1911s Suck - Page 9

1911s Suck

This is a discussion on 1911s Suck within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by smolck There are two types of folks in this world, those who put their own picture in their forum avatar with elephants ...

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 193
Like Tree167Likes

Thread: 1911s Suck

  1. #121
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,139
    Quote Originally Posted by smolck View Post
    There are two types of folks in this world, those who put their own picture in their forum avatar with elephants to impress the ladies, and those who don't.
    So are you saying you have a crush on me? I'm flattered.
    64zebra, Guest1, OD* and 1 others like this.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.


  2. #122
    Member Array Troll1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Eastern Oregon
    Posts
    26
    I summed it up and will again;

    Mr. Yeager's false statements in video;

    *@1:07 "A properly functioning 1911 is as rare as a malfunctioning Glock".... thats plain B.S

    *@1:43 "you dont need alot of bullets, its a .45", "its all horse shi t" .... yea it will just bounch off your left eyeball...lol

    *@2:20 J.B. designed a 1911 without grip safety ..... err.... that would be the "safety lock (thumb safety)"... http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y95...51e1b429_o.jpg

    *@3:001911 only works with loose sloppy fit, modern manufacturing processes dont work.. but he wont name brands...

    *@4:271911 owners make a poor choice. ... no we dont

    *@5:471911 is designed for a arched main spring housing".. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...A1_pistols.JPG

    *@5:50A arched main spring housing, changes grip angle... Oh, it magically changes the front strap too?

    *@6:30only 2 or 3 places can build a 1911.... Wow

    *@7:07Nowbody gives a shi t if your 1911 works..... well, why make a video they suck then?

    *@7:101911 owners dont know if their guns work or not........ lol

    *@7:15Dont bash me for my opinion.... we know what those are like.....

    *@7:291911s suck is near fact... With at least whole video being full of false statements, I guess #12 has to be the truth?



    Troll
    With so many false statements, its hard to believe other statements.







    Plus I see this list of 1911 makers here; List of 1911 Manufacturers, current and former - 1911Forum

    A.J. Savage (US gov't contract slides only)
    American Classic
    American Tactical
    A&R Sales
    AMT
    Armi Dallera Custom (ADC)
    Armscor
    Astra
    ATI
    Australian Precision Arms
    Auto Ordnance
    Briley
    Brolin Arms
    Cabot
    Caspian (slides and frames only)
    Charles Daly
    Cimarron
    Citadel
    CO Arms
    Colt (commercial and US/foreign gov't contract)
    Chiappa (.22LR 1911 copy)
    Crown City
    Cylinder & Slide
    Dan Wesson
    Detonics
    Devel
    Dlask Arms
    D&L Sports
    Double Star
    Ed Brown
    EMF
    Essex (slides and frames only)
    Federal Ordnance
    Falcon
    Firestorm
    Freedom Arms
    Fusion
    Gemini Custom
    Griffon Combat
    GSG (.22LR 1911 copy)
    Guncrafter Industries
    Hero Guns
    High Standard
    Imbel
    Imperial Defense
    Infinity
    Interstate Arms (Regent)
    Irwindale Arms Industries (IAI)
    Israeli Arms Industries (also called IAI)
    Ithaca (current resurrected company)
    Ithaca (US gov't contract only)
    Iver Johnson
    Kimber
    Kongsberg (M/1914 pistol manufactured in Norway under Colt license)
    LAR
    Les Baer
    Llama
    Lone Star
    Magnum Research
    Maximus Custom
    Metro Arms
    Mitchell
    MP Express
    Nighthawk
    Norinco
    North American Arms Co. Ltd.
    Nowlin
    Para Ordnance
    Pistol Dynamics
    Olympic Arms
    Omega Defense
    Peter Stahl
    Randall
    Ranger
    Reeder Custom
    Regent
    Remington Arms (current)
    Remington Rand (US gov't contract only)
    Remington-UMC (US gov't contract only)
    Rock Island Armory
    Rock River Arms
    Ruger
    Safari Arms
    S.A.M
    Sarco
    Sig Sauer
    Singer (US gov't contract only)
    Sistema (aka D.G.F.M.-F.M.A.P.) (M1927 pistol manufactured in Argentina under Colt license)
    Smith & Wesson
    South Fork Arms/Perkins Custom
    Springfield Armory (former military arsenal in MA, made 1911s from 1914-1917 under US gov't contract)
    Springfield Armory (commercial business established in 1974, not associated with above)
    STI
    SVI
    Tanfoglio
    Taurus
    Taylor & Co.
    TİSAŞ
    Turnbull Mfg.
    Unertl
    Union Switch & Signal (US gov't contract only)
    Uselton Arms
    USFA
    Walther/Umarex (.22LR 1911 copy)
    Wilson Combat
    Vega (frames only)
    Valtro
    Victory Arms
    Volkman
    I'm sure some wont run, many are excellent.
    OD* likes this.

  3. #123
    Member Array 1911srule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    367
    Its a well designed TOOL. Some people are'nt trained in its proper use or care. Some chose other tools for the same job, good for them. The tool is only as good as the person wielding it. Its a combat proven design I've relied on since 1983. In and out of uniform. My father before that in Korea. To each their own, but those who criticize it are lacking knowledge imho...
    RIP Jeff Cooper

  4. #124
    Ex Member Array Doodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    From my experience with 1911s, in honesty, I too had trouble with them. This summer, I decided to give them one more try. I purchased the Colt Gov model, and had trouble with feeding.

    I consulted the experts here on the board, OD* and QKshooter, and in no time, it was working perfectly.

    The trouble was the magazines springs were not up to specs because the supplier of the springs dropped the ball. I purchased high quality magazines by Wilson, and the issues disappeared.

    Upon notifying Colt, they confirmed the problem, and promptly sent me new mags, which are steller in performance.

    I ran a test of the Colt and Glock firing a total of 1000 rounds each, posted here. I had no issues with either gun. However, it was not meant to be an endurance test, but a test to see which was easier for follow up shots from different target presentations on the draw.

    Lesson I learned is not to try and fix something you do not understand. Additionally, most every quality 1911 problem can be traced to magazines/ springs.

    Buy a quality gun like a Colt, or Springfield, and leave the damn thing alone!
    I had a springfield loaded full sized stainless that suddenly stopped feeding the last round from it's factory mags...I switched to wilson #47's and that issue stopped but for some reason that pistol was prone to FTF if you didn't hold it firmly and I mean concentrate on holding it firmly (spoken not the simple limpwrist, I'm not a pansy). It was finnicky in genneral, I would generally have 3 or 4 out of every 100 malfunction of some kind. I'm sure the more expensive american made versions are better like the TRP...once again though I think that's an exorbitant price for a pistol just so you can have faith in it's function. YMMV

  5. #125
    Ex Member Array Doodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911srule View Post
    Its a well designed TOOL. Some people are'nt trained in its proper use or care. Some chose other tools for the same job, good for them. The tool is only as good as the person wielding it. Its a combat proven design I've relied on since 1983. In and out of uniform. My father before that in Korea. To each their own, but those who criticize it are lacking knowledge imho...
    Sooooo, if your 1911 doesn't work it must mean you don't know how to shoot/clean it? If it requires constant tweeking and tuning of parts then I rest my case. My 1911 didn't work, 2 of them actually...I have put down here my opinion of a firearm, this responce is a vague at best, insulting judgement of people that haven't had the same result as you did. You might have well said, "if you disagree with me your an idiot."

  6. #126
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    9,139
    Doodle, I think any design is prone to issues. I personally love my Glocks. But the 1911 has alot of endearing qualities. I choose based on my requirements, and or whim of the day.

    I personally would not be afraid to carry a gun that had 4 or 5 bobbled every 100 rounds. Just learn immediate action drills and get back in the fight. There are other things that are just as important to me, such as accuracy and quick hit ability.
    I think it all depends on ones level of competency with the chosen package.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  7. #127
    Member Array kaboomkaboom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911srule View Post
    Its a well designed TOOL. Some people are'nt trained in its proper use or care. Some chose other tools for the same job, good for them. The tool is only as good as the person wielding it. Its a combat proven design I've relied on since 1983. In and out of uniform. My father before that in Korea. To each their own, but those who criticize it are lacking knowledge imho...
    And there are more and more who are not trained in it's use or care....I had a young soldier, in uniform, berate me because I was carrying in Condition 1...(at the range no less)... and told me I needed to "decock it"....ya..."lacking Knowledge" imho too!!

  8. #128
    Ex Member Array Doodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX
    Posts
    948
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Doodle, I think any design is prone to issues. I personally love my Glocks. But the 1911 has alot of endearing qualities. I choose based on my requirements, and or whim of the day.

    I personally would not be afraid to carry a gun that had 4 or 5 bobbled every 100 rounds. Just learn immediate action drills and get back in the fight. There are other things that are just as important to me, such as accuracy and quick hit ability.
    I think it all depends on ones level of competency with the chosen package.
    Fair 'nuff

  9. #129
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    Troll, all you did was post Yeager's opinions, and then label them all "false" because they are different from your opinions. Seriously, an opinion CAN'T be false. It can be based on shoddy intelligence, bias, limited sampling, or any number of things, but it can't be "false," and trying to say one opinion is "false" when the only counter-argument/evidence to support your statement is.....your own opinion... isn't a very good argument. Let's take a look at these "falsehoods."

    *@1:07 "A properly functioning 1911 is as rare as a malfunctioning Glock".... thats plain B.S
    I can actually give you this one, mostly. Although neither you nor I (nor Yeager) has the scientific data to prove it one way or the other, I would credit this statement to hyperbole.

    *@1:43 "you dont need alot of bullets, its a .45", "its all horse shi t" .... yea it will just bounch off your left eyeball...lol
    First, that isn't at all what he said. Second, name me a bullet that WILL just bounce off of your left eyeball and, once you've done that, name me someone who is a proponent of using that round for SD. Third, all the actual evidence suggests that the major SD calibers are so close in performance these days as to make that particular debate less and less meaningful.

    *@2:20 J.B. designed a 1911 without grip safety ..... err.... that would be the "safety lock (thumb safety)"... http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y95...51e1b429_o.jpg
    From the Browning web site: "Since cavalry troops were going to be the primary combat users of the pistol, several specific design features, like the grip safety and lanyard ring, were mandated by the horse soldiers." I am not a 1911 historian, but my brief research shows MANY references to the grip safety being a requirement for military trials, and not a part of the original design as envisioned by JMB.

    *@3:001911 only works with loose sloppy fit, modern manufacturing processes dont work.. but he wont name brands...
    He never actually said that, but even if he had, looser tolerances supposedly aid in reliability, so that would stand to reason in some circumstances.

    *@4:271911 owners make a poor choice. ... no we dont
    "I know you are, but what am I?" This is the purest example of OPINION. It cannot be called false. Yours is yours, and his is his. His is based on (I would wager) a HECK of a lot more observation and experience than yours (or mine), which may make it more valid, but it cannot be said to be FALSE. And, according to his bio, he is a recognized expert witness for firearms related items in a court of law, which (legally, anyway) makes his opinion an "expert" opinion. Not true or false, but expert. I'm guessing that yours isn't so recognized?

    *@5:471911 is designed for a arched main spring housing".. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...A1_pistols.JPG
    I don't know the answer to this, and will research it.

    *@5:50A arched main spring housing, changes grip angle... Oh, it magically changes the front strap too?
    My 9th grade geometry tells me that one doesn't have to change more than one side of a two dimensional shape in order to change it's angle. If I cut a diagonal slice off of one side of a piece of paper, would the ANGLES of that piece of paper now be different?

    *@6:30only 2 or 3 places can build a 1911.... Wow
    He didn't say that only 2 or 3 places COULD build them, he said that there were only 2 or 3 places that he would CHOOSE to build one FOR HIM. Big difference.

    *@7:07Nowbody gives a shi t if your 1911 works..... well, why make a video they suck then?
    His point - again as evidenced in this thread - was that whenever someone says something bad about the 1911, a bunch of folks come on and say "well mine worked good, so they must all work good!" This is a logically flawed statement and, more importantly, doesn't mean anything in the aggregate. If someone were to rant about the dangers of drunk driving, and a bunch of people came on and said "well I drive drunk good, and it's always worked for me!" would that mean that drunk driving is "just as good" as sober driving? Or would it mean that - despite doing something with an inherently higher failure rate - some folks just got lucky?

    *@7:101911 owners dont know if their guns work or not........ lol
    I'm not sure that "lol" as a counter-argument bears discussion, but... What he is saying here is that most 1911 owners (like most gun owners, actually) have never really run their gun other than for range plinking. They don't know what the gun will do if run hard, if run dirty, if run dry, and so on. I'm not sure where the humor is in that statement, but if it made you laugh then I guess the video wasn't totally wasted on you.

    *@7:15Dont bash me for my opinion.... we know what those are like.....
    Yours included.

    *@7:291911s suck is near fact... With at least whole video being full of false statements, I guess #12 has to be the truth?
    Again, you failed (with the possible exception of the mainspring housing) to point out a single false statement, much less eleven of them. The FACT that Yeager based his opinion on is that he sees 1911s fail much more often than he does other pistols. If you'd like to disprove that one with your own 15,000 student, 15,000,000 round observation, I would be extremely interested to see it.
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  10. #130
    Member Array RonCo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    MS Gulf Coast
    Posts
    248
    I think this video is serving JUST the purpose Mr. Yeager intended.
    Tzadik and OD* like this.

  11. #131
    Member Array Troll1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Eastern Oregon
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    Troll, all you did was post Yeager's opinions, and then label them all "false" because they are different from your opinions. Seriously, an opinion CAN'T be false. It can be based on shoddy intelligence, bias, limited sampling, or any number of things, but it can't be "false," and trying to say one opinion is "false" when the only counter-argument/evidence to support your statement is.....your own opinion... isn't a very good argument. Let's take a look at these "falsehoods."


    I can actually give you this one, mostly. Although neither you nor I (nor Yeager) has the scientific data to prove it one way or the other, I would credit this statement to hyperbole.


    First, that isn't at all what he said. Second, name me a bullet that WILL just bounce off of your left eyeball and, once you've done that, name me someone who is a proponent of using that round for SD. Third, all the actual evidence suggests that the major SD calibers are so close in performance these days as to make that particular debate less and less meaningful.



    From the Browning web site: "Since cavalry troops were going to be the primary combat users of the pistol, several specific design features, like the grip safety and lanyard ring, were mandated by the horse soldiers." I am not a 1911 historian, but my brief research shows MANY references to the grip safety being a requirement for military trials, and not a part of the original design as envisioned by JMB.


    He never actually said that, but even if he had, looser tolerances supposedly aid in reliability, so that would stand to reason in some circumstances.


    "I know you are, but what am I?" This is the purest example of OPINION. It cannot be called false. Yours is yours, and his is his. His is based on (I would wager) a HECK of a lot more observation and experience than yours (or mine), which may make it more valid, but it cannot be said to be FALSE. And, according to his bio, he is a recognized expert witness for firearms related items in a court of law, which (legally, anyway) makes his opinion an "expert" opinion. Not true or false, but expert. I'm guessing that yours isn't so recognized?


    I don't know the answer to this, and will research it.


    My 9th grade geometry tells me that one doesn't have to change more than one side of a two dimensional shape in order to change it's angle. If I cut a diagonal slice off of one side of a piece of paper, would the ANGLES of that piece of paper now be different?


    He didn't say that only 2 or 3 places COULD build them, he said that there were only 2 or 3 places that he would CHOOSE to build one FOR HIM. Big difference.


    His point - again as evidenced in this thread - was that whenever someone says something bad about the 1911, a bunch of folks come on and say "well mine worked good, so they must all work good!" This is a logically flawed statement and, more importantly, doesn't mean anything in the aggregate. If someone were to rant about the dangers of drunk driving, and a bunch of people came on and said "well I drive drunk good, and it's always worked for me!" would that mean that drunk driving is "just as good" as sober driving? Or would it mean that - despite doing something with an inherently higher failure rate - some folks just got lucky?


    I'm not sure that "lol" as a counter-argument bears discussion, but... What he is saying here is that most 1911 owners (like most gun owners, actually) have never really run their gun other than for range plinking. They don't know what the gun will do if run hard, if run dirty, if run dry, and so on. I'm not sure where the humor is in that statement, but if it made you laugh then I guess the video wasn't totally wasted on you.


    Yours included.


    Again, you failed (with the possible exception of the mainspring housing) to point out a single false statement, much less eleven of them. The FACT that Yeager based his opinion on is that he sees 1911s fail much more often than he does other pistols. If you'd like to disprove that one with your own 15,000 student, 15,000,000 round observation, I would be extremely interested to see it.







    1.
    Troll, all you did was post Yeager's opinions, and then label them all "false" because they are different from your opinions.
    If you need scientific data to prove "A properly functioning 1911 is as rare as a malfunctioning Glock", fine. Then how can you dismiss the statement as hyperbole? Maybe a shred of common scene would do. ..... hahaa




    2.
    First, that isn't at all what he said.
    *@1:43 "you dont need alot of bullets, its a .45", "its all horse shi t" .... yea it will just bounch off your left eyeball...lol
    How is it two to the chest and one to the head ....."horse shi t"? He said it, and its false.


    3.
    2:20
    JB designed a 1911 without grip safety
    Gee who would have guessed, another false statment. Heres a pic of a original 1911 http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3638/...51e1b429_o.jpg
    Notice it has a grip safety and no thumb safety.


    4.*@3:001911 only works with loose sloppy fit, modern manufacturing processes dont work..
    He never actually said that
    errr..........yes he did ....and its false.
    Yes the 1911 does lend itself to mass production.



    5.
    "1911 owners make a poor choice"
    His is based on (I would wager) a HECK of a lot more observation and experience than yours (or mine), which may make it more valid, but it cannot be said to be FALSE.
    Yes it can be said to be false........ Carrying a 1911 isnt a poor choice. Period.


    6.
    *@5:471911 is designed for a arched main spring housing"
    False again
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...A1_pistols.JPG


    7.
    anyway, I gotta roll, too much time on a uninformative video.... Have fun brother.... Troy the Troll

  12. #132
    VIP Member
    Array OPFOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Nomad
    Posts
    4,713
    Wow. That was coherent, cogent, well researched, and logically sound. It was such a stunningly complete reply that nothing more could possibly be said.

    If a class on debate, logic, or critical thinking ever comes your way, it might not be a bad idea to jump on it....
    A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

  13. #133
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,598
    "They don't know what the gun will do if run hard, if run dirty, if run dry, and so on."

    It's an interesting historical factoid that the box/stock 1911 was selected for use by the military as the carry sidearm in sub-freezing Arctic conditions because it would run and function perfectly when completely devoid of all traces of internal and external lubrication.

    Gun oils would thicken up in radically sub-zero temperatures and render a firearm inoperable so the 1911 was completely degreased and carried/run bone dry.


    ~~~~> Not posted to further a Glock/1911 argument/debate. Just posted as an interesting tidbit of information.

  14. #134
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,173
    Quote Originally Posted by smolck View Post
    My 1911 was nothing but trouble. What's your point?
    Honestly Smolck, my point is this: Buy crummy off-brand 1911 clones, monkey with them, and suffer consequences. It's come to mind that you sanded off the finish of a 1911 you acquired and further monkeyed with it, plugging in Ed Brown parts. Now you decry it as nothing but trouble. I'm no prophet or 1911 guru but I know a 1911 train wreck coming when I see it.

    Leave 'em alone. That is, leave 'em alone unless you particularly enjoy the specialized hobby within firearms/shooting sports of customizing and modifying 1911s. If that's the case, and it is a valid hobby in itself, then chop 'em up to your heart's content. If you prefer to shoot 1911s rather than work on them then leave them alone. Some brands' renditions of 1911 guns have more solid reputations than others. Study up on them. I happen to prefer Colt over all others but don't even like all the various versions that Colt produces. Full-sized Government Models suit me. I'll leave all the shorties for someone else to fool with. Commanders and shorter models are 1911-ish but not quite the real deal. This is only one opinion.

    Wish I could live long enough to watch Glock patents expire so everyone and their blind and deaf uncle could crank up and make their own "improved" renditions of Glock. Or, substitute one's favorite name brand in place of Glock in the previous sentence. The results will be the same. Some good. Some not so good.

    Then we'll have some "expert" on some future YouTube clip claiming that Glock (or whatever) sucks. Well...duh!

    Oh yes, and the "massive experience" of the subject of this particular 1911-bashing clip means exactly squat to me since my own experiences and observations, limited though they may be, do not square with I hear from him. My experiences naturally ought to mean squat to other forum readers. Take everything read or imparted, including "massive experience" with a large grain of salt. Study and read certainly but form your own opinions from your own experiences.
    JD and OD* like this.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society "Get heeled! No really"

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  15. #135
    Senior Member Array Cold Shot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    908
    Quote Originally Posted by OPFOR View Post
    Wow. That was coherent, cogent, well researched, and logically sound. It was such a stunningly complete reply that nothing more could possibly be said.

    If a class on debate, logic, or critical thinking ever comes your way, it might not be a bad idea to jump on it....
    cogent - good word

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

1911 suck
,

1911's suck

,

1911s suck

,
chris kyle carjacking
,
ria 1911 extreme tactical
,
rock island 1911 extreme tactical
,
rock island armory extreme tactical
,
rock island armory extreme tactical 1911
,
rock island armory gov't model 1911-a extreme tactical
,

rock island armory gov't model 1911-a extreme tactical 2011

,
rock island extreme tactical
,
why 1911s suck
Click on a term to search for related topics.