I like 1911 the most. People always say it is the best among all. If that is the case, why not the millitary and LE all use it as their primary carry? It does comes with different sizes and calibers after all.

Some Dpt's or special units still carry it.

LAPD Swat carries the Kimber TLE/TL II which I happen to own.

The military switched over the the M9 simply because of the 7 round mag capacity of the 1911 vs. the 15 round capacity of the M9 & the universal Nato 9mm round.

 

As for LE once Glock hit the seen and most LE DPT's never looked back from their .38's and .357's. My Brother in law carries a 92 9mm and my Brother carries a SIG P220 in 40 s&w. For a LE dpt to completely change over to a new caliber or side arm is costly, Larger dpt's will have trained Armorers surplus of parts and ammo in the specific cal for their pistols. To just up and trade it all or sell it back at a low cost is not DPT or tax payer friendly. If anything all LE will eventually move to the .40S&W rather then to a 1911 or .45 the same as the FBI did in the same line of pistol they carry now.

Recoil is too great for some people, limited ammunition capacity (7~9 shots depending on the model), lack of double-action (some models do have them I think), and I think it also lacks a drop safety.

 

1911s with double stack mags and hand-grips are quite large and don't suit people with small hands.

 

Great firearm, it will be around as long as human beings have a trigger finger and want something reliable and accurate to use it with.

Well I always hated the .45, now I'm loving them

Marketing

"why not the millitary and LE all use it as their primary carry?"

 

1) From personal experience; The police department I worked for refused because the other officers considered the .45 ACP "too punishing to shoot".

 

2) Pure Politics; The US Military 1911 in .45 ACP was replaced by the(cough, cough) Baretta 9mm ,so the USA could place missiles in Italy and European countries in the early 80's.

(The Italian pistol contract sealed the deal for the missile placement)

 

Don't believe me, look it up!

 

The 1911, .45 ACP was used successfully thru WWI to vietnam by the US.

 

It has proven itself numerous times in battle, enough said.

I like 1911 the most. People always say it is the best among all. If that is the case, why not the millitary and LE all use it as their primary carry? It does comes with different sizes and calibers after all.

 

IF a 1911 is fit properly, it should last for about 150,000 rounds with only minor parts replacements.

The problem is with the cost and time necessary to properly fit that many 1911's.

Many of the divisions you don't hear about everyday (yeah - the "special" ones) do still issue 1911's.

 

Since a 9mm 1911 requires even more fitting to ensure reliability with the shorter 9mm NATO round, this would be way too expensive IMO.

 

Plus, as TB said, Marketing has led many people to believe the Hi Cap Beretta 9mm is a better choice for many of the above mentioned reasons.....ie....recoil tolerance and ease of parts replacement(drop in vs hand fit with a 1911).

The real reason, I unfortunately believe to be the BIG ONE which sealed the deal that Bill from NJ mentioned........POLITICS.

Look it up - you will see how the decision was made to give our soldiers inadequate sidearms.

 

 

 

God bless our troops.

Wow, you guys are saying that Politics came over troop safety? I don't believe it. Next you will be writing that Macnamarra changed the original M16 specs to save money. :?

Well I always hated the .45, now I'm loving them

 

Welcome to the club my friend.

Wow, you guys are saying that Politics came over troop safety? I don't believe it. Next you will be writing that Macnamarra changed the original M16 specs to save money. :?

 

I'm with ya.

US military switched in 1985 to meet a nato standardization mandate that all members issue handgun be in 9mm - we are still using .45acp in 1911a1 + hk socom platforms - .45 + 762 are troop prefered in the sandbox - many 1911's + m14's are being pulled from storage for reissue -

From what I understand, military isn't allowed to use hollow-point bullets, so .45's have more knock-down power than 9mm. Comes in handy when suicide bombers are running at ya.

I like 1911 the most. People always say it is the best among all. If that is the case, why not the millitary and LE all use it as their primary carry? It does comes with different sizes and calibers after all.

 

The 1911 is a great combat pistol and will be around in one form or another for another 100 years at least.

 

Why is it not used by Law Enforcement. Some of the answers have already been given; more recoil, more training required etc. The best way I heard it put was by Massad Ayoob and I will relate basically what he said. The 1911 is undoubtedly one of the best combat pistols in the world. The fact is most LE use a pistol not for combat shooting but as threat management tool. A DA auto (in one form or another and this would include striker fired guns like Glocks) is a better threat maangement tool and also requires less training than a 1911. Available in all calibers as well.

 

As far as military use, the US always crammed the NATO calibers down the throats of NATO countries. 30-06, 7.62 NATO, and 5.56 NATO all became standard calibers in small arms. 60 and 81mm mortars. 105 and 155mm howitzers. At the same time every NATO country used the 9 mm parabellum while we used the 45 ACP. Other things like track shoes for tanks and other repair parts are also standardized in NATO including tactical terms (STANAGS, stanard agreements)

 

It was decided we needed to adopt the 9mm in order to better meet the threat of the Russian Bear (remember this was the early 80s). Going to a 9mm was not considered an issue as far as stopping power as pistols are usually carried by people who only need it for defensive purposes, people not directly involved in fighting with small arms due to job or rank. If you're fighting you're supposed to use a rifle.

 

One consideration was converting 1911s to 9mm. This idea was scrapped as the military had not bought any 1911s since 1945 and they ranged from hardly used to worn out. In fact there was a shortage of handguns in the US military and the 1911s were supplemented by S&Ws, Colts, and Rugers from WWI to the 70s.

 

The first round of tests were won by SIG. They were tenatively adopted and SIG even ran ads at the time with the SIG across the American Flag with a banner something like "choice of the world's finest military forces".

 

Pure Politics; The US Military 1911 in .45 ACP was replaced by the(cough, cough) Baretta 9mm ,so the USA could place missiles in Italy and European countries in the early 80's.

(The Italian pistol contract sealed the deal for the missile placement

 

It wasn't pure politics though Bill. The Russians were worried about the Pershing missile we had in Germany. They were mobile, they couldn't keep track of where they were, and in order to reach an arms agreement the Russians wanted them out. The Reagan administration knew we had much more capable cruise missiles in the inventory which would accomplish the same as the Pershings but the problem was where to put them. Italy was the answer and as Bill stated we bought Berettas in return. The Russians could think they won and we still had the same capability. The missiles in Italy could do the same mission as the Pershings. They could also do a lot more damage than 45s vs 9mms. New tests were conducted and they were won by Beretta (who was #2 in the original test). There was also a side benefit. Beretta had to expand a plant in MD, creating quite a few new jobs without anyone in the US laying out the cash.

 

I apologize for taking up all this space but it wasn't a simple answer.

 

I like the Beretta, have used it, but in a 9mm I'd prefer a Glock (not around in the early 80s).

The M9 is a fine pistol.

Great write up Griz, lot's of cool information.

I actually carried a 1911 when i was in the military not too long ago, and loved it. When i was overseas if i recall correctly the 1911 I would always check out of the armory was made in 1951. As for the m9, it didn't fit right in my hand, so I avoided it. But i can say they are very devastating at close to moderate range.

Very well written and explained GRIZ.

 

Excellent, and informative.

 

Thank you Sir.

Thanks for all the replies.

+1 on the Griz reply. I still love my 92FS but I love my 45's too!

i never liked 1911s. out of the box theyre overrated. theyre heavy, grip is too slim, and limited ammo cap. ill take my beretta and glock over a 1911 any day when the zombies attack. the only reason i bought a GI 45 is because im a WWII buff, and wanted something close to the real thing.

 

if hell freezes over and a CCW ever gets passed in NJ, a 1911 would be the last thing id carry.

I personally love the 1911 systems. I have used the M9 in theater and other taskers, and I was never a big fan. I wish I would've had the opportunity to use a 1911 instead. Nice write up, GRIZ

a 1911 would be the last thing id carry.

 

ditto - but not because of the reasons you mentioned.

a 1911 would be the last thing id carry.

 

ditto - but not because of the reasons you mentioned.

 

And those would be.........?

Give me a good ole 1911 and I am a happy man. After shooting Armory Grade pistols for 4 years, just about any commercial pistol is a welcome edition. I am also big enought to pull off carrying one. That is an issue for others of smaller stature.

Give me a good ole 1911 and I am a happy man. After shooting Armory Grade pistols for 4 years, just about any commercial pistol is a welcome edition. I am also big enought to pull off carrying one. That is an issue for others of smaller stature.

 

springfield and kimber took care of that with compacts..

If I'm carrying concealed, I would prefer to carry something lighter - and you know my 1911 is fairly light being scandium framed.

Secondly, I sweat, enough that I would be worried about wood anything near my body and many 1911's have wood grips.

Third, I want something with more than 8 rds - (yes, this pushes my beloved Bersa to backup gun territory.)

Fourth, I want something without a safety. Pull and shoot, period. If I'm going to use it, i want the extra 0.03 seconds that dropping the safety takes.

Fifth, I don't want anything with an exposed hammer

 

Many of the compact 1911's have function issues.

Certainly, I too have enough human frame to hide the 1911 frame... but.

If I'm carrying concealed, I would prefer to carry something lighter - and you know my 1911 is fairly light being scandium framed. Your 1911 is ridiculously light. Your not going to get much lighter than that and atleast you know that thing will go boom every time.

Secondly, I sweat, enough that I would be worried about wood anything near my body and many 1911's have wood grips. A lot of guys make new grips for them, so thats always an option

Third, I want something with more than 8 rds - (yes, this pushes my beloved Bersa to backup gun territory.) yes and no. I guess if you find yourself in a situation where you need more than 8 rds, your kinda F'd as it is, but I guess it doesn't hurt to come prepared

Fourth, I want something without a safety. Pull and shoot, period. If I'm going to use it, i want the extra 0.03 seconds that dropping the safety takes. I know if your shoot the way Tim showed me, your grip actually releases the safety on the gun. Also because the 1911's have the grip safety, you can technically leave the safety as the slide off

Fifth, I don't want anything with an exposed hammer this was definitely your best point. That is the one downside of hte 1911 and one of the things I have been thinking about. But your 1911 is similar to the CBOB and those guys say they have no problem with the hammer because its sorta concealed.

 

Many of the compact 1911's have function issues.

 

But it definitely does come down to what you feel comfortable with, and what fits your frame etc etc. It'll be interesting to see how the I like carrying the CBOB. If it ends up I don't like it 100%, whats the problem with adding another gun to the collection

Dan, the only point I question is #4. The safety is removed as you draw the gun and bring it into position, there is no extra time involved. One fluid motion. It takes more time to place your finger on the trigger than it does to disengage the safety.

 

Other than that, I think you should carry what you are comfortable with.

I was thinking the same thing TB, As the gun is drawn the safety is turned off before you have your finger on the trigger.

 

Although it is one step less you have to remember, and if you are familiarized with drawing a glock you may forget to take the safety off..that would be a bitch..

Matt, cocked and locked is the only way to carry a 1911. It has a safety and should be used.