Glock vs 1911, side by side comparison

[HighLander51]

[locosway]

I haven't been able to find any information on the .45acp being more accurate than a 9x19. Do you have any information that would support your claim?

[MrMarco]

Apples and oranges comparison... Both are great guns in their own way.

[Oceanbob]

Good report....Thanks.!

My Glock 21 shoots 'almost' as well as my 1911 Gold Cup against the back wall.

Closer in, they are the same. I have one extra barrel for one of my G21s from 1992 and it was polished out to run lead Moly Wadcutters (200 grain) and with that barrel on a good day I can make cloverleafs dead center. Of course that barrel wouldn't run Cor-Bon or hot reloads because of the poor case support .

But I love shooting my Gold Cup. !..In a 'to go' situation, my GLOCK 21 would take over. (or my Glock 17)

Glock 21....14 rounds. Colt .45 Gold Cup 8 rounds.

[redcliff]

Yes you need 17 rounds to survive with your handgun. Having a Glock will let you survive against insurmountable odds. I feel sorry for all those poor G.I.'s that were stuck with only 8 round in their 1911's in World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam. Didn't they know that the 1911 was unreliable in harsh environments? I'm surprised the slide didn't rust shut while wading in off the landing craft at Omaha Beach. What was our Government thinking by sending them out into combat with a sidearm that had only passed a 6k round reliability test without a failure. I don't know how Sgt. Alvin York killed 6 charging Germans with his one magazine in his 1911. I don't know why the 1911 was almost universally used as a sidearm by Texas Rangers when they were sent out alone to apprehend wanted men.

Hmm wait... maybe hitting your adversary with your shots is more important than sending multiple rounds down range. Maybe 8 rounds is enough for any realistic self defense scenario you're ever likely to encounter and possibly survive if you make the shots count and have an accurate pistol in a serious calibre that you can shoot well. Maybe, with a minimum of maintenance your 1911 will keep firing. Maybe if you need 17 rounds of ammunition you really need back-up and a rifle or shotgun more or to wake up from your daydream and to stop under-estimating your adversaries. Try some force-on-force training against reasonably skilled adversaries and see how your lone avenger against numerous assailants scenario plays out.

I've got nothing against Glocks, shoot one if it makes you warm and fuzzy. But I get sick and tired of hearing 1911's aren't battle-worthy.

Thanks for the opportunity for me to post some 1911 posters again

[giants_fan24]

When you talk about 17 rounds for the Glock and 7 rounds for the 1911, your also saying a 9mm for the Glock and .45 for the 1911. Here in Californa as we all know we can only have a ten round mag and I have 8 round mags for my 1911 so not a big deal when it comes to mag cap. If you go with the Glock 21 you get 10 round mags and even tho its a great gun I will still go with my 1911, unless I didn't have the funds for a 1911. As far as a better gun the my Colt 1911 wins but a Glock 21 is a close 2nd.

[locosway]

Yes you need 17 rounds to survive with your handgun. Having a Glock will let you survive against insurmountable odds. I feel sorry for all those poor G.I.'s that were stuck with only 8 round in their 1911's in World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam. Didn't they know that the 1911 was unreliable in harsh environments? I'm surprised the slide didn't rust shut while wading in off the landing craft at Omaha Beach. What was our Government thinking by sending them out into combat with a sidearm that had only passed a 6k round reliability test without a failure. I don't know how Sgt. Alvin York killed 6 charging Germans with his one magazine in his 1911. I don't know why the 1911 was almost universally used as a sidearm by Texas Rangers when they were sent out alone to apprehend wanted men.

Hmm wait... maybe hitting your adversary with your shots is more important than sending multiple rounds down range. Maybe 8 rounds is enough for any realistic self defense scenario you're ever likely to encounter and possibly survive if you make the shots count and have an accurate pistol in a serious calibre that you can shoot well. Maybe, with a minimum of maintenance your 1911 will keep firing. Maybe if you need 17 rounds of ammunition you really need back-up and a rifle or shotgun more or to wake up from your daydream and to stop under-estimating your adversaries. Try some force-on-force training against reasonably skilled adversaries and see how your lone avenger against numerous assailants scenario plays out.

I've got nothing against Glocks, shoot one if it makes you warm and fuzzy. But I get sick and tired of hearing 1911's aren't battle-worthy.

Thanks for the opportunity for me to post some 1911 posters again

I own a 1911, and it was my first handgun I shot before buying my H&K USP .45 in the late 90's. I think you're reading into my posts a little too much. I never said that the 1911 never did those things, or that it couldn't. I've seen some really reliable 1911's, but they're usually GI models, and not accurized pistols. My post was about which gun was more accurate, mostly, with a little bit of my OPINION on which one I've noticed to be more reliable. Glocks do malfunction, or so I've been told (mostly by 1911 shooters). However, none of the Glocks I have ever owned have had a single malfunction. Does that mean anything to anyone other than me? Nope, I'm just a nobody, so my views, experiences, and opinions largely do not matter.

I do however think that 17 rounds is better than 7, especially given the number of rounds that are normally fired in a SD scenario. If you think capacity doesn't matter, then why have 30 round AR mags? Or 33 round Glock mags? Well, because there are times when capacity does matter. I don't think, or hope that I would ever need 17 rounds for a single person threat inside my home. But what if it's more than one person? What if I'm on the road and I can't get to spare mags? What if one round is a dud and doesn't fire? What if I'm hiking and want 17+1 in my gun without having to run extra mags?

The reasons to have more rounds are numerous and there is no downside to having more. However, there is a huge downside to not having enough. Why you even make the argument against more rounds is silly. Frankly, if higher capacity magazines didn't matter, then they wouldn't be as popular as they are.

When you talk about 17 rounds for the Glock and 7 rounds for the 1911, your also saying a 9mm for the Glock and .45 for the 1911. Here in Californa as we all know we can only have a ten round mag and I have 8 round mags for my 1911 so not a big deal when it comes to mag cap. If you go with the Glock 21 you get 10 round mags and even tho its a great gun I will still go with my 1911, unless I didn't have the funds for a 1911. As far as a better gun the my Colt 1911 wins but a Glock 21 is a close 2nd.

You can have any capacity magazine you like. There's no law against owning a high capacity magazine. So, for those of us who have them, it's definitely the way to go.

[HK35]

Good read, Loco. Thanks for sharing.

[resident-shooter]

Sig > all

[HPGunner]

Thanks for the write-up, but this is going down the path of comparing 9mm to 45acp. I think both guns are more accurate than the shooter. In the right hands they both are deadly accurate. As far as reliability goes - a 1911 are just as reliable and can be made more reliable for a defensive carry weapon. Just how often will someone encounter a situation that requires you to shoot thousands of rounds without maintenance? Who can carry that many rounds on them anyways. I'm pretty sure a well maintained 1911 will function flawlessly through the first couple hundred rounds.

[DaveFJ80]

Now, to be fair I should have shot a Glock 21, but I had the Glock 17 and the ammo.


Capacity: 7 rounds for the 1911, and 17 for my Glock. This is a big deal to me. I really don't like the idea of only 7 rounds in my gun. 17 rounds is better, especially if you're using this for a defensive weapon where you might have to sling a lot of lead in a short amount of time.

Even with a standard mag in a G21, you're still at 13+1 rounds. With a 10rd mag in a 1911, you're at 10+1, so not much of a difference there.

Not until you get an Arredondo mag extension and add 4 more rounds of .45 ACP, for a total of 17+1 in the G21. Anything more than that becomes too awkward to carry & wield around IMO.

[ap3572001]

Glock vs 1911, side by side comparison ???????

Glock vs 1911, side by side comparison ??????
Ok. Lets see.... I have Sprigfield Armory Custom Shop full size PC9404 in .45. ( A little over 3000.00 MSRP) and I will use my STOCK Glock 23 that I pack off duty.

No comparison at all....

Glock is 100% reliable with HST and Ranger ammo ( the only ammo I can carry)
I have 13 and now new 22 round magazines for my G23.

Can hit "A" zone at 50 (FIFTY YARDS) MOST of the time.

The custum 1911 is WAY more accurate , even with PMC Ball.
Looks way nicer , much more fun to shoot. NOt as near as reliable with factory JHP ammo. Can only be used with 7-8 or 10 round magazines.
Very heavy compared to a Glock.

Love them both!!!!

[IPSICK]

Fair write-up. How about comparing a single action CZ75 vs. the G17? It will close the capacity difference and the CZ (internal rails) may be just as accurate as the 1911.

[redcliff]

I own a 1911, and it was my first handgun I shot before buying my H&K USP .45 in the late 90's. I think you're reading into my posts a little too much. I never said that the 1911 never did those things, or that it couldn't. I've seen some really reliable 1911's, but they're usually GI models, and not accurized pistols. My post was about which gun was more accurate, mostly, with a little bit of my OPINION on which one I've noticed to be more reliable. Glocks do malfunction, or so I've been told (mostly by 1911 shooters). However, none of the Glocks I have ever owned have had a single malfunction. Does that mean anything to anyone other than me? Nope, I'm just a nobody, so my views, experiences, and opinions largely do not matter.

I do however think that 17 rounds is better than 7, especially given the number of rounds that are normally fired in a SD scenario. If you think capacity doesn't matter, then why have 30 round AR mags? Or 33 round Glock mags? Well, because there are times when capacity does matter. I don't think, or hope that I would ever need 17 rounds for a single person threat inside my home. But what if it's more than one person? What if I'm on the road and I can't get to spare mags? What if one round is a dud and doesn't fire? What if I'm hiking and want 17+1 in my gun without having to run extra mags?

The reasons to have more rounds are numerous and there is no downside to having more. However, there is a huge downside to not having enough. Why you even make the argument against more rounds is silly. Frankly, if higher capacity magazines didn't matter, then they wouldn't be as popular as they are.



You can have any capacity magazine you like. There's no law against owning a high capacity magazine. So, for those of us who have them, it's definitely the way to go.

Obviouisly 17 rounds makes you warm and fuzzy and as I said you should shoot a Glock then. I'm warm and fuzzy with 8+1 .45acp plus I have a spare magazine. If you think magazine capacity is the over-riding factor in a self-defense handgun thats your right. I'll agree to disagree as the average civillian self defense shooting is 3 rounds fired total at 3 yards in 3 seconds. I'll stick with the pistol that I personally shoot best which is the 1911. You shoot a Glock better? Than carry that!

If I'm not to cover as a civilian by the time I fire 9 rounds/3 seconds elapsed against 3 adversaries I'm probably already dead. Perhaps you're nimble enough to run around and fire bursts into each adversary without being hit or the bad guys will be clueless and miss every shot like in the movies while you systematically take them out one by one. However I don't believe it's wise to underestimate your adversaries (or over-estimate my own abilities).

Many, many people have successfully defended themselves with 5 and 6 shot revolvers and 8 shot 1911's against assailants with higher capacity handguns. They're not obsolete. I'd much rather face a gang-banger with a Glock then a real shooter with a revolver.

[keson]

Thanks for the review!

I love both my Glock 19 and Nighthawk Predator