[Euclidean]

Gideon, sometimes when you're so deep into something you lose a bit of the overall picture. You'll find the 1911 has a rich and deserved following here.

But for me, the 1911 is fascinating from the perspective that it runs completely counter intuitive to how I think a pistol should work, yet so many people prefer it over anything else.

It carries cocked and locked and I don't like that. It separates the ammunition from the firing platform and I don't like that. It fires expensive ammunition. But how can that many military men and LEOs and shooting enthusiasts be wrong?

I say that to give you perspective; if I were to purchase a 1911 it would be to see what the big deal is and to see once and for all if I thought it was truly better or worse than what I've experienced so far. I would not buy a very expensive one regardless of how much I had to spend, but I wouldn't buy the cheapest one either. They can keep those Charles Daly .45s are far as I am concerned, and Phoenix Arms need not apply either.

I have decided if I ever purchase one, I'll get a Springfield Mil-Spec. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles, but it's a good piece at a reasonable price. It's a good enough gun to start an addiction, and I've been informed that if one were to become a serious 1911 enthusiast this gun could be tweaked to a high enough level of performance that would make it useful as a spare or a "user". The GI would be my second choice. Actually, if not for the sights on the thing I think I'd like it more. There's a thread here somewhere that I think Clipse posted that shows some changes you can make to really get it up and running.

As a non-1911 owner who has investigated the possibility, I have been told my interest in even the inexpensive Springfield models is well founded and shows some degree of promise. I don't think it's a bad idea at all to buy the GI and just see if it's your bag or not. I have entertained doing that very thing myself.

I personally like this site a lot:

http://www.m1911.org/m1911dt.htm

It seems written for someone who is not a virgin to firearms but who's not so sure about whether the 1911 might be for them or not. If nothing else, it's a manual of arms I wish I knew better because it's a timeless tool that's never going to go away even if I don't like it.

 

[Euclidean]

Not to highjack the poor guy's thread, but what do you 1911 afficionados think of that .45 GAP caliber? The gun rags love it, but it seems shooters are less than impressed. I've seen a number of ".45 GAP is NOT .45 ACP!" threads going around.

 

[Euclidean]

I think I've made a decision. I think the SA mil spec would be a good choice. I got to hold a GI and a Mil Spec today. I REALLY liked the look of the GI but the sights are sooo much better on the mil spec!

You echo my sentiments exactly. If the GI model had Mil Spec sights, well okay it wouldn't be accurate to call it a GI model but it would be a much more attractive piece!

You picked exactly what I would have (Well mine would be stainless...).

 

[Euclidean]

I just realized something quite remarkable...

Did we all just agree we like the Springfield Mil Spec to some degree?

Did I just agree I, the only non-1911 owner/devotee on this forum, a goober so devoted to the round gun, do in fact like a gun with a detachable magazine, an external safety, that facilitates cocked and locked carry?

I noticed it's a full moon tonight.

 

[Euclidean]

Either when I finally can't contain my own curiousity, or you send me the $490 I need. I'll put the $60 in my wallet with it and order one from my FFL as soon as the check clears.

 

[Euclidean]

Well I picked it up today. My first 1911, SA Mil Spec. Feel a little guilty because its the first gun I ever bought for no reason other than I love the way it looks and feels. Lord knows I didn't need it. Still, it's a pleasure to just hold it! I could sit here and just look at it and point it, etc. I guess this must seem awfully silly for my wife to see a middle aged man fondling over his gun. Just like a big kid with his boy toys! Have two Wilson 47D mags enroute along with a set of wooden grips. I'm hoping to get off to the range this weekend. It'll take a little bit to get the hang of breaking this think down. I did do a lot of research on the cock and lock and have come to the conclusion that it's the best way to carry for CCW. Otherwise it'll be condition 3 or totally empty.

I appreciate all the advise and input. I feel like I got just the right gun with all your help! I didn't have a minute there when I wondered if I should have gotten a micro or compact with a shorter grip, but then I'm not intending this for carry, but rather to use at the range, plinking, or if the US ever gets invaded.

Thanks all!

Gideon

Keep us posted! Some of us are interested in that gun and how it does.

I feel if you're only going to own one 1911, it should be a real deal full size one.

I've been told if you're going to try something new, don't get the cheapest one and don't get the most expensive one either. If you get a cheap one you'll get the wrong impression, and if you spend too much money you're going to be stuck with something you don't understand and probably don't want. I think the Mil-Spec fits that requirement nicely.

 

[Euclidean]

why not try a revolver? one shot, one kill....game over.

Oscar you might be my brother from another mother, but even I, the wheelgun loving pariah in this community of Glockbois and old 1911 addicted farts, have to disagree with you unless you clarify your statement.

Your cylinder holds more than one catridge for a very good reason. There's no such thing as a one shot stopper.

Now I personally don't think it's absolutely necessary to have immediate access to 20 or more rounds of ammunition to defend yourself successfully. I've argued the point before that I don't realistically expect to fire more than a handful of shots in any given scenario involving the use of a handgun for personal defense.

But when we're talking about handguns, unless you score excellent shot placement, one shot stopping (not to be confused with one stop shopping) doesn't seem to happen very often. Even the FBI's information seems to convey that two shots to the center of mass seems to be the most efficient and most likely way to stop a threat.

I practice double taps and firing at speed as often as I can, even if it's just dry firing.

Now for me personally it's probably very accurate to say I personally am much more likely to stop someone faster if I use a revolver because I shoot better with one. But that's because of my own biases and experience, not because of the physical format of the gun.

The wheelgun offers many advantages but the ability to stop an aggressor in fewer shots isn't one of them.