2011 - 4.25" Commander vs 5" Full Size

[Douglee25]

This question isn't the normal one "which one is better... 4.25 vs 5?", but rather this... 

 

I'm 6'2" with big hands.  I've always shot full size 1911 models until recently.  I acquired an officer and a commander 1911.  I shoot them well given minimal range time.  I'm an average weekend shooter.  With that said, I'm in the market for a 2011 and can't decide between the two sizes.  Specifically because 75% of the market says go with the 4.25".  Even the dealers stated 75%+ of their sales were commander frames.  I feel as though I'm missing something as to why I should select that model, and yet to me, the larger guns 'seem' to fit me better.  The one and only reason I can come up with is that when holding the commander length gun, when you wrap your left hand around the front of your right, and then place your thumbs over top of each other, my left thumb and knuckles are about 3/4 forward on the barrel.  The gun isn't small in my hand by any means, but the 5" seems like I have more room.  I'm assuming this is 'normal'??  Do you just get used to it?  Do others find this to be 'cramped'? 

 

I understand it's a preference thing, but am I missing something that I should consider the 4.25" for my first 2011?  I have held both guns, but I'm trying to avoid dropping big bucks only to possibly regret it.  I will not have the opportunity to shoot these unfortunately until I buy. 

Edited January 12, 2023 by Douglee25

[Jim Watson]

I don't have big hands but for SHOOTING, like USPSA, I only want a 5" 1911 or 2011; a 4.25" just isn't as accurate for me, handheld.

I could - did - do well enough with a real Colt Commander for carry, but it is largely retired in favor of small plastic.

[Douglee25]

10 minutes ago, Jim Watson said:

I don't have big hands but for SHOOTING, like USPSA, I only want a 5" 1911 or 2011; a 4.25" just isn't as accurate for me, handheld.

I could - did - do well enough with a real Colt Commander for carry, but it is largely retired in favor of small plastic.

 

I'm with you on the carry piece.  I prefer small polymer framed pistols for carry.  Whatever I end up purchasing will strictly be a range toy. 

[Racinready300ex]

I think it's just a preference thing. The 4.25 I guess has a shorter sight radius, depending on the distance you shoot that may not mean much to you. If you run a optic that goes out the window anyway. 

 

4.25's feel faster, the slide is lighter and the stroke is shorter so slide speed is higher. But, you're not out running the 5" gun either. You will feel like the 5 is sluggish if you shoot short guns for a while then pick up the full size. At the same time that can mean the 5" gun feels softer if that's a concern. Another consideration might be loss of velocity. If you were to shoot matches that makes it a little harder to make PF.

 

I like how the 4.25" guns shoot, I could be bias I got my match bump to GM in limited with a commander size 2011. I find I need to shoot my 5" guns a little while to get used to how they feel again. But both are fine.

[Jim Watson]

Right, sight radius doesn't matter if you are dotting.

 

[Douglee25]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

I think it's just a preference thing. The 4.25 I guess has a shorter sight radius, depending on the distance you shoot that may not mean much to you. If you run a optic that goes out the window anyway. 

 

4.25's feel faster, the slide is lighter and the stroke is shorter so slide speed is higher. But, you're not out running the 5" gun either. You will feel like the 5 is sluggish if you shoot short guns for a while then pick up the full size. At the same time that can mean the 5" gun feels softer if that's a concern. Another consideration might be loss of velocity. If you were to shoot matches that makes it a little harder to make PF.

 

I like how the 4.25" guns shoot, I could be bias I got my match bump to GM in limited with a commander size 2011. I find I need to shoot my 5" guns a little while to get used to how they feel again. But both are fine.

 

Appreciate your response.  Your response is more geared towards a competition shooter...of which I'm not. I totally understand where you're coming from however.  For me I guess it comes down to a preference thing outside of the competition scope if you will. 

[Douglee25]

11 minutes ago, Jim Watson said:

Right, sight radius doesn't matter if you are dotting.

 

 

What does 'dotting' mean in this case?  Plinking one by one? 

[Boomstick303]

3 minutes ago, Douglee25 said:

What does 'dotting' mean in this case?

 

Putting a Red Dot on the gun.  If you run a Red Dot the sight radius of the Iron Sights is a Moot point in that they will rarely used if ever.  

[MikeBurgess]

Seems the 2011 manufacturers have been targeting the tactical market pretty hard and in that market the 4.25 will sell better because of the impression that its better for concealment (the fact that many are adding red dots mag wells and flash lights that all add to the bulk of the gun) 

 

In the case of a range toy I would get whatever gun you like better, that's really the only metric that matters at all.

[donnyglock]

Split the difference with a 4.6”. That’s what I’m building myself for a carry piece. 

[Douglee25]

4 hours ago, Boomstick303 said:

 

Putting a Red Dot on the gun.  If you run a Red Dot the sight radius of the Iron Sights is a Moot point in that they will rarely used if ever.  

Makes sense. 

[Douglee25]

2 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

Seems the 2011 manufacturers have been targeting the tactical market pretty hard and in that market the 4.25 will sell better because of the impression that its better for concealment (the fact that many are adding red dots mag wells and flash lights that all add to the bulk of the gun) 

 

In the case of a range toy I would get whatever gun you like better, that's really the only metric that matters at all.

 

I think you may have hit the nail on the head right there.  I just wanted to understand if I was missing something that wasn't readily apparent.  I think I'll continue to shoot my single stack commander and get a full size 2011 in the mean time.  Maybe after further range time I'll know if I need to switch it up or add to the collection again.   

 

 

45 minutes ago, donnyglock said:

Split the difference with a 4.6”. That’s what I’m building myself for a carry piece. 

 

Not a bad idea. 

 

[Racinready300ex]

14 hours ago, Douglee25 said:

 

Appreciate your response.  Your response is more geared towards a competition shooter...of which I'm not. I totally understand where you're coming from however.  For me I guess it comes down to a preference thing outside of the competition scope if you will. 

 

Yeah, I'm certainly seeing it from the competition perspective but was hoping my experience might help you if you know what you want. To sum it up, the shorter gun looses velocity and sight radius but gains slide speed. 

 

It's really not a big deal, I'd probably say just get the gun you think is the coolest. 

[Douglee25]

2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Yeah, I'm certainly seeing it from the competition perspective but was hoping my experience might help you if you know what you want. To sum it up, the shorter gun looses velocity and sight radius but gains slide speed. 

 

It's really not a big deal, I'd probably say just get the gun you think is the coolest. 

 

Given that, I'm going to go with the 5" for now.  I don't really care about slide velocity at the moment.  I have noticed a difference in sight radius, however, it's pretty small.

 

 

I appreciate everyone's response to clear things up. 

[Nathanb]

4.25 and a threaded barrel bring you to 4.75 if you’re feeling that. 

[Wrathen]

in 9mm I've owned 2011s in 4.15, 4.25, 4.4, 4.6, 4.75 and 5" guns running both iron sights and optics. For me its more the frame size and fitting me than the slide length. the 4.15 was a bit too short for comfort in carrying as for me I find with my body size and shape it uncomfortable to conceal smaller guns. the 5" slide is fine, but in 9mm I feel it cycles a bit slower. the 4.4 and 4.6 seem the best for me. I find them easy to carry and conceal, the slide cycles fast and tracks well I can manage .15-.18 splits with ease, and when shooting with irons its plenty of sight radius to get a good sight picture. My Staccato P with a 4.4" bull barrel or my 4.75" threaded work great and I love my Atlas Athena with its 4.6"

 

If we are talking 45acp I like a 5" slide over a 4.25", but I assume we are talking 9mm.

[Davecambell]

Good discussion, thanks.

[Douglee25]

7 hours ago, Wrathen said:

in 9mm I've owned 2011s in 4.15, 4.25, 4.4, 4.6, 4.75 and 5" guns running both iron sights and optics. For me its more the frame size and fitting me than the slide length. the 4.15 was a bit too short for comfort in carrying as for me I find with my body size and shape it uncomfortable to conceal smaller guns. the 5" slide is fine, but in 9mm I feel it cycles a bit slower. the 4.4 and 4.6 seem the best for me. I find them easy to carry and conceal, the slide cycles fast and tracks well I can manage .15-.18 splits with ease, and when shooting with irons its plenty of sight radius to get a good sight picture. My Staccato P with a 4.4" bull barrel or my 4.75" threaded work great and I love my Atlas Athena with its 4.6"

 

If we are talking 45acp I like a 5" slide over a 4.25", but I assume we are talking 9mm.

 

Thanks for your feedback.  I could probably make a staccato or another 4.25 commander work fine, but for whatever reason the 5 inch feels better in my hand.  Still evaluating... 

[zzt]

For me it is all about balance.  I hate muzzle light guns.  I detest muzzle heavy.  All of my 1911s have 5" barrels.  So do my 2011 Open guns.  Since the steel comp adds muzzle weight, they all wear steel grips to bring the balance back.

 

Since the 5" 'feels' better to you, buy it.  You give up nothing.

[Knight85]

I have two 1911's and both have the 4.25" barrels. Both have functioned perfectly. If you prefer to carry, this size is perfect. I have shot both 4.25" and the 5" barrels ....... and if you have  a quality 1911, you will not notice any difference, as far as accuracy or muzzle flip.
My Ed Brown Massad Ayoob is the best pistol I've ever encountered !

[Arcrunner]

On 1/13/2023 at 7:16 AM, Racinready300ex said:

I think it's just a preference thing. The 4.25 I guess has a shorter sight radius, depending on the distance you shoot that may not mean much to you. If you run a optic that goes out the window anyway. 

 

4.25's feel faster, the slide is lighter and the stroke is shorter so slide speed is higher. But, you're not out running the 5" gun either. You will feel like the 5 is sluggish if you shoot short guns for a while then pick up the full size. At the same time that can mean the 5" gun feels softer if that's a concern. Another consideration might be loss of velocity. If you were to shoot matches that makes it a little harder to make PF.

 

I like how the 4.25" guns shoot, I could be bias I got my match bump to GM in limited with a commander size 2011. I find I need to shoot my 5" guns a little while to get used to how they feel again. But both are fine.

 

Same, I like short 2011's, especially when a comp comes in to play. I have what is essentially a cutdown 5" slide so I don't have to modify the frame.

[ltdmstr]

I just started shooting a 4.25 prodigy with a dot, and due to the lighter weight, I find the dot to be a bit jumpy.  Not bad, but noticeable.  Part of that is probably me adapting to the dot v. iron sights.  But I'm pretty sure part is also due to the gun being much lighter than the 5.4" long dust cover Limited guns I'm used to shooting.

Edited January 16, 2023 by ltdmstr

[Davecambell]

Thanks 

5 hours ago, ltdmstr said:

I just started shooting a 4.25 prodigy with a dot, and due to the lighter weight, I find the dot to be a bit jumpy.  Not bad, but noticeable.  Part of that is probably me adapting to the dot v. iron sights.  But I'm pretty sure part is also due to the gun being much lighter than the 5.4" long dust cover Limited guns I'm used to shooting.

Could you give us a review of the Prodigy?

[ltdmstr]

Basically, I had no issues with it from the get go.  Put a couple hundred through it in stock form and it ran fine with various types of ammo and magazines.  Then did a few minor mods and put a couple hundred more through it.  Then did a full custom build and had it refinished.  I replaced just about everything expect for the slide, frame and barrel.  Put about 600 rounds through it since I got it back together.  Only issue I had was the AOS plate coming loose because the screw was too long and contacting the extractor.  I cut that down and remounted everything and now it's fine.  Gun shoots as well as any of my high dollar custom guns.  It's accurate, reliable, and feels good.  I'm very happy with it.

[Douglee25]

1 minute ago, ltdmstr said:

Basically, I had no issues with it from the get go.  Put a couple hundred through it in stock form and it ran fine with various types of ammo and magazines.  Then did a few minor mods and put a couple hundred more through it.  Then did a full custom build and had it refinished.  I replaced just about everything expect for the slide, frame and barrel.  Put about 600 rounds through it since I got it back together.  Only issue I had was the AOS plate coming loose because the screw was too long and contacting the extractor.  I cut that down and remounted everything and now it's fine.  Gun shoots as well as any of my high dollar custom guns.  It's accurate, reliable, and feels good.  I'm very happy with it.

 

Great to hear.  I have this one on the list but it's up against guns that are 2500-3000.  I can't make up my mind.