Henry Rifle Forums

Even though most of our shooting is with single shots, with some revolver work, now and then, we do have our 1911s and to stay in form with the 1911s, we try to get them out for some shooting, every now and then. This last week was one of those every now and then times.

I confess that I sometimes get lazy and don't push myself to the limit the way I so often do. Maybe it was the hot weather, but just didn't feel like any long range shooting, this time out. Really only wanted to make sure my 1911 shooting form was still up to par, so figured my personal up close distance of 16+ yards was good enough. That's usually as close as I ever shoot, by the way. Now, I know that 10 yard and 7 yard and even 3 yard pistol shooting is the big thing, these days, given the emphasis on self-defense shooting and that kind of practice is totally legit and useful, but I'm no self-defense shooter. My background is bullseye and handgun hunting and for those disciplines, 50 feet (16 +yards) is usually as close as it gets.

Had no doubts about the Dan Wesson A2 in 45 auto, of course. I get along very well with this gun.


The A2 may look rather plain, but it does have a Match grade barrel.





Had no doubts about the STI Trojan in 9mm, either.


Very easy to shoot, being a 9mm 1911. Cheap to shoot, too.



By the way, I have to laugh when I hear people regurgitating internet lore that that a 1911 or any other quality semi-auto has to be fit loose to be reliable. I've had 8 or 9 quality 1911s, these two included, that have had absolutely no play in the slide to frame fit. No play anywhere on the gun. Zero. Zilch. Nada. You couldn't force any play in them if you put the guns in a vise and put all your weight into a good push and pull. These same guns, mind you, have never had one single failure to fire with even cheap ammo, and that's right out of the box, not with some specified break-in period. In fact, over the years, I've had fewer jams and hiccups with my 1911s than with my revolvers. That's right, fewer malfunctions and jams with my 1911s than with my revolvers and that's over many thousands of rounds with each and dozens of guns tested.

Something to think about when you hear someone going into a rant about how much more reliable revolvers are than a good semi-auto. Love my revolvers for lots of reasons and prefer them for some things, but more reliable than a quality semi-auto in terms of failure to fire? Sorry, but the numbers haven't been there for me and we're talking dozens of each type of gun and many, many thousands of rounds fired. When and if I have to carry, it's a good semi-auto. They've been more reliable for me. Just that simple.

Rant over. Your mileage may vary. Comments welcome.

Very nice groups. As for your comments...

I have to agree. My match 45 is so tight that my builder advised I not disassemble it often. Lock the slide back and clean what I can reach from there and take it down when it gets nasty. Never had the gun fail... a couple mags failed before I switched to wilson mags.


Revolvers or autos? I carry both. A Sig P220 45 sees the most work, Glock 23 40 cal follows next. Both are super reliable and I carry those with ONLY factory mags.

Carry revolvers? Two Smiths. An Airweight 642 .38 hammerless snubby and/or the brutal model M&P 340 Scandium .357. That beast is so light you forget it's in your pocket, but if you shoot it with full power .357 loads... it makes it's presence known.

All four guns have been very reliable. No problems. However, for protection purposes, I carry fresh factory ammo, shooting the carry ammo after six months. Then putting new ammo in the gun and backup mags or speedstrips.

Better safe than sorry.

Given the 1911's military pedigree, there were valid reasons to make 1911s a bit on the loose side for battlefield conditions. A gun that is not spec'd tight is more likely to function when dropped in sand or mud and it's much easier and quicker to replace parts on a gun when the fit is loose. Under battlefield conditions, 1911s sometimes had to be built from left over parts. There was no time for fitting and tuning.

This, of course, has been widely misinterpreted as meaning a 1911 or other semi-auto has to be fit on the loose side in order to shoot. I really don't know too many people who have dropped their gun in the mud or plan to build a 1911 from spare parts they might have around home, though.

I should also add that part of my numbers, revolvers versus semi-auto hiccups, has been the result of a string of defective and poorly finished new revolvers, right out of the box. I won't mention brand names other than to say my success with new production S&W revolvers has been very good. I'd have no hesitation buying a new S&W revolver. Had I stayed exclusively with Smiths, my reliability numbers between semi-autos and revolvers would have been a toss up and statistically not even an issue.

North Country Gal wrote:Even though most of our shooting is with single shots, with some revolver work, now and then, we do have our 1911s and to stay in form with the 1911s, we try to get them out for some shooting, every now and then. This last week was one of those every now and then times.

I confess that I sometimes get lazy and don't push myself to the limit the way I so often do. Maybe it was the hot weather, but just didn't feel like any long range shooting, this time out. Really only wanted to make sure my 1911 shooting form was still up to par, so figured my personal up close distance of 16+ yards was good enough. That's usually as close as I ever shoot, by the way. Now, I know that 10 yard and 7 yard and even 3 yard pistol shooting is the big thing, these days, given the emphasis on self-defense shooting and that kind of practice is totally legit and useful, but I'm no self-defense shooter. My background is bullseye and handgun hunting and for those disciplines, 50 feet (16 +yards) is usually as close as it gets.

Had no doubts about the Dan Wesson A2 in 45 auto, of course. I get along very well with this gun.


The A2 may look rather plain, but it does have a Match grade barrel.





Had no doubts about the STI Trojan in 9mm, either.


Very easy to shoot, being a 9mm 1911. Cheap to shoot, too.



By the way, I have to laugh when I hear people regurgitating internet lore that that a 1911 or any other quality semi-auto has to be fit loose to be reliable. I've had 8 or 9 quality 1911s, these two included, that have had absolutely no play in the slide to frame fit. No play anywhere on the gun. Zero. Zilch. Nada. You couldn't force any play in them if you put the guns in a vise and put all your weight into a good push and pull. These same guns, mind you, have never had one single failure to fire with even cheap ammo, and that's right out of the box, not with some specified break-in period. In fact, over the years, I've had fewer jams and hiccups with my 1911s than with my revolvers. That's right, fewer malfunctions and jams with my 1911s than with my revolvers and that's over many thousands of rounds with each and dozens of guns tested.

Something to think about when you hear someone going into a rant about how much more reliable revolvers are than a good semi-auto. Love my revolvers for lots of reasons and prefer them for some things, but more reliable than a quality semi-auto in terms of failure to fire? Sorry, but the numbers haven't been there for me and we're talking dozens of each type of gun and many, many thousands of rounds fired. When and if I have to carry, it's a good semi-auto. They've been more reliable for me. Just that simple.

Rant over. Your mileage may vary. Comments welcome.

Funny you posted this. I'm just looking into picking up an A2. It will keep the Les Baer company.

I just drooled on your STI .....again.
A good 1911 in 9 mm is incredibly tempting.

Bugs, the A2 is a limited run DW. Not sure of the availability. DW doesn't crank out a lot of 1911s in the first place. Great 1911, though, if you like the no frills style (which I do.)

Seabee, anyone who loves 1911s should have one in 9mm for the sake of practice, if nothing else. Very mild shooting cartridge in a full size 1911, but mostly just so cheap to shoot.

NCG, how is the trigger on your Dan Wesson?

It is right there at about 4 pounds and completely free of creep. Very crisp. Exactly what a good all around use 1911 should be. The STI, being more of a match gun, is equal quality, but about 3.5 pounds. Both excellent, in other words. Also, may have mentioned this, before, but no MIM parts on either gun.

Hey, NCG, this thread is next in my "ketchup" reading for my time away in July. Have a Q and some comments to send your way.

Up front, my shooting history is very short and measured with little experience compared to yours. I've only had one semi-auto, which was a Springfield Armory XD 9MM, full-size 4" Service Model. It was very easy to shoot, great sights, and I don't recall any issues with FTFs or FTEs with that gun. It had a 16-round magazine capacity.

On the revolver side, I determine to shoot D/A only with the revolvers I've had/and now have. Because of that choice, I find that it is harder to learn/maintain accuracy shooting my revolver than shooting the XD 9MM.

Full disclosure. I'm a wheel-gun guy, and really love handling my current Ruger 3" snubby, an LCRX in .38 Special + "P" caliber. I only had the semi-auto for about 10 months and let it go. Your most telling statement in your "rant" was the last four words of this section: "When and if I have to carry, it's a good semi-auto. They've been more reliable for me. Just that simple. Rant over. Your mileage may vary." That comment completely takes care of the revolver/semi-auto (ad nauseum and ad infinitum) debate for me. It is what a person likes and is comfortable with that really matters.

With such little experience using both types of handguns, I cannot say that a revolver is more dependable for me. However, I can say that I make my revolver dependable,because I choose a revolver and really like it compared to a semi-auto.

Now for my Q. Since I'll continue to prefer my revolver and will always have one, I'm curious what are the dependability factors were/are that you found with revolvers? I'd like to know since I've had about zero issues with the revolvers I've owned. It would be interesting to find out.....just in case!

Enjoyed your "thoughts."
Take care.
PT7

North Country Gal wrote: By the way, I have to laugh when I hear people regurgitating internet lore that that a 1911 or any other quality semi-auto has to be fit loose to be reliable. I've had 8 or 9 quality 1911s, these two included, that have had absolutely no play in the slide to frame fit. No play anywhere on the gun. Zero. Zilch. Nada. You couldn't force any play in them if you put the guns in a vise and put all your weight into a good push and pull. These same guns, mind you, have never had one single failure to fire with even cheap ammo, and that's right out of the box, not with some specified break-in period. In fact, over the years, I've had fewer jams and hiccups with my 1911s than with my revolvers. That's right, fewer malfunctions and jams with my 1911s than with my revolvers and that's over many thousands of rounds with each and dozens of guns tested.

Something to think about when you hear someone going into a rant about how much more reliable revolvers are than a good semi-auto. Love my revolvers for lots of reasons and prefer them for some things, but more reliable than a quality semi-auto in terms of failure to fire? Sorry, but the numbers haven't been there for me and we're talking dozens of each type of gun and many, many thousands of rounds fired. When and if I have to carry, it's a good semi-auto. They've been more reliable for me. Just that simple.

Rant over. Your mileage may vary. Comments welcome.

That's a great question and probably best answered in a separate thread, so I'll start one. Stay tuned.

Ditto on the 1911 info. I have a pre-war Colt National Match .45 . By the serial # it was made in 1937 and there is no slop in any of the parts the slide included. It goes bang whenever the trigger is pulled if it is loaded.

That's one of the Holy Grails of the 1911 world. Impressive.

Thanks, I bought it from one of my college Profs in the late sixties and for some reason I had sense enough to hold on to it. Best $125 I ever spent.

Of all things I was surprised when the most accurate 1911 I own turned out to be A Tarus PT1911 !!! I have Colts, Para Ordnance target limited...I bought it because it was an inexpensive carry pistol..Who wuda thunk it.

Similar experience with my plain jane, nothing fancy Springfield Mil-spec in 45 auto. It's been able to hold its own in the accuracy department against 1911s that cost more than twice its price. Love a nicely fitted and high grade 1911, I surly do, but you do not have to pay big bucks to get a 1911 that shoots, well.

My heart is with the 1911. It’s the weapon I was issued in the ‘60s and my first USMC centerfire. A work of art. Throwing a clod in the churn, there may be something to the point that sloppy is good for military use (vis the AK reliability versus the M4/M16). And accuracy is the tradeoff.

Having said that, I’ve been shooting competitively since the 70s and there are some VERY fine 1911s in circulation. OTOT, my experience with other weapons (e.g. Glock) is that they all will malfunction. Including revolvers. Every last one. One of my favorite guns is my Les Baer, so tight that when it arrived my gunsmith went for a hammer. It was just that tight, though. We couldn’t rack the slide.

Revolvers will fail. Autos will fail. I lost a complete stage in a championship match because my Glock choked and puked in a rapid-fire stage. If it’s a man-made device it’ll go off the rails from time to time, and the best we can do is jiggle the odds in our favor.

Notwithstanding, the 1911 frame is my personal favorite. I can heartily recommend Dan Wesson, and heartily recommend Les Baer if you want to throw down big money. No design to date has matched the 1911 trigger. John Browning was a pretty bright guy, all in all

Good points, Rochefort and, also, welcome to the forum. Great first post. I can see you'll fit in, here, just fine. Lots of 1911 love on this forum.

Couldn't agree more on any type of gun going off the rails, sometime, as you say. Along that same point, over the years, I've actually had more issues with revolvers, overall, than semi-autos. Part of that has been poor QC on some new production revolvers, the last half-dozen years or so. I think modern gun manufacturing favors the production of semi-autos. Revolvers, after all, are old school and the timing and alignment of parts doesn't lend itself to get it done quick assembly.

Oh, yeah, love my DW A2.

Welcome to the forum from CT, Rochefort. I agree with North Country Gal -- you'll fit right in here.

Rochefort wrote:My heart is with the 1911.

North Country Gal wrote:I can see you'll fit in, here, just fine. Lots of 1911 love on this forum.

...and Greetings from the Show-Me-State, Rochefort.

Cool first post; interesting thoughts and glad you shared your favorite firearm with us. I've only shot a 1911 one time, and don't know enough about semi-autos to determine what is a good shooter and what is not. Anyway, there are a lot of favorites out there to choose from!

How true: "Revolvers will fail. Autos will fail." Valid assessment, and a definite truism. That's why we all "jiggle" so often!
Enjoy your time on the Forum.

PT7

Oh yes, forget to mention that I'm a person that really likes wheel guns. Way to go for me.

Rochefort wrote:My heart is with the 1911. It’s the weapon I was issued in the ‘60s and my first USMC centerfire. A work of art. ---- Revolvers will fail. Autos will fail. ---- If it’s a man-made device it’ll go off the rails from time to time, and the best we can do is jiggle the odds in our favor.

Love my Ed Brown.