Don't get me wrong. It's a fun gun to shoot and very well built. Many handguns were worked after it, including the TT-30 and 33 series pitols. The thing is all the practical merits of this particular handgun are gone. While the .45 round does have good performance for close range self defense, it's simply too big for what it is- that is evidenced by the fact that despite the energy the cartridge produces, the pressure on the case is, compared to other modern handgun cartridges, rather low. On top of that, when compared to modern handguns in luger that have their roots in the Wonder nines, these can often hold over two times as much. I agree that at close range that most self defense situations take place in america, one .45 round might have better stopping power than 9mm luger, but certainly a single .45 won't outperform two or more 9mm rounds. Even mode modern handguns for the cartridge, like CZ 97B cannot usually hold more than 10 rounds, compared to CZ p-09 in luger with 20 rounds. For the original M1911 it's only 7 rounds, which in my opinion does not give much advantage over revolvers which are, in my opinion, better if you want to defend yourself with strong rounds while firing few rounds.
So what I don't understand, why do so many companies make M1911 copies when handguns have evolved past them? Is it because that people avoid revolvers even at roles they might be better at? Is it because of the rich history the handgun boasts? Or is it because they hate 9mm luger that much for being a "nazi round"?
yes, it is overrated.
>>29456737
Ergonomics, style, god tier reliability, and the fact that 7 rounds of .45 is plenty good for most of what you'll encounter.
Plus, plenty of people are really used to 1911s, and the best gun is the gun you're proficient with.
They're outdated, yes, but they're plenty good for what they are.
>>29456737
I would have to say it's simply due to the rich history the M-1911 has with the American military. That's the reason I bought mine.
>>29456848
>god tier reliability
>>29456900
They are, if held to GI specs.
All of these super custom, hand fit ones have given the 1911 kinda a bad rep for it.
>>29456900
Make that "god tier simplicity"
But once you worked out what ever kinks yours has, then near god tier reliability.
>>29456737
>the pressure on the case is, compared to other modern handgun cartridges, rather low.
.45 super
230 grn @ 1,100 fps
>On top of that, when compared to modern handguns in luger that have their roots in the Wonder nines, these can often hold over two times as much.
Glock 17: 17 rounds
Glock 21: 13 rounds
>but certainly a single .45 won't outperform two or more 9mm rounds.
The average defensive gun use involves 2 or 3 rounds being fired, depending on the source.
>Even mode modern handguns for the cartridge, like CZ 97B cannot usually hold more than 10 rounds, compared to CZ p-09 in luger with 20 rounds.
the p-09 has a much longer grip, and the mag sticks out rather far
>For the original M1911 it's only 7 rounds,
8 round flush fit mags exist
So it's a total of 9 rounds.
>So what I don't understand, why do so many companies make M1911 copies when handguns have evolved past them?
The problem probably starts with you fundamentally misunderstanding a lot of things.
>>29456927
>.45 super
I should have been clear I was talking about .45 ACP, in which all but a few 1911 are chambered, as 10mm reigns superior over those. I give you that though,, its excellent yet simple design means better adaptability to bigger cartridges.
Never used glocks, so I didnt know about G21. I guess getting one for close range self defense makes sense, though I still think .45 acp has more shortcomings than pros. My point was about 1911s though, and one extra round with a flush mag doesn't exactly change that much.
>>29456986
>I should have been clear I was talking about .45 ACP, in which all but a few 1911 are chambered
You can put .45 super into a gun chambered for .45 acp
It's externally the same dimensions.
Just much higher pressure, with thicker case walls.
>>29456737
Compared to many more recent designs, yes.
>>29457004
I definitely wouldn't dare to load .45 super into a gun that wasn't specifically made for it, and then I would just buy 10mm auto instead.
>>29457019
>I definitely wouldn't dare to load .45 super into a gun that wasn't specifically made for it,
.45 super is literally made to be put in guns chambered in .45 acp
You should probably get more beefy recoil springs if you plan to shoot it often, but it's not like it'll blow up your gun.
The Harley Davidson of guns
