1911: 7 or 8 rd mags?

[Drail]

That's a pretty "creative" analogy there 45 auto. Not very good but "creative".

 

[GBExpat]

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

I have only used tested USGI 7rounders in my 1911s and never experienced any issues after the "testing" phase (some fail, btw).

I am glad that you have asked the question, though ... thanks. I will now go to the top and read thru all of the 50 answers in order to learn what other reliable options are available to me.

 

[JRH6856]

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.

Well, comparing changes in the design of a complete system to changes in the design of a component of a system is invalid. How far do you think the Wright Flyer would go if you built the same design today but added a 20% larger gas tank?

Will it fly? Perhaps, but the margin for error in the rest of the system is a lot less. And so is the range of operating environment.

Each of us will use what we have to most confidence in and that won't be the same for all of us.

 

[420Stainless]

My XSE came with an 8 round mag and I've I've since purchased two more with the Colt logo (don't know if Colt actually makes them). All have worked well together without any problems. Only a sample of one gun and three magazines, so not much use in determining overall reliability.

All of my other 1911 experience is with 7 round magazines, so I have no idea how touchy as a whole the design might be to 8 round mags. I tend to trust those with more experience that are saying it can be touchy. Quite honestly, the only magazine problems I've ever had with any 1911 was when I bought a couple of $5 no name magazines at a gunshow back in the 80's. Performance sucked with those things and I promptly threw them away.

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

Well, comparing changes in the design of a complete system to changes in the design of a component of a system is invalid. How far do you think the Wright Flyer would go if you built the same design today but added a 20% larger gas tank?

Will it fly? Perhaps, but the margin for error in the rest of the system is a lot less. And so is the range of operating environment.

Each of us will use what we have to most confidence in and that won't be the same for all of us.

Very poor analogy. Let's assume the Flyer was built using the latest in composite materials, lightweight metals, etc. and the margin of error changes completely.

Same thing with the 1911 magazine deaign. A number of things have been improved with the 8 round magazines - feed lip and follower design, and the springs are of a completely different alloy material, and they're also designed so they're tapered and collapse inside of themselves instead of stacking. Then you get to the new ETM design with the flat wire spring - and you have yet another improvement.

I have about 40 Wilson ETM's that I use in seven different 1911's and find no difference in reliability when compared to 7 round magazines.

Use whatever you want - but the 8 round designs cannot be directly compared to the original 7 round magazine as the 8 round magazine is a different design.

 

[JRH6856]

Very poor analogy. Let's assume the Flyer was built using the latest in composite materials, lightweight metals, etc. and the margin of error changes completely.

Let's not. Once again, you are changing the entire system. Keep the same wood and paper construction, the same engine, the same size and weight pilot. Just add a larger and heavier fuel tank.

Or, redesign the entire system making changes to the design and materials of various components and their relationship to each other, in a manner that takes advantage of the improvement in technologies. IOW, get a Glock.

 

[Hunterdad]

I use nothing by chip McCormick 10 rounders and they've been 100%· I would imagine the 8 rounders are just as good.

 

[mljdeckard]

I'll say it this way. Yes, I use 8 rounders, and I trust them. But if I was really worried about higher capacity, I wouldn't carry a single-stack auto. (In fact, I often carry a Para SF-45A with 14 rd magazines.)

I can go along with the idea that Browning designed the magazines for 7 rounds and that might be for a good reason. But that doesn't mean that any design that came AFTER it is automatically flawed.

 

[JRH6856]

I can go along with the idea that Browning designed the magazines for 7 rounds and that might be for a good reason. But that doesn't mean that any design that came AFTER it is automatically flawed.

Nor does it mean they are automatically flawless. It is a change in the design of the system. When making such changes, it prudent to be aware that there may be problems. If you start with that awareness but have no problems there is nothing lost.

 

[mljdeckard]

My Wilson 47Ds run better than any traditional magazine I have ever used.

 

[JRH6856]

My Wilson 47Ds run better than any traditional magazine I have ever used.

Just curious, do they function flawlessly in all positions? Such as upside down? The article linked in post #39 suggest they might fail under those conditions and not having any to test myself, I've always wondered.

 

[mljdeckard]

I have run them a few times upside down, no problems. If I recall correctly, I even dipped the rear sight in the dirt as I fired, and got eyes full of dirt, but no, it didn't malfunction. I have fired a lot more sideways, no malfunctions that I can recall.

 

[Field Tester]

Buy once, cry once. Chip McCormick for all your needs no matter what capacity. I bought cheap for years. Picked up a CM my first time 5 years ago on a whim. It may be double the cost but the cheap ones only last a year. My CM is still going strong with no hiccups. I'll only buy CM and Wilson from now on.

 

[JTQ]

Ref Wilson 47D magazines

JRH6856 wrote,
Just curious, do they function flawlessly in all positions? Such as upside down? The article linked in post #39 suggest they might fail under those conditions and not having any to test myself, I've always wondered.

That is an interesting article and I've read it several times over the years. The author claims that due to their wadcutter feed lips, Wilson mags display a loss of controlled round feeding is just that, a claim. The author makes that claim early in the article and then tests a bunch of mags, but never demonstrates the loss of controlled round feed in his tests. Note, there is not a McCormick or Tripp mag in the test.

Many make the logic leap that since Wilson mags have wadcutter feed lips and will display a loss of controlled feeding, they will avoid the Wilson mags and buy another top rated mag, McCormick PowerMags. If you've ever held Wilson and McCormick mag side by side, you'll notice their feed lips are virtually identical. Both use wadcutter feed lips with the same release point. Another very highly rated mag is the Tripp Research Cobra Mags. They also have wadcutter feed lips, though they do have a slightly later release point.

While I've not been to any of the big name 1911 training courses, if you look at pictures or videos of trainers from Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, or Shootrite, chances are good you'll see them using Wilson mags. Certainly it's possible they use them because Wilson gives them to these instructors for free, or even pays them to use them. However, those guys are rolling on the ground, shooting from the oddest positions imaginable and I'll guess those mags work just fine or they wouldn't be able to conduct their classes. The USMC uses the 7 round Wilson 47 mag in their 1911's, and I suspect they shoot their guns at odd angles, even upside down sometimes.

There is a lot of love for CheckMate's hybrid feed lip mags on a few forums, but ask any group of 1911 shooters what mags they use and chances are they are using a mag with wadcutter feed lips, whether it is Wilson, McCormick, Tripp, CERTAC, or ACT-Mag/Novak/Wolff, they all have wadcutter feed lips. I'm not claiming any of those are the best, just that if they didn't work, they wouldn't be popular.

 

[JRH6856]

Thanks, JTQ. That helps. I've lost count of the mags I've gone through over the years in several different 1911's. I had one that was happy with any 7 round mag holding any shape bullet I fed it but it went jamomatic using the same ammo in 8 rounders with the same shape lips and followers. Had another that had no problem with either 7 or 8 as long as the followers were flat with dimples. It would choke on the last round off of a rounded follower.

My current 1911 wants GI tapered or "hybrid" feedlips with flat, dimpled followers. It will feed anything from those, but from wadcutter feed lips it will only feed 185 gr semi-wads. It doesn't like rounded followers, either. I haven't tried any 8 rounders with this one.

 

[goon]

If you're talking stock magazines, I prefer the 7 rounders.
If you're not talking stock magazines, maybe some Wilson 8 rounders.

 

[cdb1]

Thanks for all of the responses.