[Fatelvis]

Do you like `em, or not? Please tell me why!

[BigG]

Um - it's not a 1911. The 1911 Government pistol has an internal extractor as do the factory Colt Government Models. :scrutiny:

[Fatelvis]

Ok, 1911 STYLE.... :rolleyes: always a stickler in the bunch. LOL

[Marko Kloos]

Internal for me.

Best of all worlds may just be the new Para power extractor...the benefits of an external extractor blended with the aesthetics of an internal one.

[viking87]

External extractor just looks... well... wrong. 1911=Internal extractor

[1911Tuner]

Internal for me. Why fix what ain't broke. The external is the manufacturer's way of (finally) admitting that a proper internal extractor needs to be made of the right stuff, correctly tempered, fitted and tensioned...and that they're not willing to do what it takes. Might cost'em an extra 15 bucks...Goodness gracious...
can't have that! :eek:

[roo_ster]

So far, I am the only yea-sayer.

I have nothing but praise for my SW1911. I am glad S&W fianlly made a 1911-pattern pistol. I have always like the quality of S&W autos...but disliked the DA, DAO, etc. The external extractor they have used looks an awful lot like the external extractors used on their other autos. I kind of think of it as a mauser-claw scaled down for a 1911...over-engineered & confidence-inspiring.

Maybe if the other 1911-builders used better materials/fit/finish/whatever for their extractors, I would feel differently & eschew the external extractor. For a pistol that is less than $700, I think the external extractor is a good way to go.

[Ken Rainey]

I don't like'em........

The design called for a spring steel extractor and when one is properly tuned for the pistol, it will work just fine for a long, long time. The problem with extractors came about when "they" quit using spring steel. This problem is also added to by weak mag springs and slick followers with short legs (mostly 8 rders) that "make" the extractor climb over the rims of ammo that got ahead of the extractor causing failure that much faster. A proper in spec magazine will go far to help extractor life.

Cylinder and Slide makes spring steel extractors. The factory extractors can be "Tunerized" to mimic spring steel and will last longer but it still ain't right that the companies quit using what the design called for.........just another case of penny pinching to raise their profit margins and lettin' the customers pay for it - literally.

I also prefer the original design due to ease of maintenance - as it was intended. As is said of the 1911 - the farther you go from the original design, the more problems you have.

On the other hand, the Glock has a spring loaded external extractor that I like - it's user friendly also.

As always, YMMV.
Ken

[Jim K]

As long as gun and part makers won't use the proper material for the internal extractor, and customers won't pay for doing things right, the best alternative is to go to an external extractor which does not require high quality material or intelligent manufacture.

I fully agree that a properly made internal extractor will last for years and give no problems. But the choice today seems to be between internal extractors that are cheap junk and external extractors that might be well enough made to actually work. Sorry, but purists can keep internal extractors made of cast pot metal if they choose, but I want a gun that works. If that means one with an external extractor, so be it.

Jim

[Jeff Timm]

Both the S&W Model 39 and the Browning Hi-power were improved by using "external" extractors. Or so many believe.

Attempts to "improve" the M1911 design with such a beastie, have not proven viable. Arminus (sp) comes to mind.

Geoff
Who knows how to check an extractor. :cool:

[Lone_Gunman]

As long as gun and part makers won't use the proper material for the internal extractor, and customers won't pay for doing things right, the best alternative is to go to an external extractor which does not require high quality material or intelligent manufacture.

Absolutely my thoughts on the matter. I like 1911s, and I like extractors that work. If I can't consistently get an internal extractor that works, then for God's sake, give me an external extractor that will work.

Aesthetics be damned if your gun doesn't work.

[g56]

As much as I like 1911's, and I like them a lot, I have fought extractor problems for years in the 1911, it's just not a good design, and to work its best it needs to be "tuned", you tune it by bending it, nope, poor design. I believe the new Para Extractor is a step forward, but external extractors work fine, and like the Energizer Bunny they just keep going and going, no tuning necessary.

[sm]

Internal for the reasons stated above .

I just thought a guide rod plug could end up in the wierdest places...Aftek spring dealie - clear winner in this event.

[moorerwc]

Just another MIM part--and this one I can't replace with quality aftermarket.
Oh, and are any of them standardized??

Just look at how many quality traditional extractors are out there--many of them have great reputations for quality/durability even if not advertised as "spring tempered" ie. Wilson, Brown, Caspian. Not to mention C&S.

Also, the originals are much harder to blow out of the slide with an overcharge and relatively easy to adjust in the field. And, to top it off, the externals just plain look ugly. I just don't see the upside.

The manufacturers could've tried spring steel and a warning to use proper magazines and not to load a round straight into the bbl.

-Chad

[Grump]

Sure, it's "proper" to only feed rounds into the chamber from the magazine. But 1. if chambering a round and then closing the slide will damage a part, you have a poor design, poor materials, poor execution, or all three. Every purely G.I. M1911 I ever handled could do the "improper" chambering trick without breaking the extractor and without crushing the cartridge rim.

2. Ever get a bad round jammed in the chamber? How are you going to make the firearm safe with that bent brass case locking the barrel and slide together? With an external extractor, you can press the back end, disengage the extractor from the cartridge and pull the slide back.

3. The only "tuning" you do with an external extractor is swapping out springs and making sure the part is machined to properly good the round/empty, and to snap over the rim if needed. It is a far less arcane art/science/voo-doo than is "tuning" internal extractors.

4. It is far easier to "tune" an external extractor, if it were even likely to ever come up as a need.

5. For standard "controlled" feeding, both internal and external are equally impervious to getting clogged with mud. But if you're in need of the snapover function, mud in the standard extractor channel is harder to clear out.

6. An external extractor can double as a loaded chamber indicator

So, everything a standard extractor can do, an external can do. And an external can do some things an internal cannot.

Much of this pro-M1911 talk sounds a lot like car buffs saying how great the Ford Model T is because if you know what you're doing and doing it right and tune it up and otherwise fiddle with it all day, there's no problem with an engine that requires stopping every 50 miles to dribble oil on the felt pads that lubricate the valve rockers (or whatever).

[shiva]

After having shot 17600 rounds of .45 ammo last year through five different 1911 pistols I submit to you for your approval the following observations.

smith and wesson 1911{external} purchased new failures to extracts after several hundred rounds taken to smith and wesson armorer for tuning upon return it extracted fine but sometimes would not feed due to increased extractor tension.

Kimber TLEII {external} purchased new failures to extract from the very beginning, spoke with kimber was sent new extractor. Better but still not 100%

Kimber TLEII RL {external} see kimber TLEII above same problem same solution same results.

Colt series 70 current vintage {internal} purchased new one failure to extract when gun was very dirty. cleaned gun no more failures.

Springfield 1911a1 {internal} have shot this gun for four years no extraction issues.

I don't know what it all means but these are my observations. I just got a Nighthawk Custom 1911 {internal} have not shot it much but it seems to function fine

[rbernie]

1. if chambering a round and then closing the slide will damage a part, you have a poor design, poor materials, poor execution, or all three. Every purely G.I. M1911 I ever handled could do the "improper" chambering trick without breaking the extractor and without crushing the cartridge rim. Is this a statement for, or against, the internal extractor? My internal extractors will allow me to do this just as well as will my extrernal extractor-equipped pistols - I just know not to make a diet of it if I want the extractor to live a long and happy life (as with my other controlled-round-feed firearms).

2. Ever get a bad round jammed in the chamber? How are you going to make the firearm safe with that bent brass case locking the barrel and slide together? With an external extractor, you can press the back end, disengage the extractor from the cartridge and pull the slide back. I've never been able to do this on my external extractor-based pistols without the use of some tool to help depress the aft end of the extractor. Is that truly any better than field-stripping the pistol to clear the malfunction? Dunno. Fortunately, I've never, ever, in excess of 60,000 rounds fired from my pistols, EVER had a bad round stick in the chamber.

3. The only "tuning" you do with an external extractor is swapping out springs and making sure the part is machined to properly good the round/empty, and to snap over the rim if needed. It is a far less arcane art/science/voo-doo than is "tuning" internal extractors. I've never had an issue tuning an internal extractor - no voodoo required. But I have spent half the evening chasing itty bitty external extractor springs around the shop/kitchen. Lord help you if you're not somewhere where little sproingy parts are easily contained.

I've also needed to replace the external extractor springs far more frequently than I needed to 'tune' my internal extractor's tension, and that's a fact.

4. It is far easier to "tune" an external extractor, if it were even likely to ever come up as a need. Absolutely not so. I cannot 'tune' an external extractor without getting new/different springs. I *can* tune an internal extractor without special tools or needing additional parts.

5. For standard "controlled" feeding, both internal and external are equally impervious to getting clogged with mud. But if you're in need of the snapover function, mud in the standard extractor channel is harder to clear out. I'm not sure that I follow this, but water does a great job of cleaning mud out of actions just fine when you're in the field and you get the pistol all full of muck. And frankly, I've never been without a ready source of water (including the yellow stuff). :)

6. An external extractor can double as a loaded chamber indicator Yup, sure can. But my primary loaded chamber indicator is the thumb safety. I also treat all pistols as loaded until I prove otherwise. I've had several pistols with loaded chamber indicators and others with external extractors that, as you point out, can provide that same function. But I never quite understood the appeal of these devices - either it's loaded and in Condition 3, or it's not loaded.

So, everything a standard extractor can do, an external can do. And an external can do some things an internal cannot. Actually, having many pistols with internal extractors and many pistols with external extractors, my opinion is that the external extractor does NOTHING useful that the internal does not do, adds more parts, and actually provides less actual adjustability and maintainability.

[riverdog]

When I upgraded my 1991A1 from a MIM extractor to a Wilson Combat Bulletproof (toolsteel) extractor, "tuning" took all of 5 minutes on my very inadequate workbench. Just followed the directions that came with the part from WC. Incredibly easy and extraction problems just went away. How anyone could refer to this as voodoo is beyond me. Compare the cost of a simple spring or tool steel extractor to the machining and tolerances necessary to go the external extractor route; how can an external be justified?

I'm sure S&W had their reasons, but they are primarily a company that designs their own firearms. They probably just couldn't stop themselves from tweaking the design to "fix" the extraction issue.

[BeLikeTrey]

I want her to work. aesthetics? POOH

that being said, Mine (internal) has been fine so far on my springfield 1911.

[Black Snowman]

Before I had been edumacated on the 1911 pattern guns I improperly loaded my Delta Elite a few times and now I think my extractor might be slightly out of adjustment as I've had 3 FTE after puting 700 rounds or so though it. I've done lots of tweaks to the pistol so it's quite possible I've caused issues elsewhere.

Now that I'm better informed thanks to the likes of 'Tuner, 'Fuff and Mr. Sample I know where to look to correct the issue. Once I've got this on out of the way my gun will be about as close to 100% as I could wish for. There are advantages and disadvantages to both but I prefer staying as close to the intended design as possible.

[Zeke Menuar]

Stuff that I will not have on my 1911's

MIM
External extractors
Front cocking serrations
Extended safeties
Plastic mainspring housing
Intergrated safety locks (ala Springfield)

I want my 1911's old school.

ZM

[Series 70]

I have one of each, and I prefer the original internal extractor. I like to clean the extractor and the slide tunnel and it's more of a pain to detail strip the slide with the external extractors. More stuff under spring pressure to sproing around the room if your fingers slip, more stuff that needs to be manipulated at the same time to get the firing pin stop back in.

[Black Majik]

I dont have experience with external extractors (thank goodness) but since my 1911's with the internal extractors work great, then y even bother with the external extractors.

Say NO to external extractors.

Plus the external extractor is jus' fugly. They ruin the lines like the front serrations IMO.

So I voted option 2. :)

[Missouri Mule]

First off I will say two very important things...
#1 I am a bit of a 1911 snob.
#2 I have an open mind when it comes to handguns.

Now, I do not like the Kimber designed external extractor.
I have finally gotten mine to a ~98%'er.

I do not like not being able to adjust the tension.
I don't care what the factory or others here say about not needing to either.

I have never ever had a 1911 that was as difficult to break in to reliable as this one Kimber with the external extractor.

I am not saying external extractors on 1911s are necessarily bad as a whole if properly designed and implemented.

If one of my other 1911 extractors starts acting up and I can't smooth it out, I can simply upgrade and install the part then go on shooting.

[TheEgg]

In my limited experience with externals on a 1911 pattern (a SW1911), it works just fine. But then so do my other dozen or so 1911's with an internal.

Could this be because either one, properly executed, works just fine?

NAAAAAAAAAAAH. Couldn't be.

[baker]

Didn't the precursor to the 1911, model 1909 have an external extractor? If so, I wonder why it was switched?

I currently own 1 1911, w/ external extractor, and it functions perfectly. ~2800 rnds