The 1911 Project

[Domino]

This is a call to anyone who is interested in bringing one of the 1911 model handguns into Infiltration. I think we could hash out a plan, figure out what needs to be done, and give it a shot.

I will help in any way I can, and I encourage even just 1911 fans like myself to lend your support. The more input, the better, in my opinion.

This project is not to design a unrealistic weapon... I am hoping that we can recreate the 1911 in the most realistic manner possible, all disadvantages and advantages intact. Realism is what INF is all about, and I don't want to forget that.

So anyone who can offer any services towards this project, please make yourself known. If you want to contact me, my e-mail is domino_gold@hotmail.com

Long live the 1911!

 

[SaraP]

Ah, I was wondering when you’d get around to setting something like this up. I think it’s just as silly as a Colt Single Action Army revolver, but practically speaking I see no reason at all to complain about people using obsolete, inferior weapons for sentimental reasons. So much the better for logical, intelligent people who choose weapons based on performance and not looks!

 

[Demosthanese]

Besides, why use a pistol when you can carry a few extra mags and frags

 

[Domino]

the 1911 is immortal, it will never die... well maybe it will when that laser of yours enters mass production Even so, I'd take a 1911 over a Laser any day.

 

[Demosthanese]

Too bad lasguns blow up when you shoot a shield

 

[SaraP]

No, he means the Stavatti TIS-1 infantry laser rifle I mentioned the other day.

Compared to a modern 9x19mm pistol like the Beretta M9, the Colt M1911 has:
- Inferior penetration of infantry body armor
- Inferior magazine capacity
- Inferior accuracy
- Inferior reliability
- Inferior safety
- Inferior operating mechanism
- Superior sentimental value

Compared to a modern .45ACP pistol like the USP or SOCOM, the Colt M1911 has:
- Inferior magazine capacity
- Inferior accuracy
- Inferior reliability
- Inferior safety
- Inferior operating mechanism
- Superior sentimental value

The 1911 was a fine weapon in its day, but so was the longbow -- it's a day long past, and it's about time the U.S. military switched to a 9mm, no matter what sentimental coots like Domino think about it.

 

[ecale3]

The military does use 9mm

 

[Vega-don]

you got a point sara p , but this is a game.
thats why i hang out like a ninja with a knife on RTK, thats why i take a Desert eagle in some of my loadouts . if it was for efficacity i would only take the M16 or the Famas all the time. but i like to have some fun with outdated weapons.
im not a fan of the 1911 i would be more happy with an UZI or an AK47 or AK100's series gun , or a G36.. but good luck to 1911 developpers.

 

[SaraP]

The military does use 9mm

I know they do.

 

[Meplat]

Sara- Much as I hate to reinforce Domino's 1911 based rantings,(Which I endured under another handle) I do need to interject. I'll adress point by point.

Compared to a modern 9x19mm pistol like the Beretta M9, the Colt M1911 has:
- Inferior penetration of infantry body armor - This can be altered, as one can easily adapt the 1911/1911A1 design to operate with a huge variety of chamberings. But we'll stick with base designs. Point to the M9

- Inferior magazine capacity- No arguement. Although I still prefer shot placement to "One mag, one kill". This then opens the stinky can of worms, "personell training, and basic markmanship" which seems to have died, long ago. Point to the M9- it IS easier to shoot, and does have a larger magazine capacity.

- Inferior accuracy- No. With two "service grade" handguns, the .45 ACP/1911 can, and does demonstrate superior accuracy, at normal engagement ranges. (It just takes a very well trained shooter, or a Ransom rest to accomplish this.) Also, by changing one component, the 1911 design will deliver superior accuracy to the M9. The barrel bushing. The M9 does not have what would be called "this weak point" but it does allow one top achieve stupendously small groups, with a minor amount of work, and money. Get a copy of a Brownells catalog. There are a LOT of 1911 parts for a reason. Competetion shooters want something that is accurate, and upgradeable. Point to the 1911 .

- Inferior reliability- No. Although one who treats either a M9, or 1911 bad enough to induce an environmental stoppage deserves a bayonet. The M9's P-38 based lockwork is far more prone to environmentally induced stoppages than the M1911. I and others can, and have demonstrated this. Given my choice, I'd carry a Steyr GB, over all others, but of the 1911, and M9? 1911. I'll call this a tie.

- Inferior safety- No. Diffrent would be a better term. In fact, the 1911 was designed to be "soldier proof" in a day when a soldier might be falling off a horse, or swinging the 1913 "patton" sabre. Both are about as "unsafe" as one needs a service issued handgun to be. Again, a Tie.

- Inferior operating mechanism- No. Much simpler, and significantlly more field maintainable. Lacking double action is not a detriment to a handgun intended to be carried in a locked and cocked condition. I'll tear down a M9, and a M1911 if you want. The 1911 is a LOT simpler, and more robust.

- Superior sentimental value- *Shrugs* Only if you attach sentimental value to tools.I carry mine because they are reliable.

The U.S. Military changed to the 9X19 for a number of reasons. The 1911 being "inferior" was not one of them. It was expensive to make, it did consume more time in training, and did not use a NATO standard handgun load. Converting it to such would have been time consuming.

Firearms selection in the U.S. Military rarely has much to with "what is best for the troopies"..Look how long the U.S. has hung on to the M-60.

All in all, I think someone should offer a 1911 for the game. I won't be "carrying" one, but if it makes someone smile, what the hell?

Demosthanse- No more Dune for you.

Meplat-

 

[Demosthanese]

You know, meplat sounds an awful lot like mentat. Can you predict when INF 3.0 will come out?

 

[SaraP]

Sara- Much as I hate to reinforce Domino's 1911 based rantings,(Which I endured under another handle) I do need to interject. I'll adress point by point.

Compared to a modern 9x19mm pistol like the Beretta M9, the Colt M1911 has:
- Inferior penetration of infantry body armor - This can be altered, as one can easily adapt the 1911/1911A1 design to operate with a huge variety of chamberings. But we'll stick with base designs. Point to the M9

Oh, I know the 1911 design is quite modifiable; one of the top handguns on my wish list is the Colt Delta Elite in 10mm AUTO. Which, unfortunately, is a rather rare variant.

- Inferior magazine capacity- No arguement. Although I still prefer shot placement to "One mag, one kill". This then opens the stinky can of worms, "personell training, and basic markmanship" which seems to have died, long ago. Point to the M9- it IS easier to shoot, and does have a larger magazine capacity.

I also favor a smaller number of more powerful rounds, which is why I'm fond of the 10mm AUTO caliber. I do, however, feel that the .45ACP is in many ways the worst of both worlds, in that it's a large-caliber round with a medium-caliber punch.

- Inferior accuracy- No. With two "service grade" handguns, the .45 ACP/1911 can, and does demonstrate superior accuracy, at normal engagement ranges. (It just takes a very well trained shooter, or a Ransom rest to accomplish this.)

Doesn't the .45ACP round have inferior ballistics, though? I've always been much more inaccurate with 1911-series pistols than 92FS, even though I'm strong enough to handle a .44 Mag without much trouble. Or maybe it's just me.

Also, by changing one component, the 1911 design will deliver superior accuracy to the M9. The barrel bushing. The M9 does not have what would be called "this weak point" but it does allow one top achieve stupendously small groups, with a minor amount of work, and money. Get a copy of a Brownells catalog. There are a LOT of 1911 parts for a reason. Competetion shooters want something that is accurate, and upgradeable. Point to the 1911 .

Hmm. I recall the Delta Elite has a solid barrel bushing...never knew what difference it made. Care to explain in more detail?

- Inferior reliability- No. Although one who treats either a M9, or 1911 bad enough to induce an environmental stoppage deserves a bayonet. The M9's P-38 based lockwork is far more prone to environmentally induced stoppages than the M1911. I and others can, and have demonstrated this. Given my choice, I'd carry a Steyr GB, over all others, but of the 1911, and M9? 1911. I'll call this a tie.

The M9 was much more heavily torture-tested than the M1911 prior to adoption, though, and is rated to a higher MRBF. Or was that simply a matter of the 1911 predating the newer, tougher standards?

- Inferior safety- No. Diffrent would be a better term. In fact, the 1911 was designed to be "soldier proof" in a day when a soldier might be falling off a horse, or swinging the 1913 "patton" sabre. Both are about as "unsafe" as one needs a service issued handgun to be. Again, a Tie.

The M9's double-action trigger is supposed to be less likely to fire accidentally than the M1911's single-action. As I recall, this was considered a significant selling point when the Army picked it.

- Inferior operating mechanism- No. Much simpler, and significantlly more field maintainable. Lacking double action is not a detriment to a handgun intended to be carried in a locked and cocked condition. I'll tear down a M9, and a M1911 if you want. The 1911 is a LOT simpler, and more robust.

*shrug* SA/DA just seems more flexible to me than SAO or DAO.

- Superior sentimental value- *Shrugs* Only if you attach sentimental value to tools.I carry mine because they are reliable.

It seems a major reason for the 1911's continuing popularity, though.

Firearms selection in the U.S. Military rarely has much to with "what is best for the troopies"..Look how long the U.S. has hung on to the M-60.

Look how long the U.S. hung onto the BAR, too. Not that it wasn't a great gun for its time, and still a pretty awesome one now -- the civvie semiauto version of it is #1 on my wish list (but too pricey to be #1 on my will-really-get list), and a full-auto version is drool-worthy.

 

[jaunty]

I'm hereby declaring my official intention to sabotage this rediculous project. Stop being a dick. It's obsolete in both real world and gameplay terms. That is all.

 

[Freon]

come on jaunty, let them try. I just want to see how far they go.

Good luck

 

[DEFkon]

No offense, but if your serious you should've started this thread in the Development forums, at least you would've heard responses from people more likely to give you technical assistance. The Suggestion forum is basicaly the place for do-nothing's like myself to dream, beg, bitch and moan. You'll never get off the ground asking for help here.

 

[Meplat]

Demosthanse- Hang on, let me finish this cup of tea. Whoops, I swallowed the leaves. Ah well. No predictions today.



Sara- For looking like a near spherical lump of lead, the 1911 ball round has a massive engagement area. pull one, roll it across an ink pad, then across a piece of paper, and you'll instantly see it's diffrence from the NATO 124 grain pill. This, and it's mass are reasons why it's still used for match shooting. (Although .45 ACP match loads of late could be fired by an arthritic. missing three fingers. VERY light )



There's two kinds of "accurized" bushing. One, looks like a series of spring steel fingers, that maintain a constant pressure on the outside of the barrel. Assures the minimum amount of play between the barrel and the slide. The other requires some fitting, but is a hardened ring, which can pivot within the bushing. The "spring" type was used by Colt for some time on the Gold Cup, and other match grade 1911's. it was almost the first thing replaced on any 1911, as people sought to tighten their groups (instead of spending that money on ammo, and range time.)

I'll admit that the 1911's testing was "unusual". it was basically issued to some units. Many pigs were shot, a few foreigners, then the reports came back. The 1910, became the M1911.

I chose the '60 as an example of how far "we'll" go to save a poorly concieved project. Had the M-60 been issued in say, 1940, it would have been a "good" design. The BAR held on, because the '60 did'nt want to pop out of the womb(I'm still waiting for someone to publish a book of it's teething troubles. Should make the M-16's story look simple).I could drone on and on about how the BAR should have been issued, but it'd bore you'all mightily.

Hmm. I have heard that those S/A M1918's were accurate. Having plenty of access to a live M1918, I just have'nt had a chance to play with one.

Jaunty- *Shrugs* if they want to make one, let em. Like I said, I won't carry a 1911 in a situation where I can carry a '249.

Meplat-

 

[SaraP]

Hmm. I have heard that those S/A M1918's were accurate. Having plenty of access to a live M1918, I just have'nt had a chance to play with one.

From what I've read, the regular M1918A2 was almost ridiculously accurate when fired prone from the bipod; it could routinely put its entire twenty-round magazine into a two-by-three inch square at the standard machine gun range of a thousand yards in full automatic. The "M1918A3 SLR" by Ohio Ordnance works reportedly scores five-inch groups with regular ball ammo, three-inch groups with match-grade (without bipod).

A live M1918? You lucky SOB! *grumblegrumblegrumble* There's so few of those in civvie hands that it isn't even funny -- only about a thousand total, and only ten M1918A2s.

 

[Nightmare]

Replacing components may be possible for civilians, but armies rarely pay for such unless they can afford to modify a very large batch of guns. It takes a lot of expensive work too, mind you. I hear those SOCOM pistols cost a fortune each, and they're specialist items.

Competition guns in general aren't suitable for military work, what with specialist sights, extra weights and all the bells and whistles you can imagine. It's just more stuff that can get broken in the field, more spare parts needed in the armory, more training needed for the men.

 

[NTKB]

...more training needed for the men.

Now billy bob I need you to understand this! One push of this ere button turns on the flashlight on this ere socom pea shoooter! Oh and you push it again and a laser comes out! Now im gonna give you a month of training to figure that out and memorize it ok bob?

 

[jayhova]

I'd like to interject my 2 cents here. The reason that the 1911 was selected in the first place was the stopping power of the .45 cal. At the time John Browning was developing a 9mm varient of what would become the 1911. The Army asked him to create a similar pistol in .45 because they felt that it was too close to the .38 they were trying to replace. The reason they wanted to replace the .38 was experience in the Philipinense had showed them that the .38 lacked the ability to stop a determained man with a machete before he hacked someone.