1911 sacrilege

[1911Tuner]

The "works reliably, straight out of the box" 11911s start at about twice what you paid for yours. Entry level guns require a LOT of tuning, fiddling, adjustment, etc.

I'll have to respectfully but aggressively disagree. Many more do work than don't. The issue is that there are so many manufacturers flooding the market with so many pistols, that if even 1% of them have problems, that number can be pretty signifigant. Note that other designs also have problems...and at about the same ratio.

Like a hundred-pound bag of grass seed that's "Only 3% weeds." When you've got a gazillion seeds in that bag...3% is a helluva lotta weeds.

Also...The feedback that we get is usually from the dissatisfied buyers. The ones who get a good one rarely make noise.

The other unknown is durability vs use. If the gun runs flawlessly for 500 rounds, many people don't beat the guns hard enough to ever wear out anything or break it, while others...like me...set out to shoot the gun apart within a year. Still others, fire a few boxes of ammo through the gun...clean it and put it up...and never match that initial count over the next 10 years.

I've seen many recent, entry-level pistols do just fine under normal use. I've seen others have problems out of the box...which are generally pretty simple to correct. I've seen others perform exceptionally for 5 or 6 thousand rounds, and then break a small part...also usually simple to cure.

Now, if you get into customizing and preference modifications, you can quickly double the cost of the gun.
My advice for those who want the modern accoutrements, is to buy a low-end pistol that already has some of the things that you want...and upgrade with a good barrel, and more durable small parts, if that's a concern...and it is for many of us. You can end up with a pretty nice pistol for about half the cost of a full custom build from scratch.

 

[ezypikns]

Doggone it.....

I love my S&W Blue Steel 1911. Wouldn't take anything for it. But now you've gone and made me crave a S&W M&P .45.

 

[mister2]

The "works reliably, straight out of the box" 11911s start at about twice what you paid for yours. Entry level guns require a LOT of tuning, fiddling, adjustment, etc.

FACT: I bought a used, SA GI, completely stock with US grips and just shot the heck out of it with the mags that came with it.

I could complain it looked "unusual" with the high ejector port, and it chucked empties on my noggin', and it had tiny sights, etc. etc., but it NEVER malf'd. Call it luck, call it a freak of nature, but it IS possible to get these (even in used condition) to perform well out of the box.

Since it was used, is it possible the PO had it reworked? Yes, but at a selling price of $375, not likely.

MR2

 

[xsquidgator]

I could complain it looked "unusual" with the high ejector port, and it chucked empties on my noggin'

I was going to say that I bought this one until got to the part about it "NEVER" malfunctioning! This is the first pistol I've had that throws some of the brass straight up. No harm no foul though I guess.

I don't mind the idea of needing to do some smoothing out and a little bit of work to get it to work better. I didn't fully believe that would be the case, so I've already learned something!

 

[dschulte]

If you purchased the parkerized version, there is a breakin time for the finish to wear off the contact points. One solution is to put in a 18.5lbs recoil spring and set aside the 16lbs factory spring. This will solve the feed issues until you break it in. I had to do this to my own and to a few others, works like a chark and short money.

 

[xsquidgator]

If you purchased the parkerized version, there is a breakin time for the finish to wear off the contact points. One solution is to put in a 18.5lbs recoil spring and set aside the 16lbs factory spring. This will solve the feed issues until you break it in. I had to do this to my own and to a few others, works like a chark and short money.

Sounds like a good work-around for me to try! Yes, I do have the parkerized finish and it doesn't take much imagination for me to picture that roughness adding friction between the slide and the frame. So, I called around and a local store does not have an 18# spring, but they do have a 20# spring (for $20). Do you (or anyone else) think the 20# spring would be worth trying, to get more reliable cycling? I'm game to try it, I just don't have any experience with what will or won't definitely work.

BTW, what about an "18.5#" spring is eighteen and a half pounds? Is that the spring constant in pounds per inch? I understand a "higher poundage" spring is going to be stiffer, I'm just curious as to how they specify it.

 

[Old Fuff]

You can buy a spring if you want to, but it isn't necessary, and in some ways is counterproductive.

Field strip the pistol and remove the recoil spring assembly and barrel from the slide. Then remove all of the lubricant from the slide and frame rails that you can.

Put the slide back onto the frame and hand-cycles it about 200-300 times.

Lubricate the slide and frame rails again, and reassemble the pistol.

Do you think that Uncle Sam's Army went through this during World War Two (or whenever) when a new pistol was issued to the troops?

But then, their pistols were made to print...

 

[xsquidgator]

You can buy a spring if you want to, but it isn't necessary, and in some ways is counterproductive.

Field strip the pistol and remove the recoil spring assembly and barrel from the slide. Then remove all of the lubricant from the slide and frame rails that you can.

Put the slide back onto the frame and hand-cycles it about 200-300 times.

Lubricate the slide and frame rails again, and reassemble the pistol.

Do you think that Uncle Sam's Army went through this during World War Two (or whenever) when a new pistol was issued to the troops?

But then, their pistols were made to print...

Another interesting idea that I just may try. I was wondering what a safe way would be to smooth up the slide-to-frame contact areas and that might be something to consider, too, without spending $ for springs that may or may not work.

Since you bring up WWII, and in fact a few minutes ago I was discussing my new GI 1911 with another gun guy at work and WWII came up. Did new gov't issue 1911s need this kind of messing around? Back in the early 90s I was issued some old 1911 a few times, don't know how old or worn it was, but at the time I didn't even know they COULD jam, the thing always worked ok on the few occasions when I could shoot it. How did this work in WWII, an armorer go over it or something?

 

[dschulte]

Do not pay $20 for a spring. Goto fusionfirearms.com and order one for $3.69. They are not expensive and extremely high quality from these guys. The owner is the ex-CEO of Dan Wesson!

http://www.fusionfirearms.com/servlet/the-29/Recoil-Spring-5%22/Detail

 

[dschulte]

The spring poundage needs to match what type of load you are shooting, a heavier spring is for heavier loads, lighter springs for lighter loads (i.e. range loads). Springfield recommends going to an 18.5lbs to resolve this issue until the gun breaks in. I would not recommend using the "dry" method of wearing off the parkerizing (my 3rd genereation GS felt that the spring change and running rounds through it was the best way to go, unless you went with a slide job.).

 

[Old Fuff]

Since you bring up WWII, and in fact a few minutes ago I was discussing my new GI 1911 with another gun guy at work and WWII came up. Did new gov't issue 1911s need this kind of messing around? Back in the early 90s I was issued some old 1911 a few times, don't know how old or worn it was, but at the time I didn't even know they COULD jam, the thing always worked ok on the few occasions when I could shoot it. How did this work in WWII, an armorer go over it or something?

You got to be kidding... There was a war on. The Old Fuff can still remember a bit about it...

No, no armorer or anyone else went over the guns. Colt alone was making shipments of 1000 or more... PER DAY!

First of all these pistols were built to government blueprints and manufacturing standards that were enforced by both contractor and government inspectors. Read that to mean there was real quality control in place.

Second, they had calculated clearances in place that made breaking in and other foolishness unnecessary, even when the pistols were Parkerized. Oh, and they would shoot into 3 inches @ 25 yards.

Because of what today’s buyers think they want, the pistols being made are much too tight in the wrong places to be good services pistols. Target pistols and big-boy-toys maybe.

 

[Tom Fury]

New mags

Someone suggested it; not just new ones; CMC or Wilson. I would be very surprised if the problem doesn't just go away.
Cheers, TF

 

[Pat-inCO]

I'll have to respectfully but aggressively disagree. Many more do work than don't. The issue is that there are so many manufacturers flooding the market with so many pistols, that if even 1% of them have problems, that number can be pretty significant. Note that other designs also have problems...and at about the same ratio.

Very true.

One of the problems, and I'll bet you see them every day, is that the expectation of perfection does not go hand in hand with the dollars paid. If the expectation is that it function, that will be met. if the expectation is that it have a VERY precise trigger, NEVER have a failure in feed or eject, be supremely accurate, etc. - those expectations will seldom, if ever be met by an inexpensive gun.

If you buy an RIA .45 for $375 and expect it to perform like a Wilson Combat, you will be disappointed. If you take the RIA, put on Trijicon or Mepro sights, a "commander" hammer, match grade barrel and bushing, match grade sear (mated with the commander hammer), new springs and carefully tune the trigger, you have as much invested as a mid-grade Kimber or (insert brand name of your choice). Will it be equivalent to a Wilson Combat? Not even close. Will it be darned nice? You dang betcha. But it is now an expensive $375 RIA.

The second part of your comment (even 1%....) is right on target. AND we see a WHOLE LOT of the complaints on these forums.

 

[Old Fuff]

New Magazines: Someone suggested it; not just new ones; CMC or Wilson. I would be very surprised if the problem doesn't just go away.

Maybe - it depends on what is causing the problem. But this begs a question: Why is it necessary to buy different magazines when the gun is new? Do those that buy other makes and models of pistols need to do the same?? :banghead:

 

[Marshall]

The sole function of a semi-auto handgun is to shoot the projectile, eject the casing, load the next, etc. If a brand new gun does not do that without being problematic, it's not performing it's most basic intended function. Simple as that. There is a warranty against defects and any gun that doesn't perform it's basic function when new, is defective.

 

[1911Tuner]

New Magazines: Someone suggested it; not just new ones; CMC or Wilson. I would be very surprised if the problem doesn't just go away.

OOH! OOH! I beg to differ again!

I've seen several that choked like a pukin' buzzard on those magazines...with apologies to our 101st Airborne vets...and purr like kittens with WW2 USGI contract magazines...hollowpoints and all. The owners...it goes without saying...were completely dumbfounded.

 

[Dick1911]

I bought a used SA 1911 A1 GI long barrel model and the only problem I've had with it is that when it gets to 150 or so rounds since the last cleaning it will occasionally not return to battery or stovepipe. While I don't know if that's normal or not my fix has been to clean it after every range trip. Hopefully I won't need it for defense and have to fire more than 150 rounds

It is at the gunsmith for a change of sights because of my myopic old eyes and to have a beaver tail installed because of the bite, but those aren't reliability issues. I really enjoy shooting it and can't wait to get her back!

 

[tntwatt]

The problem is that with 1911's they may or may not work unless you pay big bucks. Even then it can be questionalble. Give me an example of any other tool you would buy new and immediately expect to have to fix it.

If it's new, it should work. Period. "Plastic gun" manufacturers realize this and try their best to make it happen. Remember, just because the design has been around for 100years doesn't mean it's good.(sorry all you 1911 gurus)

In my book, less parts, more reliable,and cheaper, means better.

.

 

[Dick1911]

Remember, just because the design has been around for 100years doesn't mean it's good.(sorry all you 1911 gurus)

Say it ain't so!

It may not be perfect, but it's a classic, it's what Dad had in the big war and used to let me hold on occasion when I was a squirt (I can still remember a few things from back then) so it was the first pistol I bought. I'm very happy with it and it's a fun shoot.

 

[trbon8r]

Remember, just because the design has been around for 100years doesn't mean it's good.(sorry all you 1911 gurus)

In my book, less parts, more reliable,and cheaper, means better.

Conversely a gun isn't necessarily better because it is newer, made of plastic, or has half a dozen less parts. What matters is how those parts work together as a system, and how well constructed those parts are. You are making a leap of logic that somehow plastic guns are in absolute terms more reliable than a 1911. Maybe that has been your experience, but there are many of us who have had the opposite experience.

Regarding plastic guns being cheaper, I won't argue that point. You get what you pay for.

 

[1911Tuner]

Remember, just because the design has been around for 100years doesn't mean it's good.(

If it wasn't good, it wouldn't have lasted a hundred years. Sorry Glockster...but this thread ain't about a comparison between the 1911s and the Glocks. If you want to start that fight again...start a new thread.

Many more examples can be found. The Winchester M94. The G98 Mauser. The Smith & Wesson Hand Ejector Model...which is still with us.
The side by side double shotgun is another one. So is the venerable slide-action scattergun...aka "Pump" shotgun. It predates the 1911 by a good many years.

 

[Old Fuff]

After 97 years it's pretty clear that there is nothing wrong with the design. The problem is that today's somewhat incompetent manufacturers have meddled with it.

Do notice that current makers of other pistols have borrowed heavily from Browning's patents. The only ones I can think of off hand that haven't are Beretta and Walther.

 

[tntwatt]

Didn't mean to imply a Gock vs 1911 fight. I love my plastic guns and my 1911's. Trying to look at it with complete objectivity with a pistol being a simple tool.

I love tweaking a good 1911 to make it better just as much as the next guy. But I can also see the point of the OP.

 

[1911Tuner]

Didn't mean to imply a Gock vs 1911 fight.

Excellent! No harm, no foul.

I love tweaking a good 1911 to make it better just as much as the next guy.

If by "better" you mean customizing to suit your particular tastes...that's one set of standards that only the individual can determine. If you mean "reliable" then you haven't handled one that was built to spec instead of someone trying to make something out of it that it wasn't meant to be.

The platform lends itself to modifications that result in wicked accuracy. I've handled a gun built by a really good Bullseye wrench that would outshoot a good many off-the-rack rifles that I've shot. But, when that goal has been met...the gun is essentially out of spec.

Not to be taken that a 1911 has to rattle like a box of rocks in order to be reliable...nor that it's impossible to have bug-hole groups and acceptable reliability. Just that it's harder and more tedious...and more expensive...to have it both ways. It can be done...but at what price comes match accuracy? If carrying a 4,000-dollar pistol is your cuppa Joe...Salute'!

FWIW, neither of my pistols pictured above even approach the "loose as a goose" category. They're actually quite nice in that respect with just enough play to feel if pushed/pulled hard...but are boringly reliable.

 

[tntwatt]

By "better" I mean I tinker way too much. Smoother,better feed, lighter, etc..... I happen to have access to my uncle's tool and die equipment and he shares my love of guns. "what if we tried this?" is a statement that has taken many of my guns out of original spec. Including the plastic ones. We are currently playing with a CAD program combining many features of both styles. problem is we'll probably have to make it out of titanium due to the weight.