Smoking Barrels - LTT's Unnofficial Gun Club!

[Real_PhillBert]

21 hours ago, kaiju_wars said:

I haven't had any issues with either of my Colt 1911s

I'm curious what models? Series 70 or Series 80? Did you get them new or used?

 

I've heard that Colt's QC has lately been a sad shell of what it used to be. 

[knightslugger]

7 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

So, someone linked me to a site where several YT gun channels are moving all of their videos.

 

https://www.full30.com

 

*EDIT*

Hang on, scratch that.  I may have been misled.  I checked the comments below, and it looks like some of them are from months ago, or even longer.  I don't know how active those channels are on that site.

well considering a bulk of those gun channels will be suspended when the new policy goes into effect, they'll have to pull up their roots and go somewhere friendly to the right to free speech. Full30.com certainly is that place. I know IV8888 is moving his videos over, it wouldn't surprise me that others are in discussions to do the same, though that is a substantial upgrade in service in therm of hardware that Full30 just wasn't really ready to manage. I know they are getting several upgrades so it should be good to go in the future.

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I've heard that Colt's QC has lately been a sad shell of what it used to be. 

Colt as a whole is a sad shell of what it used to be. They have 14 different lines of autoloading pistols, 11 of which are literally just variants of the M1911. The only rifles I see on their site are AR15s (only one worth buying, IMO is the M16A1 Retro model, and only for the furniture).

 

And just about every gun store in Nampa, Boise, and Meridian all but stopped selling Colts.

[Trik'Stari]

On 3/21/2018 at 9:35 PM, Drak3 said:

A .22LR can penetrate an organ, but you're not going down all that soon from it. A .45ACP, on the other hand, will not only put a bigger hole in that same organ, the energy will cause more damage, and you're probably going to stumble over from the impact.

 

A simple muzzle brake makes a standardized M1911 more controllable than any 9mm I've shot.

The problem isn't necessarily the size of a round, it's how well it imparts the energy it carries to the target.

 

.45 is somewhat underpowered for its size. They generally don't expand very well with ballistics gel testing. Whereas a 9mm expands very well in ballistics gel testing. This means more energy expended upon the target and better penetration since it has more energy to begin with. If you go look at ballistics gel testing studies that have been done, 9mm has pretty much the same stopping power as a .45. It's smaller, but it's faster and expands to be the same width as a .45 that has hit the same ballistics gel block, also penetrating further.

 

Then you have the issue of ammo capacity. And as for how easy it is to control, I'm not sure what 9mm and .45 guns you've shot, but I've never shot a .45 that had less recoil than a 9mm.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like .45. It's fun to shoot but it's not ideal for a conceal carry weapon. I'd rather have a 9mm that gives me higher capacity with roughly the same amount of stopping power, and personally better accuracy. But that's just me being more accurate with my XDM (short barrel full sized grip) than I am with my 1911.

 

I've not had any failures to fire in my 1911, my XDM, or my CZ-75 SP-01. Although the CZ is new and I haven't had as much range time with it.

 

Need to get night sights on my XDM.

[knightslugger]

15 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Need to get night sights on my XDM.

you wont need them. 

[Trik'Stari]

1 minute ago, knightslugger said:

you wont need them. 

Not really no. I just want more contrast between the front sight and rear sight than what is currently on there. Helps me line them up faster.

 

Personally I'd like a narrower front sight, but I've been told that's a bad idea.

[knightslugger]

1 minute ago, Trik'Stari said:

Not really no. I just want more contrast between the front sight and rear sight than what is currently on there. Helps me line them up faster.

 

Personally I'd like a narrower front sight, but I've been told that's a bad idea.

if it's a target or competition gun, sure. but if it's a defensive pistol, you don't need sights at all. You wont have time to look for them.

[Trik'Stari]

Just now, knightslugger said:

if it's a target or competition gun, sure. but if it's a defensive pistol, you don't need sights at all. You wont have time to look for them.

Personally I don't plan on firing unless I'm aiming and am sure of what is behind my target. Unless I have absolutely no choice.

 

From what I've read on the subject, most of the time merely having a gun in the presence of an attacker will deter them.

 

That being said, who knows. Can never predict how one will react in such a situation.

[Real_PhillBert]

27 minutes ago, knightslugger said:

if it's a target or competition gun, sure. but if it's a defensive pistol, you don't need sights at all. You wont have time to look for them.

I dont buy that. If you practice regularly and have a good draw and presentation you don't have to look for your sights. Firing rounds off without using your sights is a really really bad idea. 

 

Target and competition guns should have fiber optic front sights and a blacked out rear IMHO, defensive guns should have a light on them, so night sights arent a necessity. That said, my EDC G19 has a light, night sights and an RMR. 

 

[kaiju_wars]

4 hours ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I'm curious what models? Series 70 or Series 80? Did you get them new or used?

 

I've heard that Colt's QC has lately been a sad shell of what it used to be. 

I got both used.  One I got as a gift from my uncle for my 21st birthday.  The other I bought at a gun show.  Yes, I passed a background check for it.

 

Technically they aren't 1911's persay.  They're M1991A1's.  But they're literally just 1911's.  Colt just changed the name so they have an excuse to charge less because they don't say 1911.

As for their quality, I did get a chance to try a newer 1911, I'd say it holds up to about the same.  

[Drak3]

2 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

45 is somewhat underpowered for its size. They generally don't expand very well with ballistics gel testing. Whereas a 9mm expands very well in ballistics gel testing. This means more energy expended upon the target and better penetration since it has more energy to begin with. If you go look at ballistics gel testing studies that have been done, 9mm has pretty much the same stopping power as a .45. It's smaller, but it's faster and expands to be the same width as a .45 that has hit the same ballistics gel block, also penetrating further.

Ballistics gel testing is very valuable, but it's not the be all, end all. .45 ACP has a phenominal military track record.

 

2 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Then you have the issue of ammo capacity. And as for how easy it is to control, I'm not sure what 9mm and .45 guns you've shot, but I've never shot a .45 that had less recoil than a 9mm.

Realistically, having more ammo with a pistol isn't overly benefitial if you're a half decent shot.

 

And the .45 I've shot is a mil spec 1911 with an aftermarket muzzle brake.

The 9mm pistols I've shot are:

Walther P5

Walther P38

S&W M&P9 Pro series

 

None of the 9mm pistols have muzzle brakes, only one could have one, and only with a barrel swap.

2 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Don't get me wrong, I like .45. It's fun to shoot but it's not ideal for a conceal carry weapon. I'd rather have a 9mm that gives me higher capacity with roughly the same amount of stopping power, and personally better accuracy. But that's just me being more accurate with my XDM (short barrel full sized grip) than I am with my 1911.

If it doesn't have a grip safety and it isn't single action, I wouldn't conceal carry it, or open carry.

 

Which basically means I can choose between the 1911 and early variations of the Luger design. The latter is extremely hard to find and I'm not spending 10K on a pistol.

[Real_PhillBert]

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

If it doesn't have a grip safety and it isn't single action, I wouldn't conceal carry it, or open carry.

 

Which basically means I can choose between the 1911 and early variations of the Luger design. The latter is extremely hard to find and I'm not spending 10K on a pistol.

I'm curious as to how you came to this decision? Not going to criticize, we all have different reasons for doing different things. 

 

EDIT: it's probably also worth noting that the XDm series has a fully cocked striker and a grip safety, so it also meets your requirements. 

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, Real_PhillBert said:

I'm curious as to how you came to this decision? Not going to criticize, we all have different reasons for doing different things. 

Enough people shoot themselves with glocks, M&Ps, HKs, and other pistolsthat either have NO safeties, or only a selector, when that shouldn't happen in theory.

 

Whereas I've not seen any reports of that happening with a decently made 1911 clone under thensame circumstances.

 

And yes, I'm absolutely saying that the Glock style trigger is not a safety. If anything, it's annoying.

[Real_PhillBert]

5 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Enough people shoot themselves with glocks, M&Ps, HKs, and other pistolsthat either have NO safeties, or only a selector, when that shouldn't happen in theory.

 

Whereas I've not seen any reports of that happening with a decently made 1911 clone under thensame circumstances.

 

And yes, I'm absolutely saying that the Glock style trigger is not a safety. If anything, it's annoying.

Wait, you think no one has shot themselves with a 1911?

 

I cant say I agree with you, but I respect your opinion. I file it all under "Stupid hurts, so dont be stupid"

[Jito463]

54 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Enough people shoot themselves with glocks, M&Ps, HKs, and other pistolsthat either have NO safeties, or only a selector, when that shouldn't happen in theory.

My H&K P2000 absolutely will not fire unless the trigger is pulled.  I even tested by dropping the hammer with one round in the chamber (don't worry, I was at the range), and it would not discharge.  There would have to be some major, catastrophic damage to the firing assembly for it to go off without pulling the trigger, though I admit I do carry with the hammer up (when I carry it, since it's so big).  Since it's DA/SA, the worst case scenario is a longer trigger pull for the first round.

1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

If it doesn't have a grip safety and it isn't single action, I wouldn't conceal carry it, or open carry.

While I like the idea of the grip safety, I could foresee it being a potential issue if you're wounded and can't grip the gun properly.  I'm not dismissing them entirely - and have even considered buying them myself - I just consider that a potential problem with them.

 

Personally, my criteria is either no safety or at most a grip safety.  That's the primary reason I haven't bought a 1911 style, since all the ones I've seen had both a grip safety and a trigger safety.

[Real_PhillBert]

4 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

While I like the idea of the grip safety, I could foresee it being a potential issue if you're wounded and can't grip the gun properly.  I'm not dismissing them entirely - and have even considered buying them myself - I just consider that a potential problem with them.

100% agree. I have a Ruger SR1911 that's just a range gun, and an XDm 9mm 5.25 as my USPSA gun, and I would not carry either (given other choices) for a defensive gun because of their safeties. The 1911 is a 1911 so its big, and heavy which when you add in the manual safety and grip safety kick it out of my carry rotation. The XDm is fantastic but also huge (competition gun) and the grip safety is not done as well as they are on 1911s, it's not all that hard to pick that gun up and try to fire it without fully depressing the grip safety. 

 

8 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Personally, my criteria is either no safety or at most a grip safety.  That's the primary reason I haven't bought a 1911 style, since all the ones I've seen had both a grip safety and a trigger safety.

I'm on the no manual safety bandwagon, personally. But that's me. 

 

The grip safety on 1911s is generally done very well, so it's difficult to fire the gun without depressing the safety, unlike my XDm. I see the allure of 1911s, but they're just range toys for me. Too big and heavy for too low of capacity. 

[RollTime]

Just curious whether anyone in this thread has any thoughts on March for Our Lives and such?

[knightslugger]

everyone has a preference for a carry gun. My Keltec PF9 is adequate for my peace of mind. I carry the XDm on occasion, but it's quite heavy.

[knightslugger]

1 minute ago, RollTime said:

Just curious whether anyone in this thread has any thoughts on March for Our Lives and such?

If we did, it would be political in nature and against community standards.

[RollTime]

1 minute ago, knightslugger said:

If we did, it would be political in nature and against community standards.

I was not looking for a politically oriented response, but rather one simply involving one's own opinion.

[knightslugger]

Just now, RollTime said:

I was not looking for a politically oriented response, but rather one simply involving one's own opinion.

it can't be done. the march was a political statement. talking about it involves political discussion, which is not allowed on LTT forums.

[RollTime]

Just now, knightslugger said:

it can't be done. the march was a political statement. talking about it involves political discussion, which is not allowed on LTT forums.

Fair point. Let me revise that as "recent events involving weapons". 

[knightslugger]

1 minute ago, RollTime said:

Fair point. Let me revise that as "recent events involving weapons". 

not really in good keeping with the topic. it's a gun thread, not a social "let's talk about the gun problem" thread... which would get you a strike anywhere else on the boards.

 

you want to talk about social issues surrounding firearms, this ain't the place to do it i'm afraid.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Real_PhillBert said:

Wait, you think no one has shot themselves with a 1911?

No, I know that people still manage to shoot themselves with 1911s. But purely out of excessive stupidity and bad trigger discipline.

 

36 minutes ago, RollTime said:

Just curious whether anyone in this thread has any thoughts on March for Our Lives and such?

I have nothing positive to say about those people.

 

28 minutes ago, RollTime said:

Fair point. Let me revise that as "recent events involving weapons". 

The authorities should have done their jobs. The entire ordeal way preventable.

 

At best, the loss of human life means nothing to them.

 

At worst, the loss of human life is justifiable to them if it means further and further violation of our second amendment rights.

[Real_PhillBert]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No, I know that people still manage to shoot themselves with 1911s. But purely out of excessive stupidity and bad trigger discipline.

Psst. That's every single ND ever... 

 

If you're going to be stupid and have poor trigger discipline, no mechanical safety is going to save you.