A Pair of Prominent Automatics, part II

It is no secret to my gun blog readers where I stand on the "automatics vs revolvers" issue.  No need to go into it.  But with that being said, I will say THIS:  If for some reason I could only have ONE gun......and that gun HAD to be an automatic of some kind, but I at least had a choice in the matter..................

It wouldn't be just ANY automatic  It would NOT be a Beretta like the DOD shoved down the throats of our military, nor one these high-tech "Glocks" that people seem to make such a fuss over, or a dozen other makes & styles that seem to "be the fashion statement" these days.

It would be that tried & true old warhorse that was the brainchild of famed Utah gun designer John Moses Browning, over a CENTURY ago.  The Model 1911-------45 ACP, better known as the old "G.I. 45 automatic."

Different manufacturers still build these guns of "1911" design, because it's pretty hard to beat success.  The one we will look at here for "blog purposes" is a Springfield, which was designed after the original Colt Mark IV Government model,

A typical magazine of a "1911-designed pistol" only holds 7 rounds plus one in the chamber.  The Berettas, Glocks, Sigs and others hold TWICE that many, but I guess (according to police reports from one end of this country to the other)......with that little 9mm, maybe you NEED "twice as many!"

From the first days of battle in World War I, it quickly proved itself to be both more reliable, and superior in stopping power to the opposition, that was using the coveted Luger.  The 9mm is no match for the 45, by any stretch of the imagination.

We've seen a TON of automatics come and go, but for MY money anyway, if you're gonna carry an automatic, it should be of "1911" origin.  Simple, strong, and powerful.  A solid hit with a 45 is pretty much a ONE-SHOT-STOP.  Police files are loaded with violent arrests where the suspect was "doped-up" on something, and it took the officers multiple rounds of 9mm, and they STILL had to "wrestle" the guy to the ground.

The 45 slug is nearly TWICE the weight of the 9mm and will take a 200+lb man off his feet, and quickly "end the argument."

Although "teardown" for cleaning is a bit more involved than with the Walther we saw earlier, it is not difficult.....no tools needed, and the extra stopping power is well worth it.  The "1911's" have proven to be reliable from the trench lines in France, to the mud at Guadalcanal, to the frozen snows of Korea to the rice paddies of Vietnam.

Nothing fancy here, just a good hearty no-nonsense pistol.

The barrel toggle-link allows fast, efficient cartridge transfer from magazine to chamber, and back out again after the shot.

The recoil spring and barrel bushing retainer assembly were a well-thought-out design, and virtually flawless.  Old John Browning new EXACTLY what he was doing when he first put this concept together in 1908.  (It's called the "1911" because that's the year it was accepted into the military, after three years of testing, refinements, and a major "shoot-off" against a proposed 45 caliber Luger).

While it is "customary" to carry one of these "cocked and locked" (note the "safety" is up and locked into the slide detent), I personally do not care for a hammer spring (or any OTHER spring for that matter), to be steadily compressed for long periods of time.  (personal preference).  I'd just as soon carry it with an empty chamber, and just "rack" one in there if I was expecting trouble.

"Well Zook, what happens if you get surprised at an ATM some evening and DON'T have time to "rack" one in there?"

"Won't happen."

How do YOU know it won't happen??"

"....'cause I carry a revolver, remember?.......You just squeeze the trigger, and they go BANG!".........

Back to the 45.....there is a nice "secondary safety" on a "1911", the spring-loaded  "grip safety".  With the hammer back and the thumb safety off, you STILL have to have the gun in your hand, with the WEB of your hand holding that exposed tang IN, for the gun to fire.  Browning thought of everything.

I have to believe that the same fools at the Pentagon who "replaced" our M-14 with that little black "Mattell" piece of underpowered crap, are the same goofballs who "replaced" our old 45 with that 9mm Beretta.............and for the SAME REASON.........."smaller gun/you can carry more ammo for it."

But there was some "political correctness" involved here too.........since most of our NATO allies are using the 9mm....."OUR guys need to do the same so we can all share from the same ammo storage warehouses."

Unfortunately, these are the kinds of decisions that get made and eventually signed off on....by characters who will NEVER have to be "out there in the boonies" with the enemy.

The 9mm isn't good enough, and neither was the 223 in the M-16.  It is "gee-whiz technology" and airpower that has been able to make up the difference.  But from the standpoint of an "old grunt".............."small-arms-wise".......our average foot-soldier over there, has been short-changed.

I've heard it "crudely" stated that the 9mm is for wimps."  Now, I don't TOTALLY subscribe to that, because I myself enjoy just an afternoon of "pop-can plinking" with one of my own 9's, the 380 Walther or just one of the little 22's.  It's fun.

I do NOT believe however that the 9mm has any business at ALL on a battlefield.  If there is a need to "put some clown DOWN", I want that first shot to be enough----so I can go on to the next "activity", and NOT have to go back to the "first guy" and "pay for the same real estate" TWICE, as they say.  In THIS arena, I'm a firm believer in the 45.  If ya gotta DROP him............DROP HIM........don't "pussyfoot" around!

It's been around for over a hundred years, and has NOT become "obsolete" with the coming of the 40 caliber, (designed as a "stop-gap" between the 9mm and the 357).........nor  has it been replaced by the unique 10mm, which is more of a "passing fad" than anything else (and nearly impossible to find ammo for in chaotic times).

Not many people SHOOT a 10mm, so consequently, the ammo suppliers don't MAKE a whole lot of............what they don't SELL a whole lot of.  Makes sense.

The military "replaced" the 45 auto in 1983, after 72 years of loyal service, but it ain't "goin' away."..........there are too many of us out here who still shoot them.

Yeah.....it only holds seven...............but in 45 caliber, you only need ONE!  (providing of course, that you can shoot.....and you shouldn't be "packin" if ya can't!)