My single action revolver also doesn't work anymore. It goes bang. But now the bullets just bounce off people instead of knocking them off their horse. Then they laugh.

Hell, none of my revolvers work anymore. Single or double action. Everybody knows, if you're going to kill someone, you need a semiauto.

Just as long as it's not a 1911. Just like the Constitution, it's old, outdated, and obsolete. Nobody can figure out how to operate it.

Whatever

If its obselete and wont do its job,send them all to me--some might say I am obselete also.



SSR

I think the guy gets all "blowhard" saying that the US has always given its men the "best weapons" available!

Uninfluenced by the influence of industrial or political interests or funding issues.

Really?

Sadly history, and America Military Cemeteries, testify to the falsity of that...the prime example being the M4 Sherman and the Mark 14 torpedo with the Mark VI exploder.

The US wasn't unique in that of course. Far from it. Britain had its own scandals...Germany too with Hitler's insistence that the K98k was "good enough".

Also I'd hardly say that by WWII the BAR was still "up there" with contemporary light machine guns of any major allied or enemy nation.

It's an interesting little film but there is a lot "wrong" with it. The 1911 not influenced by safety and liablity considerations?

Well not in the strict sense, no, but on the other hand where did the grip safety requirement come from?

Lastly, during his video his "red tag" reference to "ie European men and women" is also quite ridiculous.

It was "European men"...notably Germans...that in WWII pretty much outfought everybody else put against them.

I love that hillbilly's accent!

What a dumbass!

Oh i don't know, articles about it run currently month after month after month in the American Rifleman...

quote:

Originally posted by China Fleet Sailor:
My single action revolver also doesn't work anymore. It goes bang. But now the bullets just bounce off people instead of knocking them off their horse. Then they laugh.

Hell, none of my revolvers work anymore. Single or double action. Everybody knows, if you're going to kill someone, you need a semiauto.

Just as long as it's not a 1911. Just like the Constitution, it's old, outdated, and obsolete. Nobody can figure out how to operate it.

Exactly . . .

quote:

Also I'd hardly say that by WWII the BAR was still "up there" with contemporary light machine guns of any major allied or enemy nation.

Most folks picking on the BAR forget to mention that the rest of the squad carried M-1 rifles. The later Marine squads had 3 Bars with he other 9 armed with M-1s.
Now whose squad would you want to face in a fight from those days?

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Also I'd hardly say that by WWII the BAR was still "up there" with contemporary light machine guns of any major allied or enemy nation.

Most folks picking on the BAR forget to mention that the rest of the squad carried M-1 rifles. The later Marine squads had 3 Bars with he other 9 armed with M-1s.
Now whose squad would you want to face in a fight from those days?

Maybe in the TO&E charts...in actual fact, depending on the time and place, most soldiers in all armies were armed with what was available at the time. Some American squads had Springfield '03s and a BAR. Later some had M-1 CARBINES and a Tommy Gun, and so on.

I know facing any of them would scare the sh-t out of me. One of the scariest would be a well-trained pre-war squad of Tommies carrying Lee-Enfields and a couple of Bren Guns...or late in the war a squad of seasoned eastern front SS troopers with MP 44's and whatever else they could pick up, defending the motherland...

Hell, I could only fight half-way well because I was so damned scared I'd get my ass blown off if I didn't!!

Well, guess I am too! With over 100 years of use in combat successfully, its track record beats everything else I can think of.
Also the fact that I have used one for CCW, target shooting and now Wild Bunch SASS means I am comfortable with it. Only thing I think I'd rather have in my hand as a handgun would be an N frame Smith & Wesson. I am positive they would be considered really outdated.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Also I'd hardly say that by WWII the BAR was still "up there" with contemporary light machine guns of any major allied or enemy nation.

Most folks picking on the BAR forget to mention that the rest of the squad carried M-1 rifles. The later Marine squads had 3 Bars with he other 9 armed with M-1s.
Now whose squad would you want to face in a fight from those days?

The BAR wasn't all that great. It was hard to reload real fast, it was prone to jamming, and it didn't have a large enough magazine. During the same era the Bren was actually a better firearm.

Wellllll...
The design is 100+yrs old and like the car it basically still looks the same, but: Both has seen some slight improvements, mostly to the better!

But as a Ford T the 1911 is simple as is and thus work in "any" condision. Fancy will break

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:
I love that hillbilly's accent!

What a dumbass!

Did you even listen to what the gentleman was saying, you silly person?

He said it was still a viable and deadly piece of equipment, made to kill people and not adopted because of political considerations.

My goodness, you are such "a dumb ass."

And, obviously, you haven't ever served with people who possess such an accent. Guys who would lay down their life to save yours. Obvious because of your intolerent comments. So you must be an "oxygen thief." Living off the deeds of others. What? You actually believe your entitled to all those rights. Men better than you died for those rights pal. Show some respect.

Eric

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The BAR wasn't all that great. It was hard to reload real fast, it was prone to jamming, and it didn't have a large enough magazine. During the same era the Bren was actually a better firearm.

The Sherman was not all that great
The P-40 was not all that great - at least not until they finally put Merlins in it too.

Like I said the BAR was not used in a vacuum.
The other side of that war used the German version of the Bren and they lost.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The BAR wasn't all that great. It was hard to reload real fast, it was prone to jamming, and it didn't have a large enough magazine. During the same era the Bren was actually a better firearm.

The Sherman was not all that great
The P-40 was not all that great - at least not until they finally put Merlins in it too.

Like I said the BAR was not used in a vacuum.
The other side of that war used the German version of the Bren and they lost.

The Bren was still a better gun.

The Marines are turning to the 1911 for their MEU (SOC) pistol. I doubt it's due to a sudden bought of nostalgia.

A handgun is in the great scheme of warfare a minor tool. A 1911 works at least as well as any other.

Admittedly, initially the Marines had to work within the constraints of the procurement system. Which means if they wanted something other than the Beretta or the Sig, they had to rework the 1911's that had been in the inventory since WWII. When given a free hand, they started buying Springfield Armory frames and stuck with the 1911 format.

One could argue, I suppose, that there are better choices. But the science of killing people with handguns was fairly mature when John M. assembled his first 1911. Not too many advances have been made, if any. It isn't as if someone or some organization choosing a Colt Government model in .45ACP is trying to work with an essentially bad handgun.

quote:

Originally posted by DaMan:
I love that hillbilly's accent!

What a dumbass!

I read somewhere (here maybe?) that your vernacular was fluent Ebonics. Is that true?

quote:

Originally posted by China Fleet Sailor:
The Marines are turning to the 1911 for their MEU (SOC) pistol. I doubt it's due to a sudden bought of nostalgia.

A handgun is in the great scheme of warfare a minor tool. A 1911 works at least as well as any other.

Admittedly, initially the Marines had to work within the constraints of the procurement system. Which means if they wanted something other than the Beretta or the Sig, they had to rework the 1911's that had been in the inventory since WWII. When given a free hand, they started buying Springfield Armory frames and stuck with the 1911 format.

One could argue, I suppose, that there are better choices. But the science of killing people with handguns was fairly mature when John M. assembled his first 1911. Not too many advances have been made, if any. It isn't as if someone or some organization choosing a Colt Government model in .45ACP is trying to work with an essentially bad handgun.

Kinda. The MEU(SOC) has been around more than a couple decades so it is not accurate to say the Corps is "turning to" the 1911. In fact, they never left it. Even when the M9 became general issue, the M1911A1 was still being used in various units for quite a few years. However, the MEU(SOC) pistol was only issued to Force. In the past, frames were hand selected from existing inventory of 1911A1's for the MEU(SOC) treatment at PWS/Quantico. When acceptable frames became scarce, they sourced new ones elsewhere.

As far as the pistol itself, few other designs incorporate the caliber, ergonomics, and trigger quality the 1911 does. It can be as accurate and reliable as any pistol out there and makes a useful club when it is empty.

To be honest, were I a unit commander of some non Ninja unit, I would want my armorers doing something else besides restaking plunger tubes, tuning extractors or fitting barrel bushings when other designs have completely eliminated those things. The tradeoff in downtime and manpower is not worth it for a line unit. That's not true for a MARSOC unit though.

'Course, I also believe that whowever thought a 9mm with an exposed barrel, trigger bar, and slide mounted safety was an improvement over the 1911 ought to be keel hauled twice on an oiler from the ghost fleet.

quote:

Originally posted by ChetNC:

quote:

Originally posted by China Fleet Sailor:
The Marines are turning to the 1911 for their MEU (SOC) pistol. I doubt it's due to a sudden bought of nostalgia.

A handgun is in the great scheme of warfare a minor tool. A 1911 works at least as well as any other.

Admittedly, initially the Marines had to work within the constraints of the procurement system. Which means if they wanted something other than the Beretta or the Sig, they had to rework the 1911's that had been in the inventory since WWII. When given a free hand, they started buying Springfield Armory frames and stuck with the 1911 format.

One could argue, I suppose, that there are better choices. But the science of killing people with handguns was fairly mature when John M. assembled his first 1911. Not too many advances have been made, if any. It isn't as if someone or some organization choosing a Colt Government model in .45ACP is trying to work with an essentially bad handgun.

Kinda. The MEU(SOC) has been around more than a couple decades so it is not accurate to say the Corps is "turning to" the 1911. In fact, they never left it. Even when the M9 became general issue, the M1911A1 was still being used in various units for quite a few years. However, the MEU(SOC) pistol was only issued to Force. In the past, frames were hand selected from existing inventory of 1911A1's for the MEU(SOC) treatment at PWS/Quantico. When acceptable frames became scarce, they sourced new ones elsewhere.

As far as the pistol itself, few other designs incorporate the caliber, ergonomics, and trigger quality the 1911 does. It can be as accurate and reliable as any pistol out there and makes a useful club when it is empty.

To be honest, were I a unit commander of some non Ninja unit, I would want my armorers doing something else besides restaking plunger tubes, tuning extractors or fitting barrel bushings when other designs have completely eliminated those things. The tradeoff in downtime and manpower is not worth it for a line unit. That's not true for a MARSOC unit though.

'Course, I also believe that whowever thought a 9mm with an exposed barrel, trigger bar, and slide mounted safety was an improvement over the 1911 ought to be keel hauled twice on an oiler from the ghost fleet.

The 1911 can be had without a bushing system. The S&W E Series 1911 has eliminated the old internal extractor with an outside Browning type that is even more robust then the previous one. There's a plunger tube change but it doesn't come to mind at the moment. It's hard to beat the 1911 and just about all the modern designs in a sense evolved from it.

My Kimber Stainless is so antiquated it will even shoot LEAD[!] projectiles. It's damnably accurate with these too, better than jacketed.

Albatross.

quote:

Originally posted by ChetNC:

quote:

Originally posted by China Fleet Sailor:
The Marines are turning to the 1911 for their MEU (SOC) pistol. I doubt it's due to a sudden bought of nostalgia.

A handgun is in the great scheme of warfare a minor tool. A 1911 works at least as well as any other.

Admittedly, initially the Marines had to work within the constraints of the procurement system. Which means if they wanted something other than the Beretta or the Sig, they had to rework the 1911's that had been in the inventory since WWII. When given a free hand, they started buying Springfield Armory frames and stuck with the 1911 format.

One could argue, I suppose, that there are better choices. But the science of killing people with handguns was fairly mature when John M. assembled his first 1911. Not too many advances have been made, if any. It isn't as if someone or some organization choosing a Colt Government model in .45ACP is trying to work with an essentially bad handgun.

Kinda. The MEU(SOC) has been around more than a couple decades so it is not accurate to say the Corps is "turning to" the 1911. In fact, they never left it. Even when the M9 became general issue, the M1911A1 was still being used in various units for quite a few years. However, the MEU(SOC) pistol was only issued to Force. In the past, frames were hand selected from existing inventory of 1911A1's for the MEU(SOC) treatment at PWS/Quantico. When acceptable frames became scarce, they sourced new ones elsewhere.

As far as the pistol itself, few other designs incorporate the caliber, ergonomics, and trigger quality the 1911 does. It can be as accurate and reliable as any pistol out there and makes a useful club when it is empty.

To be honest, were I a unit commander of some non Ninja unit, I would want my armorers doing something else besides restaking plunger tubes, tuning extractors or fitting barrel bushings when other designs have completely eliminated those things. The tradeoff in downtime and manpower is not worth it for a line unit. That's not true for a MARSOC unit though.

'Course, I also believe that whowever thought a 9mm with an exposed barrel, trigger bar, and slide mounted safety was an improvement over the 1911 ought to be keel hauled twice on an oiler from the ghost fleet.

Maybe my choice of words were a bit sloppy.

quote:

As far as the pistol itself, few other designs incorporate the caliber, ergonomics, and trigger quality the 1911 does. It can be as accurate and reliable as any pistol out there and makes a useful club when it is empty.

I think you captured what I was trying to say.

If it is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO outdated then I take it he would have no fear from being shot with one?

Anybody who don't want their outdated,old ass 1911, please send them to me and I will dispose of them as they wear out. How friggin stupid is this post. Ain't callin' names just stating fact.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The 1911 can be had without a bushing system. The S&W E Series 1911 has eliminated the old internal extractor with an outside Browning type that is even more robust then the previous one. There's a plunger tube change but it doesn't come to mind at the moment. It's hard to beat the 1911 and just about all the modern designs in a sense evolved from it.

Ok, then how about "fit sears, hammers, and triggers, and barrels, tune main springs, and restake grip bushings". Look, I am not bashing the 1911a1 as a design per se. Heck I got one handy with me every day and a spare in the house.
But, as a general issue military side arm, well, that ship has sailed. The per unit cost of an all steel, hand fitted unit that requires a 'smith (not a parts replacer) to keep up and running is simply not worth it for folks that will likely never fire a round in anger.

Again, not saying it's a bad design at all. I love it. But, the MEU(SOC) has shown us that keeping a limited number of utterly reliable 1911's in the field takes lots of work - but it's worth it because those guys earn their keep with it. We simply can't afford to do that service wide for folks who will be lucky to get an annual qual in much less fire a shot in anger with their sidearm. For them, a decent, mass produced 9mm is more than adequate - I am just sorry it was the Beretta.

quote:

Originally posted by ChetNC:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The 1911 can be had without a bushing system. The S&W E Series 1911 has eliminated the old internal extractor with an outside Browning type that is even more robust then the previous one. There's a plunger tube change but it doesn't come to mind at the moment. It's hard to beat the 1911 and just about all the modern designs in a sense evolved from it.

Ok, then how about "fit sears, hammers, and triggers, and barrels, tune main springs, and restake grip bushings". Look, I am not bashing the 1911a1 as a design per se. Heck I got one handy with me every day and a spare in the house.
But, as a general issue military side arm, well, that ship has sailed. The per unit cost of an all steel, hand fitted unit that requires a 'smith (not a parts replacer) to keep up and running is simply not worth it for folks that will likely never fire a round in anger.

Again, not saying it's a bad design at all. I love it. But, the MEU(SOC) has shown us that keeping a limited number of utterly reliable 1911's in the field takes lots of work - but it's worth it because those guys earn their keep with it. We simply can't afford to do that service wide for folks who will be lucky to get an annual qual in much less fire a shot in anger with their sidearm. For them, a decent, mass produced 9mm is more than adequate - I am just sorry it was the Beretta.

I suppose you're talking about fixing up the old ones the government may have, I'm not. I'm talking about new ones. So what fitting is there to new ones? They should be ready to go from the factory. What you said about keeping them running pertains to every piece of military equipment in the inventory, alone the firearms.

Now once those special teams get a "new" 1911 I don't expect them to tour the world and take part in every pistol match there is. Sure they should train. What I'm saying is you're making it sound like 1911's go out of tune and wear out fast...they do not. For example it's not like a Navy Seal on a mission is going to shoot thousands of rounds out of his 1911 before it gets to his objective.

The 9mm was a very poor choice. Bigger is better and the 9mm just doesn't have the oomph to kill as reliably as the larger calibers, such as the 45 acp. Funny when we first went to the Beretta I remember it had a problem of cracking the slides. A better pistol then the Beretta that is the same gun in reality is the Taurus copy. My friend found that out shooting 9mm carbine ammo, or if you like submachinegun ammo. Even the Browning HP held up better then a Beretta. Don't get me wrong, the Beretta is a fine pistol, just not up to the task.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The BAR wasn't all that great. It was hard to reload real fast, it was prone to jamming, and it didn't have a large enough magazine. During the same era the Bren was actually a better firearm.

The Sherman was not all that great
The P-40 was not all that great - at least not until they finally put Merlins in it too.

Like I said the BAR was not used in a vacuum.
The other side of that war used the German version of the Bren and they lost.

The Bren was still a better gun.

And it was a copy of someone else's design...

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The BAR wasn't all that great. It was hard to reload real fast, it was prone to jamming, and it didn't have a large enough magazine. During the same era the Bren was actually a better firearm.

The Sherman was not all that great
The P-40 was not all that great - at least not until they finally put Merlins in it too.

Like I said the BAR was not used in a vacuum.
The other side of that war used the German version of the Bren and they lost.

The Bren was still a better gun.

And it was a copy of someone else's design...

I don't think so:

During the early 1930s, the British Army subjected several designs of light machine gun to competitive trials. Among the weapons that were submitted for the trials were the Madsen, Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR), the Neuhausen KE7 and the Vickers-Berthier. The Vickers-Berthier was later adopted by the Indian Army and also saw extensive service in World War II.

Following these trials, the British Army adopted the Czechoslovak ZB vz.26 light machine gun manufactured in Brno in 1935, although a slightly modified model the ZB vz. 27 rather than the ZB vz. 26 had actually been submitted for the trials. A licence to manufacture was sought, and the Czech design was modified to British requirements. The major changes were in the magazine and barrel. The magazine was curved in order to feed the rimmed .303 British cartridge, a change from the various rimless Mauser-design cartridges such as the 7.92 mm Mauser round previously used by Czech designs. These modifications were categorised in various numbered designations, ZB vz. 27, ZB vz. 30, ZB vz. 32, and finally the ZB vz. 33, which became the Bren.

I believe you'll read there that the Brits got a license to manufacture it. That's not copying it as they could have made some patent changes and then claimed it as their design.

Give me one any day.

Especially over a Luger, a P-38 or a Nambu.

Much less a Glock or a SIG.

If John Moses Browning were alive today, what do you think he would come up with? A hand-held plasma gun?

You can bet your life it would be better than a Beretta.

I like 'em. I think the 1911 and the Browning Hi-Power are about as close to handgun perfection as it gets.

quote:

Originally posted by ChetNC:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The 1911 can be had without a bushing system. The S&W E Series 1911 has eliminated the old internal extractor with an outside Browning type that is even more robust then the previous one. There's a plunger tube change but it doesn't come to mind at the moment. It's hard to beat the 1911 and just about all the modern designs in a sense evolved from it.

Ok, then how about "fit sears, hammers, and triggers, and barrels, tune main springs, and restake grip bushings". Look, I am not bashing the 1911a1 as a design per se. Heck I got one handy with me every day and a spare in the house.
But, as a general issue military side arm, well, that ship has sailed. The per unit cost of an all steel, hand fitted unit that requires a 'smith (not a parts replacer) to keep up and running is simply not worth it for folks that will likely never fire a round in anger.

Again, not saying it's a bad design at all. I love it. But, the MEU(SOC) has shown us that keeping a limited number of utterly reliable 1911's in the field takes lots of work - but it's worth it because those guys earn their keep with it. We simply can't afford to do that service wide for folks who will be lucky to get an annual qual in much less fire a shot in anger with their sidearm. For them, a decent, mass produced 9mm is more than adequate - I am just sorry it was the Beretta.

I don't think we're too far apart. As a civilian, if I were limited to a 9mm I wouldn't complain too much since advances in bullet construction have made the 9 a fairly effective cartridge. And I'd still rather fire it out of a 1911, assuming my .38 Super didn't qualify as something close to a 9.

If I were still in the Navy, and someone were to issue me a SIG P220 I wouldn't complain too much as long as it was a .45, because I think a 9mm FMJ is practically useless. It will kill, eventually. Soon enough to prevent the other guy from shooting back is a whole 'nuther question.

On the other side of the ledger, I think it's utterly ridiculous to say the 1911 is obsolete. Even if it only makes sense for Special Operations Capable units, that means it still makes sense under some circumstances. Perhaps only that and as a civilian sidearm. But that doesn't spell obsolescence to me.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
The BAR wasn't all that great. It was hard to reload real fast, it was prone to jamming, and it didn't have a large enough magazine. During the same era the Bren was actually a better firearm.

The Sherman was not all that great
The P-40 was not all that great - at least not until they finally put Merlins in it too.

Like I said the BAR was not used in a vacuum.
The other side of that war used the German version of the Bren and they lost.

The Bren was still a better gun.

And it was a copy of someone else's design...

I don't think so:

During the early 1930s, the British Army subjected several designs of light machine gun to competitive trials. Among the weapons that were submitted for the trials were the Madsen, Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR), the Neuhausen KE7 and the Vickers-Berthier. The Vickers-Berthier was later adopted by the Indian Army and also saw extensive service in World War II.

Following these trials, the British Army adopted the Czechoslovak ZB vz.26 light machine gun manufactured in Brno in 1935, although a slightly modified model the ZB vz. 27 rather than the ZB vz. 26 had actually been submitted for the trials. A licence to manufacture was sought, and the Czech design was modified to British requirements. The major changes were in the magazine and barrel. The magazine was curved in order to feed the rimmed .303 British cartridge, a change from the various rimless Mauser-design cartridges such as the 7.92 mm Mauser round previously used by Czech designs. These modifications were categorised in various numbered designations, ZB vz. 27, ZB vz. 30, ZB vz. 32, and finally the ZB vz. 33, which became the Bren.

I believe you'll read there that the Brits got a license to manufacture it. That's not copying it as they could have made some patent changes and then claimed it as their design.

You just admitted that it was not a British design didn't you.
COPY, Copy, copy
It is always spelled copy.....

So what? What's that have to do with it being better then the BAR? Guess that makes our military pistol, the Beretta a real genuine American made and designed service weapon huh? Who made what has no bearing on how it functions.

quote:

Originally posted by SmokinJ:
So what? What's that have to do with it being better then the BAR? Guess that makes our military pistol, the Beretta a real genuine American made and designed service weapon huh? Who made what has no bearing on how it functions.

How it's made definitely has a bearing on how it functions. The early American-made Berettas had an annoying habit of cracking the slide and launching the back half at the shooter. At least two SEALs suffered severe facial injuries due to this during the Desert Storm I time-frame.

I hear the Italian guns never had that problem, and the ones built in Maryland have gotten the bugs worked out.

I'm a traditionalist in most regards, but I don't hold the M9 in any special contempt. I'm not about to run out and buy one, but if someone were to give one to me I'd say "thank you" and mean it. It's not a bad gun. If someone were to give me an M11, I'd also say thank you and mean it, but there'd be a little more genuine feeling behind those words. I'm also not about to run out and buy one of those, but if a good used police-surplused P226 pops up I might consider making an offer.

On the other hand, I don't hold the 1911 in any special regard. It isn't mythical. It's not even my favorite handgun. That'd be a J-frame smith in just about any flavor you want to serve up, as long as it's a .357 Mag. Living in Tejas as I do, I very rarely encounter an irate Griz, so the .357 suits me just fine.

I certainly don't consider a 1911 in .45 ACP obsolete, though. There may be other good guns out there, but when you start listing "good handguns" the 1911 had better be on that list.

I'm late to the party but no the 1911 isn't an outdated design. The only people who call it outdated are the guys who want you to buy their choice of 9 mm to go through their classes. I've even seen guys who thought the 1911 was the best gun made turn around and call it inadequate when they got new sponsors.

Are their better designs? One or two. How many of them are copies of Browning's refinements of the design? Most of them.

I have a couple of Garands. Obsolete they may be, but I doubt anyone wants to be shot with one.

Or clubbed to death with one.

quote:

How it's made definitely has a bearing on how it functions. The early American-made Berettas had an annoying habit of cracking the slide and launching the back half at the shooter. At least two SEALs suffered severe facial injuries due to this during the Desert Storm I time-frame.

The seals were shooting very over pressureed rounds by the thousands out of there guns.

Start putting +P++ rounds through a standard 1911 and see how it stands up. Not very long I would say.

One of the worst days in my military career was when the carted off the 1911's from our armory vault and replaced them with the M9.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

How it's made definitely has a bearing on how it functions. The early American-made Berettas had an annoying habit of cracking the slide and launching the back half at the shooter. At least two SEALs suffered severe facial injuries due to this during the Desert Storm I time-frame.

The seals were shooting very over pressureed rounds by the thousands out of there guns.

Start putting +P++ rounds through a standard 1911 and see how it stands up. Not very long I would say.

I see your point. Just to stir the pot though...Do the SEALs use +++P+++ ammo for fun, or is this the kind of load they need to get results? You could argue a standard 45 ACP is potent enough without needing to go the +P+ route.

Albatross.

The 1911 has withstood higher pressure cartridges then even the +P 45acp loads like 38 Super, 9mm, even the 30 Luger. Anyways there's a hot 45 for it called the 460 Rowland and it's way more potent then any 45 acp +P load. The 1911 platform is very sturdy indeed, it's weak point in my opinion being the unsupported case head web near the feed ramp which of course can be cured by a ramped barrel.

I have a friend that has some full autos (yes he has his licenses for them) and he has tome SMG 9mm loads. He told me of some of his experiences with various 9mm pistols. He said the Beretta's absolutely won't hold up to it, but interesting the Taurus clone of the Beretta just keeps on trucking. He said the Browning Hi Power would handle it but wouldn't recommend a steady diet of it in that fine pistol.

Oh, I forgot they also ran the 10mm in the 1911. If anything is hard on the 1911 it's the slide recoiling. The actual pressure of the round firing doesn't harm the 1911. The 10mm Colt had stronger recoil springs and two of them I believe.

"The 1911 is an Outdated Design" - Well so is the wheelbarrow.