1911’s in general, 9mm versions specifically

Yeah you have to be careful with Optics Planet. If it doesn't explicitly say "In stock" on the product page, then don't buy from them. Their shipping estimates for the most part are meaningless. Unless you're willing to wait, if it wasn't in stock when you purchased I would just cancel and order from somewhere else. No telling when it will actually be shipped.

+1 to this.

Also, Ed Brown is running a Fathers' Day sale right now, 20% off. Code's FD2026.
 
Read the entire thread finally. I have a few 1911 45s that I enjoy and carry a guardian at times. Ready for a 9mm version. Not interested in a double stack currently.

What’s the verdict on the recommendation currently after everyone has seemed to either dabble or go full retard 😂? I usually stay in the full retard category 👍 I’m a lefty and have fit my own ambis without issue.

For 9mm: I deduct McGar or Tripp mags, heavier recoil springs, basic extractor tuning, and hot ammo.
 
Read the entire thread finally. I have a few 1911 45s that I enjoy and carry a guardian at times. Ready for a 9mm version. Not interested in a double stack currently.

What’s the verdict on the recommendation currently after everyone has seemed to either dabble or go full retard 😂? I usually stay in the full retard category 👍 I’m a lefty and have fit my own ambis without issue.

For 9mm: I deduct McGar or Tripp mags, heavier recoil springs, basic extractor tuning, and hot ammo.
Which 1911 safeties do you find the most lefty-friendly? I'm not sure I've yet seen an 'ambi' safety that was actually as curved and angled/blended/melted on the right side as much as the left. Some are bearable (Bul) while others have sharp 90 degree angles and go right back to the grip, and eat up my firing hand, making them nearly impossible to shoot (such as Tisas).
 
Which 1911 safeties do you find the most lefty-friendly? I'm not sure I've yet seen an 'ambi' safety that was actually as curved and angled/blended/melted on the right side as much as the left. Some are bearable (Bul) while others have sharp 90 degree angles and go right back to the grip, and eat up my firing hand, making them nearly impossible to shoot (such as Tisas).
My hypothesis is its one of these:

IMG_0733.jpeg

I've had other priorities and haven't messed with them yet.

I gave up waiting for a Sten Chen version that's been teased in the past.
 
Which 1911 safeties do you find the most lefty-friendly? I'm not sure I've yet seen an 'ambi' safety that was actually as curved and angled/blended/melted on the right side as much as the left. Some are bearable (Bul) while others have sharp 90 degree angles and go right back to the grip, and eat up my firing hand, making them nearly impossible to shoot (such as Tisas).
I too also like the EGW but I agree the angle is sharp. I definitely have to break the edge some to make it more comfortable.
 
My hypothesis is its one of these:

View attachment 1077580

I've had other priorities and haven't messed with them yet.

I gave up waiting for a Sten Chen version that's been teased in the past.
Lefty here as well. I put the Wilson Bulletproof Wide Lever Ambi on my Springfield Loaded after immediately being displeased with the factory part. Very pleased with the Wilson so far.

Have an Ed Brown Tactical Ambi en route for another pistol. Looks to be a middle ground width between Wilson Wide and factory narrow AF
 
Question I just thought of for the real handgun guys here: what is easier shoot well - a .45 1911 or a typical 9 mm striker fired pistol?
 
Question I just thought of for the real handgun guys here: what is easier shoot well - a .45 1911 or a typical 9 mm striker fired pistol?

The shootability of the 1911 is in its geometry, not its chambering. The shorter split-times you get with rapid-fire 9mm in other platforms doesn't make up for misses or decreased precision from shooting them.

This is specific to your question about which is easier to shoot well.

What you choose to carry has a lot of other factors involved.
 
Question I just thought of for the real handgun guys here: what is easier shoot well - a .45 1911 or a typical 9 mm striker fired pistol?

I shoot USPSA somewhat regularly (master class if that means anything to anyone). I own and love a 1911 in 45 as well as plenty of striker fired 9mm. My opinion and preference is that most people will shoot the striker fired 9mm better in most cases. Not talking about static slow bullseye shooting but the dynamic type introducing stress with time, having decent split times, movement, draws, reloads, etc. I'm sure there are some guys out there who are the opposite but they are few and far between. I believe there is a reason single stack division is dead and if someone new to shooting would be starting out in competition, a 1911 45 is a bad choice. It's a safe be they will struggle more than if they were to start off with a basic striker 9mm. Sorry 1911 guys.
 
Question I just thought of for the real handgun guys here: what is easier shoot well - a .45 1911 or a typical 9 mm striker fired pistol?
**I effing suck at shooting**
I am not the super duper high level shooter that some are on this thread. I’ll defer to their expertise and preferences. But I’m working on it, and have seen a lot of growth. Some general principles have become very clear:

1. Shooting is shooting. Meaning someone who shoots at a very high level with one platform will also shoot any other platform at an objectively very high level. The gun handling, vision, timing, and control that make a good shooter translates between platforms.
2. This also means that if someone sucks with a striker gun, picking up a different platform won’t make them any better. They simply have not developed the gunhandling, vision, cadence, or control.
3. Are there differences between guns? Yes!! Look at hit factor scores for USPSA classifiers. Certain guns give very well trained shooters a competitive advantage. But the majority of shooters are not good enough with their baseline skills to reap the fullness of that advantage. The differences in gun performance is the last 1% of performance that’s on the table.
 
**I effing suck at shooting**
I am not the super duper high level shooter that some are on this thread. I’ll defer to their expertise and preferences. But I’m working on it, and have seen a lot of growth. Some general principles have become very clear:

1. Shooting is shooting. Meaning someone who shoots at a high level with one platform will also shoot any other platform at a very high level. The gun handling, vision, timing, and control that make a good shooter translates between platforms.
2. This also means that if someone sucks with a striker gun, picking up a different platform won’t make them any better. They simply have not developed the gunhandling, vision, cadence, or control.
3. Are there differences between guns? Yes!! Look at hit factor scores for USPSA classifiers. Certain guns give very well trained shooters a competitive advantage. But the majority of shooters are not good enough with their baseline skills to reap the fullness of that advantage. The differences in gun performance is the last 1% of performance that’s on the table.

Well said. The only point I'd disagree with a bit, is the "1%". It's not that small - I might say the difference could be as high as 15% more precision at-speed in favor of 1911s or similar doublestack guns, with the greatest differences emerging at distance and in first-round precision from the draw. But as a generality, I'd definitely agree you're also not going to buy skill broadcloth by getting a more shootable gun - someone's not going to magically make a headshot at 25yds with a 1911 that they can't do at 15. But you take a guy who can do it consistently at 15 with a Glock and give him a 1911, and he'll make hits at 20 or even 25 he couldn't do with that Glock.

You could always go pick up a Glock, and run your Figure 5 drill as a comparison. You've got a lot of data on that one.
 
Back
Top