9MM 1911’s, Why?

[txbirdman]

I mean one COULD put a 4cyl. Even a turbo'd - boosted - nitroed motor into a Corvette... BUT THEY DON'T

Everything has its place, and 9mm DOES NOT need be everywhere! ESPECIALLY when a superior 38Super is a STANDARD CALIBER ESTABLISHED!

CW

CW,
Didn’t Sig make their 1911 in .357 Sig? That should out perform a .38 Super.

[cwlongshot]

CW,
Didn’t Sig make their 1911 in .357 Sig? That should out perform a .38 Super.

I like the 357 Sig cartridge. Mine will out step my Super loadings but I dont push the super and do push the lil sig.

The Super does better with lil weight.

CW

[45_Colt]

That is what I did, split the difference between the .45 and the 9mm Luger and built the last 1911 as a .357 SIG. Still a 9mm as that is the boolit diameter. Found the .357 SIG to be a very accurate cartridge. Much more so then expected.

And of course it does have some oomph behind it.

Not to worry though, the other 1911's are all .45 ACP...

45_Colt

[txbirdman]

Here’s a couple of ways to deal with recoil in the 1911

[boingk]

...38Super is a STANDARD CALIBER ESTABLISHED!

Sure it is - just 27 years after the 9mm. And its slipping away, too, at least according to this:

https://freerangeamerican.us/38-super/

[VariableRecall]

A lot of shooters don’t reload. The classic 1911 platform with much cheaper ammunition has appeal.

Given the prices of .45 ACP these days I can see why many shooters want something more cost effective but also providing a similar frame size and intimately familiar platform. Plus, the heavier frame and smaller cartridge means extremely pleasant recoil.

I personally think a lot of people ruin their first time firearms experiences by choosing a compact 9mm as their first, and wonder why it's so difficult to control, and have that be their impressions of firearms and how they handle. It certainly is nice to see the popularity of larger framed 9mm's come more forward into view for the general public.

[tazman]

I spoke with a small arms training officer from the military at my local range last year while he was home on leave.
He stated the military keeps a number of 1911 pistols chambered in 9mm on hand specifically due to their soft recoil. He said this weapon is the only one many of the people training at his location can qualify with because they can't seem to handle the recoil of the standard 9mm pistol for some reason.

That training officer also stated that he, himself had fired the recorded targets in some cases so certain individuals could qualify to carry handguns on duty.

I don't particularly care for the idea of people qualifying with a specific handgun and carrying a different one that they cannot shoot proficiently. Sounds like a very dangerous situation for everyone involved.

[Plate plinker]

Given the prices of .45 ACP these days I can see why many shooters want something more cost effective but also providing a similar frame size and intimately familiar platform. Plus, the heavier frame and smaller cartridge means extremely pleasant recoil.

I personally think a lot of people ruin their first time firearms experiences by choosing a compact 9mm as their first, and wonder why it's so difficult to control, and have that be their impressions of firearms and how they handle. It certainly is nice to see the popularity of larger framed 9mm's come more forward into view for the general public.

Excellent post.

I love my 9mm 1911, but those with heavy slide do not operate super smoothly.

[txbirdman]

That is what I did, split the difference between the .45 and the 9mm Luger and built the last 1911 as a .357 SIG. Still a 9mm as that is the boolit diameter. Found the .357 SIG to be a very accurate cartridge. Much more so then expected.

And of course it does have some oomph behind it.

Not to worry though, the other 1911's are all .45 ACP...

45_Colt

I’d like to have one of those .357 Sigs in 1911 with a conversion for a 10MM too. Is that possible?

[MostlyLeverGuns]

I've got a half dozen (+?) 1911 45's, do not have a 9mm 1911, BUT for fun, teaching someone, or for those older folks and others lacking hand strength for slide manipulation, the 9mm 1911 makes sense. Reloading 9mm takes half the lead, recoil is very mild and the cost of factory rounds make reloading 'almost' unnecessary. I do have 9mm's that are not 1911's, but less recoil and easy operation is appealing. A double stack 9mm 1911 is on my list, but I do have other handguns to carry/shoot. The Ruger 22/45 is a pleasant substitute, but the feel of the factory trigger is not the same as a 1911, probably should do some aftermarket work to really enjoy, the magazine disconnect is also annoying.

[txbirdman]

I've got a half dozen (+?) 1911 45's, do not have a 9mm 1911, BUT for fun, teaching someone, or for those older folks and others lacking hand strength for slide manipulation, the 9mm 1911 makes sense. Reloading 9mm takes half the lead, recoil is very mild and the cost of factory rounds make reloading 'almost' unnecessary. I do have 9mm's that are not 1911's, but less recoil and easy operation is appealing. A double stack 9mm 1911 is on my list, but I do have other handguns to carry/shoot. The Ruger 22/45 is a pleasant substitute, but the feel of the factory trigger is not the same as a 1911, probably should do some aftermarket work to really enjoy, the magazine disconnect is also annoying.

The 22/45 pictured above with the Sig 1911 BB pistol (my failed attempt at subtle humor) has a Volquartzen trigger and it makes a world of difference.

[nueces5]

You get all of the good ergonomics of the 1911. Frankly, double stacks suck in this department. They engineer for capacity first and the human hand second, and not many of them are something that make you say "OH YEAH! I wanna shoot this one-handed!". Especially if the human hand in question is smaller than those seen on the 7-foot tall centers of the NBA.

Half of the recoil of the .45. Go back to the Civil War - the Army got .44's, the Navy .36's, because one had to stop horses and the other didn't. Not many goblins on horseback these days. . .

With modern, properly conceived ammo, the coroners can't tell the difference.

If you reload, you don't have to deal with the endless list of expletives that having to deal with getting new small-primer .45 brass in your mix of your large-primer that you've been hoarding for three plus decades inspires

Massive logistical superiority when using the round the entire bloody world has gone to. How much .38 Super do you see on the shelves? Let alone .38 Super in a quality duty load?

Only the Glock is easier to work on than the 1911 (Hi Powers, CZ's etc... are a comparative nightmare) . . .

I lean harder in the direction of the Glocks these days for their greater simplicity and no-fuss/no-fiddle maintenance, but that said, if it ain't a Glock, 1911/2011, or DA revolver, it ain't worth my time.

I agree

[billmc2]

I spoke with a small arms training officer from the military at my local range last year while he was home on leave.
He stated the military keeps a number of 1911 pistols chambered in 9mm on hand specifically due to their soft recoil. He said this weapon is the only one many of the people training at his location can qualify with because they can't seem to handle the recoil of the standard 9mm pistol for some reason.

That training officer also stated that he, himself had fired the recorded targets in some cases so certain individuals could qualify to carry handguns on duty.

I don't particularly care for the idea of people qualifying with a specific handgun and carrying a different one that they cannot shoot proficiently. Sounds like a very dangerous situation for everyone involved.

Back in the early 80s the Air Force stuck a revolver in my hands and said go qualify (the Air Force wasn't much of a gun culture). I had never fired a revolver before. The extent of my training came from watching TV shows. I couldn't hit a thing. I did, however, qualify. I could shoot a rifle though.

When we qualified with the M-16, we were either at a 100 yard range or a 200 yard range. We were given 50 rounds. More than one guy scored higher than 50.

[45_Colt]

I’d like to have one of those .357 Sigs in 1911 with a conversion for a 10MM too. Is that possible?

Nothing more then a barrel swap and the correct recoil spring. The case heads are the same, so the slide, extractor, ejector and so forth are common between the two. Could also do this in .40 S&W.

45_Colt

[StrawHat]

My cousin is over 80, my brother is approaching it. Both can no longer handle the recoil of the 1911 in 45 ACP. Their solution, same pistol in 9mm. For them it works. I still prefer the 45 ACP, but I am merely approaching 70 and shoot a S&W revolver.

Kevin

[rintinglen]

Several folks keep saying "38 Super" like it was dirt cheap and nearly as common. I'm calling shenanigans on that malarkey. 9 mm ammo costs roughly half what 38 super costs, and 38 super runs neck in neck with 45 ACP in cost per shot.

Now I shoot 32-20, 9 mm Browning Long, 32-40 and a couple of other cartridges that are less than likely to be found on the shelf. But I do not for one minute contend that that any of them approaches the popularity or availability of the 9mm. The 9mm Luger cartridge, while harder to reload, feeds better than the rimmed 38 Super and is much easier to find. Reloaders make up the tip of the little finger on the overall hand of the shooting body. For everyone else, cost and availability make the 9mm a better choice.