20 May 2012

Poor Design

I hate to break it to an extremely large segment of the gun owning world; when a design is made for 101 years, it's not a poor design at all.  This should be especially obvious when you look at all the other designs that are no longer made that surfaced and disappeared in the same time frame.

Then why does this good design routinely fail?  The best design can be made poorly.  Cheaper materials and manufacturing short cuts are the bane of any design.

Blaming the design for poor workmanship shows you're less knowledgeable than you are claiming.

This is what got a burr under my saddle.

Very big of you to offer to buy my ammo if the gun runs flawlessly.  But petty to retract the offer if I, a student, make a mistake operating the gun at any time during the class.  Hey, isn't it your job as a TEACHER to FUCKING TEACH ME TO NOT DO THAT?  Or is making your point that 1911's aren't as good as your pet gun more important than doing the job you are being paid to do?

Tell you what, sir, have you ever read the reports on testing the M1911 and M1911A1?  I have.  The genuine military guns with ball ammo will give an AK a run for its money for reliable.  The companies that bid to make them to make up for the manufacturing shortage at Colt had to prove they could make guns that worked.  They did.

The question that you need to ask yourself and start stating more often is, "why can't modern manufacturers attain the standards that typewriter companies held during WW2."  Ask what is wrong with Kimber, not the design.  When you complain about 3" compact 1911's failing and lump in the original 5" gun you are comparing apples and oranges.  I know, we weren't supposed to notice the switch.  I know we untactical non-trainer types are not supposed to point it out or challenge your vast knowledge.

Because if we start asking questions, we'd ask why a self-defense handgun has to be able to take the beating of a thousand rounds in a weekend.  You know how many rounds my 1911 is going to fire in a worst case scenario?  22.  What's in the gun and the two spare mags.  Even a cheap High-Point can cross that bar.

What you're forgetting is the reason you're firing a thousand rounds during the class is to teach the shooter, not test the gun.  Putting on airs about gun quality and then make such a chintzy offer of a refund on ammo shows your confidence.  Refund the entire costs of the class, transportation, ammo, lodging and I'll know you're serious.  I know why you don't.  Because deep in your heart you know it's not the design, it's the maker, and you know there are people out there still making them right and you're terrified that one of those people will show up, pass the course and take your money; and then brag about it.

Just for the record, I own a Glock and I love the thing.  I'm going to be getting me an M&P as soon as I have the cash.  I am just sick of hearing about the 1911 being maligned because places like Kimber make bad examples.

Additionally!  If someone will pony up the test gun I will be happy to drop 1000 rounds through it and see if I can break a cheap 1911.  Rock River Island has Filipino Slag Guns for under $500.  My Springfield has close to a thousand without a failure, but it took years to reach that number.


  1. The thing i love about my rock island is its a 1911 i can buy without my wife killing me with it. It will do everything i need it to do. You just have to understand some people are ass hats and will cry about anything.

  2. I have a G-36 that is prone to FTF/FTE problems...and it's not an isolated incident. Funny that no one wants to address that.

    Oops, did I just draw the attention of the Glock fanbois?

    It's a mechanical item. It will fail. A design that is over 100 years old is successful by any reasonable definition. And besides, everyone should have at least one M1911A1 or clone thereof (it's on my "Guns I Want" list). :D

  3. Also if the guns are supposed to digest 3,000 rounds over a weekend in a dusty range in the baking heat. Why do they keep teaching tap-rack failure drills?

    Yeah and you really can't compare the 3" subcompact 1911s with the 5" full-size variant. Some people have managed to do it well, and some (like Kimber) can't seem to consistently build anything. It seems to be a massive stretch of a design.

    BTW good point on the 22 round loadout (I rock the same rig, but I use Wilson 47D, so I gots 25!) At most if things looked REALLY ugly I might toss in a belt mag carrier with an extra 16 rounds...but I'd also be carrying a RIFLE with a few reloads for that too.

    Another side to a design being around for generations...the people who made the first ones aren't around anymore...and the technologies used to make them have changed. The first 1911s were all forged and hand-fitted. Today most all-metal guns are cast with MIM parts...and a lot of those guns run just as well, and for half the price.


You are a guest here when you comment. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work.

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.