An interesting take on the Glock vs. 1911 bit

[Nightcrawler]

The Glock and 1911 tribes, much like the Sharks and the Jets, love to go round and round, battling with bouts of interpretive dance, trying to prove which pistol is superior. No end ever comes of it.

But I've been thinking, I have.

The 1911's design is old. So is the Glock-style striker fire system. Both were invented before the Great War.

The Glock has a polymer frame, the 1911 is steel. Except they make 1911s with polymer frames.

The Glock is high capacity, the 1911 is not. Except they make high capacity 1911s.

The Glock is available in all different cartridges.
The 1911 is available in all different cartridges. (Though I don't think there are any production models in .357 Sig.)

They both have loads of accessories.

The 1911 (single stack) has a thinner grip than the Glock, easier to conceal.

But Glock makes one single stack model; they could must as easily make more. There's nothing about the design that says they couldn't make a full sized single stack slimline model.

Both have consistent trigger pulls that do not change from shot to shot.

Hmm...so....it seems to me the two designs are about...equal. The only practical difference that they can't mimic is the fact that the 1911 is hammer fired while the Glock is striker fired. They do make double action 1911s if you don't like Condition 1 carry, though.

There. Nightcrawler has spoken. The Glock and 1911 designs are equal from a practical standpoint. There shall never again be any debate or conflict over this matter.

...yeah, right... LOL

[Ceol Mhor]

You forgot one distinction - 1911s look great and Glocks look ugly.

[AlanD]

What about the 1911's grip and thumb safety?

[Shmackey]

They're both shaped like the letter L, so they're both the same.

[Nightcrawler]

What about the 1911's grip and thumb safety?

I haven't seen any definitive proof that having or not having those things makes the gun "better" or "worse". It seems to be a matter of preferance.

[jack_the_sailor]

Here's 1 distinction you didn't mention. The 1911 has a much smaller grip it fits most people hands. If you finger is too long for proper trigger reach, you can add grip with add on grips. Glocks have big grips if the grip is too big for your hand & you can't properly reach the trigger. There's nothing you can do. Grip reductions wont help trigger reach. 1911 fit everyone while Glocks favor people with long fingers. I carry a Glock 17 which might be too big for my hand, I have short fingers. I might have to pick a new carry pistol. i like 1911 but Colt doesn't chamber 1 in 9mm. $700 for A SA I'll go with a HK USP c 9. The best combo of a 1911 & a Glock.

[Andrew Wyatt]

1911's have the capability for a good trigger pull, where glocks, well, don't.

when comparing two "tuned" guns, a 1911 trigger breaks like a glass rod, where a glock trigger breaks like a plastic spoon.

glocks and 1911's are suitable for two widely desparate markets.

for a carry pistol, it's really hard to beat a 1911, since they're all rounded and thin. but they need to be worked on, usually and their owners have pride in ownership. 1911's also have soul. soul is hard to describe, but i think it has to do with not being made out of processed dinosaur carcasses.


a glock is grelly great as an issue pistol, because every one of them is the same. a glock is a tool. it has no soul. it's inanimite. it doesn't need to be modified to be an acceptable pistol. it's main strength seems to be that since it's just fine out of the box, you can go and do nasty things to it without worrying that you'll destroy an important piece of americana.

they're apples and oranges, really.

[Jim Keenan]

Both are fine guns. But "1911" is a generic term for many guns, from many makers, with quality ranging from superb to junk. Glocks, on the other hand, are made in one factory, with one basic design and with excellent quality control. And their reliability has been excellent, certainly among the very best and better than many.

So IMHO, anyone touting the "1911" (as I have at times) needs to say which "1911". The major factor in purchase is simply personal preference.

That said, and aside from the fact that they are quite different designs, the principle advantage of the Glock is its freedom from any kind of gadgetry. It is a "point and pull" pistol in the DA revolver tradition. Its sole safety is a joke, so it is really free from any distractions, a major advantage for people who are not "gun nuts" and who just want a pistol to go bang when it needs to.

Jim

[Futo Inu]

Well if the San Jose Sharks did battle with the New York Jets, I suppose who wins depends on what game they're playing. Hockey, Sharks win. Football, Jets win. Baseball - anybody's guess. Analygous to the Glock vs. 1911 too.

[Demitrius]

Futo, please tell me that was a joke.

[Blue Duck357]

Difference:
In 20 minutes Blue Duck357 can totally strip a Glock to it's last pin and spring, replace any part along the way and put it completely back together (in working order).

Ehh... lets just say you would not want me to try that with your 1911 20 minutes before you were expecting a visit from Osama

Similarities

Both are very good guns, in thier own way and well proven designs.

[midnight]

20 minutes? What, are ya doing it one handed?

[Blue Duck357]

Well of course! the other hands being used to post the virtues of Glocks

[cheygriz]

Both are fine designs.

Having been a police firearms instructor for 15 years, I have made the following observations.

The 1911 requires ten times more training than the Glock if it is to be carried safely. (Cocked and locked) IMHO, the 1911 shoul;d only be carried by real "gun people" who practice and train often. IMHO, the 1911 is an expert's gun.

The Glock trigger can never match a TUNED 1911 . It, like a DA revolver is inherently safe. It requires very little transition time for officers trained on revolvers. It's quite suitable for ordinary officers or citizens that are not really interested in guns, and don't spend much time in practice or training.

Personally, even though I'm a "gun person" I prefer the Sig, Beretta and Glock to the 1911. I love my 1911 Match gun and shoot it often, but I would never carry it. Having said that, I don't criticize those who prefer the 1911.

It all boils down to what you like, and feel comfortable with. If you trust your weapon, and learn it well, you can depend on it.

I think the best way to stop these arguments is to adopt the attitude of " don't criticize my choice, and I won't criticize yours."

[croyance]

it's really hard to beat a 1911, since they're all rounded and thin. but they need to be worked on

From what I have seen and owned of late-model 1911's, they work fine out of the box. I don't think there is anything inherent in the design that says that it cannot feed or eject correctly.
I also think that every Kimber or Springfield that I have tried has always had a better trigger pull than the Glock.
But each has their virtues. Thank god Beretta, Sig, and H&K owners don't drink the same water as Glock and 1911 owners.

[yankytrash]

Always been a diehard 1911 steelgun fan. Hate plastic.

Then I shot a friend's fullsize Glock in 45ACP. Got 3" groups offhand from the first mag. Somehow, even managed to not shoot my foot off with the lack of external safeties. I guess the trick is not putting your finger on the trigger until you're ready to shoot. Haven't I heard that somewhere?

Hmm. Maybe plastic ain't so bad.

Prejudice is the art of hating something for reasons you've only heard about, but haven't experienced yourself.

[Hemicuda]

Even though at the CURRENT time, I do not own a 1911 style gun, I am the opposite of Blue Duck...

Gimme a 1911, I can dissasemble it fully, mildly polish the frrd-ramp, replace any needed parts (WITH minor fitting) and re-assemble a 1911 in about half an hour... (my dad was into competition with 1911's when I was young, and I helped clean/tune his guns as a 12 year old kid!)

Gimme a Glock, and I'm PRETTY sure I could finger out how to field strip it in the same ammount of time! (no guarantees on re-assembly!)

[J. Parker]

A Glock is a 1911 without a safety

[Cal4D4]

I have both. When I say 1911 I mean a AMT Commander sized Hardballer (eat your hearts out Wilson owners). Glock can be a G20 or G29 (fat frames and 10 round mags ). Both make decent training devices for double action revolvers. The 1911 is a decent trainer for single action practice and the Glocks stand in for double action practice. My 1076 does both in the same mag load. They all use delightful low powered training rounds and I can carry twice the ammo of the full powered revolvers. Look beyond your cap pistol trainers and cowboy up to a decent revolver. There you can debate single action vs. double action just like with 1911's and Glocks.

[Correia]

Carry a 1911, got nothing against Glocks. In fact I love the G19. Don't know why, but it is one groovy little gun.

[DMK]

Perhaps just my opinion, but I see 1911s and Glocks on opposite sides of the spectrum.

Both are excellent firearms with almost totally opposed ideologies in design. ie. metal/plastic, single stack/hi cap, SA / DAO(like), two safety controls / internal safeties, etc, etc.

Most semi-auto pistols fall somewhere in between them having features more like one or the other.

[300lbGorilla]

Hey all! Yeah, I'm a newbie, and yeah, I'm gonna chime in on this issue.

Not really from a gun family, but got into guns at about 13. Dad bought a Glock 22 at my urging (pre-ban, etc.). Ruger 10/22 was the gift for the following birthday/Christmas.

Been in and out of shooting since then, but very recently got back into it with DrStrangeLove (another newbie here). Keep in mind that I'm still improving my skills.

For some reason I can't shoot the Glock well. I know it's a problem with me and not the gun, but it is quite annoying to be putting 'em in the 9 and 10 ring at 25 feet (slow fire target) with by the Doc's Sig 229 (in .40) and have 'em scattered all over the paper while trying twice as hard with the Glock.

I can put all 17 rounds that my +2 mags hold on the paper at 50 feet, but it's quite messy... and that's with a 3.5 pound trigger.

Then I shot a Springfield Loaded TRP... . Me likey. Me likey so much that I had 'em order one right there on the spot. My only regret is that I had just purchased a Ruger 22/45 an hour or so earlier... the wait is already killing me, and I've got another 5 weeks before I can walk out of the shop with it.

Accuracy-wise, the TRP outshone the Sig... which says a lot in my book. Chances of me going back to a Glock are somewhere in between slim and none. But, that's just ME. The Glock versus 1911 debate is pretty one-sided in my limited world view... as long as you spend the money on a 1911 built by a good company.

I've only really shot one other 1911 (yeah, I know... poor me). It was a Charles Daly (I'm taking donations for therapy). The drill was as follows:
Fire
Pull slide back; manually lock slide open
Eject magazine
Use Glock's cleaning rod to push spent cartridge from barrel
Reload half-fed round that was pulled from the mag when it was ejected
Insert magazine
Release slide
Fire and repeat above steps

Good news is I got really good at this drill after firing 200 rounds through it... but, I would have to take a Glock over a Charles Daly 1911 any day (that's where the "slim" comes in).

Still got a week until the little Ruger comes home, but it's the TRP that's got me chomping at the bit... luckily, the shop that I bought from has its own range, so i get to shoot the 2500 rounds of hardball that I bought at a recent gun show once the gun's delivered.

I really didn't think I had an addictive personality... until I got back into this wonderful sport of shooting. Now, let's see what it'll take to get a CCW permit here in San Bernardino County, CA.


Man, talk about on- and off-topic... multiple personalities will do that to ya.

Be seeing y'all around... and to the moderators and admins: GREAT SITE!!!

[asp]

As in most debates, valid points can be made for both sides. Support for one or the other typically springs from which is owned and used. I've owned four Colt 1911s, one Kimber, and five Glocks. To paraphrase Ed Abbey, it's the differences, not the sameness, that create the tension and the delight. Simply put, 1911s and Glocks are great guns, but in different ways. Why not enjoy both?

[dawg23]

Dear Ceol Mohr:

You forgot another little distinction - Every time you pull the trigger on the Glock, it goes "boom".

Every time you pull the trigger on the 1911, it might go "boom."

[Double Naught Spy]

How old a design is seems to be a big negative as the concept that newer is better seems to permeate the 1911 Glock comparisons.

One of the arguments made by Glockies is that the 1911 design is old, but the Glock design is new. As noted above, the striker design of the Glock is old as well. More over, the 9 mm round precedes the .45 acp and therefore is much older.


In this cases, the issue of age is not relevant. I have yet to see anyone provide a justification for why older aged designs detracts from the usefulness of the firearms. We continually use old technology and designs in everyday life and even in guns. The major principles of firearms are hundreds of years old, yet we still use firearms. The same can be said for other technologies such as the wheel, writing, language, etc.

The concept of design age in the comparison between 1911s and Glocks really is not relevant or valid.