acaixguard

The first trigger pull being longer would also take most people longer to get an ACCURATE shot on target. By the time my 1911 is out of the holster, the safety is already off with my thumb riding on it. Also there should never be a need to ever decock a 1911. Maybe the only times I do are after I check to make sure it's empty and I store it away, but is is just out of habit more than necessity.

Out of the box, the M&P trigger is typically worse than a Glock's.

I've experienced with quite a few different sling positions. I've concluded that using a QD end plate (by the castle nut) and another QD at the start of my rail (near the receiver) is what works best for me. Hangs nicely, and allows for easy shoulder to shoulder transitions. As mentioned previously, avoid 3 point slings. That was my first sling many years ago, and they suck donkey balls!

Definitely download by 1. The rule of thumb is you should be able to press down on a the top round of the mag and have a little bit of space remaining between the top round and the feed lips.

Colt all the way. They are one of the few companies that actually conform to true mil-spec standards. There is nothing really wrong with the M&P15, but it's not on the same level as a Colt, BCM, DD, Noveske, and a couple others.

Amongst everything you've listed, I'd go with either the series 70 reissue and save up for a full custom job by a good smith, or the M&P. The series 70 is a great base gun which many top smiths love to build on. But be warned that having a properly built 1911 that has quality components and proper fitting will not be cheap. I don't care what anyone says...you WILL NOT have a quality 1911 that means modern reliability criteria without spending at least $2K on a new one. Many people may piss and moan at that statement, but it's the truth. The M&P is probably one of the better modern guns you can get today. Improving the trigger on it is easy enough if you decide you don't like the factory one. If you're considering a 9mm striker gun, I'd highly suggest a Walther PPQ as well. Avoid the XD series.

Oh man, not to rain on your choices, but I'd avoid the Para at all costs. Para belongs in the same class as Taurus, Kel-Tec, etc. That is, avoid at all costs! Paras are regarded by any serious 1911 as among the worst of the big names. They are known for incredibly crappy parts and poor fit, along with a poor reliability record. When I say crappy parts, I mean pretty much every piece of the gun, including the frame. Talk to any reputable 1911 pistolsmith, and you'll likely hear similar sentiments.

That's a beauty. Congrats!

Regarding the stamped/folded slide of the older SIGs vs the forgings of the newer ones, I agree with you there. I preferred the stamped ones cause they made the overall gun feel nicer, but nobody would argue that they are stronger than the newer stainless slides. People liked the stamped slides because they just worked, and very little went wrong with SIGs back in those days. I believe the complaints about current SIGs have more to do with the quality of the smaller parts, along with the overall fit. Not to rely completely on what's typed on the errornet, but it's been stated multiple times that SIG began outsourcing the production of those small parts several years ago. I don't have absolute verification of this, but the fact that it's been stated enough times makes me at least think about it. Regarding Cohen, nobody doubts his ability to bring financial success to a company. He is a proven CEO. But we're not talking about a company's increased revenue right (at least I'm not)? Cohen obviously knows a thing or two about marketing, and also how to improve production cost efficiency. What this translates to is funky and often outlandish pistol designs, and most cheaper components and less production time spent per product. While this obviously makes the executive team/board happy, it doesn't put a smile on the faces of those who just care about receiving a top quality product in the end. Maybe the latter represents the minority of the shooting population, but again, I'm talking from the standpoint of an end user who wants the most highly engineered and durable pistol for the money vs those who measure a company's reputation by their financials.

Yes, the internet is to be taken with a grain of salt. But by that statement, anything you say and I are saying shouldn't be taken seriously either right? After all, positive or negative statements on a gun can be discounted just the same. And yes, I'm well aware of separating fact from fiction. The vetting process involves knowing which sources tend to have more credible sources. I don't want to get into which forums are better, but the reason I spend the more time on a particular forum vs anywhere else online is due to the reputations and known credibility of some of the members. When I see a pattern of repeated observations from some of those folks, along with my own personal observations, it's probably safe to give it a little more thought. Here's an example.. http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=133869 DocGKR, who is Dr. Gary Roberts, is a known ballistics expert in the industry. And of course, Ken Hackathorn needs no introduction. Scroll down to where Doc summarizes what Ken said about various pistols, including Glocks and recent SIGs. Would it be wise to discount what the say, just because you read it on a forum? This is an example of how to properly vet what is written online. And forgetting what I read online, I've heard in person, from known professionals including Ken, that SIGs are not what they used to be. Not to mention, from a corporate perspective, it makes sense. The same guy (Ron Cohen) who turned Kimber into a joke of a company is now doing the same thing to SIG. (Oops, I said it...Kimbers do absolutely suck now!)

You clearly said "Don't listen to the naysayers New production g19 gen 4= flawless". This is something one would say if they have personal experience with a number of samples, or at least have a credible source. Now you admit you made this statement based on your personal experience of one sample? Hahahaha The 2 stovepipes I witnessed are worth twice more than your single datapoint of your own pistol. Not to mention, the instructor at the range who recommends people find an older Gen 3 instead of any newer Glock happens to be none other than Larry Vickers. Oh sorry, I forgot to mention earlier, make that 2 instructors that have stated the same thing. Ken Hackathorn also told us this at another class I was at. I've been the one, as a Glock fan, pointing out the realities that yes, all guns have strength and weaknesses, and there you are saying that those who point out flaws in Glocks are naysayers. And by your own admission, you make the bold statement that myself and others are naysayers based on your experience of 1 sample. Sorry, I'm not the one getting my panties in a bunch, cause I'm the one who can accept that my guns may not be perfect, and am prepared to deal with it. Who's the tool now huh?

Ding ding ding! This is known as the 10-8 1911 extract test I believe. It shows when there is inadequate tension in an extractor, and that the gun was reliant on the magazine for support for the casing about to be ejected. My Gen3 G19 failed this test, with most rounds going down the mag well. The good news is, after I installed the Apex FRE Gen3 extractor, I was getting much more positive extraction, and it passed the 10-8 extraction test.

What do you base this on? Sorry, but to say this as an absolute fact is pretty ignorant. There are quite a few people on various forums reporting extraction issues with Gen 4's after they were released. Very reputable instructors also have stated similar findings. And my limited experience from witnessing Gen 4's (probably still larger than some internet commandos who base their statements on their own sample of 1) already revealed 2 specimens in the same class having extraction problems. This is not to say that Glock hasn't addressed the problem recently, and it sounds like things have gotten better. However, one shooter I know who has a somewhat recent Gen4 still had extraction issues with his sample.

I hope you're right about samples made this year. But I have personally witnessed 2 Gen 4's stovepiping in a class last year. And the instructor (who is well known) said that's been consistent with what he's observed in other classes. I do want a Gen 4 as my next Glock, so I sincerely hope the ejection problems have been put to rest this year.

Not here...I'm not necessarily a German gun fanboy. In fact, I suggested the M&P45 first. The only current German pistols I usually suggest to people are the HK45/P30 or the Walther PPQ.

The parts aren't as durable as they once were. My own immediate observation is that out of the box triggers on older SIGs are also better. Here is some further reading. The fact that this debate even exists, especially on a forum where many people know what they're talking about, should be enough to raise questions. http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=117571 There's a few more threads like the one above too.

I'd highly suggest the M&P 45. If you are dead set against a striker gun, then the HK45. No offense but I'd stay away from any of the guns you listed. None of them are known for quality. SIGs used to be, but their QC took a nosedive since 2005 or so.

The jury's still out on whether the extraction issues on the 9mm Glocks are fixed. It seems that there are less problems from the guns today, but if you follow posts on other forums such as m4carbine.net, people with recently manufactured Gen4's are still having some extraction issues. The good news though, is that the Apex FRE extractor seems like a pretty reliable fix if you happen to get a pistol with weird extraction patterns. Unfortunately, this means another $60 you'd have to shell out just to make a gun run normal.

When it comes to carrying, one needs to dress around the gun, and not the other way around. Unfortunately the most effective means of carrying means you need to give up a little in terms of comfort and convenience. I would not want to carry with any of my athletic shorts. Even a j-frame in the pocket will cause it to sag in short order. My suggestion is to find a relatively comfy set of cargo shorts, and use a proper belt and holster. That means, not a belt you can buy t the mall, and not a crappy holster like Fobus or SERPA.

Here's an updated pic of mine... Daniel Defense M4V5 LW upper, on a DD complete lower (so essentially a DDM4V5 LW) Vltor Imod buttstock, pinned in the 5th position Battlecomp 1.0 (pinned and welded) DD fixed front and rear iron sights Aimpoint T1 on a DD mount (bottom 1/3 witness with irons) BCM Gunfighter Mod 1grip BCM Gunfighter Mod 4 charging handle Surefire X300 Ultra light (12:00 mount) DD Convert (short) vertical foregrip Magpul XTM rail covers Magpul 15/30 PMags (yes, NJ compliant) Blue Force Gear VCAS sling

Well said above! The bottom line is, the SERPA is a poorly designed, poor quality holster. To me, they are on the same level of quality as Fobus. Safariland and G-Code make far better retention holsters, which not only stand up to abuse, but don't carry the increased risk of failing on you at the worst possible moment.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=99259 It's amazing that a debate about the SERPA still even exists today.

Larry Davidson's Shredder grips. As the name implies, they are VERY aggressive. http://www.davidsonknives.com/

Another shot of the Springfield Pro with a Milt Sparks 1AT holster...

My Springfield Armory Professional with an Alessi CQC-S holster...