This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / North America / United States / World War I This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history Associated task forces: /  Military science, technology, and theory task force Weaponry task force North American military history task force United States military history task force World War I task force Firearms Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: Gun politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Gun politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

“Language cautioning against pulling the trigger with the second finger was included”. This is not clear to a lay person. What does it mean? (I.e., how could you pull the trigger with your second finger? Mithalwulf (talk) 13:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine how, either, but it's apparently not only possible, it was done frequently enough to need a warning. Picture holding the weapon in your firing hand. Insert your middle (longest) finger into the trigger guard and onto the trigger. Then imagine what happens when the slide recoils.... 67.225.123.161 (talk) 20:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That 1938 price seemse very misleading. I've seen mention of Colt contract prices for the Army in the early days of $14.50. 67.225.123.161 (talk) 20:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Posting here since I have a COI with the cited source. Under =Users=, ==Current Users==, the last sentence of the second paragraph states "... to more than $4,000 for the best competition or tactical versions (Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Les Baer, Nighthawk Custom, and Staccato)." Item #15 in this compilation of items sold on GunBroker.com shows a Staccato set sold for $18,495.00 on 5 May 2024, so it seems like the "more than" referenced could be bumped up to at least $9,000 (since the listing mentioned is a set of two): https://www.gunbroker.com/c/article/18-most-expensive-guns-sold-on-gunbroker-in-may-2024/ On the same list, #12 shows a set of 2 selling for $21,000.00 on 29 May 2024. LoVeloDogs (talk) 20:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Under the heading Composition, the article states, "Other than grip screws there are no fasteners of any type in the 1911 design." But a screw head is plainly visible on every 1911 pistol, on the right side, at the base of the trigger guard. Tex (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. That's the far side of the mag catch release. There are (depending on definitions) several 'fasteners' in an M1911, because there are also a number of pins driven into place. But the basic point still stands - unlike many contemporary designs, the take-down for field stripping to clean it is deliberately intended to not require tools. Even detail-stripping it (taking the firing pin and extractor out for deep cleaning) can be done with a pointy-stick, i.e. some other component of the weapon. This was Browning's deliberate choice and it's worth mentioning.

So, any thoughts on better wording? Andy Dingley (talk) 21:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The wording you have there is very good. You state the actual point of being able to field strip the weapon without tools, instead of making a flat "no fasteners" statement, which is not literally true, and avoids the point. Whether that belongs in a section titled "Composition" seems questionable. Tex (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]