Simulating grown up conversation...

I'd never say the 1911 was obsolete, that is just stupid, it's not and never will be. I have at least (3) myself and love them. A friend and I were driving along and we began a discussion. 1911 lovers (I'm one too) are so passionate. Before we finished the topic his face was flush and I think he might have begun to tear up. He had stopped being scientifically objective and put up a wall.

Jeff Cooper did a lot to promote the 1911 (combat shooting disciplines as a science in general) from the late 1950's up through the 80's. The 1911 did not have much (any really?) competition anyway. But by the time Mr. Cooper passed in 2006 (fourteen years ago) he was a very old gentleman and many things have changed in the last 40 years. Were he alive today and just starting, say 35 yrs. of age, would he tout the 1911 platform? Seriously? Would he carry a 1970's designed Star PD for personal defense? Possible, but I'm not so sure. (BTW - I have and would again)

It's like trying to argue the point to a fellow who still drives his beloved Chevy 57' Bel-air. It's the greatest car there ever has been. But the soulless Camry has more HP, is much faster, gets 35 mpg, and will happily run 300,000 miles with basically no major maintenance. How can you begin to present an intelligent argument, fighting that level of passion?

The wonderful 1911 platform has basically (46) parts total, (7) in the barrel, locking, and recoil systems. But that barrel interfaces with two lug recesses carefully machined into the underpart of the slide, which is also influenced by the recoil plunger that forces the link to move upward in locking. A bushing in the slide is necessary, or some form of support. Feeding is influenced partly by feed ramp in the barrel but also part of that ramp on the frame too (unless a custom ramped barrel is used). Bottom line is there are a lot of things going on and many parts interfacing. Impressive engineering and you can't argue, it certainly does work as designed.

The modern wonder plastic piece has only (31) parts, that's 32% less total parts. The barrel and recoil system is comprised of (3) parts, only two if you count the captive assy. as only one part. The locking is via the mono-block wedged into the slide opening, pushed there by the recoil spring. No other support or bushing is needed or utilized, the barrel just hangs there, locked. Feeding is integral only with the barrel ramp. Other critical systems such as "grips" and mechanical sear locking "safeties", fire control systems, could be critiqued as well. They have taken over 100 years of knowledge and applied it using modern materials and methods. For all the "cheapness" and use of plastic, the piece exhibits sub 4 MOA "mechanical" accuracy from the basic service grade production. I can only speculate what the base 1911 might produce but it's more than 4 MOA, possibly several feet! Neither were envisioned as target arms but the mechanical engineering in performance is notable rather than moot.

We have not even begun to dive off into the considerations of capacity or reliability, under adverse conditions. No the 1911 is not obsolete, never will be. But there are some very amazing arms available to us today. Admittedly many will never be passionately coveted as the old slab-sides, but their performance and service will be noted by engineering history.