[Marshall]

OK guy's and gal's, help me out here, I'm befuddled.

Why are 1911's attractive? It seems like I read weekly where someone buys a 1911, from a GI Springer to a Kimber to a Custom, that doesn't work. To me, it's awful ironic to spend half a thousand to a thousand and a half on guns that won't operate properly out of the box, I get the feeling it's a crap shoot.

Now, admittedly my first love was revolvers but I have quite a few semi-auto guns. From shotguns to my BAR's to my BHP's and yet I don't experience these problems like I consistently read about with 1911's. I can't imagine my primary carry piece being one of these guns.

I want to like them very much. I like their looks, feel, the .45 caliber loads, the history they come with and I want to buy one! But, I keep reading these awful post about them not going into battery, jamming, having FTF's, etc. Is it just my mindset? I think if I spend money on a product, especially one from a quality manufacturer, the damn thing should work, cycle itself, feed and go bang over and over again. It doesn't seem like I should having to trim this or polish that, spend 2 days and 40 bucks on products to mix up a special lube or, buy different parts to make the thing be reliable.

Granted, I also read posts where people have never had a problem but the ratio seems out of whack compared to other guns. Do I use the information I have read and learned about here on THR and just go cross my fingers on the better brands and models and hope I get a good one, or is this just expected to be the norm?

[shep854]

Bells and whistles, enquiring one, bells and whistles.

If you keep the Gov't Model simple and loose as JM Browning designed it, and get one from a goood makers, there shoiuldn't be any problem. Quality mags should go without saying.

[Josey]

I have NEVER (yet) had any trouble with a 5", true to original JMB design 1911. I have had Colts, Kimber Is, Llama, Springfields and Rock River Arms. I feel it is NOT the quality or brand. It IS the deviation from the original form. I have tried twice to buy/build subcompact 1911s from Springfield. Dismal failures. I carried a Colt Government Model and a Colt M1991A1 that gave me excellent service. It does seem that Wilson and Colt M1991A1s have given me the best service for the money spent. I have not owned a bad Wilson anything. The JMB design is expensive to build but, they work like the pink bunny when they are made out of steel. No plastic, polymer, nylon or MIM (powdered metal).

[ddj8052]

I think that most the problems you read about are new to 1911 shooters who do not go through the brake in period before they start to complain about their guns, I have found that both of my Kimbers needed about 300rnds before they started to work perfectly. Unlike other guns I have owned (Glocks sigs etc) 1911 are generally tightly fitted with quite a bit of hand fitting. So they need to be shot to lossen up. My kimbers are now very reliable. I would also suggest that you get quality mags to go with any 1911. I will warn you that once you try one it is very hard to stop. I just started the paper work for a custom built Spriner and have a Milspec-springer on layaway. These things are very addictive. Try one I am sure you will love it.

[cracked butt]

I worried about reliability too before I bought one. But so far I've put about 600 factory loads through it, along with 200 of my homemade cast bullet reload SWC's through it and the pistol hasn't stopped yet. I even bought a few cheapo Mecgar magazines for it and haven't had a problem with them either. I'm starting to get the feeling that people who have major problems with their 1911s are dropping them alot, not cleaning them, or using them for hammers to pound nails in their walls to hang pictures with.:D

[c_yeager]

Consider for a moment the popularity of the 1911 design. With SO MANY of these guns floating around you are going to hear about more problems just by the law of averages. The real question is what is the ratio to broken guns vs guns that dont work. I bet the 1911 platform actually looks pretty good in that light.

[1911Tuner]

Howdy Marshall,

First off...understand that we normally only hear the gripes and complaints
when a 1911-pattern pistol doesn't work. Most of the people who get one that does, we never hear from.

Josey said a mouthful, and hit the nail on the head. Deviation from original design parameters are a great big fly in the ointment.

Since about 90% of my work on the 1911s and their clones has been in addressing functional issues...I can offer some insight on the most-often noted causes of malfunctions in the guns.

By far...the biggest problem is in the magazines rather than the guns themselves. I can't remember how many problem children that I've "fixed"
by simply handing the owner a good magazine and telling him to go try again. It mystifies'em when my beat-up old GI mag works better than their
Wilson 47Ds.

The second issue is the extractor and correct set-up/tensioning. Spring-tempered 1075 or 1090 steel is the only real way to fly...but a good 4340
extractor can be made to work well if it's correctly prepped. Manufacturers
seem to have forgotten how to tune an extractor these days...or they just
skip that part and stick it in because it takes time, and time is money.

The third is ammunition. The advent of light bullet Plus P, high-pressure, high-velocity ammo has an effect on the timing of the cycle. Slide
velocity is faster, which makes other things have to struggle to keep up.
Stronger recoil springs are added to slow things down...and they only
serve to make it harder for the magazine to time the next round.

The 1911 was designed with certain bullet weights, pressures, and velocities in mind...and deviating very far from those parameters is
asking the gun to do more than it was ever intended to do.

Changing recoil spring rates in the hopes of compensating for the high
pressure screamers only brings on more problems...and the recoil spring
doesn't have one thing to do with containing pressures. By the time the
recoil spring comes into play, the chamber pressures have dropped to
almost nil...and heavier springs make the guns more grip-sensitive and
the magazine timing more critical. They also reduce battering of the frame and slide at the expense of the lower lug feet and the slidestop crosspin.
No such thing as a free lunch, I'm afraid. Springs work both ways.

Dinking around with the design often causes more problems than it solves. So many people have been trying to outsmart ol' John Moses for so long...that they really believe they have.

15 to16 pound recoil springs with 31.5 to 32 turns...7-round magazines with good springs and a dimple on the follower...ammo that uses a 230-grain bullet at 800-860 fps...a 23-pound mainspring...unaltered sear primary angles and hammer hooks that aren't cut shorter than .025 inch...
slide to frame clearances that hover around .003 inch....A good extractor that is made of the right stuff and correctly tuned...And finally, real steel
small parts instead the "Near Steel" that has been foisted off on us.

Stick to those guidelines, and you'll find that 99% of the pistols you encounter will be so reliable that they'll be boring. You'll go broke
trying to buy enough factory ammo to wear one out or break it...and
you'll probably go broke before you get one to jam as long as you keep it reasonably clean by detail-stripping it about every 2 or 3 thousand rounds for a good scrubbin' and lube job.

Luck!

Tuner

[Marshall]

Guys, thanks for the answers, they make sense!

Tuner, your points are well taken and your detailed answers really help me see why we read so much about problems and see why it's not the fault of the gun itself but rather the various factors that can negatively effect the gun.

Someday I hope to have more time to fiddle with my firearms and perhaps even get into rebuilding and refinishing projects on various types, some I own and some more I would buy. Anyway, that's a goal I have. For now though, I don't want to have to jack any gun I buy beyond cleaning and things such as sight changes, grips and or panels and a needed spring here or there.

If I may ask, what specific models do you feel best about when sticking to your guidlines? Likewise, any you would steer clear from?

[1911Tuner]

Marshall asked:

If I may ask, what specific models do you feel best about when sticking to your guidlines?

Norinco. If you can find a nice one that hasn't been altered, modified, trigger jobbed, buffed-fluffed, or blinged...grab it. They meet or exceed US Ordnance specs...they have ZERO investment cast or MIM parts, and they've got honest-to-John Moses spring steel extractors.

I think that, right after they hit the US market, the Big Three bought a few, tore'em down for a look-see, and said: "Boys...We gotta get this stopped
or we're gonna be flippin' burgers at Mickey D's in about a year."
They probably lobbied the Clinton Crew to pass that ridiculous law.

Good news is...all parts except the frames can be obtained through John
Marstar in Canada. Specify genuine Norinco parts, though...
__________________________

And:

Likewise, any you would steer clear from?

Uh-uh! Ain't gonna open THAT can of worms...:p

As things stand...the Springfield GI Mil-Spec is about the best of the lot,
even though MIM and cast parts abound throughout the gun. Upgrading
to better small parts would cost about 150-200 bucks, and the result would be a solid hard-duty 1911 pistol that you wouldn't mind carrying into the boondocks for half the cost of a Loaded Model They'll do as delivered as long as they aren't subjected to 25,000 rounds a year. Save yourself some headaches and replace the extractor right off the bat.

Luck!

Tuner

[Wildalaska]

15 to16 pound recoil springs with 31.5 to 32 turns...7-round magazines with good springs and a dimple on the follower...ammo that uses a 230-grain bullet at 800-860 fps...a 23-pound mainspring...unaltered sear primary angles and hammer hooks that aren't cut shorter than .025 inch...

Sounds like a Colt!

WildgimmeolslabsidesAlaska

[Erik Jensen]

myself, I think half the reason people seem to have so many problems with 1911s is that they won't leave the darn things alone! nearly every post I see about someone buying a 1911 contains discriptions of the parts they're going to change out, where they're sending the pistol to get throated, how much a "reliability package" will cost, etc.. etc..
my springfield is bone stock, aside from a replacement long trigger. for 2000 rounds, it's been absolutely flawless, rivalling my Beretta for reliability. I donno.

[1911Tuner]

Quote:

Sounds like a Colt!

WildgimmeolslabsidesAlaska

Now if they'd just drop the Near Steel sear, disconnect, thumb safety,
grip safety, get the lower lug in spec so the barrel wouldn't ride the link,
center the barrel throat up, and specify some real springs in their
contract magazines from Metalform,(A two-dollar upgrade)...and get the
slide to frame fit squared away, they could return to the top of the heap.
Oh yeah...and drop the Series 80 deal for those who don't want it and live in a state that doesn't require it.

I'd be willin' to pay 6 or 7 hundred bucks for a REAL 1911 fresh from Colt.
A man wouldn't need more than one...

Cheers!

Tuner

[stans]

I have two 1911's that have never had problems. The first one is roll marked U.S. Army Model 1911-A1. It was obviously thrown together by an armorer somewhere. Some blued parts, some parkerized parts, some 1911-A1 parts some 1911 parts. It has not jammed, it has not failed to function as designed. Modification that I have made have been a new barrel and bushing, better sights, beveling of the magazine well opening, a long trigger, and new stocks as well as giving the whole works a GunKote finish. No attempt was made to tighten any tolerances, the rattling is not all that annoying. It is at least combat accurate.

The other one that has never failed in any way is a Colt Delta Elite Stainless. Again, it rattles a bit, but it has been a flawless performer and easily holds 3 inches at 25 yards.

1911's become less reliable when the clearances approach zero and changes such as bull barrels and barrels shorter than 4-1/4 inches come into the picture and the substitution of cast and MIM parts for barstock machined or spring steel parts. At least in my opinion and experience.

[Wildalaska]

get the lower lug in spec so the barrel wouldn't ride the link, get the
slide to frame fit squared away,

Geez tuner we in the same decade here?:D

Agree with ya on the mags...have yet to see a factory mag from ANY maker that is worth a .....

Ahm done debating the series 70/80 ting...least it aint a Schwarz safety :neener:

All aside, I usually agree with ya tuner, but not on springfields...they have been nothing but trouble for us...ya think they would even be cheaper made in Bwazil!

WildponyboyAlaska

[albanian]

For all the talk about how unreliable 1911s are, I have not had a problem with the three I have owned. I am not a 1911 fan really but they do work and can be made very accurate. When you get into custom target pistols, reliablity is sacrficed for accuracy.

[cratz2]

This picture represents about one third of the 1911s I've owned. Out of all the guns on the table, I doubt if I've experienced 50 failures in tens of thousands of rounds. I've had one junk 1911A1... a very early 90s 1991A1 from Colt. But I had another one with a similar serial number than never failed with ball ammo.

As others have said, the 1911 has transitioned away from a pure combat tool into a work of art in the minds of many 1911 owners. When the guns are super tight and have a lot of non-originally intended parts - and when questionable ammo and/or mags are used - reliability will be compromised.

In general, if you get yourself a 5" NRM Colt or even a non-GI SA MilSpec, get five good mags, have a steel extractor tensioned and put in it (maybe $60) and maybe a polish job (another $60 or so) and put 500 rounds of ammo through it, clean it throughly and lube it... You should have a gun that will run with very, very few problems. While the gun is with the smith, maybe drop another $80 on a trigger and a trigger job.

When I read about problems on the internet concerning this 1911 that 'can't be made to run right' and that 1911 that was 'junk from the word go', I think these problems can often be attributed to bad ammo, bad mags or bad extractors. It's like anything else, you can spend $550 on a Glock 21 which should be reliable out of the box, or upwards of $700 on a SIG 220 that should be reliable out of the box, or you can spend $400 on Springfield MilSpec, $40 on a couple magazines, $200 on the custom work listed above and you'll have a gun that will likely outlive your grandkids.

Or said another way, Glocks and SIGs may be akin to new Honda Civics and Toyora Corollas... Very reliable, good resale value, but somewhat lackluster in the enjoyment department. If you appreciate certain things from cars, a nice 1988 BMW 5 Series may not be 100% when you pick it up, but with a little investment, you should have a 100% reliable car that is likely more enjoyable to someone that appreciates fine things than the Civic. It's all about choices and which ones you want to make.

http://photos.imageevent.com/cratz2/guns/1911%20Collection%202.jpg

[Old Fuff]

I have gone through a small mountain of .45 pistols, starting about 1949. Most of them have been Colt’s, or surplus USGI. The earliest one was made in 1914 – or the second year of commercial production. Most of the last ones date from the late 1970’s. I am fortunate to have been able to own these fine handguns when they were made the way they were supposed to be. Thereafter I built my own guns using quality parts, such as frames and slides from Caspian. They had one common denominator – they all worked fine - and did so out-of-the-box without needing any so-called breaking in or “reliability tuning.”

During more recent years I’ve “fixed” a lots of guns for others. They needed fixing because they simply weren’t reliable. The quality workmanship and materials that I was used to slowly disappeared. One might say we saw a similar trend in U.S. made automobiles.

Yes, we do get a considerable number of complaints from new owners, and much fewer if any from those who own the older guns. When was the last time you saw a post from an owner of a USGI .45 that was in good shape but wouldn’t function reliably? Same for an older Colt commercial? Don’t say that they aren’t around because they were turned out in the hundreds of thousands.

As Tuner just pointed out, they can’t even make decent magazines anymore. I have stacks of older magazines that work fine as they are, although some have had their springs replaced.

This unfortunate situation will continue until the buyers – the folks who spend money – demand better. But if they get what they want don’t expect the finished product to be inexpensive. The Great Depression is long gone, and with it went the concept of highly skilled, dedicated workers who would work for peanuts. That I suppose is a good thing, but it goes a long way toward explaining why some guns aren’t the way they used too be.

[Ky Larry]

Marshall, the next time you go to a gun shop or gun show,count how many Kimbers, Wisons, Browns, etc are for sale. Then try to find a GI 1911-A1. Then try to find GI spec parts for a 1911-A1. The new models are everywhere but the old war horses are as rare as hens teeth. People that have them don't turn loose of them.
A 1911 that is built to JMB's spec's will perform at least as well as any new pistol and will out perform most of them. Problems are caused by changing the original design or ammo specs. Built the way JMB intended, the pistol will outlive you, me, and even Tuner (now that IS old).:D

[boogalou]

15 to16 pound recoil springs with 31.5 to 32 turns...7-round magazines with good springs and a dimple on the follower...ammo that uses a 230-grain bullet at 800-860 fps...a 23-pound mainspring...unaltered sear primary angles and hammer hooks that aren't cut shorter than .025 inch...

My question is why aren't the above specs followed today. I've had gunsmiths tell me that 18.5# recoil springs are the "right" ones to use, or the advice to use only 8-round MMC and/or Wilson mags. And where in the hell can you find aftermarket hammer hooks that are not at .020 inch?

The only reason I can come up with is money. Most 1911's today are in Tuners words - TOYS! There doesn't seem to be as much interest in 1911's as a pure defensive tool, and more money is to be made catering to people who are more concerned about how much their 1911 costs then how well it functions.

I also don't understand the use of MIM parts in 1911's. Are they really that bad? I can't think of another gun maker where this issue is even discussed that much. Glocks, CZ's, and Hi-Powers have a great reputation for reliability, do they use these type of parts? If they do, why are they ok in those designs? If they don't, then why the hell do 1911 makers insist on putting MIM parts in their pistols. I really like the 1911 platform, but it bugs me that I'm expected to replace "substandard" parts on them because the manufactor can't or won't bother to put quality parts in them.

:banghead:

[1911Tuner]

boogaloo asked:

My question is why aren't the above specs followed today. I've had gunsmiths tell me that 18.5# recoil springs are the "right" ones to use...

Because they don't understand the gun, and because they're STILL tryin'
to outsmart ol' John M. Browning...
_________________________




the advice to use only 8-round MMC and/or Wilson mags.

See above...
_______________________

And where in the hell can you find aftermarket hammer hooks that are not at .020 inch?

By calling the seller and ordering the hammer with unprepped hooks. Colt's
OEM hammers have .027 hooks...So do the Norincos, and they're available
as spur or rowel type. My Springfield GI Mil-Spec's hammer has .028 hooks, although it's MIM. Pretty sure Cylinder & Slide hammers have .023 hooks, which will do. Call to ask.

Luck!

Tuner

[Standing Wolf]

...I get the feeling it's a crap shoot.

Shhhhhhh! That's supposed to be a secret!

[DonGlock26]

I'd take a hard look at a P220ST with night sights. Wunderbar!:D

[spacemanspiff]

dangit cratz!!! now i gotta clean the drool out of my keyboard.

[Josey]

My full size pistols are simple. A Browning Hi-Power MKIII in 9MM, a 1919 Colt 1911 in 45 ACP, a Colt M1991A1 in 45 ACP and a VIS-35 in 9MM. All are OEM except for the odd grip change-out. I have a Llama MAX-1 in 45 ACP that runs fine. The Norincos are difficult to find. They are great pistols. My own thoughts are Rock Island and ORM Colt M1991A1s for a starting point. If I wanted a great 1911, I have to say Rock River Arms. Expensive. Worth every penny. What to avoid? Glocks!:neener:

[bad_dad_brad]

I think if you stick with the basics, you will be okay.

A basic M1911 will serve you well.

A basic Hi-Power the same.

A G17 Glock will always shoot.

Stick with the basics.

P.S. I choose the G17. It might be tupperware but it has never let me down, and it is so simple in construction and operation. Simple. Can't beat that.

[Josey]

:evil: There is something SO WRONG about changing recoil springs and ADDING a recoil buffer!

[Sean Smith]

My 5" 1911s have all worked out of the box. Never played with the midget versions or junk brands, though. Never tried to shoot +P hollowpoints out of "target" guns. Didn't try to use $5 magazines in a $600+ gun and wonder why it didn't work. You get the idea.

[Treylis]

7-round magazines with good springs and a dimple on the follower

Why does a dimple on the follower matter?

[Delmar]

Lots of great advice here-my experience is very similar to Sean's, although in my younger days, I tried to hot rod some 1911's-some were good and some not so.

One thing I have never done is to alter the frame or slide on a government model. That way, when my modified parts did not work as I wanted them to, I could always go back to the tried and true.

The original design is a deceptively simple, and lots of people think they can just swap out parts and dremel the heck out of it. The function is in the details, and every part you change has to have the strength as well as the proper angles, although Browning's design is pretty tolerant up to a point.

If the design were bad, it would have died in the WW1 trenches.

[1911Tuner]

Treylis asked:

Why does a dimple on the follower matter?

Here ya go Treylis. It's a fairly long read, but it's in-depth.
Try to keep one thing in mind as you sort it out:

Browning put it there for a good reason, just like he did with everything else on and in the gun, and everything worked....Best leave it be. :cool:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63584&highlight=Inertia

Happy huntin'!

Tuner

[CZ52GUY]

http://www.1911forum.com/forums/index.php?s=

When I was researching my recent 1911 purchase I visited the folks over at the link above.

I think you'll find it very educational. I ended up with a SA Mil-Spec, 3 Brownell 7's, an 8-rd Wilson, and 4 8-rd Chip McCormacks mag's that have all worked very well. The only mag's I've had any issues with are 7-rd factory Colts (feed fine...don't lock the slide back after last round).

The 1911 is a special platform...I didn't know what the big deal with...but after shooting mine...I'm starting to understand...it's a joy to shoot and mine has about 1000 trouble free rounds through it in the first 10 weeks of ownership. I don't expect to do much of anything to customize it...it'll be a workhorse .45acp piece that I hope to shoot a lot.

Good luck,

CZ52'

[Cameron Lamont]

Like the network news, you are much more likely to read the negative stories here, for every problem reported there are a couple hundred shooters that have not had any...

My bone stock Colt Government 4 weeks old, 1000 assorted rounds ZERO FAILURES

Cameron

[1911Tuner]

The Problem:

The only mag's I've had any issues with are 7-rd factory Colts (feed fine...don't lock the slide back after last round).


The Cure:

Wolff springs...ba-da BING!

EDIT TO ADD:

Oh yeah...Overspringin' the slide'll cause that too.;)

[Andrew Wyatt]

when gou get right down to it, the 1911 is a solid and reliable gun when built as JMB intended, and when properly built can do really amazing things AND be reliable, ut idf middled with by the inexperienced, will be counted on to malfunction.

[Wildalaska]

Because they don't understand the gun, and because they're STILL tryin'

Yikes Tuner thats bold...:)

Wildiuse18Alaska

[Jacobus Rex]

I prefer 1911's to be plain and simple. They should have loose tolerances as intended and not have infernal gadgets hung on them. :D

Having said that, I've owned 4 through the years and all 4 have been reliable.

They are as follows:

1. Colt Series 80 - Reliable but dented brass. OK accuracy. Sold it.
2. Remington-Rand 1911A1 - Super reliable and pretty accurate. Should not have sold it.
3. Colt Combat Elite - Reliable. OK accuracy. Too expensive. Sold it.
4. Springfield Milspec. - Reliable. Nice price. Simple. OK accuracy. Still have it.

The only repair that I can think of that I made to any of these was to replace the flat spring on the Remington-Rand 1911A1 that I had. It broke after almost 60 years of use.

I really like plain, simple basic 1911's. I don't like the custom jobs and high priced production models. I find it funny that some custom 1911 smiths scream if you use the slide stop as a slide release. It seems odd to worry about damaging a gun made for combat by using it in such a manner.

The unmodified 1911 as it was designed is a fine gun and reliable with good magazines. I've had failures but 99.9% were the result of bad magazines and bad ammo. (My buddies and I used to make .45 ACP reloads that we called "dirt loads". They were very primitive, ugly, and cheap. However, they were not reliable.)

Thanks,
Jacobus

[paladyn]

I've had Glocks, Berettas, a CZ, a Ruger .357, Dan Wesson .357 (both revolvers), Taurus revolvers, Bersas, an old S&W revolver, and I've finally settled into 3 1911s and a Browning Hi Power. For me the 1911 style is the best. I've had no problems, but I'm just using stock models with no mods to them.

The only one I regret getting rid of is the Ruger GP100.

[CZ52GUY]

The other cure, use the stone cold reliable 8-rd Chip McCormick's Power Mag's for competition...use the partially functional 7-rd Colts for dry fire or simple target practice ;)...use the spring money for ammo' :D.

In all seriousness, the research I did before buying my SA Mil-Spec and mag's pointed to several schools of thought and a variety of experiences among 1911 owners as posted on multiple forums. Put another way, the constant was variability of experience.

I read good and bad about Metalform, CM, Wilson, Ed Brown, GI, etc. The other constant was that few had good things to say about their factory mag's.

Given that I enjoy competing in "pistol games", I tried to filter some of the feedback and focused on those who indicated that they competed with their 1911's. IDPA shooters tend to shoot a lot, slide lock reloads will get some sand in the mag'...tactical or reload with retention will involve some hard slamming into the well. If a mag' stands up to this kind of use, it should do me just fine. While there were no absolutes, the CM 8-rd Power Mag's with Pad seemed to get the best overall reviews for reliability, durability...and value.

I haven't had mine long enough to stand the test the time...but so far, so good. My experience has tracked to that of the CM advocates. I continue to practice with my Mil-Spec with a goal of shooting it competitively in the fall (right now I'll probably stick with my Glocks...simple, reliable, and accurate enough for the distances of the average IDPA stage).

Bottom line, respectfully, I question the premise of the original thread title that suggest that the 1911 platform "don't work". Mine purchased NIB and without modification (other than Hogue FG grips) has worked so very well with a round-count-per session that exceeds anything I've asked of any autoloader I've owned (I have 14). None have been expected to bang out 1000 rounds in 8-10 weeks (4 or 5 session)...my SA Mil-Spec just seems to keep on chugging, ready for more...but like any product, your experience may vary.

Safe shooting,

CZ52'

[1911Tuner]

Quote:

The other cure, use the stone cold reliable 8-rd Chip McCormick's Power Mag's for competition...
________________________

Until the your extractor fails due to the last round gettin' ahead of the slide and starts climbin' the rim...or you start gettin' Bolt Over Base feeds and
a primer pressure detonates when the slide hits the round in just the right place...Can anybody say "frag" less than two feet from your nose?

Several years ago, when I was a young pup...I heeded Ken Hallock's advice
to remove the dimple from the followers to make the last round feed smoother. I learned that it was a mistake...and just because a man writes
a book, that it doesn't necessarily mean that he understands how the gun works.

I'll say it again...That silly dimple is there for a reason. Whenever you change one thing on a successful design, you change other things along with it. Just because the gun is runnin', doesn't mean that it's runnin' right.

Wolff mag springs are less than 6 bucks a copy...and around $3.50 if
you qualify for Brownells' discount. I mentioned that I had "fixed" several
malfunctioning pistols with a good magazine. I also have "fixed" dozens of
"junk" factory magazines with Wolff 11-pound mag springs. I don't know why the manufacturers insist on saving a quarter per spring by going with
the cheapest ones they can find... (I don't understand why Metalform doesn't just use Wolff springs in all their magazines to begin with. They'd hcorner the magazine market if they did.) If the Big Three would simply opt for the Wolff springs from their vendor...which is usually Metalform...their service techs would be like the Maytag Repairman.

Cheers all!

Tuner

[CZ52GUY]

...to raise this kind of alarm...

Until the your extractor fails due to the last round gettin' ahead of the slide and starts climbin' the rim...or you start gettin' Bolt Over Base feeds and a primer pressure detonates when the slide hits the round in just the right place...Can anybody say "frag" less than two feet from your nose?

...I'd be interested in hearing more evidence than an assertion with conviction from a knowledgable source.

Recommending 7-rd mag's is certainly within the rights of an individual as experienced as Mr. Tuner. However, suggesting that using widely available/popular 8-rd mag's represents a hazard to an individual who chooses to do so and those who may be nearby seems a little over the top.

Not trying to start a flame fest, but in a litigous society like the one we live in, claims like these seem less than responsible unless backed up by compelling evidence. Folks come to boards like this one to get good information. When someone as knowledgable as Mr. Tuner makes these assertions, folks will listen.

It seems like many 1911 enthusiasts who do a lot of shooting manage to avoid unwanted detonations like the one described while using 8-rd magazines from reputable manufacturers. Suggesting that fidelity to the original design is fine. Making claims of a hazard of this type seems reckless without real life examples.

In the end, board members will have to draw their own conclusions based on the evidence available to them.

Stay safe,

CZ52'

[1911Tuner]

.I'd be interested in hearing more evidence than an assertion with conviction from a knowledgable source.

Sir,

I make an effort here to accurately report what I have seen and experienced over the years. If my favorite brand of whatever I report about fails to live up to expectations, I don't spin the results to favor my choice of parts or accessories. Neither do I make a flat statement on any product based on my own preferences. I make these statements based on experience and very often lengthy and expensive experimentation and research. I will go to great lengths to prove or disprove a theory...my own included. If something fails, I say that it has failed, and the statement is
never made based on one example or experience. If something fails, I work to see if it will repeat the failure. If it fails again, I keep looking...
and the third time's the charm, or so it's said.

You may trust them with your life if you wish. I won't.

EDIT:

In the interest of keeping to the high road, I have deleted much of my response. I have no beef with McCormick or any other manufacturer or supplier, and don't wish to come across as bashing any of their products.

Be of good cheer...Hear? :cool:

Tuner

[Old Fuff]

I agree with Tuner. I have experimented with non-extended 8 round .45 magazines. I never broke an extractor for the simple reason I discontinued their use before anything happened. Unless it is lengthened a box magazine can only hold so many cartridges, plus the spring and follower. Browning designed his magazine to hold 7, with a follower that worked - at least for hardball, which is all he had to contend with - and not over-stress the spring. Of course the gamers couldn't be satisfied with this, so they played around until that 8th round could be squeezed in. In my experience it wasn't too long before the last round would bobble, particularly if other modifications to the gun shortened the slides run-up on the cartridge. I don’t care to compromise reliability to gain one extra round. Eight rounds may be an issue in some games, but it isn’t one on the streets.

I don't give a hoot about what others carry in their guns, but mine have standard 7-round ones' with standard followers and sometimes Wolff replacement springs - nothing else. My personal experience dates back to 1949, and my guns work - always. Nuff said.

[1911Tuner]

Howdy Fuff,

Thanks for the backup on this old argument...but I fear that we are trying to plow the sea...:rolleyes:

Gentlemen...Use'em if ya got'em! we old geezers will stick to what's
worked for 92 years and countin'.

Bedtime! I'll be back on at 0400

[Majic]

People talk of the reliablity of the Glocks, Sigs, Berettas, and others. You notice that there is no booming aftermarket parts industry for those designs? Those pistols are shot as they come from the factory or with factory spec parts. The 1911 has been modified and remodified from it's original design and specs by different makers and aftermarket parts. Then after all these changes have been made to the pistol people complain about it not being reliable. Reconfigure any part of any machine and you change it's dynamics. If you must modify your 1911 then at least take the time to learn what you are doing and why.
Remember, the 1911 helped set the bar on performance that the pistols since then have strived to attain.

[marauder220]

I've always had spotty luck with 1911's ranging from high-end pieces to GI models. Currently I have a Kimber TLE II which I carried on duty for awhile, and as of now has fired just over 2,000rnds of assorted ammunition with only 2 malfunctions, both magazine related. I used Kimber factory 8rnd mags that didn't like being loaded with all 8rnds. Loaded with 7 and no problem. I am also hesitant to buy ANY 1911 since I've had prior bad experiences with them. Currently I either carry a Sig P220 or Beretta 92FS backed up by a SW 642 .38. The P220 and Beretta have gone well over 8,000rnds each without any problems. I replace springs regularly but thats it. I have come to think that many of the problems with the 1911 isn't the design, but the inconsistant quality of manufacture from various sources.

[CZ52GUY]

Respectfully, you didn't answer the question.

What may be self-evident to you is not necessarily so to others.

You advocate traditional 7-rd mag's, no issue there.

Others advocate the benefits of widely used standard length 8-rd mag's. You put forward a plausible scenario where their use could result in a safety hazard...said hazard as described posing risk not only to the shooter, but anyone in close proximity to them.

There is a difference between a risk that is plausible and one that is probable. There is also value in describing what might be done to mitigate that risk.

Mr. Fuff describes his experience with them as being mitigated by not running them to a point where the risk scenario would be realized.

I think many would find it useful to expound upon the nature of the risk, the warning signs that might be looked for to say time for repair or even discard, etc.

I have no dog in this fight other than my experience in life in risk management as part of my vocation. Possible risks are sometimes described as probable (we see consumer safety alarmism all the time in the media...including attempts to restrict sale of firearms in the name of product safety). Sort of like the story of the boy who cried wolf, folks get desensitized to claims of severe hazard that are contrary to common life experience, or common sense.

Sir, I have no fight with you and attempted to go to great lengths to respect your expertise. What I've called you on is your characterization of risk on the use of a product type (brand name being irrelevant assuming quality product from reputable manufacturer) that many seem to enjoy without experiencing the severe hazard you mentioned.

I would ask you to re-read my original post and to take it with the high road intent I put forward. I was reacting to the nature of the alarm raised and the manner in which many might take it, as a blanket statement. Taken to a logical extreme put in a mathematical equation, use of standard length 8-rd mag's in a 1911 = probable risk of extreme safety hazard.

I don't think you would say "use 'em if you got 'em" if you believed that the risk was probable or unavoidable. I don't think you wish on any of us, even those who may disagree with a specific statement you make from time to time, severe injury...or to their loved ones who may be in close proximity.

A clarification of your alarm, and some good advice about how it can be avoided short of don't ever use 'em (most folks seem to use them safely...so there has to be a way), would be in keeping with the quality advice you dispense on a daily basis.

Stay safe,

CZ52'

[Delmar]

I'm very interested in knowing exactly what would have to take place in order to set up a situation where an 8 round magazine will help to cause a detonation. A scary thought to be sure.

My last purchase of a 1911 is a blued Gold Cup Trophy, and it came with one 7 round and one 8 round magazine. In the booklet, the 8 round is recommended for semi wadcutters, and the feed lips are what I've heard called a fixed release. The feed lips run parallel for a short distance and then flare out abruptly to the width of the magazine body.

I personally stopped using 8 round magazines because they did not feed as reliably as the standard 7 round, all using what is called a variable release-meaning the feed lips opening has a constant angle from the back of the mag to the front.

For me, it was easy to tell just by feeding a round into the chamber-the 8 round mag made a "ker-chunk" sound, and the slide was noticably slower in coming into battery than the 7 round, which was so fast that you cannot hardly see the round being stripped and fed. That told me what I needed to know right there so far as being reliable.

Tuner? Fuff? Anybody? Why is this?

[1911Tuner]

There is a difference between a risk that is plausible and one that is probable. There is also value in describing what might be done to mitigate that risk.


Hello again,

If you've seen many rideover feeds, you'll note that they get caught in
different positions...depending on where the breechface happens to catch the round. That slide weighs nearly a pound, and traveling fast when it
doesn't actually strip and chamber a round. I've seen hundreds. I've witnessed two pressure detonations that resulted from the occurence. I've NEVER seen a rideover feed when a proper magazine with good springs was used.

I've seen most of them occur with improper magazines...even new ones
with strong springs. Most have been of the 8-round variety. I don't use
those BECAUSE of the issues that I've noticed over the course of 40 years.
I was playing with modifying standard magazines to take 8 rounds before
Devel introduced the first commercial ones. The results were dismal.
Incidentally, the Devel follower design is exactly the same as in the Shooting Stars and the Powermags.

I've seen "extractor breakers" magically stop breaking extractors whenever proper magazines were used. I don't base my judgements on
what I see happen once or twice...or with one pistol/magazine combination. I don't spin the results of experiments to favor or disfavor anything or to prove my theories. If somebody would come up with an 8-round design that was as reliable in every way as the standard magazines, I would be the first to shout it from the rooftops. So far,
there hasn't been....and yes...I've tested two of the "New and Improved"
Tripp Research Cobras. Better...but still not quite there yet.

As for the risk, and my statement to "Use'em if ya got'em....There's no
way TO mitigate that risk except to use proper magazines. The magazine that works fine today may suddenly stop working tomorrow. All it takes is a little spring fatigue...very little in this case. The springs are already on the edge because of the reduced number of turns. Increase the wire diameter, and you can't load it to capacity. Decrease it, and it won't work in the majority of guns. There simply isn't as much leeway with the modified springs.

I said "Use'em if ya got'em" mainly because I'm tired of sitting here on this keyboard for hours a day trying to present logical reasons to people who
take it as a personal affront that I have "dissed" their choice of accessories.
Too many flame wars have been fought here over magazines. I've pointed to the stumbling block, and that's all I can do. Whenever a demand to
"Prove it" is thrown out...there's no way that I can prove it. I don't keep
documentation or photos. I'm a pistolsmith...not a research scientist. The
proof will only come when it happens to the individual. My experience and my word is all I can offer...and if you knew me personally, that would mean more.

I will only add that IF your rideover feed gets rammed in just the right place...or in the wrong place, as it may be...the primer CAN pressure detonate...just the same as laying the round on a concrete slab and beating on it with a hammer. IF...that happens, a miniature fragmentation
device has fired less than 2 feet from the end of your nose. Since I don't
walk around town with safety glasses on, I won't take even a small risk with MY eyes for one extra round. Think of it as a trip down the Highway of No Return.

Think about it....please.

[CZ52GUY]

Thanks for your thoughtful response.

Board members will need to draw their own conclusions based on all the information at their disposal.

I did not take and do not take any personal afront from your comments. I did not intend to to inflict a personal attack. I was reacting to the statement of hazard as written. What concerned me, is that the hazard was described without the benefit of sufficient supporting context.

You provided that context, and I thank you.

For me, I am unable to reconcile observed performance, documented performance and endorsement of same with sufficient probability of spontaneous occurrence of the hazard you describe to change my choice of magazines to use in my 1911.

Again, I did not wake up one day seeking to pick a fight with a good man. I reacted to your comment as presented. I hope that in the end you can appreciate that on some topics, good people will disagree.

Stay safe,

CZ52'

[1911Tuner]

CZ said:

Again, I did not wake up one day seeking to pick a fight with a good man. I reacted to your comment as presented.

Nor did I. I probably reacted to what I perceived to be an insinuation
that I would make a broad statement based on my own preferences
or biases. I know that I would never do that...but some people don't.
If I overreacted, I apologize. It had been a long time from 0400 yesterday until I answered that at 2200 hours last night.

Promise me one thing...and you don't have to respond publicly. If and when
you have one of the above-mentioned issues with your Powermags...let me know. Meanwhile, you can experiment a little on your own to see how critical the spring rate is. The only real difference between Powermag and
Shooting Star is the spring. Buy two new ones of each and start shooting.
Note the number of failures with the Stars...any failure....as opposed to the Powermags Try to start the experiment with a fresh recoil spring for each magazine...in order to keep it apples to apples...and let me know what you see.

There's method to this madness...I'm working with another guy on a
spring and follower design that will hopefully change things. If we can
get the kinks worked out...I'll send you a set to install in the Shooting Star
and re-test.

[sm]

Good discussion.
It caused me to look at Ken Hallock's book. I paid particular attention to sketches of gun being fired and pages 122 for extractor, pages 43, 134 and 136 on mags.

Now for some reason in MY brain I had thought that Hallock said to remove the "pip" as he calls for setting the gun up for 'wadcutters'. He also mentions the mag lips needs adjusting a bit for these to feed better. The tone I get from his book is the gun is designed to run a certain way for combat and any deviation lends itself to the need to alter pistol to said "new task". Lo and behold - he does say to remove pip [ pg 136] and this was not in the set up for wadcutters.

Seems we want a proven reliable combat weapon designed for hardball , that always worked and want a 'jack of all trades". IIRC many folks set up guns for tasks , bulls-eye for instance but I dont' think Mr Clark expected that set up to work for carry. ;)

Everything else I have read, heard from folks that use and build for serious use state what Tuner and Fuff cite - deviation leads to problems. Over and over again I hear of the relationship of mags, mag design, mag springs, follower slide catch, ....everything we are reading here again.

What I'm also hearing, is folks that build a 1911 for a specific task, I'm talking an agency here , build everything together as a unit. Mag, ammo everthing is part of that unit.

I'm also hearing and have seen, that folks get wind of part # such and such is used by so and so agencey, competitor...and they want it too - not thinking that the part itself does not make the unit - it is the sum of all parts that make a unit.

I have some older Wilson 8 rounders, I have seen / compared to some newer ones, they are different. I also note the wear on the newer is quicker and that wear affects the slide stop.

I'm still learning...evertime I read Hallock, Tuner, Old Fuff, Kennan, etc, ....I learn something...

[CZ52GUY]

Next time I order, I'll look for them.

Right now I use CM-8's and Brownell 7's on probably an 80/20 ratio if I'm doing IDPA style practice. If I'm just shooting some groups, I generally shoot the Brownell's.

I find them to be equivalent in reliability...I do find that with any 7-rd flat plate mag', I occasionally fail to seat it properly. The w/Pad mag's (regardless of capacity) seem to always get seated properly.

No insinuation intended. I generally try to react to the statement, not the person.

I'm off on business...won't be on the forum for a few days.

Have a good week,

CZ52'

[1911Tuner]

Howdy sm...Good to see ya in the middle of this one.

Hallock's advice to remove the "pip" is ill-advised for any
application other than a gun that's destined to shoot "softball"
ammo...and I mean SOFT-ball. A 200-grain wadcutter at under 700 fps
requires a light recoil spring for the task...and THAT..is where lies
the fly in the ointment for magazines that have undergone a pip-ectomy.

As noted before...the pip...or dimple...helps to keep the last round
under control during the inertial effects of recoil. Thus, it stands to reason that the softer the gun recoils, the less critical it becomes. The dimple also
serves another function. It adds a tiny extra bit of height on the last round, and helps to get it up to feeding position in time to meet the oncoming slide. Not much...but every little bit helps when the magazine
spring tension is at its minimum. Again...the light recoil spring reduces the
slide's return to battery velocity...and the dimple's importance is lessened.

Enter the 8-round magazine with pip-less follower. Nobody ever survived a gun fight complaining that they had too much ammo on tap. When the
8-round Devel magazines hit the market, the serious pistoleers latched onto the concept of a flush-fit magazine that held an extra round...

Problem was, that the missing dimple wasn't compatible with the ammo and the recoil springs that were used in serious pistols. The recoil was too sharp, and the slide velocities too high on the feed stroke.

Remember that whenever one thing is changed...we usually have to
change three other things to compensate. No free lunches. Enter the
McCormick Powermag, with its higher spring rate. Things chugged along
pretty well until the spring lost 2 or 3% of its original tension...

Enter the shortened follower WITH dimple. The short follower wasn't
stable, and produced nose-dives on the top and bottom rounds. Adding
a brute-strong spring helped...but not a lot.

The short, split Devel follower had a tang added on the bottom that
the spring hooked onto...and it solved most of the stability problem...
and heavy Wolff springs made it even better...which gave rise to the Powermag. Trouble was, that the heavy springs and extra round was murder on the base welds of the magazines. Enter the removeable,
tongue in groove style base plate that we see today. It solved the
problem, but jacked the price of a magazine to almost double. No
free lunches. And there was STILL the issue of the spring that was necessarily shortened to make room for the extra round.

So...the distance between coils was increased in order to speed up the
magazine during that critical last round position...and keeping the magazine loaded to capacity put the wire right on the peg of exceeding its elastic limits...which caused the spring to lose tension more quickly.

Change one thing...get ready to change three other things...

Enter chrome silicon spring wire...which drives the price even higher...
and they do last longer...but we often find that we can't load the magazine to capacity without a struggle. The advice is to load it and let it stand
overnight...which forces the spring to take a set, but it still sometimes a struggle to top off the mag.

All this...for the sake of ONE extra round... that, in all probability won't be
needed in the unlikely event that we have to shoot to survive. Most
gunfights take place at less than 21 feet...and the biggest majority at less than 10 feet...with the winner and loser determined in under 5 seconds with fewer than 6 rounds fired from both sides. Put another way...either your problem will be solved, or you'll be neutralized or dead before the magazine is empty. The first three rounds are infinitely more critical than the last...unless you plan on Spray, Pray & Luck.

Next: Tighten up for 2-inch, 50 yard groups...(which are very nice in a match) and hope a speck of sand doesn't tie it up...or leave it loose and go with 5-inch, 50 yard groups for what will probably be a 10 or 15 foot encounter with your nightmare?

Cheers!

Tuner

[Old Fuff]

CZ52GUY mentioned a problem getting flush-fit magazines to latch during "tactical reloads." I experienced this problem on my carry guns and easily solved it by attaching a thin (3/16") home made bumper pad to the magazine's base. Such a pad is thick enough to insure the magazine will latch while not materally adding to the butt's overall length or bulk. It also has absolutely no effect on the magazine's performance.

[1911Tuner]

Old Fuff said:

easily solved it by attaching a thin (3/16") home made bumper pad to the magazine's base...

I've used magazine bases that separate from the tubes...A little dab of
epoxy, smeared around does the trick. Once a scrounger, always a
scrounger, I say...:cool:

Tuner the Pack Rat

[Pythonman]

Has anyone had any experience with Pachmayer 1911 clip followers? I read a good review of them in a HANDGUNS '93 wherein the author claims very good reliablility with them, even installed into old beat up G.I. clips. Basically they are quite similar to the regular flat followers but the edges are all well rounded, it's made of what looks like stainless steel and there is a pronounced hump in the the top of the follower. Turns out they're still available.

Also, in that very same book is the one single best article describing the many, many positive attributes of the 1911A1 pistol I ever read. It was written by Jim Dickson and shortly after reading that article back in late '93 I traded a 6" Colt Anaconda 44mag for the first of quite a few 1911A1 styled pistols I've owned. Still don't miss the Anaconda but I do wish I'd have kept that first Norinco now!

[Dr.Rob]

Never had a problem with a STOCK Colt.

It's when you start "tinkering" with them that you end up re-inventing the wheel.

My 'custom' franken gun is a just a tad unreliable... still fun to shoot but I have other pistols better suited to defensive use.

If I bought a new gun that 'didn't work' I'd send it back asap. No matter what I paid for it.

[sm]

I made some wood base pads back many years ago. I had access to nice wood, and thought "why not?". I was not having a problem with my Colts or nothing...no seating problems, I could tell by "feel" if seated while in holster. Even back then I marked my mags, I could keep a record of any problems and replace springs or repair if dropped and stepped on.

24 hr epoxy worked very well. ( I have a degree from Epoxy Univ.:p ) I ended up drill and tap. I was sure surprised later to see "my idea" in...in ...rubber! Arrggh. :) Mine were thinner, real wood , held up and easy to refinish.

I just thought it looked nice and matched my double dia grips. I had Cherry grips and mag pads for the Blue Lt Wt Commander, and Walnut for the Stainless Steel Combat Commander.

Oh I engraved the mags, none of this hen scratching with a awl...I may have been young and poor, I had "class " tho' :D :D

Rawshide for laynards too...

My old USGI and Colt mags worked...just worked, Only thing I recall doing To a Stock gun was cleaning the factory lube and polish compound , re- lube and shoot the durn thing. Mine even fed the "flying ashtrays" , my carry load ( when I had money for them) otherwise I used USGI hardball.

[wildehond]

What ever!

I have '81 Series 70. Bought it second hand with 50 rounds through it two years ago. That is suppose to be the years when Colt did not make good products. Combat sights, lowered ejection port and dimpeled. Rattles a bit, but works evertime. 3" at 25m standing two handed when I concentrate.

When I got it, I could basically buy anything I wanted. Everyone asked me why that!. Every one was buying Glocks. Now I see more and more 1911's at the range.

Keep to the basics. Keeps you safe and alive.

wildehond.