Liberty wrote:I never understood the emotional attachments to the 1911. a 100 year old design that has a reputation for being finnicky. Are they pretty? I suppose so, but installed in a proper holster who will notice? Its a tool, such an attachment to a penknife or electric drill wouldn't be concidered normal.
I can understand a preference for a 1911, a Glock or any other platform... But the emotional attachment and reverence for these things don't make sense to me Any hand gun, is an engineering compromise. some of these compromises may be in safety, capacity and firepower, reliability, ease of carry including availability of holsters).
What bothers me about the fanboism of the 1911 is how it affects newbies. I don't believe the 1911s are an ideal choice for most newbies. Too expensive, to picky, to complicated. and usually too heavy. I don't mean to demean the 1911 there are some mighty fine ones out there, and triggers are sure nice, they sure are pretty. and there are lot of gun people a lot smarter than me that prefer them.
BLASPHEMER!!!!! 
I own both. For years, I carried 1911s. Today, I carry 9mm Glocks.....for several reasons. I do NOT think that the Glock is a superior platform, but I do think it is easier. Allow me to draw an analogy.
My youngest brother owns a 1971 Jaguar XKE-12. It has a 5.7 liter V-12 under the hood, fed by a trio of carburetors. In that era, it was a true supercar of the same ilk as Ferraris and Aston Martins. It is a real treat to drive, but it does NOT reward sloppy habits. It goes exactly where you point it, and the connection between the steering and front tire patches is direct. There is zero slop in the steering. It demands precision, and it
rewards precision with a remarkable driving experience. OTH, if you over-correct, you will be rewarded with bad juju. You literally feel the road surface in your hands, and can tell exactly what your tires are doing. The connection between the gas pedal and the engine is equally direct and linear. There is no mush in the pedal. There is no delay in the throttle response either. The car leaps forward
immediately when you give it the gas. The only difference between a small amount of pedal and a big amount of pedal is how hard it pushes you back into the seat....but the response is
right now. If you give it too much gas when you didn't mean to, you are rewarded with bad juju. Not enough gas = not enough juju. The brakes are equally responsive, with no mush in the pedal. Either too little or too much pressure on the brake pedal rewards you with bad juju. The
right amount is astonishing for its efficiency. The ride is on the harsh side. It
has suspension, but that suspension (using the technology of the day) was calibrated to control a car going 150 mph, not one going 45 mph. The interior ergonomics are designed for high performance driving and comfort is secondary.......so while I would gladly borrow it for a day of spirited driving on curvy country roads, it is not a car I would choose for daily commuting. The electronics are by Lucas, Prince of Darkness.....and you need a set of British Whitworth tools if you want to work on it yourself. You
can work on it yourself if you want to, but most XKE owners I know (my brother included) also maintain friendly relationships with their local XKE-specialist mechanic. I said that driving it is a real treat, and it is, but the whole time I'm behind the wheel, I'm scared that some knucklehead is going to run into me.....or that in the process of trying to avoid said knucklehead, I'll over-correct with steering/gas/brakes. The car
demands precision, and it is not happy in traffic. It
wants the open road, preferably with lots of curves. It's a crapshoot whether it will light on the first turn of the ignition key or not.....or not light at all.....in which case you get to lift that sexy forward-hinged hood while an admiring crowd gathers around and asks a lot of questions.....which in the moment, if you are honest, you have trouble answering.....because you had to raise your hood. Finally, the XKE hasn't been built that will last 200,000+ miles on regular oil changes.
I drive an SUV - a 2015 Toyota 4Runner Trail Edition. It is big enough for me (compared especially to a XKE), comfortable, has a very good ride for a vehicle using a truck chassis, but it is NOT any kind of sportscar. It is heavy. It will tow a lot. It has very good brakes and plenty enough power, but it does neither linearly. It exhibits lots of body roll (compared to the Jag) in corners at speed......so I don't corner at speed. There is plenty of interior room, and the interior ergonomics are centered around driver comfort rather than high speed driving. It is utterly reliable - boringly so, even. It handles long distance travel and daily commuting in traffic with equal aplomb......and unlike the Jag, has 4WD and will go off-road with perfect equanimity. You don't drive it through corners, you herd it through corners. It has a better stereo (I don't think my brother's Jag even
has a stereo.....
or A/C....). It is bland. What it lacks in character, it more than makes up for in dependability. And, if I change the oil regularly, I can reasonably expect to get at least 200,000 miles out of it. (My brother used to own an old Toyota 4x4 pickup that went just shy of 350,000 miles before his stepson totaled it.)
1911s are like the Jag, and Glocks are like the 4Runner.
Now, before anyone gets their unmentionables in a twist, I am NOT saying that 1911s are unreliable. I wouldn't have carried one myself if I thought they were unsuitable that way. BUT, like the Jag, a 1911 requires a certain amount of precision from the person wielding it in order to obtain its full potential - which is higher than a Glock's. The full potential of an out of the box Glock is easily realized by an average shooter.....because it sets the bar lower, within the capabilities of average shooters (which includes me, by the way, so don't be insulted by this statement, as it is not a reflection on whether or not
you are just average). The sky (and budget) is unlimited when it comes to turning an average 1911 into a fine instrument that would rival something from the best 1911 gunsmiths; whereas upgrading the Glock is a matter of buying drop in parts that, no matter how much you spend, will never give you the same feedback and results as shooting a truly precision 1911 will give you. Just as I would be crushed if I crashed my brother's Jag, and merely upset if I crashed my SUV, if I'm ever involved in a self-defense shooting and law enforcement - however temporarily - confiscates my gun pending the outcome of the investigation, I would be crushed (and worried about its safe return to me) if one of my 1911s was confiscated, and just a little upset (and less worried about its return) if my Glock were confiscated. If my $1,000 Kimber is stolen, I'm out $1,000. If my $600 Glock is stolen, I'm out $600. If my 1911 falls into a mud bog during a gunfight, I'll likely have to at the minimum rinse it out to bring it back into action. My Glock simply starts shooting again.
Etc., etc., etc.
It's not that one pistol is better than the other. They are both great designs. But for "lowest common denominator" practicality, I'll take the Glock. At the range, I still have more fun shooting my 1911s.
