1911's - are they THAT finicky?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Really? Can you prove that? Because nearly every issue with a 1911 I've seen on gun forums over the past 20 years has been with stock 1911s. Quite a few have been magazine issues, but a lot have just been bad factory parts or fitting.

"Buy a quality 1911 and rock on..."

Would you consider a Dan Wesson 1911 to be a quality 1911?

I can literally take 5 minutes worth of internet searching to find at least a dozen threads with Dan Wesson and other "high-quality" 1911s having issues.

https://www.danwessonforum.com/forum/1911-pistols/valkyrie-45-issues/

https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/dan-wesson-cbob-1911-problems-help.1174670/

https://www.danwessonforum.com/forum/1911-pistols/problems-with-pointman-9/

https://www.1911addicts.com/threads/guardian-issues-questions.42778/

https://www.1911addicts.com/threads/les-baer-problem.19630/

My point is that I think you are sorely mistaken if you think most issues with 1911s are due to amateur gunsmithing and buying a $3000 1911 will guarantee you will have no issues.

The 1911 is a finicky platform and it is really easy to get one out of the box that doesn't work. I don't own any because I don't need a heavy, unreliable, low-capacity pistol and can't afford to gamble on a problem child at any price point.
My DW ECO .45 was a pita until I started lubing with Mobil 1. We are happy now.
 
A friend just got a Dan Wesson of some kind, I don't know the exact model, but so far, it's not looking like it's going to be staying very long. LOTS of problems. He says it's pretty though.
 
I haven't fired very many 1911s and only own two. But, I think to refer to a "1911" as though they are all so similar in behavior is not a valid or justified generalization--no matter what the alleged attribute. Like saying "1911's are super-accurate". I'm not aware of any other auto pistol description ("1911") that applies to handguns made by or assembled by or customized by hundreds of companies, in dozens of configurations, many calibers and and an assortment of materials, using parts that may come from dozens if not hundreds of other manufacturers. It's not even like referring to "Glocks" as though they're all the same--at least they all start out from the same designers and manufacturer. My point is: it's probably just not valid to generalize about a 1911 that way, when there's not exactly an ANSI Standard 1911 that everyone conforms to in all aspects of the gun that affect function--especially feeding.

I have a Glock that won't feed anything I give it, a 1911 that feeds almost everything I put through it, and a dozen other pistols that are everywhere in between. Compared to my wheel guns, they're *all* fussy, and I wouldn't trust any of them for carry after slapping any old ammo in them. From the Kahr K40 to the XDm 10 and the Grizzly Win Mag...they have some trouble with some ammo. Well, except for the M&P 45c...it doesn't have any trouble with anything. I wouldn't bet my life on that, though.
 
I own something like 10 1911s (original design, not compacts). I also own a number of sub-compact handguns based on the 1911 design too.

Haven't had a problem with any.
 
the mags are a lot of the problem.
run tripp cobras and be happy

This. Every non-Wilson mag that I have now has a Tripp kit. And the rest are Cobra Mags. My experience and my experience only (all .45ACP):

1996-purchased Colt 1991 had some issues, but I was new to the platform
Used Colt XSE tons of issues
Used Les Baer Concept VII tons of issues
DW VBOB issues until I discovered how to break in mags, change mag springs, and buy Tripp Cobras...
- nothing since
Wilson CQB perfect from first shot to last
Wilson ULC Commander perfect
Alchemy Prime Elite- Perfect
CZ 1911A1 Finicky with all mags
Colt Lightweight Commander perfect
Colt Level II perfect
Springfield Pro- never fired it and then sold it
Colt M45- never fired it and then sold it

I’ve stopped buying them now that I have the Alchemy. It’s satisfied my lust.
I have it down to three remaining 1911s.

I’ve kept these three:
Wilson ULCC....it is my EDC when not carrying my PPS
VBOB... I just love it
Alchemy... wow...just wow... by far, the best semi-custom out there.
 
I somewhat regret sticking my nose back into this thread, but for those that are new to the 1911 or are looking for information to help improve their experience with the gun, the 47D is probably the worst mag in the Wilson line-up.

Seconded, third-ed, or fourth-ed (whatever we're up to by now) on avoid the Wilson 47D 8-round .45 magazine. They may feed reliably for a while, but the springs get weak fast and then the issues start. I actually handled a Novak-customized Colt 1991 that had been left untouched for years (a decade or 2 maybe) and the empty 47D that had been stored in it didn't even have enough spring strength left to engage the slide stop. Oddly enough, the 7-round Wilson 47 .45 magazine is one of my favorites.

Next, to the OP's question, I'd say your mileage will vary on 1911 experience. My father had an inexpensive 1911 in .45 ACP when I was a teenager that would work, and then not (it's where I learned not to trust Wilson 47Ds). My brother had a Kimber lighweight 4" gun and a Dan Wesson Pointman Major, both .45 ACP, both with intermittent issues. The Kimber's issues were never resolved. The Dan Wesson would run fine on hardball, sized to min-spec, using 7-round magazines. Use 8-round magazines and all bets were off. I have a friend with a very pretty Kimber Raptor II in .45 ACP that I'm kind of skeptical of, as it had one failure to extract on me when clean, using fresh Winchester 230gr hardball.

But my personal 1911 is a Colt Competition in .45 ACP. This one just works. It feeds from any magazine I can get my hands on. It feeds hardball, it feeds Remington Golden Saber JHP and it feeds 200gr SWC reloads. The thumb safety works smoothly and slickly. It hits to the sights. The trigger breaks cleanly at about 4.5-5 pounds. You couldn't get me to give up MY Colt 1911. But it wasn't an easy step to take the plunge when the money came out, based on my past history with the platform. However, I'm glad I did, because when you have one that works, it just WORKS right.

alZLQR.jpg
 
When you have one that works, it just WORKS right.
I generally avoid these kinds of discussions since they're usually just lists of everyone's experiences with out-of-the box pistols. I've worked on enough of them that my wife now says there's no such thing as an out-of-the-box 1911 that'll run. Obviously that's not true but she likes to tease me by besmirching JMB's crowning achievement.

Here's my take on 1911s that don't run out-of-the-box or that have intermittent failures.

Yup, magazines are a weak link in the system. Yup, ammo is a weak link too. But in a correctly built 1911 any quality magazine will run any quality ammo.

The trick is the pistol must have been built with all the correct geometry and measurements. In a non-ramped barrel .45 ACP 1911 the frame feed ramp must be 31.5 degrees, ideally it should extend .400" below the top of the frame rails, and the barrel bed must be no less than .246" long. All the frame holes should be correctly placed, the bottom of the barrel ramp should have a gap of .033" between it and the top of the frame ramp, the gap between barrel and slide at link down should be .010" - .015", and on and on.

Importantly, the extractor must be fit correctly. I've not run across many extractors that have been fit correctly by the manufacturer. In fact, my default SOP is to replace any factory extractor that crosses my bench with an after-market one from EGW or Harrison (sometimes Wilson). Fitting an extractor is not as simple as it may seem. Here's a tutorial on how it's done.

Unfortunately, the design of the 1911 does not lend itself to shoddy workmanship which is why skilled 1911 'smiths are in such high demand these days. They fix all the out of spec dimensions. Once that's done the pistol becomes a marvel of reliability.
 
I haven't fired very many 1911s and only own two. But, I think to refer to a "1911" as though they are all so similar in behavior is not a valid or justified generalization--no matter what the alleged attribute. Like saying "1911's are super-accurate". I'm not aware of any other auto pistol description ("1911") that applies to handguns made by or assembled by or customized by hundreds of companies, in dozens of configurations, many calibers and and an assortment of materials, using parts that may come from dozens if not hundreds of other manufacturers. It's not even like referring to "Glocks" as though they're all the same--at least they all start out from the same designers and manufacturer. My point is: it's probably just not valid to generalize about a 1911 that way, when there's not exactly an ANSI Standard 1911 that everyone conforms to in all aspects of the gun that affect function--especially feeding.

I have a Glock that won't feed anything I give it, a 1911 that feeds almost everything I put through it, and a dozen other pistols that are everywhere in between. Compared to my wheel guns, they're *all* fussy, and I wouldn't trust any of them for carry after slapping any old ammo in them. From the Kahr K40 to the XDm 10 and the Grizzly Win Mag...they have some trouble with some ammo. Well, except for the M&P 45c...it doesn't have any trouble with anything. I wouldn't bet my life on that, though.

I really don't know what to say to that. Maybe we have a different interpretation of reliability. i have a bunch of modern Centerfire Semi-Auto Handguns and I am willing to bet my life on all of them. I wouldn't still own them if not.

The most temperamental one I have is the P365.
It won't feed Winchester Steel Case and will stop completely returning to battery after 400 rounds with dirty ammo which will result in a light slightly off-center strike. But then I also have revolvers that don't function if you go to long between cleanings too.

I would have no problem carrying the P365 cleaned, test fired and with the usual nickel cased defensive ammo if I could shoot it better.

My primary carry right now is a M&P M2.0 Compact in .40 S&W and it will go 1000 rounds between cleanings (haven't tried more) and has several thousand rounds through including 700+ rounds of the carry ammo (I buy "Seconds" for testing and practice). If it ever malfunctions I will let you know.

The only revolver that has ever shot a thousand round string for me without issue is my DW M15-2 which did it without failure on Zero 148 WC decades ago.

Now as I said earlier my 1911's are not maintenance free. You do have to clean, lube and adjust or replace extractors and springs a little more often than in modern pistols in my experience. Some did need minor attention to extractor tuning or throat when NIB to be 100% with what I wanted to shoot or carry but they were a small minority.
 
Last edited:
Man, the good ole 1911 is one of those guns that everyone should have at least one of, and there are lots of them. The problem with a great many of them is that they are so easy to mess with that there are also many self proclaimed "gunsmiths" out there. I've had to send more than one slide or frame out to be welded up so that I could have work redone after putting my trust and confidence in the wrong person. 1911's are unbelievably easy to mess up. Truthfully, there are many great deals to be had on used 1911s out there, but I won't buy another used one unless I know that it is in stock form, or I really know the guy I'm getting it from and who did whatever work was done. 1911's are not Glocks.

Back in the day (30 years ago), buying a new 1911 meant that your experience was just beginning. Gotta have the ejection port lowered. Then a throat and polish. Then getting the slide milled for a front sight that won't pop off every 2000 rounds, etc. These days, I've found that most modern 1911's are built very well. They aren't too finicky about ammo and shoot pretty well. Geez, what you can buy now over the counter for $1K would have cost you $2500 30 years ago. Shoot, I bought a brand new, stock out of the box STI Spartan, I don't know, maybe 8 years or so ago. Paid $650 for it out the door. That thing fed empty cases, as long as they were resized first. It shoots and feeds everything from those big mouth Gold Dots (I think theyre called) to semi wad cutters.

I had a friend at one time who was a machinist genius. The guy truly made works of art that were tack drivers. He once told me that when it comes to 1911 .45s, a ramped barrel has no business in a single stack gun. It will just give you headaches. He told me this after I brought a Springfield compact model to him to make it run right. Since then, I've avoided ramped barrels in single stack 1911s and haven't had any sort of problem since.

I also have to agree with regard to magazines. Get good ones. My 1911 only gets shot at the range so I got good and cheap. I bought a bunch of Chip McCormack mags from cdnn investments and never had any problems with them. Just beware of that "custom" 1911
 
Color me green as all get out!:D
Have any pictures for us to drool on?:)

2dC4k9s.jpg

I love this "1911"...and love the round, too. I wish Magnum Research would build a DE in this caliber, but I think they just chuckled when I asked them if they'd consider it.
The gun has its issues, but cycling reliably is not one of them. Bangs the crap out of the brass (no biggie, resizing fixes most if not all damage, brass is cheap), recoil beats the crap out of the magazines, and because they wanted it to handle every cartridge on Earth, the grip is ridiculously long front-to-back...even for .45 Win Mag it could be a tad shorter.

Accurate as can be, and an absolute blast to shoot--if you don't might a gallery when at the range. With book loads approaching 12-15% above hot 44 Mag levels and the mass of a cement block, it's a real mitten-full of hand cannon.

This one was pretty much mint, as I'm sure most are, and fairly reasonable for price when I bought it. My plan was to get at least one or two more, because I need them, you know. But every time I went to find one, the price seemed to go up about 50%. Might as well just squander the money on an Anaconda! If I had unlimited resources, I git me one of them rare 10" models, though. A real punkin blaster that would be.
 
Last edited:
I really don't know what to say to that. Maybe we have a different interpretation of reliability. i have a bunch of modern Centerfire Semi-Auto Handguns and I am willing to bet my life on all of them. I wouldn't still own them if not.

I wasn't saying the guns are not reliable or that I don't trust them. What I meant was that I would not trust any of them to be reliable with any untried ammo I threw at them.
 
I love this "1911"...and love the round, too. I wish Magnum Research would build a DE in this caliber, but I think they just chuckled when I asked them if they'd consider it.

I would love a .45/.50AE. When I suggested that to Magnum Research they gave me a line of how the 440 Corbon beat Eagles to death...
Then they (re)introduced the .429 DE...
:(
I don't like 44s.:thumbdown:

:D Thanks for the lust image!
 
This thread is a perfect example of why real statistics are not driven my single anecdotal evidence but is instead based in empirical evidence. There will be stories on both sides of this but does not prove anything because the data set is not controlled for the unlimited number of variables involved. There is nothing scientific about saying I owned 1 and it did not function properly or I have owned 50 and they all ran perfectly. None of those one off examples tell you anything about the reliability of the platform itself. I tend to agree with @Steve in Allentown. If the gun is made to JMBs spec and you are using a good quality magazine a 1911 is as reliable as any other platform. Unfortunately regardless of price point this does not always happen. A gun which was manufactured out of spec and sent to a paying customer does not make the design flawed or unreliable it is more reflective of the manufacturer not the design. Also when you change the dimensions, the caliber and the capacity..... All bets are off.

maxresdefault.jpg

Again I cannot think of a person who love the 1911 platform more than Ken Hackathorn. He has spent most of his life shooting 45 ACP out of a 1911 and even though he says it in a tongue and cheek way he always says: The 1911 chambered in 45 ACP is the Worlds Finest Close Quarters Sidearm and King of feedway stoppages and every true American Patriot should own a least one. -Ken Hackathorn

Here is a good video with KH and Bill Wilson. Some of the info is spot on some is sort of anecdotal myths. From example my understanding the old day Colt assembly line workers where not what we would call a "gunsmith" as much a machinist who was trained to assemble guns to a single spec.

 
Last edited:
I'm certainly willing to step up to the plate in an effort to get better data--to that end, I can start a "What's the Best 1911?" thread. :)

The only thing I can think of in this topic area that might be even less productive would be to ask the manufacturer (or better yet, the seller), "Now, is this 1911 built to the original Browning design specs? I mean, are all the holes in the right place and stuff?" That would be a real gut-buster.
 
I would love a .45/.50AE. When I suggested that to Magnum Research they gave me a line of how the 440 Corbon beat Eagles to death...
Then they (re)introduced the .429 DE...
:(
I don't like 44s.:thumbdown:

Well, I like ONE 44...the 44 Rem Mag. But I don't like bottle-necks in pistols. Not for any reason, really. It's just not right. Yeah, the .429 DE seems to me to be a way to spend a lot of money not solving a problem I have. When I can get 45 Win Mag brass at Starline for not a whole lot of money and beat the snot out of most auto pistol rounds, a new quirky wildcat isn't for me.
 
My thought is it is unfair to lump all 1911s together and make a decision on that.
Lots of companies make 1911s some are better than others.
Lots of people make mags for 1911s, some are good some are not so good, bad mags and of course it won’t work.
Might as well lump all semi auto pistols together and say they are all finicky compared to revolvers.

Comparing all 1911s to say Glocks is like comparing say all pickup trucks to Toyotas.
Toyota’s over history tend to be more reliable as a group than say all pickup trucks.
Of course if you buy Billy Bob retreads and put them on a Toyota you could then say it’s not reliable because
the tires keep failing…..
And of course in any given sample of enough of something made by man you will always have some that for whatever reason are just out of spec/not made right
and have problems.

When I was younger I had an old single shot break action shotgun, never had any failures to feed with it,
so I guess you can say any multiple shot firearm is more finicky than that…..

35k rounds thru my Springfield 9mm 1911 loaded, maybe 5 failures to feed because I didn’t case gage some reloads and had out of spec brass.
So is that the guns fault or mine? Is it finicky because I tried to feed it bad ammo?

I had some cheap 8 round .45 mags that I was given that did not work well in one of my .45 1911s.
So is it finicky because I had junk mags?

I don’t own a Glock but with all the after market mags for them odds are there is some company that made a bunch that are junk.
Would it be fair to say Glocks are more finicky than say HKs because they don’t work with those mags?


Lots of 1911s don’t like SWCs. Some don’t care.
I will go out on a limb and say SWCs were never designed to feed in semi auto pistols.
How many finicky 1911 reports are due to SWCs?
So lets say revolvers are less finicky because they don’t have (as many) issues with SWCs.

So yes as a group 1911s are more finicky than say revolvers or single shot break actions shotguns,
.Some of mine are not finicky at all, one does not care for SWCs if they are not loaded just right, but I like them all.
(and would trust my life to them with the right ammo)

So the answer is yes as a group 1911s are more finicky, but IMO that answer is really worthless.
 
During the military trials for the 1911 Colt, and the other competitors for the contract, had to bring in 10 samples of their guns. The guns were completely disassembled and the parts placed in a bucket, shaken up and dumped on a table. Colt workers then had to assemble 10 guns that worked from the parts laying there while under the clock. Colt beat the others at this and the guns all worked.

The guns were factory made, by machine operators. Just as Ford automobile's were made. They were not individually hand fit, but assembled. This was also done for the Browning designed machine guns for both the infantry and Air Force during two major wars that Colt produced and for their rifles like the Colt Monitor. During the war years when other manufacturers like Remington Rand, USS, and others built they also had to be interchangeable with Colt and the others.

Today if we took 10 1911s from different manufacturers, broke them down and reassembled them from a heap of parts we'd be lucky to get one, maybe two that worked.

In general they are not finicky guns at all. But you can make them that why.
 
Seconded, third-ed, or fourth-ed (whatever we're up to by now) on avoid the Wilson 47D 8-round .45 magazine. They may feed reliably for a while, but the springs get weak fast and then the issues start. I actually handled a Novak-customized Colt 1991 that had been left untouched for years (a decade or 2 maybe) and the empty 47D that had been stored in it didn't even have enough spring strength left to engage the slide stop. Oddly enough, the 7-round Wilson 47 .45 magazine is one of my favorites.

Next, to the OP's question, I'd say your mileage will vary on 1911 experience. My father had an inexpensive 1911 in .45 ACP when I was a teenager that would work, and then not (it's where I learned not to trust Wilson 47Ds). My brother had a Kimber lighweight 4" gun and a Dan Wesson Pointman Major, both .45 ACP, both with intermittent issues. The Kimber's issues were never resolved. The Dan Wesson would run fine on hardball, sized to min-spec, using 7-round magazines. Use 8-round magazines and all bets were off. I have a friend with a very pretty Kimber Raptor II in .45 ACP that I'm kind of skeptical of, as it had one failure to extract on me when clean, using fresh Winchester 230gr hardball.

But my personal 1911 is a Colt Competition in .45 ACP. This one just works. It feeds from any magazine I can get my hands on. It feeds hardball, it feeds Remington Golden Saber JHP and it feeds 200gr SWC reloads. The thumb safety works smoothly and slickly. It hits to the sights. The trigger breaks cleanly at about 4.5-5 pounds. You couldn't get me to give up MY Colt 1911. But it wasn't an easy step to take the plunge when the money came out, based on my past history with the platform. However, I'm glad I did, because when you have one that works, it just WORKS right.

View attachment 888909

I need a set of those grips!
 
Seconded, third-ed, or fourth-ed (whatever we're up to by now) on avoid the Wilson 47D 8-round .45 magazine. They may feed reliably for a while, but the springs get weak fast and then the issues start. I actually handled a Novak-customized Colt 1991 that had been left untouched for years (a decade or 2 maybe) and the empty 47D that had been stored in it didn't even have enough spring strength left to engage the slide stop. Oddly enough, the 7-round Wilson 47 .45 magazine is one of my favorites.
Im still shooting the 4 8 rounders I got back in the late 90's, and with the original springs, and have been shooting them all along, all this time.

They havent worked 100% in all my 1911's, but they do work in the four I have now. Just shot them the other day too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top