3" vs 4" Barrel Compact 1911

[1911Tuner]

Those responders with complaints target these forums for a quick-fix and represent a percentage of gun owners that would not be statistically significant to the over-all pistol population.

Except for two tiny details...

The largest part of my personal experience with these little blasters hasn't been on the forums. It's been real world, hands-on repairs and tweaks...and it started way back when Detonics burst on the scene with their chopped variant...when I was a practicing smith-on-duty at a local dealer's shop. The Officer's Model followed close behind, and brought many of the Detonics' problems and shortcomings...no pun intended...and the hair-pulling along with it.

The second detail is that the fix for the shorties is rarely quick.

Then...Just about the time I'm gettin' a handle on'em...Springfield throws me another curve with one that's not only shorter and faster...but it's got an integral ramp on the barrel too.

Some days a guy just can't win...

 

[jay43]

if you are considering a compact or sub compact 1911 grouping should not be your concern conceled carry should be you don't buy a 3' barreled gun to target shoot if you are concerned about grouping buy a full sized 1911. a 3' barrelled version will be more than adequete for what it was designed for self defense

 

[Mad Magyar]

you are concerned about grouping buy a full sized 1911. a 3' barrelled version will be more than adequete for what it was designed for self defense

My fault for veering this topic off-course...Just realized that the poster was concerned about grouping comparisons rather than reliability issues...
I don't think there is much doubt about correlating barrel length with accuracy....

 

[kau]

I am MUCH more concerned about reliability than grouping. I didn't realize the extent of anti-3" 1911 models in regards to reliability when posting my OP though.

I'm still lost though. I want a compact 1911 .45 to carry. 3" is a much better fit but I would be willing to go 4" if the reliability is night and day between a 3" and 4". Seems like there is not a consensus at all though.

Why would Kimber and Colt sell 3" models that out of the box are not reliable? Isn't that a class action suit waiting to happen?

 

[CWL]

Seems like there is not a consensus at all though

kau, are you reading the same postings I am?

You sound like you are already sold on a 3" M1911, then just buy one. You will never get consensus on anything here. Everybody has an opinion and they're all free.

After you buy your gun, please tell us how yours works.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Why would Kimber and Colt sell 3" models that out of the box are not reliable? Isn't that a class action suit waiting to happen?

Bingo.

I find it hard to believe that for the last ten years my friends and I are the ones that are lucky enough to get the only dozen or so 3 inch Kimbers that are totally reliable.



Time to shoot my Tactical Ultra.
I hope it doesn't jam.

 

[Mad Magyar]

I'm still lost though. I want a compact 1911 .45 to carry. 3" is a much better fit but I would be willing to go 4" if the reliability is night and day between a 3" and 4".

Just to put this in perspective, the Colt Officer’s barrel is 3 5/8th” according to my Owner’s manual….Now, we are in need of another .625” to the 4 ¼ mark that would fit the Commander models for example that seem to gather a more favorable response.
One of the arguments used in this discussion was the number of times/posts where complainants offered their compacts as unreliable…I will keep my radar up for future posting where the above 2 models are mentioned….

 

[1911Tuner]

I find it hard to believe that for the last ten years my friends and I are the ones that are lucky enough to get the only dozen or so 3 inch Kimbers that are totally reliable.

Now, there ya go. That's why I hate to comment on threads like this one.
Somebody reads a negative comment to mean that...just because a few are bad, all are bad...and nobody said that.

Or, conversely...Just because Thomas, Richard, and Harrison happened to get good ones, that they all must be good, or it's suggested , with a hint of condescension...that Tom and his friends must have gotten the only good ones ever made.

So...Once again, for the record:

Any length 1911 variant can have problems. It's just that, the shorter they get, the more frequent the issues are and the more challenging they are to make'em right. Often...but not always.

That applies to Commanders as well. As a whole, Commander-length guns tend to be pretty reliable...especially the ones built by Colt...but some Commanders and clones do require attention. This occurs more often than with 5-inch guns...but less frequently than the shorter ones.

Accuracy is another question. I've seen shorties that are wicked accurate and Gold Cups that shoot groups that look like they were fired with a load of buckshot.

The sub 4-inch guns were never designed to be match-accurate. Neither, for that matter were Commanders. They're strictly business...like a broadhead axe. They were designed and intended to be last-ditch, close-quarters life savers. Period. They don't have to be accurate...so they're not built with that criteria in mind. If one does happen to shoot bughole groups at 25 yards, count yourself lucky. If it's also completely reliable...hang onto it and never let it get away from you. You hit the lottery.

Cheers...and OUT!

 

[brickeyee]

The officers models and compacts have to be set up more exactly than a commanded or full size.
I have a handful, and have worked on even more.
Things like link length must be measured and checked (do not believe the number in the catalog for the length, measure the darn thing).
Careful clearance in the bushing to allow for the greater angle.

I think that these guns are really not very amenable to typical mass production, pick a part from bucket #1, and another from bucket #2, etc.
When set up correctly they run fine, but the amount of variation in parts is reduced over the full size guns.
many full size 1911s will operate when 'riding the link'.
A compact may have problems.

 

[1911Tuner]

Thank you, Brickeyee!

What he's saying is that...and as Fuff observed...you've got a narrower window to work with, mainly because of the faster speeds and the shorter slide runup. Sometimes it's a close run in matching the spring rates...which sometimes doesn't apply to two identical guns in a row. Magazine timing is more critical. Grip is more critical. A gun that might run fine with a firm grip might puke when held in one hand...even firmly. That's a liability in a pistol intended purely for an emergency. Can you guarantee that you'll have the time and opportunity to get the perfect grip in 2 seconds while fending off a knife or blunt weapon attack? If so...you don't have a full grasp of the way things like that go down.

 

[distra]

I have a bobtailed 1911 commander and a 3" SA micro compact. Both function reliably with my SD ammo and practice my reloads. The micro does not seem to be more picky or jam more than the commander. It is a bit easier to conceal, but I carry both frequently. IMHO the bobtail makes a big difference in concealment for the commander size 1911. One can always find a lemon.

 

[1911Tuner]

The micro does not seem to be more picky or jam more than the commander.

Jam...more? As in...it malfunctions, but no more frequently than the Commander?

Don't wanna bust your bubble, but...Those aren't reliable pistols, m'fren.
At least not in the bet-your-life sense.

 

[Old Fuff]

Why would Kimber and Colt sell 3" models that out of the box are not reliable? Isn't that a class action suit waiting to happen?

Not too long ago one of our larger handgun manufacturers came out with a model that in my opinion was almost useless for anything but a paperweight. So while at the next SHOT Show I cornered one of their top brass and ask him, "why?" He answered to the effect that, "the company was in business to sell guns, and these were going out like hotcakes on a cold morning." They didn't have to be practical, although to their credit they did work. But most of the buyers didn't intend to shoot them, at least not very much. They were being bought up because they were seen as being cool, and the "cool factor" was enough to generate sales. A lot of strange guns get sold for that reason.

As for being sued. Unless someone can prove there is a defect in the design a suit would go nowhere, and so far as the design is concerned, it's well proven. It how some people are executing the design that's at the root of most of today's problems. But as long as people keep buying 'um they'll keep making them. The name of the game is $$$$$$$$... :banghead:

 

[Misfire99]

I had a similar situation and solved it by putting an officers model top end on an aluminum government frame. I have large hands and anything smaller then the government is to small. But I wanted light and easy to carry. So the three inch officers model with a ramped barrel and fully supported chamber went on an aluminum frame that I had. It is a sweet shooting carry gun that's light and easy to aim and goes boom when you pull the trigger.

 

[Old Fuff]

Ah.... Misfire99:

I hope you realize that the Government Model is not dimensionally the same as an Officer's Model ACP. The lengths of the frame rails and recoil spring tunnel are different. The Officer's Model frame is based on the Commander Model, not the Government model.

As it is the recoil spring tunnel in the sub-compact guns is too short, and your combination would make it even shorter. It would also have a negative effect on the slide’s run-up.

You can do what you want too do, but use a Commander frame...

 

[1911 guy]

Ah, what do we know. Two posters on this thread have been working on them for years, I've been a dedicated 1911 user and owner for twenty years. Our opinions and experiences are obviously not adequate to answer the questions and experiences of those who've taken a passing interest in them only when pocket guns came on the scene. I'm sorry if I seem a little torqued, but the analogy seems to fit of me trying to tell Mario Andretti how to drive. Tuner and Fuff have been wrenching on these things for decades and offer their hard-won experiences only to be told they dont know anything. I offer the opinion of a user dedicated to the platform and am told I'm spouting tripe. I really hope your mini-1911 works, but experience tells me otherwise.

The whole thing about a lawsuit is silly. People will buy the guns because they want to. There are a lot of crap products out there folks waste money on, nobody's crying about that. Caveat Emptor. As I stated before, most folks buy pistols as toys anyway, not tools. The manufacturers know and count on this. Look around at anyone you know of who carries a 1911 as a serious tool and see if it's a small one. Find me one and I'll buy you lunch.

Personally, I don't get the whole issue, anyway. The length of the grip frame is what matters when concealing a handgun. What do you gain by shortening the slide and barrel and compromising reliability? A lousy half inch?

Geez, it must have been a rougher night than I remembered for me to get this ticked about an internet thread.

 

[geekWithA.45]

most of the jams are stove pipe, and require, time, pressing on the magazine thumb release button and muscling the slide down just a tad to clear the jam.. no joy.

Um....the procedure described is that which clears a double feed, and is the most complicated procedure in the entire manual of arms.

The procedure to clear a stove pipe is the simplest: sweep your hand across the top of the barrel, from front to back, grasping the brass and fling it over your shoulder in passing. The slide will go into battery, chambering a round.

 

[Old Fuff]

Maybe I need to clarify a point...

All of the 1911 style pistols being made today are not absolute, malfunctioning junk. However none of them match up to the guns made prior to about 1965 when it comes to materials and dimensions. None of them go through the rigorous inspections that USGI guns did. But this doesn’t mean that most of them won’t work.

The problem is that there are enough lemons so that a buyer can’t be sure what they are getting when they take their new purchase out of the box. It may look like one pictured in the centerfold of a gun-zine, but looks don’t mean it will function reliably.

Some are satisfied with this situation, others are not. When it comes to something that might be used as a personal defense weapon I come down solidly on the “not” side.

Those that buy Glock’s, SIG’s, Beretta’s, H&K’s, Ruger’s, etc. have a reasonable expectation the pistol will function reliably out-of-the-box, without having to be broken in or tinkered with – not some of the time, but all of the time. Is there any good reason that those who buy a 1911 style gun shouldn’t be able to expect the same?

 

[Walkalong]

If it's also completely reliable...hang onto it and never let it get away from you. You hit the lottery.

Cool, I won the lottery.

My CDP Ultra is reliable, accurate and I shoot it better than the CDP Pro I just sold.

I have no dought that they are much more finicky and less tolerant than 4" or 5" models. They would have to be. Less room for error in them for sure.

 

[45auto]

Grip is more critical. A gun that might run fine with a firm grip might puke when held in one hand...even firmly.

That's what concerns me about the heavy "sprung" short 1911's, or any auto for that matter.

When people say they have no trouble with them I like to read "round counts", not time owned, and what kind of ammo, mag, and circumstances shot. Meaning, standing on the range, acquiring a good grip, or drawing out of a holster firing, etc, etc. All those "circumstances" that even "perfection" guns can puke on.

Barrel length does make a difference if you use IWB and sit down, depending on your body style.

 

[ABBOBERG]

Even though I own a few 3" barreled guns (used for research), I would never use them for self-defense. I have done a lot of testing and at least in 9mm, you lose about 20% of your energy going from a 4" barrel to a 3" barrel.
You lose over 30% of your energy using 147-grain bullets. It seems that with 9mm, the problem gets worse with heavier bullets. I have never tested the ballistics of a .45 auto in these two barrel lengths, but I am guessing the power difference is similar if not more.

I would never buy a 3" barreled gun for anything other than range use.

 

[Mad Magyar]

you lose about 20% of your energy going from a 4" barrel to a 3" barrel.
You lose over 30% of your energy using 147-grain bullets.

Not from any chrono data I've seen....I think your %'s are off on the high-side...

not velocity ABBOBERG....
Sometimes I leap before I look....My fault...

 

[ABBOBERG]

I am talking kinetic energy, not velocity. The percentage velocity difference is a bit smaller.
Admitedly, I am using the Shooting Chrony - it is not an expensive unit, but I had it factory re-calibrated before I did any testing. Besides, I don't believe the Chrony would suppress the 3" barrel velocities or exagerate the 4" barrel velocites - everything should be consistent.

Published reports (gun rags) seem to support my findings. One article showed a Kel-Tec P11 producing 321 ft-lbs with Cor-Bon 115 JHP +P. I tested the ammo myself in a 4" barreled gun and got 440 ft-lbs - that's 37%!

Most ammo I have tried are in the 25% range (4" versus 3") for 9mm - I was being conservative with my numbers.

 

[SevenMichael]

My 2 cents

Since you guys are talking 1911 style and 3" barrel, not caliber, I'll chime in about my Springfield EMP.

It's a $1k+ gun, and the quality shows. While some have had their problems (mainly magazine/feed related), I have not had a single problem.

It is NOT JUNK, it is a beautiful piece of work (as an engineer by profession, I can both understand and appreciate the quality of craftsmanship). I agree with other posts, that when you spend that much you should not expect any problems "out of the box".... and I have not had any.

I use this as my routine (but not exclusive) carry piece and have complete confidence in its performance. As for accuracy, it's the best I've shot... so I don't buy the 4" vs 3" being more accurate (BTW I have a 4 inch SIG 229; I know, not a 1911).

But as far as carry, I consider the EMP an excellent carry weapon. I haven't had a Kimber or other brand discussed here, but if their quality for a 3" is the same as for a 4" barrel, I'd choose the 3".

Just my 2 cents.... I'm not trying to get into a heated discussion here... which it sounds like it has already become.

 

[sholling]

Ok this is my first posting here but I've been shooting 1911s a lot of years. For what it's worth there is a vocal minority that have never touched a 3" 1911 but heard/read/intuited/grokked that the 3" 1911 is unsuitable for self defense. There are also a couple of undeniable experts that I disagree with. I read the same thing over and over about 5" 1911s in Tupperware forums. Well I own an early 3" Kimber Ultra Carry and in the beginning (<200rds) it was finicky about magazines because of the timing issues someone brought up. Since it completed its break in I've put another 1000+ trouble free rounds of various FMJ and JHP without a hiccup. That's using my inexpensive Shooting Stars, Mec-Gars, Colts, and even some cheap Colt marked Chinese knockoffs that somebody on Fleabay stuck me with. It's never seen a gunsmith since leaving the factory. It just works - period. I have a 5" Springfield Armory 1911 (similar to the current Mil-Spec) that I bought in the 80s that couldn't fire two rounds of ball without jamming until it went to a smith. Lemons happen. Which guns do the pistol smiths see - the lemons. They don't see the 95% that work perfectly. The also have memories going back 20 years when problems were were still being worked out of the designs. Would I buy a 3" Charles Daily? Heck no. But I would buy a Colt or a Kimber in a heartbeat if I didn't already own one.

3" vs 4" - if I had it to do over again I'd probably buy a 4" with an officer's sized frame. That gives you the best of both worlds. The concealability of the shorter grip and a good compromise velocity. Speer makes a 230gr Gold Dot JHP that is optimized for 4" barrels and would be a great choice. Personally I keep Federal LE 230gr Bonded +Ps in my Ultra Carry. These are supposed penetrate and expand reliably from a 3" barrels.

Anyway kudos to the members and staff for a great forum.