1911’s in general, 9mm versions specifically

[stealthgoat]

Yeah I just noticed Tisas has a 1911 model that's chambered to shoot both 38 super and 9mm.

just to clarify, that has two different barrels, not one barrel that works for either chambering. Many of us with Supers also have another barrel in 9mm, 9x23, etc.

 

[NSI]

Correct.

So if we were to focus only on scaled-down DS and SS 9mm 1911s besides the Staccato c/cs that would leave us with … the Wilson edc x9? Springfield EMP? Anything else?

Do the Glock mag DS 1911s like the platypus and HD or the 320 mag options like the OA and Sig appear to be scaled down in front to back grip girth?

-J

 

[Formidilosus]

So if we were to focus only on scaled-down DS and SS 9mm 1911s besides the Staccato c/cs that would leave us with … the Wilson edc x9? Springfield EMP? Anything else?

I would call the EDC x9 a 2011 or 1921 really.

Staccato C/CS, EMP, and Bul makes one.

Do the Glock mag DS 1911s like the platypus and HD or the 320 mag options like the OA and Sig appear to be scaled down in front to back grip girth?

-J

They are a bit smaller than 2011’s. But, generally blocky and not the same as the C/CS.

 

[NSI]

Thanks. BTW we ran the “lose your job if you throw one” 7 yard A zone bill drill at the local USPSA comp this morning as an optional cold start. 1 GM shot a clean 2.4 with a red dot glock, three As shot clean mid 3s and 4s (3.50 for me with a shadow 2 irons), and an A and 4 Bs failed with sub 3 times. The latter were shocked they failed - newer shooters in general struggle with “gas pedal” IME.

My normal time isn’t blazing (2.5) but adding a second made it seem glacial and I had a luxurious sight picture every time I pressed the trigger. I still struggle to see how tier 1 guys could possibly take multiple seconds longer but I trust your experience. I’ll video a string of 10 must-alpha bills in a row starting cold at any distance that pleases the crowd, next range trip. My mediocrity may serve science.

-J

 

[Dobermann]

I would call the EDC x9 a 2011 or 1921 really.

Staccato C/CS, EMP, and Bul makes one.

Form, do you happen to know which Bul model?

They seem to revise their models nearly every year - and not all are available here.

I picked up a Bul 1911 based on your info here, but curious about a 2011 - and Staccatos are not available here (unless one wanted to try to directly import, which is complicated) ...

 

[RockAndSage]

So if we were to focus only on scaled-down DS and SS 9mm 1911s besides the Staccato c/cs that would leave us with … the Wilson edc x9? Springfield EMP? Anything else?

Are you asking about viable SAOs in the Commander/G19 size range?

 

[NSI]

Are you asking about viable SAOs in the Commander/G19 size range?

Specifically - pistols scaled to 9mm mag specific grip size with 1911 or 2011 grip ergonomics and a a straight to the rear 1911 style SAO trigger.

-J

 

[RockAndSage]

Specifically - pistols scaled to 9mm mag specific grip size with 1911 or 2011 grip ergonomics and a a straight to the rear 1911 style SAO trigger.

-J

The Dan Wesson DWX line seems like it would meet what you're looking for, at least as much as the EDC X9 would. DWX grip is more CZ, but internals, controls, and slide are 1911, with a Glock or Sig-style barrel, with a lot less friction surface than the lugs and link stuff on 1911 and CZ-75 barrels. If you've already got a lot of time on a Shadow 2, it might make for a convenient transition. The full-size DWX uses P-09/P-10 mags, while the Compact uses CZ-75 mags. I've been running the hell out of a Compact for awhile, and love it.

 

[Grumman]

Specifically - pistols scaled to 9mm mag specific grip size with 1911 or 2011 grip ergonomics and a a straight to the rear 1911 style SAO trigger.

-J

Wilson’s SFX9 is a good pistol. I have the 4” model and I think it carries concealed a little better than my C did. It is a noticeably thinner grip than the Wilson X9.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[huntsman22]

Compact uses CZ-75 mags. I've been running the hell out of a Compact for awhile, and love it.

My favorite 9......

 

[WestTN2288]

So I’ve seen tisas and girsan mentioned, but what about the other cheap name brands? Specifically Rock Island.

Probably just as importantly, what are the things we’re looking for on these cheaper guns to know that you can add Forms part list and feel confident that I am more likely than not, going to end up with a Glock level of reliability? Also, I’m still stuck between whether I am going for a 9 or 45, so I’d be glad to hear what you’ve got on either.

Sorry, I’m not a 1911 guy, but this has perked my interests. Thanks in advance

 

[RockAndSage]

Also, I’m still stuck between whether I am going for a 9 or 45, so I’d be glad to hear what you’ve got on either

This can be a very tribal question, which tends to get people emotionally-driven, identity-oriented answers when you ask around. Think of the truth more as a spectrum of priorities, advantages, and limitations.

I spent about a decade each shooting .45 ACP, .40 S&W, and 9mm, and currently shoot 9mm exclusively for EDC, shifting as I got notable advantages out of each. A big part of that shift has also been the advancements in defensive bullet technology across the last 15 years.

There are pages of details, but the bottom-line points on the cartridge differences are:

- People tend to shoot 9mms more accurately, and more quickly accurately, than .45s, for the same reason they shoot .22LR and .223/5.56 better than .300 Win Mags.

- Lower recoiling also makes guns more pleasant to shoot, so people shoot more.

- Ammo for 9mm is often half the cost of .45ACP, also leading people to practice more.

- You get more ammo in 1 magazine of 9mm over .45.

- 9mm is often less than half the weight of .45, which is a big deal when you're carrying it miles, or even EDC in some cases.

- The advancements in bullet technology have led to there being, essentially, zero statistical difference in reality-based studies of shootings between the effectiveness of modern 9mm, 40, and .45.

So, bottom line on why 9mm: Quicker accuracy, more ammo, less recoil, identical effectiveness, and cheaper to practice with, leading to overall better shooting performance both immediately and especially over training cycles for the individual.

You'll get guys trying to dismiss any one of these points, but they tend to be stuck in a tribal-identity or binary, black/white thinking with how they argue it. Rather than looking at it as a spectrum of priorities, advantages, and limitations. There's nothing 'wrong' with .40 or .45, they just have different limitations, which matter more or less based on your priorities. I'd be just fine carrying one of my .45s or 40s into a violent encounter. Absolutely fine. But fine is not high-performance.