Double stack 1911

[Lead Waster]

If you are willing to stray from 1911, then there are a ton of choices, with the most "1911-ish" feeling one probably the CZ75 SAO with competition hammer. Still not a 1911 (hinged trigger on CZ) but pretty darn good and right in your price range.... and built for 9mm.

Otherwise, you'll have to SSE2 a 2011 or an RIA A2 model. Or PPT something.

Check the brian enos website, there are lots of competitors there selling off their old guns, probably a bunch of 9mm double stacked 2011s there. But also not in that price range.

[Lead Waster]

9mm 1911 (single stack) fits 10 with a slightly extended baseplate. If it ships with a magwell, 10 round mags are pretty much standard.

EDIT: if you're really stuck on the doublestack, try this: https://limited-10.com/store/products/1911-sse.html
It's out of your budget, but you might be able to stay under $1200 if you resell the single shot upper afterwards.

True, and really, what's the point of double stack in CA? Like SilentPea said .. 10 round magazines is the standard 9mm 1911 magazine size. (unlike 7 or 8 for .45s).

If you just like fatter grips, I'm sure there's a way to fatten up 1911 grips. (ie even rubber slip-on sleeves would do that).

If you are exempt from 10 rounds/magazine, then you're exempt from the roster too. But unless you are LEO, you're not. So consider why you want the double stacked 9mm 1911.

[bountyhunter]

There are only 3 para ordnance guns on roster and all are .45 not 9mm.

True, getting a P-18-9 would require a used one on PPT.

[bountyhunter]

Don't most single stack 9mm 1911s have at least 9-round capacity? The Range Officer does. Having a double stack that's limited to 10 rounds doesn't seem to be worth the effort unless it fits your hands better.

Yes, Standard single stack mag is 9 rounds and some aftermarket mags will hold ten. However, in the double stack magazine, you can buy a .40SW magazine (ten round) and tweak the feed lips slightly so it holds 9mm and the capacity is typically 14 - 15 rounds of 9mm. It's still legal AFAIK.

[pipboy]

you can buy a .40SW magazine (ten round) and tweak the feed lips slightly so it holds 9mm and the capacity is typically 14 - 15 rounds of 9mm. It's still legal AFAIK.

This sounds dangerously like "manufacturing" a high capacity 9mm magazine and would not be advocating this. Refer to CA PC 32310.

[JTROKS]

CA is not the place to live if you want certain type of guns that are available to regular law abiding citizen in a free state.

[bountyhunter]

This sounds dangerously like "manufacturing" a high capacity 9mm magazine and would not be advocating this. Refer to CA PC 32310.

I called kali DOJ and asked them directly. As long as the magazine is still functional as a .40 mag (original function) you have not manufactured a new magazine. And there is no "industry standard" spacing for magazine feed lips so it would be impossible to measure and definitively claim it was "9mm only".

As a matter of fact, the factory magazines supplied with the Beretta 92 (9mm) and 96 (.40SW) us the exact same magazine tube for full capacity units.

Based on this, I believe it would be impossible to prosecute a person for having a magazine which had been "tweaked" by narrowing the feed lips. Obviously, some cop in San Francisco might confiscate it as a "nuisance" if he sees it holds more than 10 rounds but that's a different issue.

[penguinofsleep]

What is a good double stack 1911 in 9mm? I would prefer to spend like $500-$700 so a colt is not really what i am looking for.

Nite sights would be great. ANy recommendations.

Can you recommend me a good functional space ship for $1k? Neither can I?

Doesn't mean I don't agree with you about guns being overpriced though. Especially when if the manufacturer does a good job most guns should cost under $100 to produce (ex a Glock costs them $35 to make and $10 of that is in the barrel). I get that 1911s usually take some manual labor by a skilled and trained human being, but again, that's where getting it together with manufacturing would come in.

[pipboy]

I called kali DOJ and asked them directly. As long as the magazine is still functional as a .40 mag (original function) you have not manufactured a new magazine. And there is no "industry standard" spacing for magazine feed lips so it would be impossible to measure and definitively claim it was "9mm only".

As a matter of fact, the factory magazines supplied with the Beretta 92 (9mm) and 96 (.40SW) us the exact same magazine tube for full capacity units.

Based on this, I believe it would be impossible to prosecute a person for having a magazine which had been "tweaked" by narrowing the feed lips. Obviously, some cop in San Francisco might confiscate it as a "nuisance" if he sees it holds more than 10 rounds but that's a different issue.

You called the CADOJ and asked if it was ok to modify a .40 cal magazine for the expressed purpose of using it as a 9mm magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds and they said it was fine? You really should try to get that response in writing on an official letterhead to post and share for everyone's benefit. I'm not confident the "DOJ phone rep said it was ok" argument would hold up in court.

What you describe would be far from impossible to prosecute. If one was arrested/found with a bunch of magazines stamped "Cal .40 S&W-Made in Italy" with squished feed lips and all loaded up with more than 10 rounds of 9mm cartridges. All a prosecutor would need is to independently obtain a sample of unmodified magazines with the same stampings and a set of calipers to pose the argument to a jury that the magazines in possession were modified or manufactured into "high capacity" 9mm magazines.

Ultimately everyone is going to do their own cost/benefit analysis with regard to the risk and potential consequences. Not wanting to further confuse the line between what is "legal" vs what "one can get away with", my personal stance remains to err on the side of caution, nor would I suggest doing this to others.

Sorry for the thread-jack, back to double stack 9mm 1911s with night sights for under $700....

[riprap]

A well used para P18-9.

^^^THIS. I have a Canadian made P14. Wish I would have had the foresight to buy a P16 and P18.

[bountyhunter]

You called the CADOJ and asked if it was ok to modify a .40 cal magazine for the expressed purpose of using it as a 9mm magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds and they said it was fine?

They said that it was NOT ILLEGAL as long as the mag in question still functioned for it's original purpose, ie as a .40 magazine. Call them and ask if you like, I actually called twice on the subject. And loading more than 10 rounds of 9mm into a .40 mag does not violate the law either which says absolutely nothing about usage, just manufacturing and importing.

You really should try to get that response in writing on an official letterhead to post and share for everyone's benefit. I'm not confident the "DOJ phone rep said it was ok" argument would hold up in court.

You could never be dragged into court since, as I said, there is absolutely no established feed lip spacing which would allow them to claim "this magazine must be for 9mm" since it varies and some mag makers even use THE SAME spacing for both calibers just to save money. There is absolutely no way they could prove any given magazine was for XXX caliber other than by using it..... and as I said, the deciding criteria as to whether what you did constitutes making a new magazine is whether it still works as it did when manufactured.

What you describe would be far from impossible to prosecute. If one was arrested/found with a bunch of magazines stamped "Cal .40 S&W-Made in Italy" with squished feed lips and all loaded up with more than 10 rounds of 9mm cartridges.

That would mean you (like some cops) try to pretend that laws "adjust" to ban whatever they don't like. The law says what it says and it says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about stuffing 9mm ammo into a .40 magazine. You can do it and the capacity is whatever it is. They may have wished the law said that, but it doesn't. Some cop might "confiscate it as a nuisance" under San Fran's idiot ordinance but they can not prosecute you for JACK SPIT.

Ultimately everyone is going to do their own cost/benefit analysis with regard to the risk and potential consequences. Not wanting to further confuse the line between what is "legal" vs what "one can get away with", my personal stance remains to err on the side of caution, nor would I suggest doing this to others.

You seriously think any prosecutor is going to try to go to court and win a case against somebody possessing a legal 10 round mag where the "crime" is that the feed lips are a half millimeter narrower than another one?

All the defense has to say is that it fell on the range floor and landed on the small end and it would be case dismissed. Or ask to see a refernce that showed exactly what spacing is standard for 9mm (there is no such thing).

As I said, I called Kali DOJ twice and got clarification on what they believe the law states and what would constitute manufacturing a high cap. If they have changed their opinion (?) I have not heard about it. I do know it would be impossible to prosecute such an "offense" if the only difference between mags was the feed lips are .020" closer together.

If somebody were to take the "block" out of a mag and increase it's capacity back up to original (for the original caliber), that would obviously be manufacturing a new high-cap. But "dual usage" mags do not and there's nothing they can do about it. If they tried to ban "any mag which is capable of holding more than ten rounds" then .40 mags would be restricted to six or seven capacity to ensure that you could only stuff in ten rounds of 9mm.... which would mean they were 10 round/9mm mags and ten round 40 mags would no longer be legal. They can't do that and they know it.

[PolishMike]

Don't forget - a call into DOJ on something like that holds be exact same wait as calling your local McDonald's and asking that question.

[railroader]

I know on mecgar cz mags in 40 and 9mm the feedlips look the same. I also have some promag cz 40 compact mags that feed fine in a 9mm. Just putting this out there.

[pipboy]

I know on mecgar cz mags in 40 and 9mm the feedlips look the same. I also have some promag cz 40 compact mags that feed fine in a 9mm. Just putting this out there.

And thats fine.

I never commented about plain usage -putting 9mm into an unaltered factory .40 magazine. If the manufacturer spec is the same across the board for 9 and .40 and it works, more power to you.

I am simply pointing out that once you start talking about the act of altering/modifying said magazine in order to make it function in a way it may not have in its original configuration use caution because it could be argued as "manufacturing" -creating a device that now functions in a way it didnt before. That is where one could be perceived as crossing a legal line.

Statements were made on the premise that one would not or could not be prosecuted or that its easily defendable. Again, lets not confuse or pass off what one believes they "may be able to get away with" with what is unquestionably not afoul of any PCs.

Hypothetical to consider:

Prosecutor to jury: The person before you is accused of 3 counts of manufacturing a high capacity ammunition feeding device in violation of PC32310. They were found to have in their possession a 9mm firearm, and 3 magazines marked "Cal .40 S&W-Made in Italy" each containing 12 cartridges marked "9mm Luger".

Prosecutor to accused: The caliber of the cartridges found in the magazines do not match the markings on the magazines. Did you in any way modify or alter the magazine to function with the ammunition that was found in them?

Ask yourself if you truly have no reservations with 100% confidence in your legality, to declare: "Yes Sir/Ma'am, I used a vise and pliers to squeeze the feed lips of each of the three .40 caliber magazines together .020 inches to make them function with 9mm ammunition in addition to .40 caliber ammunition."

Consult a reputable 2A attorney rather than a DOJ phone rep.

[bountyhunter]

I am simply pointing out that once you start talking about the act of altering/modifying said magazine in order to make it function in a way it may not have in its original configuration use caution because it could be argued as "manufacturing"///

Consult a reputable 2A attorney rather than a DOJ phone rep.

Cali DOJ is the body which interprets the statutes and decides who to go after. Since this is not a 2A issue, why would I call a 2A attorney? It is simply a question of how the state's enforcement body defines the process of "manufacturing a high capacity feeding device" and they have consistently said what I posted.

And the people I spoke with are not "phone reps" they are the people who work at Cali DOJ. You can call them yourself and ask the same question and see if you get different answer.

The points I clearly made explain why their position is what it is:

It is IMPOSSIBLE to define a crime around the spacing of feed lips for a couple of reasons:

1) There is no industry standard spacing they could point to as evidence a magazine had been intentionally altered.

2) The act of adjusting feed lip spacing is common practice for "tuning" magazines to optimize feeding with a given gun.

3) There is no law prohibiting it.

Read #3 above again and let it sink in...... people sometimes forget that in order to be charged with a cime, there has to be a law which says what you did was illegal. Not just: "We don't like it" or "It looks like you did this to get around that" or whatever, it has to be a crime and adjusting feed lip spacing is not a crime.

As to INTENT...... as stated, if the device still functions as originally designed (the stated criteria) it would be impossible to prove intent to turn it into something it's not or was not when manufactured since it still does what it was designed to do.