Talk:M1911

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Related task forces... United States military history task force Weaponry task force

Contents 1 Naming 2 Weight v. mass 3 Production Numbers 4 Specifications 5 Marine Force Recon's use of M1911A1 6 Error? 7 7.65mm on Photo 8 Looking for some some help 9 Image request for semi-custom 10 In popular culture 11 Swastika Model 12 Effective Range vs. Maximum Range 13 Grip Safety Elimination

[edit] Naming

for whoever insists on the word nomeclature: A nomenclature is a system of naming. "M1911" is a name or designation, based on military nomenclature, which often names equipment after the year it is adopted.

I prefer the term "designation" and would like to see it stick. Thanks for adding it.

I may be confused, but I think the current version is designated the 1991A1, not the 1911A1. It's commonly referred to as a 1911 gun, but the manual for mine is designated M1991A1LH 02:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

M1991A1 is a commercial designation by Colt for economy grade versions of their M1911-pattern pistol line. --D.E. Watters 16:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Weight v. mass

I agree that it is correct in a technical sense to speak of the weapon's "'mass,'" it is to a certain extent "'weight'" that is the issue here; i.e. the force the weapon would exert if you were to hold or carry it. Thus I left weight in place when I revised the article. Also, at least in American firearms literature, the only time I have seen the word 'mass' used (however correct it might be in other places) is when referring to the slide or other moving parts within the blowback mechanism, which move during the firing cycle by absorbing the recoil (opposite the bullet's direction of travel) force. But ... I have left it, since you are technically correct, and I suppose there's no reason to follow that convention, since it is not really based on anything.

Also you will notice that I reordered the English and metric units; this was for two reasons. Firstly, it was because all the other dimensions are listed in English first, then metric -- but before you go and reorder all of them! -- it was more importantly because the English units are the ones actually taken from the weapon's specifications, and the metric ones were converted from those (introducing some rounding error). So therefore I think it is correct to keep them this way, since the English ones are in this case "measured" and the metric "derived" quantities. Come to think of it, there should really be 'approximately equal to' (aka tilde or ~) signs in front of the metric quantities, probably.

Perhaps the next time I have my 1911 out, I will measure it and come up with some more precise figures. Also, although I applaud whoever uploaded the photo for their effort, I think it would be nice to have something which IMO is more representative of the brilliance and beauty of the design. I'll see what I can do.

I forgot to sign this comment originally. It's mine. - Kadin2048

[edit] Production Numbers

Someone changed 1.9 million to 19 million; I corrected this. Around 1.9 million were produced during WW2, with around 2.7 million over the entire service life. Source: http://www.olive-drab.com/od_other_firearms_pistol_m1911.php3 Lord Bodak 13:04, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Specifications

I just changed method of operation from blowback to recoil-actuated, which is much more accurate. The key to recoil-actuated vs. blowback is the locking lugs on the barrel, coupled with the swinging link. In blowback operated firearms, such as the Walther PPK, the barrel doesn't move, the slide does all the movement. In the M1911, the barrel recoils a short distance with the slide, maintaining postive lockup until chamber pressure drops to a safe point, whereupon the swinging link drops the barrel free from the slide and performs the extract-eject-feed portion of the cycle. kemkerj 24 June 2005 22:16 EDT

[edit] Marine Force Recon's use of M1911A1

Excellent page, congrats to the author. However, the author is mistaken in claiming that the Marines had 'recently' switched to M1911A1 pistol. The Marine Corps was not impressed by the then new M9 pistol, and almost immediately recirculated their M1911A1 pistols back to their Force Recon platoons as a modified version known as M1911A1 MEU. Nor is the purchased Kimber pistol called ICQB; the final version of the weapon is named "Warrior", with a number of improvements over the ICQB model, particularly the safety.

• The Kimber Warrior is not an exact clone of the MCSOCOM ICQB pistol, nor has the Warrior been purchased or issued to USMC units. The ICQB was ordered as a stop-gap until MARCORSYSCOM could choose an Improved MEU(SOC) pistol. MARCORSYSCOM recently chose a variation of the Springfield Professional as the Improved MEU(SOC). --D.E. Watters 23:42, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Error?

As I recall, the .38LC was a .386, not a .357. Trekphiler 05:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

No, a .386" diameter bullet would be a characteristic of the .41 Long Colt. In 1889, the Navy's original .38 load based on the .38 LC case did use an outside lubricated bullet, but it was more along the .376" range. However, by 1892 the Army began work on their .38 loaded with a smaller diameter, inside lubricated bullet. Manufacture of the Navy load ceased in 1897, with the Navy adopting the Army version of the round. The standard .38 Long Colt can be safely used in .38 Special and .357 Magnum revolvers. --D.E. Watters 01:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 7.65mm on Photo

Just to demonstrate that it really is a 7.65mm on the Photo.

The left one is a 7.65mm (model/make I don't know), I know that for sure, however I'm unsure where it came from, probably from a Iraqi made Tariq 7.65mm (some Beretta model 70 licenses if i'm not mistaken). Middle is a 9mm Luger, I took that straight out of a SIG P210. Right the .45 ACP, came with the US.M1911A1 pistol confiscated.

The 7.65 could be from a .32 cal Czech Skorpion, or one of many other weapons in that region using that caliber. —  KaiserB 06:30, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Most likely that is .32 ACP - still a fairly common caliber in the U.S. The NATO designation is 7.65 x 17, and commonly referred to in Europe as 7.65 Browning. This cartridge was fairly common in Europe in the early part of the 20th Century, but considered to have insufficient stopping power to be an effective military weapon. Most nations adopted the more powerful 9mm Parabellum. - Jana Deenax 22 Jun 06 08:30 UTC

[edit] Looking for some some help

As of March 11, 2006, I am writing a research project on the weapons used in WWII. One of the weapons used was, of course, the Colt M1911. Well, I have a question that needs to be answered for my paper, so if you could answer, it would be a great help that would be greatly appreciated. The question- Does the M1911 have any special features that make it cifferent from any of the other pistols of the time? Again, I stress and express my gratitude towards all of those willing to help. Thank You. OmniAngel 18:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

The recoil-actuated mechanism of the M1911 was a departure from the more common blowback action of WWII era autopistols. The Germans later introduced the Walther P38, which also incorporated the recoil-action and were issued to replace the costlier and dirt-sensitive P-08 Luger.

There were two versions of the M1911 - the M1911 and the M1911A1. The M1911A1 incorporated a larger grip safety with an extended tang designed to keep the 'web' part of the shooter's hand between the thumb and trigger finger below the path of the slide (and preventing a disabling injury your shooting hand!) when the slide cycles between shots. The rear portion of the handle was also redesigned with a curve to fit more naturally to the hand. - Jana Deenax 23 Jun 06 08:39 UTC

[edit] Image request for semi-custom

The current semi-custom 1911's (Kimber, Springers, SIG's GSR, Wilson, Les Baer, etc.) as well as the "race guns", esp. those from Strayer-Tripp or Strayer-Voight, look vastly different from a Remington-Rand M1911A1. I don't have access to a race gun, but could somebody out there with access to one get a photo of all 3 (or at least one of the more modern designs) to show where it has changed - lowered and flared ejection port, beavertail, return to the long trigger (but now with speedholes!!!), etc.?Attakmint 08:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I have access to a Kimber TLE II and a Wilson CQB, should I post a picture of either to show what the "modern" 1911 looks like? Please leave some feedback. Attakmint 19:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In popular culture

Does it make sense for all the pop culture material to be split off and become its own article. This content has really become a major distraction to an article about the real gun. Yaf 03:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I would support this. I agree, I think the main article should be kept specifically focused on the gun itself, as it exists in real life. There certainly appears to be enough content and interest to support a separate article on the 1911 in popular culture. However, the merge nazis will probably try to recombine them the second it's split out ... but we can always try. -Kadin2048 04:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

To paraphrase a quote from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M16 rifle in popular culture, when you're considering where the best place for M1911 cruft is, you really need to include 'nowhere' in your list of choices. I don't personally agree with the idea of keeping junk in the encyclopedia in order to keep junk out of the encyclopedia. Friday (talk) 19:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swastika Model

I have one of these. Any collectors know what its worth? I can provide a picture for the article too if needed.

[edit] Effective Range vs. Maximum Range

The M1911A1 pistol range stated in the article is the maximum distance the weapon can fire a bullet.

Military weapon ranges are always stated in two categories:

Maximum Range, which is the absolutely the farthest distance a projectile can be shot from a weapon. Accuracy and effectiveness are greatly diminished at these extreme ranges.

Effective Range, which is the range the weapon is intended to be used with the reasonable accuracy and effect as designed. This range is much shorter than maximum range.

For the 1911A1, the intended use is a backup or close-quarters weapon, and only for short range targets. In the U.S. Armed Forces, the official effective range of the M1911-series weapons is 50 meters, and is the designed range an average soldier can fire this weapon and expect to hit a man-sized target. Soldiers are generally trained to use their rifles to shoot at targets in the 50-500 meter range, and pistols and machine pistols (submachine guns) are to be used at ranges under 50 meters, or in close-quarter environments where full-length rifles would be too cumbersome and awkward, such as inside structures, crawlways, tunnels and naval vessels. During WWII, there are instances of US soliders using their 1911 to engage Japanese soliders at 100 yards distance.

No bloody way they were hitting anything at 100 yards. Engaging targets means nothing more than shooting at them. CynicalMe 19:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It is documented. Plus, it is not uncommon for a well-built 1911 in .45 ACP or .40 S&W to be able to hold 6" groups at 100 yards.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.80.176.149 (talk • contribs).

So document it. Give a citation. Besides, a match-grade 1911 is a far cry from the GI model the soldiers would have used. CynicalMe 23:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I can't give you a "citation", but I can speak from personal experience. I own a 1941 GI model 1911A1 that has had little or no "tuning", and I have fired it at 100 yards. It is certainly no rifle, but I was able to hit a 18" diameter target about half the time.

Hitting a target that size in range conditions and still only hitting it 50% of the time proves my point. 100 yards is certainly beyond the maximum effective range for combat. CynicalMe 18:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. For comparison, a .22 LR's maximum range is over mile (that is, if I shot a .22 at a 45 degree angle, it could hit the ground over a mile away). But if I wanted accuracy and some sort of power at a mile away, there's no way I would choose a .22 - I would use something heavier and with much more powder. Likewise with the 1911 - you can successfully engage targets beyond the effective range, but that's dependant on a lot of luck, and the effectiveness would be greatly diminished.Attakmint 22:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grip Safety Elimination

I wasn't aware that this was an issue. A different grip safety, or even taping it down, sure, but I've never heard of any issues or personally had any with the grip safety on any 1911 I've used.Attakmint 08:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

This whole section seems like nothing more than advertising for Novak, as it is copy-pasted from the magazine. I'm going to clean it up.--Davidwiz 23:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)