Actually it was my impression of you..the tread jack was for TDC but since you like defending your boyfriend, it could be directed toward you as well, your call Lawrence.
1911 tests - enough to make TDC's head explode.
- Thread starter Clobbersauras
- Start date
Actually it was my impression of you..the tread jack was for TDC but since you like defending your boyfriend, it could be directed toward you as well, your call Lawrence.
Greenhorse six
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
This is from the FBI handgun wounding factors and effectiveness report.
"Physiologically, a determined adversary can be stopped reliably and immediately only by a shot that disrupts the brain or upper spinal cord. Failing a hit to the central nervous system, massive bleeding from holes in the heart or major blood vessels of the torso causing circulatory collapse is the only other way to force incapacitation upon an adversary, and this takes time. For example, there is sufficient oxygen within the brain to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed."
Bigger Bullet=Bigger hole= bleed out quicker.
Thats just a fact of life.I'll take that extra 2.5mm. it may be all thats needed to nick a Artery or clip the heart.
If you're having issues with recoil and bullet size is not important to you,you should be using a .22lr/ 5mm Vs.9mm. its only 4mm,not a big difference,by your logic,it's a No brainer.
The 1911 also has one of the most fogiving triggers of any auto out of the box ,better trigger, better shot placement. and you should know that.
Last edited:
Greenhorse six
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
I'm not offering tactics in an absolute fashion. The tactics I "preach" are ones I cannot find fault with. If there are more efficient or logical methods to executing a manual of arms I'm all ears. Again, seeing how no one has anything factual to debate the tactics I've acquired from two respected schools. It is only a logical response to continue with what I've been taught.
I never said "sport" shooters are unworthy. The point I'm driving at with most of my posts is that effective tactics applied in a professional capacity(LE and MIL) also apply in the shooting sports as well. I see a double win. Effective techniques for defending yourself with a firearm and effective techniques for shooting faster and making hits. My big beef is with the IDPA and their associated leagues. There is nothing "defensive" about IDPA. There is a distinct lack of practical real world tactics being harvested in the IDPA community. Aside from poor tactics there is a tendency to push the hardware solution to software problems. IDPA is rapidly sliding into the IPSC sink hole. High dollar guns and gear coupled with volumes of ignorant rules.
My stance on tactics and the tactics I champion are ones offered by many in the business. I don't buy everything I'm offered, I evaluate the tactic and rationalize whether or not it offers more advantages than disadvantages. I train for the same reason anyone who studies a martial art does. To master that art and to have the knowledge and skill to defend themselves should the need arise. Enjoying what I do keeps me focused on striving to do better. My grasp of tactics is much stronger than many in this thread which is evident by the lack of evidence against my posts.
My previous post regarding what my firearms are setup for was intended to raise some eyebrows. Naturally a good portion of those who read it took it the wrong way. I'll clarify my point. My firearms are setup to be reliable and simple. The two important attributes for defensive(even offensive) firearms. I have no use for bolt on gimmicks, training wheels, or any other skill compensating additions. The belief that such devices are "needed" is another myth perpetuated by the untrained or undisciplined. You can't replace live fire training with bolt on goods.
TDC
This is from the FBI handgun wounding factors and effectiveness report.
"Physiologically, a determined adversary can be stopped reliably and immediately only by a shot that disrupts the brain or upper spinal cord. Failing a hit to the central nervous system, massive bleeding from holes in the heart or major blood vessels of the torso causing circulatory collapse is the only other way to force incapacitation upon an adversary, and this takes time. For example, there is sufficient oxygen within the brain to support full, voluntary action for 10-15 seconds after the heart has been destroyed."
Bigger Bullet=Bigger hole= bleed out quicker.
Thats just a fact of life.I'll take that extra 2.5mm. it may be all thats needed to nick a Artery or clip the heart.
If you're having issues with recoil and bullet size is not important to you,you should be using a .22lr/ 5mm Vs.9mm. its only 4mm,not a big difference,by your logic,it's a No brainer.
The 1911 also has one of the most fogiving triggers of any auto out of the box ,better trigger, better shot placement. and you should know that.
You're right, that 2.25mm could mean the difference. Banking on 2.25mm when a second or third 9mm could be effectively placed with little addition in time is bad form. I have no issues with recoil from any of the major calibres. I choose to shoot an effective calibre with the least amount of recoil and maximum number of rounds available. Same reason I run AR's over M14's. Only hits count and a miss with the M14 or the 1911 is still a miss. The magazine capacity issue still hasn't been addressed. 9 rounds available for multiple attackers doesn't leave much room for error. We already know that all handguns are anemic when it comes to terminal performance. Shot placement is the determining factor. Throw in multiple attackers or poor hits due to stress and you're running on the short side of success.
Your comment on "forgiving triggers" illustrates my point. Trigger control and a solid understanding of the fundamentals of marksmanship makes the shot, not the trigger itself. The belief that a tuned or match trigger is a must for making hits is nothing more than training wheels. It was already posted in this thread that Mr. Vickers does a lot of shooting with the crappy Glock and its crappy trigger. Seeing how he(and many others) manages to make hits and carry on without a hiccup it begs the question. Are high dollar guns with tuned light weight, short travel triggers really needed to make hits? If you answer yes, you're justifying your purchase or ignoring the facts.
As for 22lr, I'd run it if its all I had. There are a good number of people pushing up daisies thanks to the 22lr. Not the most effective choice but if its all you handle go with it.
TDC
We've gone over the width issue for comperable pistols. In this case two .45acp calibered Glock and Colt 1911.
They are similar in overall dimensions, exept for a few, including width that is a decided advantage to the 1911 in respect to CCW.
Heavier - there are obvious advantages and disadvantages with respect to CCW. Good thing there are aluminum frames and lightening as options.
More complex - This is a debatable point. I don't see the 1911 as being anymore complex than the Glock.
Reduced magazine capacity - I've gone over this several times; prove to me otherwise this is false.
Increased recoil - Over the same ammunition in a different firearm? This would be breaking laws of physics - please explain how this is accomplished.
This is false.
There are 'custom' pistols with different accesories from manufacturers, yes, but they are 'stock' from the factory.
That is in addition to the multitude of options that can be had with true 'custom' -one off- pistols. This is a good thing and a clear advantage to the 1911 whether you will openly admit it or not.
Again False.
The fact they are on revision 4 and there is a budding aftermarket for them for parts and accessories they didn't think to include in the patents proves this.
If I hear you correctly, you refer to options as 'customization' Which is it?
OK if is in reference to Glock but not 1911s?
I don't think the 1911 is any more difficult to work on than the Glock, but for the average user, a competent gunsmith is a good option -in both cases.
I was refering to the mainspring housing, and using that as an example of the ability (not necessity) to customize the platform.
Strictly speaking CW, I don't think 9 +8+8 (25 rounds) is negligence of any kind. Given my druthers, if I was to carry concealed, I'd certainly consider the .45 round & 1911 platform.
Have fun.
Buy the firearm that you really like.
If You want to play at the desert with your gun that's fine with me, however, most likely I won't make it there anytime soon.
If You really feel an urgent need to prove that your pistol is better than mine......well...I remember this kind of play...from the kindergarten.
Buy the firearm that you really like.
If You want to play at the desert with your gun that's fine with me, however, most likely I won't make it there anytime soon.
If You really feel an urgent need to prove that your pistol is better than mine......well...I remember this kind of play...from the kindergarten.
All good points. But try to compare any of those points under the 500 dollar US price point of the glock, and they are invalidated until double the price almost...
Without question the Glock's price point is very attractive....but so is coming out of a gunfight on the winning side. If I was making a choice to strap on a pistol, the cost would be low down on my list.
Thank you for your valuable addition to the thread. What shall we talk about and discuss on a forum then?
Let's talk about how you are the guy who just recently recieved your RPAL, and then come into theis thread and crap on some people who were trying to have an intelligent debate?
How about that?
Why is that? Nice play on words in your reply, if you just meant it that way. But if not, then I would assume then that you aren't all that versed on what qualifies a "good shoot" or the anatomy, psychology, or legality involved in a defensive (or offensive for that matter) shoot.
Never heard of it ....must be an old guy saying.
