1911 Plunger tube is loose.

[Old Fuff]

.45&TKD:

So what's a modern 1911 lover to do?

I'm not ignoring you, but an answer to the question can become involved, and consideration must be given to both the intended use for the pistol, and the potential condition of the user's pocketbook.

If money isn't an object there are several easy solutions, such as the one in the above post. Simply go out and buy a pistol that was made before cost-cutting became the order of the day. As was pointed out, used guns are often priced on the basis of how they look, not how they shoot - and cosmetic issues are easy to fix. Keep in mind that a good pistol will give good service and last a lifetime - or much longer.

If the intended use involves personal defense I wouldn't drop below a 4" barrel, and longer lengths (4 1/4" and 5") are better. The sub-compacts and super sub-compacts with 3 1/2" and 3" barrels are cool to some, but as a class of weapons they have poor reliability records.

In my view, no current maker offers a true 1911 platform service pistol, with the possible exception of the multi-thousand dollar custom pistols that have been made for certain SWAT or special military units that seem to be over-funded and lacking in common sense. The rest are big-boy toys
dressed up with tactical sounding names that don't live up to expectations.

Too many 1911 owners mess with their pistols, changing this and that and adding cool gadgets when they don't even know the correct names for the parts. This is great fun but the results are often dumb - to say the least.

It is also a mistake to expect that a pistol that was designed around a particualr configuration of a specific cartridge can shoot anything. It is a credit to John Browning that they often do better then might be expected, but the fact remains that anything other then standard ball ammunition represents a compromise, in a operating environment where compromises can get you killed. But again this only matters if the pistol is actually used as a weapon.

More later....

 

[NC-Mike]

This has everything to do with cost-cutting, as mentioned before but you can't go backwards. If you want a pistol as a weapon, buying a 30, 40 or 50 year old gun is not the solution.

This 1911 is a modern day weapon. Kimber SIS.

I'd rather carry this after shaking it out with the ammo and mags I am planning to run than hope some 30 year old Colt doesn't decide to loose a plunger tube or God knows what.

 

[Old Fuff]

Well to each his own...

But.....

This 1911 is a modern day weapon. Kimber SIS.

I beg to differ, what you have is a modern day toy.

The 1911 and 1911A1 pistols were made to specific dimensions and material specification, and the pistol you have doesn't even come close.

I'd rather carry this after shaking it out with the ammo and mags I am planning to run ...

None of which was necessary with genuine 1911A1 pistols.

My old commercial Government Model has a forged steel slide stop, the pin of which keeps the pistol together. The one in your pistol is made using powdered metal (MIM). Same with the hammer, sear and disconector. Your pistol comes with a questionable firing pin block which could cause the gun to not fire if it malfunctioned. Mine doesn't.

Everyone has a right to make their own choice, but this forum - as well as others - is filled with reports concerning Kimber pistols which for various reasons didn't run reliably. You won't find the same when it comes to those older Colts and USGI pistols you mentioned.

 

[MICHAEL T]

I'll take my 1941 USGI over a train load of new Kimbers any day. I agree with old Fuff Kimber is all looks and MIN parts A range toy Yes I have a Kimber. friends Kimber broke was that silly fireingpin block . Good thing at range not in a alley.
I trust my older Colts and My Dan Wesson for carry .

 

[NC-Mike]

Well that Kimber is not mine but the LA Special Investigations Section use them as duty weapons. I have a Taurus 1911 that is also filled with MIM parts cause thats what ya get today.

My Colt Sistema has its plunger tube and rear sight fall off but the Taurus has never hic-cupped once in 1,000 rounds so far.

YMMV.

But once again, ya can't go backwards to go forward. The only way I'd use a old Colt as a duty weapon would be if it has been completely stripped and checked for metal fatigue and tolerances. Even then, its still 30 years old. Not many folks roll that way.

Somebody once said, you can never go back home...

 

[vanfunk]

Sure, the Kimber's got my old Colts and USGI pistols beat for "window dressing", but, c'mon, in overall quality the Kimber comes up quite a bit short of the mark. You can't go backwards to go forward? Well, if going "backwards" means returning to hand-fitting, forged parts and quality control, then I'm "backward" and proud of it. I'll stand by my statement as fact, not opinion, that Colt Government Models of the 40's, 50's and 60's are far better guns overall than any production 1911-pattern pistol manufactured today (especially Kimbers, and yes, I owned one)

vanfunk

 

[NC-Mike]

While I agree with you on that you can't go back in time and get one...

Well, maybe just one but realistically, service people just don't have that option.

 

[vanfunk]

While I agree with you on that you can't go back in time and get one...

What do you mean? I go back in time whenever I go into a gunshop... I went back to 1945 when I bought my Ithaca 1911A1... I went back to 1965 when I bought my Colt Government Model...

Old guns are everywhere, and it's a good thing. Scan the auction sites for well-used, but not abused Government Models and Commanders of 30 years ago and it won't take long to find a few that meet your budget. $15 in a new Wolff spring kit and you're all set to go.

vanfunk

 

[NC-Mike]

Like I said, maybe you find one gun but its not an option for service people where duty weapons are provided.

That era is over. They don't make _anything_ like they used too.

 

[vanfunk]

its not an option for service people where duty weapons are provided

Well, no - but we weren't talking about department issued guns - we were speaking of preferences new vs. old and the relative merits and disadvantages of both. Your contention was that a new gun is better, mine was the opposite.

If you're issued a pistol, then you don't have the luxury of choosing. That's why I "issue" myself my own guns

vanfunk

 

[deadhawg]

The bottom line of all this is to point out that if your personal 1911 style handgun is a big-boy toy the above probably doesn't matter. If it is intended to be a weapon on which you might stake your life, or the life of others you'd better think about it.

None of my guns are toys. I shoot a 1911 because I enjoy it, it fits my hand well, the weight of a full size, all steel 1911 reduces the felt recoil, and it is accurate. I have owned and shot 1911 style pistols for over 40 years now, and I am fully comfortable trusting my life to them. I also own Glocks, Rugers, Kahr's and S&W's and enjoy shooting them too. While I have occasionally had problems with my 1911's, I have also occasionally had problems with my Glocks and others. That doesn't mean I don't trust my Glock or Ruger to work when I need it, only that nothing mechanical is immune to failure, especially when you fire several thousand rounds a year. No matter what gun you carry for self defense, it is wise to have a backup plan in case something goes wrong. I have devoted considerable thought, training and practice to the issue.

Ron

 

[Old Fuff]

The institutional use of 1911 style pistols of any kind by law enforcement agencies or military services is miniscule. To the degree that these pistols are used as weapons at all is under circumstances where they are purchased and self-issued by individual users. Looking forward I see nothing that is likely to change this, and fully expect the 1911’s role as a serious weapon will continue to decline.

A substantial part of my reasoning is based on how this fine pistol’s reputation is continuing to decline as sub-par workmanship; lower quality components and lack of inspection become more prevalent.

Two attributes of any good weapon is to have consistent reliability, as close to perfect as possible, as the result of responsible manufacturing practices, while using quality materials; and to have these characteristics in place as soon as the piece comes out of the box, without any additional part or magazine swaps, tinkering, polishing, or (so called) breaking in. With a few (very expensive) exceptions the current crop of 1911 style pistols do not meet these standards on a regular dependable basis, where in former years they did. A reading of past threads containing numerous complaints about newer 1911 platform pistols should serve to confirm my observations.

 

[Moonclip]

On my Firestorm(Llama) .38super (don't flame me) the plunger tube as loose as well. When I took off the grip, I found that strangely the tube was sucured with two tiny screws! I tightened them and I was back in business.

 

[1911Tuner]

Two attributes of any good weapon is to have consistent reliability, as close to perfect as possible, as the result of responsible manufacturing practices, while using quality materials;

Bingo. "Reliability" encompases more than simply going bang and functioning when the trigger is pulled.
That's actually the easy part. The weapon must also be durable, and it must be so over the long haul and under reasonably hard use.

When I see grip safeties, thumb safties, slidestop crosspins, hammers, hammer struts, extractors, ejectors, and even sears and disconnects breaking like dry twigs on low-mileage pistols...I have to wonder what the manufacturers are thinking.

Like it or not...they know that they're essentially building a toy, and that the average owner won't likely fire enough ammunition to cause an outright part failure. They know that the serious users...be that for gaming purposes or life/death situations...will have the pistol properly tended to by a gunsmith who knows his business.

And, no...A thousand rounds is not hard use. Until recently, a thousand rounds was an average week for me...fired through 3 or 4 pistols in the "Beater Battery" that I've been using for range duty over the last 17 years or so. Prior to that, there were a half-dozen different pistols that I used equally as hard and for even longer.

I don't have much chance to practice malfunction drills because the guns don't malfunction. I've had maybe a dozen malfunctions over the last 20 years, and most of those were due to weak magazine springs and/or funky ammunition. 98% of what I shoot is reloaded using my own home cast bullets, and I'm not anal-retentive about cleaning my range pistols. It takes about 4-5 minutes per gun, and once a year, I detail-strip them all and make'em sparkle. Aside from that, and it's a lick and a promise...and back to the range later on in the week.

I haven't broken an extractor in over 30 years, and I rarely have to retension and extractor...mostly after tossing a badly beaten lot of brass with overly large rim diameters...and starting with fresh brass with in-spec rims. Even then, it's not often.

While I'm well aware that even machined steel parts fail, they do it mush less often than what I've seen over the last 12-15 years. Good MIM is pretty good. The catch is that...in the interest of cutting costs to the bone...apparently not much of it is good. The other catch is that it's almost impossible to determine which is good and which is bad until it lets go.

 

[NC-Mike]

Well, no - but we weren't talking about department issued guns - we were speaking of preferences new vs. old and the relative merits and disadvantages of both. Your contention was that a new gun is better, mine was the opposite.

If you're issued a pistol, then you don't have the luxury of choosing. That's why I "issue" myself my own guns

vanfunk

That's funny Van but I don't remember saying the new 1911's were better or superior to the older, mil-spec models. I'm just acknowledging what is reality and what is available today.

Also acknowledged how everything in the world today has become walmartized and how hard it is to get something made like they used to make it.

That said, I don't think the LA Special Investigations Section is carrying "toys" as a another poster commented. It is what it is.

Using a 30 year old pistol for SD or a duty weapon is not a mainstream practice and for good reason. Anyone using such a weapon for that purpose had better be expect at determining the condition and viability of the piece and that lets out 99 percent of us.

 

[Old Fuff]

I think that those "L.A. Specials" cost the city taxpayers somewhere between $1,500 to $2,000 apiece, and possibly more - for no really serious reason other then bragging rights. But then, when you are Special Investigation you have to have extra special handguns I suppose.

Anyway, at the moment the closest “weapon at hand.” Is an old, finish worn Colt Detective Special that was made around 1957, which would make it some 50+ years old. I bought it new. It is still as tight as a bank vault door, the timing is dead on, the chambers “range” as concentric with the bore all 6 times, and it has been known to keep its shots inside of the K-zone on a B-27 silhouette target at a measured 100 yards. Excluding the stocks it is made of 100% “real” steel, and is at hand because it has proven to be reliable for a half century. It doesn’t have an internal lock, or MIM lockwork, and I am not about to retire it for no good reason and switch to something more modern that’s made with less quality and more gadgets.

Tuner’s .45’s, as well as some of mine, were made during World War Two and earlier, yet they are still reliable and I never had to break any of them in, or switch to aftermarket magazines or recoil springs. From the day the final inspector placed his stamp on them they worked. None of them has one cheap metal injected molded part in it. None of them were made by a company or contractor that put cost-cutting ahead of quality control. Age, in and of itself does nothing detrimental to a firearm. Bean counters and lawyers on the other hand are a different matter.

 

[NC-Mike]

Bean counters and lawyers on the other hand are a different matter.

That's what is all about my friend. There are bigger issues like globalization that come into play but this is hardly the place to discuss why we are making firearms out of plastic and powdered metal today and why so many firearm manufactures have left the USA. I also lament the loss of quality and hand-fitting on many manufactured items but we are in the day and age of get it done as quickly and as cheaply and I hope it works.

Sometimes the end-result is acceptable and sometimes it is not. A firearm has a singularity of purpose and the methodology to achieve that purpose is subject to many different influences. Political, litigious, economical and competition just to name a few. I in no way shape or form think that the events that led to this race to the bottom in the manufacturing industry is good in any sense. It just is what it is right now.

 

[vanfunk]

Using a 30 year old pistol for SD or a duty weapon is not a mainstream practice and for good reason. Anyone using such a weapon for that purpose had better be expect at determining the condition and viability of the piece and that lets out 99 percent of us

I coudn't disagree with you more, Mike. I'm not being acrimonious - I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with using a 30 year old (or much older) pistol for self defense. One doesn't need to be an expert to make sure that it works, either. Again, my contention is just the opposite. I think the average user would, in fact, be much better off with a 30 year old pistol than a 3 year old pistol, at least where 1911-pattern guns are concerned. It seems we'll just disagree on that point, but that's fine - lotsa room left in the marketplace of opinions.

Thanks,

vanfunk

 

[1911Tuner]

I think the average user would, in fact, be much better off with a 30 year old pistol than a 3 year old pistol, at least where 1911-pattern guns are concerned.

Sometimes I carry one that turned 90 this past March. Two others that are in my carry rotation are 65 and 66 years old respectively. If I didn't trust'em, I wouldn't carry'em.

 

[Old Fuff]

There is also an element of predictability with older guns. The component parts were for the most part made from steel forgings or machined from bar stock. Over time, and with large quantities of some models being made, and used in all kinds of environments, it became possible to accurately predict the service life of most parts.

When parts are originally designed to be made using MIM technology they seem to work well - at least in the short term if and when they are produced to high quality standards. However when an older part is simply duplicated and the quality is suspect, there is little experience or history available to draw any viable conclusions concerning service life. It is presumed that a defective part will fail fairly quickly, and they often do, but no one can say with certainty that these current day guns will still be ticking a 100 years from now.

 

[Old Fuff]

Another solution that has been proposed was to start with a clean sheet of paper and design a new 1911 style pistol with internal components that are designed to take advantage of modern fabricating technology. Such guns exist on paper, and I have handled a prototype. But they have gone no further because marketing studies clearly showed that buyers or potential buyers wanted the original Browning gun, down to the smallest pin and screw, with absolutely no changes. Thus the the irresistible force met the immovable object and nothing happened. :banghead:

 

[NC-Mike]

coudn't disagree with you more, Mike. I'm not being acrimonious - I think there's absolutely nothing wrong with using a 30 year old (or much older) pistol for self defense. One doesn't need to be an expert to make sure that it works, either

I don't think we really disagree. What I'm saying is the average guy or gal shouldn't find an old, dusty Colt and start using that as their SD weapon until a qualified person checked out the pistol top to bottom.

That is the key to using an older weapon. Knowledgeable armorers. Kinda like what the CMP does with the weapons they sell. Somebody has to wring out the weapon and then sure, you could carry an older 1911, why the heck not.

I'm not knocking older 1911's in any way, I'm just saying that most people have to live with what's out there today. Finding an old Colt that's serviceable and having a smith check it out before you trust your life with it would be a time consuming and expensive affair for most people.

I'd venture a guess that most people who do carry older weapons work on them themselves and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[45auto]

You could probably "gut" a series I kimber or Springfield and have the same quality as the "old Colt's" for @ $ 1500....yes?

I've never read/heard that the slide, frame and barrels of most modern guns are inferior to the "old ones"!

I believe a "redesigned" 1911 would sell. There are at least a generation or two that have grown up on pistols other than 1911s, and have no "preconceived" ideas on 1911s. I'm older, and shoot 1911s, and would like to see some design changes.

But, pistol manufacturers "spend" their R&D on pistols with much larger "selling" potential type weapons, i.e. S&W M&P, New Ruger auto, redesigned Springfield XD, etc. All non SA trigger types.

 

[Moonclip]

I have a S&W 1917 .45acp revolver I've considered using for hd purposes but I do feel a little strange using a 90yo pistol for that! I have a 1911 of the same vintage also.

 

[NC-Mike]

I have a S&W 1917 .45acp revolver I've considered using for hd purposes but I do feel a little strange using a 90yo pistol for that! I have a 1911 of the same vintage also.

I have a S&W MP that I keep loaded for HD.

I have no idea how old it is but it is very old and I know it works.