Re: Double Stack 1911
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In regards to the questions concerning reliability.
When these pistols were developed like many other firearm improvements, much of the focus and use was in a competition setting. The technology was new and the evolution of improvements and techniques for building them was rapidly advancing. Couple this with the crucible of competition where many of the setups were tuned to the ragged edge (think top fuel dragster not toyota camry). There was ample opportunity for less than anvil like reliability.
</div></div>
It's obvious you haven't shot too many matches lately, because an unreliable gun has no place in this game and will cost you a match every time. A competitor who is fighting with his gun is not shooting.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: slothlacrosse</div><div class="ubbcode-body">how can a pistol that holds twice as many rounds have the same footprint as a single stack pistol? i've shot ParaOrd and Caspian-based double stack pistols and they are definitely thicker; maybe not by much but it is noticably thicker.</div></div>
All you've just explained is why the 2011 was not "prior art" when it was produced. The creators got three patents for it for a reason. The Para already existed when the 2011 was invented. The innovation of the 2011 wasn't just that it held more rounds. The innovation was that the weight and grip made it feel almost exactly like a 1911, while the use of a hybrid polymer/steel frame allowed them to increase the capacity of the magazine. How can it have the same footprint? That's the whole point. Make the grip out of plastic and install a bigger magazine. Obviously not an easy task, but that's why the 2011 is such an amazing piece of hardware when compared to the other attempts at the same thing (Para, Caspian), etc., which are all heavier and thicker than the 2011.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
a single stack 1911 lies beautifully flat against one's side. the magazine, just like the pistol, lies flat and doesn't print.</div></div>
While subjective, I generally agree with that. I also think that the 1911 is too heavy for practical every day carry. It's annoyingly heavy.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
you say 6.5 oz like it's nothing. that's like carrying another blackberry or a roll of quarters. where do you put it all? at what point does being prepared become a burden?
</div></div>
I think what we've been trying to point out is that the weight is not a reason to avoid the 2011 in favor of the 1911, because the 2011 actually weighs less.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
...
95% of gunfights take place < 21 ft and 3-4 shots are usually fired.
my points are:
1) 6.5 oz is not some negligible amount of weight
2) there is no freaking way that a double stack gun has the same footprint as a single stack gun
3) violence is the last resort </div></div>
1. 6.5 ounces is not a lot of weight when you're already married to a 43 ounce gun as your daily sidearm. I do think that the 1911 is too heavy for practical every day carry, but if I was willing to carry a full size 1911, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if it was 6.5 ounces heavier, I would welcome the additional capacity, and the last thing I'd remove from a gun to make it lighter for carry would be additional ammunition. I'd rather have a shorter barrel or change some steel parts for aluminum or something before I'd ever consider removing ammunition from the equation, however unlikely it might be that I'd need it.
2. The 2011 has a substantially similar footprint to the 1911. I'd trade my Springfield EMP for an STI of similar barrel length with a double column magazine any day. Plenty of people carry Glock 19/23s. They're just as wide as any 2011 and plenty concealable. In fact, I absolutely hate Glocks but the Glock 19 is an excellent carry gun.
3. It might be your preference that one use violence as a last resort, but fortunately the law doesn't impose a duty based on your preferences. States are passing broader and broader self defense statutes which allow people to stand their ground and fight if they so choose. If someone pointed their gun at me and wanted my wallet, I think it'd be more likely than not that they'd get shot and not get my wallet than the other way around. Of course, any actual scenario would have to be evaluated based on its individual facts, but given the choice between submit and fight, my default is fight, and I don't think I'm in the minority around here. Most states do not expect someone to retreat from a fight in the street, although you should check your laws in your state to be sure, because it was once the rule in every state that a citizen had to retreat before using violence.
