The 1911 "fatal flaw" controversy

[Shooter5]

Sweet, 3 minutes and a dremel and I'll have another custom part

That is exactly what happened; apparently Brownells didn''t have a store in Baghdad.

[Shooter5]

.

Most pistols are designed by smart people who assume shooters are going to use a standard hold. If you do something odd and the pistol has a problem, it is your flaw, not the pistols.

That relates precisely to the issue; the slide release malfunction can occur due to hand placement BECAUSE a two-handed grip in the 19th/early 20th century was essentially non-existent! Everyone was taught to shoot a pistol with a single-hand, thus, the idea that the slide release could even be manipulated during the firing sequence was inconceivable during its design and early use.
Currently, the opposite is now true; shooting a pistol one-handed is seen as crazy! The solution, however, is simple and one does not have to change grip/hand placement; merely modify the slide release and its G2G.

[Johnny P]

I think someone touched on this, but the Bro's in the hood prefer the sideways hold where the index finger could substitute for the sights. Taking it a step further, the sights could be removed entirely if the index finger becomes the preferred sighting method.

[Shooter5]

IMO the only flaw in the .45 is that they arent current issue.

Some US Military units are still issued the M1911 series; the USMC is calling their latest version the M45.

http://www.colt.com/ColtMilitary/New...-Contract.aspx

Other US military units also still have access to the M1911A1 as an alternative issue depending on preference such as dissatisfaction with the M9 and/or other makes/models/calibers. However, it is not as popular anymore and if a 45ACP is sought, it is much more likely to either be a modern design or the occasional modern manufacture of some type of 1911.

[emmagee1917]

I think someone touched on this, but the Bro's in the hood prefer the sideways hold where the index finger could substitute for the sights. Taking it a step further, the sights could be removed entirely if the index finger becomes the preferred sighting method.

Naw , just adapted.
Well pooo , can't get the pics of a Glock with sights on the side of the slide to post.
sorry ,
Chris

[Guamsst]

...Currently, the opposite is now true; shooting a pistol one-handed is seen as crazy! The solution, however, is simple and one does not have to change grip/hand placement; merely modify the slide release and its G2G.

I generally shoot two handed and find no reason to put any part of my hands on the slide release on a 1911. I'm not sure what these FBI guys are doing to cause a problem, but it's an easy fix. I can't blame the pistol though as I assume everyone here agrees.

As to your comments about old pistols Vs. new holds. I have had to show people the difference many times. For example, on a model 37 Hungarian Femaru If I pull it up two handed "SWAT STYLE" I will surely hit somewhere in the vicinity of your torso from 2yds away. But if I swing it up one handed, long armed, the sights go right where I want them and line up well.

Same thing on the British Enfield revolver. Despite all the complaints about trigger pull and accuracy, I can be quick and accurate one handed at 25yds. Probably quicker (accurately) than two handed but I never tested this.

KNOW YOUR WEAPON!!

[Shooter5]

I generally shoot two handed and find no reason to put any part of my hands on the slide release on a 1911. I'm not sure what these FBI guys are doing to cause a problem, but it's an easy fix. I can't blame the pistol though as I assume everyone here agrees.

One of the common techniques is "High Hands & Much Meat"; as in, get the hand(s) as high on the frame as possible and as much surface area of the hand(s) as possible. So, depending on hand size, preference and how the fingers on the supporting hand wrap around the firing hand and the frame - the supporting (left) hands finger (usually index or middle finger) is left pressing on the frame and it can (inadvertently) contact the slide release pressing in on it hard enough to the point during slide recoil that it is pressed enough to cause it to pop out during the fraction of a second the slide aligns with the 'sweet spot' for the take-down slot.
Leveling off the slide release section that protrudes from the side of the frame to such a degree that it is essentially countersunk will virtually eliminate the potential for this type of malfunction to occur.
It is unclear by what is meant by "blaming the pistol" since it is, in fact, an aspect of its design. And since a proven firing technique is 'not to blame' either, the potential for a malfunction obviously calls for a solution hence the slide release modification. I am certain that if JMB and the US Army could have had the foresight to envision the day when pistols would be fired two-handed then he would have pre-engineered some type of feature to preclude its possible occurrence in the first place. Recall the fact the military was still riding horses and the manual of arms for those drills mandates one-handed firing in addition to the Camp Perry style target stances of dismounted training then taught. Thus, it understandable that this type of malfunction was inconceivable back in those days.
Like most technology, the 1911 is adaptable for modern techniques.

[Guamsst]

When you call it a "fatal flaw" that is "blaming the pistol".

I can see a lefty hitting the slide release I guess if they are really high with their right hand. To me though, this is like saying Harleys are defective because if you ride sidesaddle and lean way over, you may burn yourself on the exhaust.

[Shooter5]

The analogy is not relevant because body positioning in an unsafe and unconventional manner when cycling is playing with fire; your going to get burned! In contrast, proper hand position with the modern two-handed technique is completely within the bounds of conventional technique and thus, part of proscribed manual of arms and proper usage. By definition, military hardware must be reliable/durable/trustworthy, etc. In addition, it ought not to have any quirks/idiosyncrasies that lend themselves to potential malfunctions at anytime much less under stress of combat. There is zero sense in utilizing a weapon system that entails all of the above...but allow it an exception retaining the caveat that it can be held every which way EXCEPT 'it cannot be held using a common two-handed technique that may lend itself to a critical malfunction' - well, that simply won't fly in this era. It is not even possible to teach a grip technique to somehow avoid placing the fingers near the slide release protrusion because hand placement under stress and shifts under recoil will guarantee they will end up where least wanted at the most critical moment. Having had it happen once in a combat zone - which was once too many - considerations quickly boil down to either utilizing a different weapon system since sticking with the current model yields itself to potential problems or; a method to modify the current system must be implemented so as to allow reliable use across the complete spectrum of potential hand placement schemes.
The 1911 system is still great for serious duty such as what the military or FBI use may entail but avoiding discussion and mitigation for its potential to malfunction in its original configuration much less refrain from calling it what it is (i.e., inducing a jam during the middle of a firefight certainly fits the description of 'fatal') is illogical. A simple factual review indicates the weapon can jam with the modern two-handed grip for some users in rare circumstances. Combat use does not lend itself to an allowance for 'rare occurrences' because that is a recipe for playing the odds that too often in combat begin to exhibit a much higher frequency! If an agency wants to continue to consider its relevance the issue has to be dealt with otherwise no commander could possibly be justified in issuing such a system when and if it could lead to a potential malfunction under the most dire circumstances.

[Guamsst]

Ok, and how does your first little piggy get out of the hole where the trigger thingy is while firing?

Like I said, I can see it for a lefty, but a righty has to try to engage the "fatal flaw". I'm sorry, but I have trouble admitting any "flaw" of a 100yr+ service pistol which is admired worldwide, because........ if you hold your finger over the end of the pin, where you really shouldn't, it might slide the pin out.

If you hold a two handed sword one handed, is the sword flawed.....or the hold?