1911 VS Glock 21

[M1911]

Recoil? comparing equal calibers, the 1911 will recoil less because of it's weight.

I once shot my buddies Glock 30 back-to-back with my full size Kimber. Same ammo. Oddly enough, the Glock 30 seemed to me to have less felt recoil.

That said, I think a full-size 1911 has little recoil and little muzzle flip, so the difference is relatively small. In contrast, I find HK USPc and Sigs to have much more muzzle flip, even in 9mm.

 

[dwarven1]

After a year of shooting my 3.5" barrelled Para P12 (basically a compact .45) I got my full-size 1911 - 5" barrel. That extra 1.5" made a huge difference in how fast the gun came back on target for a second shot!!

Just extrapolating here, but if you're going to be target shooting, I'd suspect that the 1911 has the edge because of the weight. If you're going to be carrying and weight will be a factor, you may want to look at the Glock instead.

Why not head over to American Firearms School, Boston Gun Range, or Manchester Firing Line and rent both and see which you like better?

**that isn't the Glock you're looking for**you can buy the 1911 now** /jedi mind trick.

 

[philly]

philly,

My apologies for the flip remark. I was being silly....

Dont worry about it.

I really love the 1911, it is the best gun i ever shot. no muzzle flip at all. as much as i want carry one, i do not think its the best choice, for duty. The Glock is 13 + 1.

so its off to the range this weekend.

Phil

 

[Executive]

I have to put in my .02 here. A few weeks ago I picked up my first 1911, an all steel S&W target model. I shot sixty rounds through it, and it was accurate as hell, but something was missing. I just did not feel the 1911 love that everyone is always talking about. To me it seemed rough, especially after shooting it back to back with my Sig. Sorry guys, but the 1911 is just not for everyone. The analogy I suggest is with Harley Davidson. Old school technology that certainly works, but really needs to be modified at great expense to make it genuinely special. For the money (Massachusetts availability mark-up notwithstanding) I'd take the Glock 21 over the 1911. FOR ME, the G21 is a better choice.


Chris

BTW: I sold my 1911 to a forum member who loves it, further demonstrating the personal nature of such choices.

 

[Adam_MA]

Sorry guys, but the 1911 is just not for everyone.

That statement holds true for not only every gun out there, but for just about everything in life.

 

[dwarven1]

I just did not feel the 1911 love that everyone is always talking about. To me it seemed rough, especially after shooting it back to back with my Sig. Sorry guys, but the 1911 is just not for everyone. The analogy I suggest is with Harley Davidson. Old school technology that certainly works, but really needs to be modified at great expense to make it genuinely special. For the money (Massachusetts availability mark-up notwithstanding) I'd take the Glock 21 over the 1911. FOR ME, the G21 is a better choice.

A wise man, indeed. Go with what you're comfortable with, by all means!

I just so happen to shoot well with a Glock, but it doesn't "feel" right - a purely subjective quality, true... but real, nonetheless. And I do enjoy the 1911.

Hey, that's why they make so many different guns! So we can all find the one built for us.

 

[M1911]

The analogy I suggest is with Harley Davidson. Old school technology that certainly works, but really needs to be modified at great expense to make it genuinely special.

What works for me may not work for you. I certainly don't say that the 1911 is perfect or that it is for everybody. Sig's are good guns. If they work for you, great. I find they've got a bit too much muzzle flip for me and I don't like DA/SA. Different strokes for different folks...

That said, I disagree with the implication that a 1911 needs to be modified at great expense. Like many guns, it could use a trigger job out of the box. That's probably less than $100. Other than that, I'd be perfectly happy carrying a S&W 1911 out of the box.

You can certainly spend thousands making a 1911 into a object of art. And I'd like to do that (don't tell Mrs. M1911!). But it's not necessary.

 

[Executive]

No surprise here that M1911 prefers the (duh!!) 1911. I appreciate his comments and agree that it all depends on what the individual prefers. This is just common sense. Unfortunately, it takes the fun out of this type of "X" vs. "Y" discussion, so I'm going to add that a 1911 is a tool just like a G21 or Sig 220, and I STILL do not understand the reverence many people hold for this tool. As for modification, I said that to make it "genuinely special", great expense is required, otherwise the 1911, and any other firearm, is simply, again, a tool.

Gentlemen, (and ladies) keep the ball rolling...


Chris

 

[M1911]

G21 or Sig 220, and I STILL do not understand the reverence many people hold for this tool.

Just to be clear, these are my opinions. I know some folks will disagree. I'd feel as well armed with a 220 or a Glock 21 as I would with most any handgun. I've got 3 Sigs and 3 Glocks.

Compared to the G21, the 1911 fits my hand better. The Glock 21 is just a bit too big -- I can't quite reach the trigger easily. I hate the factory Glock sights -- the front sight is too wide. I HATE the factory Glock trigger. The Glock slide stop is too small. The Glock mag release is mushy.

The Sig 220 is DA/SA. I hate DA. The SA trigger is ok, but even after a trigger job is not as good as a 1911 trigger. The Sig trigger has more travel, more overtravel, and a longer reset. I don't care for the standard factory Sig sights -- the standard factory sights have a weird undercut rear sight that attracts my eye. I prefer a plain rear sight with either two dots or a single dot (like the Heinie Straight Eight sights). The Sig night sights are ok. The high bore axis of the Sig gives it more muzzle flip in my hands. That added muzzle flip slows down my followup shots. The Sig slide stop is too small and in the wrong place. My Sigs are accurate and I love the takedown system. I suspect that the takedown system is what is reponsible for the Sig's high bore axis.

It comes down to this: I can shoot the 1911 faster and more accurately than a Sig or a Glock. That's what makes the 1911 special to me. YMMV.

 

[Executive]

Just to be clear, these are my opinions.
Compared to the G21, the 1911 fits my hand better. The Glock slide stop is too small. The Glock mag release is mushy.

My Sigs are accurate and I love the takedown system. I suspect that the takedown system is what is reponsible for the Sig's high bore axis.

It comes down to this: I can shoot the 1911 faster and more accurately than a Sig or a Glock. That's what makes the 1911 special to me. YMMV.

Yes the Glock slide stop is too small, and the tactical replacement is not much larger. The mag release is mushy, but works every time.

Not sure about the architecture of the innovative and efficient Sig takedown system being responsible for the "high bore axis" but I shoot my 229 in .40 with nearly zero muzzle flip and very fast follow up shots.

YMMV. Also very true.

Regarding the SA vs. DA/SA debate, perhaps someone might comment of the legal ramifications of having that long first pull in a stress situation versus a lighter single action pull that has already been "cocked". I think I'd rather be in a courtroom explaining that I used a firearm with a DA first shot that I really had to intentionally squeeze rather than a light SA that could fire if bounced with my finger on the trigger. Here again, intended use comes into play. FOR ME, my all around target/carry/home defense firearm is my 229. (Yes I know we'retalking about .45s here, but I don't have one right now, but the G21 for sale at FS seems to be calling to me...)


Chris

BTW: M1911, I am enjoying this discussion. You have a logical and common sense approach. I've had this talk with too many JMB fans who insist that anyone who does not admit to the superiority of the 1911 does not know what they are talking about with respect to pistols.

 

[dwarven1]

I STILL do not understand the reverence many people hold for this tool.

Perhaps because it was designed in an age where the most advanced design tools were the triangle and T-square, and the only computing device available to the designer was the slide rule... and darn near a century later, people still find that the gun fits many of them perfectly, functions well, and has a solid performance record.

Think of how many other guns designed in the beginning of the last century that are still in production. Off hand, I can't think of ANY. The Browning High-Power was introduced some years later (1935?) and is still made, the Walther PP is an older design (1929), but what other gun is still made with only minor modifications? I think that there are some Browning-designed rifles, but I can't think of a handgun still in production that is older. (just thought of one - the Colt SA. But I can't think of another... and repros don't count.)

It's got a powerful cartridge that performs it's intended function (manstopper) well. It's not a hunting arm and never will be - but that's not what it was designed for. It's ergonomics fit a wide range of shooters. Heck, it even fits me, and I have short wide hands. Many guns with big grips (Berettas, S&W CS9's, etc.) are not comfortable for me; the 1911 is.

It's just a really well-designed gun that's stood the test of time. That's why so many people think Browning walked on water. Personally, I think he may well have been the foremost gun designer of all time. (which is NOT to insult Garand, Kalashnikov, Thompson, Stoner or even Georg Luger! Browning's designs are much more varied and run the whole range of firearms.)

Ross

 

[M1911]

Not sure about the architecture of the innovative and efficient Sig takedown system being responsible for the "high bore axis"

Hold a Sig in your hand. Then hold a Glock or 1911 in your other hand. You'll see that the barrel of the Sig is a bit higher than the barrel of the Glock or 1911.

When you fire a pistol, your hand rotates around the wrist. This is due to the torque being applied by the force of recoil. The line of action of that force is the center of the barrel. So if you extend the line of the barrel to the rear, and measure down to the center of your wrist, that is the lever arm. Torque is simply the force of recoil times that lever arm. The greater the lever arm, the greater the torque, the greater the muzzle rise (all other things being equal, of course).

This is why we try to get our hand as high up grip as possible.

Now field strip the Sig. You'll see that the frame of the Sig is deep between the frame rails and the part of the frame where the trigger guard meets the dust cover. Right above that, you'll see the rotating part that is attached to the take-down lever. That part has to rotate, so there has to be depth in the frame below the barrel to accomodate it. That's why the Sig has a higher bore axis and has more muzzle flip.

 

[ajw45]

FWIW, I just got my first g21 a few weeks ago. Back to back with my custom 1911 (with magwell and tungsten rod) I found the stock glock had less recoil and less muzzle flip for me. Polymer, wide grip, and low bore axis have their benefits. Of course, I'll need the high rate of fire and thick mag to hit anything with the dismal glock trigger....

 

[M1911]

Of course, I'll need the high rate of fire and thick mag to hit anything with the dismal glock trigger

And there be the rub...