There are three types of accuracy. Scientific accuracy: a gun’s ability to hit what it’s aimed at from a bench rest when fired by Number Five (yes, he’s still alive). Practical accuracy: any given shooter’s ability to hit a target with a particular gun at a gun range. And SHTF accuracy: the gun’s utility for a shooter who’s firing his weapon like a New York City or Chicago cop. The above video is a practical accuracy shootout between a $3080 Wilson Combat Bill Wilson Carry Pistol and a $539 Glock 30. [SHTF demo ater the jump.] I fired Winchester White Box .45 ammo from five yards. I’m an OK shot, it wasn’t my best day and the light was in my eye (kidding). I’ve put more than a 1000 rounds through each gun; I’m tuned-in to both the 1911 breaking glass rod single-action trigger and the Glock’s controllable CLICK reset striker-fired go pedal. And the winner is . . .
Not the bad guy. If you’re as good/bad a shot as this humble scribe and you keep your wits about you in a self-defense scenario, the perp or perps are going to be leaking bodily fluids all over the place. I reckon an experienced Wilsonian or Glockinado could hit a bad guy’s center mass from ten yards every time, all day. Provided the perp stands as still as a gun range target.
Yes, yes I know: eight rounds (Wilson) vs. 11 (Glock) and questioned (if not questionable) reliability vs. perfection (absent any discussion of Glock’s recent recall, which did not affect this gun). But I’m not talking capacity or reliability. I’m speaking here of a self-defense gun’s ability to help one defend oneself.
Bottom line: both guns are more than accurate enough to do what they’re designed to do. Minute of bad guy? Done.
If, however, you want to choose which button on the BG’s shirt to hit, advantage Wilson. I think. Maybe. That depends on your hand size and whether you share my ability to get a good grip on the Glock. (It’s an SF BTW, which stands for “Short Frame.” I wouldn’t stand for anything less, if I were you.)
Also not a winner: my bank account. I paid for both guns. But the basic point is unavoidable: in the hands of an amateur, the Bill Wilson Carry Pistol is not six times as accurate as the Glock 30SF. At least not when you’re taking your time. When you’re shooting like a madman, the Wilson Combat Bill Wilson Carry Pistol really comes into its own.
A loaded Bill Wilson Carry Pistol weighs-in at 38.5 ounces. Mit Kuglen, the Glock tips the scales at 33.86 ounces. The Wilson’s “extra” five ounces are a boon to a ballistic loony. The Wilson handgun’s heft helps the, uh, “rushed” shooter reacquire the target more quickly than its polymer pal.
I know you can buy a top-notch heavyweight 1911, gravity-sucking ArmaLite AR-24 or just about anything else for five to six bills. I understand that the Glock’s relative weight is one of the gun’s main selling points—although slim beats light for comfortable carry (just sayin’). I get that the Glock’s trigger is a LOT safer than the Wilson’s.
But if we’re comparing these two guns for balls-to-the-wall, screw-the-sights-my-ass-is-in-a-sling combat accuracy, advantage Wilson.
And there you have it. Well, not entirely. I shot both guns at 25 yards and . . . What difference does that make? (Yes, the Wilson won there too.) You better have one hell of a reason to shoot someone at 25 yards. And, preferably, a rifle.
So is the Wilson Combat Bill Wilson Carry Pistol more accurate than a Glock 30SF? Yes, but not by much for most people. Does that matter? Only if it matters to you. Now, let’s talk about style . . .
Now leaving out the cost of each gun, which would you feel safer carrying everyday.
That depends on how you define “safe.” Do you mean which gun would I trust to go bang every time? Either. Which gun gives me sufficient accuracy to defend myself? Both.
The Glock’s three bullet advantage goes away because the extra mag is too bulky for pocket carry. In that sense, the Wilson offers eight plus eight for a total of 16, to the Glock’s eleven. But yes, I’d need to swap mags. Which I kinda enjoy. But maybe not so much in the heat of battle.
And then there’s the whole trigger thing. I’m good enough not to let loose an “extra” bullet without meaning too with the Wilson, BUT it does happen when I shoot one-handed with my left hand. That NEVER happens with the Glock. Is that important? Probably not. I hope.
Logically speaking, the Glock is the “safer” gun. But the Wilson is MUCH easier to conceal—as I use an OWB holster. So the Wilson gets the nod. Did I mention style?
What makes the 1911 easier to conceal? Thin-ness of the grip? My G30 SF is a great gun, but I rarely carry it because I simply prefer something lighter. Concealment OWB has not been an issue.
the glock is more than 50% wider than the flat as a pancake 1911
The Glock 30 is 1.27″ wide at the slide, the Wilson Carry Pistol is 1.3″ wide. I’m sure the Glock has a bit of extra girth at the grip, but 50% is ridiculous.
Although I would love to have the Wilson gun, 2500 dollars buys a lot of practice ammo.
The choice betwen the two pistols isn’t about accuracy, cease of carry or any of that. It’s about what you like, which is a good thing.
There is another – and often overlooked – factor that needs to be taken into account: Maintenance.
Most gun owners will throw 500 rounds through their pistols. Very few will break the 1000 round mark. Even fewer still will run a pistol enough to bring it to the point where parts start needing preventative replacement. When you get to that point, you begin to see where the modern 1911 platform truly falls on it’s face. It is also why there are very few (if any) firearms instructors of note who still run the platform. Take even the nicest 1911 and put 5000+ rounds through it, and you quickly begin to see why it is *not* a weapon for high volume shooters (and thusly, why police departments or the military shouldn’t mass-issue them).
The two problems with the 1911 sort of compound to relegate it to a low-volume platform. First, it is a weapon where all the components need to work almost perfectly; it is VERY sensitive to spring fatigue, extractor tension and magazine health. That isn’t such huge problem in and of itself, but the second problem with the 1911 is that fitting many of the parts requires a (quality) gunsmith’s skills and special tools.
Of course, the Glock springs will wear out, but it is also a modern platform with a lot more tolerance for wear built into it from the get-go. It is also very easy to work on. YouTube, a ballpoint pen and a pair of needle nose pliers is all you need in life to become a quality Glock gunsmith. So when the extractor begins giving you issues, you are a $10 part and 10 minutes away from having it solved.
For the 1911? Expect to get 2500-5000 rounds out of the extractor (compared to 25,000 from the Glock). When that extractor goes, you better know one of the handful of quality 1911 gunsmiths out there and even so, your pistol is going to be gone for 4-8 weeks while it sits on his shelf, behind all his other workload. Oh, don’t forget shipping! And the fact that a new, quality extractor will run you $40. Oh, and it better perfectly match the metal finish and whatever cool-guy details that originally came on your $3000 blaster (like those cool looking serrations on the backs of many a custom 1911 slide).
I used to own a Ferrari. I used it as my daily driver. Why wouldn’t you? You know; other than money. And the fact that it was in the shop so often for so long I called my self a Ferrari “visitor” rather than a Ferrari owner.
So . . .
I’ll shoot the snot out of the Wilson (up to nearly 2000 rounds now without a hitch) and send it to Wilson if/when it breaks. And carry the Glock. Or something else.
What if it breaks in a SHTF situation? Preventative maintenance and—what are the odds?
Wilson=Ferrari
Glock=Honda???:)
Guns are different than cars. It’s doubtful that you would rely on that Ferrari to save your life in the face of imminent danger. That is the purpose of carrying a pistol. It probably won’t ever happen, but the pistol is there in case it does.
Finicky, semi-reliable cars can be tolerated. Finicky, semi-reliable guns can be tolerated on the range. Finicky, semi-reliable guns cannot be tolerated in a life or death situation. Especially one that already has as many strikes against it as the 1911 (heavy, low capacity, grip safety).
Calling a Wilson Combat finicky is ignorant and means you’ve never owner or shot one. My Glocks have an order of magnitude more FTFs especially in the compact or subcompact frame sizes. Actually, my Bill Wilson has never had a FTF so who knows what the ratio is. I guess its infinity. Reasonably maintained it will NEVER let you down.
Here we go again!… please point to any data that shows that 1911 extractors wear out after 2500 rounds. I’m not talking about Llama’s or GI WWII pistols, I’m talking about modern 1911’s made by reputable manufacturers.
I’ve got (had) 2 Springfield’s that have well over 5000 rounds each (actually, my Trophy Match had damn near 1000 in a single Rob Leatham training class). Neither of them had any FTF’s, FTE’s, FTL’s, nor did they wear out the spring or extractor. The new owner shoots this gun all the time and it shoots just as good now and it ever has…
BTW – replacing an extractor isn’t rocket science, nor does it require a 4-8 week trip to a gunsmith – only basic hand tools that everyone has (or should) in the garage. In the 1 extractor I have replaced (a friend’s Kimber), I didn’t even need to be adjusted – it dropped right into place. Others that I’ve seen be replaced required nothing more than a small (quality) file and patience. I had to lightly fit an oversized magazine release because it was made oversized (on purpose). It took a whole 5 minutes… Barrels, bushings, slides, etc do need to be fitted, but when was the last time you shot out a 1911 barrel?
I’m sort of curious why glock barrels don’t need to be fitted. Clearly there is no bushing but do the barrel
lugs to slide fitment just have more slop to allow for manufacturing tolerances?
I’ve also been curious about the machined slot in the glock barrel that effectively performs the function of
the link in the 1911. Does this also allow for more tolerance? I know having the correct link length is critical
in the 1911. They are both more similar than they are different in terms of the locked breech action. I have
never seen a good explanation of what exactly makes the 1911 more finicky.
Jason
The 1911 was designed at a time when machining metal was a rough and imprecise activity done on big, manual milling machines. These machines were very expensive to buy and run. Human time, on the other hand, was very inexpensive.
As such, parts for the 1911 (and everything else) were machined slightly oversized. Special jigs, files and tools were created that allowed assemblers to take a bucket of raw part and spend a few hours hand fitting everything together. Pictures of 1911 factories from WWII show long tables with ladies sitting there, hand fitting 1911s together by the hundreds.
Modern pistols are designed around the world of hard tooling; machine time is very inexpensive and the precision is extremely high. Human time has gotten very expensive. As such, modern pistols are engineered from the beginning to use 100% interchangeable parts that slap together very very quickly. It takes me 5 minutes to go from a bucket of parts to a working Glock 19. In the SIG armorer’s class (years ago at least), the final exam consisted of taking all the student’s P229s apart down to the frame, throwing the class’s components into a bucket, shaking it up and giving you an hour to put a (functional) weapon back together.
You could never do that with a 1911 (no matter the claims of Mr Lippard).
Interestingly, many companies have attempted to convert the 1911 to a hard-tool pistol, but the results of this have been mixed.
Very interesting, thanks for the reply.
It sounds like high-end 1911s of today like Baer and Wilson still go the machine to slightly oversize and hand fit route.
I assume this is the ultimate for precision but I wonder why, with modern CNC, they couldn’t just machine to the ideal
specs which is what I think you mean by hard tool. Is there some aspect of the 1911 design that precludes this approach?
I assume the answer is yes but I wonder what it is exactly about the 1911 design that precludes this. Although the design
is old, it seems like the 1911 and glock work on basically the same principles, both being a locked breech design. I’ve never
heard someone point to the exact parts of the 1911 that preclude a hard-tool approach to gun manufacture.
Thanks,
Jason
I’ll fully admit to not having an exhaustive catalog of experience with the 1911 to pull from in a debate about it’s reliability. I’ve owned a couple of Kimbers (Warriors – reliable, but junk finish). I keep a Les Baer Thunder Ranch Special around for the same reason that (as a watch nerd) I keep a Rolex around – any serious aficionado must respect the classics.
For the true expert opinion, let’s see what the 1911 experts have to say.
Hilton Yam, the noted 1911 smith and consultant for a number of social police units who want to run 1911s:
Mr Yam goes on to detail a litany of required maintenance that makes RF’s F355 look like a Toyota. Feel free to read it here: http://bit.ly/pFEB91
Larry Vickers was a Delta Force member, and the guy who built all their custom 1911s. The pistols he has built for the civilian market are all collector’s items. He also was the lead developer of the HK45, precisely because he feels the 1911 is too finicky a platform for real-world duty use:
Much like the Rolex, the 1911 is a pistol of a bygone era that now exists as jewelry. Appreciate them for the artifacts they are. Respect them for a century of service. Marvel at how beautiful the whole system works. Shoot the hell out of it if you can.
Like the Rolex though, the 1911 was designed in and for a different era. There are far more durable weapons, that are just as mechanically accurate, offer superior ergonomics, are easier to maintain, have larger ammunition capacity, excellent triggers (though, nothing is a good as a 1911 trigger) and cost a hell of a lot less.
Well the fact that Mr. Yam states that replacing an extractor requires a “skilled gunsmith fitting and tuning” and that you shouldn’t “try to tune it yourself”, to me, means that he is a gunsmith who is making a lot of money for his services. I find it interesting that Mr. Yam states that 5000 rounds is the average life of a 1911 extractor, then goes on to say that some go “much, much longer”, and some last only a small fraction of the 5000 round count? My guess is that Mr. Yam meant to say that some extractors aren’t fitted properly and end up breaking very quickly, probably within the first box of ammo. In my personal experience and the fact that 1911’s have a huge following, probably only rivaled by Glock, proves that they have LOTS going for them. It isn’t a fad – how many fad’s last 40 years? I would expect 1911’s to actually grow in popularity because manufacturing limitations are being circumvented.
I agree with Mr. Vickers that the 1911 isn’t the best choice for tactical operations, although many elite forces use them. 1911’s aren’t guns to be soaked in mud, dragged through sand, and run without lubrication. In those scenario’s, I’d take an HK any day (actually, I’d prefer my XDm 45)! But let’s be honest- when was the last time any of us ran through something like this, expecting to be in a gun fight?
I agree that the design isn’t easy to produce, or in the modern world, mass produce. Are they for everyone? Certainly not, but to say that they are modern relics, relegated to a life of safe “Queenism” is ridiculous. I’m still waiting for Gunnutmeager to put proof to paper. The question I always ask those who think the 1911 is junk is what kind of 1911 do you think Glock would make? Glocks, XDs, etc are cheap and easy to make. Trying to “price point” a 1911 or mass produce 1911’s without at least some level of fittings leads to huge public misconceptions as to the durability of a 1911, and unfortunately leads to pistols that are easily tossed aside for something deemed to be more reliable.
BTW- just as my Stainless Submariner will likely run for another three decades, so will my 1911’s. Although, I do feel much safer wearing my 1911 than I do my Rolex.
I have somewhere around 80000 rounds through a Kimber. The extractor is original. And never failed. A few things have broken, I will admit. The safety broke last year, but still worked. The rear sight broke in half as well. Kimber sent me replacements in days.
The 1911’s the wife and I shoot have about 30,000 rounds down the barrel between the two of them. Never a malfunction. I fired an IDPA match one day next to a state trooper who referred to it as a “geezer gun” and wondered why I fired such a jamming creature. At the buzzer mine functioned flawlessly. At his turn his Glock shut down. Jammed. Stopped functioning. Now the guns the wife and I fire are Baers, I don’t like the Wilsons but that is a personal thing. I have one Glock but have it because of the caliber not the platform which I dislike for two reasons, don’t like the grip angle and the gun is skittish. I carry it in the car because I don’t care if it gets scratched or dinged. A friend of mine fired my PII, he has had three Glocks and that is all he has owned. Said it feels like a gun, especially when it goes bang. Easy to hit with. Oh well. Differences are what make the world go round.
99 percent of shooters will be better off with the glock. How ever in the video the shooter shoots twice as fast with the 1911 as he does with the glock and his group is still better….to say “the groups are the same” is simply false…..also, i shot a 1911 sor my swat duty pistol for years and the only maintaince we did was a reciol spring and kept them really really clean…the only things that ever broke were the mim parts……slide lock pins ect….we all bought custom 1911’s to be cool and have bad ass off duty guns and they run flawlessly…..much more car and maintaince but they are simply more accurate….better grip….better trigger …period….again i am a gun guy so my pick is 1911…..the glock is better for everyone else…..btw i do own a few glocks and they have their place and are simply the best bang for the buck out there but if ive got to take a 15 yard half head shot i can do it with both but id rather do it with my 1911..
Don’t 1911s have issues with hollow-points?
Shot 100 rounds of Wilson Combat hollow points through it. No problems. Also 15 Critical Defense. And 250 Blazer aluminium rounds. Not a single FTF or FTE. Nada.
Adam, some 1911s have bad reputations for handling ball ammo, that’s true. Older models especially will choke on hollowpoints like they were hairballs. I think the issue was/is the magazines. A true 1911 maven — which I am not — could advise you better.
I believe the main issue is the feed ramps. The magazines cause a lot of problems, but feeding hollow points (or not) isn’t one of them as far as I know.
I have 2 1911’s that I shoot regularly.
One, an old Colt made 1911 (not A1) which is my competition pistol with a Bar-Sto stainless match barrel and bushing; micro adjustable sights; and the large hand filling Herter’s carved match grips, has never failed to feed and fire whatever I put in it over the past 40 years. The match barrel is throated and polished to feed match grade .45 jacketed wad cutters (semi-Keith style), and feeds everything else as well. I have even fired some ’70’s vintage Jurras Super Vel “Flying trash can” hollow points without problem, despite their huge, flat open cavity.
My other is a straight WW2 GI Remington Rand 1911A1 that is pure factory, without modifications. I have had this pistol for over 40 years, and it was in the factory box wrapped in waxed paper when I bought it at a gun show in Greenbelt, Maryland. The 67-year-old barrel has not been after-market throated or polished, and really prefers standard hardball, or other smooth, rounded bullets, including those with small hollow points that are still very rounded. With 230gr hardball, regardless of manufacture, it has NEVER failed to feed. Modern HP ammo with large hollow cavities or a flat front on the bullet do not feed reliably, and often jam between the front of the bullet and the feed ramp. The ogive of the newer HP ammo does not smoothly glide up the feed ramp.
I am still waiting for my Ruger SR 1911 to be delivered. While I personally do not have any trigger time with it, some co-workers have theirs and they allege that with its factory throated and polished feed ramp feeds anything. I look forward to trying to corroborate that statement.
If you really want to test a pistol’s mechanical accuracy, use a Ransom Rest, and also test different ammo in it.
But you are right, ergonomics are a huge factor in the end.
In my humble opinion, the Wilson is by far the prettier pistol. However for the price I would much rather buy the Glock, a trigger job, a match grade barrel and 1000 rounds 0f .45 and have a ton of cash left over.
+1. Richard Pryor once said that cocaine is God’s way of telling you that you have too much money. There is a gunny’s corollary to that. Yah, all of these high end guns are sweet and lovely and all of that, but what is the point really? Sure, if you want an exquisite piece of art to show your friends, take a hallowed throne in your safe and you can afford it, well then by all means knock yourself right the hell out. That’s just not where I’m at, and not because I don’t have the disposable (shuddering at the thought of such a thing) income. Being a soulless, thrifty and absolutely debt-free pragmatist, I’d rather put whatever surplus cash that my wife and I have towards our retirement or towards our daughter’s college fund/starting-out-in-life grubstake. Dropping multi-kilobucks on a “toy” (yes, I used that word), just doesn’t make any kind of sense to me. YMMV.
If you had added some grip tape to the Glock, I’d bet your rapid fire groups would have been on the paper. Glock grips suck! I’d bet your natural point of aim was lost when your grip slid.
On my carry pistols, I put Agrip on them. My competitive pistol has tru-grip which is like skateboard tape. I can’t shoot glocks without some sort of grip help.
1911: My favorite guns to shoot
Glock 21: My 24/7 carry
Different tools for different jobs.
Accuracy: Good points on the accuracy in this article. A true understanding if the accuracy needed for the task at hand will generally help with the decision of what to carry, buy, choose. Money matters also 🙂
I believe that ergonomics are the main thing, given a certain level of reliability. My hands like certain shapes better than others. I’ve only held a few revolvers that fit close to right. The trick is to try out different guns until you find the one(s) that really fit — without buying every bloody one. Unless you have enough money. Then you should have at least one of each.
A good trigger seems to me like a subset, but a very important subset, of ergo. Being able to handle and control a weapon easily gives me confidence, and leads me to become better, quicker.
If a glock fits me better than a 1911, than that’s my choice, the other factors between those two are secondary. Personally, I love 1911s, and think the glocks are good guns. I own an xdm.
A thought on taking pistol shots at 25 yards — if you are cc and are in a parking lot with a mall type shooter, and have a clear shot and clear down range, don’t you want to take it if you are capable?
The Glock is ugly. Maybe uglier than my XD. The Wilson is very good looking. If I could afford Wilson, I’d buy two. Other than that, there’s nothing wrong with ugly.
An off the shelf 1911 is probably not more mechanically accurate than a Glock or XD, however, its single action trigger may make it easier to shoot accurately for some people.
A custom built 1911 probably is more accurate than a Glock, but that is moot for defense is we are concerned with combination of combat accuracy and speed not ultimate accuracy.
As John Farnam says: The 1911 is the best pistol to shoot someone with and it is the worst pistol not to shoot someone with.
As I say: The trigger is the 1911’s greatest strength and its greatest weakness.
I haven’t had as much time to visit here lately, but I’m very glad to see you enjoying a Wilson. This comes from a guy who has shot an HK 45 pretty exclusively for the last six months, that I love by the way. While I’ll I admit I’m a huge Wilson fan and 1911 aficionado The HK gets the nod for reliability (as far as rounds between cleaning and very dirty conditions) and maybe even accuracy. I’ve never shot WC ammo, but from your reviews here it is also appears to be one of the best options out there. I own a Tactical Elite and an RDP. Here is a good forum for folks interested in 1911s, specifically Wilsons.
http://forums.1911forum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31
I almost bought an HK45. It was between the Hk45, usp and the sig p229. I ended up with the Sig cause I liked the look a little more but I’m thinking I’ll have to get an HK at some point.
It takes a tough man to cook a tender chicken.
The pictures of a Wilson 1911 don’t even do it justice. These things are pretty as a regular 1911 in pictures but absolutely gorgeous up close. I probably still won’t drop 2-3k on one until I make a lot more money but dammit I’m tempted to buy one.
I see room for both! I am a gun guy that has several in my collection to pick from for daily use. I must admit that I usually end up with a 1911, but there are conditions that insist that others are on duty. Really depends on the day’s travels and tasks!
I would have to point out to earlier posters that there have been many instructors that have used the 1911, in fact some of the greatest or at least most revered. Today’s instructors myself included tend to use the guns that their customers are carrying, as they should.
I would be lacking if I didn’t point out that a large number of the top shooters in the world still choose the 1911 as their competition pistol of choice, to include some of the greatest shooters that we have seen to date. While I will freely admit that in my experience most of them will win with a rubber-band pistol, but most of them choose to still shoot a 1911, when I bet they could get most anything they wanted to use.
I agree that the 1911 came along when as a nature of the process hand fitting was required to make it all work. Today with the advancements in CNC machines and the whole design process certainly the tolerances are much closer than ever before. But like most things, the mark of quality is still hand fitting, CNC’s will keep things tight enough to make a pistol but like in watches some tastes require a little more. That is why there are many to choose from.
Keep in mind the first thing a combat handgun needs is reliability.
Glocks are more reliable than a finely tuned 1911. I have seen time and time again 1911’s fail after they get just a little dirty.
You hit on the key word there – “Tuned.”
The word itself implies the exact problem with the 1911; every component must be fitted together and properly balanced to function optimally.
Like any machine, as the components wear against one another, as springs lose their force over time or tension in critical components shifts away from the optimal setting imparted by a gunsmith, the “tuned” 1911 becomes “untuned.” As such, the status of the weapon’s overall reliability is in a constant state of flux.
Some 1911s last 30k round. Some work like shit right out of the box. That is just the law of averages coming into play. The points one can make against the 1911 are simple facts intrinsic to the design of the weapon itself, and can’t really be disputed.
I shoot a Les Baer PII and a Glock 30 love them both but use them somewhat differently. Although I do carry the PII from time to time, I have a tough time sweating all over a $1600.00 blued pistol. So for the most part, I shoot the Baer, and I shoot it a lot: well over 25000 since 2005. I have changed extractors a time or two, and always have at least two new tuned extractors in my range bag for a quick change when needed, new recoil springs are also kept handy and replaced as needed. Beyond that maintenance has not been any big deal, clean the gun, keep it lubed and shoot it all I want. This Baer came with their 1.5″ at 50 yard guarantee, and although I don’t shoot well enough to get that out of it at that range, I can shoot double taps less than 2″ apart all day long. Bottom line, this gun shoots, I’d trust it for any job I need a .45 for from IPSC & IDPA matches to cocked and locked carry where my life or that of others is on the line. My thoughts on Baer’s price structure are that you get what you pay for, and while they are not for everyone, one will last a lifetime.
My G30 is an early model from ’97 I bought from a friend at an IPSC match for $400.00 with 4 mags and a bunch of ammo over ten years ago. This gun was a challenge for me right from the get. It shot high & right for me (I’m left handed) it felt like a 2×4 in my hand, and the factory sights were awful. still, I liked the gun and knew it would shoot and be a handy .45 carry gun if I could learn it and get it setup for me. So I started working on it, making changes that worked for me: Dawson adjustable rear sight combined with a fiber optic front, a very good aftermarket barrel, changed out the trigger assembly, and took 120 grit sandpaper to the frame until it fits my hand like it was made for it. I carry this pistol all the time, I can put all 11 rounds it to a group the size of my fist at 25 yards rapid fire and trust it’s reliability completely. Bottom line…there are many great guns to chose from today, find one that you like, make it your own, and SHOOT it until you know it will work for you.
1911’s are not difficult to maintain. Mine is my most-used pistol. Check the extractor tension and replace the recoil spring every 5000 rounds. That’s a great time for a better/stronger spring as most factory springs a bit under-powered. I use a shock-buff and replace the spring after every couple these get beat-up. Get quality magazines or springs/followers and they will never be an issue. The extractor doesn’t need to be replaced but does need to be tensioned properly (which is not difficult!). If the slide is routinely dropped on a loaded chamber it will lose tension/fatigue the extractor on an internal extractor gun. Avoid this and it will not be a problem.
I’ve installed/fitted safeties, barrel/bushing, trigger components, tightened slide/frame fit, and really appreciate the way they are put together. Some skill is required to build one, but not to maintain one long term.
Glocks are awesome in every way and a truly modern design, but the grip angle/feel are all wrong for me. They point completely unnaturally, and it’s just not practical to modify my natural point of aim for one pistol. The compacts feel much better, but are still a bit too blocky for my tastes and the trigger is something I haven’t been able to come to terms with. When it comes to double-stacks, CZ is my choice. The Glock 20SF is calling my name…but I don’t know if I can take the plunge!
Try comparing the Glock 30SF after adding a Tungsten Competition Recoil Spring @ 21 or 23# ($60), in addition to a Hogue Grip…. then com back with your comparison. You’ll see more than three in the center, I guarantee it. It was obvious to me that you were struggling with muzzle flip in the Glock with stock recoil spring, as do most in rapid fire scenarios. You will also see less kick thanks to the added weight of Tungsten…. I’m no pro, but can put 5 out of 6 in that little red circle from 30 feet… rapid fire as in your video. Trust me… 60 or 70 bucks can fix the problem of accurace. Add another $20 and move from the 5.5lb trigger to 3.5…. Oh yea… now you’re cooking with gas!
オークリーゴーグル オークリーレンズ http://www.shpsorestion.info/
What the 1911 fans don’t think about is the true width of their chosen weapon. Put that slim slide in a leather IWB holster (you know you do) like a Milt Sparks and it becomes wider than a Glock in a kydex holster.
But y’all always forget about that part…
what Tom said
I have three Glocks–20, 21, 22 and I have three 1911s–Colt, Para 1445, Kimber. Thousands of rounds later, two stovepipes. So as of today, advantage Glock.
The average person is going to be far better off buying the Glock…
Interesting. I like 1911s. Have experience with several (Colt, Wilson, Springfield, and a Pro Carry) and they are fun range guns. Very beautiful, heavy, solid-feeling hunks of steel. But I’d never carry one cocked and locked. Just don’t see it as safe to carry something that could fire when dropped.
As for reliability, haven’t had a problem with either shooting when I want them too; I’d be far more concerned about a 1911 shooting when I don’t want it to. I’ve never even dropped a cell phone but know plenty who have, hence the popularity of those clunky Ironman cases for Iphones. Drop a cell phone and you might crack a screen. Drop a .45 and someone could die. So, if I’m carrying, I’d take a glock over a 1911 any day. Weight is another factor. I don’t carry a mail scale but my glock loaded is lighter than my 1911 empty.
Accuracy, I prefer glock, throw on some good tru-glows and a tungsten guide rod and if I miss a target it is only because I messed up. Can’t say a thing about the firearm.
As for size, glocks don’t need as much holster as a .45; again because you don’t have to worry about the thing going off as long as the trigger is covered. Yeah, I know, .45 is more fun at the range and single action might be a little quicker under ideal conditions.
Finally, I love my G30…but the G19 is…well…a little more fun for a little less money.
Comments are closed.