Sigs And 1911's

[texagun]

Doc2005
Thanks for posting that link. That is just unbelieveable. What did Kimber say when you returned the gun to them? I have often wondered why I see so many Kimbers for sale on the gun sales forums.......I think I understand now.

 

[DogBonz]

Here we go again....

I think that many people have misconceptions when it comes to weapons like these and they don't fully understand the trade off between reliability and accuracy.

Ugly myths are raising their heads again. There doesn't have to be a trade off, nor, IMHO, should there be a trade off. This myth has been so perpetuated that folks actually believe it as gospel, and have begun to expect it. "That 1911 can't be reliable be cause it shoots one hole groups" or "That 1911 can't hit the broad side of a barn because it eats any ammo and is 100% reliable". It is just not true. 1911's can be, and are in some cases, both very accurate and perfectly reliable.

Making a gun more accurate often requires tighter more precise fitting which in turn creates more wear and tear on the these parts.

The first part here is correct, the latter is more myth. The 1911 is actually more complex than a lot of us think. Due to its swinging link, barrel to slide locking lugs, full guide rails, barrel bushing, etc, they require more fitting. If you don't believe me just field strip a 1911 and compare it to a Glock, SIG, HK, etc.

Sure you can slack on tolerances and leave the gun a little loose and it will probably be more reliable but not as accurate. Or You can go to tight and let the parts fit them selves with a "break in" period (wearing each other to a happy medium), sacrificing both reliability and durability. Both of those methods are fairly inexpensive. If you want reliability and accuracy in a pistol that will last a long time... well that takes hand fitting, and hand fitting is expensive. You can't just give CNC"d parts to trained monkeys and have them assemble them. Hand fitting requires skilled labor. Skilled labor is not cheap. If a 1911 is properly fitted with parts that were high quality to begin with, then it will be reliable, accurate, and last a life time. If you don't believe me just look at Ed Brown, Night Hawk, Wilson Combat, etc. Their guns are capable of superb accuracy but do not sacrifice reliability or durability.

It is also the case that the more precise the fitting, the more affect a tiny deviation or movement of that part will have on over all accuracy. Hence, dropping a 1911 capable of 2" groups at 20ft on the ground will affect that gun's immediate performance much more than dropping a Glock capable of 2" groups at 5ft would affect its performance.

See above. A precise fitted 1911 will be no more or less effected by wear, dirt, damage, et all than a Glock, SIG, HK, etc. A tight 1911 will be. Please do not confuse precise and tight. Precise denotes assembly with a high level of skill. Tight denotes a disregard for tolerances.

Please not that I am not attacking or being defensive. I am just trying to clear things up.

-Fred

 

[bluetopper]

If you think tight tolerances equal less dependability you probably haven't shot a Les Baer.

 

[1911Tuner]

Fred/Dogbonz has made several good points...and valid.

However...ya had to know that was comin'. ...

However...The WW2 USGI pistols weren't assembled with much hand-fitting, if any at all. They ran and ran and ran...and even though they couldn't be considered a threat at the Camp Perry pistol matches...they were surprisingly accurate before they were used and abused by conscripts and armorers who tossed parts into a bath and reassembled with no regard to what went with what.

Many of these old pistols...Union Switch and Remington Rands made from mid-1944 to the end of the run in particular...were capable of placing 5 shots into a 4-inch circle at 50 yards...and that was with general issue hardball. Match-grade ammo would bring that down to 3 inches or even less in some examples.

While it's entirely possible to have a precisely-fitted pistol that both as tight as a drum and Bullseye accurate...it's a little more tricky to arrive at that desideratum and one that's simply rattle-free and more accurate than most of us can prove without a sandbag rest.

The last thing to consider is that...when you have a 1911 pistol that exhibits zero play in any of the areas that are demanded to have that...so that it'll shoot bughole slow-fire groups at unrealistic distances...the gun is essentially out of spec.

 

[mljdeckard]

1911 tuner is absolutely right. (as always, it seems.) My unit qualified with WWII era 1911s one last time in 1992, before switching out to Berettas. We took a dozen or so of the pistols, put new barrels, bushings, and links on them, and WOW!! Fantastic, accurate, easy-shooting 1911s.

I think a lot of what you are seeing for a 'lot of malfunctions' for 1911s is just because of the resurge in popularity. If any item is more popular, and there are more of them, by sheer numbers, there will be more problems. And because of forums like this one, where we are such geeks that we post any malfunction on ANY gun on these boards within MINUTES of it happening, the problems are much more publicized than they used to be. This level of consumer awareness has raised gun quality to new levels.

I have an entry-level Kimber Custom II, it has been flawless for about 10k rounds. Or nearly flawless. Flawless enough that I can't remember any flaws. If you get a 1911 that DOES have some problems, there are so many smiths, who have been working on 1911s for so long, it's problably the easiest and fastest pistol to fix.

There will be brand snobs in here who will try to scare you with issues about MIM parts, stuff like that, say that if you don't spend at least $1500 on a custom gun, it is guaranteed to fail. Hasn't happened to me EVER.

 

[Scorpiusdeus]

I can't speak to 1911s in general, but I think the issues are most likely related to the ammo feeding properly. .45ACP is a big round. I think that feeding issues were most often hollow point ammo. That's just my impression.

Sig Sauer as it's now, again, called has an excellent reputation for firearms in their "P" series. P220, P210, P226, and so on. Where their reputation took some hits was in the 1911 line. I'm not as familiar with Sig Sauer's 1911 line, but most serious complaints I've seen, heard about, or read about were with regard to the 1911 line, not the P Series handguns.

I'm not sure I can count the number of Sig Sauers I've owned, but I know one thing, none of them have ever failed me. They are great weapons.

 

[siglite]

Yeah, I agree that Sig took a huge reputation hit with their GSR line. And IMNSHO they deserved it. Lots of us consumers have come to expect nothing but the best reliability from Sig. Their issues on that GSR line felt like a slap in the face to a lot of us Sig koolaid drinkers (and I admit, I am one).

Fortunately, as Scorp pointed out, except for some minor issues with a couple of runs over the past fifteen years ago, Sigs have been as reliable as any other manufacturer out there. As I said before, maybe not MORE reliable, but AS reliable.

<flame_suit>
I've never understood the attraction to the 1911. After over 100 years, you'd think mfgrs would have the bugs worked out by now. But I see so many FTFs, FTEs, and other goofy issues with 1911s that I wouldn't consider one for CCW. Maybe it's just my koolaid skewed perception, but it really SEEMS like the 1911 platform, as it stands today, is one of the most failure prone pistols out there.
</flame_suit>

Having said that, the running "reliability poll" I started has REALLY surprised me. The more the data and responses stack up, the more surprised I am.

 

[1911Tuner]

After over 100 years, you'd think mfgrs would have the bugs worked out by now.

The bugs were worked out by 1912. The problem is that so many manufacturers are working them back in. If they built'em like they should be built, my keyboard would rust over before I had occasion to work somebody through a functional problem.

 

[TX1911fan]

I know the Kimber Raptor looks cool, and hopefully Kimber is fixing its customer support issues. I will say this. If you are going to spend $1,000 on a 1911, I HIGHLY recommend getting a Springfield Armory pistol. I have a TRP, and while it doesn't have the cool scalloping and looks of the Raptor, it is a damn fine pistol. It is TIGHT and I have NEVER had any problems with it. FMJ and hollowpoints work every time. And, if by chance you have a problem, SA's warranty department is superb. They will fix the problem, without a doubt.

 

[Hunter0924]

Saying 1911s are not reliable is like saying cars are not reliable.
When I see someone post "1911s are most prone to failure" is the same as saying "cars are most prone to failure"
1911 is a generic (and incorrect) term encompassing Government Model pistols and copies of such.
When talking about unreliability specifics are needed. I wish I could make this point clearer.
If it were me I would look at what Colt has to offer over the Kimber line.

 

[siglite]

I'd disagree. I'd say that saying 1911s are unreliable is more like saying "dodge trucks are not reliable."

(dunno anything about dodge trucks, but that's not the point, so cut me some slack)

I often refer to the 1911 design as the Harley Davidson of pistols. Sure, they're great if wrenching is part of the experience for you. They look great. They ride great. But you're going to be turning wrenches, or alternately, you'll not be riding much or sending a mechanic's kid to college. If you want something that's going to fire up and run reliably every time you push the starter, you'd probably be better served with something Japanese.

Though, we're kind of diverting from the other half of the OP, which is "why would someone spend a bazillion bucks on something unreliable." I TOTALLY agree with him. No one's happy if that happens to them.

 

[FireArmFan]

People are more likely to post about a problem with their gun then if nothing is wrong with it. I think this leads to people's perceptions towards different products. It's not just guns, I've seen it with cars, tools, and many other things. I've shot my share of 1911's and seen even more shot and I've never witnessed one failure or reliabilty issue. I'm not saying they don't exist, but I don't think they are as common as people tend to think. I've shot a Sig P220 and the only issue I had was with a faulty piece of ammo, so that wasn't really the guns fault, only put about 100 rounds through it so I don't have a ton of first hand Sig experience.

 

[Thernlund]

I often refer to the 1911 design as the Harley Davidson of pistols. Sure, they're great if wrenching is part of the experience for you. They look great. They ride great. But you're going to be turning wrenches, or alternately, you'll not be riding much or sending a mechanic's kid to college. If you want something that's going to fire up and run reliably every time you push the starter, you'd probably be better served with something Japanese.

I could not have said it better myself.


-T.

 

[Hunter0924]

Since Dodge is the only one who makes Dodge trucks that is a bad analogy. There are many makers of Government Models as there are many makers of trucks.
If you say Kimbers are unreliable then your analogy would be better (not saying they are just an example).
For someone to say a blanket statement as "1911s are unreliable" leads me to believe they are misinformed or bias. I have more than a few Government Models and they are all reliable. I have also shot in many pistol matches with many makes of Government Models that ran fine stage after stage and match after match.
A friend once told me "there are two types of opinions in the world, ones you are entitled to and ones you are not."

 

[siglite]

That's true Hunter, re: the dodge trucks thing. Maybe a truer analogy might be "Motorcycles using engines with oddball timing which consists of two cylinders of a radial engine unevenly spaced" (yeah, that's a harley) .........

I like my Harley / 1911 analogy above... but that might clean it up a bit if we're going to hang up on semantics.

 

[col_tapiocca]

It should be noted that SIG-Sauer also makes 1911s. These are much more of a crapshoot. Some people got good ones, but I got one that was crap. At least their customer service has been good - they paid for shipping both ways and returned it promptly, even replacing my first gun after the third time something broke. But, that's the problem, isn't it.

It's SigArs Inc. in the USA who make 1911-clone. The german factory Sig-Sauer don't make 1911-clones. All 1911-GSR sold here in europe are imported from the USA.

 

[Don Carter]

Kimber 1911s

I too wondered about why Kimber was so expensive until I got one, a Pro CDP II. Listing for $1255 but I bought it new for less. I especially like the differences that the Custom shop makes....

I seem to shoot with greater confidence,,,,, and greater accuracy.

 

[Ken Rainey]

Ok now siglite...your analogy of Harley's and 1911's may have been true of the old shovelheads and mixed part military rejects ... Yeah, I ride a Harley and shoot a Kimber 1911 - both are ten years old and haven't missed a beat .. 'cept for tunin' in aftermarket parts! (thanks again cousin' 'Tuner!) ... and once tuned in, they just keep on runnin'
Granted, my Harley does have the "Evo"lution engine and my Kimber is a pre series II government size model . Sometimes, it's more about picking the right one from a particular manufacturer

 

[TX1911fan]

I've got 3 1911s and a Dodge pickup, and have had no problems with any of them.

 

[siglite]

Don't forget the AMF bikes, Ken.

</thread_drift>

 

[Ken Rainey]

Yep siglite, that's the ones....the AMF era shovelheads - also known as "troubleheads" .... the Davidson's come back with the Evolution engine saved the day....just wish I would've bought a lot of stock in the motor company back then...sigh.. ... we now return you to your regularly scheduled discussion..


As far as Kimber's go, I'd prefer to buy one without the series II safety system.....

 

[Hunter0924]

The point I wanted to make is 1911 is an incorrect term generalizing a design.
The term Government Model is more correct (that is like being sorta pregnant) but not absolutely correct.
Saying 1911 makes me think of a pistol made before 1924 by Colt, Springfield (the original Springfield armory), or Remington UMC.
Generalization of a term can cause interpretation problems.

 

[1911Tuner]

(thanks again cousin' 'Tuner!)

My pleasure, cousin Ken.

Wouldn't have missed the look on your face that day for a peanut farm in Georgia.

Oh! Again...Sorry I shot ya.

 

[Ken Rainey]

Ahh, its aw'ite cousin....Momma always said I was hard headed and now I got braggin' rights to it !