Putting aside the .45ACP part of the argument.
After caliber, he stressed the 'better trigger' on the 1911. And sure, if you have trained on the 1911 and know the trigger, those can be really good triggers. A thing of beauty for well done ones. Nothing like a crisp SA. Setting aside the change that a DA/SA trigger does when going from first to second... Were triggers really so hugely bad in the 80s and 90s?
Because now? They seem fine. Not gritty or heavy.
Ok, ok, I remember the initial M&P triggers when those first came out. 2.0 are better. 1.0 wasn't HORRID.
"You need the extensive training in those crappy triggers to be any good with em. Not like with the 1911, T-Bolt."
Wait a minute. I don't think Jeff Cooper would recommend I throttle back training in any event. He'd want my to train long with a good-trigger 1911. With that much training on a striker fired 'bad-trigger' Glock I'd be pretty good with it, too. And saved $2000 in start-up equipment.
And it's not like Cooper eschewed revolvers as long as he thought you had a stout enough cartridge in your cylinder. He trained folks on those at Gunsite (cops often had no choice of pistol). And a Model 19 might have a glorious single action trigger, but you train it with the DA. A revolver trigger might not crunch, but would be on the heavy side in DA, unless you get ridiculous with the springs. Cooper dealt with that trigger. Why box the shooting world into a 1911, until something 'better' came along?
That said, I think I want to take the 1911 to the range next trip. Plastic 9's are fine. But so is my 1911.
---
[I've never fired a Bren Ten but would not be surprised in the least if someone reported it's trigger was AWEFUL.]