yes or no..Glock or Colt 1911- which has the better service life???

[Starscream]

Why do so many of you ##### about the frame being plastic?

Who gives a flying phuck what it's made of if it does the job it is supposed to do? I wouldn't care if it was made of compressed cheese if it did what it promised and Glocks do - every single time.

We use plastics for millions of things. You have plastics in your car, in your food preparation, in your appliances, in the planes we fly in and everywhere on the planet. The material doesn't matter and it shows ignorance when you make it a point of debate.

Yes, plastics can melt and steel can rust - you have proven that you understand a concept that a child can appreciate and that is that different materials have different properties. Now put on your big boy pants and get on with it. No one gives a sh!t.

Depends really on the design. One of the things that bothers me about the glock frame design is that they put in a rail but haven't been able to get it to work properly on the G22 frames. It's an entirely minor issue for 99% of people but it's one of those, "Why the hell did you put it in when you knew it had issues?" dealies.

Main gripe is the grip angle for me; I pick up a beretta or a 1911 or even the M&P. Pretty much ANY other pistol in the world and point it; it almost always is already lined up where I want to shoot or takes a small adjustment. A glock 17, when I first draw and point the gun's either aimed upward into the sky or downward into the ground. Yes, it can be corrected with training. But I'm not buying a pistol for defence or fighting, and this isn't a department issued gun that I carry every day. It's a personal plinker for putting holes in paper for ####s and giggles; so feel does play into purchasing a pistol.

Probably why I'm going with the M&P first.

 

[TDC]

Depends really on the design. One of the things that bothers me about the glock frame design is that they put in a rail but haven't been able to get it to work properly on the G22 frames. It's an entirely minor issue for 99% of people but it's one of those, "Why the hell did you put it in when you knew it had issues?" dealies.

Main gripe is the grip angle for me; I pick up a beretta or a 1911 or even the M&P. Pretty much ANY other pistol in the world and point it; it almost always is already lined up where I want to shoot or takes a small adjustment. A glock 17, when I first draw and point the gun's either aimed upward into the sky or downward into the ground. Yes, it can be corrected with training. But I'm not buying a pistol for defence or fighting, and this isn't a department issued gun that I carry every day. It's a personal plinker for putting holes in paper for s**ts and giggles; so feel does play into purchasing a pistol.

Probably why I'm going with the M&P first.

The rail issue is only on the G22 and to the best of my knowledge has been rectified. The angle of the grip is identical to that of a 1911, the difference in the contoured "hump" at the bottom. Feel should never be a factor when deciding on a pistol.. Then again, if your pistol is strictly a toy for enjoyment, the pros and cons of brand X over brand Y are irrelevant.

TDC

 

[acm]

Feel should never be a factor when deciding on a pistol.. Then again, if your pistol is strictly a toy for enjoyment, the pros and cons of brand X over brand Y are irrelevant.

That's absolutely ridiculous. So you'd rather have a pistol that doesn't point naturally, that you have to muscle into alignment? Good thinking.

You're pandering to a brand. Again.

I've been issued a Browning HP and a P225, and I shoot (for fun) a P225, P226s, a P228, and a P30L. You know what? I'd take a SIG any day because if I ever have to point my weapon at another human being, God forbid, I know damn well that I can instictively put rounds on target easier. Does feel matter? EFF YES, IT DOES!!

If your pistol is a toy, (which all of my personal weapons are, since I can't carry them) then "feel" doesn't matter. But if I ever have to face a hostile target, God forbid, then I damn well want the most natural, pointable, comfortable pistol, with a trigger with a slight roll, and hopefully FO sights, b/c if I'm down to using a PISTOL, I want every advantage imaginable.

I'm sick of you saying that crappy ergonomics and mushy triggers don't matter, b/c you know what? THEY DO. Every single advantage that you can get in the real world does.

Go back to playing your reindeer games, because when all is said and done, I'll still be saying #### like "2 rounds to the chest, one to the head, on your own time, go on" while you try to decide what effing dip goes well with salted Rip-L-Chips.

Oh, and BTW, I shoot with a few people who have actually had to shoot another human being. None of them EVER talk about it.

 

[Stainless_smith]

Feel should never be a factor when deciding on a pistol..
TDC

Thats going into the compition for dumbest post of the year for sure

 

[TDC]

That's absolutely ridiculous. So you'd rather have a pistol that doesn't point naturally, that you have to muscle into alignment? Good thinking.

You're pandering to a brand. Again.

I've been issued a Browning HP and a P225, and I shoot (for fun) a P225, P226s, a P228, and a P30L. You know what? I'd take a SIG any day because if I ever have to point my weapon at another human being, God forbid, I know damn well that I can instictively put rounds on target easier. Does feel matter? EFF YES, IT DOES!!

If your pistol is a toy, (which all of my personal weapons are, since I can't carry them) then "feel" doesn't matter. But if I ever have to face a hostile target, God forbid, then I damn well want the most natural, pointable, comfortable pistol, with a trigger with a slight roll, and hopefully FO sights, b/c if I'm down to using a PISTOL, I want every advantage imaginable.

I'm sick of you saying that crappy ergonomics and mushy triggers don't matter, b/c you know what? THEY DO. Every single advantage that you can get in the real world does.

Go back to playing your reindeer games, because when all is said and done, I'll still be saying s**t like "2 rounds to the chest, one to the head, on your own time, go on" while you try to decide what effing dip goes well with salted Rip-L-Chips.

Oh, and BTW, I shoot with a few people who have actually had to shoot another human being. None of them EVER talk about it.

Clearly you don't get it. The "feel" of a pistol is only relevant for those who have a poor grasp of handgun marksmanship fundamentals. What you're saying is that you are incapable of making hits and/or placing rounds with any other handgun than the one that "feels" the most natural for you. That sounds like a crutch, like an excuse for a poor skill set. The vast majority of handgun users have had zero professional training. That equates to a near zero fact base when choosing a pistol. Sadly, many base their decisions on feel, or what other "cool" guys tell them they should buy or looks alone. Then after purchase and realizing they still can't hit sh*t with it, they immediately begin the search for that bolt on part/accessory that will miraculously transform their pistol into an uber accurate blaster. The usual "secrets" are match grade barrels, trigger jobs and adjustable sights. If you can't pick up a pistol and make hits, your skills need work. That's the lesson here. BS excuses like "fit" or "feel" are just that, excuses. Again, if the fit and feel is what you deem important, than the other pros and cons of a specific make/model are irrelevant.

TDC

ETA: Ever seen the video of the 11 year old girl(McKenzie) running a Glock 19 with factory ammo? Seems the grip size and shape are a non issue for her. Unless your hands are smaller and you're weaker than an 11 year old, there isn't an issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B2rKj4eZgo&feature=related

 

[misanthropist]

I wouldn't say "feel" should never be a factor, but I would equate it to "looks".

If you want a toy, worry about feel and looks...why not? It's your gun.

If you want a tool, well, by the time you get enough lead through it to be useful, it will feel like a natural extension of your arm anyway. Barring some absolutely freakish design when the grip slants backwards or something, "feel" is pretty much a non-issue.

Who cares if it points naturally for you before you're used to shooting it? Run ten thousand rounds through it and you can bet your ass it will point exactly where you want it to.

That is true whether it's a Glock, which have mediocre ergos, or a 1911, which have superior ones FOR ME. But I can now run a glock plenty fast, plenty accurate. I had no problem hitting 8" steels at 7-10 m while on the move WITH NO SIGHTS with my Glock, and I grew up on 1911s.

You can get used to the "feel" of any normal pistol. It's not a particularly important factor in performance.

 

[alexD92]

Basic Glock 17 with two 17 round mags and fixed sights goes for $499.99 in the states. If you can find a 1911 that has a similar backing as Glock, a similar magazine capacity, that is just as reliable as the Glock and costs around the same you can win the internet.

Until then, the 1911 is a novelty piece that is a round short and dollar too expensive.

 

[acm]

Clearly you don't get it. The "feel" of a pistol is only relevant for those who have a poor grasp of handgun marksmanship fundamentals.

Simply foolish.

On the one hand, I have a pistol that fits your hand well, has controls that feel like they're exactly where they ought to be, and has sights that are easy to pick up. On the other hand, I have a pistol that a carpenter with a t-square might well have designed, has a trigger that breaks like wet pasta, and sights that you may very well need corrective lenses to see.

Which one do you want to shoot?

Don't be an idiot, give yourself every advantage possible. I know damn well that I can shoot lesser pistols, I choose not to because I don't need to. Why on Earth would you handicap yourself?

 

[Stainless_smith]

I wouldn't say "feel" should never be a factor, but I would equate it to "looks".

If you want a toy, worry about feel and looks...why not? It's your gun.

If you want a tool, well, by the time you get enough lead through it to be useful, it will feel like a natural extension of your arm anyway.

Or... You could buy a natural pointing good feeling firearm and get better results faster after shooting less ammo.

 

[Ganderite]

"Glock or Colt 1911- which has the better service life??? "

Bit early to tell. The 1911 is a 100 years old. The Glock.....isn't.

 

[misanthropist]

The only good argument for using the one with worse ergos is this: if that's the more reliable gun, use it...and don't start using it when you need it, start using it years beforehand, regularly, until you are comfortable with it. Don't pick up a gun and expect to be proficient with it no matter how it feels when you first touch it. That's all a matter of training and practise.

If the sights are poor, that's a whole separate issue (and in most cases easy to fix anyway - just get new sights).

The real fallacy here is that a gun with a strange "feel" to it will continue to feel strange forever. It won't. If you want to depend on a gun, you should be putting thousands upon thousands of rounds through it (or an identical model, anyway).

By the time you get to that point, it will feel 100% natural. Even if they put the controls in stupid places (and other than mounting safeties on slides, very few manufacturers do this any more...most of the controls are in about the same spots), by the time you get to ten thousand rounds, you will know exactly where they are and how to work them. Case in point: loads of left-handed guys run right-handed guns. How much more awkward can you make a slide release than by putting it on the other side of the pistol? And yet those guys can be trained to drop the slide in the same amount of time it takes a right-hander to do it. It simply takes a different approach.

"feel" is determined primarily by whatever your hands are used to...get them used to something else and that will feel natural.

 

[misanthropist]

Or... You could buy a natural pointing good feeling firearm and get better results faster after shooting less ammo.

Not necessarily. Guns can feel good in the hand and point well, but offer less traction in your hand and consequently shoot worse.

Some people find that the large frame glocks, for example, are easier to control under heavy recoil than the short frames, despite the fact that virtually everyone finds the SF models to be more comfortable.

That is why we say that "feel" is not very significant.

And regardless, if you intend to stake your life on a gun, the amount of shooting you should be doing WILL make any gun feel like a perfect extension of your arm.

The fact is, "feel" is just not very important. It's something gun collectors worry about...it's not something shooters worry about for the most part.

 

[Invidion]

By the time you get to that point, it will feel 100% natural. Even if they put the controls in stupid places (and other than mounting safeties on slides, very few manufacturers do this any more...most of the controls are in about the same spots), by the time you get to ten thousand rounds, you will know exactly where they are and how to work them. Case in point: loads of left-handed guys run right-handed guns. How much more awkward can you make a slide release than by putting it on the other side of the pistol? And yet those guys can be trained to drop the slide in the same amount of time it takes a right-hander to do it. It simply takes a different approach.

Or faster.

There is a point here: by the time (and the round-count) to where you have gotten used to a trigger, how to manipulate it before and after the gun goes off; how to "see" your front sight (which is as different to looking at it as this is to looking at your target while firing), track it during recoil and back into the rear notch; performing quick, smooth reloads; you will have begun to index the gun on target as a natural byproduct of sighted fire. A firearm is not a natural object; it must become an extension of your body through the repetition of practice and the acclimatizing effect of training. The idea that a gun points naturally has some merit in regard to this, but not much, because by the time you have begun on the long road to mastery, you have left the stable of feels and looks far, far behind.

 

[TDC]

Simply foolish.

On the one hand, I have a pistol that fits your hand well, has controls that feel like they're exactly where they ought to be, and has sights that are easy to pick up. On the other hand, I have a pistol that a carpenter with a t-square might well have designed, has a trigger that breaks like wet pasta, and sights that you may very well need corrective lenses to see.

Which one do you want to shoot?

Don't be an idiot, give yourself every advantage possible. I know damn well that I can shoot lesser pistols, I choose not to because I don't need to. Why on Earth would you handicap yourself?

Lets compare shall we.

The 1911 has extra controls that must be operated before firing(and after), the manual thumb safety and the grip safety. The Glock, does not.

The 1911 is a single action only pistol which lends itself well to a light and short trigger. The Glock, is a double action only pistol which does not lend itself well to short and light trigger pulls.

The sights in a stock 1911(old school) are about as poor as they get. Very small black blade and black notch rear. I can see those being the cats a$$ for rapid sight acquisition. Regardless, sights can and should be changed to something more appropriate for the task.

The 1911 offers no advantage over a Glock. The usual argument is the trigger and the "feel". We've already discussed the feel part, its complete BS and irrelevant for a (as misanthropist said) working gun(a tool if you will). The trigger is nice, but its not necessary. The advantage a short and light trigger offers is grossly overshadowed by the excessive size, weight, and lack of rounds available. Not to mention the need to operate extra controls both before and after firing, the constant maintenance and the risk of running poor magazines. The advantage of the trigger is only an advantage for those who do not or cannot grasp the fundamentals of handgun marksmanship.

We're going around in circles here but perhaps another lap will help. Glocks aren't the most popular LE/MIL (perhaps privately owned as well)pistol to date because they're cheap. They work, nearly all the time, they're simple to use and maintain and yes, they are cheaper than other makes/models.

Glock has only been around 25 years or so. The 1911, a cool 100. Oddly enough, with a 75 year "tried and true" head start track record, the 1911 isn't gaining in popularity. Its not even holding its own, its losing. I'm sure that's because its the superior design right?

TDC

 

[Greenhorse six]

Oddly enough, just about every gunmaker is fielding copy of it,they don't seem to feel that they're beating a dead horse. so ,yeah, it is still popular, and not going to fade away any time soon.

Oddly enough, with a 75 year "tried and true" head start track record, the 1911 isn't gaining in popularity. Its not even holding its own, its losing.

 

[maetsack]

Oddly enough, just about every gunmaker is fielding copy of it,they don't seem to feel that they're beating a dead horse. so ,yeah, it is still popular, and not going to fade away any time soon.

This is a pointless response. You arguement doesn't address why they are copied. Are they copied because they are licensed and they can't copy others? This is much more likely the reason than anything else? Do you think if Glock licensed others to copy them clones would spring up? You are damn right they would.

And the fact that something is manufactured in no way is reflective of popularity. Correlation does not imply causation no matter how much you want it to.

You have had your turn at a invalid response. Let someone else try

 

[misanthropist]

Or faster.

There is a point here: by the time (and the round-count) to where you have gotten used to a trigger, how to manipulate it before and after the gun goes off; how to "see" your front sight (which is as different to looking at it as this is to looking at your target while firing), track it during recoil and back into the rear notch; performing quick, smooth reloads; you will have begun to index the gun on target as a natural byproduct of sighted fire. A firearm is not a natural object; it must become an extension of your body through the repetition of practice and the acclimatizing effect of training. The idea that a gun points naturally has some merit in regard to this, but not much, because by the time you have begun on the long road to mastery, you have left the stable of feels and looks far, far behind.

This guy is a good example...he is a defective left-handed weirdo southpaw and still consistently beats me with a non-ambi Glock.

Nice ergos are nice, but they're not really that important compared to other factors.

 

[TDC]

Oddly enough, just about every gunmaker is fielding copy of it,they don't seem to feel that they're beating a dead horse. so ,yeah, it is still popular, and not going to fade away any time soon.

You're right, everyone and their dog is copying the 1911. I still don't see the masses running out to get one or use one for work. The only group of people who seem to still be fascinated with the 1911 are the over patriotic ignorant Americans. The 1911 is "all American" and thus they will blindly follow it. The rest of the world doesn't care for it.

TDC

 

[mudgunner49]

You're right, everyone and their dog is copying the 1911. I still don't see the masses running out to get one or use one for work. The only group of people who seem to still be fascinated with the 1911 are the over patriotic ignorant Americans. The 1911 is "all American" and thus they will blindly follow it. The rest of the world doesn't care for it.

TDC

You're right - all those copies of that 100 year-old design are piling up in a warehouse somewhere. I wonder if they'll ever sell ANY of them???

I wonder why they make anything other than Glock - it appears that it is all that's really needed...

 

[Invidion]

This thread has begun to hurt my brain.