9MM 1911’s, Why?

[txbirdman]

First of all let me say I’m a fan of the 9MM cartridge and the 1911. I just don’t see that they compliment one another. I appreciate the 9MM for being an effective round that works in a trim high capacity handgun. I presently own three 9MM’s and carry my Sig P365 daily. Also my all time favorite pistol is my 1980 vintage Colt Combat Commander. I love the ergonomics and the 45 acp round seems perfect for the 1911 platform to me. However it seems that lately the trend is toward the 9MM in 1911’s. I have one friend who bought a SA Prodigy and another friend who just bought a Stacatto. Both of these guys already owned quality 1911’s in 45 acp. I even see that Bill Wilson has switched to the 9 in his 1911 carry gun. It seems to me that if the switch is due to mag capacity that the hipower and CZ 75’s filled that void decades ago and both are known for their ergonomics. In a single stack 1911 what’s the advantage of the 9 over the 45? Why not go with 38 super if you want that extra round in the mag? I’d truly like to hear from those who have made the transition.

[challenger_i]

+1 for the 38 Super. Having said that, I will stick with 45 ACP in my 1911s. If I want a 9mm, there are better options.

[justindad]

If I was doing .35 cal in a 1911, it would definitely be .38 Super. I guess 9mm in a 1911 could be good for competition shooting.

[Kai]

I bought a Kimber 1911 9mm and put a red dot sight on it. Quite the accurate firearm. More cast bullets per pound than the 45acp and less powder too. Don't get me wrong I also own a Hi-power, other 9mms, as well as 1911s is 45acp. I guess I'm not a good example of someone who has "switched". Lol. I just prefer a 1911 style autoloader.

[imashooter2]

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

[35 Rem]

I don't see it either especially for concealed carry. The 1911 in 45 ACP has little recoil so I see no advantage to giving up power by going to a weaker cartridge.

[Thumbcocker]

I have a Rock Island 9mm 1911that shoots very well. Classic platform. Better ergonomics than a lot of double stack 9mm's. Free brass at the range. Lots of aftermarket parts and accessories. What's not to like?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Mk42gunner]

An all steel 5" 1911 in 9mm has very little recoil. They make a fun gun for a range toy, not sure I would want to carry one concealed all day though due to the weight.

As to 9mm vs. 38 Super as a defensive gun, there are a lot more options for modern expanding ammo for the 9mm than there are for the .38 Super. Not to mention availability.

Robert

[Half Dog]

I too have a Kimber full size 1911 in a 9 mm (until the boating accident where I lost it). It’s a great fit, low recoil, and fun to shoot. I’m not a fan of carrying a 1911 for defense but it’s lighter than a 45 ACP.

[txbirdman]

From what I’ve seen on the spec the weight of a full size 9MM is almost the same as the 45. I noticed that Stacatto shows their weights without the mag. Don’t quite understand that. I can see the economic advantage but to buy a $2K pistol ( like the Stacatto) to save money on ammo doesn’t compute. Now if you’re buying your first 1911 the economics makes sense. I don’t find the recoil of a 45 to be bad but a 9 definitely has less. I guess I was just wondering why someone would replace their 45 1911 with a 9MM.

[deltaenterprizes]

I have 2 1911s in 9mm, one is a Rock Island and one is a Colt Competition.
I fell in love with 9mm 1911 when I was shooting steel plate matches at the local indoor range in the late 80.
I built a Springfield Armory and it was a sweet shooter. I sold it when I quit shooting the matches and regretted it.
I have been carrying Glocks for over 30 years but they don’t fit my hand like a 1911 so my groups are larger than with the 1911s.
I am a Reserve Deputy and bought the Colt Competition and use it occasionally as a duty weapon because I like the ability for me to put my shots more precisely than with my Glock 17.
I attended a training session and used the Colt and it definitely has its drawbacks. Trying to manipulate the safety between rapid strings of fire when moving and having to do magazines changes more often really slows down my performance.
I let my Captain shoot it when we were qualifying and he was amazed at how little recoil it has!
Did I say that I love my 9mm 1911s?

[nueces5]

I think there are as many opinions as circumstances.
In my case, I have a 1911 in 45 ACP, it was my first pistol 20 years ago, and I have shot it a lot, it has taught me a lot and I consider it an excellent weapon.
A few years ago, tired of shooting ipsc with glock, I had the idea to shoot in the classic category, which use single stack. At that point, I was going to pull the old 1911 out of the safe and get some 45 brass. But a friend, told me that it was a problem, that it was better to get a 9mm, to shoot the same bullets that I used in my glock
I almost, almost did.
I estimate that whoever has it to defend himself, will want the most powerful bullet he can handle.

[FergusonTO35]

I respect 1911's and the .45 Auto, but just never got the bug for either one. For old school 9mm shooting, BHP all the way!

[tazman]

I own a Springfield Range Officer in 9mm. I doubt I could find a handgun I can shoot more accurately than this one.
This one is a range/fun pistol for me. I have no intention of using it for defense although it would work for that quite well.
I have other handguns for home defense or carry where I might need extra rounds.

[txbirdman]

If I wanted a high capacity handgun to carry cocked and locked it wouldn’t be a double stack 1911 or even a hipower or Cz75. All of them are too heavy. I’d go with a Cz 09 or 07. The 07 weighs 28 oz and carry’s 15 rounds while the 09 has a flush fit 19 round mag and and weighs 31 oz. Either can be bought for less than $500.
Now for a range gun I can sure see buying a single stack 1911 in 9 MM. Especially if you don’t already own one in 45 acp. But the double stack 1911’s in 9 MM are just not for me.

[Scrounge]

First of all let me say I’m a fan of the 9MM cartridge and the 1911. I just don’t see that they compliment one another. I appreciate the 9MM for being an effective round that works in a trim high capacity handgun. I presently own three 9MM’s and carry my Sig P365 daily. Also my all time favorite pistol is my 1980 vintage Colt Combat Commander. I love the ergonomics and the 45 acp round seems perfect for the 1911 platform to me. However it seems that lately the trend is toward the 9MM in 1911’s. I have one friend who bought a SA Prodigy and another friend who just bought a Stacatto. Both of these guys already owned quality 1911’s in 45 acp. I even see that Bill Wilson has switched to the 9 in his 1911 carry gun. It seems to me that if the switch is due to mag capacity that the hipower and CZ 75’s filled that void decades ago and both are known for their ergonomics. In a single stack 1911 what’s the advantage of the 9 over the 45? Why not go with 38 super if you want that extra round in the mag? I’d truly like to hear from those who have made the transition.

Weak wrists? I would actually love a more powerful round than the .45acp. Some folks like little fast bullets, some like big slow bullets, and I like big fast bullets. I do have moderately large hands. I fell in love with my dad's .45acp GI 1911 when I was 12. I've owned and shot revolvers in the .22LR & WMR cartridges.38 S&W, .38 special, .357 Magnum, and .44magnum. I've owned and shot automatics from .25acp to .45acp. I want something a bit tougher. And I do not own a single 9mm firearm. Once upon a time, I did have an FN Browning Hi-Power, and it was OK. But that was it. Just OK.

I'm not the kind of guy who wants to die in a large pile of brass. I'd much prefer to do my gunfighting from the cockpit of an A-10. BIG FAST BULLETS! Blow big holes in things, and let them fall where they may. YMMV, of course. Small hands or weak wrists are not necessarily under your control. Mine aren't as strong as they used to be, but I've been shooting since I was 4 years old, and started with a SAA Colt in .45Long. Don't want to use one of those for a gunfight, either. Jonathan Browning was making magazine fed flintlocks in 1831. His son perfected the magazine, AFAIAC. I might be interested in a Hi-Power in .45acp, or a more powerful .45 caliber cartridge...

[armoredman]

Last 1911A1 I owned was a Springfield over 30 years ago. I agree, the 1911 and 45ACp go hand in hand like baseball, apple pie and Chevrolet, but I can see one reason I might choose a 1911 in 9mm - I reload the heck out of that caliber and cast for it as well. If I get a 45ACP I need new dies and a new mold...not saying that's a BAD thing by a long shot, but it's what would have to happen.
Having said all that, that Tisis Tanker 45 is really calling my name...might be time to say hello to Mr JMB again.

[contender1]

Lots of good thoughts above.

But one big reason, not already mentioned is the various competition games out there. The .9mm has taken over as THE caliber to use in almost all categories in USPSA competition. Plus,, in IPSC, or IDPA, & others,, again, it has become dominant due to ammo availability, AND expense.
The 1911 design is a PROVEN design, and as such,, a 1911 in .9mm allows for more rounds, or lower recoil, (quicker return to target) options that top level shooters enjoy.
And a LOT of shooters are involved in competitions of some type. As such, when top level, world class shooters use a 1911 design, and in .9mm, others follow.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

The reason will vary with the shooter, I think. The 1911 9mm holds a couple more rounds, and the weight dampens the recoil; perhaps giving a faster, more accurate double tap. Having both, I like both, but like the .45 a bit better.

DG

[Bigslug]

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.