HK 1911?

[T.Stahl]

Now, that HK has buried the roller-lock and gas-delayed blowback and makes AR-clones and striker-fired Glock-substitutes.
Now, that even SIG, Ruger and S&W make 1911s, when will HK jump on that wagon, too? ;)

[SAWBONES]

Doubt it will ever happen.

HK has been making pistols with the Browning tilting-barrel locking-system at least since the advent of the USP series, but has shown no indication of producing a 1911 clone thus far.

[gtmtnbiker98]

Hk1911 = hk45

[Dagga Boy]

Hk1911 = hk45

For the win.

[GardoneVT]

.
Now, that even SIG, Ruger and S&W make 1911s, when will HK jump on that wagon, too? ;)

http://pistol-training.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/HK45-week5-raindrops.jpg

[WDW]

Never. It was suggested and the end result was the HK45, which is just fine. It makes no sense for a company like HK to make a 1911.

[breakingtime91]

ya there is a interview somewhere that has Larry Vickers saying it started as a 1911 and then Sig dropped their 1911... this led HK to rethink their own 1911 program.

[Default.mp3]

HK GmbH did design an HK-style M1911 pistol in the early 2000's for an American SOF unit and for commercial sale. The design exists in the CAG machines at HK GmbH and I have a drawing of the pistol complete with unit insignia and signitures from those who were involved in the project. It was not pursued not due to the projected unit cost but because at that time HK had TOO MANY projects in the works, many of which were VERY time sensitive. With limited design, testing and prototype staff available to work on SA80 Mid-Life Improvement, XM8, HKM4/HK416, MG4, MP7 and UMP, various pistols and grenade launchers to include GMG, etc. the "HK1911" was dropped.

It would have been a very unique 1911 with CHF barrel with O-ring, external extractor, removable MIL STD 1913 rail, modular controls, special surface finish, fully interchangeable parts, and a high reliability magazine that was one of the reasons the project got started to begin with.

Like the HK416, had the HK1911 been built and adopted by the unit we were working with it is likely that like the HK416 it would have been considered the very best 1911 available and many customers would have purchased it as a result.

G3Kurz


Once again folks contrary to what has been claimed in various gun rags and at training courses, Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn DID NOT design the HK1911 nor did they design the HK45. The pistol design team at HK GmbH lead by chief designer Helmut Weldle designed the guns and the guys in the Protoype Shop there produced the protoypes and those in the Firing Lab tested them. Funny others never mention them. Larry and to a lesser extent Ken had input on what features these two guns were to have as did various other members of HK at that time who always go unmentioned in this revisionist history. In fact the features of the HK45 were in fact what US HK staff had been asking for in the USP45CT for 2 years (for WARCOM) prior to the start of the HK45 effort. There is an annoying tendency for folks to take full credit for something they took part in but did not do all by themselves. The HK1911 and HK45, and HKM4/HK416, are classic examples. Both pistols were a team approach and there is no "I" in team. Without the designers and prototype makers in Oberndorf, and the leadership of then HK CEO Ernst Mauch, neither design would have ever seen the light of day that I can assure you.

G3Kurz

G3Kurz was an employee at H&K USA for quite some time, and retired... mid-2000s? Not sure.


Here you go. Along with text sent along.

The trained eye will make out key elements in this photo taken at HK GmbH during the initial design workup of the HK1911. No prototypes were ever built. The drawing represents what HK designers loaded in the the CAD system after a detailed review oft he basic M1911 design. The HK mods were added later. What would have made the HK-made 1911 unique in the market included:

1. Fully interchangeable parts w/o hand fitting.
2. Link-less locking system.
3. HK CHF barrel with O-ring.
4. Removable MIL STD 1913 rail adapter.
5. External Extractor ala HK style.
6. High reliability HK magazines (8 and 10 rd)
7. HK KTL Surface Finish.
8. Reworked Safety Detent Housing.
9. Modular controls.
10. Dual recoil/buffer spring assembly.
11. Bushingless barrel interface.
12. Other enhancements to improve function and reliability.

It was never built because HK GmbH simply had way too many more pressing R&D efforts on the front burner - XM8, HKM4/HK416, SA80A2, MP7, P30, P46, GMG, MG4, etc. This likely would have been Helmut Weldle's last new handgun design effort.


I believe razzman1 is John Rasmussen, who is on the H&K competitive shooting team.


http://i.imgbox.com/nNwmmdnK.jpg (http://imgbox.com/nNwmmdnK)

[Robert Mitchum]

With my HK 45 (1911) 25 yards
I even have the Compact 45 (1911)

http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s1/cjstinks/hk45001_zps2b402ccc.jpg

[TAZ]

Would love to see a single stack 45 with a quality trigger from HK, but I am not holding my breath.

[45dotACP]

If HK made a 1911?

It would be overpriced :cool:

But if I could do it over, I would much prefer a HK45 over a 1911. Most shooters don't shoot accurately enough to make the 1911's trigger an advantage. Add to that the greater capacity, the Picatinny rail, and the bombproof durability of a HK45 and at a lower price point than most 1911's with mounting options for lights and you've got a better option for a .45 pistol than most 1911's can offer.

[JDM]

When's the last time HK made a metal framed pistol?

[Jim Watson]

What would have made the HK-made 1911 unique in the market included:

1. Fully interchangeable parts w/o hand fitting.
2. Link-less locking system.
3. HK CHF barrel with O-ring.
4. Removable MIL STD 1913 rail adapter.
5. External Extractor ala HK style.
6. High reliability HK magazines (8 and 10 rd)
7. HK KTL Surface Finish.
8. Reworked Safety Detent Housing.
9. Modular controls.
10. Dual recoil/buffer spring assembly.
11. Bushingless barrel interface.
12. Other enhancements to improve function and reliability.

I am sure they could have built a good sound single stack, single action .45 ACP.
But that laundry list does NOT describe a 1911, Items 2,3,5,8,9,10, and 11 are complete departures.
Note that Korth is showing a gun with a 1911 butt and lockwork under a completely different operating system. Same deal.

[Savage Hands]

Funny how H&K's gift cards from their latest promo contained 1911 in it, but I'm sure that's a coincidence.

[TGS]

When's the last time HK made a metal framed pistol?

I believe they did a rerun of the P7 for a German police agency in 2006.

[GardoneVT]

If HK made a 1911?

It would be overpriced :cool:

But if I could do it over, I would much prefer a HK45 over a 1911. Most shooters don't shoot accurately enough to make the 1911's trigger an advantage. Add to that the greater capacity, the Picatinny rail, and the bombproof durability of a HK45 and at a lower price point than most 1911's with mounting options for lights and you've got a better option for a .45 pistol than most 1911's can offer.

The HK45 is one of the best bargains in the gun world. Odd to consider an HK product as a bargain , but qualitatively the idea has merit.

As to 1911s, ill just say this: the biggest personal setback I had as a shooter was thinking I was hot stuff on the line shooting my Taurus* PT1911 and Remington R1E. I was making small holes at 10 yards because the gun fired before I could jerk it off target.


*(I know its not really a 1911 anymore then a Chicago Mayor obeys his oath to the US Constitution,but bear with me).

[45dotACP]

The HK45 is one of the best bargains in the gun world. Odd to consider an HK product as a bargain , but qualitatively the idea has merit.

As to 1911s, ill just say this: the biggest personal setback I had as a shooter was thinking I was hot stuff on the line shooting my Taurus* PT1911 and Remington R1E. I was making small holes at 10 yards because the gun fired before I could jerk it off target.


*(I know its not really a 1911 anymore then a Chicago Mayor obeys his oath to the US Constitution,but bear with me).
Heh, I learned to shoot on Kimbers...it was some time before I learned "reliability" wasn't the same as "A box of ammo without a single malfunction."

With regard to accuracy, transitioning to Glocks and Berettas was not terribly difficult, but I also learned to shoot DA revolvers alongside the Kimbers so it was nice.

[Tamara]

I am sure they could have built a good sound single stack, single action .45 ACP.
But that laundry list does NOT describe a 1911, Items 2,3,5,8,9,10, and 11 are complete departures.
Note that Korth is showing a gun with a 1911 butt and lockwork under a completely different operating system. Same deal.

I realize that "1911" has become a bit of jargon that is completely divorced from "M1911A1", but at what point do we stop calling it a "1911"? Double stack? Ramped barrel? External extractor? Cast frame with integral plunger tube? Firing pin safety? Collet bushing?

[Peally]

I specifically bought an HK45 because I wanted a reliable 1911 style pistol that would work out of the box without me becoming a gunsmith ;)

1911s are such a vast and wonky family of weapons at this point I don't even want to begin to consider wading into that cluster-frick for a carry weapon

[Tamara]

http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/nathan-fillion-well-nevermind.gif

[Peally]

Hey you both have a point ;)

To me, "1911" has become an umbrella term for a vast range of quality, and frankly their reputation in my mind has taken quite the hit unless we're talking the Cadillac brands. It's not all of them, but when you call everything from a Maserati to a Kia the same thing there's a hell of a lot of room for WTF. For me the ones in my price range simply aren't worth the work and research when I can buy a LEGO that works out of the box, at least defensive/work pistol wise. Call me lazy :D

[BWT]

1911's are analogous to me to AR15's.

The operation hasn't changed that much. But there are many things that are different.

The first AR15's had 20" barrels. An AR15 carbine RE, mid length gas, 14.5", with pic rail, and a railed hand guard is similar to what a 1911A1 was compared to modern 1911's.

Almost every part has experienced a change in either how it's processed or modified.

Just my $.02

That's not a bad thing, if it works.

Beaver tail grip safeties, long triggers, modern sights, and commander hammers are improvements.

[Jim Watson]

I realize that "1911" has become a bit of jargon that is completely divorced from "M1911A1", but at what point do we stop calling it a "1911"? Double stack? Ramped barrel? External extractor? Cast frame with integral plunger tube? Firing pin safety? Collet bushing?

I am not a collector purist and am willing to call a reasonable approximation of the base gun a "1911" as Internet Shorthand.
But enough is enough:
Double stack? No, STI called theirs a "2011." OK.
Ramped barrel? No, not interchangeable with standard.
External extractor? No, not interchangeable with standard.
Cast frame? OK, acceptable cost cutting in spite of Internet Commando Metallurgist Expert Pronouncements.
integral plunger tube? OK, no effect on operation, sturdier; not a user replaceable part anyhow.
Firing pin safety? Colt was doing that in the 1930s, I guess we have to put up with it now.
Collet bushing? Obsolete, feared by many, who cares? Readily replaceable with standard.


Beaver tail grip safeties, long triggers, modern sights, and commander hammers are improvements.

I LIKE the beavertail.
Uh, they STARTED OUT with long triggers, the short was introduced to suit the needs of the times, then the long came back to suit the Modern Technique, along with flat mainspring housings.
Sights you can see are a major improvement, see Cooper from several decades ago.
I fail to see how the commander hammer is an improvement except as needed to clear a beavertail.


Back to the OP; I think a H&K with the ergonomics of a 1911 but with such changes as suit their notions and the advantages of single source procurement would be a Fine Thing.

[Robinson]

I specifically bought an HK45 because I wanted a reliable 1911 style pistol that would work out of the box without me becoming a gunsmith ;)

1911s are such a vast and wonky family of weapons at this point I don't even want to begin to consider wading into that cluster-frick for a carry weapon

Buying a pistol that can still be referred to as a '1911' for all intents and that works isn't all that difficult -- there are several makers who actually make pretty good ones that tend to work. I do typically have some changes made to mine, but that mostly amounts to sights and other small parts according to my preference. I think the question is whether someone really wants to use a 1911 and if they know why they want to use one.

Personally I have just been using them a long time and I like them. If suddenly all the 1911s in the world disappeared, after saying 'well darn!' I would pick up a metal double action pistol and move on. I've been shooting double action revolvers a long time too.

[Peally]

I hear you, and I believe it. I'm just a lazy individual that never had that itch to own a 1911 real bad. I have a Garand for my 'Murica fix :D

My purchasing criteria for the HK was a 45 chambered full size hammer fired pistol that had big controls and fit my hand while still being a reasonable size (the alternative FNX-45 is huge). If it hadn't been around I probably would have gone a 1911 route, but it was so I didn't.

[WDW]

I specifically bought an HK45 because I wanted a reliable 1911 style pistol that would work out of the box without me becoming a gunsmith ;)

1911s are such a vast and wonky family of weapons at this point I don't even want to begin to consider wading into that cluster-frick for a carry weapon
Your average current production Colt will work just fine. None of mine have been any less reliable than any other gun. I wouldn't generalize the entire field of 1911's as wonky.

[BWT]

I am not a collector purist and am willing to call a reasonable approximation of the base gun a "1911" as Internet Shorthand.
But enough is enough:
Double stack? No, STI called theirs a "2011." OK.
Ramped barrel? No, not interchangeable with standard.
External extractor? No, not interchangeable with standard.
Cast frame? OK, acceptable cost cutting in spite of Internet Commando Metallurgist Expert Pronouncements.
integral plunger tube? OK, no effect on operation, sturdier; not a user replaceable part anyhow.
Firing pin safety? Colt was doing that in the 1930s, I guess we have to put up with it now.
Collet bushing? Obsolete, feared by many, who cares? Readily replaceable with standard.



I LIKE the beavertail.
Uh, they STARTED OUT with long triggers, the short was introduced to suit the needs of the times, then the long came back to suit the Modern Technique, along with flat mainspring housings.
Sights you can see are a major improvement, see Cooper from several decades ago.
I fail to see how the commander hammer is an improvement except as needed to clear a beavertail.


Back to the OP; I think a H&K with the ergonomics of a 1911 but with such changes as suit their notions and the advantages of single source procurement would be a Fine Thing.

I think functionally a lighter hammer with more momentum will be more beneficial to properly igniting primers with a heavier spring. That's just my opinion.

I wasn't aware that a flat MSH and long trigger were in the initial design. I think the extended thumb safety and slide release are great as well.

Anyway, I don't think I'm going to persuade you otherwise on some features.

I don't think HK is going to introduce a 1911 for reasons cited here and also; they've been down the expensive/difficult to manufacture pistol road before with the P7.

They now only do exclusively polymer framed guns and it's working great for them. I don't see them seeing 1911's as a step forward.

But I'm a dude in SC that doesn't even own any HK products and certainly has no insights on the company's product development.

Take that for what it's worth.

[Jim Watson]

Since HK offers the P45 with a proper thumb safety, there is no need for them to clone a real 1911.
I found the USP45 to be too big in the butt. Maybe the P45 is better.
I wish they made the P30 operable in SAO.

[GardoneVT]

I wish they made the P30 operable in SAO.

Whats wrong with the P30S?

[farscott]

I fail to see how the commander hammer is an improvement except as needed to clear a beavertail.

Biggest issue I experience with the spur hammer is getting the concealment garment stuck between the hammer and the grip safety. For some reason, this does not happen to me with a rowel hammer. Second issue is that the spur hammer seems to tear up concealment garments at a much faster rate than the rowel hammer.

[YVK]

German + 1911 = Korth PRS. Just leave HK alone, they are busy figuring out how to make a trigger that doesn't entirely suck.

[BLR]

Momentum is mass*velocity, Energy is 0.5*mass*velocity^2

Lighter hammer means less momentum, faster lock time, higher energy.

Primers are indented on momentum of the firing pin, which is a function of the hammer. The pellet is ignited by energy.

Heavier hammers are better for everything other than squeezing a few milliseconds out of lock time.

[BWT]

Momentum is mass*velocity, Energy is 0.5*mass*velocity^2

Lighter hammer means less momentum, faster lock time, higher energy.

Primers are indented on momentum of the firing pin, which is a function of the hammer. The pellet is ignited by energy.

Heavier hammers are better for everything other than squeezing a few milliseconds out of lock time.

Interesting, I'm not an Engineer; I'll admit defeat on that one. I simply thought a lighter hammer with the same or more spring lb rating and faster speed would increase effectiveness. So going back to traditional hammers would be an improvement?

I imagine faster lock time simply is the faster response.

What role does energy play with the hammer? Since it has more energy but less momentum. I struggle to grasp the energy concept. Momentum makes sense; you have speed x mass.

I'm always suspicious of foot pound ratings and energy for any real meaning in ballistics. Knowing you like 10mm can you elaborate on it's value?

ETA: Ellaborate on its value with hammers and ballistics, rather.

[Rich]

I hope not!

[Rich]

Whats wrong with the P30S?

I carry a P30S and the location of safety could be better.
Because of this I use it as a TDA hammer down safety off with rd. in chamber

[BLR]

Interesting, I'm not an Engineer; I'll admit defeat on that one. I simply thought a lighter hammer with the same or more spring lb rating and faster speed would increase effectiveness. So going back to traditional hammers would be an improvement?

I imagine faster lock time simply is the faster response.

What role does energy play with the hammer? Since it has more energy but less momentum. I struggle to grasp the energy concept. Momentum makes sense; you have speed x mass.

I'm always suspicious of foot pound ratings and energy for any real meaning in ballistics. Knowing you like 10mm can you elaborate on it's value?

ETA: Ellaborate on its value with hammers and ballistics, rather.

With the hammer - Deformation of the primer cup is done through momentum. Take a LW hammer, add a Ti firing pin, and a stiff FP spring, and you are now dancing at the edge of reliable ignition for "hard" primers, like Wolfs. But, for most instances, you're in the range for "normal" primer cups, like Federal. Take a heavy hammer, a normal steel firing pin, and you can ensure reliable ignition with those hard cups, but the dwell time might be double. Which might not matter one bit to you and I, but for the dude shooting a mover at the GM level, it very well may.

Kinetic energy, ballistically speaking, is the amount of work that may be done by the bullet. Which includes deforming the bullet itself, cutting tissue, and so on. The problem in correlating terminal ballistic performance is that no two wounds and no two bullets are the same. That said, like horsepower, you really can't have "too much" energy. Until it becomes limiting by recoil, and the sort. This is the reason 9mm ~ 45 in terminal performance, they have approximately the same energy level, so they can create approximately the same wound, assuming bullet design equality, and we aren't shooting through hard materials. At least that's the grossly over similified way KE relates to terminal performance. The real fun is when you start adding in additional variables like cloth and the sort.

If you go to the literature published in the 50s, you'll see a wealth of insight and knowledge on this topic. Today, a review of the literature shows a distinctly trial and error/science project level of knowledge. Technology hasn't moved forward, just the design specifications getting better. Remember, the ammo companies were addressing different customers in 1950 vs 2015.

FWIW, YMMV, etc

[YVK]

Bill, is there a way to explain in layman terms why momentum of a hammer is more important in primer ignition than the energy of it?

I could never understand when energy vs momentum apply. As a frame of reference, I've been hit with 60 mph tennis balls enough times. Not pleasant, but I am alive. A momentum of a 60 mph tennis ball (59 grams x 88 fps) is lower but comparable to a momentum of a 124 gr 9 mm bullet (8 grams x 1100 fps). On a face value it seems that the energies (88^2 vs 1100^2) determine the outcome. Where in my thought process I am making a mistake?

[JAD]

German + 1911 = Korth PRS. Just leave HK alone, they are busy figuring out how to make a trigger that doesn't entirely suck.

Um, dude, Peters-Stahl. Fondled a 10mm once.

[BWT]

Bill, is there a way to explain in layman terms why momentum of a hammer is more important in primer ignition than the energy of it?

I could never understand when energy vs momentum apply. As a frame of reference, I've been hit with 60 mph tennis balls enough times. Not pleasant, but I am alive. A momentum of a 60 mph tennis ball (59 grams x 88 fps) is lower but comparable to a momentum of a 124 gr 9 mm bullet (8 grams x 1100 fps). On a face value it seems that the energies (88^2 vs 1100^2) determine the outcome. Where in my thought process I am making a mistake?

I'm not Bill but mass is half of the equation for momentum. If you reduce the mass but keep the same spring; you're losing momentum.

As far as igniting the primer, it isn't energy that's going to indent the primer which will compress the primer enough to create ignition; it's momentum. The lighter hammer hitting the same pin with the same spring; will equate to less momentum.

In my elementary understanding, the energy probably resides in this situation would be potential energy stored in the spring and in the primer or maybe kinetic energy in the transfer from spring to hammer to pin to primer. However, I'm way out of my lane.

I have no idea for the tennis ball other than the larger surface area and materials of the object; do they have the same energy levels?

ETA: The 9mm also has more momentum, 8x1100 = 8800 versus 59x88=5,192 to have the same momentum it'd have to be around 59 grams at 149 fps. Then you run into the difference in shape/size of projectiles and the influence of the target as well.

I didn't even stay at a holiday inn express.

[BLR]

Bill, is there a way to explain in layman terms why momentum of a hammer is more important in primer ignition than the energy of it?

I could never understand when energy vs momentum apply. As a frame of reference, I've been hit with 60 mph tennis balls enough times. Not pleasant, but I am alive. A momentum of a 60 mph tennis ball (59 grams x 88 fps) is lower but comparable to a momentum of a 124 gr 9 mm bullet (8 grams x 1100 fps). On a face value it seems that the energies (88^2 vs 1100^2) determine the outcome. Where in my thought process I am making a mistake?

Sure thing:

What every HS "physics" class teaches, is momentum is a vector, energy a scalar. That is, momentum has a direction, while energy is an amount. Momentum is often used to describe elastic collisions, such as billiard balls. Energy describes plastic collisions, such as rain drops in water. The fun in terminal ballistics, is understanding what percentages are elastic vs plastic. How much elasticity exists in a bullet? What is the actual rheology of tissue? How does strain rate (in other words velocity) affect it? The more elastic, the more momentum dominates. The more plastic, the more energy dominates. So when the bullet hits the bone, momentum is more important (Golden Earring, tip of the hat to you). Of course, this is a very simplistic solution, and the real fun lies in describing real life.

Which is why energy is the common descriptor of ammunition, rather than momentum. It describes the amount of work available to mushroom/deform the bullet. With the organization I worked with on ammunition, the older guys took a perverse joy in getting the new engineers wrapped around their axle because without fail they had a very poor grasp of momentum vs potential energy vs kinetic energy, and how to use each one.

Momentum enables deformation of the primer cup, but it is energy that ignites the mixture. Chemicals are largely ignorant of momentum, but intensively dependent on energy.

Your tennis ball-bullet comparison falls short in a couple areas. First, total contact area, deformation of the tennis ball upon impact, resilience of the ball vs the bullet, and so on. Then add strain rate to the mix (hint for above, blood and tissue are not Newtonian in ballistic velocity range). This principal escapes many bullet designers today.

Make sense?

[Savage Hands]

Funny how H&K's gift cards from their latest promo contained 1911 in it, but I'm sure that's a coincidence.

http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad251/SShenaniguns/Screenshot_2015-02-18-20-25-44_zpseuus86mz.png

[lightning fast]

An overpriced overpriced service pistol sounds delightful.

(Typed correctly)

[YVK]

Make sense?


Some does, some's hard, but thanks, I'll think through that.

[BLR]

Let me restate a few things, as looking back at my post it's not clear what I'm saying.

Momentum is the better measure of the "force" of a striking object. Energy is a better measure of the potential for the bullet to "do work."

Which is why a 45 recoils so much more than a 9mm. The bullet also "strikes" harder than a 9mm.

[tomr]

Let me restate a few things, as looking back at my post it's not clear what I'm saying.

Momentum is the better measure of the "force" of a striking object. Energy is a better measure of the potential for the bullet to "do work."

Which is why a 45 recoils so much more than a 9mm. The bullet also "strikes" harder than a 9mm.

Not working for me, yet.....

[LOKNLOD]

Collisions, like when bullets hit objects (especially those like a plate rack), I think it's best described as a momentum transfer as conservation of momentum is in play. A typical 45 has more momentum than a typical 9mm and when it impacts a solid object like a plate it the impact imparts a force on the plate which transfers momentum because as the bullet goes to zero velocity the momentum transfers to the plate which then accelerates to a certain velocity such to have equal momentum. This is why a 5-lb plate that a 9mm pushes over seems like it's slapped by the Thor's hammer comparatively when a .45 hits it.
(I'm considering negligible here the momentum of the spall from the bullet splattering and the energy lost as heat, etc, treating it as an elastic collision)

Likewise this is why a bullet that hits a human (let's assume it stops in the body, and is therefore an inelastic collision) can never really have much "knockdown power" because the mass of the human is so large compared to that of the bullet that it is nearly impossible for the combined momentum to have enough velocity to be meaningful. The mechanics are a little different for solid vs soft bodies, but if you shot a plate rack and all the plates weighed 200 lbs like a human they wouldn't move much if at all (unless maybe you had them on one of those physics-class frictionless surfaces...). Whe you factor in the external forces of human body in motion, the only reason a person reacts when a handgun bullet hits them is because their brain tells it to.