FireBirdDS
Expert
Why I would put forward $1500 for a Springfield TRP (or any comparable 1911) for the purpose of being an EDC fighting pistol that would allegedly give me some sort of an edge over my $500 M&P 45c. (Merry Christmas btw!)
Let me start off by saying I'm not trying to whack the 1911 hornet nest, nor am I criticizing the TRP for singling it out. It's a great pistol, damn sexy looking, and no doubt an effective instrument in experienced hands. If I had $1500 laying around, and no other obligations I'd get one for myself in a heartbeat. Also, my designation of a pistol for "fighting" purposes in my mind means it will be expected to endure some abuse, wear-n-tear, and even some scuff marks that'll come with the training that any fighting pistol deserves; with how pretty it looks at the end of the day being a last in line bonus. With that in mind, the primary crux of the matter is why $1500 would do any better of a job taking the abuse and winning the day than $5-600.
My M&P, even with the apex and sight job, is still under half the cost of the TRP. The flush mags hold just as much (8 rounds) while still being able to naturally use the full size factory 10 or even 14-round mags.
For barrel length as far as muzzle velocity, assuming standard 230gr, 5" on average adds 30-40 fps over a 4" barrel. Does that 30-40 extra fps lend to anymore considerable "stopping power"? The inch more in sight radius will indeed lend towards slightly higher accuracy on the range, but does that give any sort of an edge in a 10-15 yd defensive hostile encounter? Also, some might argue that 4" will clear the holster sooner than 5" along with less upward arm motion. Now a compact 1911 will negate the barrel length argument if shorter is considered preferable for EDC, but they are still as (if not more) expensive as their full-size brothers, and probably more maintenance intensive. Also it is my understanding that the 1911 was designed to operate at it's best as a full-size piece.
Top quality 1911s like the TRP (once broken-in) are indeed great pistols, and I'll be the first to sing their praises. However one's heart will tend to sink when this handsome looking $1500 piece gets beat up on and abused, while hardly anyone would not lose much sleep over their $5-600 Glock, M&P, or XD getting it. So the question remains as to why I would consider spending nearly a grand more for something that'll be taking the same potential wear and abuse as my M&P. In my opinion, the few scratches or scuff marks any of my M&Ps have endured tend to give them character (I've even dropped them in the sand or gravel on purpose once or twice). And the polymer frame seems to be able better resist scratching than a metal frame would (or maybe it just hides it better).
Maybe the answer is more psychologically complex than simply a matter of reliability and usability, and that's okay; since for most of us there comes a certain emotional attachment we assign to our EDC pieces. That's where I'd like to hear your thoughts.
For the sake of an apples to apples discussion, we will only be discussing within the realm of .45acp "fighting" pistols. Also I only used the M&P for comparison because it's what I currently have and train with, not as a dismissing of other comparable polymer-framed .45 platforms.
Let me start off by saying I'm not trying to whack the 1911 hornet nest, nor am I criticizing the TRP for singling it out. It's a great pistol, damn sexy looking, and no doubt an effective instrument in experienced hands. If I had $1500 laying around, and no other obligations I'd get one for myself in a heartbeat. Also, my designation of a pistol for "fighting" purposes in my mind means it will be expected to endure some abuse, wear-n-tear, and even some scuff marks that'll come with the training that any fighting pistol deserves; with how pretty it looks at the end of the day being a last in line bonus. With that in mind, the primary crux of the matter is why $1500 would do any better of a job taking the abuse and winning the day than $5-600.
My M&P, even with the apex and sight job, is still under half the cost of the TRP. The flush mags hold just as much (8 rounds) while still being able to naturally use the full size factory 10 or even 14-round mags.
For barrel length as far as muzzle velocity, assuming standard 230gr, 5" on average adds 30-40 fps over a 4" barrel. Does that 30-40 extra fps lend to anymore considerable "stopping power"? The inch more in sight radius will indeed lend towards slightly higher accuracy on the range, but does that give any sort of an edge in a 10-15 yd defensive hostile encounter? Also, some might argue that 4" will clear the holster sooner than 5" along with less upward arm motion. Now a compact 1911 will negate the barrel length argument if shorter is considered preferable for EDC, but they are still as (if not more) expensive as their full-size brothers, and probably more maintenance intensive. Also it is my understanding that the 1911 was designed to operate at it's best as a full-size piece.
Top quality 1911s like the TRP (once broken-in) are indeed great pistols, and I'll be the first to sing their praises. However one's heart will tend to sink when this handsome looking $1500 piece gets beat up on and abused, while hardly anyone would not lose much sleep over their $5-600 Glock, M&P, or XD getting it. So the question remains as to why I would consider spending nearly a grand more for something that'll be taking the same potential wear and abuse as my M&P. In my opinion, the few scratches or scuff marks any of my M&Ps have endured tend to give them character (I've even dropped them in the sand or gravel on purpose once or twice). And the polymer frame seems to be able better resist scratching than a metal frame would (or maybe it just hides it better).
Maybe the answer is more psychologically complex than simply a matter of reliability and usability, and that's okay; since for most of us there comes a certain emotional attachment we assign to our EDC pieces. That's where I'd like to hear your thoughts.
For the sake of an apples to apples discussion, we will only be discussing within the realm of .45acp "fighting" pistols. Also I only used the M&P for comparison because it's what I currently have and train with, not as a dismissing of other comparable polymer-framed .45 platforms.
Last edited: