# MEU SOC Pistol make?



## KBar666 (May 11, 2011)

Just Wondering can anyone tell me what the actual make of the so called "MEU SOC 1911" is?

I think its SA but I've heard they are Kimbers and couple of mixed sources.

So this while a totally irrellevent thread I know,just wondering if anyone can fill me in.

Thanks


----------



## Teufel (May 11, 2011)

They were made from Springfields and Colts mostly.


----------



## KBar666 (May 11, 2011)

Thanks


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 12, 2016)

MEUSOC 1911's began life as rack grade 1911's cherry picked for low round count/wear.
They were then modified by USMC armorers, with aftermarket parts of the time. Colt's barrels/ bushings and links. High Profile three dot sights from Kings Gunworks were added as were Pachmayer rubberized stocks. Extractors were hand fitted, feed ramps polished and ejection ports lowered  a bit. As the supply of quality 1911's from stores dwindled, frames were replaced with COT's replacements. Then there were iterations produced in small batch runs from Springfield ( Genesco USA forgings ), Kimber and now Colt's. ( I'm sure there are many more details known only to the armorers themselves ) This is the story I was told by a MEUSOC guy. We now field all of the above plus the Glock 19 Gen 3.
Respectfully
j


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 12, 2016)

Just as a question of a trivial nature:  I know MARSOC is issued the Glock; is Recon as well given they are not part of the SOC spectrum (and funding)?

One of my (personal) 1911s had been essentially a MEU(SOC) 1911, built by an armorer.  The thing about it, though, as so few were _exactly_ the same and underwent mods as parts became available, it's not particularly unique.


----------



## Teufel (Jun 12, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> Just as a question of a trivial nature:  I know MARSOC is issued the Glock; is Recon as well given they are not part of the SOC spectrum (and funding)?
> 
> One of my (personal) 1911s had been essentially a MEU(SOC) 1911, built by an armorer.  The thing about it, though, as so few were _exactly_ the same and underwent mods as parts became available, it's not particularly unique.


Recon isn't issued glocks. We get 1911s and berettas with a rail system.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 12, 2016)

Colt M1070CQBP - M45A1 Close Quarter Battle Pistol


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 12, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> Just as a question of a trivial nature:  I know MARSOC is issued the Glock; is Recon as well given they are not part of the SOC spectrum (and funding)?
> 
> One of my (personal) 1911s had been essentially a MEU(SOC) 1911, built by an armorer.  The thing about it, though, as so few were _exactly_ the same and underwent mods as parts became available, it's not particularly unique.


Yes my understanding from a guy who was in, is that they are not an exact spec'd unit with an NSN No. Ect. As parts wore or broke, they were replaced. Break an ambidextrous safety.... Oh we have some Ed Brown's in stock...for instance... In other words they were a concept pistol with some written specs. Basically what a person would do to make a 1911 uber reliable. Not unlike the FBI HRU and SWAT pistols. Of note,  a lot of the pistols I've seen wore early Laser Devices (Later Surefire) WML adapters.
Later iterations incorporated a light rail and now of course the Glock pistols and the Colt's....


----------



## Etype (Jun 12, 2016)

Johnboy said:


> Basically what a person would do to make a 1911 uber reliable...


I always thought you made a 1911 more reliable by trading it in for a Glock.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Jun 12, 2016)

Accurate - 1911
Reliable - Glock


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 12, 2016)

Etype said:


> I always thought you made a 1911 more reliable by trading it in for a Glock.


Haaaa good one! I do own a Colt's Stainless XSE that has yet to have a single failure to feed or failure to fire. It has worked as advertised 100% of the time in box stock configuration. It has been fed the Federal Premium HST 230 gr. JHP It is approaching 1000 rnd.'s I do however carry a Glock 21SF. When I feel I am proficient with the Colt's, I will rotate it in to the carry group. 
Just me though....
Good night!
J


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 12, 2016)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> Accurate - 1911
> Reliable - Glock



I think that's kind of misinformation. 1911's can be extremely reliable and Glock's can be extremely accurate. I would say with any platform, the more accuracy you milk out of it with tighter tolerance, the less reliable the firearm will function. There is a balancing act, especially on the hand fitting side of the house.

With the more modern manufacturing computer and laser guided CNC, milling, etc. It pretty easy to get a super accurate and reliable firearm right out of the box. Than again, your average shooter can't even shoot to the accuracy of the firearm, so it becomes a bit of a moot point.


----------



## Etype (Jun 12, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I think that's kind of misinformation. 1911's can be extremely reliable...


On the range, yes. The exposed hammer is a pretty big negative in the places we like to go.


----------



## policemedic (Jun 12, 2016)

Etype said:


> On the range, yes. The exposed hammer is a pretty big negative in the places we like to go.



That's why the mission should drive the gear train.  Sometimes a 1911 is the perfect tool to smack something with, and sometimes something else is. Being locked into one tool for all missions isn't helpful.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Jun 12, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I think that's kind of misinformation. 1911's can be extremely reliable and Glock's can be extremely accurate. I would say with any platform, the more accuracy you milk out of it with tighter tolerance, the less reliable the firearm will function. There is a balancing act, especially on the hand fitting side of the house.



Your right, I'm wrong, you're the best!

Please hate me more......


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 12, 2016)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> Your right, I'm wrong, you're the best!
> 
> Please hate me more......



About time you realized your place... 

But really dude, take your meds, your acting silly tonight.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 12, 2016)

Etype said:


> On the range, yes. The exposed hammer is a pretty big negative in the places we like to go.



That's a solid point, and I agree.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Jun 12, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> About time you realized your place...
> 
> But really dude, take your meds, your acting silly tonight.





So, I assume you shoot competitively....for a living?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 12, 2016)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> So, I assume you shoot competitively....for a living?



No I don't do anything firearms related anymore, except stay current on my EDC.

Why do you ask?


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Jun 12, 2016)

I was just curious.


----------



## Etype (Jun 12, 2016)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> So, I assume you shoot competitively....for a living?


There are only a few people in the world that shoot competitively for a living- there's no money in that sport.


----------



## Etype (Jun 12, 2016)

policemedic said:


> That's why the mission should drive the gear train.  Sometimes a 1911 is the perfect tool to smack something with, and sometimes something else is. Being locked into one tool for all missions isn't helpful.


All the top military units agree on Glocks. Ain't nobody got time for sticky safeties after walking in the rain or going for a swim; or rocks and mud stuck in front of their hammer. You could get dropped off 10 ft front of the door, be standing next to a wall when the breach goes off and BAM!!! Dust and dirt float down in front of that exposed hammer. It's not worth the risk when that problem has already been solved.

1911s were the cat's meow in 1911, but that ship has sailed.


----------



## policemedic (Jun 13, 2016)

Etype said:


> All the top military units agree on Glocks. Ain't nobody got time for sticky safeties after walking in the rain or going for a swim; or rocks and mud stuck in front of their hammer. You could get dropped off 10 ft front of the door, be standing next to a wall when the breach goes off and BAM!!! Dust and dirt float down in front of that exposed hammer. It's not worth the risk when that problem has already been solved.
> 
> 1911s were the cat's meow in 1911, but that ship has sailed.



Doesn't MARSOC issue a 1911?

CAG left the 1911 for the Glock (and was responsible for some design changes) primarily for ease of maintenance.  There were other reasons but maintenance was the big one.

On the other hand, the FBI, LAPD and a number of other cop shops continue to use the 1911 quite successfully.  

All that said, I only disagree with you on one point.  I don't think the 1911's days are done.  I just think it circles back to the mission:gear train issue.  If I was running missions in Afghanistan or certain other places I would probably choose something other than a 1911 as well.  In a different AO with a different mission set (inclusive of explosive breaches) a 1911 would be my preference especially for something like HR.  But that's just me.



He says, as he prepares to be issued a brand new Glock 17....:wall:


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 13, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I think that's kind of misinformation. 1911's can be extremely reliable and Glock's can be extremely accurate. I would say with any platform, the more accuracy you milk out of it with tighter tolerance, the less reliable the firearm will function. There is a balancing act, especially on the hand fitting side of the house.
> 
> With the more modern manufacturing computer and laser guided CNC, milling, etc. It pretty easy to get a super accurate and reliable firearm right out of the box. Than again, your average shooter can't even shoot to the accuracy of the firearm, so it becomes a bit of a moot point.



Yes sir! I hate using trendy terms, but you are dead on. The tool is part of the system. The Operator of the tool is additionally part of the system. Not that tools and operators don't come together in perfect harmony, but a novice shooter most likely could not extract all of the mechanical accuracy from either a Wilson Super Grade or a High Point. Just as you wouldn't normally drift a set of sights with a framing hammer, the tools should be picked for the job.   Perhaps there are places for all. This is going to sound way wrong no matter how I put it. In a combat pistol, I like them a little sloppy and very wet. I run plenty of lube on frame rails and bearing surfaces and don't want a such a tight barrel lock up, that a little bit of crud could cause a failure to work as advertised. I have seen some 1911's that cost as much as a good used car, positively choke. I have also seen others like my mid range priced Colt's just chug along with intrepid reliability ( so far ) I am sure that the folks in Smyrna have had issues, but I have had zero problems ever with a Glock product. My son now owns my Austrian proofed circa 1989 Glock 17, that has never had one failure of any kind. It is on its second set of night sights, but that falls under PM's.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 13, 2016)

I like my 1911s.  Now, I never had to carry one in the service, but mine have been pretty reliable.  I also have no issue with Glocks.  Have them, too.  For CCW for years I carried a 1911; now, a Glock.  Mainly because of easy of maintenance, simplicity of manual of arms, and it is idiot-proof.  But I don't think it's safe to assume the 1911 doesn't have a place.  Between the 1911 and the Browning Hi Power that type of gun has done about as much damage as any other, more than some.


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 13, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> I like my 1911s.  Now, I never had to carry one in the service, but mine have been pretty reliable.  I also have no issue with Glocks.  Have them, too.  For CCW for years I carried a 1911; now, a Glock.  Mainly because of easy of maintenance, simplicity of manual of arms, and it is idiot-proof.  But I don't think it's safe to assume the 1911 doesn't have a place.  Between the 1911 and the Browning Hi Power that type of gun has done about as much damage as any other, more than some.


I own one Colt's Stainless Government XSE. It has thus far proved 100% reliable, and will make one hole groups if I do my part. When it reaches a thousand round of my duty ammunition ( Federal HST ) I'll rotate it in to the "carry" group.
I really like it and since I have really small hands for a guy, it feels nearly perfect.
Respectfully
j


----------



## Etype (Jun 14, 2016)

policemedic said:


> ... Glock (and was responsible for some design changes)...


Which design changes besides magazine colors?


----------



## policemedic (Jun 14, 2016)

Etype said:


> Which design changes besides magazine colors?



From what I understand, the RTF frame.


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 15, 2016)

Of the Glock pistols I have seen with my own eyes ( not speculating on others armories ) I have observed Gen 3 Black Glock 19's with factory Glock night sights, Gen 3 FDE Glock 22's with both contrast and factory night sights. The G-19 magazines were black and the G-22's were FDE. There was also a mix of standard capacity magazines and those with factory +2 floor plates installed. I did not ask to handle any of the pistols, but don't remember any RTF or RTF 2.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 15, 2016)

Leave the barrel alone (outside of the g22) and you cannot beat a glock on reliability...period.


----------



## policemedic (Jun 15, 2016)

Johnboy said:


> Of the Glock pistols I have seen with my own eyes ( not speculating on others armories ) I have observed Gen 3 Black Glock 19's with factory Glock night sights, Gen 3 FDE Glock 22's with both contrast and factory night sights. The G-19 magazines were black and the G-22's were FDE. There was also a mix of standard capacity magazines and those with factory +2 floor plates installed. I did not ask to handle any of the pistols, but don't remember any RTF or RTF 2.



Whose pistols were these?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 15, 2016)

It's a stupid argument all around, I'm going to divorce my wife, and the only thing available to read is 1911 tech vs 1985 tech. 

Like what you like, own what you like, and those that don't have a choice, become proficient, or be made fun of....


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 16, 2016)

policemedic said:


> Whose pistols were these?


It was a small mobil "connex" type armory of some commercial type visiting the Los Alamitos Army Air Base in Southern California.
A group of United States Army Special Forces guys were there for a demonstration and cross training with the Los Angeles Police Department SWAT and SIS.
I didn't dare ask who they were or their specific MOS. I'll tell you that the fella's were all very, very kind
and answered questions that they could. Were they not in multi-cam, and perhaps Levis and t-shirts, they could have passed for an OMG. ( be it a VERY fit and health conscious bike club )
When I expressed an interest in their kit, they asked what I did and I told them. One of the fellows handling  small arms said " go ahead have a look, but please no touching "
The pistols were on a peg type board and magazines in .50 ammo cans.

I was recently told by Shadow Spear staff, that I should answer questions forthwith, so this is what I am doing. I was also asked  by the same staff, to depart forthwith as I was not a proper fit in your community.
So sir,  I wish you well and adieu.
Very respectfully
j

MOD Edit: you were never asked to leave this site.


----------



## 8654Maine (Jun 16, 2016)

I carried the MEUSOC pistol as my secondary for years during my time in.

No issue.

My current CCW alternates between G19, 1911, XD.  No issue.

I love these silly arguments.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 16, 2016)

Johnboy said:


> It was a small mobil "connex" type armory of some commercial type visiting the Los Alamitos Army Air Base in Southern California.
> A group of United States Army Special Forces guys were there for a demonstration and cross training with the Los Angeles Police Department SWAT and SIS.
> I didn't dare ask who they were or their specific MOS. I'll tell you that the fella's were all very, very kind
> and answered questions that they could. Were they not in multi-cam, and perhaps Levis and t-shirts, they could have passed for an OMG. ( be it a VERY fit and health conscious bike club )
> ...




You were never told, or asked  to depart  this site. We did note the differences between the Prison Guard world and the SOF world. Your vetting application requesting "Verified SWAT"  status was rejected for lack of supporting documentation. You were, and are invited to take part in forum discussions as an "Unverified" civilian site member. What you chose to do with that status is up to you, but you were never asked to leave this site. Your welcome to this site still stands.


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 16, 2016)

8654Maine said:


> I carried the MEUSOC pistol as my secondary for years during my time in.
> 
> No issue.
> 
> ...



Oh golly no argument from me! Right tool for the right job is always my best case scenario .
In the civilian LE world Officers should be allowed to carry a fighting caliber, effective ammunition and kit that allows them confidence and safety! But as we see all too often, a Chief, Sheriff, Marshall ect. decides for what ever motivation, that one size must fit all. Yes, given time and patience an odd fit choice can be trained up to. But, sadly small departments and CCW holders all to often lack the funding, to do that extensive of a training work up. A large Southern California Department has a 40 Hr. Glock to 1911 course prior to armorer/range staff approval.
In the course of my work, I train folks on a variety of handguns. I must say being currently stationed in Southern California, we are Glock central. But Glocks, Sig Sauer's and 1911's predominate.
As of late we've observed a smattering of Smith M&P's coming on line as well.
I have a some personal favorites, but I would never fouist my opinion on anyone else.
If the ( pistol ) is of high quality, the ammunition proven effective and the carrier of said platform feels safe doing so, by all means carry in confidence. I will gently proffer an opinion if a see an Officer report to the line, who has a brand new Glock twenty.... Wears a size seven US Gov't glove and weighs a hundred pounds in gear. But for the most part, unless a student/RQ person has a horrible attitude, I can work with them.
Very respectfully
j


----------



## Johnboy (Jun 16, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> Leave the barrel alone (outside of the g22) and you cannot beat a glock on reliability...period.



Personal opinion only.... I do not care for the .40 Smith and Wesson caliber at all!
I own two training Glock 22's and they languish unless I require them for a class.
( I attempt to carry what the students/RQ folks are carrying to be sure to walk the walk )
And yes an elephant in the room,  is the G22 with a weapon mounted light!
 ( all Gen's and intermediates )
They still have cycling issues with the less snappy ammunition(s) 180 gr Ranger "T" and 180 gr. Federal HST. Most seem alright with the 165 gr. Ranger, HST and Speer Gold Dot.
Very respectfully
j


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 16, 2016)

Bottom line, I don't give two fucks if you are a special ninja turtle or a lame dick booger eater. RF1 is one of the best people on here. For him to post what he did, speaks volumes and is everything I will ever need to know.

Stupid.


----------



## AWP (Jun 16, 2016)

On those excellent notes, does anyone have anything technical to add to a 5 year old thread?


----------



## 104TN (Jun 16, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> On those excellent notes, does anyone have anything technical to add to a 5 year old thread?



I don't believe I saw it mentioned in this thread, but Colt was awarded a contract to manufacturer an updated 1911 for MARSOC a few years back. It appears the Marines that would be issued them are being given a choice between the M45 and Glock though. More details here.

Similar to the Army's MHS and M4A1+ debacles, makes you wonder why individual service/unit leaders can't just make their own purchasing decisions and save the tax payer the expense all the eval/bid related crap that takes place for a contract to be awarded just to have it thrown out the window any way.


----------



## 8654Maine (Jun 16, 2016)

I got nothing technical, but I guess my preference is more due to nostalgia.

I have a friend who is a serious shooter and collector.

He has some high end 1911's, i.e. Les Baer, Nighthawk, Ed Brown, etc... 

They were nice but TIGHT.  

One thing with the MEUSOC pistols that I used, it rattled.  These were late 80's and 90's.  These were the first times that I heard of Pachmyr grips, Wilson mags and Barsto barrels.  I could shake it and hear the noise.

But it never failed me and it hit where the sights were aimed.  I jumped with them, dove with them, heck, I even slept with them.  

My friend sold some of his high end 1911's for G19's, XD's and M&P's.

I am trying to convert some Springfield's and Remington's to mimic my old MEUSOC's.


----------



## AWP (Jun 16, 2016)

8654Maine said:


> He has some high end 1911's, i.e. Les Baer, Nighthawk, Ed Brown, etc...
> 
> They were nice but TIGHT.
> 
> One thing with the MEUSOC pistols that I used, it rattled.  These were late 80's and 90's.  These were the first times that I heard of Pachmyr grips, Wilson mags and Barsto barrels.  I could shake it and hear the noise.



I owned a GI model Springfield which was loose, even new. The handful, 5-6, of competition 1911's I've shot were all very tight. The former rattled and the latter obviously did not. The only malfunctions I witnessed on the comp guns were due to reduced power ammo or recoil springs. 

I only bring this up because some of the folks reading this may not understand the large differences between a competition gun and a model built to JMB's original specs.


----------



## Etype (Jun 16, 2016)

Johnboy said:


> And yes an elephant in the room,  is the G22 with a weapon mounted light!
> ( all Gen's and intermediates )
> They still have cycling issues with the less snappy ammunition(s) 180 gr Ranger "T" and 180 gr. Federal HST. Most seem alright with the 165 gr. Ranger, HST and Speer Gold Dot.
> Very respectfully
> j



What makes it an elephant in the room?

Every gun has cycling issues with less snappy ammo, that's a scientific fact of any semi-automatic weapon and the fault of the operator.


----------



## busdriver (Jun 16, 2016)

Doesn't the 22 use the same recoil spring as a 17?


----------



## Etype (Jun 16, 2016)

busdriver said:


> Doesn't the 22 use the same recoil spring as a 17?


Yes, 16# I think.


----------



## busdriver (Jun 16, 2016)

Ironic that the 17 doesn't have a problem cycling with 9mm ammo.


----------



## policemedic (Jun 16, 2016)

busdriver said:


> Ironic that the 17 doesn't have a problem cycling with 9mm ammo.



The issue was believed to be related to weapon lights affecting the way the polymer frame flexed, especially if overly tightened.  Take the light off and the weapon worked.  That being said, at least one agency made a video documenting that the 22 worked fine with a light, as long as the shooter didn't limp wrist it (a common problem with all types of Glocks).

ETA:  The problem was only reported on the .40s.


----------



## Etype (Jun 17, 2016)

I've never had an issue with my 22 cycling, it always has an X300V on it.

That being said, you can't tighten X300 series lights.  They snap into place and have a slight amount of play in them which may alleviate the problem.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Jun 17, 2016)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> Accurate - 1911
> 
> Reliable - Glock



So, has anyone disproved that the GLOCK is more reliable then the 1911 or The 1911 is more accurate then the GLOCK?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 17, 2016)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> So, has anyone disproved that the GLOCK is more reliable then the 1911 or The 1911 is more accurate then the GLOCK?



I tried to explain this to you the last time. Glock can be just as accurate as a 1911 designed pistol. Go get a Barstow match barrel for any Glock that needs hand fitting, it will be stupid accurate, but wont feed for shit unless properly fit and broken in. On the other end of your statement, go get a Lama 1911, and tell me if they accurate. Again, its a moot point as most shooters cannot shoot to the accuracy level of the gun.

I think these kind of statements X is better than Y or that Z has this over X and Y don't bring anything useful to discussing firearms. Not that everyone doesn't have a preference or opinion, I generally however, find those opinions to completely biased at best or lacking professional knowledge at worst. 1911's are known for their accuracy and Glock is known for their reliability. However, again that doesn't make the statement all inclusive and can be proven wrong in the right persons hands with the right modification.


----------



## busdriver (Jun 17, 2016)

The availability of 1911 "upgrade" parts and the nature of every company cloning a 100+ year old design and making changes, leads to the 1911s are unreliable stigma.  

They don't require gypsy tears to be reliable, but they do require all the parts to be individually fitted with the modern incarnation's clearances.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 17, 2016)

Etype said:


> I've never had an issue with my 22 cycling, it always has an X300V on it.
> 
> That being said, you can't tighten X300 series lights.  They snap into place and have a slight amount of play in them which may alleviate the problem.



I have a G22 that's had a M3 streamlight on it for 13 years, using 180 & 165 grain ammo and has never failed to cycle, once, ever. Can't tell how many rounds I have through it, but its been my LE instructor pistol the whole time. So I would imagine upwards 50k rds. I replace the recoil spring every 3-4 classes, respring the whole gun every year and use good mags. 

I've seen a few break, manufacturing defects in the polymer around the roll pins, or kaboom with reloaded ammo.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Jun 17, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> 1911's are known for their accuracy and Glock is known for their reliability. However, again that doesn't make the statement all inclusive and can be proven wrong in the right persons hands with the right modification.



Thanks!


----------



## policemedic (Jun 17, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I have a G22 that's had a M3 streamlight on it for 13 years, using 180 & 165 grain ammo and has never failed to cycle, once, ever. Can't tell how many rounds I have through it, but its been my LE instructor pistol the whole time. So I would imagine upwards 50k rds. I replace the recoil spring every 3-4 classes, respring the whole gun every year and use good mags.
> 
> I've seen a few break, manufacturing defects in the polymer around the roll pins, or kaboom with reloaded ammo.



Many people had no problem with the 22 w/light, which is why I'm in the operator headspace and timing group.   But some people did, and it was a hot topic for a bit.  For what it's worth, headspace and timing includes tightening the screw on the TLR-1 until you strip the screw....

It only happened with the 22 and I think the 23.


----------



## 256 (May 29, 2018)

Etype said:


> I've never had an issue with my 22 cycling, it always has an X300V on it.
> 
> That being said, you can't tighten X300 series lights.  They snap into place and have a slight amount of play in them which may alleviate the problem.



I have a X300U-B which uses the screw. My understanding was Surefire has to pay to use that clip/snap connection, so they are trying to phase in the screw option. The screw version will change the recoil of my 17 if I over tighten it. I use the red loctite on the screw so i don’t have to over tighten it.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 21, 2018)

busdriver said:


> The availability of 1911 "upgrade" parts and the nature of every company cloning a 100+ year old design and making changes, leads to the 1911s are unreliable stigma.
> 
> They don't require gypsy tears to be reliable, but they do require all the parts to be individually fitted with the modern incarnation's clearances.



A wise old sage who has forgotten more about the 1911 than I will ever know said "it's just a machine.  If it's in spec, it'll run.  It doesn't have a choice."


----------



## Box (Jun 21, 2018)

I like a pistol that works well enough for me to get to cover so I can get my rifle working again.

Ideally it would be a 45 caliber, all steel, striker fired, match grade, high capacity, lightweight pistol with fully adjustable sites and the ability to mount an RMR that is capable of holding 2 inch groups at 50 meters using GI grade ammunition while still being able to feed the decreased power target loads that I like to shoot at the range and JHP rounds when I need it for personal protection.

...and if I cant find one that meets those strict requirements, an M9 will work just as well


----------



## Gunz (Jun 30, 2018)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> So, has anyone disproved that the GLOCK is more reliable then the 1911 or The 1911 is more accurate then the GLOCK?



Depends on who's shooting and maintaining them.

I like a 1911 only because I achieved Zen with it when I was a bush rat and have owned them and fired thousands upon thousands of rounds through them.


----------

