After posting a story on the latest “micro-9” pistol on social media last month, a close associate commented along the lines of “oh, no, it’s not a 1911!” followed with indications of sarcastic laughter. Just like any make, model, class of firearm, you can always find someone who’s absolutely against it.
The “Fudd-lore” critics who point at the “it won two world wars” strawman ignore a few facts … like the ‘classic fighting handgun’ types ignore aspects of pistolcraft that give the advantage to modern striker-fired 9mm pistols.
Similarly, a “Gun Guys” installment on the Wilson Combat YouTube channel saw my friend Mas Ayoob trying to explain that, yes, the 45 is actually better than the 9mm. That’s something I used to cling to before cynicism set in. That cynicism led me to believe that handguns are “pitiful little popguns” and that, often, the success – whether it’s a break in contact or a cessation of hostilities due to incapacitation – is largely up to (1) projectile placement and (2) the attitude of the “shootee.”
During the latest ammo drought, I used a few firearms – the Gen5 GLOCK 23 in 40 Auto as well as a few 45 pistols – to conserve 9x19mm ammo for the micro compact-moderate capacity pistols I knew were coming. I found that, as long as I didn’t overdo it, the larger calibers left me none the worse for wear. In fact, the Generation 5 GLOCKs in 40 S&W seem only slightly more enthusiastic than a 9mm on this old shooter. The 45 Auto gives a shove, not a ‘snap.’ Still, older folks are often served by less recoil – like new shooters are.
So, at the last of this year’s retiree-LEOSA events, a retired coworker arrived and I was interested to see that he was carrying a small Kimber 1911 in 45 Auto. I recall that when the agency finally moved away from the last of the 3rd Generation S&W autos in 45, he was unimpressed with the replacement – the GLOCK in 40 Auto. That was largely due to the caliber because, you know, bigger bullets and “they don’t make a ’46.’”
Kimber’s 1911 line has gotten a bad rap for years. I’ve known a number of people who’ve actually carried them – Walt Rauch being one and he didn’t tolerate unreliable guns. Out of the nine or so I’ve tried out over the years, I can’t report a lot of trouble out of any of them. That said, I don’t doubt there have been intermittent quality control issues. As for my friend’s heater, I thought it was a two-tone pistol, blue/black over ‘stainless-‘ silver with the “Ultra Carry” type frame (think “Officer ACP”) with a “Pro Carry” size slide, 4” barrel/slide.
All I could find on their website was the two-tone Ultra Carry II – and I believe that was the model he had. An alloy-frame 45, it had the newer 7-shot magazines (originally, the Colt OACP had six-round magazines). The retiree said he’d wanted a new gun to commemorate his retirement – that occasion was several years prior to the current market insanity. He specified a Kimber 1911 “made for concealed carry” when he went to the gun shop. He looked at the available models and couldn’t decide. His granddaughter was with him and he said, “you pick it out.”
The one she picked was the one he purchased. We were side-by-side on the firing line. I had a gun I was evaluating for the wires and he had his commemorative autoloader. Except for magazines that “self-disassembled” when striking the ground, he had no stoppages that I saw and, I believe, he cleaned the course.
That made me consider how much ‘obsolescence’ there is to that platform.
Aside from the S&W revolver line that sprang from the Hand Ejector, what other handgun model has the longevity of the Model of 1911 and variants?
As Ken Hackathorn notes – and I’ve repeated here before – if you care for your defense pistol the way you maintain your lawn mower, the 1911 pistols are not for you. Noted instructor-analyst-provocateur Claude Werner refers to the 1911 auto line as “PAR” – for “pathetic ancient religion,” an apparent Star Wars reference – and he has extensive experience with the platform. Compared to other autos of its era – the early 20th Century – it’s vastly better. Like any other machine, it has to be built to appropriate tolerances with appropriate parts; it needs fresh springs, enough lube and decent magazines (remember the M9 magazines fiasco of the early part of the GWOT?).
Claude notes “it’s time has passed.” As you can get any number of service/service compact autos that run 100% out of the box, he has a point. Still, there are current 1911-form sidearms that are better than previously made guns – due to improvements in metallurgy, better springs, and lessons learned over the last century and change.
When I started down this path, I saw the 1911 as the “end” and couldn’t imagine anything would ever replace it. Surprisingly, with a range of innovations, it has been surpassed by modern guns better suited for casual users who aren’t serious student of the craft. They’ve taken the ‘fantastic plastic’ to places not contemplated by those of us who were here before them.
Simple is good.
While the guns I regularly carry – overwhelmingly the G19, with the somewhat more discreet S&W Shield when discretion is better than valor, either backed up by a small revolver – aren’t 1911s, I’ve not completely abandoned the platform. After development of the comparative standards examinations, I felt the project wasn’t complete until a 1911-variant was on the scoreboard. How did it do? It kept up with modern service autos – easily. They were mostly 9mm pistols and the 1911 was in 45 ACP.
The legacy service pistol will easily outlive me. I’m okay with that. It’s a great design actually built with the best ergonomics – before anyone coined that term. It’s the standard by which other service pistols are judged … to this very day.
And that’s more critical than Fudds, Millennials, “world wars won” records and internet buffoonery.
-- Rich Grassi