I guess I was just searching for some comments that would push me toward or away from considering adding a .45acp to my 9mm. I find the 1911 easier to shoot in timed competition, probably because of my lack of skill with the trigger of the 5906, but I do like the 3rd Gens.
Compare your 3rd gen to your 1911
- Thread starter corgiS&W
- Start date
I guess I was just searching for some comments that would push me toward or away from considering adding a .45acp to my 9mm. I find the 1911 easier to shoot in timed competition, probably because of my lack of skill with the trigger of the 5906, but I do like the 3rd Gens.
Badkarma 1
US Veteran
Speaking as a former Navy Gunner's Mate I can tell you that I used to have nightmares about 1911s! But those were WW2/ Korean War rebuilt over 25-50 times BEATERS! Sure they worked but the best of the lot was lucky to keep its seven rounds on a #3 washtub at 25yards!
The newer ones are better in terms of tightness and build, accuracy seems to be good too excellent, but reliability seems hit or miss. Most of the companies building a 1911 nowadays isn't following the Browning blueprint, they gotta tweak it, and put doo dads on it the one piece guide rod is the worst offender!
2nd and 3rd Gens seem to run no matter what's in the magazine (even empties!), accuracy varies but its good enough and in some cases mind boggleing. Has the option of carrying safety on or off, AND if you pop the mag the piece is dead!
I grew up with the 1911, and despite what Cooper or anybody else said the things could and would jam! They're great guns for games, bullseye, or certain elite soldiers. (Who are now carrying G22s!). But during that same time I noticed the much maligned 9mm semi-auto and the DA mechanism worked and worked very well! Those pieces were Smith & Wessons!
So while I'll have a soft spot for the older SIG P 226 and Beretta 92, it was the 60s era Smiths that actually blazed the trail.
4506 vs 5906? Do you want a. 4 inch 15 shot all steel 9mm or a 5 inch 8 shot all steel .45?
Dale
The newer ones are better in terms of tightness and build, accuracy seems to be good too excellent, but reliability seems hit or miss. Most of the companies building a 1911 nowadays isn't following the Browning blueprint, they gotta tweak it, and put doo dads on it the one piece guide rod is the worst offender!
2nd and 3rd Gens seem to run no matter what's in the magazine (even empties!), accuracy varies but its good enough and in some cases mind boggleing. Has the option of carrying safety on or off, AND if you pop the mag the piece is dead!
I grew up with the 1911, and despite what Cooper or anybody else said the things could and would jam! They're great guns for games, bullseye, or certain elite soldiers. (Who are now carrying G22s!). But during that same time I noticed the much maligned 9mm semi-auto and the DA mechanism worked and worked very well! Those pieces were Smith & Wessons!
So while I'll have a soft spot for the older SIG P 226 and Beretta 92, it was the 60s era Smiths that actually blazed the trail.
4506 vs 5906? Do you want a. 4 inch 15 shot all steel 9mm or a 5 inch 8 shot all steel .45?
Dale
I must admit that I've had two 1911s. A Series 80's Gold Cup ($399 mid 80s from B&B guns, the outfit that supplied the ARs for the N. Hollywood shootout- I have a story about that, for later) that jamed a lot, and later, for my 45th birthday I traded an HK P7 for an Enhanced Colt 1911 (remember those?) bad trade, but that gun functioned perfectly for more than 400 rounds. I had to sell it for financial reasons. I regret the sale, but I prefer a double action first shot since I'm not working for the government. My 4506-1 fills my .45 SD needs perfectly. Or my SIG P220ST.
Regards
Richard
Regards
Richard
Glenn H
Member
Old tech
I have a friend who, when asked about the 1911, says that he prefers his obsolete, century+ old technology in the form of a Webley .455.
I have a friend who, when asked about the 1911, says that he prefers his obsolete, century+ old technology in the form of a Webley .455.
Jim PHL
Member
I've been a big fan for a long time of the 3rd gen single-stack 9mm's, having owned several 3953's, 3913's and a CS9. I still have 2-3913's and a 3953. Love 'em.
Some time ago I decided I HAD to have a 4506 and, OBVIOUSLY, a smaller, lighter, 4513 for carry. After searching and waiting for a good deal on one I finally scored one of each within a few weeks of each other. They performed well on the range but my 1911's were thinner, lighter, felt better in my hand and I shot them more accurately (with 100% reliability). If I could afford to have and fill a room-sized safe with all the guns I wanted I would certainly have a 2nd- or 3rd gen .45 or three in there, but I can't, so for me it's the 1911 for launching .45's.
(I am sure I will get flamed for the above, but apparently I am already a bad S&W fan since I prefer round butt K-frames to square butts. Hard for me to fit in, I guess. Is it OK to like 1911's if you have Smith & Wesson 1911's?)
Some time ago I decided I HAD to have a 4506 and, OBVIOUSLY, a smaller, lighter, 4513 for carry. After searching and waiting for a good deal on one I finally scored one of each within a few weeks of each other. They performed well on the range but my 1911's were thinner, lighter, felt better in my hand and I shot them more accurately (with 100% reliability). If I could afford to have and fill a room-sized safe with all the guns I wanted I would certainly have a 2nd- or 3rd gen .45 or three in there, but I can't, so for me it's the 1911 for launching .45's.
(I am sure I will get flamed for the above, but apparently I am already a bad S&W fan since I prefer round butt K-frames to square butts. Hard for me to fit in, I guess. Is it OK to like 1911's if you have Smith & Wesson 1911's?)
I have only had M&P's of the .40 and .45 variety which I can't say enough about. So then I caught the 3rd gen series affliction. So far three 4506, one 4566, and now one 4006. They are really something special. 4566 is my favorite. So easy to shoot. Never really tried a 1911. Perhaps start with a nice Ed Brown?
Badkarma 1
US Veteran
Not at all Jim. I agree the 1911 is smaller than the 645, 4506, and 4506-1. You are shaking hands with John M. himself with the 1911. The thinner part I'll argue about slightly, but grip wise there isn't much that's more ergonomic than a 1911..save maybe the Browning Hi-Power.
All I'm saying is that a 1911 built to the Browning prints, with good sights and a decent trigger (maybe a feed ramp job) is a great sidearm, but with the 4500 series you get utter dependability with better than average accuracy, and more acceptable trigger system in today's litigation crazy world.
I too have one 1911, a Colt Delta Elite! But that's a whole nother animal.
Dale
Revolver-time
Member
I have a 4506, 1006, 4006, and 5 different 1911s. I can best describe the gen 3s as pick-up trucks. They are strong, tough, and have great utilization. The 1911s are corvettes. They are slim and fast with big power. The 1911s fit my hands like a second skin. It is the one weapon that I can just wish the bullet to the target. Even at 61 years old I can put that big old slug into a 4" circle at 100 yards. When the guys go out to zero their deer rifles I show off how the 1911 shoots. A 1911 is with me when I step out of my house and I have carried one since the 1970s.
Kadonny
Member
I have only had M&P's of the .40 and .45 variety which I can't say enough about. So then I caught the 3rd gen series affliction. So far three 4506, one 4566, and now one 4006. They are really something special. 4566 is my favorite. So easy to shoot. Never really tried a 1911. Perhaps start with a nice Ed Brown?
If you are going to start with a 1911, there is no better than a Brown. Good choice.
I carried an old GI 1911A1 as my duty sidearm for a number of years up until the Berettas were fielded. During this time I was also a small arms instructor/rangemaster and trained/qualifed quite a few folks with this arm. Had quite a few of those old GI guns in my armory at a few different units. Yeah they were all tired and loose, Yeah they all rattled. But the lockup was still good and they all shot well. And so long as you could master the pathetic tiny sights worn silver with all the parkerizing gone, most folks did ok. Tens of thousands of rounds at the range and I don't recall ever having one of those 1911 breaking. Never had any problems with Browning's M2 either for that matter. I suspect ol' John Moses Browning kinda knew what he was doing. I did however experience plenty of breakages with the more modern crowd of small arms. The M60s were sometime tempermental. M16, A1 or A2 often spit out broken extractor bits. Most irritating of all was when those damnable shell latches in an M870 would come unstaked and tie up a loaded weapon on the line, Liked to drive me nuts.
But I digress. I think those old 1911s got a bad rep for accuracy primarily due to the crappy GI fixed sights. Take any of those old guns and slap a Bomar on the back and a new undercut front and they shot wonderfully. I competed with a couple of those old beater match guns from Crane just like that for a number of years. never had an alibi or any issue with my ball gun. My wadcutter gun was another matter though.
Back in the days when lawyers per-capita were a great deal less, Mr. Browning designed the 1911 as a warfighter's sidearm. Incorporating controlled round feeding with a specific cartridge and bullet ogive (GI 45ACP Ball), feedramp angle, specially designed magazine that gradually gave up control of each cartridge, and even a breechface specifed to be machined precisely at 89°8' of angle. With the in-spec ball ammo it was designed for it functioned just fine. Turn it upside down and shake the hell out of it while firing and it wouldn't drop a round, still ran fine.
I firmly believe the 1911's often spoken of rep for poor reliability stems from folks deviating from the as designed specs. For example, here comes modern defensive ammo of the truncated cone bullet shape. Think flying ashtray and early hydrashoks. Feed problems because the bullet ogive is wrong. Well then, lets mess with the magazine feed lips. We'll allow the round to pop up early (no more controlled round feed). Still got problems? Let's mess with the frame's feedramp (Oh no George, not the feedramp!). Then the barrel's feedramp and throating and on and on. Most of these modern so called 1911s have gone so far afield of the original design they ought to be called 2011s. What's my point? Well I think that poor regard some have for the guns reliability would not be so had makers (of both the guns and the ammo)stuck with the with the print specs to begin with. It's supposed to be a little loose so it tolerates gunk and lack of lubrication. Accuracy come from consistent lockup not rattlefreeness. And some entities have caught on. Take a look at the current crop of 45ACP defense rounds. Bullet ogives that closely imitate that of GI ball ammo, Ranger-T, Gold Dot, Golden Saber et al.
OK OK Bill Get to the point will Ya?... Yessir, so I'm retired now, essentially a civilian. I no longer have the benefit of qualified immunity as a Fed LE officer. So ever since I got my permit I've carried a 3rd gen 45 instead of a 1911. Why's that you ask? First, Going back to my Lawyer comment...Well, I don't go looking for trouble, I don't frequent places where trouble hangs out and I always watch my six. Nevertheless should trouble come to find me and force my hand, I don't want to wind up having to explain what cocked & locked or condition 1 is, or worse yet a overzealous liberal prosecutor explaining those things to a jury. Second, I prefer that long DA pull for the first shot in event of a high stress defensive shoot situation. I don't ever want to touch one off inadvertently. The 3rd Gen is point & shoot, don't have to flick a safety off. And on the economical/dependable side, I know in my soul that anything I can fit in the magazine will cycle through my 45xx with utter reliability. I've run stuff through my 4516-1 that will flat out gag my fullsize Colt. Plus I don't have to spend time and money proofing new carry ammo in my Colt to make sure it will work. I know the worst ratpoop battlefield pickup cheap crapola ammo that can be found, so long as it says 45ACP on the bottom, will run in my 3rd gen 45.
Cheers Gentlemen
Bill
But I digress. I think those old 1911s got a bad rep for accuracy primarily due to the crappy GI fixed sights. Take any of those old guns and slap a Bomar on the back and a new undercut front and they shot wonderfully. I competed with a couple of those old beater match guns from Crane just like that for a number of years. never had an alibi or any issue with my ball gun. My wadcutter gun was another matter though.
Back in the days when lawyers per-capita were a great deal less, Mr. Browning designed the 1911 as a warfighter's sidearm. Incorporating controlled round feeding with a specific cartridge and bullet ogive (GI 45ACP Ball), feedramp angle, specially designed magazine that gradually gave up control of each cartridge, and even a breechface specifed to be machined precisely at 89°8' of angle. With the in-spec ball ammo it was designed for it functioned just fine. Turn it upside down and shake the hell out of it while firing and it wouldn't drop a round, still ran fine.
I firmly believe the 1911's often spoken of rep for poor reliability stems from folks deviating from the as designed specs. For example, here comes modern defensive ammo of the truncated cone bullet shape. Think flying ashtray and early hydrashoks. Feed problems because the bullet ogive is wrong. Well then, lets mess with the magazine feed lips. We'll allow the round to pop up early (no more controlled round feed). Still got problems? Let's mess with the frame's feedramp (Oh no George, not the feedramp!). Then the barrel's feedramp and throating and on and on. Most of these modern so called 1911s have gone so far afield of the original design they ought to be called 2011s. What's my point? Well I think that poor regard some have for the guns reliability would not be so had makers (of both the guns and the ammo)stuck with the with the print specs to begin with. It's supposed to be a little loose so it tolerates gunk and lack of lubrication. Accuracy come from consistent lockup not rattlefreeness. And some entities have caught on. Take a look at the current crop of 45ACP defense rounds. Bullet ogives that closely imitate that of GI ball ammo, Ranger-T, Gold Dot, Golden Saber et al.
OK OK Bill Get to the point will Ya?... Yessir, so I'm retired now, essentially a civilian. I no longer have the benefit of qualified immunity as a Fed LE officer. So ever since I got my permit I've carried a 3rd gen 45 instead of a 1911. Why's that you ask? First, Going back to my Lawyer comment...Well, I don't go looking for trouble, I don't frequent places where trouble hangs out and I always watch my six. Nevertheless should trouble come to find me and force my hand, I don't want to wind up having to explain what cocked & locked or condition 1 is, or worse yet a overzealous liberal prosecutor explaining those things to a jury. Second, I prefer that long DA pull for the first shot in event of a high stress defensive shoot situation. I don't ever want to touch one off inadvertently. The 3rd Gen is point & shoot, don't have to flick a safety off. And on the economical/dependable side, I know in my soul that anything I can fit in the magazine will cycle through my 45xx with utter reliability. I've run stuff through my 4516-1 that will flat out gag my fullsize Colt. Plus I don't have to spend time and money proofing new carry ammo in my Colt to make sure it will work. I know the worst ratpoop battlefield pickup cheap crapola ammo that can be found, so long as it says 45ACP on the bottom, will run in my 3rd gen 45.
Cheers Gentlemen
Bill
Last edited:
SW CQB 45
Member
It has been a big circle for me. And I have been lucky with my purchases.
my first semi auto was a used stainless Gold Cup. it ran good, no modifications and it ran 100% with decent accuracy for my skill level at that time (mid 80s)
my dad bought me a Colt OACP (1988) and my very first shot sent the recoil spring assembly and barrel bushing flying. I sent it to Kings Gun Works and they fitted their HD guide rod assembly and it ran flawless after that.
Well then along come Glock and I had to have 45 so I sold the GC to get a Glock (this would have been 1992). was issued the same gun on duty. (later sold the Glock)
My dad also gave me a Colt Govt Series 70 5" that was a range toy and it shot very well.
Ran Glock till approx 97-98 when I shot a buddies 1006 and started learning the inners of Glock. We were experiencing a misfires with these original G21s and timing seemed to be the issue. It was always with practice FMJ and never duty which that time would have been Federal Hydra Shok.
In the early 2000s, I bought a Les Baer Monolith and it was the most accurate out of the box 1911. I did nothing to this gun but add a mag well and I was amazed in the accuracy and ran w/o a hitch. I also started shooting competitively with it. It some matches I shot, it was not approved to shoot.
I bought me my first SW 4506-1 and while the trigger pull was heavy, I preferred the hammer fired over the striker fired weapon. I sent my 4506 to the PC for a duty action job and it was sweet. I carried it on duty until I came across a CQB4563 and had to have it but funding made me sell the 4506 to help pay for the CQB. During the next couple of years….I bought many 3rd gen smiths. All of them ran great.
I decided to park my CQB from duty carry and went to plain clothes in 2006 and mainly carried a 4013TSW.
In 2008, we had administrative changes at the dept and I was asked to re write policy to allow 1911 style pistol for duty carry. It was approved and I bought me a Springfield. And while this pistol had a few mishaps in competition which were finally diagnosed to an out of spec aftermarket slide stop lever…it has ran 100% after that.
I have since sold all my 3rd Gen Smiths and have a lot of 1911s that replaced them. I will only use two for duty and the rest are mainly competition pieces. I have sold a few to get others but I have been very lucky with everything I have owned.
I used tinker too much and lately these days I don't have the extra time anymore so I will buy the right piece so no extra work is required.
so which do I prefer…..1911 style! my guns run. I mainly shoot ball, and reloads and Gold Dot and never had an issue.
the only reason I am shooting and carrying 1911, I practice with 1911 for competition and I want to carry that same manipulations for duty carry.
while I preferred the alloy CQB for accuracy potential and lightweight carry when I was full on SW, the three guns I regret getting rid of was the big ol 4506-1 with the smooth action job, DPA5906 (smooth shooter) and the 845 (this gun had a lot of potential….I just did not shoot it)
I wonder if admin did not change in 2008, would I still be using SW3rdGen…probably.
As long as you train correctly with both, either one is acceptable.
I also carry Glock 9mm from time to time and have a Shield Nina too.
my first semi auto was a used stainless Gold Cup. it ran good, no modifications and it ran 100% with decent accuracy for my skill level at that time (mid 80s)
my dad bought me a Colt OACP (1988) and my very first shot sent the recoil spring assembly and barrel bushing flying. I sent it to Kings Gun Works and they fitted their HD guide rod assembly and it ran flawless after that.
Well then along come Glock and I had to have 45 so I sold the GC to get a Glock (this would have been 1992). was issued the same gun on duty. (later sold the Glock)
My dad also gave me a Colt Govt Series 70 5" that was a range toy and it shot very well.
Ran Glock till approx 97-98 when I shot a buddies 1006 and started learning the inners of Glock. We were experiencing a misfires with these original G21s and timing seemed to be the issue. It was always with practice FMJ and never duty which that time would have been Federal Hydra Shok.
In the early 2000s, I bought a Les Baer Monolith and it was the most accurate out of the box 1911. I did nothing to this gun but add a mag well and I was amazed in the accuracy and ran w/o a hitch. I also started shooting competitively with it. It some matches I shot, it was not approved to shoot.
I bought me my first SW 4506-1 and while the trigger pull was heavy, I preferred the hammer fired over the striker fired weapon. I sent my 4506 to the PC for a duty action job and it was sweet. I carried it on duty until I came across a CQB4563 and had to have it but funding made me sell the 4506 to help pay for the CQB. During the next couple of years….I bought many 3rd gen smiths. All of them ran great.
I decided to park my CQB from duty carry and went to plain clothes in 2006 and mainly carried a 4013TSW.
In 2008, we had administrative changes at the dept and I was asked to re write policy to allow 1911 style pistol for duty carry. It was approved and I bought me a Springfield. And while this pistol had a few mishaps in competition which were finally diagnosed to an out of spec aftermarket slide stop lever…it has ran 100% after that.
I have since sold all my 3rd Gen Smiths and have a lot of 1911s that replaced them. I will only use two for duty and the rest are mainly competition pieces. I have sold a few to get others but I have been very lucky with everything I have owned.
I used tinker too much and lately these days I don't have the extra time anymore so I will buy the right piece so no extra work is required.
so which do I prefer…..1911 style! my guns run. I mainly shoot ball, and reloads and Gold Dot and never had an issue.
the only reason I am shooting and carrying 1911, I practice with 1911 for competition and I want to carry that same manipulations for duty carry.
while I preferred the alloy CQB for accuracy potential and lightweight carry when I was full on SW, the three guns I regret getting rid of was the big ol 4506-1 with the smooth action job, DPA5906 (smooth shooter) and the 845 (this gun had a lot of potential….I just did not shoot it)
I wonder if admin did not change in 2008, would I still be using SW3rdGen…probably.
As long as you train correctly with both, either one is acceptable.
I also carry Glock 9mm from time to time and have a Shield Nina too.
nocents
Member
Before I get too old to enjoy it I want a 1911....do I need one ..NO...but I want one...can't justify the expense of a custom rig at twice the price for my use....so a production piece will have to suffice....probably an "E"...or the Ruger.....just because
...can't justify the expense of a custom rig at twice the price for my use....so a production piece will have to suffice....probably an "E"...or the Ruger.....just because
SW CQB 45
Member
if I could add a little more.
I have seen both sides of the fence where they buy a 3rd Gen Smith and a 1911 thinking the gun will fix poor marksmanship.
Both require extreme attention/practice to that particular set up for best proficiency.
There is a person I know who is a **** talking shooter who has both a Wilson CQB and a Ed Brown Special Forces 1911 style pistol. He puts his money in his guns but does not train with them. He is very arrogant but will not show up to challenges. Many years ago, I told him I will take the rattiest third Gen Smith I can find and told him to show up with either gun. I am glad I have not held my breath.
I drive my family crazy with all the dry manipulations I do at the house and utilize a SIRT when the academy is not in session.
Get you a gun, learn it and get good with it. Ammunition costs and availability have me dry firing a lot.
Now if I could just figure out the 50 yd stages for PPC, I would be much happier with myself!!!!!! (practice/practice/practice/practice/practice/practice)
good luck on your decision.
I have seen both sides of the fence where they buy a 3rd Gen Smith and a 1911 thinking the gun will fix poor marksmanship.
Both require extreme attention/practice to that particular set up for best proficiency.
There is a person I know who is a **** talking shooter who has both a Wilson CQB and a Ed Brown Special Forces 1911 style pistol. He puts his money in his guns but does not train with them. He is very arrogant but will not show up to challenges. Many years ago, I told him I will take the rattiest third Gen Smith I can find and told him to show up with either gun. I am glad I have not held my breath.
I drive my family crazy with all the dry manipulations I do at the house and utilize a SIRT when the academy is not in session.
Get you a gun, learn it and get good with it. Ammunition costs and availability have me dry firing a lot.
Now if I could just figure out the 50 yd stages for PPC, I would be much happier with myself!!!!!! (practice/practice/practice/practice/practice/practice)
good luck on your decision.
I own a 1911 (RIA) I'll probably never get rid of my 1911 but I'll probably never carry it either just because I prefer the simplicity of the DA/SA platform (pull point shoot) over the SAO.
In terms of reliability I'd say all three guns are equal, I think my RIA would shoot rocks it you could get them in the magazine.
In terms of reliability I'd say all three guns are equal, I think my RIA would shoot rocks it you could get them in the magazine.
I have both 5906 and 645 in 9mm and .45 in SS. Both are excellent fit and finish and shoot quite well. Reliability is outstanding. Compared to my 1911? All are different. S&W's are a little more mechanically complex than the 1911.The 1911 might be a little more reliable in that regard. All are in the heavyweight class. All shoot really really nice. I just wish I could buy about 3 more each of them!! What is happiness?. a safe full of S&W's and 1911's and Ruger's and Beretta's and one famous CZ-75. Now if I can just convince my wife LOL Nutbustd US Army Ret.
