Thread: 1911 vs P220

The M1911 is a much better gun than the SIG but your reasoning for a .45 is way off. First, the SIG is not a good pistol for a couple of reasons: The design means the gun is very high in the hand and is consequently harder to control, and they have a problem with parts breakage. Buying a .45 just to see the bullet holes means that your technique is completely arse about face. It means that your eye is drawn to the target instead of concentrating on the front sight, and that will cause wildly inaccurate shooting. While the M1911 is a good gun it does not mean that it is the best gun for you. I would suggest a 9mm in preference to the .45 as it is easier to shoot and much cheaper to feed. Far and away the best choice in 9mm's is the CZ75 or 85 pistol. They are very well made of robust material (all steel, no aluminium or plastic!), accurate, capable of customising, ergonomically very good, and reasonably priced. In comparison, the M1911 is a harder gun to shoot accurately without a lot of experience, and the SIG is not in the hunt. A tweaked CZ is capable of 75mm groups at 50 metres in the right hands, and will last you all your shooting career.

Originally Posted by gundoc

The M1911 is a much better gun than the SIG but your reasoning for a .45 is way off. First, the SIG is not a good pistol for a couple of reasons: The design means the gun is very high in the hand and is consequently harder to control, and they have a problem with parts breakage. [SNIP] While the M1911 is a good gun it does not mean that it is the best gun for you. I would suggest a 9mm in preference to the .45 as it is easier to shoot and much cheaper to feed. [SNIP] … the M1911 is a harder gun to shoot accurately without a lot of experience, and the SIG is not in the hunt.

thanks for your thoughts, gundoc.

i may have been a little casual in the whys and wherefores of my search for a 45

if IPSC taught me how to move and shoot confidently and safely, action has taught me accuracy and consistency with its front-sight-front-sight-front-sight mantra, and all the while, skills from each discipline have really improved my performance in both of them. i currently shoot a 9mm so… i guess the real reason for wanting a 45 is just because (and because i've got the two on offer in my price range.)

so far:
— 2 x against the SIG;
— 2 x for the 1911, with caveats;
— and 2 x for CZs when i'm not even asking after them

Originally Posted by gundoc

The M1911 is a much better gun than the SIG but your reasoning for a .45 is way off. First, the SIG is not a good pistol for a couple of reasons: The design means the gun is very high in the hand and is consequently harder to control, and they have a problem with parts breakage. Buying a .45 just to see the bullet holes means that your technique is completely arse about face. It means that your eye is drawn to the target instead of concentrating on the front sight, and that will cause wildly inaccurate shooting. While the M1911 is a good gun it does not mean that it is the best gun for you. I would suggest a 9mm in preference to the .45 as it is easier to shoot and much cheaper to feed. Far and away the best choice in 9mm's is the CZ75 or 85 pistol. They are very well made of robust material (all steel, no aluminium or plastic!), accurate, capable of customising, ergonomically very good, and reasonably priced. In comparison, the M1911 is a harder gun to shoot accurately without a lot of experience, and the SIG is not in the hunt. A tweaked CZ is capable of 75mm groups at 50 metres in the right hands, and will last you all your shooting career.

he has a couple of 9mms , I thought that was also one of the reasons why he wanted a 45 .... hell even I want one just because ....