... and who said that 1911's are dead with the military?

 

 

http://gunnuts.net/2...000-colt-1911s/

IMHO, the people who "love" the M14 have never had to lug one around for a 14 day field problem. I think the M14 was "loved" by guys who sit around the bar at the VFW, 50 years after they had to carry the darn thing.

 

Interesting that they went with the 1911. Maybe it's just the thin design, or it could be as simple as parts were already in the system, or Colt was able to meet the production schedule. A 1911 now is probably better than a Beretta PX4 Storm .45 SOCOM in two years, so it could just come up to who could meet production capacity first.

I'd bet much of it has to do with costs.

IMHO, the people who "love" the M14 have never had to lug one around for a 14 day field problem. I think the M14 was "loved" by guys who sit around the bar at the VFW, 50 years after they had to carry the darn thing.

 

Interesting that they went with the 1911. Maybe it's just the thin design, or it could be as simple as parts were already in the system, or Colt was able to meet the production schedule. A 1911 now is probably better than a Beretta PX4 Storm .45 SOCOM in two years, so it could just come up to who could meet production capacity first.

 

Agree 100% with your M14 comments having carried one over most of Ft Dix, parts of Vietnam (until we got M16s), and parts of Germany.

 

The 1911 is a good platform as long as you're willing to do the training involved. Going to SOCOM, they will do the training. The contract may have been the result of "let's throw some business to Colt" which happens in spite of testing. I still think the M9 is better for general issue to the troops.

I'd bet much of it has to do with costs.

 

What? a 1911 will have much higher costs to produce and buy than a piece of tupperwear.

 

And lets be honest... if you take a look at the competition circles... by far the vast majority of the guns are 1911 design, with a lot of CZ based guns. Furthermore, I would easily argue that the 1911 does not need any more or less training than any other gun.

 

1911 being SA is a lot easier to shoot more accurately, has a far better trigger, and can be completely stripped in the field with no tools, using the gun parts themselves as all the required tools.

 

Does it take a few more mins to clean? Sure... but there is no other gun I would rather "go to" than a 1911/2011 or like it.

just came to me... the whole 1911 vs tupperwear thing is like the car thing... there is no replacement for displacement. =)

When I said "cost", I meant what they ended up getting was probably the least expensive in what they "wanted", as far as type/style/model.

Actually I do wonder... exactly what features will be on these guns... closer to GI spec... or a loaded gun. =) Everyone should have a 1911 or 5.

Here's more on the subject from a over a year ago. I haven't read it as of yet.

 

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2011/01/marine-marsoc-pistol-45cal-012511w/

As much as I LOVE my 1911, I'm not sure it would be my top choice to take into combat. Yes, it's a great weapon, and I would trust my life with it. However I think that it has one issue...capacity. 8+1 just doesn't seem to cut it for me when there's other options that could yield almost double capacity.

Wonder if i can get in on the group buy?

As much as I LOVE my 1911, I'm not sure it would be my top choice to take into combat. Yes, it's a great weapon, and I would trust my life with it. However I think that it has one issue...capacity. 8+1 just doesn't seem to cut it for me when there's other options that could yield almost double capacity.

 

 

I agree. With that statement in mind, I'm assuming the military has no "maximum number of rounds in a semi-auto" limit, correct?

As much as I LOVE my 1911, I'm not sure it would be my top choice to take into combat. Yes, it's a great weapon, and I would trust my life with it. However I think that it has one issue...capacity. 8+1 just doesn't seem to cut it for me when there's other options that could yield almost double capacity.

 

Not that it is a viable option but PARA 14.45 solves the capacity problem. The 14.45 I shot I liked the size, but it had one of the worst 1911 triggers I have ever shot.

 

I agree that plastic fantasic would be the way to go. Glock FTW and I don't even own one.

I agree that plastic fantasic would be the way to go. Glock FTW and I don't even own one.

 

The Glock is a fine pistol, but I have my doubts that the military would ever purchase a gun that had no manual safety. If they went with a polymer pistol in .45 my guess is that it would be the M&P45 (since it can have a safety) or Beretta PX4 SD since it has the same manual of arms as the M9.

 

There would have to be a sea change in order to get the US Military to accept guns with no safety, and I don't see that happening any time soon. All of the Majors and Lt. Colonels in the military now were 1st Lieutenants and Captains back during the FOB years in Iraq and Afghanistan. They did plenty of 15-6 investigations on ND's with M9 pistols. I doubt any of them would risk their careers on picking a gun without a manual safety.

Good point. We should start calling generals and majors.

As much as I LOVE my 1911, I'm not sure it would be my top choice to take into combat. Yes, it's a great weapon, and I would trust my life with it. However I think that it has one issue...capacity. 8+1 just doesn't seem to cut it for me when there's other options that could yield almost double capacity.

 

Ok, make them 2011's... lol

I agree. With that statement in mind, I'm assuming the military has no "maximum number of rounds in a semi-auto" limit, correct?

 

NO, but you have to watch how long that mags would be... LMAO

Not that it is a viable option but PARA 14.45 solves the capacity problem. The 14.45 I shot I liked the size, but it had one of the worst 1911 triggers I have ever shot.

 

I agree that plastic fantasic would be the way to go. Glock FTW and I don't even own one.

 

I havent seen a Para Hicap that ran reliably without a TON of work from a very competent smith. The only Hicap 1911 i would trust would be an STI variant

Since I as a civilian am not bound by the Hague Convention and can use expanding defensive rounds I don't think that there really is a justification to go .45 over 9mm. If I were in the military I would totally want to go to war with a .45 over a 9mm since I'm limited to FMJ.

I havent seen a Para Hicap that ran reliably without a TON of work from a very competent smith. The only Hicap 1911 i would trust would be an STI variant

Fair enough, I only shot two mags worth through my friends 14.45 at the range so I certainly can not speak of its reliablity.

Since I as a civilian am not bound by the Hague Convention and can use expanding defensive rounds I don't think that there really is a justification to go .45 over 9mm. If I were in the military I would totally want to go to war with a .45 over a 9mm since I'm limited to FMJ.

 

Although I agree with you, my rebuttal to this stance would be that I wouldn't want to limit myself to 8+1 round count if I was limited to ball ammo. Yes, round for round, I'd rather take .45 over 9mm...as long as I could obtain a gun with a more practical round count.

Although I agree with you, my rebuttal to this stance would be that I wouldn't want to limit myself to 8+1 round count if I was limited to ball ammo. Yes, round for round, I'd rather take .45 over 9mm...as long as I could obtain a gun with a more practical round count.

We can always compromise with a FNP 45!

Now to get rid of the `16 and we would be moving in the right direction

We can always compromise with a FNP 45!

 

That was EXACTLY my thought