GUNS!!!!!!!!

I'm still struggling with the 1911 decision. My budget is from $400-600.

I've got my eye on two different versions, either the Rock Island for around $400 or a stainless Springfield for around $600. Of course the stainless Springfield looks pretty sweet, but, is it worth the extra $200 bucks? Will there be a large difference between how the two shoot? Or would I be better off buying the cheaper RIA and spending the extra cash on some sights, mags, or ammo?

I still plan on acquiring a .22 pistol as well, but it'll be in the future. I bought my wife the new dryer last weekend, so, I've got her talked into letting me get a pistol once our extra ski season money starts trickling in. I figure if I have her talked into a pistol I'd better take advantage with the higher priced version first. Leroy, if you have that .22 in a few months I may be in touch.

Go with the Springfield. Although most 1911's can be a bit of a gamble, the odds of getting better parts and better fitting in the SA are higher. Plus, it's hard to beat springfield's bumper to bumper lifetime warranty. And I haven't been too impressed by any of the RIA's I've seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobMc

I'm still struggling with the 1911 decision. My budget is from $400-600.

I've got my eye on two different versions, either the Rock Island for around $400 or a stainless Springfield for around $600. Of course the stainless Springfield looks pretty sweet, but, is it worth the extra $200 bucks? Will there be a large difference between how the two shoot? Or would I be better off buying the cheaper RIA and spending the extra cash on some sights, mags, or ammo?

I still plan on acquiring a .22 pistol as well, but it'll be in the future. I bought my wife the new dryer last weekend, so, I've got her talked into letting me get a pistol once our extra ski season money starts trickling in. I figure if I have her talked into a pistol I'd better take advantage with the higher priced version first. Leroy, if you have that .22 in a few months I may be in touch.

---

Check out the remington. R something. Seems to be the better of the value 1911"s out there.

1911 is still my favorite gun. manual safety, exposed hammer, and single action. not bulky at all and easy to shoot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cono Este

1911 is still my favorite gun. manual safety, exposed hammer, and single action. not bulky at all and easy to shoot.

---

I've been meaning to ask, and I'm not trying to start a 'my gun is better then your gun' debate, but why are so many people endeared to the 1911 platform? There seem to be a lot of 1911 owners on here so I'd like to hear some opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zion zig zag

I've been meaning to ask, and I'm not trying to start a 'my gun is better then your gun' debate, but why are so many people endeared to the 1911 platform? There seem to be a lot of 1911 owners on here so I'd like to hear some opinions.

---

I wondered the same thing, and here is what I was told and found out.

1. Grip angle is the best
2. Low bore
3. Trigger design and pull (doesn't pivot, but pulls straight back)
4. Availability of parts, and different manufactures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donkey Punch

I wondered the same thing, and here is what I was told and found out.

1. Grip angle is the best
2. Low bore
3. Trigger design and pull (doesn't pivot, but pulls straight back)
4. Availability of parts, and different manufactures.

---

I'd add that the narrow profile makes them great CCW. Doesn't print as much under my shirt. Of course, you need to have a little size to you, I wouldn't recommend some little dude packing a 1911. And it's such a proven design I know it will go bang every time I pull the trigger.

Designed by the Honorable John Moses Browning. (enough said)
Big caliber (if you hit someone in the finger, they will die)
Classic
Provenance
Tons of modifications
Tried and true
With the exception of Glock, all other pistols have this grip angle relative to the barrel.

Ken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zion zig zag

I've been meaning to ask, and I'm not trying to start a 'my gun is better than your gun' debate, but why are so many people endeared to the 1911 platform? There seem to be a lot of 1911 owners on here so I'd like to hear some opinions.

---

it feels good to shoot. i'd encourage you to try one for yourself.

oh, and .45 to the mid section= hydrostatic shock

Picture yourself on the receiving end of this. Any more questions?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...n/IMG_8859.jpg

Yeah, I know it needs cleaned....

I've shot plenty of them, they seem nice enough but I guess I just prefer a Glock or a Sig.

And I'm pretty sure you guys are joking but you know that self-defense wise the .45 isn't that superior to 9mm or 40 cal, right?

Jim Higginbotham, a 30-year law enforcement veteran and trainer writes the following on the subject of pistol cartridges and failures to stop:

Quote:

---

While I have come across some lethal encounters that took a lot of rounds to settle they mostly were the result of either poor hits (or complete misses) or lack of penetration. Nearly all of the high round count cases I have reviewed involved 9mms, .38s, .357’s or smaller calibers. This is not to say they do not occur with major caliber rounds. It is to say I have been collecting data for 30 years and have not encountered many cases in which multiple hits (more than three as two or three shots are a fairly normal reflex action) from major caliber cartridges to the center of the chest have not been sufficient, - the single exception being a case involving the .41 Magnum loaded with JSP bullets which did not expand - they did penetrate - it took five hits center mass to stop the attacker - and I have not encountered any with the .45, even with Ball. I have encountered several with 5, 6 or even more hits to the center of the chest with .38, .357, 9mm and .223 rifle rounds failing to stop. Almost every one could be traced to lack of penetration with a couple of exceptions that hit the heart but just did not cause enough damage to be effective quickly. Note I am not talking about "torso" hits. There is a lot of area in the torso in which a hit will seldom produce rapid incapacitation even if hit by a 12 ga. slug or a 30-06 - we simply cannot count such data if we are going to learn anything.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Jim Higginbotham, a 30-year law enforcement veteran and trainer writes the following on the subject of pistol cartridges and failures to stop:

---

It's interesting that he attributes the non-stop to lack of penetration. As far as I know 9mm and .223 will penetrate further than a 45 round. Also, the data that the FBI uses basically rates the 40 cal and the 45 the same in regards to stopping power and the 9mm comes in about 2% behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNKen

Designed by the Honorable John Moses Browning. (enough said)
Big caliber (if you hit someone in the finger, they will die)
Ken

---

the best post in the thread so far

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by waxman

the best post in the thread so far

---

I did like that one.

Anyway, it's all apples and oranges and what you get used to. I used to hate the 40 cal because of the sharp recoil and much preferred the 'roll' of the 45 or the non recoil of a 9mm but since then I've shot thousands of rounds through the 40 and have become pretty proficient with it to the point I don't notice the recoil anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zion zig zag

It's interesting that he attributes the non-stop to lack of penetration. As far as I know 9mm and .223 will penetrate further than a 45 round.

---

In ideal conditions, possibly. But lighter, high-velocity rounds are more easily deflected, meaning the angle of impact becomes critical in achieving penetration. That's a factor that is not always controllable in real world encounters.

Also, if you need to punch a hole in a car door then kill the guy on the other side, .45 has a better chance of doing that than do smaller calibers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rubicon

Also, if you need to punch a hole in a car door then kill the guy on the other side, .45 has a better chance of doing that than do smaller calibers.

---

Hmmm, do you have data for that? Because physics tells me that velocity would be the more important factor for a steel car door/hard target. Car doors are concealment, not cover, for any round.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zion zig zag

Hmmm, do you have data for that? Because physics tells me that velocity would be the more important factor for a steel car door/hard target. Car doors are concealment, not cover, for any round.

---

Nothing at my fingertips.

I agree that velocity is important and would be the critical factor if the bullet held it's shape after impact. But as soon as it begins to deform/fragment, the smaller lighter bullet will give up energy much faster than a bullet with twice the mass, carrying less energy into the target on the other side of the obstruction.

So I guess it's more about the bullets ability to retain energy after passing through an obstruction than it is about pure penetrating power.

OK, my google-fu was weak. Tons of stuff on .45's blowing through car doors. bunch of youtube videos as well. Looks like whether it makes it through depends on whether it hits an inside crash protection beam.

What I do know is that for .223, they make a 62 grain steel core penetrator round. I have fired a .223 through 1/4 plate steel and it leaves a hole about the size of your little finger.

WRONG-----I doubt seriously that .45 would penetrate a car door, but on the other hand it may depend on whether it is coming out of a pistol barrel vs a Thompson barrel.

Ken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TNKen

it may depend on whether it is coming out of a pistol barrel vs a Thompson barrel.

---

Pistols are pistols and rifles are rifles :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zion zig zag

I've shot plenty of them, they seem nice enough but I guess I just prefer a Glock or a Sig.

And I'm pretty sure you guys are joking but you know that self-defense wise the .45 isn't that superior to 9mm or 40 cal, right?

---

Sig makes 1911's. I like the .357 better, but Ive had sig's, glocks etc and the one auto i will never trade is my kimber. They got it right in 1911.


I think .357 sig must be an awesome round. A glock 33 might be in the future. Or a 29 in 10mm. But that package frightens me a bit.

Rubicon, I've shot several car doors with a 45 on the range and it was a crap shoot if they penetrated or not. If it hit the crash beam, then it didn't. The 223 Federal bonded round zipped through the car door, both seats, the center console, and then the other car door almost every time. It made it through the first door every time.

ALL normal pistol calibers are underpowered when shot out of a pistol into a human. Shot placement is critical. Even with rifle rounds. It's not magic. People just don't automatically shit their pants and die if they get shot in the torso by a 45 or a 223. I will give you four examples, all first hand knowledge.

1. bad guy hit in upper chest by one 223 round from short distance. Falls to the ground and stops fighting, but he was clearly just a pussy and not incapacitated.

2. bad guy takes four 45 ACP rounds center mass and kept fighting. When it was over, bad guy gets handcuffed and tells good guy "you missed fucker". Good guy disagrees, then pulls open bad guys shirt to show him the holes. Medical gets called, bad guy lives.

3. bad guy shoots good guy in leg with 223 out of an AR-15 type weapon and grazes him. Good guy is not pleased with this and fires back, killing bad guy with a single hit to the temple from his 9mm Glock 17.

4. Bad guys kills five people in a mall and is confronted by good guys. Good guys shoot bad guy approximately 12 times, combo of 9mm and 223. MP5's and AR-15's. Bad guy takes 9mm round to the forehead and it fails to penetrate his skull. In fact, ME stated none of the wounds would've been fatal by themselves, but the were when combined together.

Shot placement is everything, and then sometimes even that's not enough. Unless you bust out the Barrett 50 cal, then all bets are off. Or if you get shot by a 1911 in 45 ACP, because JMB will rip your soul from your body and kill you. :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeepHelmet

Rubicon, I've shot several car doors with a 45 on the range and it was a crap shoot if they penetrated or not. If it hit the crash beam, then it didn't. The 223 Federal bonded round zipped through the car door, both seats, the center console, and then the other car door almost every time. It made it through the first door every time.

---

My experiences are similar. There really is no comparison between rifles and handguns.

This was more of a 9mm vs .45 rather than a .45 vs .223 comparison.

Got it. The 9 did about the same as the 45 on the doors IIRC. As far as shooting people goes, like I said, they're pretty much all underpowered. Most research shows there's little difference between them all. That all being said, I carry a 45. Go figure.

imo, the stopping power between pistol calibers is overrated. A .22 can kill with proper shot placement.

here's what is relevant to me:

.45 pistol- more expensive ammo, but better "feel", i love that solid push of recoil, and steel on steel ka-klunk of cocking my single action.

9mm pistol- cheaper ammo, feels like a plinker to me, but you can get much higher capacity, and lighter weight.

Ideally- have one of each. They're both fun to shoot and lethal (in the right hands).