Glock vs. 1911

Please don't get me wrong, I am not questioning Glock's reliability, or reputation. The 21 I owned did shoot rather well and was a simple straight forward design. NOTHING wrong with that, simple is a good thing. But the problems I had with the magazine and sights did aid in my decision to sell it. And yes the fit and feel in my hand was not a good fit, but that's a personal matter. And you can read that I was not all that happy with Sig 220 too. Even though they have a reputation for reliability just like Glock. So I guess I will have to concur that I indeed I do like the fit and feel of a single stack in my hand. I'm knocking other firearms, if you care for them, they WILL be reliable. Thanks for welcoming me and thanks for your understanding. Sincerely, Wvladimire

Glock wins :!: :!: :!: :!: of course.............. :lol: did I really say Glock wins....funny this morning I'm sitting here after a conversation last nite with a friend asking me about 1911's and I really couldn't find anything I didn't like about the 1911 in general. As a night gun at home, not good for me. 3.5 # trigger at night, flashlite in one hand, safety on or off??? too slow or too unsafe. I'll take a single/double action gun for that or a Glock that I don't have to mess with a safety but a trigger that is a bit less touchy then my 1911. I agree with wvladmire that the Glock is blocky, but its a tool for sure.....the 1911 is a work of art IMO and a tool........ Boy, I need another cup of coffee. BTW, my nite gun is an old HK left hand control 45 usp. The springs have never been changed and the slide racks with two fingers......easy on nite time fingers..... :lol: reliable and accurate............with nite sights.....and SWAT lite attached........sorry this is definately a one cup of coffee conversation..... :roll:

I dont have anything against 1911s. To me its like owning a 69 Camaro. Nice to take out on weekends, but you dont want to drive it to work everyday.

Re: Glock vs 1911 vs Sig
Hello one and all. I'll try to make my point short and sweet without diving into my work experience. 1) Over the years I have owned, trained, fired, and carried many pistols and revolvers. Including a 1911, Sig 220, Glock 21, Beretta 40 S&W, and a S&W 4006 (THE FIRST semi-auto pistol in the 40 S&W caliber.) 2) Out of all of those mentioned and many more, have had things I liked and disliked about them EXCEPT the 1911. The 1911, has NEVER failed to function for me, was the MOST accurate out of all the above mentioned, and WAS my off duty carry piece with no aftermarket match grade parts. Except a full one piece guide rod. 3) The Glock 21 I owned for a while was fairly accurate, a VERY simple design, and could hold more rounds than other 45 ACP's. Problems, magazines would fall out when training for tactical purposes, sights although fixed would have to be realigned every once in awhile, and some brass when ejected could not be reloaded. And though the pistol was reliable, I did NOT like the feel and fit in my hand, plus I DO NOT TRUST a polymer framed gun. To my knowledge, and my wife's, who is a chemical engineer, there is no polymer that is STRONGER than steel. With that said, I will say I sold the Glock and purchased a Sig 220. 4) Issues with the Sig 220, shot very low out of the box. 3-4 inches low at 25 yards. Put a match grade barrel in and was right on the money. It was a good, reliable, gun. But again I did not like the fit. Grip feels too bulky in my hands, just like the HK 45 ACP. But this is a PERSONAL preference and has NOTHING to do with reliability. 5) To the point, I have gone back to the 1911, a Sig Revolution. To me the 1911 feels great in my hands. It has been battle proven in 4 wars, something Glock or Sig cannot claim. And is by far out of the box, the most accurate and reliable pistol I have ever owned. Of course I clean my guns after each and every range trip. I mean a THOROUGH strip down and cleaning, something my granddaddy always said to me, "A CLEAN GUN IS A RELIABLE GUN." And he was in WWI. And an FYI FBI stats of accidental shootings show that GLOCK pistols are involved in more accidental discharges than any other brand, something to think about. I have always found interest in the "battle proven" statements. As far as US issued sidearms this is correct. WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam. Two "wars" and (No disrespect to the Korean War, and Vietnam War Veterans, just attempting to prove a point. Any warlike conflict where Americans have died count as a war to me regardless of what declarations congress passed) two "police actions". Of the other militaries in the world, who has been issued what, and what battles have they been involved in? Do we only count US military actions? Does "battle proven" mean a Beretta M9 is a better weapon than a Glock or a Sig. I think not. Just because the US chose the M9, and it has been in a battle or three, in NO WAY makes it a better firearm. As for the FBI stats, well there are other factors to consider. What percentage of the pistols surveyed are Glocks? If Glock holds a higher percentage of market share logically they would top the survey. Look at it this way: For years I was a PWC (personal water craft) mechanic. SeaDoo hold the majority of the market (by a long stretch) and as a mechanic I worked on FAR more SeaDoos than all other brands combined. That doesn't mean they were of lesser quality, just that there were so many more by comparison, it seemed they broke more often. Don't get me wrong, it is not that I dislike 1911s or Glocks or Berettas. It is just those statements are open to multiple interpertations.

Re: Glock vs 1911 vs Sig
I have always found interest in the "battle proven" statements. As far as US issued sidearms this is correct. WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam. Two "wars" and (No disrespect to the Korean War, and Vietnam War Veterans, just attempting to prove a point. Any warlike conflict where Americans have died count as a war to me regardless of what declarations congress passed) two "police actions". Of the other militaries in the world, who has been issued what, and what battles have they been involved in? Do we only count US military actions? Does "battle proven" mean a Beretta M9 is a better weapon than a Glock or a Sig. I think not. Just because the US chose the M9, and it has been in a battle or three, in NO WAY makes it a better firearm. As for the FBI stats, well there are other factors to consider. What percentage of the pistols surveyed are Glocks? If Glock holds a higher percentage of market share logically they would top the survey. Look at it this way: For years I was a PWC (personal water craft) mechanic. SeaDoo hold the majority of the market (by a long stretch) and as a mechanic I worked on FAR more SeaDoos than all other brands combined. That doesn't mean they were of lesser quality, just that there were so many more by comparison, it seemed they broke more often. Don't get me wrong, it is not that I dislike 1911s or Glocks or Berettas. It is just those statements are open to multiple interpertations. Very good points......the M9 in at least three wars.........who cares.........it wasn't so good..........Probably the cops had the accidental discharges....... :lol:

I like them both. A well built full size 1911 to me is a better looking gun, trigger is 90% better than a Glock, accuracy is only slightly better than Glocks within 25yds, much smoother action, better grip angle (to me), thinner, more chamber support and has conventional rifling (for us reloaders) and just more enjoyable to shoot. Glock is a proven design. The darn things just work. While I enjoy my 1911's for range use the Glock is what I (by choice) strap on everyday. This choice was made simply because 14rds of .45acp is better than 9rds of .45acp and I don't have to worry if it's gonna run. A little something I heard a while back that has always stuck with me: Well built 1911's are what you show your friends, Glocks are what you show your enemy. :)

BTW, I shot the new stainless steel glock frame this past weekend and I can tell you it was amazing..!!!!! shot groupings as good as a 1911, no frame flex.............but the stainless is too heavy IMO, the aluminum one would be better to carry.. .......................................

Little late on this, but whatever. The issue for me has never been pistol A is superior to pistol B. I find that a vast majority of 1911 fanatics are just that, fanatics of the 1911 model but hate everything else. Personally, I love Glocks. Why? Well you've all heard and know the reasons why. No need for me to re-list them all. While I like the "looks" of the 1911, and dont see it as a bad pistol. I still like the glock, personally I think it has a more evil/sinister look to it then a 1911 but then again, I dont exactly mind that either, lol. The triggers on both guns are quite different IMO, but ive gotten quite efficient with mine. I should also mention ive seen my gun fail to feed just once, and that was when I let someone else shoot it that limp wristed to the extent where I told him thats enough and told him to put it down. No handgun will function correctly when someone is barley holding onto it. The muzzle was damn near pointing at the sky after each shot :roll:

View Full Version: Glock vs. 1911