What is "The 1911 Experience”?

On one firearm forum, a question was posed concerning two different brands of 1911-pattern pistols.  The original poster advised having only “held both” at a gun store and asked for comments from folks who actually owned one or the other of these two handguns.  Certainly, the “Which-is-best-and-why?” type post is routinely seen and both brands had their supporters.

In the midst of this, one person responded, but not to the original poster’s question.  Instead, the idea of “getting what you pay for” was coupled with the declaration that unless one owns a high-end 1911, he is “living in fantasy land thinking you are getting the real 1911 experience when you are not.”  We also “learn” that just because a less-costly 1911-pattern pistol may “…go bang and… function but if you think that’s what a 1911 does then you don’t know (insert a little cartoon pile of dung here).”  He then goes on to note some very true merits of the 1911 design, i.e.: refined trigger-pull and fine accuracy and so forth.

I have no problem whatsoever with the idea that high-end quality costs more than “run-of-the-mill” and that the 1911-style handgun is capable of both reliable function and exceptional mechanical accuracy.  That it can be had with extremely light and/or crisp trigger-pulls has been known for decades, but I vehemently disagree with the pompous declarations concerning “fantasy land” and what a shooter just does not “know” if he happens not to own one of the rather expensive 1911-types.

When Mr. Browning’s 1911 was demonstrated to the U.S. Military, how reliably it would “go bang and function” was sort of a major selling point, don’t you think? Like many of those reading these words, I’ve shot more than a few “US Government Property” 1911’s. Accuracy ranged from better-than-expected to barely “combat accurate” depending upon how well the gun had fared or been treated but they usually worked.  I wonder if soldiers who used the 1911 or 1911A1 to actually save their hides realized that they “didn’t know s%*t” about the “1911 experience”?  After all, according to the pontificator’s criteria, unless they were using a high-dollar version, they were living in “fantasy land”.  I suspect that some of these warriors had different names for Anzio, Bataan, North Africa, Vietnam and so forth, and will gamble that “fantasy land” just was not one of them!  Even though “not the real 1911 experience” according to the poster in question, I suspect it was “real” enough!

I have been fortunate enough to know men who used the 1911-pattern pistol (and others) in do-or-die situations, in both military and civilian settings as well as some where such lines were blurred. In none of these instances were they using highest-dollar handguns. In most, their middle-of-the-road 1911 handguns had at least a few refinements.  Usually these were simply high-visibility (fixed) sights and a decent trigger.  If reliability was not there from the get-go, most didn’t really try and squeeze it from that particular, individual handgun regardless of brand; they preferred to obtain another until reliability was achieved and repeatedly proven.  Poor souls!  I guess that they didn’t realize that just because their pistols would “go bang and function” they weren’t really appreciating the “1911 experience”! I fear they would be crestfallen to learn that the poster in question gets “pissed off seeing cheap knock-offs on the market, watering down what a 1911 really is”!

In his answers to questions never asked by the original poster, the pontificator declares that we should buy “good 1911s”, but never defines “good” or “cheap”. I guess that’s alright for despite his slinging absolutes and opinion-as-fact around pretty heavily, he never defines what constitutes a “1911 experience” either, though we can assume from his “rightness” that he, at least, has had such.

In my opinion, only egos swollen to the point that they resemble impacted colons require locked-step agreement and passing years have taught me that no matter how much I may have learned, I do not know everything. I have managed to learn enough to know that I do not speak for each and every shooter!

I am not alone in owning 1911-pattern pistols that vary quite a bit in both price and options. Not a single one remains entirely stock. Does that mean that my “1911 experiences” are more “valid” than the gent who owns but a single Springfield Armory Mil-Spec?  How about the fellow opting for the same company’s Professional Model, or a Les Baer, Hoag or Wilson? Are his “experiences” somehow more genuine than someone shooting a Norinco, Rock Island Arms, Colt or Kimber?

The idea that quality costs is not new.  Neither is the concept of people having different ideas, preferences and budgets. Is one of these ideas to be more respected than another?  I think not.  Does a 1911-pattern handgun have to be capable of shooting sub-3-inch groups at fifty-yards to serve well? Nice to be sure, is it really an absolute to the “1911 experience” if a shooter cannot shoot to that level of accuracy in the first place?  What about fancy?  Is an owner with an ornately engraved 1911 realizing a more valid “1911 experience” than the soul whose gun has but a memory of its original finish…or is it the other way around?  Sort of depends on our particular point of view and frame of reference, doesn’t it?

I do not believe it is an absolute that only owning the most refined or costly versions of this pistol design are meaningful.  I suggest that if a fellow is pleased to own a 1911-pattern pistol that is meeting his perceived requirements, his “1911 experience” is as valid as anyone’s.

Best to you and yours.