What The World Needs Is A 45 Cal Pistol 0.60” Thick

[jyl]

A typical 45 cal pistol barrel is around 0.6” outside diameter.

Someone needs to build a 45 pistol that is only as thick as said barrel.

Because it is just way uncomfortable to carry my doublestack 1911 IWB.

[Joe Bob]

Get a single stack officer's model or get a lower caliber.

[HardDrive]

Do you really need a .45 as a carry weapon? I vote no.

https://www.sigsauer.com/firearms/pistols/p938.html

[jyl]

I mean in principle - a carry pistol should be no wider than its barrel.

A pistol’s mechanisms have to do various functions. None of them absolutely require width greater than the barrel.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by jyl

A typical 45 cal pistol barrel is around 0.6” outside diameter.

Someone needs to build a 45 pistol that is only as thick as said barrel.

Because it is just way uncomfortable to carry my doublestack 1911 IWB.

There's your problem.

I don't think it's possible to have a double stack 45 that's as thin as the barrel. How thick is the mag? And then on top of that thickness, you've got to add the frame for the handle, and then the grips/scales.

Originally Posted by Joe Bob

Get a single stack officer's model or get a lower caliber.

Yep, single stack.

For many years, I carried a SA XDm 9mm which is a plastic, double stack 9mm. Even in compact form, it was a big, heavy PITA to carry. I have a couple/few times carried a full size, all steel, 1911 (single stack) .45. It was easier and more comfortable to carried than the old XDm. An even smaller single stack 9mm, plastic gun is even easier to carry.

I agree with JB, get a light weight, commander (or officer) sized, single stack, and even in .45 you'll be much happier than with your double stack.

[svandamme]

If a double stack was the right design, JMB would have designed it with a double stack.
He didn't.

[svandamme]

And I fail to see how the outer barrel diameter is the problem to carry, in a 1911 that has a slide that covers the entire barrel when carried.. The barrel is only exposed when the slide is back.

How in the world is a smaller barrel going to help in a 1911 with a big slide.
They don't call em the old slab side for no reason

[masraum]

Originally Posted by svandamme

if a double stack was the right design, jmb would have designed it with a double stack.
He didn't.

ROFLMAO!

What do you really think?

[jyl]

A pistol doesn’t need a slide wrapped around the barrel. Browning’s genius was such that he shaped a century of pistols, but there have been successful major caliber pistols without a heavy, bulky slide that has to wrap around the barrel to lock it up. Imagine a Walter P38 redesigned with a narrower slide, for example. With gas delay, there is even less need for slide mass.

[jyl]

The double stack doesn’t make much difference, since the pistol butt isn’t in one’s pants.

While we’re at it, the world also needs a slimmer holster than the typical leather or Kydex holsters. They add an appreciable amount to the thickness of the package. Part of the problem is that pistols and holsters are not designed together. Some of the thickness of a holster is to securely retain the pistol, by the rather crude method of friction (leather) or clamping the trigger guard (Kydex). If the two were designed together, retention could be via an underbarrel lug, a magnetic catch, etc.

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by jyl

A pistol doesn’t need a slide wrapped around the barrel. Browning’s genius was such that he shaped a century of pistols, but there have been successful major caliber pistols without a heavy, bulky slide that has to wrap around the barrel to lock it up. Imagine a Walter P38 redesigned with a narrower slide, for example. With gas delay, there is even less need for slide mass.

Well. your question was for a different barrel, thickness, not for a different pistol design. If you want to get rid of the slide, and just keep the barrell.. You defo need it's thickness to stay what it is.

Then the question is to be rephrased " I want a .45 pistol without a slide"

Now keep in mind, that that pistol exists, it was designed , it was the Luger .45. it wasn't great else it would have been the service pistol of choice, not the 1911

The point of having that slide is mass to control the recoil and unloading/reloading mechanism.. Inertia that then translate in reliable cycling.
Without the mass you need a heavier spring and/or more complicated and finicky mechanism. It will be less tolerant for variations in ammo.

In case of the Luger he had deemed standard ball issued for the competition not good enough and he had handloaded special fast burning powder to make it work better..

It still wasn't the better gun tho.

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by jyl

The double stack doesn’t make much difference, since the pistol butt isn’t in one’s pants.

While we’re at it, the world also needs a slimmer holster than the typical leather or Kydex holsters. They add an appreciable amount to the thickness of the package. Part of the problem is that pistols and holsters are not designed together. Some of the thickness of a holster is to securely retain the pistol, by the rather crude method of friction (leather) or clamping the trigger guard (Kydex). If the two were designed together, retention could be via an underbarrel lug, a magnetic catch, etc.

Clearly you try to use a pistol for something it's not designed to do.
a 1911 is a service pistol to be holstered on the hip or under the armpit , or across the chest.
It's not a gun designed for CCW.
It will obviously be too heavy,
and it will print because of the big grip, especially double stack

Now a .45 ACP round, is also not designed for that purpose.
It's a big, fat round
and as a result it's heavy, with fat magazines, which, when double stacked will be even fatter.

Some 1911's have been made compact, but it will be a compromise because it needs a slide and the 45acp has a big diameter and so is the barrel and slide around it.
Some pistols have been designed for that purpose, but the look nothing like a 1911 and they have very little mag capacity and typically don't use 45acp to begin with because they want more boolits in the mag.

So what you need (and the world already has ) is a CCW design from the ground up, in 9mm, or if you really think you need more power, 10mm)
You are really not the first to come up with this question
There's plenty of choice already out there, many have answered that question because at least that one can be answered, it's not a conflict of requirements (.45 <>Concealed carry)

[ErVikingo]

AMT Backup 45. 5 rounds. Uncomfortable to use but packs a punch and fits in your jeans pocket

[svandamme]

How thick is the barrel on that AMT
JVL only wants it if the barrel is .60" or less thick

And do they have a double stack mag variant?

[jyl]

“45” does not mean “1911”. We need a clean sheet CCW design.

Browning wasn’t trying to design a CCW, he was designing a war weapon, with the material technology of the time (no polymer).

His design was adapted to CCW starting with the first micro-1911s like the Detonics Combat Master (which I have). With success, but CCW needs have changed. Clothing is less formal, women carry, the weather is hotter. All that drives the need for smaller and thinner pistols.

The easy route is smaller calibers, 9mm, .380 and .32, with the same basic Browning “format” (slide over barrel) and much of the concept (slide mass and movement integral to function). I think that route has been taken as far as it can go.

If Browning were here today, designing a CCW pistol, he wouldn’t take the easy route and copy a century-old design. He’d look at the 1911 and think “I can do better”. He’d think different, like he did in 1900.

So imagine John Moses Browning is here today, designing the slimmest possible CCW pistol, with a clean sheet and today’s materials, and the challenge of using an existing major caliber.

The Luger toggle design was very good, by the way. I have one, shot it a lot since 1985 or so. Most accurate pistol I have (ok, I don’t own any “target” pistols). It was superseded by the P38 mostly to save money. I don’t think it is a great design for sandy, muddy conditions, but a CCW pistol doesn’t face those. It’s also not suitable for hanging stuff on (red dots, lights), but again a CCW pistol doesn’t need that.

Anyway, carrying the Para P14 isn’t going to work. I might break down and carry the Detonics, which I’ve been loath to do because it is worth some money. I’ve been looking for a G26 but don’t like buying things at inflated prices.

[svandamme]

So you've tried al the 45's out there, and by now you are convinced there's no good CCW .45?



I mean , your problem description in this thread has been rather vague so far.
You started off saying you (the world) needs a smaller barrel diameter for a .45, because your double stack 1911 isn't comfortable
When quite frankly there's nobody out there that can somehow make a .45 barrel that is .30 diameter.. Just makes no sense. There has to be a certain amount of meat on the barrel to take the pressure.

Then you point out it should not be a 1911 per see

but you rant on about a micro 1911 and JMW would redesign from scratch..
And finish mentioning a G26 is to expensive (not really a design feature)


Ffs, if you think a G26 is to expensive , you sure as hell can't afford a new slideless fixed barrel designed for you either bud.



Maybe first try out a few more guns before you insist yours doesnt' exist

Glock 30
H&K USP Compact
S&W M&P45 Shield subCompact
Sig P320 Compact

They all exist in .45

And there's a whole lot more others you haven't mentioned, that aren't micro 1911's./

[jyl]

I think I’ve been pretty clear.

Requirements:
- 45 cal
- max thickness 0.6”

Nothing you’ve mentioned meets those requirements. A pistol that did would define a whole new market segment. It would have a lot better commercial chances than another me-too fatty. Needs appropriate styling of course, and slip a bunch of $ to the gun media/bloggers.

Agree, a G26 is an affordable level gun, but I think they are currently over-priced and I don’t like buying when prices are high. I don’t think semi-auto pistols will be outlawed anytime soon, the worst I see is a hi-cap mag ban, and I loaded up on Glock mags so I’m in no rush to get ripped off on the pistol.

[masraum]

How about

Springfield Xd-s 4.0 (slide is .9")

Colt Defender (slide is 15/16" aka .9375")

Heizer DoubleTap is the thinnest .45 acp at .665 inches wide.

[svandamme]

No he wants a pistol without a slide, because that's the only one that can do 0.6 inch diameter.
And unless something like a Derringer, or a basic revolver, it means he needs some kind of fancy low mass breach lock semi automatic, such as a Luger

Which means it will be a finicky gun that's prone to stove pipe and jam and it will be very sensitive about the ammo it needs to be fed.
GREAT FOR CCW !!

[svandamme]

https://lugerman.com/luger-45/


Luger 45 1907 Commander
$9195.00
Made in USA
Caliber: 45 ACP
Capacity: 6 + 1
Barrel Size: 3 inch
Overall Height : 5 inch
Overall Length : 7.6 inch
Body Width: 1.25 inch
Max Width at toggle: 1.45 inch
Weight: 29 ounce
Finish: Slow Rust Blue, Straw and Fire Blue on small parts
Grips: Checkered Walnut


Will have a good muzzle blast
not very reliable
expensive
And tears when the cops confiscate it after you used your CCW gun in any kind of anger.

You don't need a clean slate design, you need a bigger budget.