Now I understand why you're so concerned over bore axis......,
The pistol I carry/train with the most is a 229dak. No safety, no hammer to de-cock, nothing........... Amazingly enough, I can grab my 1911 and have "zero" issues. I can grab a DA/SA handgun and have "zero" issues. I'm sure if we put a timer on all the systems involved, I'd be slightly faster with my 229 from a duty rig, simply because that's my 12+ hour a day setup. I'm also sure it wouldn't be enough of a difference that I'd worry about it.
I never carried my 1911 due to our old policy that, I'm sure, was formulated by bean-counters and insurance folks..........it has since been rewritten by actual street cops. I'll be carrying it a lot more now.
I'm a big fan of the double action revolver, and have spent many years training with them and carrying them for self-defense. They are, in my way of thinking, superior for personal defense carry to an auto pistol possessing a thumb safety. That said, I was for many years a big proponent of the 1911, and trained with and carried them for many years (yes, I'm an older guy who's had lots of long phases in thinking about handgun carry and shooting). I defended the same ideas you folks are now defending, i.e., that those who argue the superiority of the Glock setup vs the 1911 just haven't put in the time to master the grip and correct draw stroke. I was equally arrogant about it. Been there, done that. Had it down pat. I read and studied Jeff Cooper, the whole deal.
I'm not saying it's a bad choice at all. Just not the best choice, all things considered, as I don't believe the advantages of a thumb safety outweigh its (admittedly) slight disadvantages, which come down to KISS and Murphy's Law.
I'm not defending anything as, quite frankly, I don't GAS what anyone carries so long as they do so. It seems a bit.......oh, arrogant, maybe?.........to attempt to refer to a system that is still widely in use as obsolete. You rail against one system as "unproven" then another as "obsolete". It's actually a bit humerous for those of us that don't make offering at the Glock alter.
Last edited by NH K9; 06/11/17.
�Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.�
I'm not defending anything as, quite frankly, I don't GAS what anyone carries so long as they do so. It seems a bit.......oh, arrogant, maybe?.........to attempt to refer to a system that is still widely in use as obsolete. You rail against one system as "unproven" then another as "obsolete". It's actually a bit humerous for those of us that don't make offering at the Glock alter.
Are you suggesting that the P320 is a time-proven design compared to the Glock? As for the 1911, it's a very old design, and many advances have been made since its appearance on the scene. The fact that 1) there exist designs that are "obsolete" (surpassed by better designs in the ensuing 100+ years is perhaps the more accurate way to say it), and 2) there exist designs that are too new to be thought of as time-proven, is not an argument supporting the notion that there are no designs which are both time-proven and relatively state of the art.
It cannot reasonably be denied, however, that an additional mechanical stepbeing required between the point you realize a threat exists and when you pull the trigger, is less ideal than if that step were not required. The fact that increased intensive training (or conditioning over a longer period of time) is required to overcome the mechanical disadvantage it represents is proof of this all by itself.
TRH, at the risk of beating a dead horse by repeating what BD already noted, your statement contains 2 assumptions that speak to your level of misunderstanding of the fundamentals that have been shown to result in success in armed confrontations (See SargeMO's recent post for details): 1) the ideas that gripping the 1911 pistol and inactivating the grip safety, or that presenting the pistol and inactivating the thumb safety are sequential, separate steps that slow down the shot, are misconceptions. These are simultaneously synchronized steps that are imbedded in training. Therefore, your assertion can be very reasonably refuted. 2) As to the implication that the time between recognizing the threat and stopping it is somehow protracted, I would refer you to SMO's observation on the OODA loop. A significant enhancement to shortening the front end of the OODA loop is to adopt situational awareness and appropriate mindset so that much of the required OOD (front-end) component can be compressed and only the A remains.
Originally Posted by SargeMO
Train hard for muscle memory* and stay cool in a fight. Dive the OODA loop like a dragster.
TRH, Don't mean to sound overly critical of your apparent subjectivity and possible misinformation, but facts are facts while opinions are.... well, just that.
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty of give me death! P. Henry
I'm not defending anything as, quite frankly, I don't GAS what anyone carries so long as they do so. It seems a bit.......oh, arrogant, maybe?.........to attempt to refer to a system that is still widely in use as obsolete. You rail against one system as "unproven" then another as "obsolete". It's actually a bit humerous for those of us that don't make offering at the Glock alter.
Are you suggesting that the P320 is a time-proven design compared to the Glock? As for the 1911, it's a very old design, and many advances have been made since its appearance on the scene. The fact that 1) there exist designs that are "obsolete" (surpassed by better designs in the ensuing 100+ years is perhaps the more accurate way to say it), and 2) there exist designs that are too new to be thought of as time-proven, is not an argument supporting the notion that there are no designs which are both time-proven and relatively state of the art.
So, boiled down, "my" gun's design is juuuuusssttt right!
I'm not suggesting anything. The 320 won the contract and the 1911 will do its job as effeciently now as it did for my relatives in foreign lands........facts. I'm glad you've found your "solution" in the Glock and they will fill any role with no issues. I place my well-being into the hands of Sigs without any concerns whatsoever.
�Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.�
As much as some us like to poke fun at the 1911, it has been around a long time. It has seen the rise and fall of many good designs and it will be around to see more come and go. Now where did I put my New Balances. Lol.
I think I've said what I want to say on this topic, and stand by it.
Exactly. There are people claiming to be able to do something vastly different and better than you, but rather than asking "how?" You just keep burying your head deeper in the sand. There are people here with a knowledge base so far above yours that you don't even know what you don't know. And if you were really interested in getting better you'd shut up and start taking notes.
In my mind, what sets the 1911 apart is that I see it as a handgunner's handgun. A fine pistol for someone who enjoys handguns, and everything about them. Someone who knows his weapons inside and out.
There are arguably better choices for the occasional user, or the emergency user.
I think I've said what I want to say on this topic, and stand by it.
Exactly. There are people claiming to be able to do something vastly different and better than you, but rather than asking "how?" You just keep burying your head deeper in the sand. There are people here with a knowledge base so far above yours that you don't even know what you don't know. And if you were really interested in getting better you'd shut up and start taking notes.
Amazing arrogance. And, worse yet, you seem oblivious to it.
I see quite a few folks bumbling around with newer gun designs on the public ranges. Have a screwed up back, so my 1911 is a pain to carry anymore. But then...... any gun is a pain to carry.
Not everybody is fluid in thought or action, maybe some newer designs help with that. My guess is that if of the "average"..............they're screwed no matter what they pick.
IMHO if one thinks the 1911 safety is a problem, then they have a problem. It just comes off as the gun comes up. Automatically.
Still see quite a few that the safety is on when gun is up. For them they just can't do it as it moves. Some move halfway, then click it off, then finish bringing the gun up.
Longtime shooters too.
Quite comical. But then so are the anti 1911 guys that blast the friggin ground..
Seen guys that have hunted for yrs screw up their rifles or shotguns too. Add a little hurry to things and they just can't do it. From what little I've seen, the guys that flub it have MBAs.
Seen one old timer NRA instructor guy recommend the .380 1911 guns for total new shooters (esp women). While the shooting industry mags have quite a few articles about female customers and how not to insult them......... I hang out at a pretty decent volume shop....................most do like the pink pieces of crap (price and color major factors). Those given a traditional DA auto or 1911 usually have problems, at the start, and down the road.
One lady came to shoot the range. Salesman asked her if she needed any other help..............she was rude and told him she knew what she was doing! 15 mins go by, nothing on the range. Finally comes out and says she has a problem.
Yup, cartridges backwards in mag.
Another younger hottie was all about the lingo, really playing it up with the staff..........asking about a scope for her husband. Talked of this and that and experience..............picks a decent scope out, and promptly slaps it right up to her eyeball.....proclaiming "excellent view".
Having pointed out just those two (of many others)...........and seeing plenty of the "average customer" in my area................how in the flying flip can the NRA dumbstructor push 1911 style guns onto complete noobs is beyond me.
Have seen similar from other instructors. Must be a gumball machine around somewhere with those certifications.
FWIW the majority of the noobs later have J frames.
In my mind, what sets the 1911 apart is that I see it as a handgunner's handgun. A fine pistol for someone who enjoys handguns, and everything about them. Someone who knows his weapons inside and out.
There are arguably better choices for the occasional user, or the emergency user.
Big +1, MM. It's a hand gunner's handgun is a great way to put it.
The blindness from subjectivity is indistinguishable from the darkness of ignorance.
Just to clarify, no one here has said that they have personal difficulty handling a 1911. What some have asserted is that there are now better designs more in tune with modern trends in thinking about concealed carry, personal defense, sidearms. One point wherein modern trends depart favorably from the 1911 regards the absence of a manual thumb safety, which entirely eliminates the possibility of a failure to disengage it in the gravest extreme. This is a statement about technology, not one about an inability to handle a 1911 correctly, although many of the 1911's devotees like to frame it in that way any time someone disagrees with them on this point.
To take this in a slightly different direction, would any of the 1911's devotees care to provide their arguments in favor of having a thumb safety on a personal defense sidearm? I think that might be interesting.
It's that really nice, crisp, trigger, after all, that makes the thumb safety necessary on the 1911, so perhaps you place a higher value on that than on the elimination of an extra step in the way of getting the first round down range. Is that what it comes down to?
Here's a question: what is it about the 1911 that causes you to choose a type of sidearm that requires a thumb safety? Is it only the crisp trigger? Something else?
