1911 internal extractor/external extractor

[bdjansen]

I'm planning on buying a Kimber Custom II. I have read that they have external extractors. Most 1911's have internal extractors?

Could somebody please explain the difference between the two and how to tell one from the other?

Thanks.

 

[Canuck-IL]

External extractors are, in general, a solution in search of a problem. Most external extractors are spring loaded, theoretically making it easier to tune and keep them in tune. S&W, along with others, apparently has managed to design them so that they are effective and longlasting.

Kimber, despite all their marketing hype, ended up with literally thousands of po'd customers as their external designs (they went through 3 generations) were never as reliable as needed. In the end, they replaced the whole top end for many customers whose particular set of tolerance stacks just would not work with an external.

Yes, some folks have had a Kimber external that's been problem free for years, but they're a minority and the majority of users that were dissatisfied w the externals led Kimber to effectively drop them from production. There may still be one external in their product listing.

You can see the external as the 'stripe' extending behind the ejection port on this S&W. A conventional internal would be a smooth, continuous metal side of the slide at the same point.
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/...angId=-1&parent_category_rn=15709&isFirearm=Y
/Bryan

 

[Technosavant]

Internals are "the way JMB intended." Since they are standard across makers, finding replacements is easy. They work, provided they're tuned properly. Tuning is basically bending the extractor so it holds proper tension. Too much or too little, and it won't work well.

Externals are "the modern way," They tend to be more proprietary, but since they're usually spring loaded, they don't require tuning.

If it works, it works. I tend to lean towards internals due to the replacement part issue, but I wouldn't let an external put me off a planned purchase.

 

[Ala Dan]

Agreed ~! S&W external extracrors

WORK~!

but I prefer the internal extractors.

 

[TestPilot]

Internals are "the way JMB intended."

No. From what I've read, if I remember correctly, Browning designed it with an external extractor. Change to an internal extractor was due to the request of the army, and it was not even because of a functional issue. I think this was mentioned in "Gun Digest Book of 1911"

For me, that's the only explanation that seems plausible that would make a talented gun designer choose to cram a long piece of bent spring that needs to be tuned, which is not even easy compared to the other method, and has less leverage as an extractor.

They work, provided they're tuned properly.

Many poor designs work when given the right conditions. That does not make poor design acceptable. I've never heard of "SIG or Glock extractor works, if they are tuned properly." If two different mechanism does the same thing, but one requires more tuning without a single benefit that justifies the extra effort, it's downright a poor design.

 

[bdjansen]

I guess it's not much of an issue since I am going to be buying a new one and it looks like Kimber makes them with the internal extractor now. But it's useful to know what is what.

Thanks guys.

 

[Hoppy590]

ah once again the "JMB wanted it that way" argument fails.

 

[lee n. field]

Can some 1911 geek explain to me why it seems so hard for various manufacturers to make a reliable 1911 external extractor, when when external extractors on many other guns are quite reliable.

 

[WinchesterAA]

cuz firearms designs as a whole suck.

Play a few rounds of "mousetrap" and then disassemble a gun.