The thread Title pretty much says it all. Why or why not?
The thread Title pretty much says it all. Why or why not?
If you mean bone-stock WW2 style with the tiny sights, then no. Mostly because of the tiny sights. I do carry a 1911 gov't sometimes though, and it's not been heavily modified - still has the spur hammer, original grip safety and thumb safety. I have upgraded the sights, grips and barrel bushing.
sure... but I would rather upgrade the sights.
If that is all I could afford or that was just my handgun choice to carry, yep! Sights in a gun fight a chl holder will encounter is just not that important IMO. Good practice and point shooting are, 99% won't even see the sights. So the sights are third in line next to reliability and functionality or the simple fact, can I actually shoot/handle this gun well enough to carry.
Thankfully, we have many choices out there that allow us to adapt to our carry needs/wants and a basic 1911 full size platform just isn't in the cards although it is a tried and true platform. Just to heavy, to big and the sights suck!:rofl:
Ti
Sure I would. I'd carry it without any sights. The 1911 is one of the most natural pointing guns there is.
I would and I have.
As far as sights are concerned, take a look at Colts New Agent. It has no sights but only a channel down the top of the slide. It's a dedicated carry pistol.
Dave
I used to have an unmodified Government style .45 - a WW2 vintage Remington Rand - but I never carried it. It was a good gun and I admire the 1911 design, but I just don't want to lug around a gun that weighs about 42 ounces loaded with a 5 inch barrel. It is larger than I need for concealed carry.
When I want to carry a 1911 I prefer an aluminum frame and barrel length in the 3 to 4 inch range, like this Kimber Pro CDP, which weighs 28 ounces:
http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o...imberCDP30.jpg
without a doubt I would carry it. After reading those coroner reports I would carry a govt. .45 with no sights. Been practicing point shooting and have been able to keep it on paper so I am happy. Even my snubbie is at least a .45LC. Bigger holes are better, 12ga is best.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by SIXTO
I've been carrying and training with my Colt 'Defender' which has the old school "tiny sights" for 3 yrs. now. I just this month ordered and received XS Big Sights to replace the admittedly garbage OEM tiny sights.
Not that one can't hit and be functional with them.
As to carrying a full size 1911 yeah I would and do do that too.
Although due to all day carry weight and ease of draw fullsize is not my preference.
- Janq
I would. I have before. It's on the list of things to do again. I don't know how long I could keep it "stock" though.
I would because I feel very comfortable with that platform...even without the 'bells and whistles'...
Stay armed...go 1911...stay safe!
Yep. I carry my stock Springer frequently.
Yep, sure would and have for years. Finally added Wilson triggers, tactical safeties and drop in safeties for my personal likes to both my SA's, one full size and a 4" Champion. Both pistols came with the higher visibility factory sights (not mil-spec) and I have no problem hitting with them. Keep em and your mags (Wilson 8 rd.) properly maintained and you have one hard hitting, reliable weapon in your hands. MO
Yep +1 Airdale, Sixto etc
did for years and will again (soon too)
:wave:
You mean something like SA's WW2 1911, bare bones stock model, yup I have for a couple years now. The sights could be better but work. It's reliable, in a caliber I like, and I shoot it well.
As far as the weight of carrying it around, thats not an issue for me, but I guess it could be for some people.