+1, although my G30 does group tighter, go figure.
What is up with the 1911 discontent?!?!?
I am sorry that some of you had poor experiences with 1911’s. A properly set-up 1911 or a G17 both work equally well for me. If a pistol can’t run at least a 1000 continuous rounds without problems, I immediately get rid of it, be it a 1911, Glock, or anything else.
The first time I used a 1911 at our local SWAT pistol training certification, I fired 1200 witnessed and documented rounds with ZERO failures to feed or function, all without cleaning the pistol during the course. The other guys with properly set-up 1911’s also had no problems. Officers with Para’s, seized “Franken parts” pistols, and those with poorly executed 1911’s did not fare so well. Since then, I’ve put thousands of rounds through various customized Colt and SA 1911’s at numerous training evolutions with no significant problems—most recently at a LMS sponsored Larry Vickers course in San Jose.
My 1911’s are as equally reliable as my G17’s.
Too many manufacturers these days try to take short cuts on parts quality to reach a specific price point; likewise many vendors fit 1911’s too tight in a quest for match accuracy, rather than striving for combat reliability. Were any of the poor performing 1911’s mentioned in this thread properly modified as a combat pistol by a competent pistolsmith who is experienced with DUTY pistols as opposed to game guns? Likewise, were the pistols properly maintained? These two factors are critical for success with the 1911. Duty 1911’s set-up by Larry Vickers, C&S, Chuck Rogers, Hilton Yam, Don Lazzarini, and others of that ilk are all very reliable and remain that way, as long as they are properly maintained.
As Pat Rogers has discussed, the M1911 MEU-SOC pistols issued to Force Recon, see very hard use, shooting up to 25,000 rounds per year–yet these pistols routinely prove to be reliable and durable. Travel to Range 130 at Camp Pendleton during any training cycle and you will see many Marines shooting their MEU-SOC M1911’s without significant problems–they all seem to make it through the package without failures, something M9’s don’t seem to be able to accomplish; again, witnessed and documented fact. FBI SWAT, LAPD Metro SWAT D-platoon, USMC Force Recon, as well as various USSOC personnel all seem to have no problems running 1911’s. In fact, many of these folks are using their very reliable 1911’s on duty and in combat as I write this. Our fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers didn’t seem to complain about their 1911’s failing to make the grade at Belleau Wood, Guadalcanal, Monte Cassino, Normandy, Bastogne, or Chosin. Perhaps Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn are right when they comment on how much more care and concern went into the building of those wartime 1911’s…Although it rattled and was heavily worn, the tired old 1944 manufactured M1911A1 issued to me in 1989-1990 went bang every time I pulled the trigger…
In this day and age, if someone is not willing to spend the time and money to allow one of the rare pistolsmiths who actually knows how to set-up a combat 1911 and ensures it gets done right, then a 1911 is probably not the way to go. Likewise, 1911 users need to be a bit more diligent in performing periodic maintenance—if that doesn’t happen, then the 1911 is likely not a good choice. As I’ve mentioned before, if someone desires a non-1911 .45 ACP pistol, the S&W M&P or the HK45 are probably the best current choices.
Based on my personal experiences, as well as what I have observed, a properly set-up 1911, a stock Glock 17, or a slightly modified .40 M&P are my top choices for rugged pistols that I would want to rely on in chaotic, stressful combat/duty situations.
A SEAL friend wrote the following while in combat OCONUS a bit ago:
”I’ve been re-reading some of the archived Jeff Cooper Columns in my down time. He has commented that there are two types of American soldiers/Marines over here in Southwest Asia- “those that have 1911’s and those that wish they did.” That is nearly a true statement…Folks, it’s just this simple, for me. Out here, sometimes you can see more clearly and for me one of those things is this: I want a good reliable thugging pistol. I have a comprehensive collection of the major martial handguns in service today, and access to all the rest. I’m not going to clutter up my one “go to war bag” with fluff gear anymore. Unless I’m burrowed into a hide (where a suppressed Mk 23 is an excellent hide defense weapon) I think I’d rather have a good M1911 than any other handgun. I’ve always liked them, but I have a renewed appreciation for the shear functionality and utility of the design. I’d rather choose M1911’s to outfit my Team than SIGs. We have an abundance of SIGs at this time, so that’s what we’re using for most things…Now that my neck is on the line a little more, I would prefer to upgrade to a M1911 if I had the chance. There isn’t as much to the lockwork on a M1911 and there’s a much bigger hole in the barrel. It’s small enough to conceal, but large enough to serve as an adequate secondary…I have A LOT of experience with SIG P226’s. They are outstanding 9mm pistols. But when push comes to shove and shove comes to breaking heads the M1911 is a better tool, in my opinion, than any other handgun.”
And all God’s children said “Amen!”…
The distinction is that the 1911 needs to be properly set-up and then maintained. As you pointed out yourself with these questions:
Were any of the poor performing 1911’s mentioned in this thread properly modified as a combat pistol by a competent pistolsmith who is experienced with DUTY pistols as opposed to game guns? Likewise, were the pistols properly maintained?
Far, far too many of the 1911’s I see in classes, in matches, or at the range during practice will not meet either of these requirements. Both require a level of technical proficiency which is beyond the skill or attention of the typical gun-toter.
As Pat Rogers has discussed, the M1911 MEU-SOC pistols issued to Force Recon, see very hard use, shooting up to 25,000 rounds per year–yet these pistols routinely prove to be reliable and durable.
They’re also hand-built by people with experience making combat pistols, and they receive routine professional maintenance and inspections.
At the initial industry meeting for what would become the JCP program, one of the few people in the room with extensive experience running 1911’s for a whole unit stood up and implored his fellow servicemen not to choose a 1911-pattern pistol specifically because of the time, money, and effort that was required to keep the guns running properly.
I agree completely with your comment here:
In this day and age, if someone is not willing to spend the time and money to allow one of the rare pistolsmiths who actually knows how to set-up a combat 1911 and ensures it gets done right, then a 1911 is probably not the way to go. Likewise, 1911 users need to be a bit more diligent in performing periodic maintenance—if that doesn’t happen, then the 1911 is likely not a good choice. As I’ve mentioned before, if someone desires a non-1911 .45 ACP pistol, the S&W M&P or the HK45 are probably the best current choices.
There are some people who are happy to spend their weekends tuning and tricking out their cars. For the vast, vast majority of us there is a better option simply by choosing a car that works the way we want it to right off the dealer’s lot, and requires only the minimum amount of maintenance. And while the tuners could argue they are getting some kind of improvement performance, the reality is that their cars aren’t doing anything from a practical standpoint that can’t be achieved with a stock car.
The 1911 is fine if you have the skill and resources to get it set up properly and keep it running. Like most things gun related, sadly, 50% of the people think they fall into the top 10% in this regard … which is why we see 1911’s choking at class after class.
If someone’s personal preference for the 1911 is so strong that he’s willing to spend a substantially greater amount of time, money, and effort to own a well-running 1911 compared to any number of other suitable guns that cost much less, work right out of the box, and require much less babysitting … that’s certainly fine. But it should be an informed decision based on a real understanding of the costs compared to the supposed benefits.
With the new Elite Magazines coming out, the 1911 will now be reliable. 
I’m sorry. I just find this so comical. I’m not a 1911 hater. I shoot mine almost EVERY range trip. But we’re almost a hundred years into the 1911 and we still are coming up with the right mag?
I also love these old farts (no one in this thread or on this site) who will rip you for not using modern Red dot sights, yet they still are hanging onto the romance of the legacy pistol design. I guess part of it is whose pocket book any one “expert” is in.
agreed DocGKR, while my glocks are reliable, i carry,and trust my life to a MK:) IV series 70 Combat Commander. D…
I think pistolsmith.com is trying to start a sh*t storm so people will go to there sight. I have had my G21 for years never shot factory loads and never a problem.
The 21 FS has had quite a few changes to the internals specifically the locking block. 30+ years of 1911’s, most of it in the Marine Corps, and I do not agree at all that the 1911 is as reliable as the Glock 17. For one thing there are many more things that can go wrong. They certainly require more maintenance and frequent parts replacement. Plus I’ve seen too many high dollar 1911’s go belly up under pretty light circumstances from some big name 1911 pistolsmiths such as the ones already mentioned in this thread. These are pistols that were kept very clean and well lubed by people who knew what they were doing.
Gents
the story behind that sand test from years ago was the sand issues overseas - we tested the 1911 in 2 flavors, the HK USP tactical, and the Glock 21 - the results shocked everyone; up until that time I did not realize the open channel to the trigger mech was such a big issue in extreme environments - now I recommend a buttplug on all Glock’s as cheap insurance
I am confident that if we would have installed a buttplug on the G21 and ran the test again the results would have been different with the G21 doing alot better
In addition there had been tests conducted to determine if the USP and G21 would be suitable replacements to the 1911’s in use - every single Glock 21 had broken extractors during the testing and at a relatively low round count - this result dovetailed into what I had seen and heard elsewhere in the firearms industry at the time - the G21 had serious fleas and was to be avoided
Perhaps the newer G21’s are better guns - time will tell. I will watch and learn as I travel and train more shooters than all but a very select few of professional trainers - if there is a problem with a gun, optic, mount, ammo, etc. we hear about it and see it very early in the game
As of right now I cannot recommend Glock’s in calibers other than 9mm - period
If you want to ignore that advice that is an individual choice and more power to you - but anyone who knows me will tell you I don’t sugarcoat anything and that I am a straight shooter - as my friend Ken Hackathorn says about me ‘if you don’t want to hear the answer then don’t ask the question - cause Larry could care less if you like the answer or not’
be safe
Larry Vickers
I thought this would also be an appropriate place for this.
Matt
I had an old 1994 G21 – utter dog - and left me with a bad tatse for Glocks for a long time. The trigger safety would bite me (unlike my G23, G17 or 19’s) and it did not like several types of ammo.
My 1911 work gun has (touch wood) been outstanding, and other than FTF’s from dead primers on VERY old ammo - nary a hitch – of course its built off a WWII Ithaca frame - and the parts are all high end. The only major 1911 issues I’ve had came at the LAV/KH Low Light class – and I blame Dingers mags - since the day III with the Elites and PowerMags it worked fine.
Larry,
How did the USP do in the sand tests? My HK45 has been doing well in my “dilettante playing on the range test.”
What exactly are the issues with the G21? Is the locking block to weak for the caliber? Are there issues with the springs (firing pin, trigger, trigger bar, mags, etc.)? What exactly makes this pistol so bad? I have read the same about the Sig P220’s but no real discussion why these are such bad choices.
If any of the above are issues, does it mean one would have to perform the same type of periodic maintenance on the G21 (or the P220 for that matter) that is required with 1911?
I have a 3rd gen G-21 that has been Super reliable and has only malfunctioned due to trying to see how far I could puchs things before it malf’d. I would trust it with my life but if I had to buy it again I would not have bought it.
I have had only good experiences with shooting my Glock 21.
Several months back, I acquired a Glock 21 SF for my new duty / off duty gun. The barrel was replaced with a Bar-Sto unit (provided more case support) since mu department uses the Federal HST +P loads. Truglo T.F.O. sights were installed and the the Ny-1 trigger spring was installed. A 20lb recoil spring with a stainless steel guide rod was added. Also, Wolff extra power mag springs were installed.
I have fired 3,800 rounds so far with out any problems (many times in rainy and dusty conditions) . So far, so good. The Bar-Sto barrel did improve the groupings at 25 yards. I’ll keep you guys posted on this.
I’m in the process of selling a 21SF. Though this has nothing to do with a performance issue. It ran just fine (even with Wolf) but I always found myself having to correct an undergrip.
I like the idea of a double-stack .45 but each one I’ve tried is just too friggin big for my hands. I tried the 21SF thinking it would be better…and it is…barely.
This is not a complaint about the gun, I love Glocks, but unless you have big honkin mitts, consider staying with the single-stack 1911 if you like .45. Myself I’ve sworn off double stacks.
Just something to consider when making a choice.
Did you experience any case failures with the OEM barrel?
Truglo T.F.O. sights were installed and the the Ny-1 trigger spring was installed. A 20lb recoil spring with a stainless steel guide rod was added. Also, Wolff extra power mag springs were installed.
Why the change to the stainless rod?
This is exactly why Glock introduced the GAP. Capacity is slightly reduced compared to double stack ACP’s, but you get equal ballistics from a smaller, frame that features better ergonomics for many users.
The 230 gr +P HST rounds left a slightly bulged portion of the case where it was not supported by the stock OEM barrel. The other Glock 21s that are used by some of my co-workers exhibit the same bulges. I wanted to play it safe, and since my department allows custom 1911s for duty/offduty use, I had a Bar-Sto barrel fitted to enhance accuracy.
I’m running a 20 lb. recoil spring to prevent premature slide unlocking. The stock recoil spring is a bit light for the +P rounds.