M1911 vs. M9

The Sight M1911-A1 ^ | unknown | unattributed

[Dawgsquat]

M1911vsM9

Click here for The Sight's main menu	Visit The Sight's Gear and Supply Shop
M1911 vs. M9

In 1985, the United States Armed Forces replaced the M1911 with the Beretta 92 F to the everlasting consternation of 1911 devotees everywhere. There were several reasons for the switch. The U.S. was the only NATO country not using a 9mm as the standard issue sidearm and there was a desire to issue a pistol chambered for the ubiquitous 9mm for logistical reasons. The Beretta will hold 15 rounds in its magazine as compared with 7 rounds of the military issue 1911 magazine and is lighter and easier to field strip than the 1911. The double action/single action Beretta was perceived as being a safer pistol to carry in a state of readiness than the "cocked and locked" 1911. In some quarters, the .45 ACP was viewed as too powerful and difficult to control for those having only nominal training with the weapon.

Defenders of the 1911 will vehemently contest these last three perceptions, pointing to the superior trigger and durability of the 1911, and the superior stopping power and inherent accuracy of the .45 ACP cartridge. In terms of safety, three conditions must be met for the cocked and locked 1911 to fire: (1) a firing grip must depress the grip safety; (2) the manual safety must be taken off, and (3) the trigger must be pulled. Nevertheless, it looks scary and the Armed Forces have documented negligent discharges from improperly handled pistols.

It could be said that the 1911 fell victim to its own mythology. I grew up hearing the stories of the .45--that it kicked so badly that an inexperienced person couldn't hit a door from twenty feet away with one, that a man, struck anywhere on the body by a .45 round would be knocked down as if hit by a truck, and that you could shoot down a Japanese Zero with a .45. (A Zero was downed with a .45 but by a head shot on the pilot by an American aviator parachuting from a bomber. The Zero was trying to strafe the American.) In 1998 The FBI S.W.A.T. team adopted the Springfield 1911A1 as standard issue. Anecdotal evidence out of Desert Storm indicates that the Berettas jammed because of the fine sand in the desert and the Marines broke out the 1911's.

My Own Opinion:

The M9, Beretta 92 F, has the smoothest slide and the lightest recoil spring of any major caliber pistol I know of. When you rack the slide of the M9, you can feel the precision and quality of its manufacture. Those bottomless 15-round magazines could prove to be life savers should you decide to shoot it out with the Crips or invade a small foreign country. My wife is of the opinion that the Beretta is the nicest shooting autoloader around. It has a very good trigger for a DA/SA and the long barrel and sight radius give it adequate accuracy.

Too bad the 92 F is a 9mm. The 9mm is a reasonable defensive round. It will do its part if you do yours, but of course, the same could be said of a .32 caliber pocket gun. Questions have been raised about the "stopping power" of the 9mm and people whose lives depend on their handguns have been migrating away from the 9mm and toward the .40 S&W and .45 ACP in recent years. If I had to shoot someone and I had one shot to do the job, I'd rather that shot be a 230 grain .45 ACP.

My target and competition gun is a Kimber Compact. The question of "inherent accuracy" is the grist of endless debates, but I do believe that some cartridges are more inherently accurate than others. I base this on nothing more than my own experience with shooting them. In my hands, .38 and .45 are more accurate rounds than 9mm and .40 S&W. I shoot .45 with much greater accuracy than I do 9mm, so it is more rewarding for me to shoot .45 for fun and competition. .45 ACP is heavier and more expensive than 9mm, and folks who are particularly recoil sensitive will enjoy the 9mm more than the .45. Last, but not least, 9mm pistols tend to be lighter and more comfortable to carry than 1911s, although some lightweight models of the 1911 are beginning to appear.

Did the Armed Forces make a good choice? Well, I hope so. The M1911 isn't the best gun for a beginner. In an absolute sense, the M9 is probably safer at ready than an M1911, although, in the hands of a trained person, the 1911 is perfectly safe. The additional rounds might also be an advantage to the nominally trained soldier or law enforcement officer possessed of marginal marksmanship. Which one do I like the best? The M1911, of course.

 

MORE BERETTA 92 LINKS

Beretta's Model 92FS Page

Beretta Info Page

Francesco's Unofficial Beretta Page

M9 Manual (PDF) from BiggerHammer

---

If you don't see a blue navigation button above, click here.

This page was last updated on 12/13/01

[wjcsux]

Awesome! I am also green with envy! A friend of mine has a Thompson that I have shot many times. They are the nicest full-auto firearm next to the BAR. Unfortunately, they have gone clear out of sight price-wise since the NFA Class III laws were changed.

[Shooter 2.5]

" Bwahahaha! Good one! Competition has nothing to do with combat conditions."

The only way competition can duplicate combat conditions is if someone was shooting back. The only problem with dismissing competitions is that it's the ultimate in practice. There is no better way to practice than to get into competition. The guns have to work, the ammo can't fail, and the shooter has to adapt to different scenarios that they don't have any control over.

For anyone who tries to practice on their own: Did you practice shooting from a "flat on your back" position lately? Shooting from barricades? Behind cars? Seated at a table? Shooting moving targets? Were you out there when it's 40 degrees with a 20 mile an hour wind gusts. 110 degrees? Weak hand? One handed?

Competition can't duplicate warfare. Competition is more practice and it allows you to grade your practice.

[allthingsnew]

Many thanks to all who replied.

[Tailback]

You must have overlooked the part in post #85 where I specifically said I'd take an M240 over just about anything if I didn't have to carry it If I DID have to carry it I'd take an M4 Carbine with an aimpoint comp ML sight and a pvs-14 night vision monocle.

[PatrioticAmerican]

Unfortunately, many competitors also use guns that would never be seen in combat. People need training and competitive use of defensive, not special purpose, firearms. IDPA helps in this purpose.

[Travis McGee]

Lucky for machine gunners, they have helos and trucks dropping off crates of ammo all the time.

For those of us who may have to make do with what we can carry, the answer is 5.56mm.

[Travis McGee]

PVS 14? Why the old stuff?

[SERE_DOC]

Mine is not full auto, but the feel is the same, very heavy but sweet none-the-less

[Noumenon]

9mm is fine for Europeans, but for dangerous people, ya need a .45 ;0)

Or a 10mm. 15 rounds of black talon in my Glock mod 20 makes it a great 'looking for trouble' pistol. It's accurate and handles well. I used both my mod 20 and a SIG 229 in .40 to qualify for my Idaho CWP.

[eyes_only]

if I DID have to carry it I'd take an M4 Carbine with an aimpoint comp ML sight and a pvs-14 night vision monocle.

Amen Brother!!

I'd take my Oly M4gery any day of the week...

[Billthedrill]

Roger on the toughness of polymer frames - I saw a fellow run over a Glock with a truck not too long ago. It didn't shoot any worse afterwards (he wasn't much better a shooter than he was a driver...)

[wardaddy]

Travis, Amen to your logical argument on 223 vs 308 that convinced me on this very issue over a year ago now.

On the pistols....I like both. I prefer a 1911 style .45 because of how it feels in my hand and the bullet weight but I also own an old 92SB and a Taurus 99...both of which have very smooth action just as the article said. Pistols are generally for up close needs and the ammo weight may not be quite as large a concern as with a rifle and there are a number of high cap. (pre ban) .45s to choose from.

One 9mm I cannot shoot well and which has been in my family for decades is the High Power....I know it's wonderful and well made. Likewise, the large HK .45 tacticals are not really my cup of tea either but they are state of the art ..no doubt.

Just some thoughts.

[Travis McGee]

I think the best pistol is the one you like and shoot the best.

For some, that may be a revolver, for some it might me a .22 target pistol.

[wardaddy]

You're right...and if you want simple and almost fail-proof then a revolver is the ticket....I have just never been as accurate with them ....but I'm improving. My wife's little titanium .38 hammerless has the sharpest recoil of any pistol I've shot (due to it's 10.7 oz weight) but it's perfect for her to pull from her purse and empty 5 Glazers into an assailant 5-10 feet away ...if need be.

I work in a rough part of town and I'm always chatting with lady customers about their best protection....I always advise a light .38/357 or maybe a .44 special...but always a simple lightweight revolver....it ain't rocket science is it?? and you need not be a crack shot.

As for home protection for a single female (or anybody else)...a big loyal territorial male dog is also a must. My 70 year old mom is well served by her 100 lb Dobie...and her lightweight .38/357....she took the course and has had her CCW for 3 years now since my dad passed on.

regards.

[Travis McGee]

99% of civilians are led astray by thinking like soldiers or SWAT cops when they buy a pistol.

In reality, nearly 0% of pistol fights occur at over 50 feet, 70% are at less than 21 feet, 50% are at less than 10 feet, and 30% are "in contact" or wrestling matches.

The SWAT cop uses his high cap pistol fully aware, psyched, ready to storm a building.

The opposite is true for the civilian. He is surprised, often awakened at night, it is unplanned. The premium must be on simplicity and reliability. Pull and shoot. For me that's a revolver.

In a sudden unexpected crisis, you will have tunnel vision, ringing in the ears, and clumsy frozen fingers. Every decision which you may need to make introduces an element which may cause brain freeze and failure. The second taken to think "did I chamber a round in this auto last month" can kill you as your brain forces you to check. Your clumsy frozen fingers may then jam your gun as you pull the slide back to look. This is all happening while some dirtbag is stabbing or clubbing you or your wife. That's just one example, safeties introduce another "area of doubt": "Does the safety on this one go up or down?" People will laugh, but in a crisis, this really happens. Or folks don't get a shot off because on their carry gun the safety is "up", and this one is "down", so they push it the wrong way and never fire. This really happens, when you go from happy (or sleeping) camper to attack victim with no warning.

That's why for the civilian, who does not shoot every week, and who may not see his bedside gun for weeks, a revolver is best. It is just "point and shoot" with no "decisions" to hobble your brain with fatal doubt.

[Cogadh na Sith]

Bravo! Bravo!!!!

[Cogadh na Sith]

If it's just you, with no Uncle Sam's ammo truck following you around, what you can carry may have to last all day....or longer.

I just got an FN L1A1 (7.62 NATO). I love it. I've got an AR15 and carried an M16 professionally in Infantry units....

The L1A1 with ammo is a heckuva hump! Heavy rifle, heavy ammo. As a did some hiking with it, I became much more fatigued with it than I ever did carring the AR15.

Ugh... for that kind of extra weight, I'd rather be carrying a GPMG like the M60 and have a serious increase in firepower for all the extra weight.

5.56mm has kinda re-earned my respect.

[tortoise]

Take a good look at how small and thin the metal guide rails are on the glock. Also notice that when you want to change the magazine base plate that you squeeze the magazine together to get the base off.

I think the Glock magazines are made out of a flimsier material than the frames. As I stated, I don't have a Glock at hand to look at it myself. This is generally true of all polymer magazines; they are not made out of the same material as the frame and the good ones are reinforced with metal. I am guessing in the case of magazines it is merely a cost issue, as using cheap plastic and stamped metal is cheaper than fabricating it with good composites.

Regardless, as I stated before, there is zero play in the H&K frames even under high pressure. They are extremely stiff, and the kinds of problems you are talking about simply can't happen with them. I'd be willing to bet that some of the other polymer framed pistols exhibit similar stiffness as the H&K. Maybe Glock isn't one of these (damn, now I'll have to check next time I have my Glock around), and I have noticed that they use flimsier polymer parts than most, but you are painting with a really wide brush. That said, one of the reasons I have never been a Glock-phile (despite the fact that so many people that I know are) is that there are annoying deficiencies in the way the magazines operate with the pistol.

Of course you can call me a liar but my friend I don't need to BS anyone about this subject.

I have seen dozens upon dozens of extreme forms of abuse on Glocks, including people putting extreme torsional forces on the frame, and I've never once seen or even heard of such a failure. Which is why I suggested that there must have been something else wrong with the weapon for that to happen. Perhaps something anomalous did happen with your Glock; either way it hardly represents a trend.

The number of rounds that go through a competition pistol shows the endurance of any gun under heavey use type of conditions.

These are bogus criteria. The "endurance" of a pistol is utterly irrelevant in a military context. Reliability, on the other hand, is of utmost importance, as is durability. Cost is important too. Some of the contract rack pistols models for the U.S. military have a MRBF of >10,000 rounds on average. Shooting every kind of ammo you can think of. Military contract M1911s can't even do 1,000 MRBF with ball ammo. Competitive shooting doesn't do anything to test the design limits of reliability for a pistol, as you are shooting fine quality ammo out of a clean pistol in a pristine shooting environment. A soldier wants a pistol that goes bang every time, even if it has been dragged through the mud or dropped in the ocean. An M1911 doesn't do this very well. Note also that the SIG, H&K, and Beretta platforms have all seen a fair amount of action in the U.S. military, so they could hardly be considered unproven.

Even more competition tells you what gun handles the best as the many different styles of competition(bullseye,IPSC,IDPA and three gun matches) shows by the winner what make handles well under stress.

That is a false premise. A good shooter can take a crap pistol and beat a bad shooter with a race gun every time. The favored guns for matches are the guns that are well-suited for winning the matches; this says nothing about their suitability for combat. The criteria for a good combat pistol are vastly different than the criteria for a good match pistol. And you see a lot fewer M1911s winning and competing in matches that require that you use a stock weapon.

While I do think Glocks and H&Ks are very good for their police application I would rather have a battle poven weapon with the history of the 1911.

History doesn't win a battle. Many battles were won with swords, but I wouldn't take one into combat.

Incidentally, putting Glock and H&K together in the same basket is simply wrong as they have very different design histories. The Glock platform was originally designed to meet the requirements of a European police contract. The H&K platform was originally designed to meet the requirements of a U.S. Spec Ops contract. There are a number of functional design differences between these platforms that make it very clear which was designed as a serious military weapon and which was designed as a police pistol. "Polymer" does not equal "police".

[wardaddy]

Bump...

I keep within reach an old Super Blackhawk and my wife's ultra lightweight .38 as well as a last resort North American Arms .32 auto ( I know it's a bit small but I got the gun through a freebie..I wish it was the .380 Guardian)..all are loaded with Glazers. I love the Blackhawk...I know that it will always fire and in "inside the house" range I'm not likely to miss plus cocking an SA is instinctive for me. If the .44 mag Glazer hits an assailant's torso they are in serious trouble. And if I can get to my gun cabinet (in my bedroom) then it's showtime.

I saw some coyotes in my yard last week at dawn and I sprang into action and grabbed the Blackhawk and ran towards the door in my boxers but by the time I got outside (it was about 25 degrees) they were headed up the ridge and outta range. During the past month a group of them have killed a cat next door and a puppy across the street and with many of us having toddlers in our yards at times I wanted to send the pack a message to move on. You should have seen the look on my wife's face as I raced by as she was having her morning java...me in boxers toting my hand cannon. LOL...ordinarily I'm not much on shooting coyotes but I fear turning my back for a moment when I'm out back with my 20 month old....fears of the Dingo thing..i guess. If they'll shred a pup ..they worry me.

I had a fellow break in my house while in college....I didn't shoot him with my model 28 .357 but I could have....he ran as he saw me with my pistol. Today with 3 children and a wife in my house...I would act much differently I fear.