Best in what regard? Both the M9 and M1911 are pretty good pistols. I'd give an edge to the M9 in caliber, capacity, reliability, weight, sights, and serviceability. Not a huge edge, but there are advantages.
I forgot about the 1911 my vote gos to that now i forgot becuase mines not surplus but it is a colt. And MAttsbox umm im confused they both have standerd fixed sights my 1911 has never jammed and i repeat never. Theyr both a little over 2lbs and the .45 acp is such a **** of a caliber compared to the 9mm if you really need more than 8rds youve got problems way bigger than capacity, am i wrong?
The the M9 has some advantages and disadvantages. I hate the original 1911 sights for speed of acquisition. The M9's a quarter inch wider and longer and that makes it harder to carry concealed and harder for small hands to use, though the 1911 isn't exactly fabulous in either regard. I took four EIC points with an M9 in the small arms firing school at Camp Perry three years ago, but absolutely hated the trigger compared to the 1911. Much harder for me to hit with. The line coach confessed that the M9's as-issued trigger could make an experienced bullseye shooter cry, and I can believe it. It would take a lot of getting used to even after you got it worked on.
I don't know about user serviceability or field stripping, since I don't own one? From a commercial servicing standpoint, there are more 1911 parts and accessories and pistolsmiths out there.
I don't know about reliability, either? You'd want to avoid a surplus early M9 that didn't have the 1989 92FS mod to prevent a broken slide from flying back into the shooter's face, as happened several times with the older models. I don't know how they do with slide cracking now, having lost track of that issue, but I assume they did something to correct it? The military ordered another big heap of them in 2006.
If you allow for the gun being worked on to improve the trigger, you have to allow that for the 1911, too, and then any edge evaporates except capacity. You'll get a lot of arguments about which caliber has the edge other than for cost, but I'm not going to bother opening that can of worms in this thread. Just search the archives if you want to revisit it?
I'll give that, the 1911 has a much better trigger. 9mm is a lot easier to shoot, and in battle, I'd take 15 rounds over 8 rounds anyday. Your 1911 may have never jammed, but the extreme majority have. I'm not saying its consistent, but most prefer ball ammo or at least a RN type bullet. The M9 I had and M96 would feed rocks with no modifications or tuning. I've had numerous 1911s and 2011s and they all needed tuning or just plain a specific bullet.
Anyway, I don't want this turn into a 1911 v M9 thread.
While I'm a 1911A1 fan from way back, I'd like to point out that , from my recollection, it has only been military surplussed once by odcmp (mid-1950s) in my lifetime while the M9 (IIRC) has never been surplussed. Therefore, my vote goes to the 1911A1.
I would really love to see odcmp offer the 1911A1s to the public again!
That would be great. Politically tough and, I believe they've destroyed a lot of them already.
Matt's correct about feed. John Browning never considered anything but round nose ball, a product of his day and the fact that it was all they'd thought of at the time that the Hague Accords would allow in battle. The Beretta design drew on a police sidearm background and had civilian models before the military application, so I'm not surprised it was checked out with more kinds of rocks during the design work. The 1911 has to be modified for non-ball reliability. Mine will manually feed a magazine full of empty cases with no problem, but they didn't come that way.
I'm less sanguine about the 9mm in battle because of the ball limitation, though. When you consider that both the .45 and 9 mm ball will go through an unarmored individual, the bigger hole would intuitively seem to be advantageous, as it proved to be in the Philippines long ago. Some anecdotal reports by soldiers suggest that's so, but it is just hearsay and CBS news reporting where I've seen it, neither of which make it conclusively true.
I will go with tokarev--- following my love for this gun and the uber fast 7.62x25 round. Few thousand rounds through a tok-- any kind of brass, good, bad, surplus, dirty, clean, rain shine, sideways, rapidfire, through pocket(yes I tried that... ruined good trench coat in process) NEVER jammed. cycles flawless. impossible to break and barrel is still like new.
The design is best of all worlds--- that is maybe because tokarev came out after the handguns its based on. It combined 1911, BHP and Mauser c96 (all 3 could be easily one of the best handguns ever made) into one amazing military firearm. The 7.62x25 round is very hot even ww2 stuff.. around 1450 fps--- modern comercial ammo goes 1550 to 1750 which is around 500ft/lbs. I personally chronographed S&B at 1650-1700. Handloads I have shot in excess of 1900--- some approaching 2000--- and friend who handloads claimed he got above 2k in 4.6 inch barrel tokarev with 85 grain bullet---(hard to believe tbh, but 1900+ for sure I done it myself)-thats over 700 ft/lb. This kind of power in under 5 inch barrel can only be exceeded by big bore handguns like 44 mag and up, yet it will cycle with 1400 fps rounds too. It also points naturally for me.. and the slick design is amazing for carry even though its quite long.
There are a bunch of cons with it--- The 30 cal bullet is considered ice pick puncher and does not do massive hole compared to 45 acp. Single action system means you have to have it cocked all the way to fire rapidly, yet safety on it-well there isn"t one. Magazine volume is 8 rounds which is quite small by modern standards. It is quite big... about size of 1911,,, just a little smaller, (so not exactly ccw piece) and well for carry-- over penetration is true... its almost like shooting a rifle, it will go right through your target and can hit innocent bystander, but if you in a car, and need to punch hole in some body armor or car door and still have enough energy to stop your target--- look no further.
All in All---- gun which can penetrate class 3a body armor, shoots pretty much flat to 180 yards and has jam free reputation to match ak 47, well if I had to pick one handgun to go to war with (considering this only weapon I can have in handgun only combat)-- this would be it. So if you dont have it yet, get it .. you wont regret.
The 45acp is a great combat weapon UP CLOSE!!! It was never meant to shoot at the enemy 50 yards away. It was indeed meant to service our troops in the trenches of World War 1, most shots are less than 20 yards in fact. One reason they made a lot of noise when shook by hand, was that they were NOT fitted like target models today. This 1911 had to be picked up out of the slop, mud and water in trenches and yet still fire and do it's job.
If in fact your looking for a semi-auto that will shoot out to 150 yards and have plenty of "knockdown" in the process, the 10mm will do that for a fact. Yesterday I took my sub-compact model 29 Glock and was doing head shots on a target at 75 yards with no problem and the bullet was not dropping. Now once again it will fire in water but not the same type of conditons those troops were in during World War 1. It was tuff going in those trenches back then, a hog would be plum wore out making it to supper!!!
Im thinking 1873 SAA, only because it started the US love affair with the .45 caliber, it is still produced in its original form... More or less. There are people shooting them in competition CAS, they still work. Heck, Patton carried one to war, good enough. But if I was fighting in combat......1911.
I have a S&W 1917 DA 45 Army model. It shoots .45 auto rim or .45 ACP with or without moon clips. Excellent old revolver. I would say it shoots as good today as it did when it was new. It's one of my favorites.
I would go for my High Power Browning or Combat Commander. That said, the Glocks seem to have a good thing goin with the 10mm, 9mm and .45... For "Going to war" the choice would probably be whatever the military uses, at very least their caliber. That all said, I also like my Makarov in 9X18- light and easy to carry unobstrusively.
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
A forum community dedicated to Sport shooters, owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hand casting bullets, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!