1911: 7 or 8 rd mags?

[CWL]

Personally, I think that technology in tube, springs and feed lips has improved enough to have one extra bullet in the magazine. -But I'd never go for any cheapo magazines for any of my firearms.

I have 9 M1911s nowadays, 2 stock, but the rest range from semi-custom to full house builds.
I have found Chip McCormick Power Mags and their Shooting Star (Milspec) magazines to function reliably in all of my M1911s. They have been economical as well as reliable for me.

I still have a bunch of Wilson Combat, a couple of Tripp Research Cobras, plus a medley of other mags accumulated from over the years, but I stick with my Chip M's for practice & carry.

 

[Dr.Rob]

My Colts run on 7 rd Colt mags or 8 rd Chip McCormicks only.

 

[Papaster]

My 8 round magazines seem to be a little more ammo picky than the 7 round mags I've got. Two of my 8 round magazines don't always play nice with hollow point ammunition.

 

[skoro]

Are 8 round mags just as reliable as 7 round mags or is there no difference?

I have an accumulation of 7 and 8 rd magazines for my Colts. Some are pretty old and worn. But I've never noticed any problems with any of them. If I were to keep one stoked for HD purposes, it would have an 8 rounder.

 

[Lucky Derby]

1911tuner makes a good, and valid point, however metalurgy has come a long way in the last 100 years.
Stick with quality mags and you shouldn't have issues with either in most 1911. Sometimes the gun will have a preference.
All of my serious use mags are Wilsons. Either 47Ds or ETMs.

 

[tarosean]

I only run 8 and 10rders. (Wilson, CMC Power and ACT)

 

[mesinge2]

Wilson Combat 8rd ETM mags and Brownells 8rd mags!

 

[Steve S.]

I have a Wilson CQB that came with two stainless eight rounders; I only load seven rounds as when I try to stack eight, number eight "feels" like it really binds (adds excessive tension) to the mag - seven seems to load smooth and easy so I stick with seven.

 

[MCMXI]

I've been using 8-round Wilson Combat ETM, Kimber, Dan Wesson and Ed Brown magazines for the past four years or so with no issues in any of my 1911s (Ed Brown, Dan Wesson, Kimber). I've shot a bunch of 150+ round USPSA matches so replaced all of the WC plastic followers with CMI stainless steel dimpled followers only because the plastic followers drag/bind a little when there's sand/grit/dirt in the magazine tubes.

 

[herrwalther]

Never had a single issue with stock 8 rounders in my Para. Fire away.

 

[shooter1]

I've been shooting 1911s for the last half century. Only time I have used 7 rd mags was in the Army. Only mag related issues have been traceable to damaged mags or bad springs. With the quality construction of today's magazines and state of the art magazine springs I find no good reason to limit myself to 7rds. The 8 rounders are reliable enough for Single Stack division USPSA. That's likely the best proving ground we have these days. I do own a few dozen 7 round mags, still in the cosmoline.
str1

 

[rick melear]

Modern 8 round mags of quality manufacturing have worked flawless for me.

 

[Drail]

I also shot USPSA single stack through the 80s and 90s (before there was a single stack division) and I remember very clearly how many malfunctions occurred through those years on all of those ranges that were caused by 8 round flush magazines. And it was a very large number. Enough that I never used them for gaming or carry purposes. I still have and still use 10 Shooting Star mags that I bought around 1988 and they have never had more than 7 rounds in them and not one of them has ever failed to feed. I still use them today. I agree 100% with Tuner's post regarding this subject. If John Browning thought that there was any way that 8 rounds would fit (and I also am very sure that he did) and provide 100% reliability he would have figured out a way to make it work. In the end he went with 7. And the suggestion made that metallurgy and technology now makes it possible is ridiculous. Spring technology has not advanced THAT far yet. It may come to pass "someday" but we ain't there yet when it comes to steel springs crammed into the bottom of a magazine or holding up your 1/2 ton truck loaded with 3000 lbs. or lifting your garage door when it goes out of adjustment. I believe that with flush fit magazines the choice is - one more round - or 100% reliability. No contest in my mind. But anyone who thinks they are smarter than John Browning was is welcome to use anything they choose and bet the farm on it.

 

[StrawHat]

Here is some interesting reading.

http://how-i-did-it.org/magazines/

and

http://how-i-did-it.org/magazines/appendix.html

 

[MCMXI]

I agree 100% with Tuner's post regarding this subject. If John Browning thought that there was any way that 8 rounds would fit (and I also am very sure that he did) and provide 100% reliability he would have figured out a way to make it work. In the end he went with 7.

And I suppose JMB invented Geometric Dimensioning & Tolerancing along with Tolerance Stacks Analysis too. He was clearly a gifted individual but was limited to the tools available to him. I don't buy the "if he couldn't make it work no one can" argument.

 

[Nickb45]

I'm really liking the Wilson ETM mags, they fed my pistol another 400 rounds between today and yesterday.

 

[JRH6856]

And I suppose JMB invented Geometric Dimensioning & Tolerancing along with Tolerance Stacks Analysis too. He was clearly a gifted individual but was limited to the tools available to him. I don't buy the "if he couldn't make it work no one can" argument.

I know that if you play fast and loose enough with the Dimensioning & Tolerancing of JMB's original design, you won't need a Tolerance Stacks Analysis to tell you you screwed up.

 

[MCMXI]

I know that if you play fast and loose enough with the Dimensioning & Tolerancing of JMB's original design, you won't need a Tolerance Stacks Analysis to tell you you screwed up.

If JMB had used GD&T there couldn't be any "fast and loose".

 

[JRH6856]

If JMB had used GD&T there couldn't be any "fast and loose".

But he didn't use it and it might be a bit late to apply it 103 years later.

 

[mljdeckard]

I use Wilson 47D 8 rounders. They have a medium bump, which helps when you have to do that tap-rack-bang thing. (I REALLY hate getting pinch blisters from magazines.

 

[cfullgraf]

I only buy 7 round 1911 magazines. It is what the gun was originally designed with.

That is not to say the 8 rounders do not work but I am not willing to risk it. I will leave it up to the individual to decide which to invest in.

Back in the early 1980s, I spliced together two GI magazines to make an 8 round magazine. It extends one round width from the base of the magwell. It has worked flawlessly. Not a simple project and one I will not repeat. I guess I had too much time on my hands at the time.

 

[shooter1]

If this were 1960, I'd be using 7 rd magazines. Fortunately metallurgy and design technology have evolved considerably in the last 50 yrs. I don't know where all these failed 8 rd mags are, but they must be pretty scarce in my AO. I would love to see the results of a side by side reliability test of the two magazine types. I suspect if both were properly maintained, there would be no measurable difference in reliability. To each his own, I'll keep my 8 rounders and rock on.
str1

 

[postalnut25]

I carry a 1911 on duty, so my magazines need to work. I carry Chip McCormick 8 round Power Mags. Never had a problem.

One caveat is that I keep my gun in shape, and change springs. I also clean my magazines and change springs when they are needed. Maintenance goes a long way.

 

[stressed]

Can't comment on the 1911 mags. Only "1911" I had was a para P10 warthawg with a double stack 10 round magazine, and it sucked.

I can say MecGars are top quality. I run them in my Lugers flawlessly, and the Luger is know to be finicky as well. Like the 1911 they have them in 8 round for Lugers where original Luger mags were 7 round. So the quality is up there.

 

[45_auto]

Does anyone believe that the standard magazine would accommodate 8 rounds somehow escaped John Browning's notice? Really?

Is it reasonable to believe that he dabbled with that one extra round, and...on discovering that it didn't provide the functional reliability that he and the army demanded...forgot about it and stuck with seven?

Browning and a team of Colt's top engineers that he had at his disposal burned a lotta midnight oil in designing that pistol. They didn't just throw the thing together and call it good. Be assured that there were some very good reasons that the magazine was held to 7 rounds.

I'm pretty sure that the ability of the human race to learn and improve didn't end with John Moses. Using your logic, airplanes would only carry one person and be able to fly a couple of hundred feet. There is a lot of knowledge and tools available to modern engineers that didn't exist 100 years ago.

Does anyone believe that an airplane the size of the Wright Flyer would be able to carry more than one person and fly more than 852 feet escaped the Wright brother's notice? Really?

Is it reasonable to believe that they dabbled with that extra capacity and range, and...on discovering that it didn't provide the functional reliability that was demanded...forgot about it and stuck with the single person, 852 foot flight capability?

Wilbur and Orville Wright burned a lotta midnight oil in designing that plane. They didn't just throw the thing together and call it good. Be assured that there were some very good reasons that it only carried one person and had a range of 852 feet.

Doesn't mean that any possibility of improvement on airplane design ended with the Wright's design, just as the possibility of any improvement in 1911 magazine design didn't end with John Browning.

I've been using Wilson 8 round 1911 mags for longer than I can remember with no problems at all.