What is as good or better than a Colt 1911?

[Hurryin' Hoosier]

Touche, 22lr. Touche! Nicely played.

But you didn't answer my question about removing the firing pin, et al, with a Series 80 set-up, as a matter of course for regular cleaning. And who said anything about a boat?

[WESHOOT2]

What semi-automatic .45 caliber handgun do you think would do as good or better in Military service than the Colt 1911?

Springfield Armory XDm.

[SIGSHR]

IIRC the NAACO Brigadier was in a much more powerful round that the 45 ACP and had an aluminum frame as well.
To keep it serious, I would opt for an S&W 645 or Sig Sauer P226 with a stainless steel frame.

[Mike Irwin]

Personally I would go with a monkey with a flame thrower. .

[Hurryin' Hoosier]

Mike - "Personally I would go with a monkey with a flame thrower."

The way Dear Leader is trying to rape the military, that's what we may wind up with!

[Alpena]

A fullsize USP 45 IMO. I've never been a huge fan of 1911's for anything other than their looks so I may not be the best person to get an answer from. The only time I shot a 1911 it was a Colt Government model that I rented from my local range. After 100 rounds the checkered backstrap left my hand scraped up pretty bad. NOT a pleasant experience although the gun itself shot pretty well. An HK just feels better to me.

[7Cedars]

I firmly believe that there is not a comparible handgun out there currently that would compete. I LOVE the 1911 platform and carried one in the ARNG as an MP in the early nineties. Yes we still had the 1911 and not the M9, thank god! However, there will be something better one day. I can't wait to see it/hold it/fire it, because it will have to be one helluva good weapon to unseat the king!

[RickB]

I think the military would get more mileage out of a new bullet, than a new gun. Handguns have not advanced in design in 100 years, and they probably won't until there's an improvement in the 100yo ammo designs that they shoot.

It's interesting that a lot of people believe that the Beretta 92/M9 is one of the most reliable pistols around, some specifically pointing to the open-top slide without conventional ejection "port" as the reason, but the very brief quote I read about reasons for replacing the M9 included mention of the open slide allowing junk into the gun, ruining reliability.
Which is the more important trait?

[LockedBreech]

It's not a super popular view in the shooting community, but I think as a practical handgun there are several designs that beat the 1911 in terms of pure toughness and reliability. Glocks, HKs, and M&Ps, among others, have fewer parts and less to go wrong. My opinion only. The 1911 is a still-relevant, still-useful handgun, but I think it has been passed up as a combat gun.

[patriotic]

What's so special about a semi-automatic handgun that holds 8 rounds? S&W makes a revolver that is more compact than the 1911 and holds 8 rounds of much more potent .357. If it wasn't for the 1911's anemic capacity, it would be a perfectly acceptable military handgun......today!

A 230gr .45 cal. slug will put a man down when placed in the center of mass but it will take at least 3 157gr .38/9mm/.357 cal. slugs to do the same. The .45 cal. cartridge came to being as a replacement for the .38 (9mm) cartridges which didn’t do the job against the Moro’s and the reason the 1911 .45 cal. was selected for the US military.

[boltomatic]

Probably the only contender would be the Glock 21. Here is the US we associated Glock with domestic police forces but it was actually designed as a military pistol and many countries issue glocks to their armed forces.

The 1911 is an American classic, and for that reason i would prefer a 1911 if I were to get a .45, but in terms of performance in a military setting, I think the glock might be a little better because of the treatments the metal parts get and Glock's well known ability to function even when severely neglected.

That said, if one is better than the other the difference is probably too small to really matter, both are popular and time tested designs used by thousands of servicemen and women around the world.

[Strafer Gott]

If I can't have my Colt, I would carry my Sig 227. After I trained with it enough to get the same level of proficiency!

[LockedBreech]

Originally Posted by patriotic

A 230gr .45 cal. slug will put a man down when placed in the center of mass but it will take at least 3 157gr .38/9mm/.357 cal. slugs to do the same.

You say that as though it's a fact, but it's drawn out of whole cloth. There's no statistical evidence at all backing up a 3:1 ratio for .357 effectiveness versus .45 effectiveness. In fact, for years the Texas DPS called their 125-grain .357 magnum load "the lightning bolt" because they got a lot of single-hit kills with it.

I'm a fan of the .45, I think it's effective, but it's not magic. It's another .1 of diameter. That'll do well if properly placed, but .45 and .357 have both effectively downed targets in one shot and have had targets up and moving after whole magazine/cylinder dumps.

It's a whole different can of beans that you lumped .357 magnum, .38 special, and 9mm luger into one category based on their diameter, when they are very different rounds in real-world performance that vary widely even within-cartridge.

It's fine to have opinions (heck, I love the .40 S&W, sorta the red-headed stepchild of gun forums, so I'm used to my opinions being disagreed with) but things stated as fact should be facts.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The DPS went back to 9mm in an M and P but found malfunctions and kept the Sigs for a bit.

As we have discussed endlessly - no study shows consistent differences between quality modern 9, 40s and 45s from handguns.

For every round you can find someone who was DRT or kept coming.

The Moro story is a touch more complicated and as been summarized before.

[LockedBreech]

Yeah I was hesitant about mentioning that, I'm not a subscriber to the "one shot stop" theory or anything, I was just disagreeing that an on-target .45 is inherently more effective than an on-target .357. Should have avoided anecdotes.

[NWCP]

The HK45C is being carried by some special forces units from what I've read. I carry a HK45C and really like it. In a Kramer #3 extreme cant horsehide holster it carries comfortably and securely. The pistol can't be beat IMHO.

[ritepath]

I recommend a G20

[whip1]

I can think of about a dozen guns that are better.

[WESHOOT2]

Doesn't the Texas DPS currently use the 357 SIG?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

They used the 357 Sig and then decided to go to 9mm in a M&P. However, the latter had some problems so they kept using the Sigs. If they resolve it, they'll probably go to some 9mm. Someone might have all the details.

[rodfac]

I'd opine that it's the gun though not necessarily the round that counts. If we subject today's current crop of automatic pistols to the same tests that resulted in the selection of the 1911, we might find a better gun or perhaps not. For me, the venerable 1911, especially in it's light weight and shortened 'Commander' variation, is the quinticential military side arm. It was my trusted pal forty plus years ago and remains so to this day. Rod

[verdun59]

I find this "1911 adulation" interesting. Do some of these people really believe what they are saying or is it an effort to keep up with the "in" crowd. There are so many better more dependable pistols, with or without higher capacity, depending on what you want, than "the 100 year old, won every war, old loudmouth". Sure it's an attractive pistol, but holy smokes it's not the end all be all of the gun kingdom.

[Wyosmith]

The 1911 pistol is probably the most copied design in the history of handguns for the last 100 years.
It's been copied by many manufacturers in the USA and also in several other countries and the quality and attention to detail has run from excellent to poor. Added to this fact is the reality that parts are swapped back and forth on millions of guns with results going from good to ill.

So there is a real base of knowledge for hating the 1911 and for loving the 1911 depending on your experience with it and the experience of others which you choose to believe. Some good, some bad, much in-between.

I carried 1911A1s from 7 years as a US Marine and for several more years working for the DOD. I also have carried one as a sheriff’s deputy and for my own pleasure and self prot3ection. I was on the side that never had a problem with those I was issued and of the 5 I have owned one was very unreliable, one would jam very very seldom and the others ran like gravity or the sunrise.

I have used them in this country and in other countries for everything from the gun’s intended purpose to plinking. When I was in the Marines I had a good friend that got one once that would jam about every 8-10 rounds while the one I had seemed to be as reliable as gravity. Both were Colts and both were drawn from the same armory on the same day.

So I think it’s safe to say the 1911 is an excellent design but the individual pistols can be well built or poorly built, and the materials can run from so-so to outstanding.

If we compare the 1911 to a Glock, or an HK or CZ97 the newer guns suffer from none of the problems of having every “tom-dick and harry company” copy their guns, and the aftermarket parts are from newer companies that could not stay in business offering parts for guns made by only one company.

So I have to say I think there are several other 45 cal handguns on the market that are as good as a GOOD 1911. Are any “better”?
What is “better?
Instead of asking if any are “better” we should be asking how we can become better at shooting them and better at using them in combat.

A great fighter with an average gun will beat an average enemy with a great gun 99% of the time
The last 1% is about luck, good or bad and there is nothing we can do to affect that factor.

That’s up to God

[RX-79G]

Wouldn't a really simple "better" be more feed reliable, more protection against internal failures that result in discharges and more portability due to lighter materials?

1911 mags are primitive, throat jobs are considered mandatory by some, and the stock gun won't pass a CA drop test without a Series 80 pin block or a less durable titanium firing pin. At 39 oz it is unnecessarily heavy. Sure, that's great for target shooting, but we aren't talking about use as a target gun.

I had a PC945. It was a 3rd Gen S&W dolled up to feel and shoot like a 1911. It had all the advantages of a 1911 and none of the weaknesses (save weight).


Otherwise, many modern .45s out there are lighter, more reliable and have better internal safeties. In what military circumstance is an HK45 or P220 not going to do what the 1911 can, but do it more dependably (on average) and with less weight to haul around?

[cohoskip]

I carried one in Korea. It worked fine, and I liked it. One of the reasons the Military adopted the Colt was because it would fire under adverse conditions like rain, mud, sand, etc...