Bye Bye Glock

TDC said:
Its not amazing, its pathetic. The ignorant blind cult like following of the 1911 is no less alarming than that of the Nazi party. I'm not saying 1911 fans are nazi's, just that they blindly follow rhetoric like one. 1911's are outdated dinosaurs that are far from optimal for duty/MIL/CCW or competitive uses.

TDC
Click to expand...

Meh. Not all 1911 fans are as bad as that. Maybe it's just that we generally only hear from the ones that are that bad.

And I generally agree about better options for service pistols (though I might argue elsewhere that the user should use whatever works best for them), but there are some areas where the 1911 platform clearly does shine: Bullseye, IPSC Open, that sort of thing. Of course, there's also the "Classic" divisions in the various disciplines), but those divisions only exists because of the 1911 in the first place. Still, it's fun, and interesting. Kind of like why they bother with separate competitions for cars, trucks, and motorcycles in Paris-Dakar. Sure, one class of vehicle is faster than the other, but it's interesting to see them compete within their divisions regardless.
 
When you have made a bunch of quality parts for your 1911s, post pics.

Otherwise...I'll take the ability to purchase half a dozen Glocks right now, all with perfectly interchangeable parts, over the theoretical ability to maybe try to file some bits out of steel in a world in which the supply chain has sufficiently collapsed that proper parts are not available, then having to hand fit those parts to make them work, and hopefully ending up with a reliable gun that will work with whatever ammo you have in this hypothetical environment.

Just sayin...
 
That's funny. My Colt parts work on my Colts. My Kimber parts work on my Kimber. Your Glock parts work on your Glocks? Well no ****. Seriously, the levels of idiocy here astound me.

Every moron and their dog makes 1911's nowadays. If the parts had the same manufacturer, like Glock parts do, they'd all interchange fine. Dozens of companies make 1911's now and they obviously don't all have the same specs.
 
misanthropist said:
When you have made a bunch of quality parts for your 1911s, post pics.

Otherwise...I'll take the ability to purchase half a dozen Glocks right now, all with perfectly interchangeable parts, over the theoretical ability to maybe try to file some bits out of steel in a world in which the supply chain has sufficiently collapsed that proper parts are not available, then having to hand fit those parts to make them work, and hopefully ending up with a reliable gun that will work with whatever ammo you have in this hypothetical environment.

Just sayin...
Click to expand...

Camera's busted... can't fix it cuz it ain't built like a 1911...;)

If I were in that hypothetical situation, I'd probably do exactly what you described. If I were in Khyber Pass, I'd be pretty pleased to grab one of those shop made 1911s.
 
I have half a dozen and they are all customized to my liking. And yeah, I only use original factory parts because I know they will fit without me having to #### around with them.
 
Like I said. I keep Colt parts in Colts and Kimber parts in Kimber. If Colt is the only company that shells out parts for their new CQB pistols, I have no doubt their parts will fit their frames. Remember the first interchangeability problems with M1911 parts arose shortly before or after WWI when Colt and Springfield Armory pistols were broken down and mix matched. Measures were taken shortly afterwards to ensure all pistols were built to the same spec. Only problem was, Colt was not making their pistols to the spec of the blueprints they handed over to US Ordnance and Springfield Armory.

If you stick random parts in any frame you're gonna have to whip out your file and do some adjustments, it's not like there's several dozen companies making parts without a common blueprint.. wait? But hey, I'm a KISS kinda guy so I just go with original parts. Thousands of rounds later, the only hickups I get are due to my over-used brass.

I totally agree with what you're saying, parts from a thousand makers won't fit every frame. That's a given.
 
alpining said:
Meh. Not all 1911 fans are as bad as that. Maybe it's just that we generally only hear from the ones that are that bad.

And I generally agree about better options for service pistols (though I might argue elsewhere that the user should use whatever works best for them), but there are some areas where the 1911 platform clearly does shine: Bullseye, IPSC Open, that sort of thing. Of course, there's also the "Classic" divisions in the various disciplines), but those divisions only exists because of the 1911 in the first place. Still, it's fun, and interesting. Kind of like why they bother with separate competitions for cars, trucks, and motorcycles in Paris-Dakar. Sure, one class of vehicle is faster than the other, but it's interesting to see them compete within their divisions regardless.
Click to expand...

Unlike vehicles which can serve several different purposes. Firearms, and handguns in particular serve the same purpose, to down people. When viewing makes and models with this primary and most important role in mind. The 1911 is not suitable for the that role anymore. IPSC is pretty well designed around the 1911 platform and I couldn't care less about bullseye or any of the "sporting" disciplines. Comparing a tuned "fun" gun to a production service gun is ignorant. If it doesn't work 100% of the time and right out of the box, then its a poor tool for the job.

I do agree that its generally the rabid and ignorant that we hear from with regards to any topic of debate.


yohann160 said:
Like I said. I keep Colt parts in Colts and Kimber parts in Kimber. If Colt is the only company that shells out parts for their new CQB pistols, I have no doubt their parts will fit their frames. Remember the first interchangeability problems with M1911 parts arose shortly before or after WWI when Colt and Springfield Armory pistols were broken down and mix matched. Measures were taken shortly afterwards to ensure all pistols were built to the same spec. Only problem was, Colt was not making their pistols to the spec of the blueprints they handed over to US Ordnance and Springfield Armory.

If you stick random parts in any frame you're gonna have to whip out your file and do some adjustments, it's not like there's several dozen companies making parts without a common blueprint.. wait? But hey, I'm a KISS kinda guy so I just go with original parts. Thousands of rounds later, the only hickups I get are due to my over-used brass.

I totally agree with what you're saying, parts from a thousand makers won't fit every frame. That's a given.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight. The almighty Colt decided on their own to use different dimensions for the "best" pistol ever? If that is indeed the case, then what makes the 1911 so great? I mean, you admit that two manufacturers(at least) were running two different sets of specs. The question I have is why would a company change the spec from the original design??

TDC
 
Change? What makes you think Colt changed anything? It is their design (curtesy of John Browning).

The same problems occurred during WWII when they started full production of the 1911A1's. Guess what, Colt hadn't given a complete TDP to Ithaca, Remington, Union Switch, etc. To make things worse, none of them had the same tooling that Colt had. Entire shipments were failed because the pistols weren't the same spec. It took months and several production quota changes before the problems were solved.

You can find out more by checking out MrColt45ACP on youtube. He gives very detailed accounts and reviews every single military 1911 make from start to end of production. He also has access to a vast Colt collection and does many fine videos regarding the design's evolution over time.

Edit to add: I don't understand what your argument was. The design isn't at fault here.
 
yohann160 said:
Change? What makes you think Colt changed anything? It is their design (curtesy of John Browning).

The same problems occurred during WWII when they started full production of the 1911A1's. Guess what, Colt hadn't given a complete TDP to Ithaca, Remington, Union Switch, etc. To make things worse, none of them had the same tooling that Colt had. Entire shipments were failed because the pistols weren't the same spec. It took months and several production quota changes before the problems were solved.

You can find out more by checking out MrColt45ACP on youtube. He gives very detailed accounts and reviews every single military 1911 make from start to end of production. He also has access to a vast Colt collection and does many fine videos regarding the design's evolution over time.

Edit to add: I don't understand what your argument was. The design isn't at fault here.
Click to expand...

Curious as to why Colt would do such a thing? I'm with misanthropist, if you haven't seen a 1911 requiring hand fitted parts, or hand fitted parts not swapping across copies, then you haven't shot enough. Either way, if manufacturers today are all running the proper specs, why won't their parts interchange without custom fitting?

TDC
 
troubleinxs said:
There must be something wrong with all my Glocks, they tend to hit what I am aiming at. Since you are an expert on them maybe you could explain this to me!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You and everyone else crying over this comment...learn to READ. I never said the Glock can't do it...I said many Glock owners cannot.

Glock owners cry when you say you dislike "their" gun but EVERY pro Glock comment shoots down other guns...so why the double standard? Glocks are popular because they are cheap...if your a cheap person this will make you happy. Same reason why a lot of people think 9mm is better then .45ACP...soley because they are cheap. If a Glock was $1,100...would you still by one? A lot of people probably wouldn't...they'd move to a Ruger SR9...because its cheap (not a bad gun tho).

...and me, because I do not own one MUST be a bad shot then eh? Sorry I to not like the grip feeling like a 2x4...
 
jeffcarr88 said:
You and everyone else crying over this comment...learn to READ. I never said the Glock can't do it...I said many Glock owners cannot.

Glock owners cry when you say you dislike "their" gun but EVERY pro Glock comment shoots down other guns...so why the double standard? Glocks are popular because they are cheap...if your a cheap person this will make you happy. Same reason why a lot of people think 9mm is better then .45ACP...soley because they are cheap. If a Glock was $1,100...would you still by one? A lot of people probably wouldn't...they'd move to a Ruger SR9...because its cheap (not a bad gun tho).

...and me, because I do not own one MUST be a bad shot then eh? Sorry I to not like the grip feeling like a 2x4...
Click to expand...

The fact that Glocks are lower priced than other makes and models is not what drives many to run them. Its the simplest and most reliable pistol ever built. That's why I run them. I run them in 9mm because its easier to handle, carries more ammo(some of us think outside the limit of our ignorant laws and our country) is just as effective for downing a threat as the other calibres and yes, ammo is cheap and plentiful because its NATO standard. So where's the bad part???

TDC
 
I have never got the whole issue with people complaining about the ergonomics of a Glock. I find them extremely comfortable, more so then, beretta, sig, 1911, xdm, sr9 etc... It fits like a glove. I can understand the G20 or 21 being to big for some but a G17?
 
TDC said:
The fact that Glocks are lower priced than other makes and models is not what drives many to run them. Its the simplest and most reliable pistol ever built. That's why I run them. I run them in 9mm because its easier to handle, carries more ammo(some of us think outside the limit of our ignorant laws and our country) is just as effective for downing a threat as the other calibres and yes, ammo is cheap and plentiful because its NATO standard. So where's the bad part???

TDC
Click to expand...

That you and your Sunfire...opps! I mean Glock are just like everyone else...
 
If you want to be your own special snowflake, knock yourself out. My guns are not a representation of my personality...they're just bullet launchers to me. I'm primarily interested in using the most effective bullet launchers available to me.

I don't give a damn if other people want to express themselves by buying a different machine than I buy...but I'm not particularly interested in being told that their unique, one of a kind, made-entirely-from-pizza-dough unicycle is every bit as good a form of transportation as my 4runner.
 
jeffcarr88 said:
Just an opinion...just like yours.
Click to expand...

That wasn't an opinion, that was a very weak ad-hominem attack directed towards me. I've seen more than most on this forum I know what they look like. An opinion is your stance with regards to a particular topic. You did not make such a claim in your last 2 posts. So I ask again, do you have anything productive or intelligent to add?

TDC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom