1911: Obsolete?

In my research, I wasn’t able to find a single documented case of a LEO being killed due to running out of ammo in a 1911. Could you share the details of some of these “Too many dead cops” that you referenced?


It would be a strange machine gunner that also packed a Thompson. Way too heavy considering the rest of his loadout. In the rare instances that a gunner packed a second gun, it would almost always be a 1911.

A 9mm Thompson would be even stranger. 😉


This has been addressed before. The 1911 was originally chambered in .45acp.
quote----------------This has been addressed before. The 1911 was originally chambered in .45acp.-----------quote

If it was addressed they were wrong. Browning was told the .38 caliber was not acceptable and that they were looking for a .45 caliber. It is true Brownings pre-1911 guns i.e. the 1900 and 1902 were .38 ACP went through various changes before it became the 1911 including not even having a manual safety but Browning never intended the gun to be a .45 caliber he had to do it to get the military contract.

quote-------------It would be a strange machine gunner that also packed a Thompson. Way too heavy considering the rest of his loadout. In the rare instances that a gunner packed a second gun, it would almost always be a 1911.----------quote

You misunderstood my post. I should have worded it differently. What I was trying to convey is that a soldier using a Thompson chambered for the 9x19 would have been able to carry twice the amount of ammunition compared to the 45 acp, would have had a much more controllable weapon in full auto fire, had flatter trajectory because of the increased muzzle velocity, therefore a higher hit probability, and more penetration as well. Because if all thus it was no accident most of the WWII machine guns were 9mm and not .45 acp. simply because the 9mm was the better sub-machine gun cartridge hands down.

quote--------------In my research, I wasn’t able to find a single documented case of a LEO being killed due to running out of ammo in a 1911. Could you share the details of some of these “Too many dead cops” that you referenced?--------quote

And you did not research very well either as I remember reading one of the reasons cops had to all use the same 9mm caliber guns is that when they were allowed to carry any caliber they wanted (read that 45 acp) there were fire fights with cops that ran out of ammo and had empty guns and could not borrow a loaded magazine from their fellow cop that was there with them and did not run out of ammo because they had high capacity pistols in 9mm.

Common sense would indicate that survival in a gun fight is on the side of the 9mm shooter who unleashes a steady stream of 16 or more rounds of firepower compared to the cop that is now standing there with an empty 7 round magazine in his gun necessitating a reload under high stress when every nano second counts when you have an empty gun in your hand and bullets are whizzing past your ears.

And did I mention multiple assailments. Again Firepower wins and has a much better survival rate when "more" than one guy is shooting at you. Its no mystery why cops went to high capacity 9mm pistols.

The archaic 1911 comes up short in every way, less firepower, excess recoil, excess weight, and way less reliability with exotic expanding ammo, and you can carry twice the ammo with a 9mm because of the size and less weight.

Its also no mystery why the FN 9mm High Power pistol in WWII was the most coveted pistol not only in the European Theater but even in the Asian Theater as well. It was firepower. One Japanese Air Force General was persuaded to "not" return home at the end of WWII but to stay on in China to help train its air force by being bribed with an Inglis High Power Pistol.
 
You know....it seems all guns have a bit of a weakness in some part of their anatomy...Usually the US always had firearms that had minor problems ...trap door ...yep SAA yep Krags yep 03s yep Garands yep .carbines...yep..well you know 'em too. Fact of the matter they all won through. The fantastic plastics do have weaknesses too.. ....I have one...a Sig 365...it's for up close and personal. I will not own a Glock, but have quite a few semi autos...Of them all the 1911 shines through as the one to carry...so I do. mainly in winter as they are larger and heavier. going round the ranch here...I usually carry a revolver. Hey if it ain't broke...don't try fixing it...That said...the doo fusses that think they know it all have their weaknesses too..they prove it mostly by making stupid statements...I've never done that...today.anyw...ummm maybe tomorrow
 
My view, as someone new to the platform, is that the 1911 is a very safe semiauto pistol to handle. I pretty much shot only revolvers until a couple of years ago. Then I began shooting a Sig P365, followed by a Sig P320, both with thumb safeties added, followed by a Sig P226 SAO. While I note that many prefer the former two without a thumb safety, that strikes me as putting one’s self one step closer to an ND.

The 1911, with its exposed hammer so that one can see if it is cocked with a glance, plus a thumb safety, has two safety features beyond the P365 and P320, and with the grip safety, three. And, with the grip safety, one safety feature beyond the P226 SAO.

It does not need a decocker. As someone pointed out in a previous thread, there is no reason to lower the hammer on a loaded chamber. And, if you want to unload the chamber, rack the slide.

I think it is an exceptionally safe design, and I further think for anyone who cares about safety it is not a difficult manual of arms to learn.
I have trained regular citizens, Police (who are civilians as they do not operate under the USCMJ) and Military for close to 50 years - before the advent of the "safe action" we had more Negligent Discharges, and more Unintended Fatalities with the DA/SA autos than with SA autos (there could be logical reasons for that - one being there were fewer SAs and the other is that most people who carried them had a higher interest in firearms and in many agencies had a pass at a higher standards).

Now after the advent of the "safe action" NDs went way up - two agencies I dealt with went from one ND every 4 or 5 years to 15 in a few weeks to 45 in a few months!

NYPD covered this in their SOP9 (later called something else).

I certainly agree it is a training issue, not a gun issue!

Riposte
 
The Model 1900 isn’t a 1911, and while the 1900 was chambered in .38acp, the original 1911 never was.

That argument would be the same as saying that the M-14 was originally chambered in .30-06, because the Garand, that the M-14 was based on, was chambered in .30-06. I don’t think anyone would try to make that argument. . .
Exactly.

The change to .45 happened long before the 1911 Browning had already been working on a .41 caliber cartridge (and re-engineering his earlier design for the larger cartridge) when the government requested .45

The 1911 was designed as a .45 it was by my count his 5th .45acp model.

For fun name one other item made in 1911 that is still being made today.
 
Last edited:
To me the term “Obsolete” does not mean it is no longer mechanically functioning. For the reasons previously posted it isn’t on the A-Team list for carry outside the home.

Last year I brought a 1967 Chevy Chevelle that had been sitting in a garage for over 20 years. It has a 283 engine and automatic transmission and drum brakes. By today’s automotive standards it is obsolete. But after I make some mechanical repairs due to it sitting and not started for over 20 years and put on new tires it will be in safe, reliable driving condition.

But that will not make it my daily driver.
Newer cars accelerate quicker, handle better in bad weather, have disc brakes for better stopping make them a safer choice. So I enjoy my Chevelle as state of the art technology and manufacturing done 59 years ago just as I enjoy the 1911 as state of the art semi-auto from 100 years ago.
 
obsolete?? I cut my teeth on them, but it's been surpassed. If it's all I had I would be fine with it and have confidence, but if were being intellectually honest and not nostalgic ..its a big heavy pistol with low capacity. Not something I would want to carry every day.

I don't get nostalgic when it comes to firearms. I like and appreciate how they have developed over time. While I can appreciate a brace of dueling pistols in a fine wooden case with all the accoutrements, there are much better options in design and ammo.
I'll admit, I get nostolgic at times but not when it comes to carry guns for self defense - I test. I might let it influence my choice on hunting non-dangerous game.

I shoot a 1911 25% better (more accurate and faster) than any DA/SA auto and any striker fired auto in any caliber.

I've studied street results (which is not very scientific), teminal ballistics ( am a charter member of the IWBA) and have shot a LOT of game - the .45 is more than twice the round a 9mm is in any apples to apples comparison I've made, it is more effective than the .357 Magnum in the field, though that is a closer thing and I'd hate to live on the difference.

More to the point, I cannot put any more rounds from a 1911 in 9mm on an index card at 5-10 yards than I can a .45 in the same time. The main factor is how fast I can reset the trigger. However many more rounds a gun holds than 3-4 is moot since I will only live long enough to shoot more if the attacker(s) is (are) a clutz.

It is true enough, I can put more .22s, 9mm or .45 autos (+P) in the same target and the same distance than I acan a full power 10mm, .45 Super or .45 Winchester mag or .44 Automag.

Here is what a rapid pair from a 1911 in .45 Looks like:

Jim-Brass-Flying.webp

The "split" was .17 seconds the hits were 2" apart at 7 yards, the 9mm looks the same (but hit half as hard) and the .22 conversion is not faster nor any more accurate.

I don't mind having more rounds (and have a few 10mms which hold 18 rounds or .45s that hold 14-15). But I will not give up effectiveness to carry more rounds. One runs out of time before he runs out of ammuntion - exceptions for some military encuonters, but most of those are settled with rifles or machine-guns or artillery.

The 1911ish gun I'm carrying as a primary today weighs, loaded, 1 ounce less than a Glock 17 does loaded (depending on the bullets - measured with 230 gr. .45 and 147 gr. 9mm). It is also smaller if you measure the girth. Personally I'd take a 7 round .45 over a 21 round 9mm but that may be just one man's experience with both. That is not necessarily about effectiveness, but rather how many rounds I can draw and fire accuratel in 2 seconds at conversational ranges (Close encounters of the worst kind).

We each have to pick our own poision and I wish everone well no matter what they choose!

Riposte

PS - none of the above means anything mentioned will not do for self defense - it is about levels of performance. Measure yours and choose accordingly!
 
Last edited:
To me the term “Obsolete” does not mean it is no longer mechanically functioning. For the reasons previously posted it isn’t on the A-Team list for carry outside the home.

Last year I brought a 1967 Chevy Chevelle that had been sitting in a garage for over 20 years. It has a 283 engine and automatic transmission and drum brakes. By today’s automotive standards it is obsolete. But after I make some mechanical repairs due to it sitting and not started for over 20 years and put on new tires it will be in safe, reliable driving condition.

But that will not make it my daily driver.
Newer cars accelerate quicker, handle better in bad weather, have disc brakes for better stopping make them a safer choice. So I enjoy my Chevelle as state of the art technology and manufacturing done 59 years ago just as I enjoy the 1911 as state of the art semi-auto from 100 years ago.

I hope you do enjoy that car.

We know what obsolete means. Some of us are saying the 1911 isn’t obsolete.

Some others are hell bent on convincing us we are wrong instead of accepting opinions differ.

To be fair most (probably all) of us who carry “1911’s”. Aren’t carrying actual 1911’s or even A1’s. So by carrying modern variants I guess I am admitting the actual 1911 is obsolete. I have 4 scandium commanders I carry.

output_zpsmwxkmncc.webp

I also carry archaic revolvers.
 
Last edited:
Exactly.

The change to .45 happened long before the 1911 Browning had already been working on a .41 caliber cartridge (and re-engineering his earlier design for the larger cartridge) when the government requested .45

The 1911 was designed as a .45 it was by my count his 5th .45acp model.

For fun name one other item made in 1911 that is still being made today.
Many Winchester lever actions and their clones.
 
I hope you do enjoy that car.

We know what obsolete means. Some of us are saying the 1911 isn’t obsolete.

Some others are hell bent on convincing us we are wrong instead of accepting opinions differ.

To be fair most (probably all) of us who carry “1911’s”. Aren’t carrying actual 1911’s or even A1’s. So by carrying modern variants I guess I am admitting the actual 1911 is obsolete. I have 4 scandium commanders I carry.


I also carry archaic revolvers.

OTOH some of us at times carry real 1911s - not the "modern" 1911a1 :)

I occasionally carry this, made in 1923:

Fig 3 - 1911 - circa 1923 - Win ball at 15 yards.webp

But more often this, which does qualify as 1911a1 or a Govt. Model:

Clark GM - 215gr HG-58 - 25 yards.JPG - compressed.webp

I think the Clark gun has been updated once or twice before I bought it used. The group is at 25 yards.

Not that I'm opposed to Commanders!

Riposte
 
quote----------------This has been addressed before. The 1911 was originally chambered in .45acp.-----------quote

If it was addressed they were wrong. Browning was told the .38 caliber was not acceptable and that they were looking for a .45 caliber. It is true Brownings pre-1911 guns i.e. the 1900 and 1902 were .38 ACP went through various changes before it became the 1911 including not even having a manual safety but Browning never intended the gun to be a .45 caliber he had to do it to get the military contract.

quote-------------It would be a strange machine gunner that also packed a Thompson. Way too heavy considering the rest of his loadout. In the rare instances that a gunner packed a second gun, it would almost always be a 1911.----------quote

You misunderstood my post. I should have worded it differently. What I was trying to convey is that a soldier using a Thompson chambered for the 9x19 would have been able to carry twice the amount of ammunition compared to the 45 acp, would have had a much more controllable weapon in full auto fire, had flatter trajectory because of the increased muzzle velocity, therefore a higher hit probability, and more penetration as well. Because if all thus it was no accident most of the WWII machine guns were 9mm and not .45 acp. simply because the 9mm was the better sub-machine gun cartridge hands down.

quote--------------In my research, I wasn’t able to find a single documented case of a LEO being killed due to running out of ammo in a 1911. Could you share the details of some of these “Too many dead cops” that you referenced?--------quote

And you did not research very well either as I remember reading one of the reasons cops had to all use the same 9mm caliber guns is that when they were allowed to carry any caliber they wanted (read that 45 acp) there were fire fights with cops that ran out of ammo and had empty guns and could not borrow a loaded magazine from their fellow cop that was there with them and did not run out of ammo because they had high capacity pistols in 9mm.

Common sense would indicate that survival in a gun fight is on the side of the 9mm shooter who unleashes a steady stream of 16 or more rounds of firepower compared to the cop that is now standing there with an empty 7 round magazine in his gun necessitating a reload under high stress when every nano second counts when you have an empty gun in your hand and bullets are whizzing past your ears.

And did I mention multiple assailments. Again Firepower wins and has a much better survival rate when "more" than one guy is shooting at you. Its no mystery why cops went to high capacity 9mm pistols.

The archaic 1911 comes up short in every way, less firepower, excess recoil, excess weight, and way less reliability with exotic expanding ammo, and you can carry twice the ammo with a 9mm because of the size and less weight.

Its also no mystery why the FN 9mm High Power pistol in WWII was the most coveted pistol not only in the European Theater but even in the Asian Theater as well. It was firepower. One Japanese Air Force General was persuaded to "not" return home at the end of WWII but to stay on in China to help train its air force by being bribed with an Inglis High Power Pistol.
“If it was addressed they were wrong.”

No, not wrong. Not even a little bit.

Again, that argument is exactly the same as saying the M-14 was originally chambered in .30-06 because that’s how its predecessor rifle was chambered. And it’s a ridiculous argument.

“And you did not research very well either. . .”

By all means, share the verifiable details of what you claim. “Many dead cops.” I’ll wait.

“Common sense would indicate that survival in a gun fight is on the side of the 9mm shooter who unleashes a steady stream of 16 or more rounds of firepower. . .”

Claiming “common sense would indicate. . .” is not a terribly compelling argument. Share the verifiable details of your claim.
 
OTOH some of us at times carry real 1911s - not the "modern" 1911a1 :)

I occasionally carry this, made in 1923:

View attachment 884032

But more often this, which does qualify as 1911a1 or a Govt. Model:

View attachment 884033

I think the Clark gun has been updated once or twice before I bought it used. The group is at 25 yards.

Not that I'm opposed to Commanders!

Riposte
Cant use the long triggers on the 1911's. The ones that came with one I had swapped out for the short triggers like this AO sports [ came this way so didn't have to change it out and the no sights training 1911. Both a1'sno sights 45-11.webp

DSC00185.webp
 
I was at my LGS today doing the paperwork on a Colt 01911C and there was a young buck POC eyeing the gun up in the case.

IMG_7083.webp



I couldn’t understand half of what mushmouth was saying, but I made out “Glock 40” and a few other terms.

He made it a point to laugh when I told him about the gun I was purchasing. He said 1911s were obsolete and were “boomer pistols”.

I don’t know what that means and maybe that makes me a “boomer”? I don’t know.

But it got me thinking. Do you consider the 1911 to be an obsolete defensive sidearm? What about for police service?

He is a FOOL !
 
Interesting thread. Proper training with LOTS of slugs thrown down range make any choice effective (IMHO). If you can reliably double tap and put both on the X ring, then that is an effective weapon in the hands of THAT shooter. I am not a fan of striker type weapons as many who carry them lack sufficient training (IE, rounds down range). I have been too close to supposedly knowledgeable folks that have accidentally shot themselves or someone standing near. Fortunately all lived, but I saw some pissed off victims during these events. I have also followed Massad Ayoob's journals over the years based on the numerous incidents he has investigated. So, with all this said, I carry a customized Ruger SP-101 Wiley Clap in a cross draw or shoulder rig. If total anarchy breaks out, I'll strap on my Para Arms or Kimber 1911 side carry, keep the shoulder rig, and pick up a long gun as the long gun trumps all the short ones. :unsure:
 
As always, there's a lot of learned discussion from my betters. A few random thoughts.

Off topic:

DEI hires and many of the rest recently hired in the last decade had never touched a gun before being issued one and given a minimal amount of trigger time before they were let loose on the public at large.

While that DEI brush gets widely applied as an explanation, there's no doubt that communities maintain different standards and expectations just based on who tends to live (and be open to work) there. Unfortunately, some things are reasonable, or necessary, to learn OTJ but other topics benefit from more background. Not to generalize too much, but US urban society as a whole has become less comfortable & knowledgeable with firearms and that is reflected in the talent pool available to hire in those areas. We'll see if the resurgence of firearms interest, especially in the area of CCW, changes the culture (and hiring pool) down the road.

Regrettably, among the population of potential police candidates who'd be really good at the job, I think a lot of them never choose that path because they are turned off by the increased politics and distrust surrounding an already dangerous and difficult job. It becomes a bit of a negative feedback loop. So, in some cases, who does that leave us with? I've watched it over the past decade in my current home state: A police officer is involved in some issue (which may or may not be competence-related, sometimes it was "just" a bad day.) and political leaders opine through the fog of war to try to score points. This leads to another round of scrutiny towards police departments which further convinces the better officers that they really could be doing something else. But, now I'm ranting...


Back in the early 80's, there were just two street fbi agents working all of Ma. The rest being hired at that time were accountants and lawyers who were hired to go after white collar crime to the detriment of street crimes.

I admit that Brownie has forgotten more about this than I've ever known, but accountancy and law were actually two of the major pathways into the Bureau. The occasional heroics, special teams and gangster shoot-out stories aside, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not really a street-cop type of agency and, as discussed elsewhere, few of their agents are hired or trained to be gunslingers. Other agencies may copy that model, appropriate or not.

The people get what they vote for, sometimes at their own peril.

Amen. Living that dream...

On topic:

Browning never intended the gun to be a .45 caliber he had to do it to get the military contract.

As often mentioned: John Moses Browning was a genius. Both as a firearm designer and a businessman. Want a specific caliber? No problem. Want a grip safety? No problem. Want a magazine safety? No problem. The single example of the 1911 (or High Power, etc) isn't really the ultimate expression of his aptitude . The fact that his creations are still used & trusted by so many, and have been extended to work in different sizes, materials and calibers is a much more meaningful testament. Some of these extensions even came from competitors.

While I quoted Paul Harrell's comment about obsolescence above, these things have to account for context. We, as individuals, have a lot of latitude in terms of what we buy for our own purposes. Institutions have to deal with constraints and other factors involving training, logistics, liability and over-all costs for their wide-ranging user base of accountants, lawyers, genuine tactical operators as well as "wild-eyed pistol wavers who ain't afraid to die". It's not always appropriate to ape your choice as an individual on the business choice of an institution with different priorities. A lot of 1911 fans get lathered up in these discussions about obsolescence and Fuddity but it's all relative - ask the guy who carries a revolver. At the end of the day, you gotta make your own decision based on your context versus the unsolicited advice from some YouTube-taught gun bro whose been shooting for 15 minutes.

Since I'm on a roll; I admit it: My current 1911 was made by Smith & Wesson, has a 3" barrel, uses an external extractor, has an alloy frame and is chambered in 9x19mm. Heresy? Nah. I still think JMB would be pleased with my choice because he was that kind of genius.

IMG_0754.webp

Now it's time to step away from the computer and do some gardening. Later I'll take my SW1911 out to the range. After the guns are cleaned and put away, I invite you to join me in spirit tonight and pour one out for the genius of Ogden...

Thanks for charitably reading and stay safe y'all.
 
Last edited:
It appears that most of you do not read the reports of why to go to 9mm in the military but got your info from gun magazines. The big reason was NATO; most all members used 9 mm and would not change. Picking up ammo on a battel field, 9mm would be easier to find. A lot of the military did not want the 9 mm, but the top brass did so it happened. I have guns in .32 ACP, .380 ACP, 9mm, .40 S&W, 10 mm, .38 Sp, .357 mag, and .45 ACP. I don’t care what you carry but I shot the 1911 better than any other form of pistol except the 1851Navy.
 
I can get 11 more rounds of 9mm in a gun of the same size, meet the FBI penetration standards, have less recoil, and faster follow up shots. You know what else makes bigger holes? MORE holes. 9mm lives at a very good nexus of terminal performance, capacity, and recoil and that is borne out by police forces and militaries issuing 9mm's en masse everywhere for the better part of 3 decades now.

The difference in energy delivered between energy on target between your average 9mm defensive load and your average 45 defensive load is 50 ft-lbs of energy or less in most cases. The shooting public isn't carrying max loaded underwood. That extra energy seems to be like a lousy trade for losing 10+ rounds of capacity, and most police forces and federal agencies agree with me.

I can get 15 rounds in a pistol with a red dot in a smaller and lighter package than a full size 1911.

My Glock 21 carries 13 rounds which has been my EDC, so not sure how you have 11 more rounds in a Glock 17 as I have one of those as well, and the 1911 has a Wilson 10 round magazine, plus one in the chamber for each. Haven't you discovered each one of us carries what we are comfortable with, I happen to have large hands. Keep on beating the dead horse until a plasma round comes along, Lol! NEXT SUBJECT PLEASE!
 
When given a choice, I saw some of the elite Army Special Forces and Navy Seals carrying 1911's over in Iraq as late as 2011.
Non-elite forces have no choice in what they can carry, as Brownie0486 said. I saw it with my own eyes and spoke with them about it.
When the Army chose to go to a new handgun in the mid-80's, they chose 9mm in order to be in sync with NATO and the last new 1911's the Army had were from 1945
Actually I read some years back that one of the Armed Services bought a batch of Colt 1911 pistols that were modern updated brand new models.
 
Exactly.

The change to .45 happened long before the 1911 Browning had already been working on a .41 caliber cartridge (and re-engineering his earlier design for the larger cartridge) when the government requested .45

The 1911 was designed as a .45 it was by my count his 5th .45acp model.

For fun name one other item made in 1911 that is still being made today.
This is the company making brand new Colt 1903 .32 acp pistols for "Colt".

https://usarmamentmfg.com/colt-1903-pocket-hammerless-pistol-blued/
 
Actually I read some years back that one of the Armed Services bought a batch of Colt 1911 pistols that were modern updated brand new models.
You are correct. The new Colt 1911 made for the one of the U.S. Services had all the modern bells and whistles.
 
The 1911 was declared obsolete before I was born over 70 years ago, but it has been in continuous production the whole time. In an unbiased review of "best" handguns it will usually rank in the top ten and no further than the top 20. What else do you know that is 115 years old that can make such a claim. You want to see obsolete, look at trains, planes and automobiles from that era.

I own a pile of handguns, good, bad and ugly, but if I could only have one, it would be a 1911. Yea, I am old, but experience and wisdom may be a part of my decision.
 
I have 3 Sig Sauer P220's in 45ACP and 1 Browning BDA Sig in 400 Corbon with a spare 45ACP barrel, 2 Colt series 70 1911's, a Government Model and a National Match Gold Cup Mark IV both in 45 ACP.
3 in 9mm, a Ruger P85, a Luger P08, and a F B Radom VIS Model 35.
Can you tell which cartridge I like the best.
 
Back
Top