The Glock line of pistols is far superior to the 1911 design.
I hear this comparison a lot and it is, to be honest, not very well thought out. Here is why:
Glock pistols are made by Glock. All Glock pistols. Every Glock is like every other Glock of that same model except for engineering changes, which are controlled by Glock. Therefore any Glock should be a good representation of a Glock.
The 1911 is a type of design. They are made by the following companies:
Colt
Springfield Armory
Kimber
Remington
Smith and Wesson
Taurus
Sig-Sauer
AMT
Armscore/Rock Island Armory
Wilson Combat
Les Baer
Nighthawk Customs
Llama (may be out of production)
Auto-Ordnance
Para-Ordnance
And a gazillion custom gun makers worldwide, all with varying degrees of success. Each of the manufactuers has found new and unique ways to either make their version of the 1911 even better or screw it up royally.
So, to make the comparison you make it would have to be comparing a Glock to a Taurus 1911 (which imo Glock would win) or a Wilson Combat 1911 (which imo Glock would lose) or a Colt 1911 (which I have no idea what would happen). Besides, the design is 100 years old and we are having this discussion. I haven't seen many "Which is better - the Glock or the Luger" threads so this speaks to how great the 1911 truly is.
The 1911 is a great weapon system. It is still in use today (100 years after it was first designed) by MEU/SOC and several law enforcement agencies, as well as millions of shooters. Breaking one is almost impossible unless you do something REALLY stupid. That said it has to be made right. I had a Springfield Armory 1911 that was an absolute heap of cr#p -the thing never would run right. I finally sold it at a loss. That said I was at a local gun shop this weekend drooling over a Kimber.
BTW - calling a gun that has been in continual use for 100 years a "Delorean" doesn't give you any credibility with anyone here.