why only 1911's?

with all the diferent 22's you see on the line,why is the 1911 patfôrm pretty much all thats used for .45? Is it how the rules are writen? or just that no manufactuer has steped up and made a firearm to compete?  Dont get me wrong.. i love the 1911's, i would just think someone would try to compte with a new 45 platform by now.

The 1911 is used because it is/was the standard military sidearm when the match was created.  You have to shoot a .45 why not use a 1911?

You can shoot quite a few different 45 caliber pistols, I once ran an 860 with an HK USP Tactical.  The mag release killed my fingers but the gun worked fine.  Very few custom gunsmiths, work on HK pistols and a scope mount is tough to find.

Back in the day, someone ran an AMC Matador in NASCAR and it won,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,once.

s1120 wrote:with all the diferent 22's you see on the line,why is the 1911 patfôrm pretty much all thats used for .45? Is it how the rules are writen? or just that no manufactuer has steped up and made a firearm to compete?  Dont get me wrong.. i love the 1911's, i would just think someone would try to compte with a new 45 platform by now.

 Bullseye shooting, like any other sport is governed by supply and demand, and it is such a small part of the shooting sports, the demand is very very small. 

  If there was some huge flaw, in the 1911 design, the competition gunsmiths would have built a better moustrap and the world would have most likely beaten  a path to their door.  
     Pardini makes a decent 45, and you will see several of them on the line.  When someone wins a National championship shooting one, then you might see a giant jump in their popularity.  

I have been told, although I dont know this for sure, that Ruby Fox may be almost totally responsible for the popularity of the Hammerli 208s for Conventional pistol.  

      But there are so many aspects to the .45 match, when someone says they have a "better" platform for it, the next question is going to be better in what way?  Recoil?  Reliability?  Trigger?   Accuracy?  Balance?

Since the accessories exist to modify the 1911 to make it work for just about any hand size,  most people elect to not reinvent the wheel, but instead, modify the existing platform, to customize it for the individual.

I've heard of some .45 ACP revolvers also.  I can't shoot a revolver worth a lick, so I am not going to explore it further.

Thanks for the replys. I know in other shooting circles you hear alot adout 1911 vs other brands, and just wonderd about here in the BE world. Personaly i love the  1911, querks and all. Ive shot a few other pistols in 45, and wile they were nice, just didnt have the feel that the 1911 does.

With pretty much every match grade 1911 being able to produce as small as 1''-3'' 50 yd groups with hanloaded ammo, the answer is because there is almost nothing else that can compare. But your welcome to join the long list of those that have tried and failed. Not one national championship has been won with a non 1911, ever.

DavidR wrote:With pretty much every match grade 1911 being able to produce as small as 1''-3'' 50 yd groups with hanloaded ammo, the answer is because there is almost nothing else that can compare. But your welcome to join the long list of those that have tried and failed. Not one national championship has been won with a non 1911, ever.

Good question OP.

It's also more of an availability, knowledge, and tradition thing. 1911s are easy to buy and easy to send to a gunsmith to accurize. Many years of experience from military armorers accurizing an 1911. Tons of 3rd party aftermarket parts to tinker with. Great platform, great results.

Eventually technology and invention will create something better. If everyone could buy Masaki's dragon gun off the shelf, maybe that could win Perry  

This reminds me of tennis. Up until maybe 10 years ago, ALL (okay, 99%) of pros used natural gut to string their racquets. Sampras used a dinky, ancient Wilson Prostaff racquet with 85 sq inches (surface area of strings) with gut strung at 80 pounds (really high). He kicked everyone's butt, but he admitted in his autobiography, that he probably should have upgraded his racquet in his latter years, which could have helped him win another Open. These days, coinciding with a different playing style, many (all?) top pros use versions of poly (synthetic) strings and typically racquets with ~100 sqin head size. Essentially, this allows players to rocket massive groundstrokes with massive top spin.

I picked the 1911 for bullseye because of the massive top spin. 

DavidR wrote:With pretty much every match grade 1911 being able to produce as small as 1''-3'' 50 yd groups with hanloaded ammo, the answer is because there is almost nothing else that can compare. But your welcome to join the long list of those that have tried and failed. Not one national championship has been won with a non 1911, ever.

nope not looking to join that list . i like the 1911  just seemed strange that it was pretty much the only game in town for BE

Not really, 99% of 45 cal handguns produced today are built for defense use, accuracy out to 25 yds is all a few are concerned with and many aren't even concerned with that.