[Monkeyleg]

I dropped my defense pistol on the bathroom floor. It landed on the beavertail of the grip safety. At first, everything with the pistol seemed to be fine. Then I checked to see if the hammer would fall if I pulled the trigger without pressing in the grip safety. The hammer fell.

The grip safety seems to me to be redundant, but I'm concerned that whatever broke inside might at some point affect something else. Should I send the pistol off to a 'smith, or just let things be?

[Old Fuff]

If this is your defensive pistol and the safety doesn't work I wouldn't let it be. If something is wrong the safety may start working too well - in other words lock up the gun. You need to call on Dr. Tuner (aka 1911 Tuner) for advise. To start look up his previous post on how to detail strip a .45 (or whatever you have). Then go from there.

[NMGlocker]

Buy a pistol without a bunch of levers and other crap to break or crap out.
Get rid of that nickle plated sissy pistol, and get yourself a Glock.
:neener:
*just kidding*

[dsk]

I assume this is a 1911-type pistol, right? I don't see how dropping it on its grip safety could possibly break the tab inside that blocks the trigger. There is nothing for the tab to impact against, as the grip safety bottoms out in the frame before the tab can contact anything.

Can I also assume this is a Kimber?

[Monkeyleg]

dsk, it is a Kimber. A 1999 vintage Pro-Carry. As I said, the hammer will drop when the trigger is pulled, even without the grip safety being deployed.

I've been PM'ing 1911 Tuner about going over this pistol for a complete reliablity check. Unfortunately, the GCA of 1968 prevents me from sending it to him.

So, I'm going to give the pistol to a local smith with a good reputation. And, as long as it's there, I'll ask that smith to look at areas that 1911Tuner advised should always be looked at: extractor, mags, feed ramp, etc.

I'd go into the pistol myself, but as 1911Tuner suggested, there are other areas where a pistol may need some work that may not be readily apparent.

Over the past 37 years I've torn apart motors and rebuilt just about everything on a car or motorcycle that could be torn apart. Then I would take said vehicle onto the freeway to check out my work. No qualms about the checks, even at 125 mph, as I was confident about my work.

But here I sit, worried about a part that's probably the size of a paperclip. No big deal, unless the pistol goes "click" instead of "bang" when it's needed to.

Some things are best left to experts.

[Old Fuff]

Monkeylegs;

You are obviously a competent mechanic. I suggest that you go to the following link:

www.gunbooks.com

and buy a copy of Jerry Kuhnhausen’s “The Colt 45 Automatic – A Shop Manual” The book is well illustrated and when you get done reading it you’ll know enough about your Kimber (or any other .45 1911) so that you won’t have this hopeless feeling. Compared to what you’re used to working on the pistol is really a very simple piece of machinery. The only thing you lack is confidence and knowledge. Between this book and Tuner you’ll soon be a different person.



I suspect that when you dropped the pistol it hit on the grip safety in a manner that may have caused a misfit between the safety and the trigger bow. If the respective parts aren’t broken repairs should be pretty simple.

[Monkeyleg]

Thanks for the replies, Old Fluff. I'm not particulary concerned about replacing the broken piece; I have absolutely no doubt that I could do that. I just figure that, as long as I'm going to address a problem, I might as well have a qualified gunsmith go over the whole thing and get it to the point where it's 100% reliable.

There's a difference between those who can follow the factory manuals and those who can get things working 100% properly. The former are those who you and I used to call "shade tree mechanics." The latter are called "artisans."

[1911Tuner]

Look on the bright side...It didn't go off.

Seriously, I've gotta defer to Dana on this one. I don't see how anything
could have gotten busted that wasn't already busted. Are you sure that
the hammer wouldn't fall before?

The grip safety lug...the finger that blocks the trigger doesn't contact
the trigger until the trigger is pulled without gripping the gun. If it hit
on the upswept rear part, the most it would have done is pivot in at
the bottom to let the trigger stirrup would pass under it...or it would have pivoted in the other direction, possibly breaking off the tabs that catch on the mainspring housing, but it still wouldn't have contacted anything that could break and keep it from blocking the trigger.

If the thumb safety crosspin had broken, it might allow the grip safety to
shift enough to let the trigger get past it and trip the sear...but that's a LONG shot.

Strip the gun down to the grip safety...It requires removing the
mainspring housing and thumb safety. The grip safety will lift out when
the thumb safety comes out. See if anything is obviously broken.

Standin' by...

[Old Fuff]

Monkeyleg:

You misunderstood my intent. I don't want to turn you into one of those instant "pistol-fixers" who all too often mess up an otherwise good gun. Taking the gun to a professional is a good idea if he is truly qualified.

The point I wanted to make is that if you read and listen you'll soon be in a position to understand what is going on inside your pistol, and to then correctly identify problems. You'll also be able to tell the real article when you talk to a 'smith, and not be taken in by a bull-shooter, of which we have too many. Personally, I wouldn't carry a weapon that I didn't understand - inside and out. Being knowledgeable doesn't mean you have to do your on work, it simply means that you understand what's going on.

[Old Fuff]

Forgot to mention ......

If your gun has an ambi manual safety with a two piece keyed shaft it could have twisted when you dropped the gun which would allow the grip safety to be out of place. Have this possibility checked first.

[sgt127]

Silly question maybe...but...is the grip safety jammed in the down position or does it still move freely?

[Hal]

Tuner-
Kimbers must come pre-busted or something. The local Springfield dealer told me he didn't particularly care for Kimbers because you could squeeze the grip safety hard enough to "break" it. Tried it myself and darned if he wasn't right.:cuss:
*shrug* unlike Dicks', mine's a range queen (full size target model) that won't ever see carry so I've just been putting off getting it fixed.

[Big Daddy]

If this is a Series II Kimber the firing pin safety is integrated somehow with the grip safety. I have never owned one or looked at one apart to know if they could be related. This wouldn't explaine the hammer actually dropping, but if the grip safety arm bears on a secondary piece not found in a series 70 type gun then it is plausible that this secondary piece could be what allowed force to be transferred to the grip safety arm breaking or bending it. Let us know what ends up being the problem.

[Monkeyleg]

It's not a Series II, just a plain 1999 Kimber Pro Carry.

Here's what happened after I dropped it. I removed the loaded mag, then tried to click off the thumb safety. It wouldn't budge. With the gun pointed in a safe direction, I tried working the slide, and the hammer fell to the half-cock position. Even though it was pointed in a safe direction, the hammer falling startled me, since there was a round in the chamber.

Then I was able to click off the thumb safety and check to see if the hammer would fall with the grip safety not depressed. I also tried pulling the trigger with the thumb safety engaged, but thankfully nothing happened with that.

To be honest, I don't know if I ever checked the grip safety on this pistol to see if it worked. I know I have on others. It's always moved freely, and still does now.

As I said before, I've been wanting to take this in for a reliability tuneup for quite some time. Ideally, sending it to 1911Tuner would be the way to go, but as I said, the GCA of 68 prohibits that. There's a gunsmith here who's been around forever and who comes well-recommended. I'll take it to him tomorrow, and let everyone know what the diagnosis is.

[Clean97GTI]

could you disassmble the gun (to make it non-functional) and then send it to 1911Tuner? Perhaps in two different shipments?

[Monkeyleg]

Clean97GTI, the fed's regard the receiver on any gun as a gun unto itself. Thus the receiver has to be shipped to someone with an FFL. Prior to 1968 you could mail a gun to anyone, anywhere.

[1911Tuner]

Monkeyleg said:

Here's what happened after I dropped it. I removed the loaded mag, then tried to click off the thumb safety. It wouldn't budge. With the gun pointed in a safe direction, I tried working the slide, and the hammer fell to the half-cock position. Even though it was pointed in a safe direction, the hammer falling startled me, since there was a round in the chamber.

Whoa Nellie! Sounds like you've got a broken hammer hook or two, or
maybe a chipped and/or broken sear nose. I don't think the grip safety took the brunt of the fall.

You'll need to detail strip the gun down to the sear and disconnector in order to see exactly what's damaged. If you need a walk-through on the
disassembly, check the thread or we can go to the phones if you'd be more
comfortable with that. The pre-Series 2 Kimbers don't have any added
surprises with a firing pin block. Basic 1911-A1 strip.

Standin' by...

Tuner

[Dale Taylor]

I like what dsk said except for dissing Kimber. Ive shot several thousand rounds through my Series 1 SS Compact but never dropped it. It is the best gun I have ever owned, Tunner(JT) has a wealth of knowledge about 1911's. Listen to him. Try to strip it and fix it your self. You will swell with accomplishment. Dale Taylor

[Monkeyleg]

Thanks again for the responses. Ordinarily I'd go ahead and tear it apart myself. It's not something I'm afraid of, and would enjoy doing so. But there's the issue of the "reliability tuneup" that I mentioned before. Also, I'm working seven days a week on a gun-related website, and haven't had any time for myself in months. And it's going to be like that for months further. So, at this point, I'm willing to pay a gunsmith to do the work.

Actually, I just realized that the last time I went shooting was probably October or November. :(

[Monkeyleg]

OK, time for an update. The 'smith had the gun for about two to three weeks while awaiting parts and doing his first-come-first-served schedule, at which time I called and asked him to put night sights on it as well. So, it was another week. Today was the first chance I've had to even take an hour at the range in months, so off I went to test fire the pistol.

First, what the gunsmith did. The thumb safety was indeed broken on the shaft, and he replaced it with a factory safety, per my instructions. The mainspring housing was also broken, something I hadn't noticed. I'd also asked him to do a reliability tuneup on it. He replaced the recoil spring with one that was about two pounds heavier (he said the original was weak). He also got a new extractor and tuned and polished it. And, of course, added the night sights.

I put 200 rounds of ammo--a mix of my reloads, factory ball ammo, and Federal HydraShoks--through it, rapid-fire. (Well, as rapid as I can fire). Not a single hiccup or even a hint of one. I could definitely feel the difference in the cycling with the new spring.

I'll keep trying for a misfeed, but I suspect the pistol is now correct.

That's the good news.

The bad news is that the new MIM safety broke off about halfway down the lever. Time to call Wilson for a new one. I could see the air cavity in the metal.

I have three Kimbers, and MIM has never been an issue until now. I could probably call Kimber for a replacement and odds are that it would be fine.

Oh, and the night sights are great.

[Old Fuff]

I am delighted to know that all of these parts break at non-critical times. I hope your luck holds ...

[BluesBear]

MiM
Breaks in your gun,
Not in your hand!


:neener:


(with appoligies to M&Ms)

[Monkeyleg]

Old Fluff, I know you mean the best when you say what you do. But your comment raises a larger question: how can any of us ever be assured that the protective stuff we have--guns, fire extinguishers, brakes, airbags, smoke alarms, baseball bats, burglar alarms, home difubrulators, etc--won't break down when we really need them?

For example: today I ran the pistol through 200 rounds, and had no problems other than the aforementioned broken thumb safety. Let's say the safety didn't break at all for the next 20,000 rounds. Or that I had no other problems.

What if the gear, whatever it is, decides to break down when it's most needed? How do you prevent against that? Obviously, getting rid of stuff like breakage-prone MIM parts is one way. But, in the end, it probably just boils down to Bad Mojo.

I have a friend who did a couple of tours in VietNam. He took diligent care of his M16, and it never failed him, until he was on point, came into a clearing and faced two North Vietnamese soldiers. He shouldered the rifle, pulled the trigger and...nothing. He often tells me that he would have been better off with a camera at that point to capture the look on the VC's faces. His only saving grace was the the VC knew he had a platoon behind him and didn't want to make noise.

Ansel Adams, a legend in photography and one of my heroes, used to carry in the trunk of his car a complete set of replacement parts, including an entire rear end assembly--differential, axles, bearings, hubs, etc. He never had to replace the entire rear end on his car when out photographing the desert, but he was ready.

I guess you just never know. Maybe that's why so many people on THR talk about having back-up guns.

Bluesbear, that is too funny. :D

[Old Fuff]

Monkeyleg:

I admit that I’m getting a little jaded with manufacturers that put cost savings for themselves ahead of serious concern for your neck and safety. What set me off was your first post where you referred to your arm as a “defensive” pistol – or in other words a weapon. Now from my perspective any firearm or other weapon I use to protect myself should be “the best and most reliable that’s available.” I have an older S&W model 10 Military & Police revolver that cost $150.00, and is much more likely to go “bang!” if I need it then many of the .45’s on the market that cost four time that or greater. So it isn’t necessarily the most expensive, or the most fancy that counts, it’s the one where the most basic things of importance have been taken care of first.

This means starting with components that are made from the best possible materials for the particular application, not ones that were made with cost savings in mind. It’s true that the most “economical” parts may work fine, but Murphy’s Law implies that the cheaper kind are more likely too fail, and fail at the wrong time. I think that Mr. Murphy was undoubtedly a very wise gentleman, and I try to follow his observations.

John Browning’s big .45 was a landmark in handgun development and design, but it was never intended to be made with some of the parts and materials that are being used now. Prior to the last two decades or so it had an impeccable, and well deserved reputation for reliability. Today some have sullied that reputation to make themselves a few extra bucks, and in the process endangered some of their customers.

You have wisely invested in having your pistol “tuned” for greater reliability, and apparently it is working fine – at least for the moment. But all of this expense and trouble is worthless if a sub-standard part breaks at the wrong time. Your recent experiences should have made this clear.

If your pistol belonged to me I would replace the “questionable” parts with ones that were made from machined forgings or tool-steel bar stock. The result would not guarantee there would never be a failure, but it would stack the odds much more in my favor.

I sincerely hope that you will never have to use your pistol to defend yourself or others. But if that should happen I also hope that it isn’t comprised of what’s apparently inside of it now. Mr. Murphy does too.


>> Ansel Adams, a legend in photography and one of my heroes << Mine also.

[Monkeyleg]

Old Fluff, all of your points are well taken. In fact, some represent why I kept a revolver at my bedside for decades: I just didn't trust those new-fangled semiautos. ;) Fact is, I still keep a loaded revolver close by as well.

This Kimber has been through more "torture tests" than any other handgun or rifle I've owned: rapid fire, temps over 100 degrees to nearly zero degrees, and whatever ammo was available or whatever I happened to have loaded.

I have to think--and perhaps 1911Tuner or others more knowledgeable would either agree or correct me--that an MIM part with an air pocket is going to fail sooner or later, and more likely sooner. Not always in the first couple of hundred rounds, but certainly within several thousand.

In the end, I'm going to do some serious shopping for replacement parts on this pistol. Trouble is, even the "Bullet Proof" parts advertised by certain reputable names don't always work. A couple of years ago, while taking a pretty extensive self-defense course, a "Bullet Proof" slide stop just didn't work. I got a call into Kimber that day, got the slide stop FedEx'd to me next day, and things went perfect.

It was a couple of threads on THR that got me to checking reliability of my primary HD gun, and I'm glad I read those threads. They got me off my butt and on to getting the pistol checked out and, I hope, properly adjusted.

But, still, it's a mechanical device. If I had to depend upon a weapon that would be absolutely 100% reliable, I'd choose the Louisville Slugger: it gives a licking, and keeps on ticking.

[sm]

I hate to hear things breaking, I'm glad it is fixed and " so far so good".

Old Fuff ( as usual) stated a pet peeve of mine as well. We have firearms and other products we really need to be dependable. We pay a LOT of money for these things and still we have to do the beta testing and fix 'em right.

Tamara has a great comment about how all new guns should be considered broken until inspections proves otherwise. Sad ain't it? Downright dangerous is what it is.

I had many students on a budget that chose a used police trade-in model 10 as first CCW gun. I still do not regret my suggestions, I still suggest this thinking...the OLD guns.

Now some students gave them flack and all...

I really think folks "taught" the mfgs how much "defect out of the box" we would accept. Especially if it had gadgets and looked pretty.

If firearm mfgs were swamped with correpondence as establishments are that do not allow CCW in restaurants, grocery stores ...Maybe, just maybe.

I'm a realist not a idealist...spending monies on something that may save a life is serious. Same as the ability to CCW in normal daily routines like going out to eat and buying groceries.

Gimme about 10 yrs , I ought to be really opinionated on matters. ;)

[BluesBear]

Gimme about 10 yrs , I ought to be really opinionated on matters. Yeah sm, you be even more opinionated by then all right. But at least your opinions will be based on facts, truths and experience.

We need more Old Fuffs, 1911 Tuners, Mike Irwins, Paxs, Jim Marchs, Wil Terrys, M58s, WildAlaskas, Travis McGees, P95Carrys and such, just to name a few. People who act as the voices of logic and reason. People who actually know of what they speak.

Perhaps the true legacy of The High Road will be that the torches of knowledge were passed along from here.

[Tamara]

Tamara has a great comment about how all new guns should be considered broken until inspections proves otherwise. Sad ain't it? Downright dangerous is what it is.

Don't misinterpret what I mean by that.

All new guns. All used guns. All cheapo new plastic Kel-Tecs. All hand-built prewar Colts. All of them should be considered broken until verified otherwise.

There's a big ol' thread stickied at the top of the revolver forum explaining in painstaking detail how to check out any revolver you buy. It recommends to use this checkout on new guns and used ones, modern ones and classics. Yet one forum away we have folks in stunned amazement that some cat at Sprimbolt milled their breechface wrong or neglected to include a side order of "tension" with the extractor.


Old Fuff,

I admit that I’m getting a little jaded with manufacturers that put cost savings for themselves ahead of serious concern for your neck and safety.

There are plenty of models that have the materials and construction you want. They also happen to start somewhere around the $900 price point.

To want a gun made entirely out of machined tool steel yet priced to compete with injection-molded wunderguns is a little unrealistic, nicht wahr?

The trick is finding out where on the design you can shave materials costs without compromising reliability, and therefore allow your 90+ year old design to remain priced semicompetetively with guns designed to make use of manufacturing methods that didn't even exist fifty years ago.

[1911Tuner]

This thread is gettin' interesting, and all parties have made good points.

Old Fuff has made a very good point, and because I've seen many of the
guns that he refers to, I have to agree that they were built in a different
time, in a galaxy far, far away.

Tamara has also made a very good and completely valid point in saying
that all guns should be considered broken until fixed...or rather verified
as otherwise.

While I have a lot of faith in the pistols produced at a time when mass
production meant something very different than it does today, I am
still gonna check it out before I'll trust to blind faith if the gun may have
to stand between me and what I often refer to as: "A trip down the
Highway of no Return."

I have faith in those pistols because they weren't built with "A Penny
Saved is a Penny Earned" mentality...but I still check'em out. I know that they didn't use "Near Steel" or stuff that is claimed to be: "Just as Good"
or "95% as Dense". Whenever I hear somebody insist that something is
"Just as Good...I get suspicious...because while it may very well be a fact...it's generally NOT just as good. Norinco 1911s are the exception.:p

When MY old skinny is potentially on the line, I'm gonna check it out.
I'm gonna tweak it to MY satisfaction. I'm gonna test-fire it until MY
standard for reliability is satisfied. I don't care who built the gun or what their credentials are. This is also why I line my own brakes instead of going with the "$49.95 Special" that they're running at the local muffler franchise. Those folks may well do a good job, but they're not gonna take the time and give attention to detail that I will. They can't. There isn't time if they intend to turn a profit, and turning a profit is why they're there.

I'd also like to make my own point here...and all may accept it or not.

There is more to reliability than feeding, firing, extracting, ejecting, and returning to battery with each trigger pull. That's usually the easy part.
The gun not breaking is at least as important as the other facet. I have
over a dozen recently-manufactured 1911-pattern pistols. They all run
so reliably that they're boring, but if I had to grab one and run..and that pistol had to be reliable under all conditions for months on end, I would
pick up the Norinco without hesitation. This is assuming that I couldn't
get to my GI Rands or Colts...and even then, it would be a coin-toss.

Cheers all!

Tuner

[Old Fuff]

Tamara:


>> To want a gun made entirely out of machined tool steel yet priced to compete with injection-molded wunderguns is a little unrealistic, nicht wahr? <<

I didn't say that. I did point out that, " --it isn’t necessarily the most expensive, or the most fancy that counts, it’s the one where the most basic things of importance have been taken care of first." I also said, "This means starting with components that are made from the best possible materials for the particular application, not ones that were made with cost savings in mind." The mostly European "injection-molded wunderguns" did exactly that by starting with a clean piece of paper and designing a product that used these technologies to make components where the methods were appropriate for the application. They did not try to do the same with the Colt design for purposes of cutting costs without regard for what effect it might have on long or short term dependability.

>> The trick is finding out where on the design you can shave materials costs without compromising reliability, and therefore allow your 90+ year old design to remain priced semicompetetively with guns designed to make use of manufacturing methods that didn't even exist fifty years ago. <<

That may be "the trick," but numerous posts on this forum seem to indicate that all too often it isn't working. In the meantime the customer is supposed to stake their neck on the product while the company experiments with alternative technologies.

>> There are plenty of models that have the materials and construction you want. They also happen to start somewhere around the $900 price point. <<

Maybe ... Some of them don't seem to work either. (Here I am referring to the old Browning/Colt, not later pistols). It may be that someone will have to pay $1,000.00 or more to buy a new (basic) Government Model style gun that works as it should and stands up reliably over the long run. But if this is the case we should admit it, and recommend that buyers that can't afford such prices consider an entirely different gun, rather then advise them to buy the "old .45" for half the money knowing full well that it probably won't be dependable.

My beef is that compromising reliability and dependability in a particular handgun that's used as a personal weapon can under the worst of circumstances endanger lives. This doesn't mean that potential buyers don’t have other choices though.

[Old Fuff]

Monkeyleg:

>> I have to think--and perhaps 1911Tuner or others more knowledgeable would either agree or correct me--that an MIM part with an air pocket is going to fail sooner or later, and more likely sooner. Not always in the first couple of hundred rounds, but certainly within several thousand. <<

MIM, as well as other parts fail (if and when they do) for different reasons. Metal fatigue, stress or wear may be the cause, or a sudden impact may start a crack or complete break. Investment castings and MIM parts may have unseen voids or seams. Components may, or may not be properly heat treated if heat treating is called for. None of this is predictable in most cases, but a "use over time" record sometimes gives on an indication. MIM parts are relatively new, and in firearms they haven't established a track record. I personally don't want anything I carry as a weapon to be part of someone's research & development program - especially if it's more driven by cost savings rather then greater quality. You of course can make your own choices.

>> Trouble is, even the "Bullet Proof" parts advertised by certain reputable names don't always work. A couple of years ago, while taking a pretty extensive self-defense course, a "Bullet Proof" slide stop just didn't work. <<

This may have had more too do with fitting rather then material. But anyway, going to "best quality parts" isn't ever a sure solution, but they usually do increase the odds in your favor. This is the best you can ask for in any mechanical devise.

[Old Fuff]

Tuner:

>> -- but if I had to grab one and run..and that pistol had to be reliable under all conditions for months on end, I would pick up the Norinco without hesitation. This is assuming that I couldn't get to my GI Rands or Colts...and even then, it would be a coin-toss. <<

I agree. But because of political reason the Norinco isn't available (or at least very much so) and USGI Remington-Rands and/or Colt 1911-A1's (older commercial or USGI guns) are priced out of sight as collectables. Both you and I are well set, but for others these guns are not viable options.

[1911Tuner]

The observation:

while taking a pretty extensive self-defense course, a "Bullet Proof" slide stop just didn't work.
_________________

The response:

This may have had more too do with fitting rather then material. But anyway, going to "best quality parts" isn't ever a sure solution, but they usually do increase the odds in your favor. This is the best you can ask for in any mechanical devise.
_____________________

Bingo!

Wilson Bulletproof slidestops have a built-in "Anti-Premature Slidelock" ridge on the butt-end. I have yet to see one that DOESN'T
need a little tweak to allow the slide to lock AND prevent premature
engagement. It's usually a simple matter of stoning the edge of the ridge,
but a few require a little light relieving in the slot to allow them to move
up on the slide...which is usually just a matter of using a fine triangular file
to break the sharp edges and let it "funnel" into place.

Watchin'.....

Tuner

[1911Tuner]

Fuff said:

I agree. But because of political reason the Norinco isn't available (or at least very much so)

High time we voted the rascals out! Give us back our Norincos, you
scallywags!

[sm]

Don't misinterpret what I mean by that.
All new guns. All used guns. All cheapo new plastic Kel-Tecs. All hand-built prewar Colts. All of them should be considered broken until verified otherwise.

Tamara, first I have too much respect for you, and I really do appreciate what you share with us all. Thanks!

I did not misinterpret what you meant by "that quote" - I agree 100%.

In the business I grew up in /participated in for some 35 yrs...I learned this early on. Though not firearms, the caveat was real. Even back in the older days when craftspersons were really artisians, the material were of better quality, and the inspections ( QC) were better. WE knew to check "hands on" and to verify for ourselves before ever letting it be put in a showcase or the customers care.

Even we folks that did "craftwork" would inspect and critique each others' work. Another set of eyes often sees what the maker's did not.

I was then and still am one that "educated" my customers. If a customer had a price range, I showed them the best quality for the money. I showed then some items/services that were more than the original price range as well. NOT to make more money , honest, what I wanted them to see and it was their choice to make...Quality of materials and workmanship. I showed the differences, explained them, compared them side to side. If "they" chose the better quality, because "they" knew and felt the difference of monies - well I was honest.

I also showed them that sometimes one "pays for a name" and not quality. Yes If they "insisted" I would allow them to pay too much to poorer quality...I didn't like it....I much preferred for them to get more quality for the money.

Old school and honest...that is me.

There is hardly anything that some man cannot make cheaper and sell for less - those who buy on price alone are this man's prey. John Ruskin

[1911Tuner]

sm...We're cursed, mah fren.

Average shooter looks at the pistol in the showcase and thinks: What
a SWEEEET piece of ordnance!

Toolmaker looks at it like this::scrutiny:

Average man plunks down his long green and takes that puppy home and
shows it off at every opportunity.

Toolmaker buys it with trepidation...take it home and strips it down to
the bare frame...looks at the small parts...breaks out the calipers and dial indicator and thinks:

"What in the name of Popeye the Sailor kinda metalwork is THIS???"

*sigh*

Once upon a time..in a galaxy far, far away.........

Cheers...
Tuner

[Tamara]

I agree. But because of political reason the Norinco isn't available (or at least very much so)

How much does a machinist in Inner Mongolia Plant #2 get paid, versus a machinist in Yonkers, New York? (Especially if the Chinese machinist is a political prisoner or a private in the People's Liberation Army?) Regarding manufacturing costs, you're comparing apples and wombats.

and USGI Remington-Rands and/or Colt 1911-A1's (older commercial or USGI guns) are priced out of sight as collectables. Both you and I are well set, but for others these guns are not viable options.

Again, how much did Rosie The Riveter get paid in 1943, vis a vis a skilled machinist in 2002, who thinks that his salary for running a mill should cover payments on a Camaro, an SUV, a timeshare in Destin, a Dish Network hookup, and a college education for his three kids?

Manufacturing costs, like all other costs, have shot up.

It may be that someone will have to pay $1,000.00 or more to buy a new (basic) Government Model style gun that works as it should and stands up reliably over the long run. But if this is the case we should admit it, and recommend that buyers that can't afford such prices consider an entirely different gun, rather then advise them to buy the "old .45" for half the money knowing full well that it probably won't be dependable.

Damn skippy. I've been saying for years that if you want a 100% reliable gun for defense, right out of the box, for ~$500, then here's a Glock, XD, or used SIG or Beretta. If you want what I consider to be the ne plus ultra of one-hand firearms, be prepared to pay ~$1000+ for a 1911 pattern.

Any 1911 below that price point deserves a careful checkout and a thorough wringing out before being trusted for defense. :scrutiny:

I personally don't want anything I carry as a weapon to be part of someone's research & development program - especially if it's more driven by cost savings rather then greater quality.

Talk to any S&W engineer and they'll tell you some interesting stuff: "MIM parts, once the bugs were ironed out, resulted in hammers and triggers that were uniformly better fit from the factory than the milled parts they replaced," and "The plastic disconnector in the semiautos is not only cheaper, but due to the lubricity of the material used, holds up better in extended wear tests than the steel part it replaced." The right materials, done right, for the right task is no sin. I'll take a good MIM or investment cast part over an indifferently heat-treated milled one any day of the week and twice on Sundays. The key words, of course, are "good" and "right task". :uhoh:

[Monkeyleg]

I cannot believe that this little discussion has gone so far. What's more, I am in absolute shock that Tamara would defend MIM parts.

I'm visualizing the scene in "Goodfellas" where Tommy kills Spider for not delivering his drinks on time, after being goaded by DeNiro's "what's this world coming to?" remarks.

Ok, this is it: three Kimbers over a period of six years. First failure is on the new safety.

What does it mean? I don't know. I'm not 1911Tuner, nor do I have the expertise in 1911's that others here do.

One thing 1911Tuner and I have in common is that, when we buy something, we take it apart immediately. Must have something to do with our upbringing. I want to know how it works.

I took that so far as to tear apart my first and only Jag XKE into tiny little pieces, then welded them all back together again, but in better condition.

I will still maintain that a problem part--MIM, forged, or held together by Crazy Glue--is going to fail sooner rather than later. It's just the nature of the beast. You can't stress the same area time after time after time, and then witness a failing after the 20,000th time. The odds are simply against it happening.

Not here defending MIM, just looking for educated replies.

[Tamara]

What's more, I am in absolute shock that Tamara would defend MIM parts.

I ain't so much "defending" them as pointing out that there are good parts and bad parts and MIM parts and non-MIM parts and that all the subsets don't necessarily intersect where you'd think they would.

Ask Tuner how many busted Colt MIM disconnectors he's seen.

Ask me why the last 1911 I had built got an Ed Brown disconnector, even though I think a good MIM one probably would've been just as good. Probably...

(And, for that matter, why was the machined steel disconnector that was already in the gun worn to a nubbin in a gun that was otherwise still fairly tight?)

There's more than two axes on this graph, that's all I'm sayin'. :)

[BigG]

Damn skippy. I've been saying for years that if you want a 100% reliable gun for defense, right out of the box, for ~$500, then here's a Glock, XD, or used SIG or Beretta. If you want what I consider to be the ne plus ultra of one-hand firearms, be prepared to pay ~$1000+ for a 1911 pattern.

Times have changed and so have prices. I heartily agree with the above.

I buy gently used Colts for less but I know what I'm looking at. (I think) :o

[Old Fuff]

Tamara:

>> How much does a machinist in Inner Mongolia Plant #2 get paid, versus a machinist in Yonkers, New York? (Especially if the Chinese machinist is a political prisoner or a private in the People's Liberation Army?) Regarding manufacturing costs, you're comparing apples and wombats. <<

No I’m not. I’m well aware of production costs in the United States vs. elsewhere (been there, done that) and I certainly don’t advocate the Chinese Communists (or any Communists) way of doing anything. What I pointed out was that as a solution to the availability of a lower cost but quality handgun the Norinco was a moot point because it was for all practical purposes – other then a few used guns - not available.

>> Again, how much did Rosie The Riveter get paid in 1943, vis a vis a skilled machinist in 2002, who thinks that his salary for running a mill should cover payments on a Camaro, an SUV, a timeshare in Destin, a Dish Network hookup, and a college education for his three kids? Manufacturing costs, like all other costs, have shot up. <<

Actually “Rosie” was paid scale for that time. But again you missed my point. Certainly manufacturing/labor costs have gone up. And inflation has devalued the dollar over time. During the late 1940’s you could (and I did) buy a military surplus, unissued .45 for $20.00 and less. Those days are gone forever – I think. However the high valuation placed on these and similar commercial .45 pistols is usually based on their status as collectables, and not users. As such their original manufacturing cost doesn’t matter. What does, is the reality that most people can’t go out and buy one for a user. Tuner and I are “set” in that we’re members of an earlier generation that was fortunate enough to have been able to purchase these fine guns when they were affordable. For us that’s nice, but it does absolutely nothing to address the problems facing today’s buyers – unless of course they’re wealthy.

>> Damn skippy. I've been saying for years that if you want a 100% reliable gun for defense, right out of the box, for ~$500, then here's a Glock, XD, or used SIG or Beretta. If you want what I consider to be the ne plus ultra of one-hand firearms, be prepared to pay ~$1000+ for a 1911 pattern. <<

Funny, but that’s what I thought I said too.

>> Talk to any S&W engineer and they'll tell you some interesting stuff: "MIM parts, once the bugs were ironed out, resulted in hammers and triggers that were uniformly better fit from the factory than the milled parts they replaced," and "The plastic disconnector in the semiautos is not only cheaper, but due to the lubricity of the material used, holds up better in extended wear tests than the steel part it replaced." The right materials, done right, for the right task is no sin. I'll take a good MIM or investment cast part over an indifferently heat-treated milled one any day of the week and twice on Sundays. <<

I’ve been talking to people inside and outside of the industry for over a half-century, and much more so during the last 30 years. This is how it works in the real world.

It used to be that the major manufacturers made everything that went into a gun in their own plant. That included such small parts as screws, pins, springs, stocks and even magazines. This gave them pretty good control over what did or didn’t go into their products. Today these manufacturers buy more parts from vendors then they make themselves. Some of the smaller ones depend on outside sources for everything, and only finish and assemble that which someone else fabricated.

In the constant drive to reduce costs they may play one supplier off against another. Vendor “A” is making (whatever) parts for such-and-such a price. But a potential vendor “B” offers to make the same things for less. So the gun company goes back to Vendor “A” to see if they want to match the new price. Of course they do! Nobody wants to lose business. So they match or beat vendor “B’s” proposed price or lose the business. However don’t bet that the parts the company gets will be will be exactly the same. When one is cost-cutting something has to give or eventually the vendor making the part(s) will go out of business.

Now comes vendor “C” who says they have a new technology and can make the parts for less money then vendors “A” and “B” and the quality will be even better. Maybe, and then again maybe not. And if there are problems they may not be discovered until some time has passed. However the gun buyer, who has little or no knowledge about what’s going on may be staking his or her neck on what amounts to the manufacturer’s experimenting and learning curve.

I have no objection when a manufacturer starts from scratch and designed a new gun that utilizes current technologies. Some European companies and Sturm-Ruger are excellent examples of manufacturers that have done that, and their guns function reliably for the most part and component failures are minimal.

The trouble starts when a maker of an old design tries to keep the price competitive by using methods that aren’t necessarily the best in the particular application because they represent a cost savings. It gets worse if they try to manipulate their suppliers to improve their own profit and loss statements.

>> The key words, of course, are "good" and "right task". <<

Absolutely! So what do you do if the answer is, “often not?”

[1911Tuner]

Yew rang?:cool:

Tamara said:

Ask Tuner how many busted Colt MIM disconnectors he's seen.

Nary a one. Never seen a Colt MIM sear fail either...and I've done my
level best to destroy a pair of 1911-A1s with MIM sears and disconnects.

I've seen one Colt MIM sear with a light chip on the backside of the primary angle It didn't fail, and it didn't cause a function problem with the gun. It belonged to a friend who brought it to me for a detail-strip cleaning and inspection...his 12 month, 12,000 round checkup. No way to know how long it had been chipped.

Apparently, whoever is supplying Colt with MIM parts has a handle on the process. Kimber should start using the same vendor. Their rep is at stake.

Cheers all!

Tuner

[BigG]

The days of the hand-burnished whatsis are over. Unless you are willing to pay the freight.

[Tamara]

Actually “Rosie” was paid scale for that time.

My point with that was that labor costs have not raised in lockstep with inflation, but much faster than it.

A machinist back in the day was happy to get enough cash to pay for rent on his apartment in a rowhouse, food, streetcar fare to and from the plant, and maybe a trip for the wife and kids to the Jersey Shore one weekend a summer.

Nowadays, if his buddy has a better FishFinder or Garmin GPS on his bass boat, he's underpaid. Our consumer culture has driven the price of labor-intensive goods through the ceiling, and sadly, a good 1911 is a labor-intensive item.

That Being Saidtm, I've handled plenty of good products from latter day Sprimbolt guns that work just fine; I just tend to scrutinize them a little heavier before giving them a spot in a holster. That, and I carry a backup gun, whether my primary was made entirely out of cost-cutting materials or whittled out of meteoric nickel-iron by JMB hisownbadself. ;)

[Old Fuff]

Tamara:

I don’t think anyone would argue your point about the cost-of-labor differences between say 1954 and now – especially if they’d been buying guns at the time. And the more labor intensive the product the higher the price will be. This is clearly a fact of life for manufacturers, dealers, and retail buyers.

And yes, your practice of carrying a back-up is a good one. Do so when and if you can.

That said, I would hope that both your primary and back-up guns are picked on the basis of reliability and quality. Anything less under the worst of circumstances could result in something catastrophic. Here again, we consult Mr. Murphy’s well known law.

This thread started with a report from “Monkeyleg” explaining that he’d dropped his “defensive” pistol and thereafter things didn’t work as they should. It was later determined that both the mainspring housing and manual safeties were damaged or broken. They were replaced, but the new safety – purchased from a well-known maker – also broke shortly after being installed for no apparent reason.

As I pointed out in previous posts, manufacturers are increasingly being driven by cost considerations and it is clear that in seeking solutions they have employed materials and technologies in some older designs where they may not be appropriate. The result has been different degrees of unreliability and/or component failures. On the other hand they have used the same materials and methods in other guns that were specifically designed from scratch with these technologies and applications in mind, and these have generally not exhibited the problems associated with “current” Colt clones.

Given the realities of today’s production costs I would suggest that a wise and informed person might conclude that if they are going to carry some version of “Ol, Slabsides” they’d better be prepared to spend a fair amount of money. If this is out of the question they should consider a different make and model that can take advantage of the modern way of building things without making any serious sacrifices where it matters.

Hopefully you and others will find these suggestions to be both sensible and viable. There is certainly a place for pistols of the 1911 variety with unproven parts when they aren’t used as weapons. No one will suffer injury or death if a part busts at the shooting range, and immediate replacement probably won’t be an issue. Then too, such guns can be upgraded by substituting new, higher quality parts for lesser ones’ that are critical.

Those who “work behind the counter” are well aware of some customers who will literally spend thousands of dollars to buy the latest competition arm that will insure they’ll win the next match or tournament, but seek less expensive choices for their personal protection. I think though, that the members of this forum are both better informed and more intelligent then the run-of the-mill who darken gun shop doors.

A good solution isn’t one … unless it works.

[1911Tuner]

Excellent thread and good points made by all.

May I offer something?

If the manufacturers of the 1911s and clones would but OFFER a pistol
that is made of all "The Right Stuff", it's a distinct probability that the
folks who are aware of the difference would buy the guns in large enough
numbers to keep the line alive. This MIM/Investment Cast issue has been
batted around for long enough that it's fairly common knowledge. The
price, of course, would reflect the cost of production, and the guns could be
offered in Base and Loaded models...for those to whom such things matter.

I mean real steel for all the parts that are now MIM-ed or Cast...right down to the thumb safety and mainspring housing. I'd pay 1200 dollars for such a gun that is built with modern steels and heat-treatment technology.

At this point, I'd be more likely to pay a Loaded Springfield price for a Norinco than I would be to pay a current Norinco price for a Loaded Springfield...and I ain't chitten, kitten. :p

Cheers all!

Tuner

[sm]

Yes a very good thread indeed.
I appreciate the input and views of all.

Tamara phrased it "consumer culture", and I agree.
I say "Folks teach people how to treat them".

WE [society] taught the mfgs we would pay X dollars for X quality to satisfy a "want" or a "need". When we didn't balk, question, or gripe...well what is to keep the mfg from going a bit further. As Old Fuff pointed out with vendors and getting a market share.

I dealt with "stock" or raw materials. Castings made up a large bit of the smaller parts. Now castings and the processes did improve - centrifuge stuff depended on the alloys and the "force". Vaccum was another process used. Soem companies started cutting corners with alloys and I raised cain and quit buying from them.

Then a new company spent big money and used newer technology. I cautioned the CEO to NOT skimp on the alloys.
I told him flat out " If you use quality alloys, and quality control, even if the product costs a bit more - I will buy it".

He used quality alloys, he had QC, he had Service to get to folks like me [ Fed Ex kept trucks and employees on site] And yes he was a tad more expensive.

He blew the competitions away. His business skyrocketed. Fed Ex had a plane held back for his goods. He invested in more equipment...He never once ever considered using poorer alloys, or letting QC slide. Tough at first , boy did it pay off very quickly.

All anyone of us wants is to pay a fair price for a quaity product and / or Service. Get what we pay for.

I have said and assisted to many times...
You only have $250 or so For a handgun...get a used police trade-in older S&W model 10. Heck If the action and timing is better on the one with less blueing...buy it. Action is more important than bluing.

Heck told one lady the price was too good to pass up on a GLock 26 for CCW for her. Parting out on a Divorce...hey they darn sure would not hesitant to buy from you if the tables turned. She bought it.

We Just need to keep educated as to what is going on, pass it on, and let the mfgs know what we - or will not accept for the dollars spent.

[Monkeyleg]

SM and others: all very valid points. I paid $600 for this pistol five years ago. How much more would it have cost to have steel parts where they're needed? I don't know.

What I do know is that people are driven toward the consumer culture that Tamara mentioned, and that is something that manufacturers respond to. I can ride my scoot for an hour or two, and see $350,000+ houses on literally acres of grass. And the owner is cutting the grass with a Murray riding mower. The pistons are probably old Campbell's soup cans, and the rings are cast-off Madonna wrist bracelets. Doesn't matter: it will run, at least for a couple of years.

I bought this pistol five years ago, and it's been reliable, but... compared to my 1980 vintage S&W 586, there's just no comparison.

All this isn't just limited to 1911's, or guns in general. For decades I did all of the photography for Allen Edmonds shoes, shoes that begin at $250 a pair. Once they got their brand identity established, the marketing manager told my sales rep point blank: we don't need Dick's quality of photography anymore.

I'm hoping that 1911Tuner will revisit this thread and suggest other MIM parts that should be replaced. In the meantime, if I have to use the pistol in self defense, I hope the bad guy is using a Murray 1911.