I'm Giving Up On 1911s


PDA






MagnumDweeb
February 11, 2014, 11:49 AM
I tried so very hard to become a 1911 fiend. But I'm giving up on them. Last night did it for me. A friend of mine bought one of the latest Sig 1911s (a nearby shop had a deal on them) and we met up after work to try it out. I hadn't brought my problem child Spartan (I have two, one works great, the other needs work and time I haven't been able to bring myself to put into it), instead I only brought my S&W 15-3 and Rossi 462.

My friend supposedly oiled the gun and everything so it was wet. I could feel a film of oil on the gun when I picked it up. We got two magazines into it and then the headaches started. A stove pipe, easy to clear, a few shots, then a a lock back there was an empty mag but there were rounds left. Then jam, then jam, a couple shots, then jam.

Out of a hundred rounds it jammed at least two dozen times. We got through three mags without issues and it started again. I vice gripped the damn gun thinking maybe it was limp writing but it did it on me too. Then I tried each hand to see if maybe when I was shooting left handed I was knocking the slide catch somehow.

This did not inspire confidence. My buddy hadn't shot it before last night, the mags were what came with it. Maybe he got one of the bad ones and Sig will make it right but after two different 1911s giving me problems. My faith is shaken something awful.

I flat give up on 1911s. I'm going to Glock for .45 ACP needs via a Glock 21. I'd been playing with the idea for a bit and thought about the Sig 220 but after so many easy years with my Glock 20, I'm just going to do the Glock 21.

I'm sure I'll eventually get my second Spartan running right but I won't trust it, so it'll get converted to .38 Super and used as a range toy. And I've got plenty range toys, no danger of a shortage there my friend. My Ruger 90 has been solid as a bank vault when it comes to reliability and while it's not the best shooter I've ever fired in .45 ACP, it'll still get fifty rounds on a 11"x8" piece of paper at fifty yards. Though the groupings may not be tight or pretty, the gun goes bang every time.

The pursuit of the 1911 was fun but....it wasn't me. I'm a Magnum Dweeb. It's all about hand cannons and ridiculous velocities. Spend a little more time with my Ruger SRH .454 Casull. Get a few more revolvers, and stop pursuing semis after 2014 (after getting a Glock 21 and Remington R51).

Oh 1911, I tried to love you but like a feral mutt brought in from the cold, you turned and bit me with malice where I only wanted to welcome you. So alas two of your platform shall reside in my safe. One .45 ACP, one .38 Super. And while I will take you to the range and perhaps smile after a good day of shooting. I will still in my heart, fear your unreliable streak waiting for when I should need you most and so I will not carry you to where I am not at the range. Adieu.

If you enjoyed reading about "I'm Giving Up On 1911s" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
JTQ
February 11, 2014, 12:02 PM
Good for you. You've found what you like and are sticking with it. There is no law that says you have to have, or like a 1911.

I'm often intrigued by the posts from guys that complain about their 1911's. Why is it so heavy, why does it carry only 8 rounds, why does the finish rust so easily, why do I have to oil it so much, why don't all the parts drop in, this safety/cocked and locked stuff it too complicate/scary, etc.?

Hey, all guns have limitations. Those are some of the limitations of the 1911. However, those that appreciate the good characteristics of the 1911 are often willing to put up with those limitations because the things it does well, out weighs the limitations.

Fremmer
February 11, 2014, 12:05 PM
Feral mutt, lol that's harsh. But I don't blame you after what you've been through.

How about a Sig 220 SAO?

Drail
February 11, 2014, 12:45 PM
Sounds to me like your problem is with Sig not setting the gun up properly. If a 1911 is done right it is VERY reliable. The design is very very good. But too many companies are just slapping them together and boxing them up to sell to the masses. And Sig is not the only one doing it. A decent pistolsmith can fix all of the problems. Of course they shouldn't have to if the manufacturer did it right in the first place. It's the basic problem of mass production and building to a price point.

Old Fuff
February 11, 2014, 01:13 PM
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?

It's the later guns, made by lord knows how many manufacturers who tweek things to make the pistol tighter or easier to make. In itself, tightness isn't bad, but it requires careful attention by an experienced 'smith that's seldom seen in a mass produced product.

What we see today are pistols that (sort of) look like the real thing, but aren't. Most can be made to work, but don't expect it out-of-the-box.

A sad situation, but that's the way it is. :banghead:

Glocktogo
February 11, 2014, 02:24 PM
Take an in-spec frame and slide, correctly fit barrel and extractor, quality internal parts and magazines, and a 1911 is just as reliable as any other pistol. The problem comes when so many manufacturers cut corners on the really important stuff to sell a "pretty" 1911 at a palatable price. Either that or they want to sell one that will print tiny groups at the sacrifice of reliability. To build a tough, reliable, accurate, pretty 1911 costs money and takes skill.

I've always said that to be a satisfied 1911 guy, you really need to understand the how and why of it's operation, along with the basic skills necessary to fit parts and/or tune them. Not because 1911's are inherently unreliable, but because unreliable manufacturers build them.

Old Dog
February 11, 2014, 02:32 PM
Let me get this straight: you're giving up on 1911s because a friend's brand-new 1911, right out of the box with no break-in, and one of your entry-level 1911s, that you admittedly haven't spent time with, didn't function?

the other needs work and time I haven't been able to bring myself to put into itDoes it really need to be mentioned on a gun board with so many knowledgeable 1911 guys that the 1911 requires a certain level of commitment? Like buying a Harley and then deciding it's junk after the first time it has an issue because you haven't even learned rudimentary bike maintenance and have never figured out how it works?

Ah well, more 1911s for the rest of us, those of us for whom the platform fits our hands like no other pistol, and for those who truly appreciate that there is nothing better than a good 1911 trigger ...

tarosean
February 11, 2014, 02:49 PM
Let me get this straight: you're giving up on 1911s because a friend's brand-new 1911, right out of the box with no break-in, and one of your entry-level 1911s, that you admittedly haven't spent time with, didn't function?

I was scratching my head on that one too. C'est la vie..

Course if I listened to the inter web I wouldn't own guns period, as they all purportedly suck... :scrutiny:

critter
February 11, 2014, 03:03 PM
I'm down to about 10 1911's in .45, .40, . 357 SIG, .38 super and 9mm. I've owned several more. All that I have and most that I've had are dead-nuts reliable. I'd trust any one that I have for a save-my-life carry gun.

Brands: Colt, Ruger, Ed Brown, Les Baer, Springfield, Kimber, Para Ordnance, 'smith built on Essex frame and Cart barrel. Accuracy varies from pretty good to fantastic.

That's why they build all kinds of guns. To each his own.

zoom6zoom
February 11, 2014, 03:10 PM
I could feel a film of oil on the gun when I picked it up.
Slides need grease. Oil won't last in that application.

MikeJackmin
February 11, 2014, 03:20 PM
I've had four 1911 style pistols over the years.

My first was a Paraordnance P12-45. I've shot the hell out of it and it works great.

The second was a little Colt Mustang .380. Only problem I ever had with it was when my thumb would touch the slide stop lever during recoil. Once I learned to not do that, it ran great.

Third gun was one of those Phillipines-made government models. I sold it because the hammer bit my hand and I hated the sights. It ran like a top though.

My latest is a Springfield Mil-Spec (http://www.guns.com/review/2012/02/17/springfield-armory-mil-spec-1911-review/), the one with the modern sights and the slightly-modified hammer profile that's less likely to bite you. I replaced the flawed magazine that came with it, and after that? I've yet to see any behavior from it other than a predictable BANG, and a big hole where the sights were pointed when it happened.

None of these guns were fancy, and two of them were bought used. I honestly think I've been lucky.

The extent of my 1911 gunsmithing skills involves occasional recoil and magazine spring replacement, occasional cleaning, a trace of purple motorcycle grease and a couple of drops of synthetic motor oil for lube. I detail-stripped the Para after I dropped it into a mud puddle once, and I'm still proud that I got all the pieces back together without breaking anything or hurting myself.

tomrkba
February 11, 2014, 03:28 PM
Six of the eight 1911's I have owned were bad. My EMP was bad until SA fixed it twice. Only the Colts were good. So, six out of nine were crud, two were fine and one was OK for awhile. I could have had an Heirloom Precision gun for that.

This is not a good track record. It makes it difficult for me to shell out another $1,100+ for a new Colt when I can get a Glock 21 Gen 4 for $675 OTD.

Robert101
February 11, 2014, 03:31 PM
I feel your pain. I too fell in love with the 1911 only to be disappointed by having some reliability issues. One of my DW's had to make a return trip to them for fixes. I still own a few of them, that do function well, and will for life.

PJSprog
February 11, 2014, 03:37 PM
...right out of the box with no break-in,
Yeah ... like a revolver. If your gun needs a "break-in" period of even one round, you should have bought a better gun.

Now, I'm admittedly new to the 1911 platform, having only owned mine for about two years. It's a Rock Island - one that most here consider a cheapie - but it has functioned flawlessly for me. I've read for years all the complaints against 1911's, and that's mostly what has kept me away ... well, that and prices of the "good" guns. But, I'll never understand the mentality that a gun of any kind, much less one designed for the military and carried in battle for 75 years, needs a "break-in." That is truly ridiculous to me.

19-3Ben
February 11, 2014, 03:46 PM
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?

While my 1991A1 doesn't quite fit this description (series 80 and all that), it's a basic, no frills 1911 from Colt, and as usual, RC is spot on. That thing will even load empty straight from the magazine. I actually load them in there to do malt-clearing drills at the range because that's the only way to get it to not fire, and even then, the empties still chamber perfectly. I haven't yet met a round of ammo that gun wouldn't feed, fire and eject perfectly.
And for the record, I have never ever lubed it with grease. It just gets lubed lightly with Militec.

Hangingrock
February 11, 2014, 03:52 PM
I have two examples of the 1911 series pistol a Colt and a Springfield. Both are not problematic as long as I use ball equivalent 230Gr-FMJ. With the 200Gr-SWC load its a problem in both of them. The same 200Gr-SWC load utilized in a Glock-21, S&W 4506 and SW99 no problems. With the 1911 series pistols everyone seems to have their favorite brand of after market magazines. That's my story.

Old Dog
February 11, 2014, 03:57 PM
If your gun needs a "break-in" period of even one round, you should have bought a better gun.One supposes that you do not realize the unintentional irony of this statement. So in your mind, you simply pay for your gun, take it out of the box, load it up, and you're ready to defend hearth and home?

But, I'll never understand the mentality that a gun of any kind, much less one designed for the military and carried in battle for 75 years, needs a "break-in." That is truly ridiculous to me. Well, "truly ridiculous" to you, yet something a great many folks who know a great deal about semi-auto handguns understand.

Fishbed77
February 11, 2014, 03:58 PM
It's a shame you're giving up on a whole class of handguns because of two bad examples. The last few 1911s I've had much experience with (all Colts and Springfields) were boringly reliable.

To each his own, though. I will say my brother's SW1911 has sucked since day one (constant failures to go into battery).

Lennyjoe
February 11, 2014, 04:04 PM
I guess this will get me in trouble with the 1911 lovers, but I'm no longer excited about them either. Had a Kimber and a Springfield and they were good guns and served me well in the past. But, with the newer lines of .45 ACP pistols, I prefer my XD45, and even my Kahr CW45 over any of the 1911 guns I've owned. It's sad I know because the 1911 is a tried and true platform.

So, fire away fellas because I'm a bit bummed at myself for turning away from such a wonderful pistol line that has served gunnies well for many years.

PJSprog
February 11, 2014, 04:18 PM
One supposes that you do not realize the unintentional irony of this statement. So in your mind, you simply pay for your gun, take it out of the box, load it up, and you're ready to defend hearth and home?
Irony? It's irony to you that I think a firearm should work? I expect when I buy a new firearm that it will work. In the same manner that I expect a new automobile to run, not leave me stranded on the side of the road every so often until the "break-in period" is over. They are tested before they leave the factory. They should work. Immediately. Everything else in our lives that fails to work when new is called a lemon or broken. Why is this different for a firearm?
Well, "truly ridiculous" to you, yet something a great many folks who know a great deal about semi-auto handguns understand.
I'm sure you know more about 1911s than do I. That's not hard to accomplish, as I've already noted my lack of long experience with them. New to semis? Nope. I haven't had one yet that malfunctions on even an irregular basis.

Those who expect their firearms to fail and just accept it as a quirk of that particular platform are, in my opinion, doing a great deal of dis-service to the rest of the firearms community. Stop accepting this, and demand better.

Eaglestroker
February 11, 2014, 04:26 PM
Good. More for me out there :)

Mike J
February 11, 2014, 04:31 PM
I bought my first 1911 back around July. It is a Ruger SR 1911. Now I have only run a few hundred rounds through it so far but I haven't experienced any malfunctions. I like it.

If the Spartan is causing you problems maybe you should contact STI & see what they will do for you.

I don't know your friend or how much experience he has with guns but I once managed to cause a Ruger P-series pistol to jam. I had changed lubes & put more grease on the rails than I should have. It migrated through the whole gun & caused a stovepipe. I cleaned it all out & used the grease much more sparingly & it has run fine ever since.

Fiv3r
February 11, 2014, 04:35 PM
I think Glock has spoiled a lot of people on out of the box reliability, and please keep in mind that this is coming from someone who sold his last Glock and doesn't miss it at all.

Current 1911s built to manufacturer specs and not to original specs can sometimes need a break in to loosen then up in the right places. For me, I've had one out of three flawless 1911s. So far, knock on wood, my Springfield has been 100% with nothing done to it short of a quick cleaning and lubing the rails. 400 or 500 rounds down range with nary a hiccup or burp shooting a variety of ammo from brass to aluminum to steel cases, etc.

I absolutely love the 1911, but it took me some time to get there. To be honest, if I were caught in a fire fight in a gun store and had to pick one brand new pistol out of the box to shoot back with, it'd be a Glock of any variety. They just flat work, they just aren't for me.

Most 1911s need a break-in. I think they should come out of the box broken in, but such is life.

chris in va
February 11, 2014, 04:46 PM
Despite having issues with my Glock 21sf, you may want to look at the new G41. Thinner, longer slide and (hopefully) better ergos.

EdLaver
February 11, 2014, 05:15 PM
I've given up on 1911's as well. I've owned four (Kimber, Rock Island, Citadel, and Ruger) The Kimber, Citadel, and Rock Island gave me constant issues and the Ruger not so much but still periodically I could never get through more than two mags using hollowpoints before I'd get a FTF. I no longer own any and dont plan on getting anymore anytime soon. There are just so many better options out there.

My Springfield XD Tactical .45 i've had for 6 or 7 years, NEVER one malfunction. Its extremely accurate, reliable, has a higher capacity, I believe lighter, and eats all ammo I've used.

JERRY
February 11, 2014, 05:19 PM
I can go either way with a 1911, but my $340 out the door RIA G.I. is the best 1911 I've owned regarding function.

MagnumDweeb
February 11, 2014, 05:27 PM
Wow, okay....My Spartan that's acting up, it's one of a few things ultimately. It either doesn't like the mags I use with the other Spartan that works great, it either needs some work done on the slide catch or the slide catch needs to be replaced with a better one (I've seen one from Wilson Combat I think was called the "Bullet Proof" one). I replaced the recoil spring with a 17lb spring in case that was the issue but nope (solved all the problems in my first one). I have Wilson combat mags and Chip McCormick mags that work great with my first Spartan and the second Spartan doesn't seem to like them.

So now I have to at some point disassemble the bugger, take a file to the slide catch, and see if that resolves the problem. To get the really great mags that supposedly would fix everything, I'd be looking at $40 a mag if not more without any guarantee.

These are not problems I've had with Glocks, Sigs, Taurus PT99s and 92s, Tokarevs (I own a bunch), Makarovs, my Bersa Ultra Compact 9mm, or P Series Rugers. Oh sure i've had trouble with my XDS .45 but nothing so major, and for the time being that gun is being allowed 300 rounds of use to allow for settling of problems that I think are largely slide spring related.

I get that top end 1911s can be awesome performers, if they weren't folks wouldn't buy them, but for what I would pay for a NIB Spartan (bought all mine used at good deals) I could used to get a used Sig 220. Yes Sig 220s have their issues, and the mags ain't cheap but the folks I know with their used and West German made Sig 220s that have fired over 10k rounds through them with nary a hiccup, would prefer them over 1911s most days (some who own Sig 220s also own high end 1911s).

Maybe it's because I'm cheap. Maybe I don't feel like I should have to scratch aside for six months to save up for a gun and then worry if it will work (I'm thinking like $900). I like being able to reach for my used Glock 20 or Glock 23 that I paid maybe $400 a piece for and having them run like champs to only need to be cleaned when I get home, and then left lighting oiled for the next go.

I'm only going to get a Glock 21 if I can find a Gen 2, Gen 2s are my favorite (I hate finger grooves). I know the Spartan can be fixed but I hate that I have to put all that work into to get it to run right when I bought my Glock 23 off an old man who had his sit in his tackle box for a year straight having the errant round popped through it and never cleaned. To only get a mild cleaning and bore scrubbing, to then run like a champ and have almost no issues since that weren't ammo related.

If you found a 1911 that works for you, more power to you, if you like 1911s, I get it, I still do, I'm just done buying anymore unless I somehow get an awesome deal and am prepared for another range toy. I'm not up for dropping $1,000 and praying the gun works right and doesn't need to go back to manufacturer or have a smith pay it some love and attention. Especially when I can get a used Ruger GP100 4" for $400 or less and have it go bang all day. And then with my remaining $600 go and buy a bunch of ammo or used Glock and still have money for ammo.

SwampWolf
February 11, 2014, 06:35 PM
Those who expect their firearms to fail and just accept it as a quirk of that particular platform are, in my opinion, doing a great deal of dis-service to the rest of the firearms community. Stop accepting this, and demand better.

I've dubbed them "enablers". You don't have to be an "expert" to expect a 1911 pistol to run without malfunction straight out of the box (and, no, this doesn't mean that you still don't have to test-fire any new gun with a sufficient number of different loads to verify reliability if you plan on employing the gun for self-defense). The car engine break-in analogy is a false one: break-ins for car motors have everything to do with possible longevity benefits and absolutely nothing to do with whether the car runs or not.

The first thing the enablers do to pardon a new pistol that doesn't run right is to blame everything but the pistol: bad or too cheap ammunition, bad magazines, feed ramp needs polishing, not enough lube or too much lube, recoil spring too soft or too heavy, "limp-wristing", etc. (which isn't to say that it's not possible that some of these things could be a factor in a malfunctioning pistol, only to argue that they often become scapegoats for excusing a poorly made pistol).

Then, of course, there is the idea that the 1911 pistol just requires more patience, more "break-in" round count and a higher level of expertise if you ever expect one to be reliable from the get-go. You need to tweak it and fluff it and buff it and, apparently, pray to it and to sacrifice a virgin chicken or a bleating goat or two to appease the 1911 gods. More excuses that would probably turn J.B. Browning's stomach if he heard them.

I've purchased, owned and shot more than a couple of new 1911 pistols that were 100% reliable from the start (and still are). Admittedly, my experience has been limited to only three brands over a period of fifty plus years, mostly Colts but, during the past few years, also Smith & Wesson and SIG 1911s.
I did buy a new Colt Government Model in 1968 that was a real stinker to get running right and actually never got to be totally reliable-but the rest of them ran without a hiccup straight from the box. And there's absolutely no reason why any customer, "expert" or novice alike, after spending upwards to a thousand dollars and often much more, should not only expect but demand the same kind of performance. It's not too much to ask.

JustinJ
February 11, 2014, 06:37 PM
Don't get why one would feel obligated to like anything, much less a type of gun. I've always considered the 1911 to be archaic relative to modern handguns. Yeah, they can be stupid accurate but outside of competition the accuracy advantage of a 1911 over a glock is meaningless. I do appreciate their history but for a gun to be shot there are far more important things in my book.

rdhood
February 11, 2014, 06:49 PM
Thus far, my cheapie RIA 1911 has not missed firing even once (I have kept count) in the last 928 rounds. I reload my own (MBC "softball"s) . it was much less reliable with 200g flat nosed.

A 1911 set up correctly is very reliable.

jjones45
February 11, 2014, 07:08 PM
Nowadays 1911s need 1000 round break in period, springs replaced every 1500 rounds, dripping wet with lube, round nose bullets, best mags manufactured on earth, and a pair of vice grips to run properly. Sorry I couldn't resist. 1911s are to me the best looking semiautos and most accurate in my hands but they are just not out the box bet your life on pistols. Like posted earlier, everyone and their grandad is making 1911s these day in the masses so it comes with consequences. Nowadays I trust the likes of glock, walther, m&p, hk and sig p series over 1911s for ccw and home defense. 1911s are my favorite pistol in case I didn't tell you but they have a different role in my life these days. Still there is nothing like a fine tuned 1911. If you have one never let it go

GLOOB
February 11, 2014, 07:08 PM
I only have extensive experience with one 1911. It's a recent manufacture Colt Gold Cup. It has had dozens of doublefeed jams with both stock and aftermarket mags. It's running great, now, but it has jammed more times than all my other handguns combined.

I still don't know what caused these jams. Live round in the chamber, another one trying to join it. They're supposedly caused by magazines, but it happened with 3 different brands of magazine, and now it has stopped.

Glocktogo
February 11, 2014, 07:14 PM
FWIW, you can go buy a 100% GI issue 1911 and it will work every time you pull the trigger. It won't be any more accurate than a Glock or M&P, but it will work. However, expecting to get a finely tuned tack driver that runs 100% and looks fantastic doing it for $400 is just not realistic at all. Those days are long gone.

As for "out of the box ready to run, I've only ever bought one gun that was literally ready to shoot out of the box, a Noveske Rogue Hunter. Upon disassembly, it was cleaned and properly lubricated and ready to fire. That includes Glocks, which should be field stripped, removal of the copper anti-sieze and lubricate to spec. Sure, it might work reliably even if you don't, but there's no guarantee.

My Colt Rail Gun 1911 was purchased used for $800. So far it's digested about 3,500 rounds of JHP reloads without a single malfunction. Not...even...one. My S&W 1911PD, bought for $825 is the same, albeit with around 1,500 rounds of mixed FMJ, JHP, reloads and factory ammo. No malfs since day 1.

I might purchase another Colt or Smith 1911 and need to tune an extractor, replace a spring or magazine, who knows? I am not enabling anything by accepting this. I simply understand the platform and what's required to make it run efficiently.

It took Randy Lee considerable time and engineering to figure out why late Gen 3 Glocks were having failure to extract and failure to eject issues. It took some time for Ruger to diagnose and repair...well... a ton of issues with several of their guns. The same goes for S&W M&P's with slide stops, mag catches and 9mm accuracy woes when it came out.

No mechanical contraption designed and built by man is ever going to have a 100% reliability rating. Knowing and understanding how and why something works and what causes it to fail is never a bad idea for an end user. I don't care what you shoot, it's worth knowing if you're truly a student of the gun.

silicosys4
February 11, 2014, 07:15 PM
It's not the design. Its the manufacturer. "1911's" is such a vague term anymore that it's almost inappropriate to use in itself to describe a specific gun. You can't just lump them all into one generic "1911" label anymore....More correct imo to say "a Colt 1911" or "a Kimber 1911" or "a Sig 1911" or "a RIA 1911" or "a Spartan 1911"....each brings a different level of gun to the table. You can't, say, buy only budget 1911's and then hate the design because whatever manufacturer you got yours from has substandard quality control

A correctly manufactured 1911 doesn't have the issues you are describing. Colt's are usually spot on.

If out of the box reliability is crucial, and you only have $400 to spend, get a glock.

Glocktogo
February 11, 2014, 07:16 PM
I only have extensive experience with one 1911. It's a recent manufacture Colt Gold Cup. It has had dozens of doublefeed jams with both stock and aftermarket mags. It's running great, now, but it has jammed more times than all my other handguns combined.

I still don't know what caused these jams. Live round in the chamber, another one trying to join it. They're supposedly caused by magazines, but it happened with 3 different brands of magazine, and now it has stopped.

See, that would bother me. How do you know that it won't happen again? The way to know is to know why it malfed in the first place, and what changed to make it stop.

JTQ
February 11, 2014, 07:18 PM
I still don't know what caused these jams. Live round in the chamber, another one trying to join it. They're supposedly caused by magazines, but it happened with 3 different brands of magazine, and now it has stopped.
More likely an extractor problem.

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=6311

I'm all for guys giving up on the 1911. If it's not for you, get something else.

Rule3
February 11, 2014, 07:20 PM
Gee was it ever mention what ammunition was used??:confused:

Ammunition and magazines. If it was new tight gun and crap ammo was used it may not cycle.

I will admit that the 1911 platform is not my favorite but I do have a few nice ones and they all work just fine.

calaverasslim
February 11, 2014, 07:43 PM
I have owned 3 different 1911's from Sig Sauer and one from Kimber. Never a burp from any of them. I grant that the Kimber is about 10 years of age, made back before they had some reported QC problems but the Sigs have all been in the last 2 years. Perfect right out of the box. :D

Go figure

arspeukinen
February 11, 2014, 08:40 PM
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications


I have a loose-as-heck Norinco 1911A1 and a Ruger SR1911. Both work flawlessly now but both needed some work to get to this point. The Nork especially is incredible value for the money.

1911 is a half-product. Relic. Sweet when it works.

BYJO4
February 11, 2014, 09:14 PM
I am sorry to hear that you are giving up on 1911s simply because you experienced problems with several of them. You are always going to find some new guns that require adjustment to function properly regardless of the type of platform or make. It's no different than buying a new auto and having to take it back to the dealer within days to have something fixed. While I shoot a variety of handguns, I find the 1911 to be reliable, accurate, and fun to shoot. Most problems with any firearm are minor and easily fixed by a good gunsmith.

hey_poolboy
February 11, 2014, 09:58 PM
I will readily admit that the 1911 is far and away my favorite platform. I wish I had more and someday I will.
Different strokes for different folks. I hope you find a platform that you like. I know there's all kinds of pressure to love 1911s, but not all guns inspire everyone. As long as you're putting lead down range and having fun doing it is what matters.

Billy Shears
February 11, 2014, 10:24 PM
I guess I've been lucky -- I've owned half a dozen 1911s (1 Springfield Armory, 1 Les Baer, and 4 Colts) over the last twenty years and not one of them has been anything but totally reliable with any and all ammo I've put through it. They've all been full sized guns from the best makers of 1911s though so that probably has something to do with it.

It's a shame you've had bad experiences with the platform. It really is a great gun, but there are a lot of makers who have departed from the original specs these days, so there probably are a lot of unreliable ones out there. Even the good makers can probably turn out a lemon now and again, and God knows, Colt had its days of poor quality control, but one of my 1911s is a very recent Wiley Clapp model, and I couldn't be happier with it.

Liberty1776
February 11, 2014, 10:25 PM
I'm conflicted on this topic. I love, love, love the 1911 and clones. My first one was a parts gun on an Essex frame and while not super accurate, gobbled any and all loads without blinking... the two I have now, Charles Daly and a RI are super accurate, but only will feed hardball.... my Ruger 345, Glock 21 and Sig 220 all feed anything and everything and never miss a lick... so - once again I find myself sitting on the fence...:cool:

private snowball
February 11, 2014, 10:40 PM
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?

It's the later guns, made by lord knows how many manufacturers who tweek things to make the pistol tighter or easier to make. In itself, tightness isn't bad, but it requires careful attention by an experienced 'smith that's seldom seen in a mass produced product.

What we see today are pistols that (sort of) look like the real thing, but aren't. Most can be made to work, but don't expect it out-of-the-box.

A sad situation, but that's the way it is.

I believe that modern day 1911 manufacturers are trying to turn the 1911 into something it was not meant to be, accurate. It was meant to be "combat accurate" I always found it silly that 1911 makers strive for 1" at 25 feet. Who cares if it can do that? A handgun is not meant to be a precision target weapon. It personal protection tool at short distance and that is what Browning designed and going for accuracy violates the weapons design principle.

I would love to hear what John Browning would say if he came back from the dead and someone had to explain to him that they took his design and tried to make it as accurate as possible. He sure as heck would wonder why.

skoro
February 11, 2014, 11:17 PM
I flat give up on 1911s.

It's all good. Not all of us are going to have the same likes/dislikes.

exdetsgt
February 11, 2014, 11:27 PM
I recently bought a full sized Cimarron 1911 built to the exact specs of the 1918 model, tiny sights, etc. Original ejection port. Plus it had one of the best, highly polished blue finishes I've ever seen. It functioned perfectly, reloads, WWII ammo, new JHP, new FMJ, on and on. And didn't care what magazines I used, and I've got a box full.

I intended it for EDC, however it was just too long. Foolishly I traded it in on a new American Classic Commander with all sorts of modern stuff. Worked fine with the supplied ACT magazine, but didn't like Chip McCormick magazines at all (several failure to feed episodes). But when I went to clean it, the slide stop wouldn't come out. You would think MetroArms would at least have tried one disassemble before shipping it out.

Valkman
February 11, 2014, 11:46 PM
It's too bad you've given up, especially after the last experience when better mags might have solved the problem. I've loved 1911's since I held one in the 80's and have 7. I also love my revos and XD's but 1911's will always be #1 in my book. I'd try again if I were you.

gc70
February 11, 2014, 11:57 PM
I assume most folks don't buy 1911s just to be like the "cool kids" so something about the design must be inherently appealing. Even folks who give up on 1911s usually lament the fact that operating issues drove them away from a gun they otherwise liked.

It surprises me that most current 1911s do work well. The design is proven, but it is interpreted with slight differences by dozens of manufacturers. And many folks seem to think that the first order of business after buying a 1911 is to change out some or all of the small parts with replacements from any of hundreds of parts sources.

At any rate, there are lots of guns that shoot .45 ACP - buy what works for you.

MICHAEL T
February 12, 2014, 12:06 AM
Several Colts and 1 Dan Wesson none of them ever a problem

Para Ord and Kimber Got rid of quickly. I trust Colts before any other brand I can afford a Colt So can't speak about Brown and Wilson

I have 1 of the 1st American Classic in country and its been fine . But I have only shot maybe 500 or 600 rounds thru it.

I carry my Colt Defender more than any other 1911 I have.

exdetsgt
February 12, 2014, 12:13 AM
VALKMAN - somewhat OT: so you live in Pahrump, NV. Seems like your town is one of the main import/repair firearms centers in the country. How many are there in Pahrump, anyway? And what a strange name - do you know its origin?

tarosean
February 12, 2014, 12:15 AM
It's not the design. Its the manufacturer. "1911's" is such a vague term anymore that it's almost inappropriate to use in itself to describe a specific gun.


This. Only the AR world comes close to comparison. Literally dozens and dozens of manufactures from bargain basement imports/knockoffs to high end customs and all points between. All built to differing "specs" out of differing materials using components from an even larger list of manufactures. Yet always refereed to just a "1911"

The design has been around for over a hundred years.. If it was that bad it would have fallen by the wayside some time ago.

2wheels
February 12, 2014, 12:36 AM
That's too bad. I do understand how a bad experience or two can give you a bad taste in your mouth. Maybe someday you'll give 1911s another chance, and you might not be disappointed.

I guess I was lucky that my first 1911 worked flawlessly from the day I got it, and still works. And it's not some high priced fancy 1911. It's an parts gun with a WW2 era slide and an Auto Ordnance frame. It runs even with $5 no name mags.

The 2 Colts and 1 Springfield I've bought since then have treated me well, there will definitely be more 1911s in my future.

gym
February 12, 2014, 12:46 AM
There are good and bad with every gun. No one particular type that is problem free, and has all the features you want. That's why Glock is so popular , they came the closest to building a reliable reasonable weapon that fires at a higher percentage rate than any mass produced gun out of the box, "or at least did". They just may not be everyone's cup of tea. There are always going to be haters, but out of all the guns I have owned in 44 years, I would have to say that a 23, 19, 30 or 26, 27 are almost a sure thing to fire every time.
I want a ppq next but only because I have enough other guns.

peacebutready
February 12, 2014, 02:49 AM
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?

It's the later guns, made by lord knows how many manufacturers who tweek things to make the pistol tighter or easier to make. In itself, tightness isn't bad, but it requires careful attention by an experienced 'smith that's seldom seen in a mass produced product.

This is why I'm not a fan of tight 1911s. I'll take the looser one that gives up an inch in grouping at 25 yards. I'm skeptical of even a well made, massaged, tight 1911 firing hundreds of rounds of ball ammo in a day reliably or firing multiple types of hollow-points reliably for one box.

What we see today are pistols that (sort of) look like the real thing, but aren't. Most can be made to work, but don't expect it out-of-the-box.

A sad situation, but that's the way it is. :banghead:

This is why I wouldn't buy most of them out there but am a fan of the platform.

peacebutready
February 12, 2014, 02:54 AM
My first was a Paraordnance P12-45. I've shot the hell out of it and it works great.

Third gun was one of those Phillipines-made government models. I sold it because the hammer bit my hand and I hated the sights. It ran like a top though.


The Para sounds like one from the 90s.

The Filipino one had relatively loose tolerances.

peacebutready
February 12, 2014, 03:02 AM
Most 1911s need a break-in. I think they should come out of the box broken in, but such is life.

Something I'm curious of is if a 1911 needs of break-in for the first few hundred rounds or so, then seems to be reliable, will it be as reliable as a 1911 that never had any jams from round one.

el Godfather
February 12, 2014, 03:36 AM
I tried so very hard to become a 1911 fiend. But I'm giving up on them. Last night did it for me. A friend of mine bought one of the latest Sig 1911s (a nearby shop had a deal on them) and we met up after work to try it out. I hadn't brought my problem child Spartan (I have two, one works great, the other needs work and time I haven't been able to bring myself to put into it), instead I only brought my S&W 15-3 and Rossi 462.

My friend supposedly oiled the gun and everything so it was wet. I could feel a film of oil on the gun when I picked it up. We got two magazines into it and then the headaches started. A stove pipe, easy to clear, a few shots, then a a lock back there was an empty mag but there were rounds left. Then jam, then jam, a couple shots, then jam.

Out of a hundred rounds it jammed at least two dozen times. We got through three mags without issues and it started again. I vice gripped the damn gun thinking maybe it was limp writing but it did it on me too. Then I tried each hand to see if maybe when I was shooting left handed I was knocking the slide catch somehow.

This did not inspire confidence. My buddy hadn't shot it before last night, the mags were what came with it. Maybe he got one of the bad ones and Sig will make it right but after two different 1911s giving me problems. My faith is shaken something awful.

I flat give up on 1911s. I'm going to Glock for .45 ACP needs via a Glock 21. I'd been playing with the idea for a bit and thought about the Sig 220 but after so many easy years with my Glock 20, I'm just going to do the Glock 21.

I'm sure I'll eventually get my second Spartan running right but I won't trust it, so it'll get converted to .38 Super and used as a range toy. And I've got plenty range toys, no danger of a shortage there my friend. My Ruger 90 has been solid as a bank vault when it comes to reliability and while it's not the best shooter I've ever fired in .45 ACP, it'll still get fifty rounds on a 11"x8" piece of paper at fifty yards. Though the groupings may not be tight or pretty, the gun goes bang every time.

The pursuit of the 1911 was fun but....it wasn't me. I'm a Magnum Dweeb. It's all about hand cannons and ridiculous velocities. Spend a little more time with my Ruger SRH .454 Casull. Get a few more revolvers, and stop pursuing semis after 2014 (after getting a Glock 21 and Remington R51).

Oh 1911, I tried to love you but like a feral mutt brought in from the cold, you turned and bit me with malice where I only wanted to welcome you. So alas two of your platform shall reside in my safe. One .45 ACP, one .38 Super. And while I will take you to the range and perhaps smile after a good day of shooting. I will still in my heart, fear your unreliable streak waiting for when I should need you most and so I will not carry you to where I am not at the range. Adieu.
Ok.

However, problem is not platform specific.

WC145
February 12, 2014, 09:16 AM
The root of the problems with "1911s" is that too many companies are building/selling they're version or interpretation of the design. SIG is actually a good example, they brought out their "1911" but it has some squared off "SIGesque" slide profile and an external extractor. That's not a 1911, that is they're interpretation of one. If someone wants to alter a design that is known to function reliably, they need to put in all of the time and effort necessary to ensure that their alterations don't screw things up. A pistol is a machine, start changing the shape/size/weight of parts, tolerances, spring rates, etc and you're inviting problems. If 25 companies took Glock 19 blueprints and started building G19 clones, most with their own little twist on the design to set them apart from others, you'd see the same complaints and failures that "1911s" (yes, I'm using the term generically:rolleyes:) have become known for over the last 20 years.

The AR-15 world has the same issues, some companies are known for building reliable guns, others aren't. It's all a matter of their interpretations on the design and the effort they put into making them correct from the start.

miles1
February 12, 2014, 09:27 AM
Doesn't that make it a crap shoot as far as deciding what 1911 to get?Especially for those new to the 1911?

DT Guy
February 12, 2014, 09:40 AM
Only if your only criteria for buying a 1911 is that it's a 1911; most folks research the makers, as well.

I agree with the OP, though-the 1911 is not a friendly beginner platform, and requires more technical knowledge to get, and keep, running than a Glock. Tweaking an extractor, throating, all that stuff is part of running a 1911, IMHO.


Larry

tomrkba
February 12, 2014, 10:00 AM
Quote:
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?


Why does Michael Bane frequently say that in the 1970's and 80's the SOP was to buy a Colt pistol and to send it to a gunsmith to make it run?

Do not believe the mythology. The 1911 must be tuned properly in order to work, just like any other gun. Some designs allow more "slop" and others, such as the 1911, have far less. Kahr pistols seem to be almost as finicky, at least in my experience with the K9 and three PM9's that I have owned. I have seen friends' problem Kahrs too--five or six instances where the gun was not trustworthy at 1,000 rounds.

This whole mythos surrounding magazine reliability seems to be exacerbated by 1911's. Hilton Yam stated that the bodies and lips on 1911 mags seem to wear out in 18-24 months of continuous duty use. My SIG and Glock magazines have been exceptionally reliably despite neglect and heavy use. I *finally* threw out a second generation Glock 19 magazine after 15 years of use because a chunk of plastic broke on the front of it. The other one shows no sign of cracking. My gen 3 mags have a metal liner that goes all the way up the front of the mag and I expect I will get many years of use out of them. My SIG P220 mags have always been good. I do occasionally work on all my magazines, but a 24 month lifespan is not acceptable to me now that quality 1911 magazine prices are approaching $30-40 per magazine.

To be fair to the design: If someone has a 1911 for duty and/or competition and the technical skills, tools, money and patience to maintain it, then I see no reason not to use one. However, most people, including myself, lack the technical skills to properly tune and maintain a 1911 pistol. I would not be so hesitant to buy another 1911 if I had those skills. After spending thousands of dollars on shoddy 1911's (and the additional thousands of dollars in gunsmithing, range fees, test ammo, parts and so on), I have lost interest in acquiring those skills. Maybe one day I will buy a custom 1911 and take an armorer's class. Until then, I am content to shoot Glocks, SIGs and revolvers.

Tony k
February 12, 2014, 10:18 AM
To each their own. I have a Taurus PT1911. I Love it. After seven years and over 5000 rounds the thumb safety broke, so it's back a Taurus right now. I can't wait to get it back because it it by far my favorite gun to shoot.

When I first got in to reloading I had some feed issues, but that was an issue with my reloads, not the gun.

I'm not so sure I can get on board with those middle price range, super tight models (I'm thinking Kimber, STI Spartans, etc). It seems to me that if you're gonna build a tackdriver 1911, it's gonna probably take some quality smithing to ensure reliability. That just doesn't sound like something I want to do right now. I'd like to get a compact 1911, but I don't need it to be a bullseye shooter. I think I like em loose and rattley.

Follow your gun bliss and don't worry about it.

Vodoun da Vinci
February 12, 2014, 10:35 AM
I dunno. My Wife and I have had several Colts in the 1911 style....all stock guns. A Colt Government, 2 Colt Combat Commanders, and the only one we still have now is a Colt Officers ACP...series 80.

None of them ever missed a lick. Never needed to see a gunsmith - never experienced any failures of any kind. I do/did polish the ramp but I polish the ramp on every gun I ever owned except my Glock 26 and my Beretta PX4 which both feed anything without a hiccup.

Then again all I ever shot was ball, Flat nose lead/FMJ, and the occasional off the shelf hollow points of unremembered manufacture in my Colts. I think people push them too hard and get upset that they don't feed exotic ammunition or buy fancy guns (not of Colt origin and design) and have troubles.

I'd bet my life on my Wife's series 80 Officers ACP any day with my hand loads or ball. Accurate and dependable and all Colt - Even the extra mags. Sucks when folks have problems but then some folks have problems with all kinds of things I never had problems with. I can't imagine "giving up" on the 1911 platform when it has been so successful and so emulated and copied for over a century.

VooDoo

WinThePennant
February 12, 2014, 11:32 AM
In my mind, every gun owner should own an American made 1911. It's just the thing to do.

I love my Ruger SR1911. It's a range and safe queen, however. The real work is done with my Glocks and M&Ps.

SDGlock23
February 12, 2014, 12:10 PM
I really like the 1911, but I don't own them any longer. I started with Glock and it's what I like best, the Gen4 G21 is my favorite of all .45's.

TexasPatriot.308
February 13, 2014, 01:53 AM
the U.S. military tried to give up on the 1911....troops that experienced the 9mm especially most special forces want and got their 1911s back....9mm=hammer, .45 acp= sledge hammer....maybe it aint your cup of tea...if my life depends on it and I got a choice....I'll pick up the 1911 anytime....maybe in time you will realize this too....if not, good luck.

tarosean
February 13, 2014, 03:11 AM
Lets look at some hard evidence instead of anecdotal stories.
From Todd Greens Endurance tests. http://pistol-training.com/

SA 1911 (9mm)
64,579rds 15 Stoppages 0 malfunctions 5 Parts Breakages
*Barrel shot out

Glock 17 Gen4
71,260rds 19 Stoppages (+1 non LCI) 0 malfunctions 3 Parts Breakages
*Breachface damage

S&W M&P9
62,333rds 2 Stoppages 0 malfunctions 3 Parts Breakages
*Cracked Slide

H&K P30
91,322rds 13 Stoppages 0 malfunctions 5 Parts Breakages
*Broken Frame

H&K45
50,000rds 1 Stoppages 1 malfunctions 1 Parts Breakage
*unknown why he stopped the test..




You will see that the 1911 used in his testing was average with the others.

Another interesting tid bit was that Glock had the quickest stoppage at round 62 and the HK45 went the longest to round 31,523.

miles1
February 13, 2014, 08:53 AM
the U.S. military tried to give up on the 1911....troops that experienced the 9mm especially most special forces want and got their 1911s back....9mm=hammer, .45 acp= sledge hammer....maybe it aint your cup of tea...if my life depends on it and I got a choice....I'll pick up the 1911 anytime....maybe in time you will realize this too....if not, good luck.
With all due respect TexasPatriot. I don' think this a caliber debate.There are many that were in the military including myself that liked the 9 as well as the 45.The spec ops that you are referring to I believe are using the Colt M45A1 Close Quarters Battle Pistol (CQBP) which retails to the rest of the public for around $2000.A finely tuned 1911 made by a reputable company.Personally I would love to have that Colt CQBP as well.But alas....most of us average joe's don't have that kind of money to buy such an iconic weapon.With regards to the OP's bad luck with the 1911...I'm guessing his 1911's didn't cost as much as one of the Colt's the spec ops purchased in bulk.

The Lone Haranguer
February 13, 2014, 09:03 AM
I too have had bad luck with 1911s. A P-O P12, a Colt (used, early 1990s manufactured) and a SIG were all lemons. But this isn't the fault of the original design. It's the fault of deviation from the original design and poor quality control. I like the trigger, the pointing, balance and other handling qualities of Commander-length guns and the slenderness, but I just can't be sure of getting a good one. Also, .45 Auto (the original cartridge they were designed around) target/range ammo is quite costly these days. But I still can't resist picking up and handling a Ruger Commander when I see one. :uhoh:

Tcruse
February 13, 2014, 10:00 AM
If you want an "out of the box" 1911 at a reasonable price with a company that will stand behind it, probably the Ruger SR1911 should be top of your list
If you want a gun that will be your protection, get a Glock (or S&W M&P)

460Kodiak
February 13, 2014, 10:11 AM
Nothing wrong with giving up on something that doesn't work for you if you have a viable alternative.

hdbiker
February 13, 2014, 11:38 AM
My Loaded Target Springfield is over 8,000 rounds of home brew ammo and has had no stovepipes, and only one FTF,(my fault, setback, not enough crimp) in 5 years. Each to his own. hdbiker

Onward Allusion
February 13, 2014, 11:56 AM
Ya know, there are some folks here that get totally bent when anything negative is mentioned about the 1911 platform, including some of the mods.

The truth is that the old original design was good 'cause the thing was so dang loose and only ate ball ammo. Fast forward 80 years and you got all kinds of manufacturers trying to make so called race guns on that platform. Tight tolerances, smooth triggers, polished ramps, beaver tails, ambi safeties, extended slide lock releases...etc...etc...etc...that costs thousands. It's like trying to make a silk purse... <gasp!!!> Oh the sacrilege!!!

There are much better modern guns out there in 45 ACP that holds more rounds, are more accurate out of the box, comes in SA/DA or DAO with smoother triggers out of the box...etc...etc. If the 1911 platform isn't obsolete, we'd still be using in in LE & the military. No. I'm not talking about the few guys who carries it. I'm talking about it being the standard.

I can't even count the number of times I've heard people complain their 1911 isn't performing out of the box. They're usually told to let it break-in. Run a thousand rounds through it. Polish the ramp...etc...etc... Ya know, lots of people say the same about a Hi Point and those same folks will tell you that a Hi Point is a turd because it doesn't work out of the box!!!

I've had 3 1911's so far. A Norinco, a Taurus, & a Kimber. Both the Taurus and the Kimber were pieces of garbage. The Norinco rattle and was loose but performed out of the box.

The 1911 is a fine platform for competitions, collections, & range, but it would definitely not be in my top 10 for self-defense.

SSN Vet
February 13, 2014, 12:20 PM
The custom 1911 makers have successfully sold the myth that tighter is better.

But in the 1911 platform, reliability comes naturally with mil-spec clearances.

Tighter than that and you (or the mfg) will likely have to work hard to achieve reliability.

My S-80 Colt has never had an issue with the factory mags and the trigger (despite all the official internet report) is awesome.

Old Fuff
February 13, 2014, 12:54 PM
The truth is that the old original design was good 'cause the thing was so dang loose and only ate ball ammo.

Which is another myth. I've got several older, unmodified Colt's - both USGI and commercial - that will even hand feed empty cases. All that was required was to insure correct extractor tension and some adjustments to the magazine lips. Otherwise short cartridge overall length (common in some hollow point/light bullet, ammunition) can cause problems.

I would point out that most of the later-day service pistols are usually used with the manufacturer's magazines. When it comes to reliability this can be important.

tomrkba
February 13, 2014, 01:05 PM
Lets look at some hard evidence instead of anecdotal stories.
From Todd Greens Endurance tests. http://pistol-training.com/


Oh, that's rich! :p

Did you see all the magazine problems he had? The guns required trips to the gunsmith for remediation. It took him awhile to get technically used to the platform. Granted, he shot thousands of rounds during that time, but most people do not come close to the volume he puts through his guns. Overall, he is impressed with the guns, but keep in mind they are expensive custom pistols. They are not out of the box Springfield "Loaded" 1911's that cost $800-900 retail.

The good news is that Green documented the problems and solutions. We now have confirmation regarding which mags to use for a 1911 in 9mm. We also know what needs to be changed with the mags over time. This is a good thing because the experiment improves our knowledge of what is necessary to keep 9mm 1911's going.

gc70
February 13, 2014, 01:57 PM
If the 1911 platform isn't obsolete, we'd still be using in in LE & the military.

And please turn in all of your obsolete bolt-action rifles.

Onward Allusion
February 13, 2014, 02:06 PM
^^^ Not even apples to oranges here...

1858
February 13, 2014, 02:17 PM
I don't have a huge collection of semi-auto pistols. All I have is 1911s and SIGs, with seven of the former and six of the latter. After a brief stint as an owner in the striker fired world (XD-S) I've realized that I have no wish or need to add to what I already have. If I ever feel the need or desire to thin the herd, the last to go would be two of the Ed Browns and two of the P220s.

tarosean
February 13, 2014, 02:38 PM
Oh, that's rich!

Yet it's better than your an your" evidence" you post every single time a 1911 is brought up..

Whereas I own six and they have proven to me that they are more reliable than the Glocks whom reside in the same safe.... ( well aware that my "evidence" is just as circumstantial as yours).... :)

gc70
February 13, 2014, 02:42 PM
Sorry, Onward Allusion, but the idea that bolt-action rifles are obsolete is perfectly aligned with the tired, old complaint that 1911s are obsolete because they aren't (supposedly) used by LE and military. In fact, LE and military do still use 1911s ... and bolt-action rifles.

If the 1911 was obsolete, a whole bunch of people didn't get the message. In 2011, there were 712K pistols larger than 9mm manufactured in the US (http://www.atf.gov/files/statistics/download/afmer/2011-final-firearms-manufacturing-export-report.pdf). 190K, or 27%, of those pistols were produced by 1911-only makers like Colt, Kimber, and Remington - not even considering major companies like Ruger, S&W, Sig, Springfield that make 1911s and other large-caliber pistols.

Stevie-Ray
February 13, 2014, 04:18 PM
This first post needs to be installed in the Kimber threads right after somebody posts: Ditch the Kimber and get a reliable 1911 like a SIG.:neener:

3 1911s, 2 Colts and a Kimber and none of mine have ever malfunctioned.

wheelyfun66
February 13, 2014, 04:56 PM
I must be lucky......never had a bad 1911 (Colt/Sig/Dan Wesson/Springfield Armory)

I buy Wilson Combat magazines, use grease on the rails, and properly maintain them......

If the 1911 ain't for you.......plenty of other "platforms" available!

http://i1062.photobucket.com/albums/t497/spec4towle/006_zpsaa52147c.jpg (http://s1062.photobucket.com/user/spec4towle/media/006_zpsaa52147c.jpg.html)

Onward Allusion
February 13, 2014, 09:18 PM
gc70
Sorry, Onward Allusion, but the idea that bolt-action rifles are obsolete is perfectly aligned with the tired, old complaint that 1911s are obsolete because they aren't (supposedly) used by LE and military. In fact, LE and military do still use 1911s ... and bolt-action rifles.

If the 1911 was obsolete, a whole bunch of people didn't get the message. In 2011, there were 712K pistols larger than 9mm manufactured in the US. 190K, or 27%, of those pistols were produced by 1911-only makers like Colt, Kimber, and Remington - not even considering major companies like Ruger, S&W, Sig, Springfield that make 1911s and other large-caliber pistols.

The 1911 design is obsolete for LE & Military. Yes, I know about the FBI & Special Forces...etc, but that doesn't make it any more of a modern design as a Mosin Nagant. The 1911 is a proven design. It's a classic. But most of all, it is finicky! I'm pretty sure gun makers have learned a thing or two in the last 100 years.

With regard to bolt action rifles, I never said that they were obsolete. They still have their niches in LE & military, but you don't see our military issuing Springfields or the Ruskies issuing MN's, do you?

Yes, some in LE & Military carry 1911's, sure - there will always be fans for the design. Just like there are fans of the Hi Point. No. A 1911 does not equal a Hi Point, but there will be fans of almost every model of firearm out there.

WC145
February 14, 2014, 10:06 AM
The 1911 design is obsolete for LE & Military. Yes, I know about the FBI & Special Forces...etc, but that doesn't make it any more of a modern design as a Mosin Nagant. The 1911 is a proven design. It's a classic. But most of all, it is finicky! I'm pretty sure gun makers have learned a thing or two in the last 100 years

With regard to bolt action rifles, I never said that they were obsolete. They still have their niches in LE & military, but you don't see our military issuing Springfields or the Ruskies issuing MN's, do you?

Yes, some in LE & Military carry 1911's, sure - there will always be fans for the design. Just like there are fans of the Hi Point. No. A 1911 does not equal a Hi Point, but there will be fans of almost every model of firearm out there.
The design does not make the gun finicky, current manufacturers deviating from the design have caused that problem. 100 years of reliable use under the worst of circumstances haven proven that the design works. A "1911" built to the proper specs and maintained appropriately is a reliable and effective sidearm. Never mind that most "modern designs" are based on guns that were designed 100 or more years ago.

The popularity of inexpensive polymer frame framed handguns, double digit capacity magazines, and smaller, less effective calibers than the .45acp doesn't mean that the 1911 is obsolete. It means that there is a perception of obsolescence because those things are "modern" so they must be an improvement. One the biggest drivers behind the popularity of polymer handguns is that they are cheap to manufacture and are practically given away to agencies because manufacturers can profit from volume and name recognition. Just as the car companies used to use the popularity of racing to sell cars - "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" - Glock sells more guns to the private sector because of the popularity among LE agencies. They paid for that market by low balling their products to police depts. Other polymer framed handgun lines have since ridden Glock's coat tails to success.

As far as the military goes, the move away from the 1911 to the 9mm was prompted by many things, at the top of the list was ammo standardization with NATO and the idea that more little bullets were going to better than the 8 big bullets we'd been working with. We've seen how well that idea worked out with the switch to the M16 and 5.56mm rifle round, the lack of effectiveness of the 5.56mm round has been a complaint since it's inception. The war in Afghanistan has seen the military bringing the "obsolete" M14 out of mothballs and reissuing them due to the need for a more effective caliber. Capacity and volume of fire does not necessarily trump terminal effectiveness.

Today it seems that the general consensus on the 1911 is that is more difficult gun to master, a harder gun to maintain, and is best left to the experts. Nothing could be further from the truth, as millions of servicemen can attest. They learned to shoot and maintain the 1911 effectively through military training that is designed to make someone with absolutely no experience proficient with the least amount of time and effort. Certainly the average shooter today is capable of the same feat.

So, clearly, there is nothing obsolete about the 1911 design. Supporting that statement is the fact that the 1911 continues to be the sidearm of choice of so many special operations and SWAT type teams, as well as many more "average" agencies and individual officers. Those decisions are made based on what has been shown to work best for them, not simply because "it's a classic", that they are "fans" of the design, or that a manufacturers rep is offering 4 guns for the price of one quality 1911.

miles1
February 14, 2014, 01:06 PM
^.......A 1911 built to "proper specs" is the key term here.A $2000 colt seems to be what it cost for the spec ops to get that kind of reliability amd performance otherwise they would've gone with springfield or kimber I'm assuming of course.Glocks are in the LE because their easier to maintain and cost factors but they also just work and have a much better capacity.No one is debating that they are not as pretty as a 1911 mind you.

Hometeached1
February 14, 2014, 01:50 PM
Got to run and get more popcorn!:D

EdLaver
February 14, 2014, 02:19 PM
All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints? None of mine never did, and if all a 1911 shoots is ball ammo, that would make it rather obsolete in today's world. If you have a 1911 sub $1200 that runs hollows reliably, list the manufacturer and purchase year. I'm curious, not to be a prick, but because I DO like the feel and look of the 1911, but my experience hasnt been very good with the four I've owned.

JTQ
February 14, 2014, 02:24 PM
All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints? None of mine never did, and if all a 1911 shoots is ball ammo, that would make it rather obsolete in today's world. If you have a 1911 sub $1200 that runs hollows reliably, list the manufacturer and purchase year. I'm curious, not to be a prick, but because I DO like the feel and look of the 1911, but my experience hasnt been very good with the four I've owned.

Notice the dimple Colt puts in the barrel throat of their current barrels.

http://www.m1911.org/prodte26.htm

Fiv3r
February 14, 2014, 02:52 PM
My basic sub $900 Springfield "Loaded" will feed JHP just fine. I haven't shot a lot through it, but it feed 14 of them gun without an issue. I don't remember the brand or the type of HP it was as these were some loose rounds I had rolling around in my range bag from when I had a Glock 21.

Brass cased, steel cased, ball, and jhp, the Springer eats it up just fine.

While the 1911 isn't my absolutely favorite gun to carry simply due to the weight and size, I really don't see it as obsolete. To me, obsolescence is when something literally cannot hang with or offer comparable performance to the next item in line. Case in point, I found an 8 year old laptop in an office drawer the other day. THAT is obsolete. It cannot run the programs of today. Short of whatever is loaded on it as it sits, it cannot do anything today that a computer is called upon to do.

I don't see a 1911 as that. A handgun is generally a sidearm that will reliably act as a back up to your primary long arm, be used in close quarters combat, or as a reliable form of protection and a compliance tool by armed public servants for whom it would impractical to carry around a long arm.

I see 1911's as different. They are products of a time when war was fought a little differently and hardware was produced to a different scale and with a different mindset. Chosen firearms are 90% politics. Granted, they have to work and be effective, but guns are ordered based on dollars, cents, and promised favors.

Our local Sheriff's Department carry .45 GAP pistols. Why? Glock made them a deal they couldn't refuse. In town, the PD carry .40 Glocks. The next county over I think they use 9mm Sigs. In a 50 mile radius, you would think the criminal element would overlap enough that three different departments wouldn't need 3 different calibers if the gun made THAT much difference.

I know a couple of old cops who would carry a crusty old 1911 if they were allowed to. It's not obsolete or outdated. I just don't think a quality 1911 fits the perceived needs nor the limited budgets of LEOs. It's just cheaper to buy plastic and feed it little bullets. Once again, i like those plastic Wonder Nines, but I think the 1911 is still a very viable weapon if it fits the philosophy of the times.

Old Dog
February 14, 2014, 03:02 PM
If you have a 1911 sub $1200 that runs hollows reliably, list the manufacturer and purchase year.
Gosh, tough one, lemme think ... oh, how 'bout:

Colt's XSE LW Commander (SS), $1039, purchased 2011
Colt's Combat Commander, $899, purchased 2010
Colt's Series 70 Repro (SS), $929, purchased 2009
(2) Kimber Pro CDP II, $1049, purchased 2008
Kimber Custom TLE II, $799, purchased 2007
Kimber Pro Tactical II, $999, purchased 2007
Springfield Armory Loaded Champion (SS), $799, purchased 2005
Colt's (special run) NCO (SS), $799, purchased 2004 (approx.)
(2) Springfield Armory Loaded LW Micro-Compact, $939, purchased 2004
Springfield Armory Mil-Spec (SS), $569, purchased 2004
Springfield Armory (pre-Mil-Spec/GI) parkerized 1911A1, $369, 1991

Sorry, I think I've got only thirteen (13) 1991s that I still have the records on that reliably feed JHPs. Please note that these represent ONLY the pistols I bought new. There are a few 1911s from prior to 1991 that reliably feed JHPs. And there's probably a few in the back of one of the safes I am not remembering ...

And, of course, every 1911 I have that cost more than $1200 (at time of purchase) reliably feeds JHPs.

So, I guess -- either I am simply incredibly lucky -- or I have figured out the magic necessary to get these obsolete, heavy, low-capacity dinosaurs to run reliably. It ain't rocket science, boys; you just gotta commit to the platform. If you don't want to, don't go buying any classic Harleys, old airplanes, British motorcars ... I get that today's average gun-owner is pretty lazy and doesn't typically understand, nor want to understand, what makes his gun work or get involved in anything more than a casual field-stripping and occasional cleaning.

2wheels
February 14, 2014, 07:54 PM
My 2 Colts, a New Agent for $850 and a TALO CCO for $1100 both purchased in the last 5 years both could care less if they're running hollowpoints or FMJs.

In fact, I can't think of the last time I saw a 1911 that wouldn't run hollowpoints but was otherwise 100% reliable with FMJs... Of course I don't get to go out and test that many 1911s but still. My buddy got one of those Filipino 1911s a year or two ago and it runs JHPs just fine (although it required a new mag out of the box), another friend has a Ballester Molina (I know, not technically a 1911) and it's ancient, but it'll run JHPs!

1911Tuner
February 14, 2014, 08:04 PM
Just for the record...

I have a number of unaltered/untweaked, original/correct USGI and commercial Colt Government Models with DOBs ranging from 1913 to 1945 that can't tell the difference between hardball and hollowpoints and even cast SWCs of the H&G #68 design.

And they all feed'em from the old "Hardball" magazines as well as the newer Colt-designed 7 rounder with the tapered, timed release "hybrid" feed lips.

Colts and Remington Rands and Union Switches and Ithacas.

Nary a bobble.

And none of them rattle like a bucket of bolts, either.

The only hollowpoints that give trouble are the old Hydra-Shok and the Hornady XTPs with the same truncated cone profile...and not in all the guns.

The 1911 was designed to function. If it's built to spec and fed decent ammunition from a proper magazine, it will function. It's a machine. It doesn't have a choice.

peacebutready
February 14, 2014, 10:04 PM
And they all feed'em from the old "Hardball" magazines as well as the newer Colt-designed 7 rounder with the tapered, timed release "hybrid" feed lips.

The 1911 was designed to function. If it's built to spec and fed decent ammunition from a proper magazine, it will function. It's a machine. It doesn't have a choice.


I've wondered how much aggravation 1911 shooters have gone through due to parallel feed-lip mags; failure to feeds that would not have happened with tapered feel-lip mags.

JTQ
February 14, 2014, 10:15 PM
I've wondered how much aggravation 1911 shooters have gone through due to parallel feed-lip mags; failure to feeds that would not have happened with tapered feel-lip mags.
The most popular 1911 mags sold today all have parallel feed lips. McComick, Wilson, and Tripp all have parallel feed lips.

tomrkba
February 14, 2014, 11:04 PM
Yet it's better than your an your" evidence" you post every single time a 1911 is brought up..

Not at all. Green's guns have been tuned and are not production guns. He received direct support from Springfield for all problems. Mine were production guns and all but the Colts did not work out of the box. Mine were randomly offered at gun shows and in gun shops. I had mags from major manufacturers and took all the usual actions to get them running. Why have I not had problems with SIGs, Glocks and other service grade guns? What are those manufacturers doing differently in their non-1911 lines?

All threads like this show is there are some serious problems with consistency in the manufacture of 1911 pistols. Many manufacturers have the attitude that the customer will do the debugging. This is wrong especially given the high cost of many guns in this class. If I get another 1911, it will be a tuned gun from a major manufacturer such as Wilson Combat, Ed Brown or similar.

Onward Allusion
February 14, 2014, 11:06 PM
All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints?

That's the thing! If it was any other gun that required a fluff/buff/ramp polishing to function properly (ala Kel-Tec or Hi Point), you would have legions saying that it is a design/gun that wasn't ready for prime time or the manufacturer makes garbage because of crappy QA. BUT if it's a 1911, some of the same people will tell you that it should be expected...break in...polish ramp...whatever. Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy?

buckhorn_cortez
February 14, 2014, 11:59 PM
This is why I'm not a fan of tight 1911s. I'll take the looser one that gives up an inch in grouping at 25 yards. I'm skeptical of even a well made, massaged, tight 1911 firing hundreds of rounds of ball ammo in a day reliably or firing multiple types of hollow-points reliably for one box.

This is one of those Internet memes that get repeated and repeated until it becomes an echo chamber of people telling the same story.

It's hard to find an original Colt as it came from the factory in WWI or WWII. If you should ever get the chance to handle or shoot a nearly new 1911 from that period, you will find that they ARE NOT loose and do not rattle.

The military 1911's that rattle are the ones that have been used in WWII then the Korean war and then Vietnam and rebuilt a number of times; are worn out and rattle. That's what people seem to think is "normal" - it's not.

All of my 1911's are what people call "tight." That has nothing to do with reliability as loose guns just jam up on larger pieces of dirt while tightly fitted 1911's don't let the dirt get into the gun at all.

I generally clean my 1911's between 750 - 2,000 rounds depending upon the amount of time I have available for that task. If you keep the gun lubricated properly it will function just fine.

As for breaking in a 1911, the ONLY manufacturer that recommends that is Kimber. Wilson and Baer only recommend shooting the gun without cleaning it for a certain number of rounds. I have no problem with that.

I have a full custom built by Bob Marvel. Bob ran 200 rounds through it prior to shipment and then recommended running it wet and shooting another 200 rounds before using it for competition. He supplied a 4 oz bottle of Bob Marvel Custom Oil with the gun to ensure it was lubricated with the oil he preferred.

When I get a new 1911, I take it to the range and run 300 - 500 rounds through it just to get used to the gun and the way it works and how the sights work.

What you're doing by running the gun wet and not cleaning it for 200-500 rounds is letting the crud build up in the rails which acts as a lapping compound - it polishes the rails and ultimately, the gun will run better.

You don't want to do that - fine. But, unlike polymer guns, the 1911 has full length metal rails. The smoother the rails, the better the gun will run. That's the trick with a 1911 - shoot it a lot and it will work better.

That doesn't fit your personal philosophy on how guns should work - then don't buy a 1911.

I have had 1911's jam, and SIGs jam, and have witnessed Glocks jamming in competition to the point the shooter had to quit the stage and change guns for the next stage. It happens, they're all mechanical devices

buckhorn_cortez
February 15, 2014, 12:20 AM
All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints?

All of mine run with hollow points. But, here's the deal. The 1911 was originally designed to run with ball ammo - meaning the bullet has a round nose to it. If you're smart, you don't run a hollow point with a wide opening on the front that could catch on the barrel. However, IF the gun has been throated and ramped to run hollow points - you can be assured it will run whatever you want to use.

If you are unsure of the setup, there is a simple answer. Use Winchester PDX1 ammunition, virtually every 1911 will easily run that ammunition. The reason is that the contour of the bullet is nearly a duplicate of a round nose, with only a very small hollow point opening in the front. I use the PDX1 in all of my semi-autos and have NEVER had a malfunction with that ammunition. The bonus is that the cases are nickel plated and you can leave the ammunition in a magazine for extended periods of time without being concerned about the cases oxidizing, sticking together, etc.

benzy2
February 15, 2014, 01:40 AM
Lets be honest. Not all 1911's are created equal. Most times you get what you pay for and occasionally even the higher priced models run into snags.

Now, here's what I find funny. The OP mentioned that both of his Spartans were bought second hand, not new. Seems the bigger issue is in the desire to save a penny, the purchase of someone else's lemon presented. I'm all for used firearms, but I also accept the reason it went in on trade may have been a reliability issue. The second thing I find funny is that there has been no mention of sending the pistol in to STI for a check up. Part of your purchase is the quality of the warranty and STI seems to be regarded as towards the top of that list. I would give them a chance to fix it before giving up. If multiple trips are required, I would change my tune but even the best have one squeak out now and then. Plus, I'm not sure what all the boys in Texas inspect on each pistol of the Spartan line as it comes in from the Philippines.

As for the Sig, well again let's be honest, its not a "to spec" 1911. They do seem to have good quality and they are far from a budget pistol. If its having problems, I would try to dive deeper into how and why its jamming. Either fix the issue, send it in to be fixed, or send it down the road.

If I had to pick a pistol to go bang out of the box, it wouldn't be a 1911. That's not why I'm attracted to 1911's. If reliability is your main goal, I'd look elsewhere. The features it does present are more than enough for me to own what I do and continue to shop for other configurations. It won't be a carry gun for me, but they always go to the range with me.

To each their own. I do suggest letting STI give it a try once before throwing in the towel. Same with letting Sig have a go. I'm not going to defend the 1911 because its a 1911 but I'd also go through a few attempts to remedy any issues, regardless of being a 1911 or not, and see how that goes before losing faith in the type.

1911Tuner
February 15, 2014, 02:06 AM
I've wondered how much aggravation 1911 shooters have gone through due to parallel feed-lip mags.

I'd be afraid to guess...and the trouble comes mostly from the too early, too abrupt release typical of wadcutter magazines. Then, there's the matter of the lack of a speed bump on the followers of the 8-round variety to keep positive control of the last round. Stir in a spring with fewer active coils than should be there, and it's a wonder that they run at all.

Stir in a half cup of Dremel Dan's Double Throwdown Ramp'n'Throat Job...and the complaints come rollin' in.

Ah, well.

wriggly
February 15, 2014, 02:47 AM
I have an Ed Brown Executive Carry, a Dan Wesson Guardian, and a Cylinder & Slide Super Grade Commander, all brand new and unfired as of yet. Now after reading this thread, I dont think I will sleep tonight. :eek:

sauer1911
February 15, 2014, 10:31 AM
OK FINE! Send me your 1911's and I'll take on the burden.

be safe

Torian
February 15, 2014, 10:42 AM
I tried so very hard to become a 1911 fiend. But I'm giving up on them. Last night did it for me. A friend of mine bought one of the latest Sig 1911s (a nearby shop had a deal on them) and we met up after work to try it out. I hadn't brought my problem child Spartan (I have two, one works great, the other needs work and time I haven't been able to bring myself to put into it), instead I only brought my S&W 15-3 and Rossi 462.

My friend supposedly oiled the gun and everything so it was wet. I could feel a film of oil on the gun when I picked it up. We got two magazines into it and then the headaches started. A stove pipe, easy to clear, a few shots, then a a lock back there was an empty mag but there were rounds left. Then jam, then jam, a couple shots, then jam.

Out of a hundred rounds it jammed at least two dozen times. We got through three mags without issues and it started again. I vice gripped the damn gun thinking maybe it was limp writing but it did it on me too. Then I tried each hand to see if maybe when I was shooting left handed I was knocking the slide catch somehow.

This did not inspire confidence. My buddy hadn't shot it before last night, the mags were what came with it. Maybe he got one of the bad ones and Sig will make it right but after two different 1911s giving me problems. My faith is shaken something awful.

I flat give up on 1911s. I'm going to Glock for .45 ACP needs via a Glock 21. I'd been playing with the idea for a bit and thought about the Sig 220 but after so many easy years with my Glock 20, I'm just going to do the Glock 21.

I'm sure I'll eventually get my second Spartan running right but I won't trust it, so it'll get converted to .38 Super and used as a range toy. And I've got plenty range toys, no danger of a shortage there my friend. My Ruger 90 has been solid as a bank vault when it comes to reliability and while it's not the best shooter I've ever fired in .45 ACP, it'll still get fifty rounds on a 11"x8" piece of paper at fifty yards. Though the groupings may not be tight or pretty, the gun goes bang every time.

The pursuit of the 1911 was fun but....it wasn't me. I'm a Magnum Dweeb. It's all about hand cannons and ridiculous velocities. Spend a little more time with my Ruger SRH .454 Casull. Get a few more revolvers, and stop pursuing semis after 2014 (after getting a Glock 21 and Remington R51).

Oh 1911, I tried to love you but like a feral mutt brought in from the cold, you turned and bit me with malice where I only wanted to welcome you. So alas two of your platform shall reside in my safe. One .45 ACP, one .38 Super. And while I will take you to the range and perhaps smile after a good day of shooting. I will still in my heart, fear your unreliable streak waiting for when I should need you most and so I will not carry you to where I am not at the range. Adieu.
Reading this post reminded me of why I purchased a used (tried and true) Springfield Champion Operator. I was originally looking at a Sig...but I was worried about this exact type of problem.

HellTrain
February 15, 2014, 10:59 AM
^^^^reminds me why I went with the old reliable glock 21 for my 45 acp needs. I don't need to take it to a smith, worry about weather it'll shoot, or have to break it in for it to work right, heck the trigger on the glock gets better after it gets broke in.

mattk
February 15, 2014, 03:15 PM
So you have an STI Spartan that doesnt work? Send it back. STI will fix it.
I don't know why but if a 1911 doesn't work people just bitch or try to fix it themselves, if a glock breaks people send it to glock immediately.
Yes Glocks break.
My 1911s work.

Stevie-Ray
February 15, 2014, 03:35 PM
All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints? Both my Colts have thousands of hollowpoints through, my Delta, almost expressly hollowpoints. My Mark IV, every bullet type imaginable, but mostly truncated cone, which generally exhibit the most problems. In fairness, this is a custom barrel/comp system, though the original barrel was 100%. It just had underwhelming accuracy. My Kimber is an Ultra CDP and has NOTHING but hollowpoints through it, specifically Hydra-Shoks and HSTs.

Onward Allusion
February 15, 2014, 03:41 PM
wriggly
I have an Ed Brown Executive Carry, a Dan Wesson Guardian, and a Cylinder & Slide Super Grade Commander, all brand new and unfired as of yet. Now after reading this thread, I dont think I will sleep tonight.

I would hope that any gun you will be using for self-defense would be test fired and broken in with a few hundred flawless rounds. If it's strictly a collector's piece or range toy, then it really doesn't matter if it is unfired or if it chokes (IMO).

mattk
February 15, 2014, 03:43 PM
Yes HPs run fine on my 1911s

Pointshoot
February 15, 2014, 04:31 PM
If you're going to conceal carry a 1911 (not just punch paper for fun at the range) you better be a dedicated enthusiast. It takes much more time & effort to properly maintain and run a 1911. If you're not going to expend those resources, other options are likely a better choice for you. ( I like the 1911 and used to CCW them for many years. ) Some guys will get their new pistol, put a couple boxes of ball target & maybe a few rounds of that expensive self defense ammo through it, and consider themselves good to go. That ain't a real test.

I could go on and on with my own opinions, but here's an article by a true expert. There are also other resources on his website on the 1911 (and other pistols):


http://www.10-8performance.com/pages/Choosing-a-1911-for-Duty-Use.html

1858
February 15, 2014, 04:53 PM
Stir in a half cup of Dremel Dan's Double Throwdown Ramp'n'Throat Job...and the complaints come rollin' in.


1911Tuner, what are your thoughts on the new chamber geometry from Colt?

CAR
February 15, 2014, 04:56 PM
I own 6 Colts, ranging from a 1974 Gold Cup to a 2013 Rail Gun. Never had an issue with any of them.

SIGLBER
February 15, 2014, 06:33 PM
I had two Kimber Ulta Carry SS 3" guns. Total crap.Would not funtion long no matter what was done to them. All my SA including a loaded Ultra Carry (officers size) and all my S&W 1911's have been 100%. Don't carry them often. I'm down to a S&W Gunsite Scandium and the Springfield Ultra carry. Wouldn't trade them for anything.
But I tend to carry more "modern"auto pistols. Lighter, higher round counts in whatever caliber including .45, simpler designs, less safeties, I like simple.
Pull, point, and shoot works for me. Love 1911's for all the general reasons. Flat, natural pointers, very accurate, great triggers, a real piece of Americana. And I would and have carried them. Just feel their are better choices out there for concealed carry.

1911Tuner
February 15, 2014, 09:55 PM
1911Tuner, what are your thoughts on the new chamber geometry from Colt?

If you mean the new "Dimple Throat" the majority work very well. Occasionally, one doesn't, but it's a simple matter to change it back to the old standard configuration.

The idea behind it is to insure reliable feed and RTB with a variety of bullet shapes, and provide good head support as a bonus, but if the gun is within spec to start with, the head support is a non-issue.

What I don't like is the narrowed barrel hoods and corresponding recesses in the slides. Bad show, Colt.

rick melear
February 15, 2014, 10:11 PM
Interesting reads, I own 3 1911s, Colt Combat Commander bought new in 1980, S&W PD new in 2009 and a RIA Tactical in 9mm purchased a few months ago. All three have been pretty much flawless. I got into reloading not long after buying the Colt and it ate my rookie reloads without batting an eye. Guess I've been lucky but all three have been great.

peacebutready
February 16, 2014, 12:17 AM
As for breaking in a 1911, the ONLY manufacturer that recommends that is Kimber. Wilson and Baer only recommend shooting the gun without cleaning it for a certain number of rounds. I have no problem with that.


I'm certain Para-Ordnance and Rock Island also mention a 500 round break-in period.

Old Fuff
February 16, 2014, 12:30 PM
Gee..... :scrutiny:

I wonder where we'd be if during World War Two (or for that matter, World War One) all of the 1911 or 1911A1 pistols produced by various government contractors had to have 500 give-or-take rounds run through them before they could be packed up and delivered for issue? :uhoh:

miles1
February 16, 2014, 01:01 PM
^ Which makes me wish that the 1911 design stayed in the hands of those 2-3 company's.

WinThePennant
February 16, 2014, 01:05 PM
I don't know a lot about 1911s. I do know that I've owned two, and they've both been every bit as good as my Glocks. Others have a different story to tell.

I will tell you that the best bang for the buck 1911 was the Norinco I bought sometime in the early 90s. Man, that thing never failed, was accurate as hell, and actually looked pretty good (gov't model). I sold it because I had a real problem with owning a Chinese made 1911. But, man, that thing ran like a top.

Onward Allusion
February 16, 2014, 01:17 PM
I had a Norc, too. Reliable as can be. Accurate enough for a "duty" gun. But know what? That thing rattled (just a little) and that's probably why it ran and ran and ran.

WinThePennant
February 16, 2014, 04:27 PM
I had a Norc, too. Reliable as can be. Accurate enough for a "duty" gun. But know what? That thing rattled (just a little) and that's probably why it ran and ran and ran.
Yup -- My Norinco rattled, too.

peacebutready
February 16, 2014, 05:19 PM
I wonder where we'd be if during World War Two (or for that matter, World War One) all of the 1911 or 1911A1 pistols produced by various government contractors had to have 500 give-or-take rounds run through them before they could be packed up and delivered for issue?


I guess tolerances and hand-fitting made them reliable from the get-go.

OTOH, maybe they fired a mag or two before calling it GTG. I haven't read anything like that.

peacebutready
February 16, 2014, 05:24 PM
I will tell you that the best bang for the buck 1911 was the Norinco I bought sometime in the early 90s. Man, that thing never failed, was accurate as hell, and actually looked pretty good (gov't model).


I wish I could pick one of those up these days. I wonder if there are any LNIB ones out there and how much they go for.

Maybe Zastava in the former Yugoslavia should make them. They make new Tokarevs in both 7.62mm and 9mm. They even make a smaller one in 9mm (M88A).

1911Tuner
February 16, 2014, 06:30 PM
I guess tolerances and hand-fitting made them reliable from the get-go.

No. Adhering to blueprint specs made them reliable...and there wasn't a lot of hand-fitting done. Mostly gauging and cherry-picking which was rarely necessary during final assembly...and the guns weren't rattle trap loose when they were new. That's another myth that likely started when a slew of old, badly worn military pistols were released for sale through the NRA and the Civilian Marksmanship Program.

peacebutready
February 16, 2014, 06:49 PM
No. Adhering to blueprint specs made them reliable...and there wasn't a lot of hand-fitting done.


I've seen a 1911 where the nose of the round seemed closer to the feed ramp with the slide back and a mag inserted compared to other 1911s.

miles1
February 16, 2014, 07:26 PM
1911Tuner....Who in your opinion follows the classic design the closets?

kbheiner7
February 17, 2014, 10:23 PM
Hard for me to relate to the reported 1911 problems.

1911Tuner
February 18, 2014, 05:10 AM
1911Tuner....Who in your opinion follows the classic design the closets?

Colt, if you can ignore the Series 80 system.

stressed
February 18, 2014, 05:33 AM
I have only owned 1 1911. Double stack para warthawg. Properly lubed like allmy flawless functioning other weapons, at times struggled to get through it's 10 round mag without 3 failures. Mostly where an unfired round would end up pointing up primer down out of the ejection port with slide closed on it. It was a while ago I owned it but plonger arm failed to fall down in slide, and ripped out the back of the metal of the slide after fired. Sent it back to para. Waited a year, gotit back with a cheap parkarized finish on filled in slide, they even parkerized over the sights and everything, had to paint new dots. Still had problems and got rid of it. Insane for what they cost new.

I know people have 1911's that run good for them. Hell my luger runs flawlessly that I would trust my life on it and other people claim of how unreliable they can be.

bluekouki86
February 18, 2014, 06:37 AM
I have only owned 1 1911. Double stack para warthawg.

Could have stopped right there. So far from the 1911 design, I don't even consider it a 1911.

mattk
February 18, 2014, 05:00 PM
When I shot USPSA every weekend, we called malfunctions Paras. I have heard their single stack guns are better.

peacebutready
February 19, 2014, 12:55 AM
When I shot USPSA every weekend, we called malfunctions Paras.


That was funny. I'm surprised they haven't gone under.

peacebutready
February 19, 2014, 12:56 AM
Colt, if you can ignore the Series 80 system.


My guess would have been Springfield. I guess they have more MIM/cast parts.

kilibreaux
February 19, 2014, 03:04 AM
Glock has shown the world how reliable autoloading pistols CAN BE.
However, long BEFORE GLOCK there existed what has become a legend for both power AND reliability - the U.S. GI issue 1911A1 pistol in .45 ACP! Sgt. Alvin York didn't KILL a bunch of Germans in WWII with a 1911 that didn't work...the 1911 "pattern" has been vetted on battlefields around the world...yes it's reputation has become ridiculously mythologized, but that reputation has it roots in reality....many men, in combat, have pulled out a 1911 and given good account...the pistol performed and their exploits entered the annals of history.
COMMERCIAL 1911 "pattern" pistols are NOT the same as military issue...military issue guns are much "looser" (I know I was issued a 1911 as a mortar gunner assigned to the 1/504 PIR, 82 ABN Div). I qualified expert with an AS ISSUED 1911 at distances out to 75 yards...the pistol never malfunctioned and since I qualified expert the pistol was clearly capable of hitting man size targets 75 yards away!
The problem with commercial models is they're built "tight" intentionally because this is what the consumer EXPECTS! The consumer who pays $1,000 for a pistol EXPECTS it to be smooth and tight....when somewhat loose is much better for combat. This is where "breaking in" comes to light. We thinking in terms of firing 200 rounds to break in a pistol built to shoot 100,000 rounds! A 1911 with 5,000 rounds fired through it is still virtually brand new! A revolver chambered in .454 Casull with 5,000 rounds of REAL Casull ammo shot is virtually clapped out....
The problem is...typical Americans think MONEY buys the best...yet that's not true when it comes to whores...not true when it comes to cars, not true (by far)when it comes to GUNS! Best way to approach the 1911 is buy cheap, like this amazing RIA 1911 GI model I just snatched up for $329, and shoot enough rounds through it to break it in...the problem isn't the gun, it's the consumer's expectations...they want Glock reliable, yet they want $1,000 "fitment of parts." The two are mutually exclusive.

1911Tuner
February 19, 2014, 07:43 AM
My guess would have been Springfield. I guess they have more MIM/cast parts.

They've all got MIM parts. Some more than others. I meant more dimensionally within spec than reference to materials.

mes228
February 19, 2014, 08:53 AM
!911's can be reliable. But as often as not out of the box, they can choke. I have several that are reliable but they are the exception. My Baer Mono Heavy has been flawless as my Ten X and I've kept them. Both of those are high end custom & semi-custom 1911's. I also have some inexpensive 1911's out of the Philippines that run very well. Long story short is I shoot 1911's a lot, but I carry a Glock.

peacebutready
February 19, 2014, 05:55 PM
They've all got MIM parts. Some more than others.


Last I heard, Dan Wesson didn't have any MIM parts.

1911Tuner
February 19, 2014, 06:09 PM
Last I heard, Dan Wesson didn't have any MIM parts.

Yeah. I heard the same thing about Sigs...but when I tore one down, I found'em.

1858
February 19, 2014, 07:25 PM
Glock has shown the world how reliable autoloading pistols CAN BE.

:rolleyes:

SIG had been there and done that long before GLOCK fanboys were pooping in their nappies!!!

WC145
February 19, 2014, 07:38 PM
And Colt set the standard for reliable sidearms that saw the worlds greatest military through two world wars and dozens of other engagements, "conflicts", and "police actions" for the better part of a century, long before Glock and SIG even came on the scene.

peacebutready
February 19, 2014, 08:56 PM
[QUOTE]Sgt. Alvin York didn't KILL a bunch of Germans in WWII with a 1911 that didn't work...

Anyone know if he changed mags mid-battle?


COMMERCIAL 1911 "pattern" pistols are NOT the same as military issue...military issue guns are much "looser"

The problem with commercial models is they're built "tight" intentionally because this is what the consumer EXPECTS!

The tight 1911s can perform impressive groupings. That's one of the selling points. I don't want one, though.

A 1911 with 5,000 rounds fired through it is still virtually brand new!

Not most of the modern ones, which have MIM parts. Better change those parts at that round count...

peacebutready
February 19, 2014, 08:59 PM
:rolleyes:

SIG had been there and done that long before GLOCK fanboys were pooping in their nappies!!!


With tons more character!

CoalTrain49
February 19, 2014, 09:03 PM
I've had a few Colt's. All of them worked just fine, new and used.

Sig is a Johnny-Come-Lately to the 1911. Maybe they don't know how to put one together so it works.

Why would one buy a copy 1911 when Colt has been making them for 100+ years. I wouldn't buy a Colt P220 if they made one, I would buy a Sig.

peacebutready
February 20, 2014, 12:05 AM
Sig is a Johnny-Come-Lately to the 1911. Maybe they don't know how to put one together so it works.

Why would one buy a copy 1911 when Colt has been making them for 100+ years.

Theirs has an external extractor. It looks a bit different with that and the way the slide is shaped. Maybe a European take on the 1911? IIRC, one respected 'net gun journalist claims their extractor is either a little too high or low on the slide.

1911Tuner
February 20, 2014, 04:40 AM
Not most of the modern ones, which have MIM parts. Better change those parts at that round count..

Generalize much?

In the fall of 1991 and wither of 1992, I bought two 91A1 Colts strictly for beater duty, and I've beat on'em hard.

Together, they're approaching 400,000 rounds, about evenly split. They're both on their 3rd barrels, and they both came with MIM sears and disconnects among a few other parts.

One is still operating on the original sear and disconnect, and the other on the original sear. On that one, I changed out the disconnect at roughly 75,000 rounds...not because it failed, but because it looked a little worn and I wanted to nip any pending hammer follow issues in the bud. I also changed out the plunger tube on one of the Colts when one of the legs broke a couple years after being restaked.

A friend of mine brought a NRM Colt to me to have me replace the MIM sear and disconnect with aftermarket parts, despite me telling him that the OEM set would probably outlast his ammunition budget.

When he said that he didn't want the originals, I arranged a scientific experiment for him. I laid the sear on an anvil, arched side up, and whacked it 3-4 times with a 4 ounce hammer. It didn't break. It didn't crack. When I installed it in another pistol, it function as intended, albeit with a pretty rough trigger.

Then I clamped the disconnect in a vise and whacked it with the hammer. It didn't break until the 2nd lick...after it had bent about 15 degrees.

Good MIM can be very good. It's just not well suited for all applications. It doesn't generally fare very well with impact stresses, for example...as with a hammer...nor does it seem to like to be sprung as with an extractor. For most others tasks, it's fine assuming that it's good quality to start with.

And for the record, military/ordnance spec pistols weren't rattle-trap loose when they were new...and loose doesn't guarantee reliability any more than tight guarantees accuracy.
Too loose can be worse for reliability than a little too tight for a number of reasons...wide gaps allowing larger pieces of dirt and grit to get in being one of them.

peacebutready
February 20, 2014, 07:56 PM
Generalize much?

In the fall of 1991 and wither of 1992, I bought two 91A1 Colts strictly for beater duty, and I've beat on'em hard.

Together, they're approaching 400,000 rounds, about evenly split. They're both on their 3rd barrels, and they both came with MIM sears and disconnects among a few other parts.

Colt doesn't strike me as having typical MIM quality parts. My guess is most other manufacturer's 1911 MIM parts are not as good.

1911Tuner
February 21, 2014, 03:18 AM
Colt doesn't strike me as having typical MIM quality parts. My guess is most other manufacturer's 1911 MIM parts are not as good.

They do. To date...aside from the occasional plunger tube...I've never seen a Colt MIM part fail.

In the beginning, Kimber used good quality MIM. Somewhere along the line, that changed. I don't know if they decided to go with a different vendor to save a few pennies per part...or if their usual vendor's QA went fugasi...but it happened. I understand that's been rectified in the last few years.

Of course, Colt has never used MIM hammers, and they learned a hard lesson with MIM extractors about 10 years ago. As far as I know, Colt is the only major manufacturer that ever tried MIM extractors.

There's also been a lot of progress in technology since the MIM bugaboo raised its head. Good quality MIM is becoming more common...and bad MIM less so.

Hometeached1
February 21, 2014, 01:14 PM
Sgt. Alvin York didn't KILL a bunch of Germans in WWII with a 1911 that didn't work...the 1911 "pattern" has been vetted on battlefields around the world.

Sorry, but Sgt. York fought in WWI. Yes he did have one that worked though.

peacebutready
February 21, 2014, 02:16 PM
They do. To date...aside from the occasional plunger tube...I've never seen a Colt MIM part fail.

In the beginning, Kimber used good quality MIM. Somewhere along the line, that changed. I don't know if they decided to go with a different vendor to save a few pennies per part...or if their usual vendor's QA went fugasi...but it happened. I understand that's been rectified in the last few years.


I didn't word my previous post well. I meant Colt's MIM seems of higher or much higher quality than other 1911 manufacturer's MIM parts.

It would be good to know at what round count should a person replace MIM parts in the more typical brands like Kimber, Rock Island, Para, Springfield, etc.

1911Tuner
February 21, 2014, 03:21 PM
It would be good to know at what round count should a person replace MIM parts in the more typical brands like Kimber, Rock Island, Para, Springfield, etc.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

You could ask the same question regarding machined parts.

As a rule, if an MIM part survives for 500 cycles, it'll likely last for 50,000 as long as impact isn't part of the function.

One thing you can be sure of. Like it or hate it...it's here to stay.

exdetsgt
February 21, 2014, 10:01 PM
I've got a new minor problem with my new American Classic Commander. First problem was that I couldn't get the slide stop out. Couple of swipes with a diamond file on one edge of the little notch in the slide, problem solved.

Second problem is new to me: Every once in awhile during shooting the slide does not go fully forward into battery. Sometime I can give it a little push and it goes forward. Other times not. Then I have to drop the magazine, retract the slide, and the round falls out into my hand. Close examination of the cartridge reveals nothing. Looks just the same as when I loaded it. These are not reloads but right out of the box new.

Could it be that I need to buy a stiffer spring?

1911Tuner
February 22, 2014, 12:22 AM
Sounds more like a little too much deflection in the extractor...or too much of the tensioning wall showing past the guide block it passes through.

If it looks anything like this, there's about twice as much deflection than it should have.

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e243/1911Tuner/ZDeflection_zps7ba1f5b6.jpg

exdetsgt
February 22, 2014, 09:54 PM
Thanks, 1911 Tuner. Doesn't stick out that far. Took it over to the Douglas LGS where both owners are 1911 guys. I wrote out what you said and they said you definitely knew 1911's. So they checked that first. Wasn't out of spec.

Then they took out the barrel and discovered that when they tried inserting a round by hand (using an aluminum case so it would mark clearly) they discovered that it did not seat easily into the barrel and you could see the mark on the case. Then one of them used a shaft with markings that was supposed to seat precisely at a certain mark. It didn't quite make it. So they fixed that problem and now an inserted round seats precisely where it should.

I'll take it to the range again and see if now it runs as it should.

Once again, thanks for your suggestions and the photograph.

tinygnat219
February 23, 2014, 12:53 AM
I have 4 1911s right now and I don't carry any of them. I take them out to the range every now and then if I want to experience them. Here's why I don't carry them:
1. Too heavy for the limited capacity of 8 or even 10 rounds.
2. Too finicky. Yes, they are too finicky for me to depend on.
3. Capacity. 7-8 rounds may have worked well 75 years ago or so, but we've made progress. I prefer something with minimum 15 rounds.
4. Manual safeties. I generally disdain them.

For me, the 1911 is a quaint anachronism whose time has come and gone and has been surpassed by other options. That is not to say that it is less effective, or that it's not a useful firearm. Shoot, there are more variants being made by more entities than at any other time in it's storied 100 plus year history. It's just not something I'll keep in my toolbox of different carry guns.
I'm more of a polymer framed 9MM kinda guy. It's a simple system that works for me and has no manual safeties.
I DO trade for 1911s though as they tend to hold their value pretty solidly.

peacebutready
February 23, 2014, 01:15 AM
I have 4 1911s right now and I don't carry any of them. I take them out to the range every now and then if I want to experience them. Here's why I don't carry them:
1. Too heavy for the limited capacity of 8 or even 10 rounds.
2. Too finicky. Yes, they are too finicky for me to depend on.
3. Capacity. 7-8 rounds may have worked well 75 years ago or so, but we've made progress. I prefer something with minimum 15 rounds.
4. Manual safeties. I generally disdain them.

I'm more of a polymer framed 9MM kinda guy. It's a simple system that works for me and has no manual safeties.

1. Weight tames the recoil. Slender profile for the 1911s, especially with slim-grips.
2. Finicky out the box frequently. Also subpar parts like extractors and MIM parts. Extractors can be replaced with original spring-steel spec ones from Cylinder & Slide. MIM parts can be replaced with tool-steel parts.
3. IDPA and IPSC shooting will build proficiency for mag reloads.

Trigger on 1911s, especially tuned ones are much sweeter than the polymer guns. The polymer gun triggers can be tuned as well, though. It still won't match a 1911 and a tuned polymer might be best with a manual safety.

.45 does have more oomph than the 9mm.

1911Tuner
February 23, 2014, 06:23 AM
Took it over to the Douglas LGS where both owners are 1911 guys. I wrote out what you said and they said you definitely knew 1911's. So they checked that first. Wasn't out of spec.

That deflection issue is one of those little things that not many people know about...and these days it's more common than you'd think. With roughly half the failure to go to or return to battery problems that I see...the position of the extractor in the breechface is the bug.

We hear the advice to loosen up extractor tension when a simple failure to go to battery is in the works, but if excessive deflection is the cause, you can relieve tension until the gun fails to extract and/or eject without curing the RTB problem.

When the distance between those blocks is within spec, and the deflection is good at .010-.102 inch...the gun will run like a top with a lot more extractor tension than most will tell you is ideal.

tomrkba
February 26, 2014, 12:01 PM
The Real Truth About 1911s (http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3250) describes some of the problems of the 1911 and mirrors what I have been saying: you have to be a technician as well as a shooter with the 1911.

mattk
February 26, 2014, 12:18 PM
The vast majority of quality brand 1911s run 100% with decent mags. You don't have to be a technician or gunsmith to own one. The problem is there are so many brands out there and not all of them are good plus there are even more mag manufacturers.
Sure good companies occasionally have a lemon but if its Colt STI or Springfield, they will fix it.
I have seen plenty of broken glocks and smiths and sigs out there. For some reason people with broken guns that aren't 1911s just send them in for warranty work.

1911Tuner
February 26, 2014, 03:07 PM
The Real Truth About 1911s

The one picture in that write-up is called a Bolt Over Base misfeed, and it's a magazine spring problem. In about 90% of the feed problems, the magazine is at the root of it...and in about 90% of magazine-related feed problems, the spring or the follower is the cause...and most of all that stems from using magazines that deviate from the original specs.

Wish I had a dollar for every problem 1911 that I've "fixed" by doing no more than handing the disgruntled owner a few of my magazines to try. I tell ya, they've been plumb mystified when their problems vanished.

The rest of it? Oh, how I lol'd and gigglesnorted. Wish I could buy him for what he knows and sell him for what he thinks he knows.

And you can run tell him that I said that. I don't mind a bit.

mirrors what I have been saying: you have to be a technician as well as a shooter with the 1911.

I guess all those hundreds of thousands of GIs who carried'em were armorers, then.

HDCamel
February 26, 2014, 03:19 PM
I agree with Tuner, as always, but we also need to remember that it's not that the magazines are necessarily "bad" so much as they don't really jive with certain 1911-pattern pistols.

For example, my cheap Turkish copy runs Kimber mags just fine, but my buddy's Springfield can't run 3 rounds through them without jamming. Interestingly enough, the Turk doesn't like Wilson Combats for some reason. More expensive does not equate to more reliable.

That being said, magazines made to mil-spec always seem to work well. Doubly so when the gun is mil-spec too.

Hangingrock
February 26, 2014, 03:40 PM
HDCamelDoubly so when the gun is mil-spec too.: What I am going to ask is not meant to be nettlesome or confrontational but I must ask the following. What 1911 series pistols have been built to Mil-Spec since those produced during WW2?

1911Tuner
February 26, 2014, 04:19 PM
I must ask the following. What 1911 series pistols have been built to Mil-Spec since those produced during WW2?

As far as dimensions and tolerances go? Most of'em...as long as they're single stack with internal extractors. Some are a little tighter than they need to be, but that's really neither here nor there. I've occasionally run into one with the feed ramp or the frame rails cut wrong or mislocated, but that's a matter of QC and a job for the warranty department.

The majority of the ones that I mentioned "fixing" with proper magazines were built by various manufacturers in the last 20 years.

And I didn't polish any feed ramps.

Gun Master
February 26, 2014, 04:59 PM
Not all 1911's are created equal.

I'm satisfied with my 1980 Series Colt Gov. Model. I also have a clone (Star Model P).

Good for the money shooter is Rock Island Armory. Better, but more expensive, Remington R1, which also has a nicer look. (As an aside, I'm looking forward to the Rem. R51 - 9mm later on).

peacebutready
February 26, 2014, 06:35 PM
Wish I had a dollar for every problem 1911 that I've "fixed" by doing no more than handing the disgruntled owner a few of my magazines to try. I tell ya, they've been plumb mystified when their problems vanished.

The rest of it? Oh, how I lol'd and gigglesnorted. Wish I could buy him for what he knows and sell him for what he thinks he knows.


I think they're into parallel feed lip mags.

peacebutready
February 26, 2014, 06:38 PM
I've occasionally run into one with the feed ramp or the frame rails cut wrong or mislocated, but that's a matter of QC and a job for the warranty department.

I don't think the warranty department of the manufacturers that make mistakes like that want to be bothered. A lot of owners have had to bite the bullet, no pun intended.

tomrkba
March 5, 2014, 08:58 AM
MY PERSONAL PATH AWAY FROM THE 1911 by Hilton Yam (http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=6631&utm_source=feedly&utm_reader=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=my-personal-path-away-from-the-1911)

Tim and I taught a few 1911 specific classes in the last couple years, and we typically saw a failure rate of over 50% of the student pistols in each class. Something that really resonated with us was a pair of LEO’s who came to one class with the 1911s that they carried for work. The guys enjoyed the class so much they came back again the following year. This second time they still brought their 1911s, but told us they started to carry Glocks at work after seeing all the things that went wrong with the student guns and how difficult it was to keep the guns in top shape.

Being bombarded with nothing but the failures of the 1911 design, day in and day out – days, nights, weekdays, weekends, in person, on line, via email, by telephone, at work, on vacation – pretty much wore me out for the charm of tinkering with the gun. It is one thing to keep after 1-2 of your own 1911s, and a whole other matter to be a professional surrounded by guns constantly seeking your attention.

It is easy to get caught up in the mystique and history of the 1911, but the design is over 100 years old, and we have learned a few things about designing and manufacturing since then. If you enjoy the craftsmanship of a finely built 1911 or you enjoy tinkering on your own, by all means continue to enjoy them. However, if training, shooting, and performance is your primary goal and you lack the resources, time, patience, or knowledge to keep after a 1911, then be realistic and choose something more modern.

tomrkba
March 5, 2014, 09:03 AM
Not all 1911's are created equal.


But they all start out on the short bus and tend to return to it even after the owner has spent gobs of money.

SP2000
March 5, 2014, 09:18 AM
I like the look and feel of 1911's, but there is no way I'd trust one as a carry gun/nightstand gun over my Glock. JMO. Far too many little glitches or kinks with it. For the record, I've had no problems with my 1911's.

1858
March 5, 2014, 02:08 PM
If you enjoy the craftsmanship of a finely built 1911 or you enjoy tinkering on your own, by all means continue to enjoy them. However, if training, shooting, and performance is your primary goal and you lack the resources, time, patience, or knowledge to keep after a 1911, then be realistic and choose something more modern.

Yam makes a good point here. For me my 1911s are all about the journey whereas my SIGs and Rugers are all about the destination.

Stevie-Ray
March 5, 2014, 02:12 PM
But they all start out on the short bus and tend to return to it even after the owner has spent gobs of money. :rolleyes: Uh huh. Like the $425 I spent buying my Delta Elite? The $459 I spent buying my Mark IV? Or the $950 I spent buying my Kimber UCDP? Because there has only been ammo and cleaning since, on all three.

Potatohead
March 5, 2014, 02:34 PM
Got to run and get more popcorn!:D
lol

Potatohead
March 5, 2014, 02:42 PM
What exactly do you guys mean by a "tuned" gun?

tomrkba
March 5, 2014, 02:43 PM
Like the $425 I spent buying my Delta Elite? The $459 I spent buying my Mark IV? Or the $950 I spent buying my Kimber UCDP? Because there has only been ammo and cleaning since, on all three.

It's amazing how many perfect 1911's people have.

Where was that sale on Delta Elites? I would love to save 70% on a new one.

What exactly do you guys mean by a "tuned" gun?

I define "tuned" as one that has been worked on by a gunsmith for the purposes of making it reliable and/or improving aspects of its performance such as the trigger pull.

farm23
March 5, 2014, 03:01 PM
I haven't read all of this thread so this might not be new. First I like 1911's and carry one when going to town so I am biased. If the gun was "wet" with oil it had too much and I find that much oil is trouble. Second many guns require a break in period. Third not all 1911 are equal and there are some being made that the only thing good about them is the price. Don't give up on the concept as it has been around for a long time and has proven it can be dependable.

miles1
March 5, 2014, 03:49 PM
Slightly off topic.....1911Tuner;are their any "budget" 1911's that you personally would recommend?For those that don't have the $$$$ to spend on a expensive Colt are they better off getting something else?I'm not trying to put you on the spot honest.I would really like your insight that might help people(including me) in deciding whether to invest in this type of gun.Thanks Tuner.

Derek Zeanah
March 5, 2014, 04:23 PM
Tim and I taught a few 1911 specific classes in the last couple years, and we typically saw a failure rate of over 50% of the student pistols in each class. Something that really resonated with us was a pair of LEO’s who came to one class with the 1911s that they carried for work. The guys enjoyed the class so much they came back again the following year. This second time they still brought their 1911s, but told us they started to carry Glocks at work after seeing all the things that went wrong with the student guns and how difficult it was to keep the guns in top shape.

Being bombarded with nothing but the failures of the 1911 design, day in and day out – days, nights, weekdays, weekends, in person, on line, via email, by telephone, at work, on vacation – pretty much wore me out for the charm of tinkering with the gun. It is one thing to keep after 1-2 of your own 1911s, and a whole other matter to be a professional surrounded by guns constantly seeking your attention.
You know, I hear this a lot, but I don't run into that problem myself. Four THR Staff members went to a 1911-only Gunsite course a few years back and we didn't see many problems with the 40,000-some-odd rounds fired. We brought a cheap 1911 (http://www.shootingreviews.com/american-classic-commander-review/) that never fed a complete magazine without misfeeding and it continued to misfeed. I also brought a Rock Island (http://www.shootingreviews.com/rock-island-armory-1911a1/) pistol with less than 50 rounds through it and it didn't misfeed once over 1,200 rounds, despite the fact that I deliberately never cleaned it.

We saw a Ruger choke in a way that it needed to go the the armorer, but that was when Ruger was trying hard to get into the 1911 market and they'd sent one of their marketing guys to Gunsite with a new revision of the pistol. Turned out the extractor spring wasn't up to snuff. But the design was still in testing...

I get that people don't like 1911's. They were designed when labor was cheap and machining was expensive, and times have reversed that relationship. They're made of steel rather than plastic, so they're heavy. They have low capacity single-stack magazines, and everyone knows you need 15+ rounds in a defensive pistol. They need to be carried in condition 1 which frightens some people (generally the same people who aren't frightened of something like a Glock whose only external safety is disengaged by pulling the trigger.)

This doesn't make the design bad, and it certainly doesn't make the design inherently unreliable. We ran a Rock Island $500 special through Gunsite with no problems without cleaning it. We did the same with an STI VIP (http://www.shootingreviews.com/sti-vip-review/), a Baer, and saw lots of other firearms go through the same course of fire without issues over a week. Well-made 1911's are reliable, from the $4,000 custom guns all the way down to the $500 imports (at least some of them).

But the quote listed above? It doesn't match my experience, or the experiences of many here.

But this is the Internet. Everyone's opinion is equally valid, right?

Derek Zeanah
March 5, 2014, 04:30 PM
I should also point out that we used quality magazines, and we lubricated the pistols properly. It's possible other people don't, and this might contribute to the issues that people see...

rbernie
March 5, 2014, 04:47 PM
I've pushing a number of 1911's into 200-300 round workouts on a weekly basis over the course of many years. In that time, I've had extraordinarily few actual issues with any of the pistols, even when up well into the 20K+ rounds counts per pistol. The issues that I had were easily rectified (e.g. loose plunger tube), and none actually tied up the gun and rendered it non-functional.

On the other hand, I don't think that Hilton Yam is a stranger to high round count 1911s and their associated issues. His experience probably trumps mine.

tarosean
March 5, 2014, 04:59 PM
This doesn't make the design bad, and it certainly doesn't make the design inherently unreliable.

If they were that bad, they would have fallen into obscurity much like all the bad designs that never worked throughout the years. I seriously doubt that they would have served our military for 75 years much less be manufactured by so many companies over 100 years later.

I do follow Mr. Yams proving guideline for my 1911's that I put into SD service. Keeping in mind I am just an average Joe (no MIL or LEO either in past or present). So far none of them have failed, with my newest acquisition half way through my testing without a hitch.

1858
March 5, 2014, 05:24 PM
But the quote listed above? It doesn't match my experience, or the experiences of many here.

But this is the Internet. Everyone's opinion is equally valid, right?

I think it's generally accepted that Hilton Yam is a 1911 expert. However, it would have been useful (and helpful) if he had provided more data such as type of failure along with the make and model of the 1911s in question. Simply stating "we typically saw a failure rate of over 50% of the student pistols in each class" isn't that helpful. Given that there are numerous 1911 manufacturers, his anecdotal "evidence" is of little help to someone wanting to buy a well built and reliable 1911.

Gun Master
March 5, 2014, 05:41 PM
I think it's generally accepted that Hilton Yam is a 1911 expert. However, it would have been useful (and helpful) if he had provided more data such as type of failure along with the make and model of the 1911s in question. Simply stating "we typically saw a failure rate of over 50% of the student pistols in each class" isn't that helpful. Given that there are numerous 1911 manufacturers, his anecdotal "evidence" is of little help to someone wanting to buy a well built and reliable 1911.
As stated earlier, "All 1911's are not created equal.":scrutiny:

peacebutready
March 5, 2014, 09:03 PM
On the other hand, I don't think that Hilton Yam is a stranger to high round count 1911s and their associated issues. His experience probably trumps mine.

I noticed on his site he's a big fan of Chip McCormick mags, which have parallel feed-lips.

peacebutready
March 5, 2014, 09:18 PM
I think it's generally accepted that Hilton Yam is a 1911 expert. However, it would have been useful (and helpful) if he had provided more data such as type of failure along with the make and model of the 1911s in question. Simply stating "we typically saw a failure rate of over 50% of the student pistols in each class" isn't that helpful. Given that there are numerous 1911 manufacturers, his anecdotal "evidence" is of little help to someone wanting to buy a well built and reliable 1911.

+1

I noticed some manufacturers that sell a lot of 1911s have a lot of issues, percentage-wise.

The other part is what kind of magazines were used? The 1911 was designed with tapered feed-lip magazines. There's a lot of parallel feed-lip mags out there.

I would be curious to know how many failures would not have happened if tapered feed-lip mags were used. Also, the amount of stoppages with 8-round flush-fit mags or 10 round extended tube mags.

Personal experience: I was using a flush-fit 8 round mag when I think an unfired round was ejected with the spent brass a couple of times. I sent that one back and received the requested 7 round version. I haven't had that problem since.

exdetsgt
March 5, 2014, 09:21 PM
Peacebutready: I recently bought an American Classic Commander and the only magazine related problems I had was when I used either of my two Chip McCormick magazine.

Rudedog
March 5, 2014, 10:42 PM
I have a Series 70 Colt that I bought new in 1978. I don't shoot it as much as I used to but it probably has 6,000 to 7000 rounds through it. Mostly hardball. The number of jams I had with it - I could count on 2 hands and those came from using military magazines. I have no experience with any of the later model 1911s except a friend's Kimber which had no issues. From my recollection all of the Army 1911A1s I fired didn't give me any trouble with mil ammo.

Steve S.
March 5, 2014, 10:51 PM
Wilson Combat CQB and Les Baer PII; shoot 230 gr. FMJ only - never, ever fail to run as advertised. Original design shoots as designed. Carried one in the Army and fell in love - my fav - good shooting!

jon_in_wv
March 5, 2014, 10:56 PM
I also have a love/hate relationship with the 1911. I LOVE the way they look, the genius of the design, the elegance of the pistol, etc.........BUT they hate me. I went through several 1911s of different brands until I found a good deal on a Colt Combat Commander. When I had it at home I loaded one of my McCormick Powermags with ball just to run the rounds through it to see that it would feed smoothly. When I dropped the slide, BANG!, and there was a .45 caliber hole through my bed. I inspected the gun to realized the hammer would drop about 1/3 of the time the slide went forward. I replaced the hammer, sear, dis-connector, and springs with Wilson parts and headed to the range. A few shots later the gun stopped. I looked it over and realized the barrel bushing had broken and had flown down range with the recoil spring plug and spring. I replaced those parts and headed to the range again. A few more shots and the shaft of the slide lock broke. I replaced that and then sold it for a few hundred less than I had in the weapon and all the damned parts. I got the bug again a while later when I handled an American Classic II at the LGS. It was even nicer than the Commander and the action was smooth as glass. I was accurate, reliable, and worked great. Once I finally found a 1911 that worked (it was my fifth I believe) I finally was cured and sold it to buy my second love a S&W 3913.

My honest opinion is that a good 1911 shoots and works as well as the best weapons out there, BUT the best weapons our there are a lot cheaper and the chances they will ALSO be reliable is a hell of a lot higher than the 1911. I would and will own another 1911 just for the love of the design, but when it comes to a tool, to defend what is important to me, I'll take an M&P, Glock, Sig, etc.......long before and ungrateful trifling 1911.

theQman23
March 5, 2014, 11:23 PM
Add me to the list of folks who respect the design but don't trust them for carry. I've worked on quite a few for the guys at the range, and built some myself, (search build threads under my screen name for more info) but the honest truth is this.....
1911's are for guys who want to learn, or who already can, tinker with their guns. It's fine modifying, tinkering, cleaning, tuning, and otherwise obsessing over something you want to compete with, show off, or in my case I was still in a learning phase of gunsmithing.
But when you are defending yourself, (or more importantly, someone else.....) you can't be tinkering. You can't stop and show interested parties what you did with the trigger, or barrel, or whatever. You can't load up 200 rounds thinking it's acceptable that one or two will stove or fte.
When you are constitutionally protecting a human, via your God given right to Life, Liberty, and POH, then it's time for something that works 99.999999 percent of the time. I know nothing is perfect, not even the Glocks. But for every 5,000 rounds of training I have done with various Glocks I probably have 4 or 5 rounds that had a problem, usually ammo defect related. Out of every 5,000 rounds I have on 1911's, 1,000 of them are break in, 500 of them are tuning, and 100 more are failures.
I love 1911's, (see the ones i built from scratch, I really, really do love them,) but they are NOT best used as carry weapons.

SP2000
March 6, 2014, 12:25 AM
Add me to the list of folks who respect the design but don't trust them for carry. I've worked on quite a few for the guys at the range, and built some myself, (search build threads under my screen name for more info) but the honest truth is this.....
1911's are for guys who want to learn, or who already can, tinker with their guns. It's fine modifying, tinkering, cleaning, tuning, and otherwise obsessing over something you want to compete with, show off, or in my case I was still in a learning phase of gunsmithing.
But when you are defending yourself, (or more importantly, someone else.....) you can't be tinkering. You can't stop and show interested parties what you did with the trigger, or barrel, or whatever. You can't load up 200 rounds thinking it's acceptable that one or two will stove or fte.
When you are constitutionally protecting a human, via your God given right to Life, Liberty, and POH, then it's time for something that works 99.999999 percent of the time. I know nothing is perfect, not even the Glocks. But for every 5,000 rounds of training I have done with various Glocks I probably have 4 or 5 rounds that had a problem, usually ammo defect related. Out of every 5,000 rounds I have on 1911's, 1,000 of them are break in, 500 of them are tuning, and 100 more are failures.
I love 1911's, (see the ones i built from scratch, I really, really do love them,) but they are NOT best used as carry weapons.

+1. My thoughts exactly.

tomrkba
March 6, 2014, 08:55 AM
You know, I hear this a lot, but I don't run into that problem myself. Four THR Staff members went to a 1911-only Gunsite course a few years back and we didn't see many problems with the 40,000-some-odd rounds fired. We brought a cheap 1911 that never fed a complete magazine without misfeeding and it continued to misfeed. I also brought a Rock Island pistol with less than 50 rounds through it and it didn't misfeed once over 1,200 rounds, despite the fact that I deliberately never cleaned it.

I attended yet another "Level 2 Advanced Defensive Handgun" course in November 2013. The guy to my right had a Springfield Mil Spec that could not get through two magazines without a jam. Another guy brought two 9mm 1911 pistols. Both the Springfield Loaded and Dan Wesson Guardian were jamomatics. The instructor was a 1911 guy for many years, but got tired of the failures and switched to the M&P. He was able to diagnose the guns' problems. The first SA needed a basic tune up--new recoil spring and extractor tensioning. This was the student not following the maintenance schedule. He should have had those parts on hand and left with instructions on what parts to buy. I am not sure what was wrong with the SA 9mm; the DW's chamber was too tight and needed to be reamed out a bit.

Everyone else in the class ran Glocks, M&P's, with one SIG P229 in 357 SIG and one HK. I ran a SIG P220. There were several Glock 19's, one or two 17's, a few M&P 9 FS, and a whole bunch of ladies running M&P Shields. Nobody reported issues when I walked around and asked, though the Shields were difficult to get hits with past 35 yards on the "Walk Back" drill.

HDCamel
March 6, 2014, 10:00 AM
The first SA needed a basic tune up--new recoil spring and extractor tensioning. This was the student not following the maintenance schedule. He should have had those parts on hand and left with instructions on what parts to buy. I am not sure what was wrong with the SA 9mm; the DW's chamber was too tight and needed to be reamed out a bit.
So one guy had worn parts and the other had guns that were out of spec. And that somehow reflects poorly on the 1911 as a design?

It's stuff like that that made me to start referring to non-Colts as "1911-pattern pistols" rather than 1911s. Granted, even Colt produces lemons on occasion (like jon in wv's commander) but even during the dark ages of the late 80s-early 90s, they were pretty rare.

The biggest issues are that these days, far too many companies and gunsmiths (both amateur and professional) are making target pistols and marketing them as defensive pistols and also that far too many companies are producing 1911-pattern pistols from out of spec parts and inferior materials in key areas to save on costs.

Gun Master
March 6, 2014, 12:52 PM
You're right on, HDCamel ! If a spade is spade, then a Colt is a Colt, a Kimber is a Kimber, and a Springfield is a Springfield, etc., et al. If we start being more specific, maybe we can see which company's pistols are causing certain problems. Let's quit saying just "1911", and name names and models.

Slightly off the subject, but who said you have to add "semi" to automatic pistols. Fully automatic pistols are rarely and infrequently encountered by the gun public. Some collectors have "fully" automatic pistols, and then only after all the government red tape, and an expensive tax on same. The "ACP" of .32ACP, .380ACP, .45ACP, etc., is translated to Automatic Colt Pistol, not "Semi-"Automatic..... Why don't we just keep it simple, like Einstein said ?

It is great to know the difference between "specific" and "simple", and to practice both !:)

Phaedrus/69
March 7, 2014, 05:38 AM
It's amusing how "lively" a 1911 discussion can get!:D Some folks consider it apostasy on a criminal level! I don't really see what the big deal is myself. If the OP has moved away from the 1911 what's the problem? It's not like everyone else has to follow. There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of good sidearms out there- certainly there's room for personal preference.

My own opinion on the design waxes and wanes. I've owned 1911s in the past, both .38 Super and .45 ACP, and while I enjoyed my time with them I don't have any of them now. Maybe I'll pick another one, maybe I never will. There's nothing at all wrong with the 1911 design IMO, but there's very little that it alone can do that's unique to it. Better trigger than my USP45, I'll concede that. But most 1911s aren't any more accurate or reliable than my HK, nor are they appreciably cheaper. Many of them are vastly more expensive.

sauer1911
March 7, 2014, 08:35 AM
Why is this still going on??? I said I would take the 1911's and stop this controversy!:banghead::banghead:

I am still waiting to be contacted!? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?:neener:

be safe.

peacebutready
March 7, 2014, 12:29 PM
So one guy had worn parts and the other had guns that were out of spec. And that somehow reflects poorly on the 1911 as a design?

The biggest issues are that these days, far too many companies and gunsmiths (both amateur and professional) are making target pistols and marketing them as defensive pistols and also that far too many companies are producing 1911-pattern pistols from out of spec parts and inferior materials in key areas to save on costs.


Excellent points. I won't buy most 1911s out there.

peacebutready
March 7, 2014, 12:34 PM
If we start being more specific, maybe we can see which company's pistols are causing certain problems. Let's quit saying just "1911", and name names and models.

Bravo.


Also, the era of a manufacturer can play a part. Ex: New Colts are better than some periods in the past, new Kimbers seem to be inferior to ones in the past.

peacebutready
March 7, 2014, 12:41 PM
But most 1911s aren't any more accurate or reliable than my HK, nor are they appreciably cheaper. Many of them are vastly more expensive.


Is that at least partly due to 1911s being in vogue?

1coyote
March 7, 2014, 06:05 PM
A wise and visionary decision.

May I have your extra mags? :D :evil:

pendennis
March 7, 2014, 07:52 PM
The current lot of 1911's made by a myriad of manufacturers other than Colt, for lack of a better term, are usurpers to the original Model of 1911. The gun that the U.S. Army adopted ran 6,000 rounds, over two days, without a single failure, and was cooled by dipping it in a bucket of water.

The specs of the current models are all over the place, and the very thought that the newer guns should run perfectly, out of the box, is unreasonable. While parts are held to tighter tolerances because of modern manufacturing methods, those tighter tolerances don't necessarily translate to a perfect end product. The newer specs vary greatly from the original.

When World War II ended, and well into the 1970's, Colt had a nearly perfect monopoly on the 1911. So, they manufactured them to their specs; tighter for target models, and more to GI specs on the rest; a bit loose. National Match models weren't designed to survive in the mud, and GI models wouldn't be competitive at national matches. You couldn't use the same gun for both jobs.

Enter the mid-1950's. Folks wanted to do "combat shooting". This required a gun which would shoot tighter groups, yet function like the GI models. Clark, King, and other customizers got a ton of business, so shooters could upgrade their standard models. Add sights, bushings, barrels, new safeties, etc., and the original model soon lost its identity. These were/are still compromises.

In the 1970's Randall, and a couple of other manufacturers got into the 1911 business, challenging Colt for market share. Later on, enter Kimber, Springfield, AMT, Smith & Wesson, and several others, each trying to "plus one" over Colt. They added beaver tail safeties, commander hammers, different sears, and other critical parts, and the original 1911 had lost its identity, compared to the original. The magazine, built for seven rounds, now has any number of different followers, springs, base plates, etc. Ever wonder why some guns don't run with some magazines?

People bought these new 1911's, then decided to further modify them. Add a Wilson beaver tail safety, a King hammer, Cylinder and Slide mainspring housing, different sights, Chip McCormick magazines. Now, you wonder why your "custom" 1911 doesn't feed properly; has FTE's, etc.

Will any of the modern 1911's, straight from the factory, run 6,000 rounds, without a failure? Hardly. However, if you spec'd that 1911 back to the original John Browning model, you might be talking real reliability.

Gun Master
March 7, 2014, 08:32 PM
All right, pendennis ! You have it for sure. We need to keep track of which "Brands" and "models" do well, and which don't. Saying "My 1911" does (or doesn't) perform well, isn't enough.

Which are the more reliable ("mudders" that might even rattle), and which are the best target models, or a compromise between both ?

As far as the basic "carry" models, I believe the Colt 1970's or 1980's Series suit me. Also I like the Remington R1, and for economy, Rock Island Amory as best for the $ .

Please feel free to offer your opinion (but you don't need my permission).:)

peacebutready
March 7, 2014, 09:52 PM
The specs of the current models are all over the place, and the very thought that the newer guns should run perfectly, out of the box, is unreasonable. While parts are held to tighter tolerances because of modern manufacturing methods, those tighter tolerances don't necessarily translate to a perfect end product. The newer specs vary greatly from the original.

If it doesn't run out of the box, I personally am not interested unless I had plans to send it off for 'smithing right away. The problem there is a good chance one's 1911 will be butchered by a 'smith. I know from experience.

Tighter tolerances without the requisite quality. I'll take looser.

In the 1970's Randall, and a couple of other manufacturers got into the 1911 business, challenging Colt for market share.

This competition is good for the consumers. For some reason, it didn't seem to prevent more lemons than what should have been, IMO.

Will any of the modern 1911's, straight from the factory, run 6,000 rounds, without a failure? Hardly. However, if you spec'd that 1911 back to the original John Browning model, you might be talking real reliability.

There's an opportunity for a modern manufacturer to do just that!

Anyone know what kind of groups the original 1911 was held to? My memory is telling me either 8 or 10 inches at 50 yards.

Thanks for the good post, pendennis.

pendennis
March 7, 2014, 10:11 PM
If it doesn't run out of the box, I personally am not interested unless I had plans to send it off for 'smithing right away. The problem there is a good chance one's 1911 will be butchered by a 'smith. I know from experience.

Tighter tolerances without the requisite quality. I'll take looser.

This competition is good for the consumers. For some reason, it didn't seem to prevent more lemons than what should have been, IMO.

There's an opportunity for a modern manufacturer to do just that!

Anyone know what kind of groups the original 1911 was held to? My memory is telling me either 8 or 10 inches at 50 yards...
I readily agree, that competition is always good for the survival and improvement of an existing product.

I would only add, that the changes wrought weren't always for the better. Remember the gall-o-matics by AMT? And the Colt Series 70 twelve year experiment with collet bushings, was great for the target shooter, but not a great bet, especially for a life-or-death gun.

Thanks for your observations.

exdetsgt
March 7, 2014, 10:23 PM
Thanks again, pendennis for the insight.

I might point out that there is a 1918 GI replica made by Cimarron, a company specializing in replicas. I saw a shiny blue new one in a gunshop and bought it on impulse. It appears to be a no frills milspec 1911. Maybe because of that it ran flawlessly right out of the box with a variety of different new/old ammo and never hiccuped.

The ONLY reason I sold it was to get a commander length for EDC. At present I am kicking myself for selling it, as the hi-zoot commander I bought has had a handful of problems, most of which have been resolved. As someone suggested we should name the brand: American Classic Commander (duo-tone). But it sure is pretty. Also, the Novak sights are dead-on. Needed no adjusting.

peacebutready
March 7, 2014, 11:55 PM
I might point out that there is a 1918 GI replica made by Cimarron, a company specializing in replicas. I saw a shiny blue new one in a gunshop and bought it on impulse. It appears to be a no frills milspec 1911. Maybe because of that it ran flawlessly right out of the box with a variety of different new/old ammo and never hiccuped.

Oof. Sounds sweet.

The ONLY reason I sold it was to get a commander length for EDC. At present I am kicking myself for selling it, as the hi-zoot commander I bought has had a handful of problems, most of which have been resolved. As someone suggested we should name the brand: American Classic Commander (duo-tone). But it sure is pretty. Also, the Novak sights are dead-on. Needed no adjusting.

I think American Classic is Shooter Arms Manufacturing in the Philipinnes.

Cimarron is Armscor in the Philippines.

exdetsgt
March 8, 2014, 12:08 AM
You are right about Armscor and the Cimarron. However, I believe American Classic's parent company is Metroarms. And, yes, both are made in the Philippines.

Stevie-Ray
March 9, 2014, 06:00 PM
Where was that sale on Delta Elites? I would love to save 70% on a new one.So get in the wayback machine and set it for Bill Goodman's Gun & Knife Show in Detroit, 1989.

Sorry you think there are no perfect 1911s, but all your whining doesn't make it any less true.

If you enjoyed reading about "I'm Giving Up On 1911s" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!