What if Glock made a 1911 ??

[spf159753]

What if Glock made a 1911?
Sig sauer did it. They also went polymer.
Springfield Armory Did it like a Glock and a 1911.
S&W now makes 1911's and polymer guns similar to Glock.
So, now it's Glocks turn to make a Polymer 1911, like Wilson Combat, But way less expensive.

What a fun gun that would be. Glock 1911. I would buy one. in .45 ACP of course.
:happy::happy:

 

[spf159753]

Glock, cocked and locked

I want Glock to keep it with all the normal 1911 features;ie; thumb safety,grip safety,4 lbs. trigger.
night sights made of carbon steel. in all calibers. .38 supper,9mm,40 S&W, .45ACP, 10mm,.50GI.

what a great and affordable gun Glock could make????

 

[mpohio]

I'd try one out. I didn't start off as a Glock fan,but have warmed up to them. I really wish they would make some micro sub-compacts!! That currently seems to be the booming market. Something in the line of the ruger lcp or Kahr pm40. The best thing I like about Glock and the reason I am sold; When I pull the trigger, It goes bang each and every time. I have never had any issues with any of my 6 glocks and I shoot them often :biggrin:

 

[GETMRUTN]

I would give it a try as well. Sounds like a an excellent Idea. Now if they would just do it.

 

[Cocked _and_Locked]

Not a bad idea, they could use the Para-Ordinance LDA design as a base, lose the grip saftey and frame mounted safety, and incorporate the Glock trigger safety.

I don't think you could call it a 1911 at that point. :no:

 

[mpohio]

I am still researching the sig comb gun they came out with. But Glock is due for something new. The problem is their sales were up something like 70%, so I'm willing to bet they will stick with what works.

 

[SC Tiger]

Not a bad idea, they could use the Para-Ordinance LDA design as a base, lose the grip saftey and frame mounted safety, and incorporate the Glock trigger safety. I'd buy one, in 50AE of course. :biggrin:

The LDA is not a 1911 IMO. The design keys for a 1911 are the SA trigger, grip safety, and frame mounted safety with the ability to be carried condition 1. Just my opinion of course - I don't know if there is an accepted rule as to what changes can be made to a 1911 and it still be a 1911.

 

[Wolfling68]

I guess I am the only one who believes a company should stick with its core competencies. Do what you do and be the best at it. Glock is the standard bearer in what they do, making a 1911 would diminish their image. IMO.

 

[handgonnetoter]

Whoa there now, I don't think Gaston Glock would know how to do that! If they did, I would like to see what they came up with.:laugh:

 

[handgonnetoter]

Signed up to take my class for the Utah non-resident CCW. Can't wait to get that done, as my Indiana permit is only good in about 17 or so states!:biggrin:

 

[HardCorps53]

I guess I am the only one who believes a company should stick with its core competencies. Do what you do and be the best at it. Glock is the standard bearer in what they do, making a 1911 would diminish their image. IMO.

You're not the only one - it's Business 101. The appeal of a Glock is its simplicity, reliablity, and price. The first two go away by virtue of being a 1911. R&D costs and capital investment in a new assembly process likely hurt the last one.

I'm not bashing the 1911. I own Glocks and 1911's. I love them both.

 

[.45acp]

The appeal of a Glock is its simplicity, reliablity, and price. The first two go away by virtue of being a 1911.

I'm not bashing the 1911. I own Glocks and 1911's. I love them both.

I understand your comment about pricing, machined steel cost significantly more than Tupperware.

But…where does your reliability claim come from.

Why does reliability go away by virtue of being a 1911? I have several 1911’s that are absolutely reliable.

Steve

 

[Islander]

machined steel cost significantly more than Tupperware.

You mean 13th century BC material technology costs significantly more than modern polymers. :biggrin:

 

[SC Tiger]

I understand your comment about pricing, machined steel cost significantly more than Tupperware.

But…where does your reliability claim come from.

Why does reliability go away by virtue of being a 1911? I have several 1911’s that are absolutely reliable.

Steve

Lets be honest - the 1911 can be a real bear to manufacture (and I love the design BTW). When done right there's no better gun. When done wrong you've got a boat anchor. Lots of machining and hand-fitting required. Plus, if you got any further from the Glock design than the 1911 is you'd be making shotguns (striker fired vs hammer fired, grip and thumb safety vs trigger safety, steel vs plastic, single stack vs double stack, etc).

Also, you're getting WAY outside Glock's core compentencies here - they've been making basically the same design for at least 25 years (they came over here in '85 I think - not sure how long they've been in business). No guarantees they could pull off something different.

Now the company that I think needs to jump into the 1911 pond is Ruger. I'm fairly certain they could do it, do it right, and do it for a reasonable price. I'd be very surprised if they have not at least talked about it (they make an AR-15 variant now).

 

[dmaxx3500]

just to add my .02's worth,,why would i want a heavy steel 7 rd out-dated gun ,when i can have a up to date 12 rd 45 acp that shots better [yes i've had a few 1911's and their copys],,i don't want a 1919 ford truck either,ive got a 2008 gm diesel ,,but if thats want to shot/carry ,its ok by me

 

[SC Tiger]

You're not the only one - it's Business 101. The appeal of a Glock is its simplicity, reliablity, and price. The first two go away by virtue of being a 1911. R&D costs and capital investment in a new assembly process likely hurt the last one.

I'm not bashing the 1911. I own Glocks and 1911's. I love them both.

I would say the first and THIRD go away by being a 1911, as the design is quite complex and requires a good bit of hand-fitting. Reliability is no issue if the gun is done right. If you try to make it cheaply, then reliability suffers.

Glock, IMO should consider new designs at some point. Right now they are a 1-trick pony (although it is one he!! of a good trick). Springfield, and Smith and Wesson have started to perfect that same trick, and Ruger is working on it (supposedly the SR9 is a very good weapon, and around here is about $100-$150 cheaper than the Glock).

All designs get surpassed at some point.

 

[dmaxx3500]

ok, how about a glock rifle?

 

[spf159753]

Glock 1911

H&K USP was able to be carried cock and locked, but cost too much. Good gun though.

The Ruger idea sounds sort of okay. I just don't like their company. they would for years only sell 5 round magazines to civilians for the Mini-14, and because all European high capacity guns were out selling them(Glock, H&K,etc.) Ruger helped get the Assault weapons Ban in effect, limiting 10 rounds in a magazine.
'So, I don't like buying from them, and sold my Mini-14.

Smith and Wesson ,and Sig Sauer make expensive but good 1911's.

My Wilson Combat is a great, but expensive 1911.

I just think, it would be interesting if, Glock could do a cocked and locked gun like a 1911,
for around $550.00, but still be reliable like all regular Glocks are. with a 4 Lbs. trigger pull,
and thumb safety. No grip safety needed.

I don't like Taurus either...

Well.... Glock.... I'm waiting...

 

[kerb]

What's wrong with Taurus?

 

[Islander]

Glock was supposed to come out with a carbine way back in the ealry 90s. Someday maybe...