So what good is a 9- or 10-round nearly-full size 1911 style pistol in 9mm that's designed for carry? That was the first question I got when I mentioned Colt was shipping a Commander O4842XE pistol for review. It's a fair question. You're talking about a form factor slightly bigger than a lighter, higher ammo capacity capability, striker fired, polymer framed – and therefore lower cost – option. So why get something slightly larger, slightly heavier and using an old 'operating system?' Like everything else, it depends. Our recently lost friend Todd Green had settled on the 9mm 1911 as a carry pistol before the disease that ravaged him took the capability to use that weapon system. To reach a relevant decision, look for the arguments against it and evaluate them against reality. First, it's "just a 9mm." Please, no caliber conundrums. I'm writing this on a dreary Monday and I've heard it all before – much of it before many of you were born. It was nonsense then and it's more ridiculous now. And I'm not talking about "improvements in ammunition." While ammo companies have worked to the point of distraction over making ammunition that pass a test designed by bureaucrats, the reality is that (1) handgun bullets don't work, (2) pistols are there to stop fights, but often don't stop them simply due to ballistics alone, and (3) 9mm NATO ball, used to shoot a number of people in foreign venues, didn't fail to impress everyone shot with it according to sources who were actually there to see it. Yes, I use premium defense ammo – the companies likely spend more time making it reliable over the "available by the shipping container full" range ammo. I presume that any load won't be enough to stop a fight with one hit and that I'll have to shoot more than once if I have to shoot at all. Second, "it's a 1911 and 1911s don't work."

Aftermarket magazines by Brownell's and Wilson Combat were secured for the shooting test of the new 9mm Colt.

If you said "mechanical device," I'd agree with the statement. I've had all kinds of guns puke during range sessions and training. Anything that can go wrong will go wrong, but only at the worst possible time. Been there, done it, seen it done to others. Actually, the 9mm 1911 – like the 'real' 1911 – is most often hampered by magazines. I have the Colt marked magazines – 2 9-round magazines were shipped with the gun and I have a "3-pack" of Brownells magazines and four Wilson Combat Elite Tactical Magazines. These aftermarket magazines are rated at 10-round capacity and they are each longer than the Colt-supplied magazines. The followers and feed lips are nearly identical across brands. I think we have that base covered. Next, "bigger, heavier, harder to hide." Actually, sort of. The O4842XE has a real Commander 4 ¼" barrel and slide, Novak Sights – real ones, the Series 80 firing pin safety – now proven over years of use and essentially the same as 'striker safety plungers/blocks' used on the "modern" pistols. Let's look at actual dimensions: Commander – 7.75" OAL. Glock 43 – 6.26" long. S&W Shield – 6.1" Weight: Commander – 29.4 oz. Glock 43 – 17.95 oz. Shield – 19 ounces. Capacity: Commander – 9 rounds (factory magazine. G43 – 6 rounds. Shield – 7 and 8 rounds. The Commander has Colt's new Dual Spring Recoil System, custom black cherry Colt G10 stocks, an undercut trigger guard, a long thumb safety, and upswept beavertail grip safety.

The Colt Commander 9mm has the new dual recoil spring system. Like all 'real' Commanders, the barrel is 4 1/4" long and the gun uses the spring plug/barrel bushing system similar to the Government-size 1911 type pistols.

It may not be a fair comparison – I compared the Colt to what could be called "micro" pistols and not "compact" service style pistols. They are considerably smaller – and likewise tougher to shoot well, though the S&W Shield handles far better than a pistol of its size should. Properly holstered, the Commander pistol is no harder to hide than any other "compact-service" type pistol. The smaller guns are tough to get a consistent grip on. The Commander trigger is by far better than any modern striker-fired pistol. Another argument is the ancient operating system of the Colt. This requires a bit of examination. Here's the thing – the 1911 operating system (hammer-fired, single action, manual and grip safeties, single stack magazine) is one of the safest pistol designs ever made. In terms of threat management, the short, light trigger is seen by many as a problem. In terms of shooting for your life, the short, light trigger is the best chance you have of making a fast, center hit at distances from arm's reach to mid-range (say 75-feet or so): a far better chance than a 'traditional double action' and somewhat better than a factory MSFP. If you elect to carry it chamber empty – a silly idea regardless of the pistol you carry – this doesn't apply. If you elect to lower the hammer on a loaded chamber, you should give real consideration to choking yourself. These methods show a lack of understanding of the pistol design and operation. Carried properly, the chamber is loaded, hammer is still cocked and the thumb safety is pushed "up." We refer to this as locking the pistol. When the safety is on, the slide will not move. Inside the gun, part of the safety rotates, blocking the base of the sear and stopping the sear from releasing the hammer. If there's a breakage, the hammer is positively stopped from hitting the firing pin – which is now locked in any event by the firing pin safety. You have to press the trigger with both safeties off to allow firing pin movement. It's a robust system. The thing to remember is that (1) you need to be reflexive with the thumb safety – pushing it off and riding it during firing as well as putting it "on" before holstering and (2) you need to keep your finger off the trigger and your muzzle in the safest available direction until you are forced to shoot. "Gun point" is UNSAT in any event with any gun – and with this one. We'll continue this as we examine the test gun. -- Rich Grassi