1911 reliability in 2-3 day class

[tipoc]

Post number 37 quotes from a piece written by Pincus...

My company currently recommends the following firearms, in 9mm, as the first places to look when choosing a defensive handgun. In alphabetical order, they are:

* Caracal — C & F models without the “quick sight” option.

* Glock Models 26, 19 or 17. If you choose a 4th Gen, ensure you have the currently recommended springs. This specific model was plagued with problems when first released.

* Smith & Wesson M&P — models without a manual safety or magazine disconnect.

* Springfield XD. This model is suggested with one caveat: the grip safety presents a failure point that is most significant when clearing complex malfunctions or shooting in unorthodox positions. But it is recommended particularly because of its better fit for many shooters with small hands.

All of the above MSFs have been observed to be reliable under a variety of circumstances with a variety of shooters.

Handguns that get Honorable Mentions as defensive choices:

* Snub Nosed Double Action Revolvers, such as the S&W 642, for the reasons spelled out above.

* Walther PPS. This slim MSF is currently going through an extended reliability test and has performed very well to date.

* Ruger LCP. This reliable gun is an extreme compromise to carryability, is chambered in the less-than-optimal .380 ACP round, and has relatively low shootability. But it has proven reliable and is extremely convenient to carry because of its small size.

http://www.personaldefensenetwork.co...fense-handgun/

The link is to an article also by Pincus that is useful reading.

Pincus has developed his own training course which has gained him some respect based and which he has written about in a couple of books based on the idea of "instinctive shooting". Some of his thinking harks back to the point shooting of Rex Applegate and others. The basic idea is that under stress humans do certain things instinctively and so techniques which play to those strengths are useful and techniques and methods that cut across the grain of those "instincts" are problematic and less useful, even dangerous.

After ensuring you can get the minimum aspects of a good grip on a firearm, next look to see that you can manipulate any levers or buttons beside the trigger without shifting your grip. Optimally, the only other button you’ll need to use will be the magazine release. Decockers and manual safeties decrease the practical reliability of the gun and/or the shootability of the gun by making them more complicated than they need to be. Most people benefit from an oversized or extended magazine release in order to be able to eject the magazine as efficiently as possible. It is not vital that you can eject the magazine with no shifting of the hand, but you should look for a gun that requires as little movement of the hand as possible.

One of those is guns with external safeties. So in his list above and other writings you notice his preference for striker fired pistols without manual safeties of any type (he cautions about the grip safety of the XD) and double action wheelguns particularly those which are double action only, like the 642 Centennial model that he recommends above whi9ch have no external hammers.

Missing from his list are of course the 1911 and the high power, but also the Beretta M9, Sigs particularly da/sa Sigs with decockers, the CZ75 and it's kin and clones, all third generation Smith and Wesson handguns and many others. Mostly all the most widely used handguns by the military and law enforcement over the last century do not make his list of recommended guns that fit with his method and concepts.

Pincus' challenge is directed at the 1911 which is the most visible and popular of the external safety handguns. But others could stand in as well. The M9 for example.

In the vid you see a fella who brought the sub compact Kimber in 45 acp to a 2-3 day "combat" oriented course. You see that gentleman struggling with a gun he is clearly unfamiliar with and does not know how to properly manipulate. You see the man fumble under pressure.

The man who brought the Kimber made a couple of errors. He brought a small back up gun to a combat oriented course where several hundreds of rounds would be fired. It's not a good choice for that. Anymore than a J frame S&W would be. He also brought a gun he wqs unfamiliar with and expected that he would learn more about gun handling there from a fella willing to teach him. He made a mistake on that as well.

tipoc

 

[wow6599]

In the vid you see a fella who brought the sub compact Kimber in 45 acp to a 2-3 day "combat" oriented course. You see that gentleman struggling with a gun he is clearly unfamiliar with and does not know how to properly manipulate. You see the man fumble under pressure.

Absolutely. I wondered if it was his first time with it too.........anxious and jerky with it.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Also understand that this course isn't a beginning or even an intermediate course. You're supposed to know how to run your gun before attending, that isn't the point of taking this class.

I was one of the Staff that attended the 1911centric course at Gunsite mentioned in Post #64. A couple of the 1911s we brought were straight from the manufacturer and hadn't been testfired...but we also had backup 1911s, which had proven reliable prior to attendance.

None of the guns I shot had a failure during the class, but many others did. Fewer than I expected, but then we weren't running them very hard and many folks were cleaning at lunch and during the evening

 

[jimbo555]

Who cares what Pincus likes or don't like! I don't! He's obviously getting free advertisement from all this!

 

[tarosean]

I'm willing to bet he has failures of all kinds of pistols depending on the severity of the class and the experience of the students/participants with their chosen pistol.

In the following link you will find some of Pincus's comments regarding this video.


http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/05/rob-pincus/rob-pincus-sub-compact-1911s-suck/

FWIW, the success rate for 1911′s in class is less than 10%. For the major Striker Fired guns it is over 80%…

I only mean an operator error in regard to the manual safety… Extending the gun and trying to shoot with it on or going to holster with it off.

While this vid is specifically about subcompacts, I don’t recommend 1911s for defensive use at all because of the high failure rate we see in class and the inherently more complicated nature of the system (as compared to modern striker fired guns)

I recommend a lot of guns for a lot of people with a lot of problems… the 1911 simply isn’t on the list. Name a problem and I’ll offer solution that I feel is a better option. Saying “sell it” isn’t a cop out… it is a reality check.

 

[Gordon]

"Rob Pincus is not impressed with 1911's. That's OK, I'm not impressed with Rob Pincus. Actually, I find him pretty comical, but that's just me."
This.
Having gone thru lengthy schools like Starlight Academy with a 1911, American Pistol Institute 250 and 499
ITTS Handgun 1 thru Handgun 3
Everthing Lewis Awerbuck could throw at me including the infamous Arizona Gunfighters Conference (6 days)
# 1 the only course I shot in those 35 years that approached a 2000 round handgun count was Ray Chapman's old Starlight course which was brutal , yet the 1911s all made it thru it (pre tricked out days) pretty well. In an advanced course about 500 rounds a day gets you quality training, less for elementary training.
I think I did close to 2000 rounds at API 499, in five days, with a series 70 Gold Cup!

 

[tipoc]

From 9mmEpi...

Also understand that this course isn't a beginning or even an intermediate course.

Which course are you referring to?

You're supposed to know how to run your gun before attending, that isn't the point of taking this class.

In the video from Mr. Pincus the fella he shows is clearly unfamiliar with the gun he has. Maybe unfamiliar with semi-autos of any type and if not then maybe just flustered under pressure. But if folks are supposed to know how to run their guns before attending then maybe the gentleman in the video is not typical. But if not why use him in the vid?

Mr. Pincus does not favor guns with external safeties. He gives his reasons clearly. He thinks 1911s are particularly problematic. He can't explain why, as he says he's not a gunsmith or engineer, his opinion he says is based on his experience. He has issued a challenge. Folks can come to his class with a 1911 and take it and he will challenge them to not have a malfunction of any type or a handling error in a class where it is to be expected that such will be induced and where he will instruct folks on when to engage or disengage their safeties.

tipoc

 

[9mmepiphany]

From 9mmEpi...



Which course are you referring to?

Pincus' Combat Focus Shooting course.

In the video from Mr. Pincus the fella he shows is clearly unfamiliar with the gun he has. Maybe unfamiliar with semi-autos of any type and if not then maybe just flustered under pressure. But if folks are supposed to know how to run their guns before attending then maybe the gentleman in the video is not typical. But if not why use him in the vid?

From their FAQ:

Q: Is there any prerequisite or prior experience required to take this course?

A: No, there is not a course prerequisite to take the Combat Focus Shooting course. We have trained students from all disciplines and skill levels. It is recommended that you know how to operate your firearm and holster prior to attending a CFS Course. For those completely unfamiliar with defensive firearms, I.C.E. Training Company offers the Introduction to Defensive Handguns course.

Let me state that I'm not defending his course or his challenge. I don't know him well enough to defend him. But I'm familiar enough with his teaching history and the 1911's shortcommings (especially the subcompact ones that are the original focus of the Youtube video we are discussing), that I think it is unfair to vilify him for his stance.

RE: Shooter in the video. I think that he represents a fairly typical shooter he gets caught up in the legend of the 1911 and selects a sub-compact model without understanding it's limitations and the small operating window it has.

The important take-away that I'd hope this video and this discussion would present is that one should know more about a gun before buying it than it's legend/myth/romance

 

[Old Dog]

Gordon's experiences pretty much mirror mine.

I don't intend anything I say to necessarily be a defense of the 1911, but every pistol class I went through from 1987 through 2005 (excepting some military courses post-M9 transition) was using a 1911.

I have personally never seen anyone using a 1911 smaller than a Commander in a commercial training course (NOT a local CCW class) but I've seen numerous 1911s make it through some pretty intense, down-and-dirty courses without malfunctions that couldn't be instantly rectified. I have also seen some pretty high-end 1911s choke on the firing line.

But it's been my experience that the savvy 1911 folks can run their guns well, as a rule. And I've seen guys with more money than experience have problems with Wilson 1911s ...

In one weekend course, an extractor tip on one of my (repro) Series 70s broke. In another high-round count one day session, an extractor problem on the same Series 70 interfered. These were the only instances I've had where my 1911s went down and a back-up pistol was needed to finish a class.

Almost seems as though Pincus is trying to stir the pot a bit as a marketing technique.

And -- as tipoc noted -- the fact that Pincus seems to dismiss such battle-worthy icons such as SIGs, CZs, Gen 3 S&Ws and Berettas makes me believe that he is blinded by his prejudices, as I'm pretty sure most of us have seen the products of those four makers provide stellar service in both the training and combat arenas.

 

[tipoc]

Not all criticism is vilification, so in looking at the Pincus video and challenge critically I'm not aiming to vilify Mr. Pincus.

Is the video an honest depiction of the average shooter of a compact 1911 who has some experience with their gun? I'm not so sure of that. The vodeo and it's challenge are over the top. Attention getting. There is a bit of P.T. Barnum in it and in many of his other you tube vids as well. I've seen one of him doing bicep curls with a weight in one hand while shooting with the other.

From what I've read so far from Mr. Pincus he has developed a concept of "Combat" training that focuses on the stripped down gun without manual safety so that nothing impedes the ability of the shooter to draw and fire. No thumb safety, no grip safety, etc. Those type safeties are not "instinctual" where it is instinctual to draw point and shoot. A semi is better than a revolver due to higher round count and that you can carry 2-3 spare mags. If a revolver is used he prefers hammerless models and dao versions. A hammer can snag and single action is not needed in defensive encounters.

Point shooting is emphasized as defensive encounters are rarely beyond 21 feet.

It appears to focus on the CCW urban carrier.

There is some validity to some of his thinking here particularly as it's not original to him.

The challenge is over the top as well. It's a valid challenge but not one that proves much.

I expect that if I go to any high round 2-3 day combat oriented training course with any gun that I'm going to experience some kinda failure of some type. I'll drop a mag, shoot before I'm sure of my target 100%, put a round in the dirt downrange, fumble un-holstering, or holstering, fumble a safety on or off, etc. That's part of what the course is for. Malfunction clearance drills involve inducing malfunctions.

The point of the vid does not seem to me to be mostly warning about the limited role of shorty 1911s or educating about their foibles. Or to preach realistic expectations from sub compact 1911s. To do that would mean less "they suck" and more explanation. Seems mostly about, indirectly, publicity for his course and methods.

My take anyway, for the little it's worth.

tipoc

 

[9mmepiphany]

The point of the vid does not seem to me to be mostly warning about the limited role of shorty 1911s or educating about their foibles. Or to preach realistic expectations from sub compact 1911s. To do that would mean less "they suck" and more explanation. Seems mostly about, indirectly, publicity for his course and methods.

I agree with your take on it. I've long advised against selecting the sub-compact 1911 as a first time defensive pistol

BTW: my reference to vilification wasn't directed at you

I expect that if I go to any high round 2-3 day combat oriented training course with any gun that I'm going to experience some kinda failure of some type. I'll drop a mag, shoot before I'm sure of my target 100%, put a round in the dirt downrange, fumble un-holstering, or holstering, fumble a safety on or off, etc. That's part of what the course is for. Malfunction clearance drills involve inducing malfunctions.

I'd agree to everything except holstering, we've sent shooters off to the side for dropping their guns while reholstering...that is usually a sign of lost of focus and becomes a safety issue.

I've done all the others at one time or another during training

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The title of the video is "Subcompact 1911s Just don't work well...." It doesn't address full-size M1911s.

The problem with the M1911 subcompact is no different from any other "subcompact" tilting barrel gun. If the gun is made by simply shortening the slide and barrel, the steep tilt angle needed to function the gun becomes a reliability problem.

The solution is to re-engineer the gun's geometry, not just cut it down.

 

[Old Dog]

Okay, so I feel silly ... finally watched the video. Sub-compact 1911s. Note to self: stop posting unless I watch the video provided ...

I like my SA Loaded LW Micro-Compacts, but I'd never use one for a training course ... sheesh.

 

[tomrkba]

The major problem is that most of the students try to 'improve' their guns and thus introduce after-market parts that are not in spec.

I've even seen an odd Glock fail, no because the gun was bad, but the user had modified it and not tested it throughly.

The above quote does not explain why five of the seven factory stock 1911's I have purchased did not function reliably from the factory. Production 1911's *can* be correctly built, but most are not. Even the Springfield EMP had problems (incorrectly cut feed ramp, incorrectly fitted barrel, loose ejector, rough breech face), but Springfield managed to fix that gun. My Kimbers were a disaster, as were my (non-EMP) Springfields. Only my Colt XSE and Colt WW II Repro worked perfectly so long as the extractor was in good condition and did so from the first shot. I attribute both guns' reliability to a correct build with the addition of the barrel dimple.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Tom,

You will find that most 1911 builders do not exactly follow John Moses Browning's schematics on his gun. The barrel was supposed to sit the lugs on the slide stop pin. Most today do not do that but instead the pin itself forces the barrel to lock. JMB also specified the tension of the extractor and most just stuff extractors into the hole and not bevel the ends nor adjust tension. Alot of short cuts are taken to get the weapons built.

My Dan Wesson CBOB has a S&W style extractor and it works wonderfully BUT only with GI mags. Wilsons or Chip McCormicks don't hold open the slide on last shot. My Kimber Gold Match (MK 1) works perfect with SWCs but unless you use a GI mag it might not feed FMJ!

Only my Colt Combat Commander, made in 2012, works perfect with anything. I mean any mag or bullet design. And yea, that's one keeper of a gun.

Deaf

 

[tarosean]

BTW: my reference to vilification wasn't directed at you

Must be me posting quotes in his own words????

As I stated previously any bias from an instructor should be left at the door.. It shouldnt matter if grandma signs up with a top break revolver. Teach her how to do the drills effectively and safely as that is what you were hired to do.

While he may have been irritated at the shooter for holding up the class (?) it is still not an excuse IMO.

Regardless if I think my 1911's could pass the class or not, I'd rather give my money to Ignatius Piazza, Clint Smith, Buz Mills, etc. than a _____________.

 

[SE Flyer]

I tried several times and had to switch to either a SIG P220 or a Browning High Power MK III. I always take a back up gun, but I've only gone to them when using a 1911 as primary. I'm 1911 cursed, so my 1911 expectations are different than most folks.

You must have trying to use a Kimber.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

You must have trying to use a Kimber.

I have one of the early Kimbers (bought in 1995) and have put literally tens of thousands of rounds through it. The only stoppages I've had were traced to failure to iron out the belling during the crimping process.

 

[tomrkba]

You will find that most 1911 builders do not exactly follow John Moses Browning's schematics on his gun.

I know...the problem is finding a production gun that is correct.

In your estimation, which manufacturer most closely adheres to the standard for production guns?

I have one of the early Kimbers (bought in 1995) and have put literally tens of thousands of rounds through it. The only stoppages I've had were traced to failure to iron out the belling during the crimping process.

I did not have a "good" Kimber. I had the Kimber II series with the ineffective external extractor. They also lacked the proper space at the top of the feed ramp (the one on the frame) so the bottom of the barrel extended past it. The breech face was rough and the radiused area was higher than the rest of it. The Kimber techs missed the burr in the chamber twice. I know there were several other problems with them, but I cannot remember at this point.

 

[moxie]

Posts like these make me yearn for a gunmaker who would replicate the Star PD with some updated metallurgy. Basically leave the rest intact, external extractor and all. Maybe some Novak sights.

Then you would have a 1911 based gun that would run 100% of the time with little to no attention beyond cleaning and lubing and would last virtually forever, instead of just 25K rounds or so.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I did not have a "good" Kimber. I had the Kimber II series with the ineffective external extractor. They also lacked the proper space at the top of the feed ramp (the one on the frame) so the bottom of the barrel extended past it. The breech face was rough and the radiused area was higher than the rest of it. The Kimber techs missed the burr in the chamber twice. I know there were several other problems with them, but I cannot remember at this point.

I don't deny that Kimber from time to time has slipped in quality (so has Colt and Springfield, for that matter.) But the early Kimbers were so good they scared the pants off Wilson, who took out attack ads against them.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Posts like these make me yearn for a gunmaker who would replicate the Star PD with some updated metallurgy. Basically leave the rest intact, external extractor and all. Maybe some Novak sights.

Then you would have a 1911 based gun that would run 100% of the time with little to no attention beyond cleaning and lubing and would last virtually forever, instead of just 25K rounds or so.

Part of the reason the Star PD ran so well, is that it wasn't too closely based on the 1911. That is also why the Star BM and BMK run better than most 9mm 1911s

 

[Deaf Smith]

In your estimation, which manufacturer most closely adheres to the standard for production guns?

Oddly enough, from what I hear the Rock Island Armory 1911s are pretty much good to go out of the box. Wither they are exact reproductions of JMB's 1911A1 I am not sure. But they are close as I looked at several of them today.

Today I also examined a mirror image of my Colt Combat Commander (mine being made in 2012.)

The throat on the chamber was cut exactly like mine (it has a visible trough cut where the rounded barrel entrance is.) Now that is not a JMB spec but it definably helps feeding ash-tray style .45 ACP ammo. Catch is they want almost 1000 bucks now for those Commanders!

I'd give RIA a hard look. No frills but you can get them with better hammers and 'duck billed' grip safeties.

Deaf

 

[tarosean]

In your estimation, which manufacturer most closely adheres to the standard for production guns?

Oddly enough, from what I hear the Rock Island Armory 1911s are pretty much good to go out of the box.

I have *heard* just the opposite, that they are out of tolerance for a lot of aftermarket small parts that simply cannot be fitted. I have absolutely no first hand experience though.

Ive never taken a caliper to any of my 1911's and compared them to the blueprints though... Doubtful as I ever would, as all 5 of mine work reliably even though; one is a 4" Cone Barreled Commander sized, a 5" with full length dust cover, two other 5"s and a LW Commander.

My latest acquisition #6, (Commander Slide on Officer frame) is unfired so I cannot comment on that one till I am back in the US.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

Who is Rob Pincus? As of yet, he has not made himself know to me.