1911 Reliability

[nebeel]

Question I've been wondering about for a while....

In a 1911, doesn't looser parts fitting = greater reliability?

I always see current 1911 manufacturers touting how close tolerances are, custom slide to frame fit, etc.... But wouldn't this make the gun less reliable especially in a true combat situation (less frequent cleaning, etc...)?

I guess the main point to the question would be that if you want a truly reliable pistol and were willing to sacrifice some accuracy, wouldn't a fairly loose fitting 1911 be the answer?

 

[LTR shooter]

I owned a Clark Custom Guns 1911 built on a Springfield Armory 1911 and the pistol was totally reliable and extremely accurate. It surely was not a loose fitting pistol by any means.

 

[HDCamel]

You should put a lid on that can of worms.

 

[mljdeckard]

My Kimber Custom II has a match trigger, hand-fitted slide, barrel, bushing, etc, and I don't remember the last time it malfunctioned.

 

[BullfrogKen]

In a 1911, doesn't looser parts fitting = greater reliability?

No.

Some parts can enjoy a looser fit because the tolerance between those parts isn't critical. But some are, and a sloppy fit with those parts will make it choke.

Having a good fit with no slop will prevent crap from collecting, building up, and then causing problems with the gun.

 

[nebeel]

Interesting... too many random thoughts/ideas floating through one's head make some interesting things float to the top

 

[flatlander937]

As far as I understand, a tight barrel lug fitment and tight barrel bushing fitment is where nearly all the accuracy is derived from. Slide to frame fit doesn't mean much of anything.

My 1991 Commander has taken about 500 rounds of various stuff with never a problem yet, from crappy 230gr FMJ "Precision Cartridge Inc." reman ammo, to 165gr Federal JHP and Magtech 230gr FMJ and everything available at Wally World to test it out. I figured the 165gr stuff would cause issues due to being low recoil, but not a problem.

FWIW my slide to frame fit isn't tight by any means, but there is a tiny bit of play. It bugged me when I first found out about it, but seeing the groups it is capable of(in my buddy's hands... because I'm still relatively new and am lucky to keep a 5" group at 40ft), I know it's not the gun holding me back and I know it's reliable and I can trust it for CCW.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

In a 1911, doesn't looser parts fitting = greater reliability?

To a point, yes. "Tight" ones can be reliable, but it takes more work and skill to get them there. Sometimes (not always) the makers want you to finish the fitting by firing 500 or so rounds to "break it in." This is nearly $200 by itself.

 

[Pyro]

Back in the day, loose fitting parts made auto-loading firearms reliable (Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, M1911...Avtomat Kalashnikova), tight fitting parts made them unreliable at times (Pistole Parabellum 1908).
Today, we have a much more advanced metals and designs that allow firearms to be both tight fitting and extremely reliable.

 

[Old Fuff]

If you pay attention you may notice that you’ll almost never see reliability complaints about the USGI pistols made during World War Two, and yes some of them are still being used, both inside and outside of the military services.

Uncle Sam's Army spent a lot of time working out dimensions and tolerances so that parts made by various contractors and sub-contractors would interchange.

They also incorporated some "calculated clearances" to insure reliable function in any environment.

Today most 1911 platform pistols are made (more or less) to target gun specifications, and this forum has a long history of threads concerning "Why is my new 1911 a jam-o-matic??

Tight is only good if everything is carefully fitted - and many aren't. During wartime there isn't time to make weapons on a bench made basis. No way, ever were those service pistols broke in. They were test fired and shipped! And history has shown that they established a highly commendable record for reliability.

 

[nebeel]

That was my main thought, in wartime nobody had the time to build the quantities of 1911's in a custom fashion.

Is the main difference just that few 1911's are built to true milspec standards anymore?

 

[Old Fuff]

I don't know of anyone who makes a 100% duplicate of the 1911A1 USGI pistol. Today's products reflect different dimensions, tolerances and materials. If you want that the best thing too do is look for a commercial Colt made from between 1945 to the introduction of the Series 70.

That said, Springfield Armory and Rock Island Armory (both commercial companies, not government arsenals) have models that approximately duplicate the service pistol.

Put bluntly, most buyers now are not interested in service pistols, and what the manufactures’ make reflects this. What they buy are more along the lines of big-boy-toys. Tightness is seen as a virtue - which in some cases it is - but in seeking more accuracy (which they may not need) some, to a lot of reliability is sacrificed. Again, notice the makes and models that are specified in “Why won’t my new .45 work” threads, and also they aren’t always the less expensive guns. It isn't so much that you can't build a tight pistol that's reliable under favorable condition, but that doing so is necessarily expensive.

If you examine any modern service pistols (Beretta, Ruger, SIG, Glock, S&W, and so on) you will find that they aren't especially tight, and don't require breaking in. All of that seems to be reserved for the 1911 platform. This is part of the reason I use the term, “big-boy-toys” to describe them. The best of them are very good, in that they are for all practical purposes target pistols, but they aren’t something I’d want to carry in a “sand box” environment.

 

[PabloJ]

Look into those shockingly expensive war vintage 1911s from Colt, Ithaca, Rand,......which are a pile of outsourced parts. They have reputation for reliability with full patch slugs.

 

[WinThePennant]

1911's are notorious for needing constant and mindful tuning and calibrating. Of all the popular firearms out there, this one generates the most noise and annoyance. Pick a gun related discussion board, and it's literally filled with questions about how to make a malfunctioning 1911 work.

 

[Red Cent]

Got a well fitted 1911?

Keep it clean.

 

[PabloJ]

1911's are notorious for needing constant and mindful tuning and calibrating. Of all the popular firearms out there, this one generates the most noise and annoyance. Pick a gun related discussion board, and it's literally filled with questions about how to make a malfunctioning 1911 work.

All one needs is WWII workhorse and box of Federal 'Champion' from Walmart. The price of good sample gun will be big sticker shock to most.

 

[Old Fuff]

1911's are notorious for needing constant and mindful tuning and calibrating.

1. Yes, but they are recent or current production. By recent I mean around 1970 forward.

2. Smith & Wesson makes Smith & Wesson's, Ruger makes Ruger's, but everybody and his brother is making pistols based on the 1911 platform. Thus they are mostly good, bad or indifferent.

3. Looking backwards I can remember when the only 1911 style pistols were the commercial models being made by Colt, and those made by Colt and other government contractors during the recent World War. Both were made to US Military standards regarding dimensions, tolerances and materials.

And yes, they worked - out of the box. However they generally shot 3" groups at 25 yards (which is good enough for a service pistol) but not at 50 - that is expected of a target gun.

 

[Old Fuff]

Some years ago our very own member, Tuner1911 took a stock Springfield Armory bottom-of-the-line G.I. Model, did some minor fitting and lapping, finish reamed the chamber, replaced the piece-of-trash extractor, and proceeded to shoot thousands of rounds through it.

He stopped occasionally to dunk the pistol in a pail filled with mud and water.

As I remember the pistol didn’t jam. But it wasn’t particularly tight. It also wasn’t on the sloppy side. It didn’t need any special breaking in.

I can be done, and it doesn’t require big bucks.

 

[Drail]

My experience building, repairing, and competing with 1911s is that it does not really matter how "tight" the gun is, it's how precisely (correctly) fitted the parts are when you want reliability. Les Baer's guns are one of the tightest 1911s out there (maybe a little too tight when new) and are probably more reliable than many loosely fitted but poorly thrown together guns being sold today. I have 3 Springfield 1911s that do not rattle when you shake them and they are all 100% reliable as far as feed, fire, and eject goes. They will also chew the center out of a target too even with the factory issue barrel.

 

[918v]

Having a good fit with no slop will prevent crap from collecting, building up, and then causing problems with the gun.

+1

My Springfield Armory Pro is as tight as a Sig P210 and runs like a champ, clean or dirty.

 

[Ankeny]

When it comes to 1911's I am kind of a new kid on the block. I have only been shooting them for 35+ years and the design is 100 years old. Most of the problems I see with 1911s are feed related and stem from ammo problems. If everyone only shot the old milspec ball ammo I think you would see a lot of complaining go away.

I have had several 1911's that run like the Energizer Bunny and I wouldn't hesitate to carry them in a "sandbox". Come to think of it, there are 1911's on some of the thighs (almost said hips) of high speed, low drag operators in the big sandbox.

 

[RevolvingGarbage]

My '89 Colt Gov't Stainless isn't exactly tight. The slide has some side to side play, and when you shake it, it does make some noise.

It also rarely ever has any feed issues, in fact I can remember only three ever happening, every time while shooting dirty reloads and using a friends CMC 8 rounders, which his Springfield loaded doesn't like either.

And as far as accuracy, well if you give me a bench and a sandbag I can make less than fist sized groups at 40 yards. Its nice to know its capable of that accuracy, but to be honest its not exactly a necessity with a service/defense handgun.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Most of the problems with the quality-made 1911's get solved when you throw away the piece of junk OEM magazine they're sold with these days and buy something better quality.

I can't tell you what to do if you bought a budget-based, foreign-made 1911.

 

[nebeel]

Great information!

 

[vail2073]

Lots of good information. Basically, it comes down to this: tight tolerances are great for point accuracy. Loose tolerance is good for area accuracy and some reliability. Yes, MOST Mil-Spec/GI-Spec models are a bit looser than most other models. The military preferred a loose tolerance for "reliability" in combat operations. is it a requirement to have super tight tolerances to have a good shooting weapon....No. Is it a requirement to have super tight tolerances for competition shooting.... no but it really really helps.