Don't forget the Luger, almost, became this countries service handgun.
This is a discussion on Which had more revolutionary impact: Colt 1911 or Glock? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Revolutionary Impact. 1911 or Glock. Hmmmm. 1911 Swinging link that unlocks barrel from the slide. There were plenty of other semi auto around at the ...
They were equally influential
Revolutionary Impact. 1911 or Glock. Hmmmm. 1911 Swinging link that unlocks barrel from the slide. There were plenty of other semi auto around at the time and many different breech locking mechanisms. The swinging link system is in probably 90% of the non blowback semi autos. The glock barrel cam is the same action as the 1911. Beretta uses a locking block or rotating barrel on some models. So I'm gonna have to say 1911 has that revolutionary design feature. The grip safety was added later at the request of the cavalry. The original safety was pretty small. A tiny tab that is nothing like the later more refined versions. The grip on the 1911 feels great but I would not call that revolutionary. I love the 1911 but that is all I think is Revolutionary.
Now to the Glock. What is revolutionary. A guy with no experience with guns assembles a group a designs a masterpiece on the first try. Brownings father was a gunsmith and browning had several attempts untill he got the 1911 right. OK so Gaston had the advantage of new technology. Yes Browning was a more mechanical genius without question. Gaston wanted to produce a gun for his countries armed forces. So did JMB. Here is what's revolutionary. Using plastic grip frames with good triggers and offering extreme relibility. The HK VP70 was the first plastic framed handgun and had high cap 9mm magazines. But from what I can tell, the really bad trigger pull, high cost, and limited marketing caused poor sales and led to its lack of sucess. They Glock frame would not rust or show wear like steel or aluminum.
It also happened to weigh alot less than even aluminum. It has actually proven better suited to heavy loads versus the steel 1911. Remeber the Colt Delta Elite 10mm auto. They eventually crack from all the battering. While the Glock 20 with a plastic frame is the only gun that continually handles the abuse. Ok next on the revolutionary side. Gaston used a non firearm finish. The Tennifer process that gets into the metal is amazing. In 1986 no other gun manufacturers had anything like this. So there is revolutionary. After that the rest of the indusrty tried to come up with better process's than 200 year old chemical rust finishes. I have seen a glock evidence gun that the police recovered after being submerged over 8 months in a river. The only spot that had any rust was three spots on the slide where rocks had finally worh thorugh to the bare metal. The gun was cleaned up after being sold back to a dealer. The rest of the finish was great. The 1911 won't do that. JMB didn't use stainless either. OK what else. Gaston added simplicity to the design and manufacture of the gun.
They overall cost of the weapon was low with the quality being high. Somehow Gaston got his gun to function with huge ammounts of dirt and abuse yet still be reliable and accurate. The 1911 that JMB made was a much loser fit gun to allow for functioning under battlefield conditions. The super tight 1911's we have today won't handle the dirt like a glock will. Also everything you read about the first 1911's is that the have soft steel. Heat treating improved between WWI to WWII. So the glock has a more revolutionary frame. He used a material that people didn't think was worthy and changed the whole freakin industry. How many gun companies are making frames out of polymer now. Heck even the High end STI 1911 wide body race guns have plastic grips.
The 1911 is a great gun. The Glock is even better. John Moses Browning was a brilliant innovator that built plenty of variations of the same theme. He did not have the ability to make plastic frames that would stand up to recoil better than steel. But if JMB were still alive today hw would not be like gun snobs of today and hold something against a pistol that had a plastic frame. I think he would take a long look at the design and execution and congratulate Gaston on a fine piece of weaponry. Yes the 1911 is more beautiful than the slab sided utilitarianess of the glock. The glock has grown on me just as pure function being beautiful. When I look at the other polymer guns out there today. They have slides and frames that are being designed to be more stylish or sexy. But without much added function. I love the 1911 but Glock has done a better job and imagine how refined it will be in 100 years.
Last edited by JD; April 20th, 2012 at 06:14 PM. Reason: spaced out text.
Don't forget the Luger, almost, became this countries service handgun.
" Blessed is that man, who when facing death, thinks only of his front sight"
"Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." - St. Augustine
Gotta say 1911. Browning did an amazing thing- he created the semi-auto handgun. There were others before it, but... That design had been copied, and produced 'new' for over 100 years. How can you REALLY compare a tupperware handgun to that?
In all fairness, and honesty, I think Glocks are great guns- just not for me.
"Gun control should mean hitting your target every time."
Please try to remember- I have a very dry sense of humor. It usually sounds mean, but isn't meant to be.
I voted 1911 because of the history and time that it came about. the 1911 saved a lot of lives during the World Wars, the old service revolvers that were under powered and under capacity for war. That is why I voted for the 1911... but Mr. G. Glock did do a great thing. With out him I don't know if I'd have my awesome polymer framed M&P the way it is now.
NRA Certified Rifle/Pistol Instructor
Accuracy ALWAYS WINS! So carry what you can hit with.
If you find yourself in a fair fight your tactics stink.
Comparing these two is like comparing Tavern on the Green to Dennys. 1911 all the way.
Do NOT blaspheme in the church of JMB.
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain."
- Roy Batty
Got to consider when both were released. The 1911 back then was a technological genius and the Glock was the same back in the 80's. Like another poster stated. When Glock has stood the test of 100 years as the 1911 has, then we can compare the two. Just my opinion.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I would have to say that David and he rock and sling had them all beat!
Ccccccc what? Ccccccccccc Hawks!
Owe my existence to the 1911...
Guess that had more "impact" for me personally.
"Death is lighter than a feather, but Duty is heavier than a mountain" Robert Jordan
Si hoc legere scis, nimis eruditionis habes
Ecucmgt's enjoyable post is a well-crafted read on his thinking of why the Glock should be considered the more revolutionary pistol.
The Glock is great for those who love it but it is mostly an amalgamation of design concepts previously introduced including a surprising number of major features that pre-date World War II. Gaston borrowed heavily when pulling his concept together.
Besides, there are still those dinosaurs among us who loathe plastic, don't consider the Glock trigger to be good at all, dislike the fact that Glock is lighter in weigh and the fact that it has a top-heavy balance, don't care for the factory chamber leaving as much or more of the case head unsupported than the 1911 thus rendering the Glock no more suitable for heavy loads, don't wish to be limited to shooting only jacketed bullets using the factory barrel, leaving out the cast lead bullet handload, and who find the Glock's appearance as unattractive as the Hi-Point's.
A lifetime of using plain ol' steel guns in wet conditions finds that carbon steel isn't such a problem to maintain except for the lazy so stainless steel or special coatings are nothing more than a nice convenience, at least for the civilian user. Most don't contend with leaving their firearms submerged for 8 months either.
This business of the early 1911 being made of untempered "soft steel" has been greatly magnified since the rise of the internet firearms forum. They were and are serviceable with factory type loadings. Besides, there are very few early production military contract 1911s or their civilian contemporary Colt Government Models still seeing regular use. I can think of one though and it lives here. Many times more 1911s and their clones have been made since advances in steel composition and heat treat technologies were introduced than were fabricated to steel specifications that predate World War I. The 1911 design cannot be criticized unfairly because early pistols were made of so-called "soft steel." There are too many modern 1911s about.
The "loose" military contract 1911 will still group inside of a coffee can lid at 25 yards so there's nothing wrong with the "looseness" of the military pistols.
Compare the 1911 design's continued popularity to the automatic pistols fielded by other nations' military establishments in the first decades of the 20th Century. We don't see either continued production or a market demand for newly made pistols built to design of the Bergman-Bayard, P'08 Luger, C96 Mauser, Glisenti M1910, Nambu, Astra Model 600, Mexican Obregón, Roth-Steyr, Steyr M1912, Lahti, Frommer Stop, or even Colt's own earlier efforts at producing automatic pistols. All these pistol designs were fielded between 1900 and 1935. The 1911 was their contemporary but has outlasted all of them and it's due to the superior goodness of the basic 1911 design and its continued suitability for use today. A design that remains in demand 100 years after its introduction has to be considered revolutionary.
The 1911 was more revolutionary for its time than the Glock was when it was introduced.
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
I think, personally and with no disrespect, this is a silly question. There is only one answer really...The first successful military semi-auto handgun, it served as the standard U.S. sidearm through four major wars and countless police actions. As popular today as ever, maybe more so, it is still carried by some law enforcement personnel and countless civilians. The most customized handgun ever, An entire industry based on parts, accessories, custom gunsmithing, training centers and formal competition has grown up around the Model , and today the design remains the world-wide standard for competition pistols. NOW THAT is Revolutionary! Which am I speaking of? The glock, or the 1911?
My metal band: Born under Sirius
Glock 23, mic holster, clipdraw, abdominal carry.
[QUOTE=MrBuckwheat;2236548]all at the same time? and is one of the smiths a 629?[/QUOTE]
I would rather die with good men than hide with cowards
If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans
Don't ever think that the reason I'm peaceful is because I don't know how to be violent
M&Pc .357SIG, 2340Sigpro .357SIG
What we've got here is failure to communicate.