[Haycreek]

Some will agree, that two weak design points with the typical 1911, is the "plunger tube" and the "internal extractor". Some newer models now have an external extractor, but what 1911's now have improved or eliminated the "plunger tube" ? Your comments please !

[BluesBear]

The internal extractor is NOT a weak design point.
As John Browning designed it it works great.

It's the cheap, lazy, penny pinching manufactures who took it upon themselves to change the specification of the part that had made it a sometimes problem.

If the plunger tube is properly staked in place it also works fine. Notice how the original grips were made to partially cover the plunger tube and protect it.

[Chupacabra]

Weak points of the 1911

Uhhhhh... :uhoh:

I can't think of any.

:D

[9mmepiphany]

the internal extractor gives the 1911 a very sleek look, much as it did in the original p-35 (browning hi-power), but the external extractor is a definate functional improvement. without even mentioning it's reduced cost and self adjustablility, it is more resistant to breakage during malfunction (FTExtract) drills.

i've always felt that the weakest points of the 1911 design were the barrel link and the barrel bushing.

1. the link is an overly complicated design as demonstrated by follow on designs such as the p-35, smith m-39

2. the bushingi is easily eliminated by simply drilling the hole in the slide at an angle as in the sig sauer line

[9x19]

And yet, all of those things mentioned are continuing to provide service on my USGI Colt 1911... built in 1914! Just exactly how many years does it take for these things to show themselves as weak points?

Caspian has taken to relieving their frame a bit where the plunger tube mounts, claiming that the minute groove they make adds more stability and support to the tube. Whatever...

[9mmepiphany]

the colt SAA also comtinues to provide service, but i think most would agree that it's left handed loading gate is a weak point compared to the swing out cylinder of the smith m-10 to say nothing of the detachable magazine of the semi-auto pistol

[jhisaac1]

BLASPHEMER!!!

[tc300mag1]

I like the left handed loading gate on SAA couse could be cause im left handed :) as for weekness od 1911 i think the only ones are the people building them using sub quailty parts

[BluesBear]

You hold a SAA in your left hand and insert the cartridges with your right.

Most right handed people have more dexterity in their right hand. The loading gate on the right side enables a person to load with the hand with the best fine motor skills. The left hand cradles the gun and strokes the ejector rod. Both of which are gross motor skills.

Much the same way that the left hand grabs the swing out cylinder on DA revolvers so the right hand is free to load.

[1911Tuner]

though I wouldn't call them weak points, the most trouble-prone
points are: The magazine, the extractor, and the ammuniton. If all
three are good, about 99% of the functional problems with the
1911 pattern pistol would be non-existent.

Most feed-related problems can be cured with a good magazine and
correct extractor set-up. Ammunition that is in-spec...both as to external
dimensions and internal ballistics, will do a lot to insure reliability.
HINT: Lightweight screamers and +p pressures don't help things none.

The real weak point is that the current manufacturers of the design
don't use good materials and tight quality control standards during the
process. They know that they're basically building a toy, and that
pistoleers who are both serious and knowledgeable will upgrade their
pistols at whatever the cost.

The 1911 is one of the most rugged designs to come down the pike, and will withstand a lot of rough handling, but outright abuse will degrade the reliability of any pistol. Take that one to the bank.

Cheers!

Tuner

[Delmar]

Well spoken, Tuner.

I know some see the internal extactor as being a weak point, and the cause is not the design.

I'll keep mine internal. Have a near 20 year old early Series 80-back when Colts were "crap" (whatever:rolleyes: ) and still ticking after 100K + rounds on the original extractor and barrel. And its taken loads from the lightweight screamers to the +P, back a few years when I thought you had to firewall the load to make it work.

When you consider the way the pistol is designed, it is a purely modular constuction, designed to stay in service with routine rebuilding.

Bushing wear? Replace it-cheaper than changing out the slide.

Link wear? Tap out a pin and put in a new one.

Plunger tube? Protected by the grip, but is not rocket science to replace with the correct tools.

Mags? If the spring/follower is bad, chuck em and put in new.

[Sarge]

It ain't a Sig 220- but like so many things about the 1911, it has an "easy fix". Just take 200 bucks and your old '11 down to the local gun shop, and come away happy. It'll probably be the best $200 you'll ever spend toward making a 1911 both trouble free, and accurate.

I drug those things around for a long time, and out of a dozen or so I owned and/or was issued, there were two that actually worked with any degree of certainty, and shot pretty well. Only one of those two (a 1991 Commander) never jammed with new ammo. I probably should have kept that one, just for nostaglia if nothing else.

[Double Naught Spy]

Wow Sarge, that is great. Just what the heck are you suggesting we give away $200 for that is supposed to be fixed on a 1911 that will make it accurate and reliable? You forgot that tidbit.

FYI, by design, the 1911 is a pretty darn accurate gun, so I am really interested in known what will make it reliable and more accurate.


BluesBear, yes, JMB designed it and yes it does have weak points including the plunger and extractor. Don't fret too much. That is just the way it is. Those are problem areas on the gun that are some of the more likely to break or be troublesome. Both can be improved. Just because JMB worked on the gun does not make it some sort of religious icon beyond improvement. Remember, the 1911 is not his masterpiece, but his bastardchild with the US Military. There are lots of things on the 1911 that JMB would not and did not think were appropriate, but the wages were being paid by the military.

Haycreek, as noted, one of the most problematic areas has been the magazine. JMB might have been a genius, but the magazine has always been a source of potential issues he was not responsible for what contractors did after the designs went into production. As far as the design of the whole package, the magazine is probably the worst part of the gun. This has largely been rectified by some improved magazine versions such as by Wilson and McCormick on a broad scale basis.

[stans]

The weak points in the 1911 were the Colt Series 70 collet bushing- the fingers would break off the bushing if the barrel was incorrectly fitted. The other weak point is the substitution of MIM or cast parts. The internal extractor works well when properly adjusted and made of spring steel.

[Sarge]

I was suggesting that if you really need an accurate and utterly reliable .45 auto, you might be better off spending $200 toward a better design. I loved the 1911 despite it's fleas (still do), but Sig will be getting my "45 auto money" from now on. Just my solution to the problem, and I wish somebody would have talked me into trying one of these 15 years ago.

When hardball was THE .45 ACP load, the '11 was THE gun. I woudn't feel naked with either, so long as I knew the gun was reliable. I just think the odds of getting a reliable Sig are a lot better than those of getting a reliable 1911- based on about 20 years of fiddling with the latter. I've owned way too many 1911's to say anybody is 'dumb' for trying one, and I didn't mean any particular offense. Just trying to illustrate a point.

[BigG]

When I was a younger man, I had a pal whose dad worked for a major firm, GE, whose job as an engineer was to cheapen a product once it had been rolled out to the point where it would last out the warrantee period but not much longer. The kid's dad finally lost it and quit and left the family and I lost track but don't think the bean counters are not staying up nights trying to find how to save the next two cents. :uhoh:

[Soap]

The real weak point is that the current manufacturers of the design
don't use good materials and tight quality control standards during the
process. They know that they're basically building a toy, and that
pistoleers who are both serious and knowledgeable will upgrade their
pistols at whatever the cost.

Exactly.

[Zeke Menuar]

The only weak point of the 1911 I can find is that they tend to muliply in the gun safe.

ZM

[Slowhand]

The 1911 does have some weak points, but then so does every firearm. That said, I love 1911s, they are all I use for IDPA and for carry, and I am always looking to add more to the collection. They are the perfect gun for me. Back to the topic, my KZ-45 has some neat things about it. The plunger tube is part of the molded polymer frame, so it can't come off, and the ejector is actually machined right into the stainless insert inside the frame, so it can't come off either. It also has an external extractor. I don't really care one way or another, so long as the gun is reliable, but it is cool that Wilson put some thought into it and tried to address these common beefs. I like my KZ- I don't know if I'd call it a true 1911, but it is a nice gun and a good shooter.

[45auto]

The weakest design point of the 1911, IMHO, is the grip safety.

Unless you are bouncing around on a horse without the manual safety on with a heavy steel trigger, I am at a loss at the "real" world function of that kind of safety. I'm sure someone could think of a situation where it would help, but I'm curious.

It does, however, prevent many people from firing a 1911 due to grip style, hand size, etc and provide sharp edges if not properly designed/blended and it leaves some good sized openings for dirt to get into it.
Other than that... it's okay. ;)

When Para, innovative company at least, introduced a double action, manual safety, series 80 LDA and still included a grip safety, I knew it was a "lost cause" for a grip safetyLESS 1911. Oh well.

[Sean Smith]

Funny how the internal extractor is a weakness for the 1911, but not the SigSauer P226, P228 or P220. Maybe Sigarms is smart enough to not go cheap on a vital part of the gun, and so it works? What an idea! ;)

Of course, the SigSauer P-series guns have plenty of shortcuts to make them cheaper. Sigarms was just smarter about HOW they took shortcuts, and where they did and didn't take them, than some current 1911 makers.

I'd suggest that the real weaknesses of the 1911 were things like: tiny sights, a hammer/grip safety combination that can bite you, too-small thumb safety, and so forth.

[scalinghammer]

THe weak points are not very weak in my opinion. But..

The plunger tube on a SVI or STI in built into the fame and is one piece with the frame.

The internal extactor - a case can be made for the external extractor but the internal works OK for me. The internal extract costs more to get right and is more likely to quit if fooled with but it has the advantage of no external parts to get dirt into and it looks better.

The bushing can be a small problem. That can "solved" by using a coned barrel. There is no bushing then.

I like and use most of these "fixes" you don't need them but if you want them they are there.
Ed

[Kaylee]

near as I can tell, the internal extractor on an 1911 functions more or less the same way as that on a Mauser or pre-64 Winchester (long spring steel extractor and controlled cartridge feed) while the external extractors with their lever and "Bic pen spring" arrangement is more akin to the later push-feed rifles that supposedly aren't reliable enough for hunting critters that hunt you.

Why a given idea is a "weak point" in a self defense pistol but I keep hearing that it's de rigeur on a dangerous game rifle I'll never know. :confused: :)

-K

[BigG]

Kaylee: You gotta stop talking like that. You're making too much sense! This is a gun discussion! :neener:

[Rambosky]

Weak points of the 1911 ? The operator?

[jercamp45]

It is soo good, having such a long history of kickin' butt at CQB, won so many trophies, save so many lives that every other gun wants to be like it! Every gun person has to use it as a basis of comparison, the gun to beat.
All the developmental evolutions of ammunition and handguns have tried to get to the level of the .45 auto in stopping power, and the reliability of the 1911 in function.
A 1911 pro/con....tis so easy to repair and modify.....many a kitchen table 'gunsmith' will screw up what worked fine and then scream about its unreliability. Same applies for the ametuer reloader that blames his firearms when his crappy reloads are the culprit.
You cannot fault humans for being human...we always want to tinker and improve....so 1911's come in every size, material, double stacks, tack drivers, loose fitted trench guns, with all the doodad's or none. The little bullets have be improved in a attempt to give them more stopping power, guns like the Glock came to challenge the 1911 as the ultimate defensive hand tool(hey, it works pretty good, as does the Springfield XD I recently shot).
But the bonafide gunnut, wants many things...reliability and stopping power, for sure. The 1911 provides that. History and tradition too...a connection to the past and too the events that shaped history...the 1911 gives us a truckload of history. And we like to personalize our weapontry... and theyre are few(if any) handguns that can compare to the 1911's ability to be personalized and customized for nearly any concievable mission.
Weak Points? Not really, but no other gun can be as screwed up by a 'smith or the misuse by a ignorant operator.......so, if there is a weakness it is that it is no 'fool proof'. No machine is, cause a fool can screw up anything!!
Jercamp45

[boogalou]

I think the best thing about the 1911 is its modular design. You can try different types of barrel bushings, triggers, and MSH's. Try that with any other pistol design. Internal extractor is one part and easy to remove. External extractors consist of 3 parts. And why would a plunger tube be any worse then a spring loaded detent behind a safety that can fly to who knows where when you remove it?

The neatest thing about 1911's is that they are easy to completely dis-assemble, and are there own toolbox! I also love CZ's but they are a PITA to totally take apart.

The only negative thing I can see about them is the amount of money some of them cost, and some folks being hesitant about using a SA.

In their most basic form, my experience has been that they are reliable and accurate, and more then amply provide the user with the tool needed to protect himself.

[BigG]

A possible weakness: No empirical evidence, but, I always thought the slide/frame interface might be a little weak for pistol whipping with the bbl, as compared to a heavy frame revo like a S&W "N" frame. So, I have opted for the muzzle eye poke when practicing with my .45 auto. Other than that, she's closet enough to perfect fer me. :D

[Dobe]

Sean Smith:
I'd suggest that the real weaknesses of the 1911 were things like: tiny sights, a hammer/grip safety combination that can bite you, too-small thumb safety, and so forth.

I'd have to agree with the above. You know its a keeper and a great design when you continually see threads like this every 30 days or so. If it were such a poor design, it would have died years ago. At the very least it would have been used only on shooting ranges and not in the mode for which it was originally designed.

Botton line...I'll keep my 1911's. What some see as weekness, I see as a strength.

[BluesBear]

Double Naught Spy, I do not think of the 1911 pattern as a "religious icon". I was just stating facts.

As far as the 1911 pattern being "his bastardchild with the US Military", I believe Browning was working with/for Colt's Patent Firearms Co. at that time. The government specifications stated what they wanted, not how it was to be accomplished.

If you want an external extractor on your pistol then get one. Just don't say that the internal extractor is a design flaw. The external extractor is hardly a new innovation. If the internal one was such a defect it could have been remedied 75 years ago.
I personally have noting against external extractors. When they are finally produced I will be considering purchasing a SIG GS (not a GSR). But not because of it's extractor.

The design weeknesses observed by the military were the hammer spur-grip tang ratio and the trigger reach issue.

As for the magazine being a weak link, does anyon here expect a magazine to be a lifelong commitment? Magazaines, especially on military weapons are a semi-expendable accessory at best.

[1911Tuner]

BigG said:

always thought the slide/frame interface might be a little weak for pistol whipping with the bbl, as compared to a heavy frame revo

Simple enough. Get a MSH with the original lanyard loop. It makes for
a pretty wicked skull pommel. Pistol empty? Flip it over and grab it
by the front and bring the rear sight down on a noggin. The sight
will do the job pretty well, and the slide and frame won't be damaged.

Can anybody say OUCH?:D

[BigG]

Tuner, your always welcome posts continue to bust my gut. Thanks! :neener:

Re: The muzzle eye poke technique: This kata comes in as an interim move in my force escalation sequence. Before the pistole has been shot. Oncet it is shot dry, and the mayhem begins, I agree that the reverse pistol butt stroke can be very effective. :eek: All the best!

[444]

From a users standpoint, if there are weaknesses in the 1911 design, I would have to say it is the extractor and the hammer/grip safety.
I have put a lot of rounds down range with 1911s. The only part that stopped working was the extractor. I have been through several extractors on my main "go to" 1911. The thing is though, I don't know if this is better or worse than any other handgun design since I have never shot any other handgun design until it had problems. In other words, I have had that part fail on me, but it was only after more than 10k rounds or so. Would a better design of extractor have lasted beyond this point ? I don't know.
The problem with the hammer/grip safety for me is simply a matter of comfort. I can not shoot a 1911 without either a commander style hammer or a beavertail safety without bloodying my hand. The gun will run fine without it, but my hand suffers as a result.

I don't know how many rounds I have fired though one of my 1911s, but it is considerable. I am sure there are plenty of people who shoot more than I do, but not near as many as shoot less. The finish is wearing off in several places. But the gun just keeps running. New springs every couple years and the occasional extractor and I am a happy man.

[Haycreek]

Thank each of you for your different ideas. For the record, a full sized govt model is my favorite carry. It has been my favorite handgun since our Uncle Sam furnished my first one, 52 years ago. I recognize the strength and good points of he 1911, as well as some of the weaker points that has been mentioned in this thread. The 1911 does have some places that may can be improved upon, and some have been addressed by a few makers. But like someone said, most of the manufactors continue to sell 1911's that may fall a little short in a place or two- because we continue to buy them because of price or effective advertising and magazine articles or have someone to personlize the piece, or do it ourselves. A few noteable custom builders like Mr Vickers, have recognized that the stock 1911 from some makers have weak points, and some design features can be improved upon. We magnify the problem sometimes because we replace some good stock parts with an off of the shelf part that just doesn't fit the specs of the true 1911. Then some one hollers that the 1911 is undependable. All of my 1911's are the original factory specs, and I am happy that they are reliable. The 1911 has always been the best fighting handgun in my books, but lets face it------in the recent years, other makers have built handguns that may please some folks better than the 1911. It is good that we all have choices.

[355sigfan]

I would say a weak point is the dependance of having someone hand fit the guns. The lemon factor is higher than more modern weapons simply because there are more places in the manufacturing process for human error to rear its ugly head. That being said I love 1911's.
Pat

[Tamara]

Something wierd is going on here, but I have to say that I totally agree with 355sigfan. The 1911's biggest weakness is that it was designed when modern mass production machinery was nonexistent or expensive and guys with files and a lot of spare time were plentiful and cheap. It doesn't translate well to a world of castings and stampings and MIM bits, having been designed around tediously machined bits of steel.

"All parts milled from forged tool steel" means "bucks-up custom gun" nowadays, when it used to mean "ordinary GI 1911"... :uhoh:

[BigG]

I'm not sure that 355SIGFan and Tamara's point about the lack of modern mass production friendliness is not a chimera. IIRC, interchangeable parts were pioneered by Eli Whitney and the subject was the Hall Rifle around eighteen-thirty-something. When the 45 was built, the USA contracted with Springfield Armory as a second source of the weapon. SA took some design drawings and tried to build guns from that; the trouble was, he actual guns did not reflect the design drawings but had been altered in some fashion. When SA made new drawings based on the Actual Colt Pistols that they studied the mystery of the unbuildable 1911 suddenly evaporated and SA began building pistols to standard.

What WAS different THEN from NOW was extremely competent observation by mechanically apt workers. I would say that if whatever company got a few colt pistols, made actual parts drawings and slavishly cloned them using correct materials they would come up with a good pistol, much as the Chinese reputedly did with their Norinco. What did they probably really do? Took some old public domain drawings, got a computer and optimized them. It still takes a human brain to come up with a bright idea; a computer can only sort data, imho. YMMV

[stipilot]

It's the cheap, lazy, penny pinching manufactures who took it upon themselves to change the specification of the part that had made it a sometimes problem. And you know that how?

Expense and/or difficulty of manufacture is a design problem in its own right. If a part can't be manufactured in a way that's inexpensive, easy to produce, and easy to make without rework, it's going to cause problems sooner or later. If indeed the design were so flawless, why did Browing change it when he designed the HiPower?

[SodaPop]

From my personal experience with my Colt 1991A1, I'd have to say that the bullet/feed ramp contact is more than on my Sig and Beretta. Once the feed ramp starts to wear.... only ball ammo is reliable.

[surfinUSA]

The only weakness in the design is that its single action. Which means it must be carried cocked and locked to be effective. Which means that a safety has to be removed and thereby interfers with the draw and fire process. Plus the grip safety especially on older models without the bump may not be disengaged during a quick draw, drop the safety, and fire process and therefore prevent the gun from firing when needed most.

I've seen top competitors forget to drop the safety during the stress of competition. Consequently, I think even well trained regular folks like myself might do that to.

I carried a LT wieght commander for years when I worked plainclothes and loved the gun. Now I carry a SIG 220 and think its a much better gun. Reliable with all ammo, more accurate than the commander, and quicker into action with its DA trigger pull. Personally, for cops I think the SIG 220 or Glock 21 with their straight draw and fire ability is the way to go.

[silent one]

Ditto Ramboskys' reply

be safe


SILENT ONE

[BluesBear]

If indeed the design were so flawless, why did Browing change it when he designed the HiPower? Somebody anybody, show me, prove to the world, that Browning himself originally indicated a preference on the external extractor on what became the P-35.

The P-35 aka High Power wasn't finalized until 9 (count 'em friends and neighbors) that's NINE (one less than ten) years after Browning died.
Browning only started the design.

[355sigfan]

The only weakness in the design is that its single action. Which means it must be carried cocked and locked to be effective.
END

Thats the best part of the 1911 its single action operation. Its the fastest gun into action. If someone is forgetting their safety they are practiced enough with that weapon. The reason the 1911 is so popular with special teams in leo and military circles is because of the cocked and locked capablity and the speed into action with a crisp trigger with minimal reset. Thats the same reason the 1911 dominates any competition where speed is a factor. As for the internal external extractor who cares. The internal one works but it is more difficult to adjust and manufacture. The external one also works. Personally so long as the gun does what its supposed to I could care less how the cases are extracted.
Pat

[1911Tuner]

From my personal experience with my Colt 1991A1, I'd have to say that the bullet/feed ramp contact is more than on my Sig and Beretta. Once the feed ramp starts to wear.... only ball ammo is reliable.

ROFLMAO! Lad, I've got 1911s that were built before the outbreak of WW1 that don't have worn feed ramps. I've rebuilt two of'em twice
each since the mid-70s because I shot'em slap to death and had to.
They feed everything I can find. Those two old warhorses have probably
burned a half-million rounds between'em since they were born.

I think maybe your 1991 Colt has other issues.


BluesBear said:

The P-35 aka High Power wasn't finalized until 9 (count 'em friends and neighbors) that's NINE (one less than ten) years after Browning died.
Browning only started the design.

Yeppers...and the original High-Power extractor was INTERNAL, similar to the 1911
-------------------------

The only weakness in the design is that its single action. Which means it must be carried cocked and locked to be effective.

R-O-T-F-L-M-M-F-A-O!!!!!
I ain't a top competetitor by the longest stretch, but I've never forgotten the safety. Missed it a time or three, but never forgot it. Practice, practice
practice.

...and finally:

Expense and/or difficulty of manufacture is a design problem in its own right. If a part can't be manufactured in a way that's inexpensive, easy to produce, and easy to make without rework, it's going to cause problems sooner or later.

It won't if it's made right the first time. How's a 70 year-old extractor that's
still in service sound? Same for the other small parts. As far as bein' a design flaw if it can't be produced out of pressed beer cans or recycled
chewing gum foil...I'll take the other route every time. Throwaway
weapons are just that, and not really worth the effort.

I'm really havin' me a large time with this thread.:D :D :D

Cheers!

Tuner

[silent one]

Tuner,
Cheers back at ya. Your right on target as usual.;)

Good Luck, and be safe


''SEMPER FI''

SILENT ONE

[Brian Williams]

The only problem I have is is collecting my brass after shooting.

My original problems were a bad barrel, bulged chamber, on my Sistema and the teeny tiny sights. I got a new barrel that dropped in and a wide front sight installed and filed a square notch on the rear.

It has become one of my all-time haul arounds, along with my S&W 13 and 586.

Mine was made in 1953....

[dsk]

Like Tuner, I have pre-WW1 Colts that still have their original extractors and plunger tubes. On new Colts they can't keep the plunger tubes tight on brand-new guns to save their life. And the first thing a prudent person does with a new Kimber is ash-can the MIM extractor before it goes limp as a noodle.

I have said it many times, and I'll say it again. The problems/weaknesses/downfalls of 1911s are almost exclusive to new production guns, not the old ones.

[HD]

the only problem with the 1911 is that NO ONE makes them the way they should be made ...
altho colts sure trying with their WW1 recreation...
give me an original prewar 1911 that hasn't been buggered and i'm happy ...
youse gwine done be can keeps all yo pimpguns ...

[SodaPop]

I've got 1911s that were built before the outbreak of WW1 that don't have worn feed ramps.

And you were only shooting ball ammo, right?

[9x19]

Somebody anybody, show me, prove to the world, that Browning himself originally indicated a preference on the external extractor on what became the P-35.

Quite impossible since the Hi Power was originally DESIGNED, BUILT, AND SOLD WITH AN INTERNAL EXTRACTOR. The external came much later, and was put there by FN, not JMB.

[BluesBear]

9x19 that was my point.
I get so sick and tired of people thinking that just because it says Browning on it that JMB himself designed it from stem to stern. :banghead:

[Tamara]

I gotta say that the "worn feed ramp" thing is a new one on me, too. I've seen alloy-frame guns where someone got too zealous with a dremel and polished the hard anodizing right off the feed ramp, exposing the soft aluminum underneath and causing it to get chewed up by Golden Sabers, but I've never, ever seen a steel-frame 1911 with a "worn feed ramp".

[SodaPop]

worn feed ramp

I didn't mean they wear out under normal circumstances, but use of non-ball ammo on a mil-spec 1911 with a GI mag will not function....... very long.


If someone walked into the average gun shop with a GI-1911 and tried to shoot all of the ammo that is sold behind the counter, how versatile is a GI 1911?

If the gun was designed to feed more directly into the barrel (why doesn't my Sig or Beretta need such a feed ramp?) it would have been more versatile.

I know all the short cuts to make a 1911 work.

I use Wilson's 8rd mags and carry 230gr American Eagle for SD.

[1911Tuner]

I didn't mean they wear out under normal circumstances, but use of non-ball ammo on a mil-spec 1911 with a GI mag will not function....... very long.

:confused: Brother, all I can say is that you musta found some pistols
made outta pot metal. Unhardened ordnance steel hits the Rockwell
"C"scale at about 28-30...The cupro-nickelalloy in bullet jacket material might go as high as 3 Rc, regardlessof bullet shape or profile..I'm afraid
you'd go broke long before you wore a feed ramp enough to cause
problems. The trouble with alloy frames isn't the bullets so much as it
is the front of the magazine follower digging in on the last round, and
even that's rare with standard followers.

FWIW, I've shot thousands of hollowpoints over the years in old
GI pistols and Commercial Colts and Springfields...Alloy and steel
frames. Never seen one stop functioning due to frame ramp wear.
I think there's something else at work with your Colt. If you'll get with
me as to exactly what it's doing, I'll try to figger out what it is and try to
get it straightened out.
------------------------------------

If someone walked into the average gun shop with a GI-1911 and tried to shoot all of the ammo that is sold behind the counter, how versatile is a GI 1911?

More than you'd think, even without throating the barrels. It has more to
do with the overall length of the cartridge than the bullet profile. Though
some profiles are more troublesome than others. Try Remington Golden
Saber or Winchester Black Talon in an unmodified GI pistol, with GI"Hardball" mags for a real eye-opener. I understand the Speer Gold Dot
is also very good.
-----------------------------
If the gun was designed to feed more directly into the barrel

That's a question often asked by people who don't understand the controlled feed design of the 1911. The round climbs the hill in order to
let the rim slip under the extractor and keep full control of the round . That's why the 1911 will function upside down as reliably as it will rightside up...Your Beretta probably won't. Climbing that rampand entering the throat at an angle like that also bleeds off some of the slide's momentum and makes for amore gentle return to battery. If it fed with a sharp "whack", the lower lug and slidestop pin would take a worse pounding...as would the hammer and sear and the slidestop hole in the
frame.

Part of getting a 1911 to feed smoothly is in the timing of the barrel's
rise as the slide returns to battery. Correct shape of the lower lug and
center-to-center length of the link is critical, and lends itself to simple tuning
if the barrel rides the link rather than being cammed upward toward
battery/lockup by the front of the lowerlug's radius. Most people who
experience feeding problems automatically assume that it needs a ramp and throat job...and ruin their pistols with overzealous filing, grinding, and polishing as a result. The truth is that the wide barrel throat that's in
vogue isn't really necessary except for shooting semi-wadcutter bullets
and one or two styles of hollowpoints. At most, they usually only require
a small amount of widening/polishing to get them to feed hollowpoints
with rounded or truncated cone-shaped bullets.

Much to learn you have...Teach you we will...but first you must open your mind.;)

Tune-Fucious say: Reading gunzines, often counterproductive to one's tuning skills.

May your journey be short and your days filled with pleasant warmth
and sunshine.

[wally]

My SIG 226 sure has a feed ramp, its part of the barrel like how Para Ordinance "improved" the 1911. My Beretta 92 also has a small reed ramp as part of the barrel. Both also have small feed ramp like cuts in the frame below the barrel's ramp.

I think if rounds are seriously impacting the feed ramp part of the 1911 frame the mag spring is too weak and/or the recoil spring is too strong. Less likely the mag feed lips could be defective and are holding the round down for too long in the feeding cycle.

I can put a resized empty in the mag and it'll feed fine when I drop the slide. Putting a dummy round on top of the empty will generally not feed because there is nothing to push the round up once it clears the feed lips.

--wally.

[Tamara]

If the gun was designed to feed more directly into the barrel (why doesn't my Sig or Beretta need such a feed ramp?) it would have been more versatile.

I would respectfully suggest that you take a closer look at your SIG and Beretta. :uhoh:

[Coronach]

Pat357sigfan said:Its the fastest gun into action.Really? How is a 1911 with a manual safety any faster than a DAO, DA/SA or Glock, with no manual safety (or, at least, not one that is required to be carried engaged)? Sure, properly carried and employed, it is no less swift, but lets not pretend that its faster.

I think you'd be better off arguing "excellent trigger, good cartridge, good ergonomics" to justify its popularity with LE/military.

Mike

[355sigfan]

Really? How is a 1911 with a manual safety any faster than a DAO, DA/SA or Glock, with no manual safety (or, at least, not one that is required to be carried engaged)? Sure, properly carried and employed, it is no less swift, but lets not pretend that its faster.
END

I am not trying to be a argumentative jerk but lets break this down.

With a 1911 your safety comes off in the rock and lock stage of a weaver presentation or as soon as both your hands come on to the gun in isocellese. By the time your sights are on the target you only have a short light trigger pull between you and hitting the target.

WIth a DAO or DA SA you can start pulling the trigger once your in the rock and lock stage or when your hands come together on the gun in the iso stance. This technique would have your trigger breaking about the time your arms extend. This sounds great in theory and should be almost as fast as a 1911. However its very tricky for timmig and I never felt comfortable doing it. So most people end up pulling the trigger only once their arms are extended. They have to pull a trigger that is over twice as long and twice to three times as heavy before they can hit the target.

Most peoples first shot with a da sa or dao handgun is about .1 to .2 seconds slower than from a 1911 or a glock. Thats been my informal observation. Glocks are as fast into action as a 1911 because their trigger is not much longer.

So I stand by the argument that a 1911 is faster into action than dao and da sa type weapons. I would back that up with the fact that 1911's dominate in speed competitions. If something was faster it would be used. Try it yourself with a timer at the range.
Pat

[Chris Rhines]

The grip safety is an unnecessary addition.
The original factory sights are crude in the extreme.
The non-fixed barrel. Of course, this is a weak point in most automatic pistols.
The link and lower lug are, to my mind, overly complicated.
The overall design of the gun is geared towards hand-fitting and assembly, as opposed to mass production. This is also a problem with most modern semi-autos.

- Chris

[1911Tuner]

Sigfan nailed that one pretty good. To wit: If there was anything faster, it
would be used. Sure, it's possible to match the speed of the 1911 from signal to shot, but putting it on target is another matter. Only hits count.
Misses are just noise. More than that, the single-action trigger of the 1911
allows a much easier and faster follow-up shot than the DA to SA switch
with the double-action and trigger cocking autopistols.

Now, for the all-time fastest sidearm for the first shot hit...brace yourselves...it's the Colt 1873 Single Action Army. That's right kids
The old Peacemaker is King of the First Shot speed contest.

Bill Jordan mastered the timing on the Draw and Fire exercise. I watched him draw a double-action revolver (M-19) and hit an aspirin tablet at about
10 paces...repeatedly...faster than my eye could follow. He's been timed at a blurred .27 second from signal to HIT. That's faster than some can even react to the signal.

How'd ya like ta draw down on THAT hombre?:uhoh:

Chitty-Chitty, Bang, bang

Tuner

[355sigfan]

Now, for the all-time fastest sidearm for the first shot hit...brace yourselves...it's the Colt 1873 Single Action Army. That's right kids
The old Peacemaker is King of the First Shot speed contest.
END

I have heard that but could never do it or understand it. Must take a lot of practice.
Pat

[1911Tuner]

Chris said:

The grip safety is an unnecessary addition.

W3ell...That one's at least open for debate. Some like it, some don't
I kinda like redundant safeties when I got me a cocked .45 nestled next to my ol' skinny. Trigger movement blocked...Sear movement blocked...half cock backin' it all up if anything breaks. Yeah...I kinda like the grip safety.
--------------------------------

The original factory sights are crude in the extreme.

True enough...but in the role for which the gun was designed, the sights
are adequate. Under the circumstances that the pistol would have likely
been deployed, the shooter wouldn't likely have time to obtain the perfect
grip and sight picture...and there's at least a chance that the action would be in the dark at contact ranges. In that, I can promise that all you'll be thinking about is that, THAT GUY RIGHT THERE...is trying to kill me, and
I GOTTA GET HIM FIRST! Or put another way...When one finds himself up
to his ??? in alligators, it's difficult to keep one's mind focused on draining
the swamp.
-------------------------------

The link and lower lug are, to my mind, overly complicated.
Nahhhh...Not really.
------------------------------

The overall design of the gun is geared towards hand-fitting and assembly, as opposed to mass production.
True enough...if you want that type of pistol, but as Rosie the Riveter and
Gus the Gun Putter Together during the gear-up for war, the 1911 CAN be
mass-produced...and it WAS successfully mass-produced, and by some manufacturers that had never built guns before. They worked then, and they'll work today if you can find a nice one that hasn't been abused.
-----------------------------

My favorite:

The non-fixed barrel. Of course, this is a weak point in most automatic pistols.

Well...It might be a weakness if accuracy is the only yardstick that we use to judge a pistol's utility, but when a barrel has to be replaced in a hurry
in the field, the non-fixed barrel has a lot going for it.

Blanket response to all the above...Remember what the gun was designed
FOR. Not for punching tiny groups in paper. Not for 50-yard bullshooting.
Not for playing games of "Let's Pretend!" Not even for law enforcement. It's not a surgeon's scalpel. It's a broad-head axe that was..and is... intended for emergency use at powder-burning distances. That it's been pressed into other, less lethal roles successfully doesn't alter that.

In its original role, it doesn't need big sights or minute of BS accuracy.
It needs to work.

Be of good cheer and mindful of your six!

Tuner

.

[dsk]

Tuner,

While on the subect of lower barrel lugs, are you too noticing how many Kimbers have battered lugs after a short while? Somebody needs to go to their factory and tell them how to fit a barrel properly.

[BigG]

Tuner's last post really summed it up well: Remember what it was made for Saving your life at powder burn range, maybe in the dark. The fact that the best combat pistol can be adapted to be the best target pistol, game pistol, etc. is wonderful but the real story of the Government .45 ACP was written with the blood, sweat, and tears of thousands of GIs in several wars on several continents. We ought to remember that. Out here. :)

[355sigfan]

I personally prefer visiable sights. I am a firm believer in sighted fire vs point shooting. However at close range indexing works well and the whole weapon can pretty much be used as a sight.
Pat

[1911Tuner]

dsk said:

While on the subect of lower barrel lugs, are you too noticing how many Kimbers have battered lugs after a short while? Somebody needs to go to their factory and tell them how to fit a barrel properly.

Dana, to tell the truth, I don't see too many Kimbers in this area since the
S-2's came out. On the ones that I do see, I've noticed some locking lugs
getting rolled/peened on occasion, but when I point to the trouble spot,
some of the owners get defensive...so I learned to approach with caution.

I have seen some lower lugs getting beaten up because of dropping the slide on empty, though...and you guessed it...When I try to gently suggest
that it'll break the gun, I get a lotta "Ah, Who told you that? Haw haw"

Ah well...

Tuner

[BluesBear]

That's right kids The old Peacemaker is King of the First Shot speed contest. I once worked with the legendary Joe Bowman, who if I recall once held the world record for fast draw & fire. He could draw a single action and fire it three times so fast all you could hear was one POP.*
Talk about a blur! He could do it faster than the eye could follow.



*This was using primed cases only. He used Ruger Blackhawks that had the topstraps ground and reconfigured to resemble a Colt SAA because he said the leaf spring in the Colts weren't fast enough.

[Chris Rhines]

The grip safety is an unnecessary addition.

W3ell...That one's at least open for debate. Some like it, some don't
I kinda like redundant safeties when I got me a cocked .45 nestled next to my ol' skinny. Trigger movement blocked...Sear movement blocked...half cock backin' it all up if anything breaks. Yeah...I kinda like the grip safety. This is fine, if you can activate the grip safety with 100% reliability, with either hand, from any shooting position. I can't, and it's the same with many others. The grip safety is simply something more to go wrong. I can put up with double-redundant safety vs. triple-redundant.

The original factory sights are crude in the extreme.

True enough...but in the role for which the gun was designed, the sights
are adequate. Under the circumstances that the pistol would have likely
been deployed, the shooter wouldn't likely have time to obtain the perfect
grip and sight picture...and there's at least a chance that the action would be in the dark at contact ranges. In that, I can promise that all you'll be thinking about is that, THAT GUY RIGHT THERE...is trying to kill me, and
I GOTTA GET HIM FIRST! Or put another way...When one finds himself up
to his ??? in alligators, it's difficult to keep one's mind focused on draining
the swamp. Sorry, but I have to disagree here. At breath-smelling distances, large, highly visible sights are even more important. If the bad guy is five feet away swinging a tire jack, you have to stop him RIGHT NOW. That means placing your shots fast and precisely, 'cause marginal hits aren't going to stop him right there. The original 1911 sights do not lend themselves to fast, accurate shooting. It's an easy fix to improve the sights (so much so that I debated including the sights as a weakness, but as issued, they really are.)

The link and lower lug are, to my mind, overly complicated.
Nahhhh...Not really. Compared to the solid lug on a P-35 or CZ-75? Or even better, compared to a fixed barrel?

The non-fixed barrel. Of course, this is a weak point in most automatic pistols.

Well...It might be a weakness if accuracy is the only yardstick that we use to judge a pistol's utility, but when a barrel has to be replaced in a hurry
in the field, the non-fixed barrel has a lot going for it. Replacing a 1911A1 barrel in the field without tools and fixtures? Um, okay. I admit that I've only fitted one 1911 barrel thus far, but it required a vise, file, and a fair amount of fiddling and fitting. With a properly designed fixed-barrel pistol, the barrel can be swapped out by pulling a latch or driving out a couple of pins.

A fixed barrel pistol is not only more accurate (and I've never heard of having too much accuracy ;)), but has the potential to be simpler in operation, more rugged, and more reliable.

---

The 1911A1 is a fine gunfighting tool, but it is not perfect. It has its weaknesses, just like any other pistol.

- Chris

[444]

Grip Safety: I have never failed to activate the grip safety on my 1911s from any position. I have fired quite a few thousand rounds out of them, the vast majority of which were from the holster. Personally, I don't see how you could fire the gun in any recognizable way without automatically depressing the grip safety. Even if you held the gun between your thumb and forefinger you would be depressing the grip safety.

This thread is about the 1911 in general but if you want to concentrate only on the original factory sights, I still feel they are adequate. Not the best by a long shot, but certainly workable. They did work on the military guns for quite a few years. All my 1911s currently have factory sights on them. They are better than the original but not by much. I have competed in IPSC, IDPA, and have used these sights in several big name gun schools. If they were a handicap, I don't think it was much of one. In a class I took this past weekend I shot a score that qualified me at their highest level for that course using factory Colt sights.

"A fixed barrel pistol is not only more accurate (and I've never heard of having too much accuracy ), but has the potential to be simpler in operation, more rugged, and more reliable."
I have to wonder about that. I am no bullseye shooter, but have done a little reading on the subject. The 1911 has dominated the bullseye world for over 75 years. One would think that they would have gone to something else if what they were using was inferior. As far as reliability, this is a very controversial subject. In my mind, there is no more reliable handgun anywhere, ever made that is more reliable than a GI issue 1911.

[Amish]

Limited capacity for such a large and heavy gun.

Not as reliable out of the box as other guns.

Only single action. Not DA/SA with cocked and locked option like the USP45.

[Chris Rhines]

Personally, I don't see how you could fire the gun in any recognizable way without automatically depressing the grip safety. It's easy if you have my hands. If I grasp the pistol in my normal offhand shooting grip, thumb riding on top of the safety, the grip safety will not be depressed far enough for the gun to fire. An aftermarket grip safety can help, but a better solution for a part that serves no practical purpose is to remove it. And I don't think that the grip safety on the 1911 has any practical use.

This thread is about the 1911 in general but if you want to concentrate only on the original factory sights, I still feel they are adequate. There are some modern factory sights that are pretty good. I was refering to the old WWI-era thumbnail front sight and tiny-notch rear sight (both my 1911s are so equipped.)

I have to wonder about that. I am no bullseye shooter, but have done a little reading on the subject. The 1911 has dominated the bullseye world for over 75 years. One would think that they would have gone to something else if what they were using was inferior. Funny you should bring up bullseye shooting, as that's my main sport. All of the fixed-barrel pistols introduced on the market in the past 75 years have had other features that make them poorly suited for bullseye shooting. There are a couple of companies working on fixed-barrel variants of the 1911, with mixed results so far. Regardless, all else being equal a fixed barrel is always going to surpass a tilting barrel in terms of mechanical accuracy.

As far as reliability, this is a very controversial subject. In my mind, there is no more reliable handgun anywhere, ever made that is more reliable than a GI issue 1911. That may or may not be true; it's impossible to make an objective assement of reliability for a particular firearm without a much larger sample size than any one person can have. But again, all else being equal, fixed barrels usually mean fewer moving parts. Fewer moving parts means fewer things to break.

- Chris

[444]

" it's impossible to make an objective assement of reliability for a particular firearm without a much larger sample size than any one person can have."
:what:

It was the standard issue handgun for every branch of the US Military for something like 75 years. How much more of a sample size can there be ? :eek:









It was good on Iwo Jima. It was good at the Chosin Reservoir. It was good in Vietnam. And it's good enough for me.

[355sigfan]

Limited capacity for such a large and heavy gun.

Not as reliability out of the box as other guns.

Only single action. Not DA/SA with cocked and locked option like the USP45.

END

Well lets start with Capacity. Its a single stack 45 7 or 8 is what they hold. If you want you can get a double stack 1911 with between 10 +1 with a light polimer frame (KZ45) to a 15 shot steel framed Para. To some of us concealability and ergonomics matter more than round count.

The 1911 is very reliable if you get the right one and not a lemon. But overall the lemon factor is higher due to previously mentioned facts. Not a big deal though. Test the gun before you carry it. IF it does not work send it back.

Only single action you say. I like single action its the fastests way to get fast accurate hits on target. The USP45 is not a bad gun but I carried one for about the first 18 months of life as a cop. The cocked and locked feature on this gun did not work well. Most of the time when you took the safety off the gun also decocked. It was top heavy with a high bore axis and muzzle flip was more pronounced. The DA trigger was hell. It was not a bad gun but I would rather have my issue Glock 21 to that and my 1911 to the Glock.
Pat

[BluesBear]

all else being equal a fixed barrel is always going to surpass a tilting barrel in terms of mechanical accuracy
You weren't actually planning on mounting both the front & rerar sight to the barrel were you?
If not then mechanical accuacy will depend on the slide to frame fit, since the sights will still be mounted to the slide.


I have never known or seen anyone who had any sort of problem squeezing the grip safety on a 1911 pattern pistol. I've seen nine year old girls who had no problem with them.
If you do I'm sorry. But for a problem that occurs once in a million doesn't make it a weakness. If you don't like, or can't use the GS then it's simple, PIN IT. Or grind the end off of it. End of problem.

As for the original GI sights... have you checked out the sights on a 1917 S&W or 1917 Colt?
Or the Colt New Army/Navy? Or the Colt SAA?
Those Lugers and P-38s had such really great sights too. :rolleyes:
Look where the sights were on the 03 Springfield. (not the 03A3)

There were no GI .45s manufactured after 1945. So for the time period produced the sights were about as good as anything else.



edited for spelling - dang Q key

[Tamara]

I have never known or seen anyone who had any sort of problem sueezing the grip safety on a 1911 pattern pistol.

Then you need to choke up higher on the pistol. It'll reduce your splits, trust me. ;) :D

[dsk]

Replacing a 1911A1 barrel in the field without tools and fixtures? Um, okay. I admit that I've only fitted one 1911 barrel thus far, but it required a vise, file, and a fair amount of fiddling and fitting. With a properly designed fixed-barrel pistol, the barrel can be swapped out by pulling a latch or driving out a couple of pins.

I just don't know where some of you guys are trying to go with this thread. A 1911A1 barrel swap takes exactly the amount of time you need to field strip it, and re-assemble it with the new barrel. If on the other hand you choose to carry a customized, accurized 1911 in the field with a hand-fit barrel, then yes it will take a gunsmith to replace the barrel with an identical one. But then again, what sort of idiot takes a hand-fitted gun out in the boondocks then expects it to be field-serviceable?

I think the main problem we have with the 1911 is that we've strayed WAY too far from the original military design. Just about all the complaints about tempermental weapons seems to involve non-military spec 1911s. I can keep any of my GI pistols running indefinitely with just a small bag of spare parts, and they never jam, cuss, moan, or refuse to earn their pay. I'm not saying there haven't been improvements over the years, but things like larger sights and beavertail safeties don't affect reliability. But this infatuation with super-tight 1911s that can put each shot in the same hole has gone way too far IMO. Keep them at the target range. Use a 1911 actually DESIGNED for fighting as a defensive piece.

[1911Tuner]

Well said Dana! Bravo! That reflects the points that I've been hollerin' about since I saw my first "Rooneygun" on the IPSC circuit. I stopped
shooting shortly afterward. Been a long time. Now that they've come up with IDPA, I'm too dang old to run and jump.:cuss:

Chris, I appreciate your problems with the grip safety. Try Tamara's
suggestion. Another thing that might help is an arched mainspring housing. If forces the web of your hand more tightly into the curve
of the safety. I might also suggest that you lower your thumb a little.
If you have a problem with your thumb kicking the thumb safety on,
have a gunsmith fix it. A nudge shouldn't allow it to move.

Now...on that tire iron thing. If a crazed crackhead is 5 feet away,
moving toward you fast, and swinging a tire iron at you and you take the
time to line up the sights, those sights will probably be the last thing
you see on this side of the River Jordan. Since most shootings take place at ranges from arm's length to about 20 feet max...wouldn't it make sense to practice fast, point-shoulder shooting? I always include that as well as one-hand hip-level to shoulder-level snap shots at 5-6 feet. You'd be surprised at how well it works with just a little practice. Just draw, punch the gun straight out, and fire. Practice doing it while you backpedal too. This notion of getting the perfect grip, stance, sight alignment, and trigger pull can get you killed in the real world. Time is not on your side unless the ranges are greater than 15 feet or so, and several people can prove that
a man armed with a knife or bludgeon can close the gap to striking distance
from 20 feet in one second. Can you react, draw, align the sights, and begin the trigger pull in that span of time? I can't.

Understand, I'm not trying to be a jerk or start a flame war concerning your shooting discipline...Just trying to point out some realities. The age-old advice to "Train like you will likely have to fight" is sound...because it will
never go down the way you think it will. The distances and the time frames will be very short, and fractions of seconds will probably determine
who wins or loses.

Again, to echo what dsk stated...The biggest problem with modern 1911s AND their use is that they have been used for range toys for so long, it's what many people have come to expect. Tight clearances...Accuracy that
is measured in fractions of inches...Big, blocky sights that are easy to see,
but can hang up on clothing when the gun is presented from under a coat...
Textbook shooting stances when it's more likely that you'll be firing one-handed from waist level while fending off a knife or club with the other...
Things like that were born on the game circuit by game players. The 1911
autopistol was designed for killing in the real world where things rarely
go as planned. At five feet, a pistol that is capable of 1 inch accuracy
on a 50-yard range will do no better than a rattletrap WW2 Ithaca or
Rand that might keep its shots in a 10 inch circle at 25 on a good day.

Quote:

"The gamesman strives for the perfect "X". The practical marksman
hits what he must before it's too late." It's a matter of priorities.

Don't worry, be happy!

Tuner

[BigG]

fittin a bbl Genuine Colt bbls drop in. You can get them in blue, nickel, or stainless and it takes as long to put one is as to strip the pistol, replace it, and your back in binness. Good luck!

[45auto]

For anyone that has "handled" an "army" 1911 in like new, non-rebuilt, form, how was the slide/ frame fit compared to todays common 1911's?

Compared to a Kimber, Colt or Springfield for example.

I realize there were many companies that produced 1911's over a time period, so "specs" probably were different, so it may be difficult. I've read "specs" before, but without feeling the slide fit it doesn't mean much to me.

Take care.

[1911Tuner]

Soda Pop's post has bothered me, and I put on my thinkin' cap in the wee
hours of the mornin', and the more I think about it, the more I think I may know where the idea came from.

Soda...is the top of your feed ramp rounded off and polished? Often,
a guy will read about a "Ramp'n'Throat job, and go at it without a full
understanding of the task at hand. Our smith will look at that sharp
edge at the top of the ramp and smooth it up with sandpaper or a Dremel,
not realizing that destroying that angle will cause the bullet nose to
impact the barrel throat at a lower point and push the barrel forward.
When the barrel is pushed forward, it pivots on the link/lug radius and
moves up in the same motion, and puts the round into stem bind.

Ball ammo, being a little longer, along with the ogive shape of the bullet,
doesn't hit the throat quite as low, and allows fairly reliable feeding.


If this is what has happened to your frame, it can be fixed if the angle hasn't been lowered/rounded more than just a little. I've run into this
pretty often.

Standin' by...

Tuner

[sm]

45auto
Best described as fitted right not tight.

I bow to the more experienced such as dsk, 1911 Tuner, Old Fuff, Mr Kennan, and others.

Deviation from original causes problems. I think this is how we got into this whole mess in the first place. We took a proven design and starting messin with for other applications.

I have no problems if a person needs to tweak the fit to hand, sights to eyes, etc. Messing with the "workings" is another deal.

Like taking a 4 door sedan, trying to make it : race 1/4 mi. on one weekend, round-n-round dirt track another, get 40 mpg on a road trip, be a 4wd for hunting, road rally car and still be a 4 door sedan. It ain't gonna be a do all -end all . Don't care if your put a Holley in place of a Carter carb, Put a Hurst, Eddlebrock, Monroe,and numbnuts dual exhaust bank of stickers on back glass.

[1911Tuner]

45Auto asked:

For anyone that has "handled" an "army" 1911 in like new, non-rebuilt, form, how was the slide/ frame fit compared to todays common 1911's?

Better than you might suspect, with the WW2 era pistols being just a bit looser than the pre-war commercial and military pistols. The state of
emergency dictated that the clearances be loosened up a little to allow
unskilled hands to be trained to assemble pistols quickly.

I've had the opportunity to handle a commercial 1911, circa 1921 that was
blue worn but mechanically mint. I doubt if it had been fired more than 200 times. The slide to frame fit was exceptional, with barely any discernable motion horizontally or vertically. The barrel fit was tight, and the pistol
showed no signs of battering or peening anywhere. It belongs to my
step-father, and there's an interesting story behind it.

His uncle had died in his sleep, and his pistol had been put away by his aunt untouched. It lay in the attic in a shoe box, wrapped in a cloth
until his aunt's death in 1991. Her sister told my step-father that he
could have Uncle Will's pistol, and to come and get it.

He called me the same day, and told me to come have a look. When I got there, the gun was cocked and locked, in condition 1. I dropped the magazine and cleared the chamber. The bore looked good, and I got
curious. I reloaded the chamber with the round that I had removed...
from the magazine, of course...and went out back to try it. The pistol fired
all seven rounds and locked the slide on empty. Perfect.

The thing is that Uncle Will died in 1929 of a heart attack at age 35. The
gun laid in an attic for 62 years in condition 1, and it worked perfectly.

Cheers!
Tuner

[owen]

Lets not forget that the 1911 was a calvary pistol. It was intended to be fired from the back of a running horse. Could a soldier have even used the sights in those conditions?

owen

[SodaPop]

Soda...is the top of your feed ramp rounded off and polished?

Yes.

I am looking at the difference between my Mil-Spec Springfield 1911 and my Colt 1991A1. I did have the the barrel throat rounded off a little and feed ramp rounded off. After I got my Colt back from my smith a few years ago I put 250 Hydra shoks threw it and it worked fine. I just don't really think I need to bother carrying hollow points, though.

I had that done within the first 1000rds or so. That was about 12,000 rounds ago and my feed ramp has horizontal lines that I can feel with my finger tips. Its always been my understanding (learned at TFL) that a 1911 will work if the barrel is throated and the feed ramp is polished.

I realize I'm looking a lot closer than most people (maybe over analyzing) but I've see it on more 1911s than any other handgun. I'm talking guns that have been shot thousands and thousands of times. There is far more wear on my Colt barrel than there is on my Sig and Beretta. I shoot just about everything threw my Colt and not everything has worked. My Sig has over 20,000rds threw it and my Beretta has close to 15,000rds. My Colt works fine if I use Wilson's Combat mags but it won't feed SWC, FPJ or HP with the Colt 7rd and 8rd Factory mags. The Wilson's mags seem to help "play the angles" better.

[BluesBear]

It'll reduce your splits, trust me.
I usually use 250mm 112,000 gr Brunswick Groove Dynamic Reactive, full urethane jacketed ball ammo against pins.
I don't seem to get many splits. ;) :D

[1911Tuner]

Soda Pop said:

I had that done within the first 1000rds or so. That was about 12,000 rounds ago and my feed ramp has horizontal lines that I can feel with my finger tips.

Okay....Tryin' to get a visual here. The lines may be tool marks,but have a look see if one lines up with a mag follower. Most smiths won't try to polish out all the tool marks if they're more than just a couple thousandths deep.

If your smith rounded the top of the feed ramp, he screwed the pooch.
The top of the barrel throat is okay...That's pretty much standard procedure
with a sharp edge there, but the top of the ramp guides the round higher up on the throat...and if that angle is lost or altered, it causes problems.

I can't figure how Hydra-Shoks could have damaged a steel frame...It just don't make sense, and even the front of the mag follower is a long shot unless it really gets rammed into the ramp hard. This is a problem more often seen on alloy-framed pistols, and even with those, it's usually the
follower that's doing the damage.

What kind of feed problems is the gun having? Round enter the chamber and stop...or does it hang up before it gets into the chamber at all?
After 10,000+ rounds, it may be a magazine spring issue. When they get
tired, sometimes the gun will do a Bolt-Over-Base feed...aka Rideover Feed.
Likewise if the top round in a full magazine nose-dives into the ramp and stops...That's most likely a magazine spring problem.

If the round hangs up before it gets into the chamber, check to see if
the bullet nose gets stuck right at the junction of the top of the ramp and the bottom of the barrel throat.

If it gets part-way in and hangs...check to see if there's a crescent-shaped
mark on the case just below the mouth. Telltale sign of stem bind.

Standin' by...

Tuner

[Brian Williams]

A good horse back rider has a fairly stable seat and a good shooter can do very well from the back of a horse.
The worst problem would be while doing a trot. While cantering or at a full gallop a good horseman is not moving up and down much. Somebody who has a great horse can do a lot while riding, Watch rodeo or any vid on quarter horses. I you ever get a chance to go to a SASS event where horses are they do some cool things



Tiny sights from the back of a horse quite possible. Wider sights while horseback definitaly doable.

[Sean Smith]

Then you need to choke up higher on the pistol. It'll reduce your splits, trust me.

Not if the grip safety doesn't work because of your technique. :neener:

[45auto]

Sean Smith:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not if the grip safety doesn't work because of your technique
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's why the grip safety shouldn't exist. :D

1911Tuner:

Interesting story. Also interesting on the tight(and right) slide/frame fit.

Take care.

[SodaPop]

What kind of feed problems is the gun having?


Like I said, I don't really shoot much other than ball ammo threw this. Last ammo time i had any malfuntions was with FPJ reloads. I tried all kinds of bullet seating depths and still couldn't get it to feed right. I've only had the GI Mil-Spec for about a month so I haven't really fed it much. If it feeds ball ammo fine then I'm not really worried about doing anymore alterations.

The lines may be tool marks,but have a look see if one lines up with a mag follower.

I see plenty of those.

[Tamara]

Not if the grip safety doesn't work because of your technique. :neener:

Mayhap the point of my post was too subtle... ;) :p



("But a memory bump looks ugly and non-traditional!"
"Hey, if I found that hanging pink fuzzy dice from my front sight would let me shoot faster and more accurately, I'd be in the checkout line at Pep Boys right now." :uhoh: :D )

[fastbolt]

Weak points of the 1911

Generally, it's the operator, would be my guess ... :neener:

[Crownvicman]

I don't like the barrel bushing. It is a pain to remove on a new or tightly fitted gun. Just my humble opinion.

[Omaha-BeenGlockin]

Weaknesses of the 1911???

For me--and the reason I no longer own any of the several examples that I've purchased over the years---

1. Single action operation----having cocked pistol on my person is just not a good thing---I don't care how many safeties.

2. Excessive weight with the standard steel models----never tried a lightweight as they seemed too fragile.


Before I catch any grief----the Glock was retired for a Steyr M9--because of the safety----the M9 has now been set aside for my new Beretta 9000s---a true double action with a safety and fairly concealable size and weight---best of all worlds.

I'm still looking for a good lightweight revolver too.

[355sigfan]

Omaha-BeenGlockin
What you carry is your buisness. But rather a gun is safe or not is up to you. With any design if you keep your finger clear of the trigger until your ready to fire you will be fine.
Pat

[Correia]

"Beretta 9000s---a true double action with a safety and fairly concealable size and weight---best of all worlds."

Yep, best of all worlds, heavy long trigger pull plus getting to switch after your first shot to a long spongy but lighter trigger pull, and the added bonus that it is really fat. :p

[Trigger]

Plunger tube? No problem...silver solder. Internal extractor...no problems, just tune correctly. Weakest point? Trigger puller usually.

[BigG]

I think the weakest point is people expecting it to be "all things to all people." It was built to win a military contract. People adapted it to other uses after it proved itself on the battlefield. Why did they adapt it? First because it was cheap, and available. The NRA sponsored the distribution of a bunch of 1911A1s for about $20 each back in the 1960s, IIRC. Now, its a monkey see, monkey do kind of thing. Everybody wants one!

[1911Tuner]

Crownvicman said:

I don't like the barrel bushing. It is a pain to remove on a new or tightly fitted gun.

Well, there ya go! The bushing ain't s'posed ta be that tight. (If ya can't
turn it without a tool, it's too tight.) Tightly fitted ain't always the best route to take. This notion that a 1911 pistol has to be capable of match accuracy in order to be a viable fighting tool comes from gun rag writers
who get a freebie once a month, methinks...

Besides, that wrench-dependent bushing can be addressed in 3 minutes with a bushing wrench and about a penny's worth of 5 micron lapping compound.
-----------------------------

dsk asked:

But then again, what sort of idiot takes a hand-fitted gun out in the boondocks then expects it to be field-serviceable?

I dunno Dana...Maybe one that hasn't really given full thought to the matter?
--------------------------



Been Glockin' said:

Excessive weight with the standard steel models

No no! One of the advantages of the steel-framed 1911 is that if
you're outta ammo, and your fight has gone to up close and personal, you can beat the hell out of him with it. Kinda like the advantage that the
Garand has over the M-16...See? It's all in how ya look at it.

Alloy frames fragile? I've got an older LW Commander that's probably seen
30,000 rounds. I put it in semi-retirement a few years back...right after
the Series 80s hit the shops
-------------------------------

This one's gettin' to be fun.:D

Be of good cheer now...Y'hear?:cool:

[Sean Smith]

Mayhap the point of my post was too subtle...

Not likely. :D

Just giving you a hard time. :evil:

As for traditional... I dunno. I don't think obese bull barrels with gain-twist rifling are exactly "traditional" either. Or 10mm caliber anything. Or electroplated finishes. Or sights that you can actually see. Or internally lightened aluminum triggers. Or lots of other fun things my 1911 has...

http://www.imagemagician.org/images/igc_76543/muzzle2.jpg

:p

[Dorrin79]

Chris - I agree completely regarding fixed barrels being more inherently accurate and by default, less prone to failure due to their simplicity.

Problem is, fixed-barrel handguns (e.g. blowback) are only available in 9x18 and smaller calibers, and usually only in smaller- framed 'mouseguns'

While many of thes are fine weapons in their own right, I prefer a .45 (or at least a 9x19) and I am not aware of any "service" pistols in those calibers that aren't locked-breech recoil-operated pistols - like the 1911.

(ok, there is the H&K P7, but it has its own set of weird quirks - not to mention a very high price tag)

Just my thoughts on the matter.

My only real complaint about the 1911 is the unneccessary grip safety - although it doesn't cause me problems, it also doesn't serve (in my opinion) a real purpose.

[BluesBear]

The Hi-Point 45 & 9mm are fixed barrel blowback pistols.

You can even get the 9mm with a compensator.

They are what all of the top shooters use aren't they? :neener: