Which pistol other than a 1911

Maybe sacrilege to many here, but which 45 pistol would you get OTHER than a 1911?

I get it, history, installed base, etc means there's more parts and expertise for the 1911. Surely some of the other best high end 45's (Pardini GT45, Sig P220 X-Six) compete with the best high end 1911s for accuracy.

And how about cheaper than "high end"?

I suppose the reality is that if I want to compete, my realistic options are one of the European guns in .22 and .32. Although my experience is limited in knowing what competitions (besides ISSF style) are out there within my travel limits.


I suppose that personally, I prefer competitions that are equipment neutral that test the skill of the one competitor. F1/Indy are great to watch but often really show which team is best and which has the best engineers and spent the most money. Driver skill plays a role, but it's in stock/production class racing that driver skill is most important.

So maybe what I would like to concentrate on production and service class competitions. In an ideal world I'd love to have access to competitions like the Glock series and the NRA World Shooting Championship where the guns are the same or supplied and everyone uses the same ammunition.

Springer XDM

used in some EIC competitions

Doesn't Pardini or one of them euro makers have a 45?

How about a 2011? Seen a few pardini GT in the line but you need some meat hooks to hold that thing one hand.

But seriously a Springfield range officer is more then enough to start with or a nice used gun.

The bullseye game isn't a equipment race no matter what you think. The best out there will beat you with a stock gun and you with a worked over one.

To be competitive with the top shooters in the nation, you need well functioning and accurate equipment like they have.

I shoot with a couple of guys who have the Pardini 45. (one in particular who is Pardini 22, 32 and 45) I have seen XD's in service pistol but not in any other competition.

Ballester Molina?  

Chris Miceli wrote:How about a 2011? Seen a few pardini GT in the line but you need some meat hooks to hold that thing one hand.

We have been talking about this very thing. The large grip format pistols are what I have been looking at for my meat hooks. I am not going that route, but did find some nice ones.

Para 14.45
STI DoubleStack 2011 of which there are many
Pardini GT45
various widebody frame only parts based on Para/STI
grip spacers for thickness

The 1911 derivatives would be my choice based on 1911 compatibility.

The trigger on a GT 45 is sweet thing for sure.

Also REVOLVERS! S&W 25-2 and 625 series

In the end though there is no better choice than a 1911. You can do so many things with it, it's like gun version of the Volkswagen Beetle. I don't think about other guns much. The only other guns I want recently are 1911s with higher quality custom builds than the ones I have now. Although that is getting into some rarefied air these days.

jglenn21 wrote:Springer XDM

Heard good things about those for service pistol.

Tim:H11 wrote:Doesn't Pardini or one of them euro makers have a 45?

As in my post, I've been lusting over SIG SAUER X5's and X6's and the Pardini GT.

Chris Miceli wrote:Seen a few pardini GT in the line but you need some meat hooks to hold that thing one hand.

And that's the reason I would nevre buy one sight unseen and unfired. Would need to try it before dropping that amount of money on something that might be difficult to use well.

weber1b wrote:I shoot with a couple of guys who have the Pardini 45. (one in particular who is Pardini 22, 32 and 45) I have seen XD's in service pistol but not in any other competition.

Pardini recognised the market possibilities and made mods to their SP/HP offerings to meet the requirements of American Bullseye shooting. IMO they need to take it one step further and offer a 45ACP bullseye version of the HP with .22 and .32 conversions.

willnewton wrote:
In the end though there is no better choice than a 1911.  You can do so many things with it, it's like gun version of the Volkswagen Beetle.

An amusing analogy. But if looked at closely I think it perfectly shows my objection to the ingrained 1911 or bust in bullseye 45's.

If we were talking Beetle only racing, yeah that's the way to go. But if anything else was allowed? Sure, you can make them top-of-the-line, sure there's a big fan base, sure everyone has one. But there are lots of cars that be bought for far less time and require far less effort to beat perhaps even the best modified VW Bug.

The only reason a 1911 .22 conversion is good idea IMO is because you can then use one trigger & frame to shoot the whole 2700. So why is the platform/design worthy of "no better choice" status in 45?

Why a 1911 in 45 with a 22lr conversion and not a SIG SAUER X6 in 45 with a 22lr conversion? 

Even if the 1911 is worthy of this mythic "no better choice" status, I'm still interested in what OTHER than a 1911 would be best considered.

Slartybartfast wrote:

willnewton wrote:An amusing analogy.

I exist only to pleasure you.

Mission accomplished.

I wrote something long and detailed....but it was lost. Ask AMU and USMC why thy use the 1911, they've spent years and probably millions of dollars research and testing for the best. They didn't pick it cause of the history........ 

If pardini made a single stack GT it might be a option that more would try.

willnewton wrote:

Slartybartfast wrote:

willnewton wrote:An amusing analogy.

I exist only to pleasure you.

Mission accomplished.

Any answers to the question:
Why a 1911 in 45 with a 22lr conversion and not a SIG SAUER X6 in 45 with a 22lr conversion? 

Slartybartfast wrote:

willnewton wrote:

Slartybartfast wrote:

willnewton wrote:An amusing analogy.

I exist only to pleasure you.

Mission accomplished.

Any answers to the question:
Why a 1911 in 45 with a 22lr conversion and not a SIG SAUER X6 in 45 with a 22lr conversion? 

Find out for us...... just so you know many service team members Hammerli 208 are modified to feel like a 1911

Perhaps a 1911 conversion is easier to work with and possibly more affordable? I don't know I'm just suggesting.

I would like to see a single-stack Pardini GT45 with a thin grip, similar to a 1911...

Chris Miceli wrote:I wrote something long and detailed....but it was lost. Ask AMU and USMC why thy use the 1911, they've spent years and probably millions of dollars research and testing for the best. They didn't pick it cause of the history........ 

If pardini made a single stack GT it might be a option that more would try.

Looking at the history as described on Wikipedia, it would seem that the US government made whole load of 1911's made in the 40's and the framers were used again and again when guns were rebuilt.
Seems that history, familiarity, and match to combat weapons is the primary driver. If there's a source that shows that something other than history drives the current choice, I'd love to read it.
The USMC isn't the only military precision shooting team. And other nations don't use the 1911 for their teams.
Why does the question "What gun OTHER than a 1911 is a great bullseye gun?" get such defensive answers?

Slartybartfast wrote:

Chris Miceli wrote:I wrote something long and detailed....but it was lost. Ask AMU and USMC why thy use the 1911, they've spent years and probably millions of dollars research and testing for the best. They didn't pick it cause of the history........ 

If pardini made a single stack GT it might be a option that more would try.

Looking at the history as described on Wikipedia, it would seem that the US government made whole load of 1911's made in the 40's and the framers were used again and again when guns were rebuilt.
Seems that history, familiarity, and match to combat weapons is the primary driver. If there's a source that shows that something other than history drives the current choice, I'd love to read it.
The USMC isn't the only military precision shooting team. And other nations don't use the 1911 for their teams.
Why does the question "What gun OTHER than a 1911 is a great bullseye gun?" get such defensive answers?

You have no clue what your talking about. Even AMU with their awesome m9 tack driver don't add scopes and use it for CF...well that I've seen. 
Get a 1911 that is match grade if you want to be competitive in the 45 match....Or do what you like. Until you win yourself a national championship or several with the SIG you won't convince any others.

Just justify to yourself why you use the gear you use.

Oh and just to let you know how great the 1911 is many international CF records were set with a 1911 some still stand to this day.

Man up. Get a real 45 and show everyone how it is done. 100% stock and no parts needed to compete. I added a dot because I'm old but the original sights are fine. In current production and available. Your choice of which "45" you want to compete with.


Start with the baby round (45 colt) and work your way up to a real load.

Chris,

I think the undefeated Mountie team uses guns other than 1911's in Canada. Maybe that's his angle 

Mightyheb wrote:Chris,

I think the undefeated Mountie team uses guns other than 1911's in Canada. Maybe that's his angle 

never seen them on the bullseye line. Maybe PPC? I thought boarder patrol was the team to beat in that game?  I know nothing about PPC or what they use.

Hello, Slartibartfast

I've tried a Pardini GT45, and it is very nice if your hand is big enough for the double stack grip. The trigger is great, basically the same as the .22 and .32 only 3.5 lbs.
In twenty-five years of competing the only serious competition for the 1911 seems to be the Pardini. I've seen a few S&W Model 25 and 625's, but not many on the line at Camp Perry.

By no means I'm an expert (I'm a sharpshooter, lol), but I believe the reason why 1911 is a de-facto standard is because it is much easier to  take a 1911 off the shelf and make it bullseye-accurate (i.e. being able to consistently hold at least 10 ring at 50 yards) than the other guns. It is also easy to tune it to the mild target .45 loads. There are very few purposely-built centerfire guns (due to the fact that most precision shooting sports use only .22), like Pardini, Sig, etc. but they only cost more and have no practical advantage over 1911. Of course, who wouldn't want to own a beautifully made fancy European gun (I have a couple and I love them), but if you could take a Ford Escort and turn it into a nice sport car for half a price, would you still pay big bucks for that fancy BMW coupe? I have a privilege to own and shoot (sometimes) a 1911 built by Bob Chow, and the trigger is 1000's times better than that expensive Pardini I dry fired at Perry last year.  I also tried Springfield XDM, well, it's nice, but not THAT nice. What else is there? Ah, revolvers, of course, if you can shoot them well, but it's not for everyone.
Well, maybe it's just because 1911 is such a great gun? Maybe?

Slarty, I think you should check out the rule book. A lot of things that you are asking about we already have in this sport. Did you know that we have three different levels of competition? There is the "Open" class which is pretty self explanatory. The "Steel sight only" class that allows you to use every pistol in the box you just can't use any optics. And then finally we have the "Production" class which seems to me to be the one you are most interested in. You need to know that a 1911 does not even qualify for production class because SA only pistols are not allowed. They started these divisions almost 3 years ago and there has not been a whole bunch of shooters jumping on that band wagon. But, they are there and you can shoot them. You will only be competing against others in same gear type class.

Len

Slartybartfast wrote:

I suppose that personally, I prefer competitions that are equipment neutral that test the skill of the one competitor. F1/Indy are great to watch but often really show which team is best and which has the best engineers and spent the most money. Driver skill plays a role, but it's in stock/production class racing that driver skill is most important.

So maybe what I would like to concentrate on production and service class competitions. In an ideal world I'd love to have access to competitions like the Glock series and the NRA World Shooting Championship where the guns are the same or supplied and everyone uses the same ammunition.

No bashing here intended but I thought I'd share a view I have on pistol shooting. I think - even if everyone were to be issued match guns and the best ammunition, the results wouldn't change much. Maybe some lower class shooters might gain a few points here or there because of quality equipment that may be easier to shoot (less recoil, less alibi's etc.) but your top shooters would remain top shooters. I personally feel that ammunition and gear aside, no mater the situation, pistol shooting is and always will be a test of the shooter and not the gear. I own a 45 that shoots 1.5'' at 50 yards out of a rest but out of MY hands... no. Not close. Now that same gun in an AMU shooters hands I'm sure would produce better scores or groups. Pistol shooting really comes down to the shooter. No matter how you spin it. Just my view on that part.

The IPSC / IDPA guys like the Tanfoglio pistols; CZ derivatives. They tend to be reasonably accurate. I tried a Stock II XTREME and it had a pretty good trigger. It could be an alternative. But they don't come cheap.