1911 Alternatives (non revolver)

Sacrilegious, I know . . . .    

I'm getting the urge to try another pistol for the 45 segment.  I'm wondering if any of you have had pleasant experiences with non-1911 pistols.  I know I can use a revolver, but I'd like to try an unconventional 45 semi auto.  Any advice?

Thanks,

Krogen

The Pardini GT-45 is about the only real option I can think of off hand. Not good for people with small - medium hands.

I know three folks who use the Pardini. I would think a Sig P210 would also be a good choice.

Do they make the P210 in 45? Maybe a Springfield XDM, or a CZ 97? Both would need accurizing work.

Dave

Tanfoglio Match 5" or Gold Match 6" and you can get slide/barrel/magazines for:
9mm, 40 S&W, 38 SA, 10mm, 45acp

Just know I love the feel of the Tanfoglio triggers amd the grip/frame from a few chances to hold a few models and dry-fire. Otherwise, I'm totally unqualified to say what might actually work for Bullseye.

Sig. P220 Super Match 45 which is also legal for CMP Service Pistol.  HK USP Expert or Elite  45

Try a S&W 645 or 745.

Another vote for a Sig P220 Super Match

I'm three months into this "hobby" and have been shooting a Marvel .22 conversion on a 1911.

I wanted to try .45 so I bought a cheap bridge mount and modified it to fit the Sig and put an Ultra Dot on it.

Saw a thread about Bob's Bullets 160 LSWC and loaded them up with WST. 

Played around with it a bit to get it sighted in and shot my first slow fire target with it (89 pts) in a club match last Saturday and this was the result. I'm a left handed shooter and the Sig presently has a 5 lb trigger, so the results being a bit low right made sense to me, as the .22 I had been shooting has a 2lb trigger.

Keep in mind that I am a rank amateur, but I was pretty impressed with the Sig.

I've never been able to figure out why on other firearms forums I keep seeing people write about how accurate their HKs, Sig, S&W, etc pistols are and I never see them in Bullseye matches in CF and 45. 

I have seen a Sig 226 shot pretty well in Service Pistol Match at the CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park, maybe Expert scores.

1911 in 38 special or super, Model 52 in 38 special, XDM 5.25 in 9mm. There are a myriad of choices.

I've only owned my  Sig P220 Super Match for about six months and my one complaint is the 5 lb trigger.

Several competitors shooting XDM 5.25 made the Presidents 100 at Perry the last couple of years.  All they need is a trigger job (drop in) and a weld so the barrel locks up tighter.  Most were probably 9MM but the .45 with the same mods shoots pretty well too with JHP ammo.
- Dave

zanemoseley wrote:The Pardini GT-45 is about the only real option I can think of off hand. Not good for people with small - medium hands.

 Sure wish they would make a single stack version. I’ve got a PO 45, and just not comfortable.

Another vote for the XDM 5.25. The price won't blow any budget and accurate right from the box. And a pile of after market goodies that can be had.

 For the record.The picture above was taken when I was playing with these seeking a good "production" pistol and was having fun with all the ammo I could burn thru it. They got rid of the production division and I have better EIC pistols so the XDM is being used for what it is best for. I never fired it in a Bullseye match but that has not stopped me from putting a lot of rounds thru it. This is what it looks like today.

Is that a laser?!!?

Dave

Well sure. The magazine holds 1/3 of a box of ammo. No sense letting it sit around collecting dust when it can have multiple uses. Laser comes off in 3 seconds.

LenV wrote:Another vote for the XDM 5.25. The price won't blow any budget and accurate right from the box. And a pile of after market goodies that can be had.

Len

Len, what trigger are you using? My xdm doesn't have a bad trigger after a basic drop in kit, but it still isn't good.

I just want to say that the OP was asking for options to a 1911. This is a fine option. I don't think any pistol is a better option then the 1911. I certainly didn't pursue the effort to make it better then a 1911. Stock trigger. Stock barrel. Holds the 10 ring at 25yds. A lot of pistols won't.

Len

My XD in 45 is accurate (at least at 25 yards) I had the trigger done and that helped a lot but I have not gotten it to shoot lighter loads reliably such as Fed gold medal match.  I find my 1911 easier to shoot. I would think one could get used to the XD and I had not thought about using the rail and putting a dot sight on it.

Sa-tevp wrote:I've never been able to figure out why on other firearms forums I keep seeing people write about how accurate their HKs, Sig, S&W, etc pistols are and I never see them in Bullseye matches in CF and 45. 

I have seen a Sig 226 shot pretty well in Service Pistol Match at the CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park, maybe Expert scores.

same reason you don't see FN SCAR or HK 416's etc on the High Power Rifle scoreboard


that and everyone has a different thought on accuracy, (and stance etc to get that accuracy)

Sa-tevp wrote:I've never been able to figure out why on other firearms forums I keep seeing people write about how accurate their HKs, Sig, S&W, etc pistols are and I never see them in Bullseye matches in CF and 45. 

I have seen a Sig 226 shot pretty well in Service Pistol Match at the CMP Talladega Marksmanship Park, maybe Expert scores.

What i see and perceive, nothing more, nothing less. Some of the following might be complete tripe:

IMO, it's peer pressure and inertia. Bullseye is essentially like a group of classic Ford Mustang racers (could alternately be any classic muscle car). If you ask whats best, it's a Ford of the given years. Ask how to improve the performance on another make car of the same vintage, you'll get told how easy it is to improve Fords.

Ask why a modern car couldn't compete, get told that no one in the group knows how to upgrade them (without really looking into if they need upgrading). Show up to competitions with something else, you might do well, but the culture, talk, focus, and available expertise won't help you advance with your choice.

I've asked the "What do you recommend OTHER than a 1911?" before, and that essentially sumarises the answers given. The experience and expertise in Bullseye revolves, for better or worse, around one pistol that is the choice it is because of history. And the reason it sticks around is current service pistols don't even use the calibre shot in Bullseye, so there's little pressure to change with no influx of service members with experience with current pistols and precision shooting or new members wanting to be as good as service member precision team shooters with service pistols. Seems the military shooting teams are shooting service weapons in action shooting, and Bullseye remains a .45 game and the 1911 remains the last .45 firearm used.

With the marines adopting the SIG P320, there might be some accurizing knowledge in the near future for the P320, but the M17 is in 9mm. Would be interesting if Sig could support Bullseye like Walther has decided to support IPSC/IDPA. But with a very limited market it unlikely there will be a X-Five version of the .45, let alone a steel frame version.

Personally, I'll never buy a 1911 if I can avoid it. I've shot a SigSauer STX in .45, and after 4 or five magazines I could see myself perhaps attaining the same scores I can get with my .22 or my centerfire guns (as bad as they are). But I HATE the grip on 1911s. I'd be fighting and adapting to the grip as much as mastering shot technique. In the same session I shot another gun I had never fired before, a standard 92FS, and improved way beyond the SIG 1911 after 2 magazines. Worse trigger, worse barrel, no special fitting, bulk ammo, but felt perfect in hand. But also, not .45.

lyman1903 wrote:same reason you don't see FN SCAR or HK 416's etc on the High Power Rifle scoreboard

that and everyone has a different thought on accuracy, (and stance etc to get that accuracy)

There's a heck of a lot more different between those two firearms and the specialised rifles used in precision rifle than there are differences between a 1911 and any pistol shooting the same calibre.

And with none of the manufacturers or reviewers considering bullseye or x-rings at 25 or 50 yards how many bullseye shooters have bothered to test pistols other than 1911s to bullseye standards of accuracy?

show me a 10 shot group at 50 yards from one of those other guns...

Hey   You. Just have to commit to doing it.The reason the 1911 dominates Bullseye and the run and gun games is its history of being the US Service pistol of choice for so long.  Industries and businesses built on the 1911 as a platform.  We know how to make it work for any competition game out there.  Are other pistols re-workable to the same accuracy potential?  Absolutely.  The SIG P210 is a fine example.   Are others better ergonomically? Yes, though this An individual thing.  Are other 45s out there. Yes.  

So if you don’t want a 1911 you can still play in the 2700 game.

Slartybartfast wrote:....how many bullseye shooters have bothered to test pistols other than 1911s to bullseye standards of accuracy?

Uh, I have and plenty of others have.

A lot of people put a lot of time, money and effort into winning matches.  There are many who don't care about much other than winning.  What wins is what gets used.

Another way to look at it is to consider .22s....why so many different types on the firing line?  Because there are many on the market that can perform to the same high standard.

I remember in the 80's when the Army was testing 9mms.  The accuracy tests had to be modified because rack grade M1911s were beating hand picked M92s.

My two cents and worth just that.

Jim

Slartybartfast wrote:

What i see and perceive, nothing more, nothing less. Some of the following might be complete tripe:

IMO, it's peer pressure and inertia. Bullseye is essentially like a group of classic Ford Mustang racers (could alternately be any classic muscle car). If you ask whats best, it's a Ford of the given years. Ask how to improve the performance on another make car of the same vintage, you'll get told how easy it is to improve Fords.

Ask why a modern car couldn't compete, get told that no one in the group knows how to upgrade them (without really looking into if they need upgrading). Show up to competitions with something else, you might do well, but the culture, talk, focus, and available expertise won't help you advance with your choice.

I've asked the "What do you recommend OTHER than a 1911?" before, and that essentially sumarises the answers given. The experience and expertise in Bullseye revolves, for better or worse, around one pistol that is the choice it is because of history. And the reason it sticks around is current service pistols don't even use the calibre shot in Bullseye, so there's little pressure to change with no influx of service members with experience with current pistols and precision shooting or new members wanting to be as good as service member precision team shooters with service pistols. Seems the military shooting teams are shooting service weapons in action shooting, and Bullseye remains a .45 game and the 1911 remains the last .45 firearm used.

Having made vehicles that have won races and race series I say tripe. Fashion and tradition has nothing to do with performance. I use to be able to measure performance with dynamometers, flow benches, stopwatches, time slips, onboard data loggers, now I use a Ransom Rest and 50 yard targets. I used to love doing things the wrong way and taking home protest or tear-down money in racing.

Also, only CMP Service Pistol sets limits on the platform. NRA Precision Pistol lets you shoot anything 45 one handed. An AR platform in 45 with a 10 inch or less barrel? Have at it.