So-called tests: Glock versus 1911

So-called Tests: Glock versus 1911

This is a discussion on So-called Tests: Glock versus 1911 within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; In order to take the drift off of another topic thread that is currently running let's look at some of these abusive "tests" that are ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24

Thread: So-called tests: Glock versus 1911

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,324

    So-called tests: Glock versus 1911

    In order to take the drift off of another topic thread that is currently running let's look at some of these abusive "tests" that are purported to illustrate the suitability of handguns to "go the distance."

    Glock 21 Torture test - Theprepared.com

    This "test" has been making the rounds on the internet for some time now. It appears to be very dramatic but in some ways is "less than meets the eye." It would almost be embarrassing to point to this test as a validation of the suitability of the Glock due to the silliness involved in some of it.

    Now frankly I'm indulging in armchair quarterbacking in reviewing this test because I'm not actually going to go out and attempt to duplicate it with another Glock or any other handgun design. Still, some questions beg the asking and some observations may be made.

    The opening paragraph's prideful statement about the abuse and neglect of the Glock indicates someone with whom I wouldn't want to share a foxhole or as a back up in law enforcement. Did this particular Glock that went 15K rounds without cleaning or maintenance do it with never a bobble? It doesn't say. It is one thing to shoot a large quantity of ammunition through one with the odd failure and quite another to manage it with perfect cycling for each and every shot fired.

    Burying the pistol or submerging it in various substances seems a straightforward way of testing its reliability to fire despite the introduction of abnormal amounts of foreign matter into its innards. This Glock was a trooper too and mostly functioned throughout these phases of the test. The photographic prop of the 10 lb. sledge hammer used to "slighty pack it in place" is a bit theatrical.

    The various rust tests illustrated seem a reasonable way to induce potentially debilitating rusting. And it is apparent that the pistol remained functional after being submitted to the rust treatment though little attention was given to an apparent FTF issue save for the single statement: "I think some of the FTF were partially the mag." Wouldn't it have been nice for this issue to have been explored further and addressed?

    Is it to be assumed that there were no failures of any kind during the 500-round shoot after the salt water bath? The text doesn't say one way or the other.

    The "bead media test" apparently didn't work out as the Glock choked and harked. This is reasonable to assume considering the abusive nature of the test. Any handgun would likely fail under similar conditions.

    The Silliness Begins

    Shooting the slide (and only the slide) with a .22 pistol is a non-test and is just goofy. What does this prove? It does prove that the owner had the prudence to leave off the polymer frame which wouldn't stand up to such treatment. Grips aside, at least certain other steel-framed pistols could withstand this abuse fully assembled. This foolish "test" is grand for dramatic effect but does it really establish a measure of reliability? Why a lowly .22 and not a 9mm, .45 ACP, or ... hey how about a .460 Weatherby while we're at it? A .50 Barrett would be interesting.

    The "Speedbump" is another non-test that looks pretty impressive in the photographs but offers little to illustrate the toughness of the pistol. Any of a host of other handguns could be run over by a vehicle and still be expected to work. All this test does is make 'em uglier.

    And to really dog out a pistol's appearance, drag it behind a truck. How long was it dragged behind the truck? Miles and miles or just long enough to obtain the photograph? What other pistols out there would stand up to this torture and continue to be functional? No real big deal this test, except to degrade the exterior surfaces.

    The last stupendous, sensational, and melodramatic test is the toss from the airplane ... into a cultivated field of very obviously soft earth. Why was the pistol not tossed out over a concrete parking lot?




    It's All Been Done Before (without the silliness)

    In a time long past another pistol design was put to the test. In searching the internet I haven't uncovered the details of the test or the actual Ordnance Dept. notes of these tests, conducted in March of 1911. It does mention 6000 rounds of continuous firing. Additionally it mentions sand, mud, acid, and rust tests and some tests with deformed cartridges.

    The M1911 Pistols Organization Home Page

    The details of the tests back in 1911 aren't given in the link but appear to be much the same as the Glock test. Lest one scorns "only" 6000 rounds continuously fired; that is a lot of rounds and well establishes the functional reliability of a handgun. It will be noted that those conducting the tests assumed a sensible amount of maintenance care were to be given a handgun. Would a reasonable person attempt to compel the handgun on which he depends to function indefinitely and with out any form of care and maintenance? Do you want to depend on that sort of person?

    The 1911 is now a very old design in the big scheme of things. It may not be the very best design out there. Henry Ford was cranking out Model T's from his Dearborn plant when it was introduced. It is not obsolete however in the same way the old "Flivver" is and remains a top choice as a fighting gun for the thoughtful individual.


    I was grateful for Cuda66's reply when speculating whether the 1911 would pass one of these Glock tests.


    "I would tend to agree with this; in that, I'd put a 1911 built to the original 1911/1911A1 specs up against Glock, Sig, or HK in the torture tests. About the only one I can see it really coming up short in is the salt spray tests; finishes have come a long way since the 1940's...but, I wouldn't put money that it would adversely effect functioning.
    And this, btw, is coming from a big Glock/HK fan."


    I agree with Cuda66 that neither bluing nor even Parkerizing would hold up against rust as well as the Glock's finish.

    I'd be skeptical that the 1911 would function after being buried in material with the slide open.

    What observations might others make concerning the 1911 if it was subjected to the same test methods?


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    The 1911 proved itself on the street and the battelfield as well as the field of competition; the only reason other guns became competitive with it on the field of competition is because organizations like USPSA and IDPA had to separate the disvisions to make other pistols competitive.

    But no other gun design has dominated or won as many trophies on or off the range as the 1911.......

    And if it was such an obsolete design, why are SWAT teams and SPECOPS types still requesting it as their handgun of choice??
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  3. #3
    Ex Member Array BikerRN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    State of Discombobulation
    Posts
    5,253
    And if it was such an obsolete design, why are SWAT teams and SPECOPS types still requesting it as their handgun of choice??
    That right there says it all.

    Biker

  4. #4
    VIP Member
    Array C hawk Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    W. Washington
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by bmcgilvray View Post
    In order to take the drift off of another topic thread that is currently running let's look at some of these abusive "tests" that are purported to illustrate the suitability of handguns to "go the distance."

    Glock 21 Torture test - Theprepared.com

    This "test" has been making the rounds on the internet for some time now. It appears to be very dramatic but in some ways is "less than meets the eye." It would almost be embarrassing to point to this test as a validation of the suitability of the Glock due to the silliness involved in some of it.

    Now frankly I'm indulging in armchair quarterbacking in reviewing this test because I'm not actually going to go out and attempt to duplicate it with another Glock or any other handgun design. Still, some questions beg the asking and some observations may be made.

    The opening paragraph's prideful statement about the abuse and neglect of the Glock indicates someone with whom I wouldn't want to share a foxhole or as a back up in law enforcement. Did this particular Glock that went 15K rounds without cleaning or maintenance do it with never a bobble? It doesn't say. It is one thing to shoot a large quantity of ammunition through one with the odd failure and quite another to manage it with perfect cycling for each and every shot fired.

    Burying the pistol or submerging it in various substances seems a straightforward way of testing its reliability to fire despite the introduction of abnormal amounts of foreign matter into its innards. This Glock was a trooper too and mostly functioned throughout these phases of the test. The photographic prop of the 10 lb. sledge hammer used to "slighty pack it in place" is a bit theatrical.

    The various rust tests illustrated seem a reasonable way to induce potentially debilitating rusting. And it is apparent that the pistol remained functional after being submitted to the rust treatment though little attention was given to an apparent FTF issue save for the single statement: "I think some of the FTF were partially the mag." Wouldn't it have been nice for this issue to have been explored further and addressed?

    Is it to be assumed that there were no failures of any kind during the 500-round shoot after the salt water bath? The text doesn't say one way or the other.

    The "bead media test" apparently didn't work out as the Glock choked and harked. This is reasonable to assume considering the abusive nature of the test. Any handgun would likely fail under similar conditions.

    The Silliness Begins

    Shooting the slide (and only the slide) with a .22 pistol is a non-test and is just goofy. What does this prove? It does prove that the owner had the prudence to leave off the polymer frame which wouldn't stand up to such treatment. Grips aside, at least certain other steel-framed pistols could withstand this abuse fully assembled. This foolish "test" is grand for dramatic effect but does it really establish a measure of reliability? Why a lowly .22 and not a 9mm, .45 ACP, or ... hey how about a .460 Weatherby while we're at it? A .50 Barrett would be interesting.

    The "Speedbump" is another non-test that looks pretty impressive in the photographs but offers little to illustrate the toughness of the pistol. Any of a host of other handguns could be run over by a vehicle and still be expected to work. All this test does is make 'em uglier.

    And to really dog out a pistol's appearance, drag it behind a truck. How long was it dragged behind the truck? Miles and miles or just long enough to obtain the photograph? What other pistols out there would stand up to this torture and continue to be functional? No real big deal this test, except to degrade the exterior surfaces.

    The last stupendous, sensational, and melodramatic test is the toss from the airplane ... into a cultivated field of very obviously soft earth. Why was the pistol not tossed out over a concrete parking lot?




    It's All Been Done Before (without the silliness)

    In a time long past another pistol design was put to the test. In searching the internet I haven't uncovered the details of the test or the actual Ordnance Dept. notes of these tests, conducted in March of 1911. It does mention 6000 rounds of continuous firing. Additionally it mentions sand, mud, acid, and rust tests and some tests with deformed cartridges.

    The M1911 Pistols Organization Home Page

    The details of the tests back in 1911 aren't given in the link but appear to be much the same as the Glock test. Lest one scorns "only" 6000 rounds continuously fired; that is a lot of rounds and well establishes the functional reliability of a handgun. It will be noted that those conducting the tests assumed a sensible amount of maintenance care were to be given a handgun. Would a reasonable person attempt to compel the handgun on which he depends to function indefinitely and with out any form of care and maintenance? Do you want to depend on that sort of person?

    The 1911 is now a very old design in the big scheme of things. It may not be the very best design out there. Henry Ford was cranking out Model T's from his Dearborn plant when it was introduced. It is not obsolete however in the same way the old "Flivver" is and remains a top choice as a fighting gun for the thoughtful individual.


    I was grateful for Cuda66's reply when speculating whether the 1911 would pass one of these Glock tests.


    "I would tend to agree with this; in that, I'd put a 1911 built to the original 1911/1911A1 specs up against Glock, Sig, or HK in the torture tests. About the only one I can see it really coming up short in is the salt spray tests; finishes have come a long way since the 1940's...but, I wouldn't put money that it would adversely effect functioning.
    And this, btw, is coming from a big Glock/HK fan."


    I agree with Cuda66 that neither bluing nor even Parkerizing would hold up against rust as well as the Glock's finish.

    I'd be skeptical that the 1911 would function after being buried in material with the slide open.

    What observations might others make concerning the 1911 if it was subjected to the same test methods?
    Kind of got your goat when I brought up the torture tests on the other thread didn't I? LOL.....

    I agree with most of what you are saying, but I have to peacefully disagree with you in your assessment of the 1911's capability's with regards to these torture tests. The models you describe are pretty old, and it's like saying that gun manufacturers have not learned anything in terms of design and reliability of the last 100 years. I am not saying this gun was not reliable during it's tours of service, that would be ignorant as this gun is legend. What I am saying is "was" for the time.


    By no means I am discrediting 1911's, I want one! But like most people I have seen with 1911's these days, it would be my polish gun with pretty little ivory handles and fancy aftermarket ad don's.

    Hell, just the finish of most polymer pistols would help it in terms of wear and tear.

    (Pasted from Wiki)
    Replacement for most uses

    After World War II, the M1911 continued to be a mainstay of the United States Armed Forces in the Korean War and the Vietnam War and was even used during Desert Storm in some U.S. Army units. It has gone on to see service in both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, with U.S. Army Special Forces Groups and Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance Companies.

    However, by the late 1970s the M1911A1 was acknowledged to be showing its age.

    (It was showing it's age over 30 years ago)

    By the way, where are the 1911 torture tests? I don't see any links? It's seem to be all so-called tests I hear about. I would love if someone took us up on this thread and actually did it to the standard Glock specifications. Get one of your boys at 1911.org to do it, I honestly would love to see this.

    For example look at this test for the Springfield XD, the guy shot over 17,000 rounds through the gun before even attempting the test that met and exceeded the Glock standard test. By the way, this one is a little less flashy then your link above.

    http://springfield-armory.primediaou.../SPstory11.php
    Ccccccc what? Ccccccccccc Hawks!

  5. #5
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,763

    Post

    Todd J puts 1,000 rounds through a 1911 in 10 minutes 44 seconds.
    What more do you want from a personal self~defense handgun?
    The 1911 is timeless. It for sure is not an outdated firearm.
    It works as well now as it did when it was first built.

    Watch the Vid & then jump back on and tell us again how outdated it is.

    YouTube - The 1000 Rounds Challenge - Part 2

  6. #6
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,324
    "Kind of got your goat when I brought up the torture tests on the other thread didn't I? LOL....."


    Heh! Nope, my goat's still here and is still ornery.

    If you would, please describe the portion of the tests that you think the 1911 would fail.

    These latest handgun designs including the Glock aren't as new as is frequently assumed but are only a synthesis of concepts that may be found a number of different pre-World War II handgun designs. Only the polymer is newish and it didn't originate with the Glock. Newer doesn't always equate with better either. Frequently it only means cheaper to manufacture. That is fine if it holds costs down for the end user but the function remains the same as the older designs which may still be as timely now as they ever were.

    When ray guns replace firearms shooting conventional projectiles then we'll see something truly new. Until then the relative values of the instruments launching those projectiles is subjective and there are far less differences between them than we enjoy imagining.

    Be that as it may, because I loathe both polymer and its trigger design I'm unwilling to own a Glock. I will own 1911s and Hi-Powers. I see the value and usefulness of the SIG line as well as the H&Ks and, though I own neither, I intend to acquire a few in future unless those manufacturers go to strictly polymer and DAO.

    Those 1911's referred to in the Wiki article were said to be showing their age in the late 1970s due to the fact that they all were manufactured prior to 1945 and had been in service for many years and not necessarily because of a notion that they were a dated design. It was deemed politically expedient to adopt a 9mm handgun. The Beretta M9 apparently won out over the rest due to politics rather than it's sterling performance.


    Sorry, I didn't designate this as a link in the opening post but it is there. Here it is again.
    The M1911 Pistols Organization Home Page

  7. #7
    VIP Member Array Cuda66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    minnesota
    Posts
    2,352
    I was glad to be of service...

    And..I'd just point out the 1911 was "torture tested" everywhere from the frigid Aleutians to the jungles of Guadalcanal; from the deserts of North Africa to rain and mud of Italy, France (twice!), and Germany; from the dry, dusty hills of Korea to the paddies of Vietnam...and a whole lot of places in between.

    And it worked, when the men who carried the 1911's very lives depended on them working.

    No laboratory test can do more to prove a design's competence.
    There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men.--RAH

    ...man fights with his mind; the weapons are incidental.--Jeff Cooper


    There is a reason they try and make small bullets act like big bullets--Glockmann10mm

  8. #8
    Senior Member Array cuban11182's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    668
    I really need to find a 1911 to shoot. I have had the desire to look at one, but don't think I would like the tang safety. I've never even seen one in person.....hmmm, that has me thinking!

  9. #9
    New Member Array pHluid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    6
    You're taking the Glock "Torture test" way too seriously. It doesn't purport to be a independent, professional, and peer-reviewed case study of extreme conditions firing - Glock already did that. You should dog their testing, if you're trying to pick a fight. :)

    What it is is exactly what it looks like - Some guy with a bit of extra cash and a whole lot of time on his hands saw the Glock marketing material and thought, "Hrm. I wonder what other kind of silly random crap I can think up to try on it."

    Both Glocks and 1911's are fine weapons. I own and respect both of them as capable, durable machines. When will this petty hatred end? Can't we all just get along? :P

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,324
    Trouble is pHluid, too many throw this silly non-test up as some example of the ultimate superiority of the Glock over any other handgun.

  11. #11
    New Member Array pHluid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    6
    That's a fault of the claimant, not the "test." I'm new, so I've probably missed a great deal of the 1911 vs. Glock debates here, but I'm pretty sure I've heard most of the arguments from both sides, and the thing is, usually, both sides are right.

    I'm going to bet most of them go like this:

    "Glocks are ugly, blocky toy guns. They have bulky grip designs. They are harder to manage. They have a stupid trigger safety system that isn't safe at all."

    "1911's are overpriced. They're outdated. They're hard to maintain. The grips are too narrow. They're too large and heavy. They have a stupid three safety system that I have to argue with all the time."

    It's all subjective, personal preference stuff. The same thing that some people hate about one, other people will love. All have their merits.

    That too me is the best "torture test" of the guns. They've both been around for years of hard service, and the most people can argue about them is they don't like the way the grip feels or which safety is better? That says a lot, doesn't it? They're both capable machines with well-earned reputations.

    You guys might as well argue blondes versus brunettes. :P

  12. #12
    VIP Member
    Array C hawk Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    W. Washington
    Posts
    3,552
    Guys, Glock just tends to get the wrap because they are famous for these types of tests. I personally love Glocks, but frankly like XD's and HK's quite a bit too.

    I would love for anyone who believes in their 1911 to step up and put it through these tests. This is honestly not to be a smart ass, I would really like to see how it would do. I would bet that if they did a good job with documentation and the 1911 passes. That person would good down in the 1911 golden, pearl lined, checkered covered record books.

    Talking only goes so far! HK, SIG, Glock and XD's all have been thoroughly tested. Seriously this is not a who's better scenario, I could careless I want to see a test come out of this. It would be cool.
    Ccccccc what? Ccccccccccc Hawks!

  13. #13
    VIP Member
    Array C hawk Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    W. Washington
    Posts
    3,552
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    Todd J puts 1,000 rounds through a 1911 in 10 minutes 44 seconds.
    What more do you want from a personal self~defense handgun?
    The 1911 is timeless. It for sure is not an outdated firearm.
    It works as well now as it did when it was first built.

    Watch the Vid & then jump back on and tell us again how outdated it is.

    YouTube - The 1000 Rounds Challenge - Part 2
    Thats great! Now he only has another 16,500 rounds to go threw to match the other tests! Oh whoops they shot that many rounds just to warm up the gun before they tested it. LOL.......
    Ccccccc what? Ccccccccccc Hawks!

  14. #14
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,763

    Post

    I'm going in alone against the entire Chinese army armed only with a handgun so I'm changing over to a Glock and a donkey cart for the ammo.

  15. #15
    Member Array Gibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    455
    cuban11182, belive me, when you handle and fire a 1911, you will be hooked.

    This comes from a Glock 30 fan and, I still am. But the 1911 captured my fancy along with the Browning HiPower. These guns are works of art that fit into my hands so well and shoot so well. Glock is good....1911 is GREAT!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Glock 30SF versus Glock 36
    By Rock and Glock in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: July 21st, 2013, 06:57 PM
  2. Why is Glock Called the Dark Side?
    By Jrod012889 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2011, 11:52 AM
  3. Should I buy a 1911 or a Glock?
    By SIGP250 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 29th, 2010, 10:32 AM
  4. Glock offers a new G21! (now called G21SF)
    By cagueits in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 26th, 2006, 08:21 PM

Search tags for this page

1911 torture test

,
1911 vs glock
,
1911 vs glock reliability
,

1911 vs glock torture test

,
built glock or 1911
,
called glock trigger silly
,
glock 21 vs 1911 durability
,
glock 21 vs 1911 torture test
,
glock vs 1911 1000 round match
,
glock vs 1911 in competition
,
glock vs 1911 in usmc tests
,

glock vs 1911 torture test

Click on a term to search for related topics.