Page 1 of 2
Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns aren't.
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 5:51 pm
by surprise_i'm_armed
All right, here's something that I have been wondering.
I can't provide a link to any specific article or website, but over time I have seen the 1911 described
as a "fighting pistol".
Well, all guns that shoot bullets could be useful in a gunfight, so who/what criteria has defined the 1911 as
a "fighting pistol"?
If you had some other pistol in 9MM, .40, or .45 (but not a 1911 style), wouldn't you be able to fight with
that just as well?
Is the "fighting pistol" description simply a nod to the fact that many US military personnel used this gun
in combat?
Is it the 1911's single action?
Or has the term "fighting pistol" simply been adopted by the 1911 fanboys to make their gun better than
a 9MM Taurus?
TIA / SIA
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 5:57 pm
by RSJ
http://www.browning.com/library/infonew ... asp?id=301" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
At the time US troops were armed with either .30 caliber Krag or Springfield bolt-action rifles and .38 caliber double-action revolvers. While the .30 caliber rifles proved effective in stopping the attackers, the US troop’s handguns demonstrated an unnerving lack of stopping power, resulting in numerous reports of Moro warriors absorbing multiple pistol bullets while they continued to hack away at the Americans. Obviously the US troops’ morale suffered badly in this situation.
The combat pistol situation became so acute that old stocks of Model 1873 Colt revolvers in 45 caliber, many of which dated back to the Plains Indian Wars were returned to active service, where they quickly demonstrated a much better track record of stopping an attacker with one well-placed shot.
caliber, stopping power, although I carry 9mm..
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:00 pm
by A-R
Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?
I believe it was Col. Jeff Cooper - but that's just a guess off top of my head
When I hear the term "fighting pistol" I generally think of a full-size handgun in a combat-effective chambering (9mm, .40, .45) that has the right combination of accuracy, ruggedness/durability, and reliability.
But that's obviously my own general description
Pocket guns, target/competition specific guns, Saturday Night Specials, and other niche guns would not fit the description.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:06 pm
by Jim Beaux
Just a wag but considering all the wars this gun has been in one can assume it has been in more fights.
Sonny Listen = Fighting Man
Michael Jackson = Not a Fighting Man
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:48 pm
by Topbuilder
Reliability, knockdown power, round capacity, good simple target acquisition. All things which must be included in a pistol designed to bring to a fight. To win fights. That is a 1911. A 1911 is designed to win fights. That is what makes it a fighting pistol.
I submit there have been a few that could be added to the list since 1911...
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:59 pm
by threoh8
I don't know of anyone who says other pistols aren't fighting pistols. I think it's fair to say that some guns were designed for combat, some were adapted, and some just happened to have been there.
The 1911 is certainly a fighting pistol. It was designed for and proved effective in combat over a long period. Input into its design came from the US military and people familiar with building military and police weapons that worked.
That one can use something in a fight does not make it a combat weapon. While the Ruger Mk I would be better than nothing in a fight, it is not a fighting pistol. One could say that the Baby Browning was designed for fighting, but it's not very effective at actually taking out an opponent. I would not call it a fighting pistol.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 7:26 pm
by C-dub
Topbuilder wrote:Reliability, knockdown power, round capacity, good simple target acquisition. All things which must be included in a pistol designed to bring to a fight. To win fights. That is a 1911. A 1911 is designed to win fights. That is what makes it a fighting pistol.
I submit there have been a few that could be added to the list since 1911...
If this were it, and I'm not saying that it isn't, then, with the exception of skins on the wall, Glock and one or two others can also be considered fighting pistols. I don't have a problem with calling a 1911 a fighting pistol, however I don't think that just any 1911 is. It is a great design, but there are some brands that are not as reliable as others that we might not consider a fighting pistol due to that lack of reliability.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:36 pm
by MoJo
What makes a "Fighting Handgun"? Any handgun you use in a gunfight is by definition a "fighting Handgun."
But, to be a true fighting handgun it needs to be powerful enough, accurate enough and ergonomic. An S&W 686, Colt Python or Ruger revolver in .357 Magnum is definitely a "fighting handgun" As are Glocks, High Powers, M&Ps, SIGs, HKs, Rugers, Berettas and, even some of Taurus' offerings.
Guns I don't consider to be true fighting handguns are anything in .380, .32, .25 or .22 these are backup or last ditch calibers not a true fighting gun. Is the 1911 the only fighting handgun? Decidedly no, is it the best fighting handgun, I don't think so. The 1911 is one of the best fighting guns it's not the only "fighting handgun."
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:52 pm
by G26ster
IMO it's odd to classify only certain handguns, or certain calibers as "fighting pistols." To me, any gun issued to military personnel for offense/defense is a "fighting pistol." I don't know where the term came from, or in what era, but certainly the Russian, French, and British soldiers armed with the revolvers below, albeit in weak calibers, would consider them "fighting pistols."
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:57 pm
by MadMonkey
I call them combat handguns, but it's the same thing. Pretty much any quality, full-size pistol in 9mm-.45ACP (plus a few other calibers I won't go into) that is tough and durable enough to last through a dusty, dirty battle and reliable enough to not fail during said battle.
How many 1911s fall into that category though, I dunno...
ETA: Please note that the above is my definition, not necessarily the RIGHT definition
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:45 pm
by The Annoyed Man
Topbuilder wrote:Reliability, knockdown power, round capacity, good simple target acquisition. All things which must be included in a pistol designed to bring to a fight. To win fights. That is a 1911. A 1911 is designed to win fights. That is what makes it a fighting pistol.
I submit there have been a few that could be added to the list since 1911...
Pretty much no such thing as "knock down" power, not even my beloved .45 ACP. That said, and at the risk of igniting another caliber war, I usually carry .45s. When I'm not carrying a .45, I'm carrying a .357 magnum. When I'm not carrying a .357, I'm carrying a 9mm. I don't go any lower down than that.
It goes without saying that a "fighting gun" is whatever gun you have in your hand at the time you're needing one. But that said, when most people use the term (my son calls them "war guns"), for me it always evoked those guns that were designed purely for combat, and typically being "full-sized:" the 5" 1911; a Browning Hi-Power; Glock 17; Sig P229; HK USP Tactical; Beretta 92FS; guns like that.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Sun Sep 30, 2012 11:46 pm
by srothstein
Well, as much as I make fun of Marines, I do respect the USMC. And they have just formally announced that their new special operations pistol will be the M45 Close Quarters Battle Pistol. And the pistol is a Colt 1911 with a rail for a light and a lanyard loop.
So, I guess I would say the Marine Corps says it is a fighting pistol. They did not say the same about the Glock or M9.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 8:40 am
by SRH78
I guess since the Marine Corp didn't adopt the AK47, it isn't a fighting rifle?
Any pistol used to fight is a fighting pistol. The only real point of debate is how effective of a fighting pistol any given pistol is.
Btw, it is very easy to make an argument for plenty of different pistols being a better tool for the job.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 6:27 pm
by WildBill
SRH78 wrote:I guess since the Marine Corp didn't adopt the AK47, it isn't a fighting rifle?
It depends who you are fighting for.
Re: Who decided a 1911 is a "fighting pistol"?Other guns are
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2012 6:47 pm
by C-dub
SRH78 wrote:I guess since the Marine Corp didn't adopt the AK47, it isn't a fighting rifle?
Nah, it just didn't meet their requirements for accuracy. It is an excellent short range fighting rifle, but if need to engage anything over 100 yards the AK is hopelessly outclassed by the M4. And the Marines, who are notorious for their marksmanship, would never have chosen the AK.