple guys talking 556 and 762 rounds and continuing to fight. As I said earlier shot placement is everything. It's why there is a fairly well known saying among those who do this stuff for a living that goes along the lines of amateur talk caliber, pros talk shot placement.

And one other thing - war is hell, and your polymer Glock is not going to hold up, in the long run, better than a steel framed 1911. And when that happens you won't have to like it.

So you take your Glock to war, I'm taking my 1911 .45.

First of all what are you basing you knowledge of war on and second you could not be more wrong. In fact I and thousands of people have been deploying to war armed with polymer pistols and have been doing so since the early days of the war on terror. In fact I had the same issues Glock from 2009 till I switched BNs near the end of 2015. That includes thousands of rounds in training as well as 4 combat rotations. And it was still going strong when I left. The only part on it ever replaced was an extractor that was starting to show wear when it went throughone of its inspections. It was still working flawlessly.


So exactly what war are you taking a 1911 to.

 

[braindrain]

Interesting.

What unit are you talking about?

How many sniper rifles are you talking about?

What are the two scopes you mention?

How is the reticle different?

How much do these scopes cost?

Did you replace the issue scope with your own money?

1st Special Forces Group.

About about 36 or so M110s and just a few less XM2010s.

The guns came with a optic that either has a mil for reticle or a Horus some are leupold with the rest being Nightforce. Tremor2. Everything we bought has either a H59 or the newer purchases are the tremor3.

The ones we bought we all Nightforce scopes and depending on the model are in the 3000 dollar range.

They are all bought with unit money.
Hope that answers your questions.

 

[braindrain]

You realize that what you wrote says nothing about the budget constraints of the military, right?

If the army could buy a satisfactory scope or sniper rifle made mostly of cheaper materials for one third of the cost.....you bet they'd grab a bunch instantly.

Just like they do with the Glocks.

Really because they had a sass actors scope that just wasn't well liked so those were shelved and new ones bought. Of course budget constraints due play a part. No one has unlimited budgets but if the 1911 was a demonstrable better weapon it would be used. You simply are not talking that much money when dealing with the smaller size of units within SOCOM.

 

[braindrain]

In real life face to face confrontations we don't get to "round off" numbers.

Yes, in real life pistol ammo knocks men down. It does that by inflicting sufficient damage to cause the man to fall to the ground. This is better called "Shocking Power." It is real. It causes people to fall down.

This usually happens with damage to the central nervous system--example, the spine. The advantage of the .45 ACP over the 9mm is that it delivers more energy and can thus damage the spine when a hit in the same spot NEAR the spine with a 9mm would not deliver sufficient damage to the spine (note the width of the damage done by each round as shown on the link I provided).

So, shocking power can make a difference. It can save your life.

Killing and shocking power do indeed have measurable differences.

The most well-known example was in the famous FBI Miami shootout with two well-armed and tough perps where several agents died or were badly wounded.

One of the perps took a hit early in the fight from a 9mm that entered his side and was headed directly for his heart but lacked the power to get there and didn't do enough damage on the way.

That perp kept on fighting and killed and wounded several FBI agents who could have been spared had that bullet possessed more shocking power, done more damage and put him out of the fight more quickly.

Yes, in that case even a slightly more powerful round would have reached the heart.

Degrees of power DO matter.

Sorry but the FBI itself disagrees with as demonstrated by the link I posted. Why do you think you know more then them.
And no you don't know that a slightly more powerful round would reached the heart. That is just you guessing. It could have been deflected of a rib or any number of things. One thing I have seen first hand is the inability to predict the bullet will travel when it enters the human body. Bullets do not travel in straight lines inside of a human. That is a fact.

And while any round may knock someone down in rare circumstances it's just that rare. I have seen guys take 7.62 rounds to the chest not get knocked down. That's significantly more power than a 45.

 

[braindrain]

The point you're missing is that most combat soldiers and civilians aren't expert marksmen with a sidearm, so when you don't nail someone in the vital places, knock-down power is extremely important. The .45 ACP is well known for it's stopping power. At that point it's all about the transfer of kinetic energy. A 230 grain .45 slug simply carries more energy with it than a 9mm.



Well, I prefer American made 1911 steel on the battlefield instead of Austrian polymer. But to each his own.

Have fun at the range!

Unfortunately the vast majority of that stopping power that it is known for is a myth. The only shots that are going to quickly take someone out of the fight are hits to the central nervous system. Not hits close to the CNS. So the more rounds you have to attempt to hit those areas the better off you are as like you said the majority of folks in the military are not expert marksman.

Unlike you my polymer pistol is for going to war which it has done a fair number of times already not for the range. At the range it really doesn't matter what pistol you use.

 

[braindrain]

uh well I am into winning and surviving depending on why I own weapons. I am blessed to be able to afford all sorts of guns including an original Bill Wilson LE-Compgun (I shot what is now GM levels on the USPSA qualifiers 30 years ago with this gun) and a bunch of other nice 1911s like the top of the line Kimber, RR, and Les Baers. Probably going to get a Dan Wesson since I am running CZ USA and CZ custom rigs in Stock, Custom and 22 divisions of our steel leagues and might as well run the DW in the 1911 division (using a SW Performance Center now). and I spent a couple decades as the firearms instructor for our DOJ component in cases where the attorneys had to be deputized (federal prosecutors who have a need to pack are deputized as US Marshals' service deputies) and issued firearms. And I spent many hours-both on the clock and on my own time reading all those ballistics studies as well as spending a lot of range time with our local FBI office's firearms instructors as well.

The ballistic gelatin is a poor second to actually studies of actual shootings. and the FBI has the greatest library of facts concerning actual studies which is one reason why the FBI has gone back to the 9mm and in ten years the 40 is going to be popular only among USPSA "Limited division" shooters because you can put more rounds in a 40 than a 45 and you cannot load a 9mm or a 38 super etc to "major" power factors in the Limited Division. . I am curious, have any of you on this thread other than me actually shot anyone in self defense with a handgun (or in a military setting).

You also note recoil is not a problem with a seasoned shooter. I disagree. if you have had any joint issues (my left elbow has been surgically repaired twice-some of the damage came from a traumatic injury and half a million arrows shot out of a 45-51 pound olympic bow over the last twenty years but a lot came from the half million pistol rounds I have shot over the last 38 or so years) a 45 is tough on you. and if YOU shoot a ton you often develop a flinch. I know, I was once a world class ISU skeet shooter and I developed a flinch. Took two years to get rid of it. And I have seen it happen to high volume pistol shooters as well. so recoil does become an issue-and experience is no cure for that

at a facility I have trained at for 30 years, all the instructors have gone back to 9mm because 45s and especially 40s were hard on their joints. I love shooting 1911's as I noted I was a Class A IPSC shooter back when that was the top class and I was pure hell in the once hugely popular "bowling pin" events. But I don't keep a 45 ACP for self defense anymore nor carry one

Just wanted to say I agree with pretty much everything in this post.

I have never used my pistol to shoot someone thankfully but one of my teammates did in a room a couple over from me as we were clearing a house. Also know a few other guys who did but I wasn't there with them. Thankfully having to use a pistol in combat is rather rare.

 

[braindrain]

I don't know about anybody else, but I shot three at Perkins today.

They were looking at my Eggs Benedict with evil intent.

:mrgreen:

Actually, I have learned never to boast about my exploits on forums......it doesn't really translate into credibility.

I do know this, though. You don't have to shoot many thousands of rounds to be a darn good shot and you don't have to be able to shoot four inch groups at 25 yards to defend your life.

You need to be calm in the face of extreme danger and be able to hit center mass reliably at 25 feet and fairly reliably while moving your own body from place to place and shooting at the same time.

You can master that without shooting many, many thousands of rounds. Keep practice fun and healthy.

So if you shoot so much in practice that you wear out your body.......that's just wasteful.

Better to take it easy and stay healthy and flinchless.

Actually yes you do need to shoot thousands of rounds to be truly good with a pistol.
There is virtually no knowledgable instructor who will tell you differently and it's why we spen multiple days of almost every week practicing shooting.

 

[Casper]

Interesting question of which gun one would take, I served with the 1911and have owned several over the years, own one now, but if I had to pick among my personal guns it would also be a Glock, they are reliable as in and far less complicated to fully disassemble and work on. Not to mention that Glocks are everywhere and if one were scrounging for parts the Glock would be far more common. I would go with either the G22 or G19, the G22 is carried by somewhere near to 80% of LEO's and while a .40 cal it does hold far more rounds and the G19 (or G17) both hold more rounds and are far easier to shoot, not to mention that 9mm is about as common as on can get and ammo could become a concern. I love the 1911, it looks like a gun should look, but when faced with the reality of needing a reliable high capacity easily served handgun I will pick up the Glock.
All that said, would pick any of my AR's over any handgun is a combat situation, the advantages are all in a rifles favor.

 

[notquiteright]

No, the HiPower was a nice 9mm with a high capacity magazine, but was never any competition for the 1911.......which was a far better military weapon all around.

History and dozens of militaries say otherwise. The High power was adopted by dozens of nations, it was built around the world for the military... the 1911 was adopted by only one major power (given free or dirt cheap to our 'allies')

The High Power 'loses' to the 1911 only because the US made millions of them and didn't want to upgrade... eace

 

[notquiteright]

Light weight is wonderful.....and who needs "man-stopping" power? (Until you actually are in a situation where one shot must stop.......a man.)

Course that 'argument' falls a bit short of reality... my ammo didn't cost me anything, I have ZERO problem with using 4 when you think one would do...

Yes weight counts when you spend three days humping your body weight in GI crap to then spend 15 minutes in terror. The 9mm and 5.556 both have man stopping power... millions of dead soldiers can attest to that.

But do tell us all about the times you used one bullet and could only use one...

Fact is, and will remain, you have to hit the other guy where it counts to 'stop' them. Many a dying man has taken his attacker with him... even those shot with a 30 ought... eace

 

[Vox]

History and dozens of militaries say otherwise. The High power was adopted by dozens of nations, it was built around the world for the military... the 1911 was adopted by only one major power (given free or dirt cheap to our 'allies')

The High Power 'loses' to the 1911 only because the US made millions of them and didn't want to upgrade... eace

Whoa. Slow down. :shock:

Let us be honest. The HP was only used by dozens of nations because it was a 9mm and those nations traditionally used that lower-power round and were wedded to it.

They had never used powerful rounds like the .45 ACP and were intimidated by it......some of these nations had even used .32 caliber pistols for some of their personnel.

The HP was made with the lower-power 9mm with those nations in mind as customers because they WANTED that particular beloved small caliber 9mm bullet.

The HP came along a lot later than the 1911 and like all the Browning designs, was quite good, but not his best.

The HP was very similar to the great 1911, although the thumb safety on the HP is too small and too easily missed in fast shooting.

And, of course, it was first made in the 9mm and thus unsuitable for many people who, rightly or wrongly, insist on more power.

That's the full and true story of the old High Power.

 

[Vox]

the vast majority of folks in the military are not marksman therefore the more rounds available to get hits on the central nervous system the better.

This is an interesting point and worthy of discussion.

It is true (and I have noted before) that military and civilian needs are different.

A civilian carrying for self-defense will encounter body armor so rarely that it is not even a consideration.

A military man or woman will encounter it almost all the time.

Thus I can see why our soldiers want the 9mm......faster on the second and subsequent shots and since your best (almost only) hope is to get the head--the nine seems to be a slightly better choice in that scenario.

The civilian on the street is in a different situation. He's not faced with body armor.

I favor the .45 when I think......."Maybe my adversary will be as big as Michael Brown." (I refer to the famous Ferguson man who tried to kill a cop.)

The .45 is the most powerful round I can realistically carry......so that's what I have.

 

[Vox]

The link you showed is what billets do in ballistic gelatin. Not human body's. So not actual tissue damage.

The link I gave you talks about the study conducted by the FBI with real humans being shot and the actual effects.
Sorry but I will take real world over lab test results all day long.

Yet, you must admit that the ballistic gel tests clearly and graphically show the relative power of the two cartridges--and clearly show that the .45 ACP did 200 to 300 percent more destruction than the 9mm.

One cannot just casually ignore that picture.

Now as to real humans being shot......studies are fine, but the failure of that 9mm round in the Miami FBI shootout DID cause the deaths of several FBI agents.

That sticks in my mind somehow.......as real world.

 

[Vox]

UH I was worried about being a pro level USPSA shooter-which I once was. most of the GMs average 50K rounds a year. some more

And that's fine and it was a choice.

And you DID have to bear the consequences of your choice.

I have NO problem with people going for high goals when they are willing to bear the consequences.

I envy you the fun you had as a competitive shooter. Sometimes I wish I had done more of it.

 

[Vox]

If a 300wm with the massive amount of energy it has fails to stop a small male with a non central nervous zone hit what exactly do you think the effects are with a 45.

Impossible question.

Almost every hit on a human body is unique.

Still, it is a fact that degrees of power and degrees of damage do exist.

Other factors being equal, the more powerful round will have a larger area of damage, thus it can kill or disable with a hit some inches farther away from a vital area than the inferior round.

This is simple ballistic and physiological fact.