Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:I don't think Colt actually makes 1911's any more.

... look at the picture I posted earlier.

Colt makes mil-spec pistols. Which means they're a good, reliable template which you customize yourself. I don't know what more you could ask for in a gun...

Colts generally had poor breaches that could lead to jamming. You had to "throat" (widen the barrel opening) and polish it and the feed ramp to be assured of reliability. Also the sights on most Colts would have been considered crap.

Better than their WWII counterparts-oh yea and in a big way. Better than the current array of 1911s, hardly.

For example. Kimbers generally are made of stainless steel and aluminum to inhibit rust. They have stainless steel match grade barrels, hammers, and trigger actions. Their sights are either fully adjustable or fixed trijicon night sights.


I see they've taken some of thisw to heart. Excellent. Now they are better guns again.
http://www.coltsmfg.com/Catalog/tabid/61/CatID/15/Default.aspx

Frazzled wrote:I see they've taken some of thisw to heart. Excellent. Now they are better guns again.
http://www.coltsmfg.com/Catalog/tabid/61/CatID/15/Default.aspx

Actually that's part of the problems that the reviews commonly cite was fixed in the 1991.

For example:

This new Colt is possibly the most reliable Pistol I have ever purchased. Almost 1000 rounds fired in about a four hour period and not one problem. No failures to feed. No failures of fire. No failures to extract. No failures to eject. No failures to lock the slide back on an empty mag. No failures at all period

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=32958

There is one final feature worthy of mention, and that is the new bullet ramp/chamber entry throat configuration. The barrel entry throat is a new style designed to allow reliable feeding of all bullet shapes, yet at the same time not allow an excessive amount of case brass to be left unsupported. It looks like two ramps in one, first a large sweeping ramp then a much smaller "dimple" right at the 6 O'clock position. The setup works perfectly in ensuring reliability, yet is much safer than the older and more common method of creating a huge, sweeping entry throat that would often leave unsupported brass at the bottom.

http://www.m1911.org/prodte27.htm

So yeah, Colt listens to their customers.

Frazzled wrote:Colts generally had poor breaches that could lead to jamming. You had to "throat" (widen the barrel opening) and polish it and the feed ramp to be assured of reliability. Also the sights on most Colts would have been considered crap.

I had problems with the Colt 1911 I owned. Stock sights were kinda poor, and I had a few jamming issues.

My S&W 1911 has had no such problems in ~ 8K rounds fired.

This new Colt is possibly the most reliable Pistol I have ever purchased. Almost 1000 rounds fired in about a four hour period and not one problem. No failures to feed. No failures of fire. No failures to extract. No failures to eject. No failures to lock the slide back on an empty mag. No failures at all period

Sorry but a thousand rounds aint gak. I burned through 30,000 or so before I finally retired my Ruger target. My Beretta has gone through about 8,000 at this point and has NEVER jammed, NEVER misfired, and NEVER failed to feed. The problem with Colt was that unless they fixed that , and it was a problem back in the day, I wouldn't trust it.

There is one final feature worthy of mention, and that is the new bullet ramp/chamber entry throat configuration. The barrel entry throat is a new style designed to allow reliable feeding of all bullet shapes, yet at the same time not allow an excessive amount of case brass to be left unsupported. It looks like two ramps in one, first a large sweeping ramp then a much smaller "dimple" right at the 6 O'clock position. The setup works perfectly in ensuring reliability, yet is much safer than the older and more common method of creating a huge, sweeping entry throat that would often leave unsupported brass at the bottom.

So yeah, Colt listens to their customers.

After about 30 years... Again, I'd take a Kimber, STI, Springfield, Wilson Combat, Les Bear, S&W, even a POS Rock Island before I'd buy an over priced Colt 1911. Seriously, if you're going to go for a 1911 style, get a real gun.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:

Stormrider wrote:Purely subjective really. There is no best or worst gun.

Not true, the sniper rifle is the best gun. I would be so awesome with a sniper rifle in a zombie apocalypse. PEW! PEW!

LOL!!!!

Ditto for me. I'm really good at Call of Duty so I know I'd be the sniper in the party!!!!!

agroszkiewicz wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:

Stormrider wrote:Purely subjective really. There is no best or worst gun.

Not true, the sniper rifle is the best gun. I would be so awesome with a sniper rifle in a zombie apocalypse. PEW! PEW!

LOL!!!!

Ditto for me. I'm really good at Call of Duty so I know I'd be the sniper in the party!!!!!

Are you kidding me with that? Pressing buttons in a pre-programmed game (or against some people around the planet) is hardly evidence to say you'd make a good soldier. I reckon that most fighting men out there now would either laugh or be insulted by this.

Darkvoidof40k wrote:

agroszkiewicz wrote:Automatically Appended Next Post:

George Spiggott wrote:

Stormrider wrote:Purely subjective really. There is no best or worst gun.

Not true, the sniper rifle is the best gun. I would be so awesome with a sniper rifle in a zombie apocalypse. PEW! PEW!

LOL!!!!

Ditto for me. I'm really good at Call of Duty so I know I'd be the sniper in the party!!!!!

Are you kidding me with that? Pressing buttons in a pre-programmed game (or against some people around the planet) is hardly evidence to say you'd make a good soldier. I reckon that most fighting men out there now would either laugh or be insulted by this.

Sweet Jesus this is the best response I could have hoped for....ROFL!!!!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/331150.page

Is that a compliment?

The Glock 17 is arguably the best all-purpose pistol in the game right now. It might be the perfect gun.

The Beretta M9/92F is a quality pistol, but it's big and heavy and not for everyone's hands.

For IPSC shooting, the go-to gun is the CZ Shadow, but a lot of shooters still use high-end 1911s like Les Baer's, Colt Gold Match, etc.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to taste, and what fits your hand best. I like my Glock 17.

hemingway wrote:The Glock 17 is arguably the best all-purpose pistol in the game right now. It might be the perfect gun.

The Beretta M9/92F is a quality pistol, but it's big and heavy and not for everyone's hands.

For IPSC shooting, the go-to gun is the CZ Shadow, but a lot of shooters still use high-end 1911s like Les Baer's, Colt Gold Match, etc.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to taste, and what fits your hand best. I like my Glock 17.

Good on ya sir, first handgun I ever fired. Still got it too.

There's also a .45 Casull

Actually, it's .454 Casull, and it's "downward" compatible with the .45 Long Colt in the same way .357 is down to .38.

For example, I own a Taurus Raging Bull in .454 Casull, and if you feel like plinking with it, you can shoot .45 Long Colt.

The Glock 17 is arguably the best all-purpose pistol in the game right now. It might be the perfect gun.

It's somewhat of a mistake to pick a specific model of Glock. They make a ton of guns, they're all basically the same thing. You can get a frame size and caliber to suit your needs. Honestly, the full frame Glocks are a bit excessive in size. The mid size frames provide a much better combination of handling, capacity and concealibility.

Anyway, my opinions in no particular order:

Revolvers are fun, but they're not useful fighting weapons. They don't hold enough ammo or reload fast enough, and any edge they might hold in reliability is either negligible or vanished when compared to the current generation of autoloaders.

1911s are very handsome guns, they've got a lot of personality and style, but they're VASTLY overrated. They're not nearly as reliable as people suggest. Certainly there are ones that run like a clock, but there are also some that don't. When comparing reliability in a field where reliability is highly perfected, it's not enough to have one gun work flawlessly. Every single one off the line has to. I don't see that from 1911s. They're also very poor carry guns. A single action is not a good action for a defensive handgun. A safety is not a good feature for a defensive handgun. They're simply not all they're cracked up to be. They've got INCREDIBLE style, but they're not the masterful fighting implements some people want them to be.

Handgun recoil is much exaggerated. They make guns that are hard to make follow on shots with, they make guns that are simply unpleasant to shoot, but if you're being physically hurt by a handgun, you need to spend more time on smaller calibers and build up your hand strength and muscle memory. There is no handgun made that will physically hurt an experienced shooter (barring mechanical failures, or poor design).

If you want a fighting handgun, get a Glock. They're the best gun made for the job of self-defense gunfighting. They're boring, they're a bit unpleasant to shoot, but they function, they don't have sharp edges, they have good magazine capacity, and they don't have any useless controls to slow you down in a fight.

Kahr also makes a nice gun, something like a miniaturized, overpriced Glock. Springfield XDs are also fine guns, very similar to Glocks.

Virtually any reputable modern handgun will do fine for you, but when it comes to fighting, and just fighting, the Glock captures the essence of what it's about.

hemingway wrote:The Glock 17 is arguably the best all-purpose pistol in the game right now. It might be the perfect gun.

The Beretta M9/92F is a quality pistol, but it's big and heavy and not for everyone's hands.

For IPSC shooting, the go-to gun is the CZ Shadow, but a lot of shooters still use high-end 1911s like Les Baer's, Colt Gold Match, etc.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to taste, and what fits your hand best. I like my Glock 17.

Oh God, now we've been infected by the Glock virus. Run!

In the words of Soundwave, the All Father:
XDM superior! Glock inferior!


(Frazzled very quietly mentions he likes Glocks and loves the Glock style trigger, just not the lack of a safety. A safety on the trigger aint no safety)

My brother carries a S&W m&p .40 and that is a really nice gun to shoot. Never once has he had any problems with it. Infact the best story Ive got so far, is he went to a training seminar back in the summer for some instructor job and needed like 2k rounds of ammo for it. Well he was there a few days and said nope, itll cost WAY to much money to stay and do this so he left. When he got back, he had about 1500 rounds of target ammo and no reason to keep it, so we got together and just shot stuff for a few hours. There was 5 of us just shooting strait the whole time. We burned through all 1500 rounds in about 2 hours or so and not once did that gun give us any hassle. The last bullet I fired, was just as smooth as the first.

And Im still surprised at how easy it is to fire. I figured being a .40 itd kick hard, but nope, smooth as silk everytime

1911s are very handsome guns, they've got a lot of personality and style, but they're VASTLY overrated. They're not nearly as reliable as people suggest. Certainly there are ones that run like a clock, but there are also some that don't. When comparing reliability in a field where reliability is highly perfected, it's not enough to have one gun work flawlessly. Every single one off the line has to. I don't see that from 1911s. They're also very poor carry guns. A single action is not a good action for a defensive handgun. A safety is not a good feature for a defensive handgun. They're simply not all they're cracked up to be. They've got INCREDIBLE style, but they're not the masterful fighting implements some people want them to be.

Cocked and locked on a 1911 is for a different purpose than a DA/SA or Glock style. While some police are comfortable with a Glock style safety and the higher trigger pull, others can't abide not having an easy off safety. Same for CCH's. DA's/SA's are a nice intermediate step with revolver weighted pull on the first shot.
We should remember, 'Glock Leg' is not just a joke, but an unpleasant reality.

Again it goes to the original point. Best handgun for what?

The point about the original Colt M1911 design is that it was designed as a military weapon, not for target shooting or home defence.

It was state of the art 100 years ago. It's not surprising that things have moved on in design, materials and manufacturing technology.

Kilkrazy wrote:The point about the original Colt M1911 design is that it was designed as a military weapon, not for target shooting or home defence.

It was state of the art 100 years ago. It's not surprising that things have moved on in design, materials and manufacturing technology.

Thats a very good point too. That same argument is why I laugh when people say that the AK-47 is outdated and crap. It was made how long ago? And within the last decade modern rifles have FINALLY caught up and some surpassed it. Again, back in its day, and up till the 80s ish, it was the king. The 1911 is still a great gun. And it looks mighty purdy for being 99 years old

The design is just fine. The original Colts needed the aforementioned tweaking but that was easily fixed.

I'd proffer the only uptick difference really worthy is potentially the new double column style.

I've seen people beat the gak out of a 1911 and it still worked.
You can beat the gak out of a Beretta 92 and it still works.
You can beat the gak out of an XDM and it still works.
You can beat the gak out of a Glock and it still works.

But frankly you can't get more cool than a Colt Dragoon. Plus you can use it to prop up your car...

Colt, makers of nasty things since the 1840s.

George Spiggott wrote:

Stormrider wrote:Purely subjective really. There is no best or worst gun.

Not true, the sniper rifle is the best gun. I would be so awesome with a sniper rifle in a zombie apocalypse. PEW! PEW!

not true.. a sniper rifle cannot possibly be the best gun, because it is a rifle. if this was truly about "guns" i would have to say that the M777 is the best gun in the world

OT, I am a fan of the 1911, or the "Dirty Harry" the .44 Mag revolver. Have also had fond times with the HK USP (in a .45 ACP of course)

Frazzled wrote:

hemingway wrote:The Glock 17 is arguably the best all-purpose pistol in the game right now. It might be the perfect gun.

The Beretta M9/92F is a quality pistol, but it's big and heavy and not for everyone's hands.

For IPSC shooting, the go-to gun is the CZ Shadow, but a lot of shooters still use high-end 1911s like Les Baer's, Colt Gold Match, etc.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to taste, and what fits your hand best. I like my Glock 17.

Oh God, now we've been infected by the Glock virus. Run!

In the words of Soundwave, the All Father:
XDM superior! Glock inferior!


(Frazzled very quietly mentions he likes Glocks and loves the Glock style trigger, just not the lack of a safety. A safety on the trigger aint no safety)

The XDM is kind of like a glock clone, but with more safeties, and looks like it was designed by a dirtbike manufacturer :-P

i almost didn't see the last bit!

the 'trigger' safety, like all safeties, is almost redundant since, by the time you're disabling it, you're ready to fire. i feel that muzzle control and proper handling are the only safeties a conscientious shooter should need, but not everyone shares that view.

hemingway wrote:
the 'trigger' safety, like all safeties, is almost redundant since, by the time you're disabling it, you're ready to fire. i feel that muzzle control and proper handling are the only safeties a conscientious shooter should need, but not everyone shares that view.

The best safety mechanism is my trigger finger... the weapon won't fire if my finger is not on the trigger. Muzzle awareness and proper handling are basically good practices to get yourself into.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

hemingway wrote:
the 'trigger' safety, like all safeties, is almost redundant since, by the time you're disabling it, you're ready to fire. i feel that muzzle control and proper handling are the only safeties a conscientious shooter should need, but not everyone shares that view.

The best safety mechanism is my trigger finger... the weapon won't fire if my finger is not on the trigger. Muzzle awareness and proper handling are basically good practices to get yourself into.

yea...ok...

As noted, the phrase "Glock leg" didn't just appear in the lexicon. there are multiple scenarios, particularly in CC, that lend themselves to the trigger being squeezed. After having dropped a kimber once, and screaming like a girl not at the thought of an accidental discharge but "oh my beautiful Kimber, NOOO!!!! oh wait its just fine, time for a burger" I like that the palm safety as well.

But yea an XDM is a definite Glock style. My best of those is the new Ruger SR-9 carry version with finger trigger and manual safety.
I started with revolvers and really like the steady trigger of that style, and I know of no one who's had a Glock that hated it later.

Frazzled wrote:

As noted, the phrase "Glock leg" didn't just appear in the lexicon. there are multiple scenarios, particularly in CC, that lend themselves to the trigger being squeezed. After having dropped a kimber once, and screaming like a girl not at the thought of an accidental discharge but "oh my beautiful Kimber, NOOO!!!! oh wait its just fine, time for a burger" I like that the palm safety as well.

hence why i will NEVER own a glock only quality fire arms for this yankee bloke.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

As noted, the phrase "Glock leg" didn't just appear in the lexicon. there are multiple scenarios, particularly in CC, that lend themselves to the trigger being squeezed. After having dropped a kimber once, and screaming like a girl not at the thought of an accidental discharge but "oh my beautiful Kimber, NOOO!!!! oh wait its just fine, time for a burger" I like that the palm safety as well.

hence why i will NEVER own a glock only quality fire arms for this yankee bloke.

Well its more the trigger safety style than the weapon. Glocks are known for being able to work through extreme punishment. You don't scream like a little girl that you broke your toy if you drop a Glock.

Cop with strong, non slip or lock type holster-I'd love a glock, or more precisely a double column .45 ACP XDM.

My favourite handgun:



(seriously? 4 pages and no one shows this?)

VikingScott wrote:My favourite handgun:



(seriously? 4 pages and no one shows this?)

And double barreled...I see respect for the Old School continues!

Frazzled wrote:
yea...ok...

As noted, the phrase "Glock leg" didn't just appear in the lexicon. there are multiple scenarios, particularly in CC, that lend themselves to the trigger being squeezed. After having dropped a kimber once, and screaming like a girl not at the thought of an accidental discharge but "oh my beautiful Kimber, NOOO!!!! oh wait its just fine, time for a burger" I like that the palm safety as well.

i'd like to hear about your experiences with the kimber. it was what i originally was going to buy when I was looking for my first pistol. nowadays, i just want to shoot cheap though, and for what i'd spend on a kimber, i could get a norinco with all kinds of bells and whistles + a match grade barrel.

reason I ask about your kimber is that they're pretty unpopular around these parts. in canada, anyway, kimber owners complain about a finicky feeding path, poor quality control, rotten warranty, etc. 'not all they're cracked up to be' is the general consensus. they're beautiful looking pistols, no question there, but i haven't ever heard complaints like that about similarly priced 1911s in say, S&W, Dan Wesson, or even SA. the seasoned IPSC guys at my club--the ones who will spend 3k on their pistol before upgrades--will take a nighthawk, colt gold cup, ed brown, or les baer if they're shooting a 1911. they won't even consider a kimber.

All I can say is my Kimber Pro Carry has never let me down.

You get what you pay for.

Ensis Ferrae wrote: the firearm won't fire if my finger is not on the trigger.

fixed that for you =P

hemingway wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
yea...ok...

As noted, the phrase "Glock leg" didn't just appear in the lexicon. there are multiple scenarios, particularly in CC, that lend themselves to the trigger being squeezed. After having dropped a kimber once, and screaming like a girl not at the thought of an accidental discharge but "oh my beautiful Kimber, NOOO!!!! oh wait its just fine, time for a burger" I like that the palm safety as well.

i'd like to hear about your experiences with the kimber. it was what i originally was going to buy when I was looking for my first pistol. nowadays, i just want to shoot cheap though, and for what i'd spend on a kimber, i could get a norinco with all kinds of bells and whistles + a match grade barrel.

reason I ask about your kimber is that they're pretty unpopular around these parts. in canada, anyway, kimber owners complain about a finicky feeding path, poor quality control, rotten warranty, etc. 'not all they're cracked up to be' is the general consensus. they're beautiful looking pistols, no question there, but i haven't ever heard complaints like that about similarly priced 1911s in say, S&W, Dan Wesson, or even SA. the seasoned IPSC guys at my club--the ones who will spend 3k on their pistol before upgrades--will take a nighthawk, colt gold cup, ed brown, or les baer if they're shooting a 1911. they won't even consider a kimber.

Kimbers are greatly respected around these parts for IDPA and personal shooting, even if its a Yankee gun.
I wouldn't compare a Les Bear to a Kimber, different price point. Thats more a Wilson or STI level. I'd put Kimber more at the high end Springfield Armory level.

My personal experience-I love the Kimber.
Positives:
-Its stainless steel and alumnium, good for not being a hanger queen.
-Very crisp trigger.
-Deburred edges.
-Extremly accurate for its barrel length. Further I can snap shoot very efficaciously.
-Its taken several types of ammo including some cheap Wolf stuff without problem. About once in every 400 or so it will fail to feed a Wolf 230 grain. But thats crappy ammo so understand.
-Upkeep, the main spring broke during its life, but considering the amount of shots fired I wouldn't consider that bad. Didn't have to pay for the repair.
EDIT: The only pistol I have had as maintenance free has been a 92 and its never broken and never jammed/misfired (knocks on wood now).

Negative:
-This model is really light. It makes my hand shake progressively more such that, at about 35 rounds, its shaking pretty badly and I can only snap shoot.