Just when I thought I was over 1911's.....

[Robinson]

Is that even the case?

To follow on from my previous post above, I think this is a case where "it's the Indian not the arrow".

[Malamute]

I love 1911s. Had a Wilson, a Yost/Bonitz, and a Baer, plus a couple of Kimbers (pre-MIM or whatever). Carried a 5" steel 1911 in a VMII for a long time.

My issue is the cost involved in stocking up the way I'd like to. I want a carry gun, a car gun, an office gun, a bedroom gun, a competition gun, a training gun, and a super-secret carry gun. I can do that by either buying 5 G19s at $500/ea, a G34 at $600, and a G43 at $450, or I can multiply 7x[1911 prices], and I just don't love the 1911 quite that much.

I still toy with the idea of shooting single-stack in competition, and maybe that G34 will turn itself into a Colt Competition, but I wish they'd just charge another $200 for the gun and make it less wrong.

I may have missed it in this thread or elsewhere, but,...is it really required to have a custom level 1911 for it to work reliably enough to carry? I ask this as someone that's never owned a custom level 1911, nor shot one. I understand the beauty of a well done work of mechanical art, but at what level can we really say is "enough" to trust carrying them? Ive had a couple of early 1911s (19-teens) a National Match made in the 60s, and a short Detonics. Those all seemed very functionally reliable, and the NM was scary accurate. One Springfield 191A1 I had somehow turned into a jam-o-matic that I was never able to get to run, but the other 1911s Ive had have been at a reliability level I was comfortable with. Maybe its different levels of reliability one is comfortable with, but does the custom level substantially change the reliability of a basic 1911 dramatically?

[Gary1911A1]

The P07/P09 are fine guns but 1) the safety is not nearly as ergonomic as a 1911 and 2) what makes the 1911 trigger so easy to shoot well is not just the weight and short pull but the fact it is in a track and less subject to lateral errors vs. pivoting trigger.

Yes! This is where the 1911 design has a significant advantage for me over other pistols to one degree or another. It just slides straight back. At speed I can't shoot any other pistol as well.

[Sawyer]

You don't have to go custom. Springfield MC/LB Operator, TRP, or Colt Rail Gun. Dan Wesson Valor/Specialist are getting close to custom cost but are very nice.

[rob_s]

I may have missed it in this thread or elsewhere, but,...is it really required to have a custom level 1911 for it to work reliably enough to carry? I ask this as someone that's never owned a custom level 1911, nor shot one. I understand the beauty of a well done work of mechanical art, but at what level can we really say is "enough" to trust carrying them? Ive had a couple of early 1911s (19-teens) a National Match made in the 60s, and a short Detonics. Those all seemed very functionally reliable, and the NM was scary accurate. One Springfield 191A1 I had somehow turned into a jam-o-matic that I was never able to get to run, but the other 1911s Ive had have been at a reliability level I was comfortable with. Maybe its different levels of reliability one is comfortable with, but does the custom level substantially change the reliability of a basic 1911 dramatically?

I think it's like a lot of things, it's not the odds it's the stakes? (or do I have that backwards, I get confused...)

point being, just like your Springfield experience, what are the chances you're going to get a FUBAR Springfield or Kimber vs. a Wilson or Nighhawk? or Heirloom Precision?

Everyone has that story of the one, or ten, 1911s they own(ed) that always ran, never had a problem, etc. But how representative is that?

The reason I tell people to buy a Colt AR isn't because no other maker *can* get it right, it's because Colt get's it right more often than anyone else.

And even at what I would consider the bottom-of-the-barrel for 1911s, you're still talking nearly 2x the cost of the Glocks, so it's not an insignificant cost, and with what as benefit to that cost? A slidey trigger?

[Malamute]

I think it's like a lot of things, it's not the odds it's the stakes? (or do I have that backwards, I get confused...)

point being, just like your Springfield experience, what are the chances you're going to get a FUBAR Springfield or Kimber vs. a Wilson or Nighhawk? or Heirloom Precision?

Everyone has that story of the one, or ten, 1911s they own(ed) that always ran, never had a problem, etc. But how representative is that?

The reason I tell people to buy a Colt AR isn't because no other maker *can* get it right, it's because Colt get's it right more often than anyone else.

And even at what I would consider the bottom-of-the-barrel for 1911s, you're still talking nearly 2x the cost of the Glocks, so it's not an insignificant cost, and with what as benefit to that cost? A slidey trigger?

I think I understand what youre getting at. I'm not a fan of various 1911 copies, and in general wouldnt consider buying anything other than a Colt for the general money involved (think Ive got about $500 in my 1914 gun). The ones Ive had that worked well were Colt GI guns and the Colt NM. The little Detonics being the only other make Ive shot much (successfully). I don't have a large pool of info to go on regarding various guns, or what people consider acceptable reliability. Trying to learn more about all this.

Its been a long time since I was shooting 1911s much, its mostly been lead bullet reloads, 230 gr RN, some 230 gr TC and the H&G 200 gr SWC. I seem to recall that Id get a failure to feed roughly every 1500 rds in general shooting. The RN bullets fed the best compared to the H&G bullets, but are pretty dismal in shooting live things. I used a mix of magazines, at the time I didn't know much about different magazines, and just used the ones I had. Factory Colts, a couple Wilsons (?), and a couple others of un-remembered heritage. I now understand magazines are better understood. None of it for me at the time was very systematic about which ones worked best, but I always carried the Colts in the gun and as carry spares.

[Sawyer]

I definitely agree that what Rob is saying has basis in fact but I think the gap between top tier production guns and their semi custom brethren had narrowed in recent years.its pretty rare to hear of problems with the guns I noted above.

[Robinson]

This has been discussed a lot in some other threads this year, but there are many different opinions about the reliability of 1911s. Some of this is due to the fact that so many companies make guns they label 1911s -- and not all of them are created equal.

Going with a high end custom or semi-custom gun might really increase the odds of having a gun that works off the bat. Or it might not. It should.

I've owned several makes of 1911s and have had good luck with all the ones I've owned except for one early on that was a full custom build. Now I own only Colts and I have a good level of confidence in my guns. I still feel .45ACP is the best caliber for reliable function in a 1911, but I have transitioned over to 9mm. Mostly my guns run great right out of the box -- but recently I had to send one back to Colt for servicing because it was not ejecting spent cases properly (possibly too heavy a recoil spring). And this was a brand new gun. Another Colt 9mm I bought the same day runs absolutely great with all ammunition and even the factory supplied magazines. I mostly use Wilson Combat mags for carry.

So I never assume a new gun I buy is good to go for carry or HD use until I shoot it a bunch with the types of ammo I need it to function properly with. But OVERALL I have confidence in non-customized Colt 1911s based on my own experience.

[45dotACP]

And even at what I would consider the bottom-of-the-barrel for 1911s, you're still talking nearly 2x the cost of the Glocks, so it's not an insignificant cost, and with what as benefit to that cost? A slidey trigger?

Well if you gotta ask you'll never get it

Bottom of the barrel for me is Springfield Mil-Spec, a bare bones Colt Series 80 or a Range Officer. I'm confident in my ability to get a 1911 running if need be....but neither of those guns is twice the price of a Glock.... unless a Glock is 350-400 bucks in your neck of the woods.

[LockedBreech]

For what it's worth, my $800 Colt Series 80 stainless Government has run 300 out of the box for me over two range trips. I haven't cleaned it yet. I don't use it as a carry or HD gun so out of sheer curiosity I'm seeing how long it'll go without being cared for. So far 300 for 300. Small round count, sample of one, etc., but there's it is. I'll update when it finally chokes on me.

I also should not have fretted so much about Series 70 trigger vs. Series 80 trigger. My O1091 has the best trigger of any gun I own except my Colt Python and is incredibly easy to shoot like an ace.

Since I'm sounding too much like a cheerleader (my XD Mod 2 is AWESOME guys), I'm sure once I pass beyond being an intermediate-level shooter with low-moderate round counts (quite low by this site's standards) I'll notice more nuanced triggers and want tighter groups at longer ranges, but as a purely average shooter the Series 80 bare-bones Colt trigger is very nice.