There are some reports (blown out of proportion, no pun intended) of Glocks "exploding" when shot. It was just a funny jibe based on The Pontificator's post.
1911 Handgun...
- Thread starter jwcarlson
- Start date
There are some reports (blown out of proportion, no pun intended) of Glocks "exploding" when shot. It was just a funny jibe based on The Pontificator's post.
It's been reported that certain Glocks, mostly their 40 S&W versions have problems with unsupported chambers. Most problems seem to be associated with reloads.
I've shot a ton of stuff through my Glock 22 (40S&W) without any problems. Most of my law enforcement friends also carry this same gun.
Pretty much every manufacture of handguns has had a Kaboom happen now and then. It's certainly not isolated to Glocks.
When I'm not working, I'm carrying my RIA 1911 GI. Work days it's usually my Taurus 850 snubbie due to work dress. Even though it only cost a bit over $300 new(had it for quite a while, they're more now), I certainly trust my life to it. Regardless of what you spend, time spent tuning and familiarizing youself with your carry piece, as well as a good holster and belt, are absolutely essential.
simon1
Self Ignored by Vista
I picked up my series 80 Colt for $300 off of another cop about 20 years or so ago; don't think you can get one for that now though. I'd love to have a series 70.
But, after I sent it off to Bill Wilson...it was a little more than your price range, even back then. He does do good work though.
+1 on another poster's comment on the barrel length less than Commander models having issues. Even after I got it back from Wilson's I still had a bit of an issue with stovepiping. I switched from 185 grain bullets to 230 grain, and got a Wolff recoil spring tuning kit (I'm of the "if it stovepipes it's either the load or the recoil spring" school) and played with it a bit. It worked like a Swiss watch after that...and I took out the recoil buffer that was popular then.
It has done it's job...it has worked well, very well, in "critical incidents." That means it's a firefight veteran.
Sorry for the smudges on the slide...I carried it today and hadn't wiped it off before I took a pic.
I also second a previous poster's suggestion of getting a basic one until you find out what you want. You can probably get a used, full sized, Colt for about $700-$800 now...I think. Haven't shopped around for awhile. The other brands mentioned are good, but I just like the appeal of the Colt brand, even though they are getting overpriced in some circumstances.
But, after I sent it off to Bill Wilson...it was a little more than your price range, even back then. He does do good work though.
+1 on another poster's comment on the barrel length less than Commander models having issues. Even after I got it back from Wilson's I still had a bit of an issue with stovepiping. I switched from 185 grain bullets to 230 grain, and got a Wolff recoil spring tuning kit (I'm of the "if it stovepipes it's either the load or the recoil spring" school) and played with it a bit. It worked like a Swiss watch after that...and I took out the recoil buffer that was popular then.
It has done it's job...it has worked well, very well, in "critical incidents." That means it's a firefight veteran.
Sorry for the smudges on the slide...I carried it today and hadn't wiped it off before I took a pic.
I also second a previous poster's suggestion of getting a basic one until you find out what you want. You can probably get a used, full sized, Colt for about $700-$800 now...I think. Haven't shopped around for awhile. The other brands mentioned are good, but I just like the appeal of the Colt brand, even though they are getting overpriced in some circumstances.
Had to compliment you on that colt, real beauty.
I'm a huge fan of Colt - if you're buying a 1911, the best part about Colt is that while they may not have the "tight tolerances" touted by Kimber, Brown, Wesson et al fans, they just go bang when you need them to. There are a myriad of parts upgrades, especially if you're buying newer models from any manufacturer with MIM (metal injection molded) parts, pick up a Brownells catalogue or bookmark Wilsons site and go to town. It's the one handgun I own that continuously surprises people who "always thought a .45 would kick more" and can't believe how accurate a 100 year old design can be. I had almost forgotten it was the anniversary year, I think I might have a pick up a 5" to commemorate and show my support.
Congrats on getting a 1911. Every red-blooded American needs one.
Here's my Kimber Pro CDP II, but it would probably be more in the >$1000 ballpark.
My favorite gun to shoot!
What just one?
Of course my GI is a bit different, what with the custom work and snake skin grips.
-Alex
Of course my GI is a bit different, what with the custom work and snake skin grips.
-Alex
Me, too, though I never thought that .45 acp was a hard kicker to begin with. I guess the fact that one of the first handguns I ever fired was a 2.5" .44 magnum may have influenced that!
It's been far too long since I bought a new gun, and I don't have a 1911, so... I want a 1911 
I've heard pretty good things about Rock Island *for the money* on various forums - they tend not to jam, at least. The last time I took a defensive handgun class, the one guy with a Les Baer had a jam-o-matic. Definitely not something I'd want to have fun with at the range, much less carry.
Thoughts?
I've heard pretty good things about Rock Island *for the money* on various forums - they tend not to jam, at least. The last time I took a defensive handgun class, the one guy with a Les Baer had a jam-o-matic. Definitely not something I'd want to have fun with at the range, much less carry.
Thoughts?
The 1911 is a way of life and there's far too much to say about it in a small space.
For many years, I shot US "Conventional Bullseye" competition. A .45acp is required for the 3rd series in that competition and it is also acceptable in the 2nd series which is "any centerfire." So, all of us spent hours tweaking and practicing with the 1911.
When it was introduced, it was the first semi-auto pistol adopted by US forces. It had to be reliable. Unfortunately, that reliability came at the expense of accuracy. Tolerances were very loose and the 1911 and the .45acp got a reputation as inaccurate.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The .45 acp is inherently accurate and the 1911 can be made to be accurate. First.... the barrel bushing has to be tightened and the barrel lock-up has to be precise and consistent. For most purposes, the standard barrel might not do it so a barrel-bushing combination is best. Today, there are "drop-in" parts which makes things easier (although not necessarily less expensive). Next is the trigger, which is usually horrendous, out of the box. There are now drop-in sears but a good gunsmith is usually essential, especially when you need to achieve a precise let-off in pounds. Sights are a must and the old fixed sights are usually worthless.
Basically, what shooters did was to tighten up those loose tolerances to make the pistol more accurate. Then reliability was restored by careful polish and tweaking. There were gunsmiths who worked on nothing but 1911's.
Back in the 80's when I started shooting, we'd have to spend about $1000 to get a competition gun.... and that with Colts and Springfields starting off at $300-350 brand-new!
I still shoot my 1911's regularly. I have them all and some of them were "done" by well known armorers like Jimmy Clark and Shocky.
They are fine, fine classic guns. I've had a love-hate relationship with them for 30 years... but now it's mostly love (as my hands become arthritic and I can't shoot them as much).
But... they are old designs and not really "user-friendly" out of the box. They are a challenge to shoot well. If you love old things and are patient, I'd say go for a 1911. If you want a reliable carry-gun that you can master with minimum practice and effort, I'd say go for a Glock or Sig.
For many years, I shot US "Conventional Bullseye" competition. A .45acp is required for the 3rd series in that competition and it is also acceptable in the 2nd series which is "any centerfire." So, all of us spent hours tweaking and practicing with the 1911.
When it was introduced, it was the first semi-auto pistol adopted by US forces. It had to be reliable. Unfortunately, that reliability came at the expense of accuracy. Tolerances were very loose and the 1911 and the .45acp got a reputation as inaccurate.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The .45 acp is inherently accurate and the 1911 can be made to be accurate. First.... the barrel bushing has to be tightened and the barrel lock-up has to be precise and consistent. For most purposes, the standard barrel might not do it so a barrel-bushing combination is best. Today, there are "drop-in" parts which makes things easier (although not necessarily less expensive). Next is the trigger, which is usually horrendous, out of the box. There are now drop-in sears but a good gunsmith is usually essential, especially when you need to achieve a precise let-off in pounds. Sights are a must and the old fixed sights are usually worthless.
Basically, what shooters did was to tighten up those loose tolerances to make the pistol more accurate. Then reliability was restored by careful polish and tweaking. There were gunsmiths who worked on nothing but 1911's.
Back in the 80's when I started shooting, we'd have to spend about $1000 to get a competition gun.... and that with Colts and Springfields starting off at $300-350 brand-new!
I still shoot my 1911's regularly. I have them all and some of them were "done" by well known armorers like Jimmy Clark and Shocky.
They are fine, fine classic guns. I've had a love-hate relationship with them for 30 years... but now it's mostly love (as my hands become arthritic and I can't shoot them as much).
But... they are old designs and not really "user-friendly" out of the box. They are a challenge to shoot well. If you love old things and are patient, I'd say go for a 1911. If you want a reliable carry-gun that you can master with minimum practice and effort, I'd say go for a Glock or Sig.
Unfortunately, Colt quality has become suspect in the past several years. I don't trust any of the Colt-made firearms these days.
I'd opt for an older one if I was buying. The Series 70's were the gunsmith's favorites.
I'd opt for an older one if I was buying. The Series 70's were the gunsmith's favorites.
They've done a much better job in the past couple years, by all reports I've read, my Defender had one issue, ejector pins sheared within the first 80 rounds (stupid MIM crap) but once that was replaced, it has run reliably for 1000 rounds since without a single FTF, FTE. I know people tout the series 70 stuff because they fear the firing pin block, but it's nothing like the horrible Kimber Schwartz unit and I've never had a FTF on my Defender, even with a wilson beavertail. I agree with you on smithing the 1911, but there are so many used 1911's out there that have already been tweaked that you can very easily pick up a gun with 500+ worth of upgrades for the same price as a stocker in many cases. Or you can simply go to one of the boutique manufacturers like Wesson who put out spectacular product for pretty modest money. The thing I like most about Colt, as you mentioned in your first post, and the thing that swayed me to them vs. a comparable 3" kimber or springfield was the loose tolerances - for a carry gun, I heard way too much about Kimber et al needing 500 rounds of break in to "loosen them up" and tons of FTF, stovepipe, return to battery issues (which, ironically I've experienced now with my uber tight Wesson that'll easily do 1" groupings at 25) whereas the Colts were designed to go bang, maybe not with 1" groupings at 25, but when you need it to go bang, it will.
I picked this one up for $399 out the door.
A Taurus PT1911 costs about $600, and needs nothing done to it. They come from the factory with beavertail grip safety, extended ambi thumb safety, ramped & throated, front gripstrap checkered, good sights and trigger. They feed anything, ball, hollowpoint, lead semi-wadcutter, mix and match in the same magazine. Unlike those costing twice as much that need 5oo rounds put through them just to break them in and make them reliable, and the ones costing 3 times the price that handle ball ammo only.
There is a huge cult grown up around the 1911. People spend tons and tons on them, becoming almost like a piece of jewelry.
I've had them, and fired the top end ones. They are nice however, I like other firearms better for various reasons, like capacity, weight, etc... But it truly is a personal preference decision.
I've had them, and fired the top end ones. They are nice however, I like other firearms better for various reasons, like capacity, weight, etc... But it truly is a personal preference decision.
+1 on all of the above. I owned three .45's. One was an Argentinean Army issue parkerized .45 that I bought for $275.00 brand new. Had the barrel throated, the feed ramp polished, installed an extended thumb safety and beavertail safety. Total investment was about $500.00 into the gun and parts and labor. That piece had thousands of rounds through it, no jams, not one. I had a Colt Government Combat model, not to be confused with a Combat Commander, which was a special issue from Colt, series 70 that came with a throated barrel, extended thumb safety, beavertail safety, and polished feed ramp right from the factory. Installed an arched mainspring housing. Finally, I had a Combat Commander, stainless, and had the same work done as I had to the Argentinean Army issue. None of these guns were "competition" pistols. They were all for carry and self-defense. While they may not have been the most accurate boys on the block, each of them went "bang" each and every time, and I had total confidence in all three as a carry/self-defense sidearm. They were also accurate enough for self-defense purposes. Look around and if you can find a reasonably priced "G.I." pistol, then you can have some simple and inexpensive changes done which will give you a fine weapon that works every time. Just my .02.
