Handgun Poll

[TheSLSAMG]

I'm coming from this from a completely aesthetic standpoint given I don't get to properly own guns because of NYC. So from that standpoint, I'd probably go with the Sig Max or a Les Baer. Something about the Sig Max's two-tone does it for me. To be fair though, Colt and Springfield probably have more experience building 1911s and there's a lot I don't know.

 

Outside of the options, I'd go big dick energy and get a Salient SAI RED. Now that's a Gucci 1911.

[Princess Luna]

Well my dad has a .38 revolver at home and that's about it, we ain't really collectors on it.

[gcubed]

What are you planning on using this thing for anyway?

 

If is is self/home defense, then any 1911 from a reliable manufacturer in the $1000 price range is all you need. Pistol gun fights in the home and on the street are typically at rock throwing distance so you don't need a $2000, sub MOA 1911 with tolerances so tight that you can drive tacks at a 200 meters.

 

If you are planning on concealed carry, you want a single stack magazine.

 

If you are planning on competition, then you will want a 1911 with tighter tolerances than found in a good combat 1911. There are some very accurate 1911's that can be had for $1500 to $2000. Any price you pay past that is for bling more than anything else.

[Trik'Stari]

On 12/30/2018 at 8:18 PM, ARikozuM said:

I'd stick with an XD-m 9mm for CCW, but for range shooting? I'd go with whatever is least expensive. 

Exactly what I have and was going to say.

[DutchTexan]

29 minutes ago, gcubed said:

What are you planning on using this thing for anyway?

 

If is is self/home defense, then any 1911 from a reliable manufacturer in the $1000 price range is all you need. Pistol gun fights in the home and on the street are typically at rock throwing distance so you don't need a $2000, sub MOA 1911 with tolerances so tight that you can drive tacks at a 200 meters.

 

If you are planning on concealed carry, you want a single stack magazine.

 

If you are planning on competition, then you will want a 1911 with tighter tolerances than found in a good combat 1911. There are some very accurate 1911's that can be had for $1500 to $2000. Any price you pay past that is for bling more than anything else.

The motivation is for this to be the last 1911 I ever buy with an intent to pass it down several generations. CCW and home defense is already sorted. The use case will be range shooting and unofficial competition. 

 

I really already know what I want, but I love to bounce things off the PC community. Y'all're pretty diverse in thought and highly intelligent consumers. 

[DutchTexan]

Seems like everyone really likes the Pro. They used to be very, very difficult to get and on 1-2 year waiting lists. Not so much anymore, there are almost two dozen FBI HRT 1911's for sale online. 

[gcubed]

6 minutes ago, DutchTexan said:

The motivation is for this to be the last 1911 I ever buy with an intent to pass it down several generations. CCW and home defense is already sorted. The use case will be range shooting and unofficial competition. 

 

I really already know what I want, but I love to bounce things off the PC community. Y'all're pretty diverse in thought and highly intelligent consumers. 

 

Well then, the Wilson Combat Texas BBQ Special. Only because I like the name, not the price ($5-6k, shudder).

[SansVarnic]

21 hours ago, DutchTexan said:

I didn't realize how popular those guns were. My dad caries a Springfield XDs in .45 ACP

oh, I have one of those as well, love it but my hand is to big for it and the last time I shot it at the range it tore the skin off my thumb knuckle... lol, didn't feel it but it bled a lot. As an afterthought though I think a 40 or 9mm would have been a better choice that size of handgun.

Wonderful little boot gun.

 

[kaiju_wars]

As far as these stupidly overpriced 1911s, vs what @Drak3 was mentioning.  

The most expensive 1911 I've fired was my boss's Kimber.  It's a gun.  That's about all I can say for it.  It shoots, most of the time.  

My two Colts from the 90s haven't had any issues.  

 

Personally, don't overpay for what is actually diminishing returns.  If you deny there are diminishing returns, you're lying to yourself to justify overpaying on a handgun.

If you want something that will be reliable all day, everyday.  Look for a used Colt 1991A1.  It's just a milspec 1911, they just changed the name so they could justify a different sku to charge less. You can pick one up used for $400 to $600 easily, and you won't have any issues.

[Drak3]

20 minutes ago, kaiju_wars said:

My two Colts from the 90s haven't had any issues. 

Same for my late 2010's Springfield milspec 1911A1 or my father's Rock Island GI 1911.

[Teddy07]

I miss the "any handgun" option. I and many other never had a handgun in their life so we don´t care about the type. 

[JZStudios]

On 12/30/2018 at 6:10 PM, Drak3 said:

None of those. Outrageously expensive and little to nothing to show for it. I'd sooner go for a Springfield Mil Spec or Rock Island Armory and upgrade anything I hate.

 

You hit diminishing returns hard and fast with 1911s, and some of the Gucci 1911s have a feed or ejection issue every few mags.

Alright, after reading up to my first comment I have some things to add.

 

Mil-spec is dog turds. They're produced to be cheap and "good enough." You shouldn't really ever settle for mil-spec unless you're really desperate for a cheap gun. Any time you ask anyone that actually uses mil-spec guns (Or anything else for that matter) about buying one, they always tell you you shouldn't even think about it. Don't fall into the fallacy that it's good enough for the government so it must be reliable. They also stay in the system because of marketing and just how long it takes the government to do anything to switch. Buying a crap gun and trying to upgrade it is pretty useless.

 

The more expensive 1911's are generally more reliable than the crap mil spec with tighter tolerances.

 

[Drak3]

34 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

The more expensive 1911's are generally more reliable

That's not remotely true. "High end" 1911s are pretty bad when it comes to reliability.

 

34 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

They're produced to be cheap and "good enough."

Good enough means that it does it's job effectively in regards to milspec.

 

34 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

Any time you ask anyone that actually uses mil-spec guns (Or anything else for that matter) about buying one, they always tell you you shouldn't even think about it.

Then you should stop asking the opinions of idiots. Milspec means that the gun will put a round in your target in any range where that round if an effective choice, provided you're not a horrifically bad shot. That the gun will run reliably when you maintain it as required, and you run a reliable type of ammo. It means that parts interchangability is ensured.

 

34 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

Buying a crap gun and trying to upgrade it is pretty useless.

Milspec 1911s are far from crap. The only MEANINGFUL upgrade between an $800 Springfield Milspec and a $4,000 Gucci gun is a ~$300 barrel.

Everything else either hurts reliability, only affects aesthetics, or has no practical benefit beyond marketting.

[DutchTexan]

2 hours ago, Drak3 said:

Milspec 1911s are far from crap. The only MEANINGFUL upgrade between an $800 Springfield Milspec and a $4,000 Gucci gun is a ~$300 barrel.

Everything else either hurts reliability, only affects aesthetics, or has no practical benefit beyond marketting.

Yeah this is false lmao

 

Is a $20k Toyota Camry the exact same as a $120k BMW M5 too?

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, DutchTexan said:

Yeah this is false lmao

No, it's not. The 1911 is a highly standardized design with little room for improvement without heavily altering the design.

 

Gucci 1911s are a waste of money, for the sake of wasting money.

2 minutes ago, DutchTexan said:

Is a $20k Toyota Camry the exact same as a $120k BMW M5 too?

No, unlike 1911s, those two cars have different designs.

[iLostMyXbox21]

None

 

get a Deagle

 

/s

[Drak3]

18 minutes ago, iLostMyXbox21 said:

None

 

get a Deagle

 

/s

Nothing less than a Smith & Wesson Performance Center revolver chambered in .500 S&W Magnum.

[DutchTexan]

2 hours ago, Drak3 said:

No, it's not. The 1911 is a highly standardized design with little room for improvement without heavily altering the design.

 

Gucci 1911s are a waste of money, for the sake of wasting money.

No, unlike 1911s, those two cars have different designs.

A 'Gucci 1911' is one that has a fancy finish and expensive engraving all over it. It has nothing functional whatsoever. That's where we can agree, but you are implying that all mid sized sedans are exactly the same.

 

You seem pretty set on this idea that 1911's are all 100% the same and they are just 'marketed and priced differently'. That's bullshit man. There are massive differences between a $2,300 Ed Brown Alpha Elite, a $1,200 Springfield TRP, a $650 Mil-spec and a $380 ATI Firepower. Just because something cost almost 4 times as much, doesn't mean it is 4 times better. Obviously. But they exist for a reason and they are better, more reliable, more precise, more enjoyable and more desirable. 

 

There are huge differences in mass produced 1911's and quality 1911's. You can not deny that. The triggers, reliability, grips, checkering, safeties, sights, parts, extractors, materials, production methods, tolerances, precision, finishes, weight and all kinds of things make all 1911's different. Just because they are all the exact same color in the exact same size shooting the exact same round does not mean they are equal. 

 

You are going to need a better argument than "oh I heard something about reliability" or "oh you can change out a barrel". You can't build these guns for less than what they cost, let alone make one as precise, at all..