Any bad 1911's out there?

[rellascout]

sorry i think you misunderstood my post a bit..
i was speaking of gunsmith's vs smiff's these days...and MY experience with them.
smiff's call my gun a cheap "whatever" and then plan on using sub grade tooling in their attempt to improve it...

Smiff's? I guess I did misunderstand... I still cannot figure out why you felt the need to mention "knock" China. Is it because that is where the Nork was produced?

There are tons of good smiths these days but you are going to pay them a high per hour rate to do the job right. If you have someone doing your work for less than $100 an hour then count yourself lucky. IMHO

 

[9mmepiphany]

smiff's call my gun a cheap "whatever" and then plan on using sub grade tooling in their attempt to improve it...

If I heard anyone say that about a Norinco, I would warn any likely customers they might attract to avoid them like the Black Death. That is one of the questions folks will ask when looking for a smith to work on a 1911, "How would you feel about building on a Norinco" (it is a little vetting secret)

The Norinco are a great base gun for a custom build...and it was built to Mil-Specs. It's steel is harder to machine...which is only a bad thing for the person machining it. Many of the internal parts might have been softer, but that isn't a factor as you throw away most of the parts in a build anyway...using mainly the slide and frame. I always regretted not buying a Norinco when they were <$200...or more Norinco 7.62x39mm ammo when it was <$1.50/20

 

[Jclind]

Most 1911's that are problemsome usually need some tuning. My Springfield had a lot of feed issues I polished the ramp and hood put Tripp research springs and followers in my mags and 2000 rounds later still no problems.

 

[Skinsanity]

Raise your glasses to 2011 ladies and gentlemen, and here is to another 100 years debating the 1911....That Being said..

Here is my personal un-biased opinion..Stay well away from Kimber, Para-ordinance,colt, Rock Island, Sig, Taurus, Llama,remington rand,Les Baer, Norinco, AMT, or Singer sewing machine 1911s. Unless you can afford them ,they work well, and they suit your intended purpose. If thats the case any one of the afformentioned Models should serve you well.

I will share a short story, 5 years ago, I came across a good deal, a friend of mine wanted to sell me a Llama IX-D, and an AMT hardballer for 400 bucks.The Llama was almost brand new, and the hardballer was pretty well used but still looked nice, I figured I could turn them around for a profit. The Llama fit and finish was a lot better than I had heard, its a nice looking pistol, so was the hardballer. And at the range, both of them lived up to my expectations, both sucked. And to top it off the hardballers safety would fail now and again. The hardballer I got rid of for the price I paid for both guns very quickly (yes I told the new owner about the safety, he's an educated gunsmith and figured he could fix it)..and it seemed I was stuck with the Llama for the time being. I would take it to the range with me and fire a couple mags just cause I like things that go bang..and lo and behold...she started shooting more and more often...after about round 300, I quit having malfunctions of any sort. The only thing I didnt like is that it had no beavertail and the hammer spur would give me a blister, easily cured with a bobbed commander hammer. I still have that pistol, and actually, despite my owning an XD and a few other "great" guns, that Llama is the one that sits in my nightstand...I trust it..its a great gun. The Moral of the story I suppose is..Kimbers are great, Kimbers suck, Colts are great, colts suck, RI is great, RI Sucks...

With the awesome advent of the internet we have both the boon and the curse of getting to hear everyones opinion about everything..Does my story mean that ALL Llamas are great..Hell no...Does it mean ALL AMTs are horrible..probably not..same goes for every brand..so to answer the OP...Yes, there are A LOT of bad 1911s out there..not of any one particular make or model...And some good ones will take you by surprise..The way I see it...the More you pay, The better the CHANCE of getting a great one. But it doesnt guarantee it.

So, find what you like...Buy it...see how it works, when you get one that pleases you ergonomically, functionally, aesthetically, and monetarily..Good Job, you found yourself a GREAT 1911...just stay away from the bad ones....

Duncan

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

I was saying that I would not recommend a lower end 1911 for folks who will be betting their lives on it...just as I've always held that the 1911 is a terrible general issue gun for LE. Lately I've been recommending the Sig 220 (in steel) or a S&W M&P45 (in polymer), which are both more accurate than most 1911s and stand up better to hard use

I don't think this is a statement that can be applied to all 1911's. You might want to look at this "Sand Box Field Report" from a Special Forces assaulter who uses a single stack 1911 as his preferred pistol.

Granted, it's built by one of the premier pistolsmiths, but if you want to bet your life on a 1911 style gun under the harshest conditions - you pay for it.

If you're an LE who desires a reliable 1911 platform, you're in the $1500 and above price range - but, again if you bet your life on it - you pay for it. If you want a $600 gun, then you look at a different platform.

 

[9mmepiphany]

You might want to look at this "Sand Box Field Report" from a Special Forces assaulter who uses a single stack 1911 as his preferred pistol.

I have read that article and do not feel that it contradicts the previous statement. It simply says that a 1911 can be reliable, it doesn't compare it to either of the guns mentioned previously.

Bear in mind, that the article refers to a personally owned and highly modified 1911, which doesn't affect it's status as a general issue LE weapon

 

[mljdeckard]

I have said many times, and I continue to maintain, that my Kimber Custom II is the best handgun I have ever owned or carried. And I have carried A LOT. If I'm just lucky, all of my friends and family who liked mine so much that they bought either Kimbers or Sprinfields must be lucky too. The only significant problem any of them have had was a Para with a guide rod stuck because they squeezed it too tightly in the vise when they installed the night sights.

I use my Kimber for everything, and I would carry it to war tomorrow if I were allowed to.

 

[McCall911]

Any bad 1911's out there?

Yes. They're all junk.
Please send them to me at this address and I will dispose of them for you:






But seriously...
Not to pick on AMT, but I would suppose AMT. (I think Frank Barnes stated in one of the older COTW that even the barrels of AMT 1911's are made from castings. Problem is, I can't find my old COTW. :banghead: )

 

[MCMXI]

9mmepiphany, what do you think constitutes "hard" or "severe" use for a 1911? What makes/models of non-custom 1911s do you feel satisfy the minimum requirement for hard use?

 

[mcdonl]

I have a hard time with the betting your life on it argument...

Many in this thread have said and I agree that an entry level gun like mine is not, and no matter what I do to it will not be a high end custom. It will never be as tight, it probably will not get 50,000 rounds of use... maybe not even 25,000 (Although I suspect the could get 25,000).... Also the fit, finish and quality will never be the same of a high end gun. Also, I do not think that an entry level gun is made for hard duty... I am not sure what other than round count constitutes hard duty, but lets assume that hard duty means it has crossed the 25K mark...

BUT...

I shoot my entry level gun(s) 400-500 times a month and I am proficient with them and would trust my life to them as a civilian who keeps firearms for self defense inside and outside of the home.

 

[9mmepiphany]

9mmepiphany, what do you think constitutes "hard" or "severe" use for a 1911? What makes/models of non-custom 1911s do you feel satisfy the minimum requirement for hard use?

My rule of thumb is 50-65k round a year, but that isn't practical for most folks unless someone else is buying the ammo...like military or LE spec ops...it's just a number for folks who want a number to compare to their normal use to.

A easier test would be a 1911's ability to run through a 1000-1500 round course/class in a long weekend. This doesn't mean 500 rounds in a day, a lot of guns can do this. It means 500/day for 3 days in a roll, without more than just a wipe down and a bore snake...plus added lube on the rails. A good USPSA match would do it too...just do it all season, cleaning between matches, and see how long you gun holds up.

minimum requirement is an interesting question. I actually have given this a lot of thought since I almost never recommend even a high end production or true custom gun...because a lot becomes a matter of taste and style when you get into the $2500+ guns.

Among the high end production 1911s, the Les Baer TRS is an excellent value as are the S&W Performance Center 1911s...if you don't mind their external extractor or FPS system

Among the high end production guns the Les Baer TRS is an excellent value, as are the S&W Performance Center 1911s...if you don't mind their external extractors or FPS system

Taking a mid-priced gun like a Dan Wesson CBOB (~$850 the last time I looked, but have heard they are asking $1200 now), having the trigger tweaked, the action timing checked and the take-down pin replaced with one made out of tool steel would be very close. I have heard (we can't get them in CA) their new VBOB and Valor is every bit the gun, for fit and finish, as an Ed Brown Kobra or Nighthawk GRP for ~$500 less

 

[EddieNFL]

So many "expert" opinions.

To sum up three pages in two sentences:

1) The 1911 is the greatest weapon invention since the knife.

2) All 1911s will fall apart if fired.

So...next topic?

 

[drewzfoster]

I have an AO Commander serial in the 200's.... it was a project gun right out of the box...

Items replaced to get it running, barely runs..

-trigger (sharpe edge)
-mag release
-barrel needs throated
-slide stop
-thumb and grip safety (machined so thin the thumb safety pin could be seen
-loose front sight
-sent back twice to A/O for different slides...the side that was face down in the box was poorly machined...very poorly.. the second slide was "Barney Purple"
-they are basically junk, I spent so much time with it swapping parts my Dad just gave it to me....he couldnt bring himself to sell it to someone!

 

[ol' scratch]

I must have really good luck...

I personally have fired all the pistols everyone seems to have trouble with and they run well. I have fired an AMT Hardballer with hollow points--no problems. I own a Kimber Custom II. I have fired it a lot and the only time I have ever had problems is after the gun gets so dirty I really should stop shooting. I have a Rock Island that some people have said jam, again, not an issue unless the gun gets very dirty. My Grandfather has an old 9mm Star 1911 and never an issue.

I have read bad things about every single 1911 manufactured. Everyone's experience is different.

 

[ol' scratch]

The good ol days weren't all that great...

Everyone keeps on going back to the old way of doing things as the standard. The old way created problems with 1911's too. How many guys had 1911's they had to send to the smith because the thing wouldn't run right? How many had Colts back in the day that were 'junk' from the manufacturer?

As far as lasting the large round count everyone keeps on talking about; who knows? I know that Star and Norinco were considered junk until you couldn't find them any more. German Lugers were junk too to some. To say that all of the guns of our fathers and grandfathers were wonderful is as misleading as saying all of the guns pumped out today are junk.

Keep in mind that the people who turned out the first 1911's Browning Hi Powers, etc. were not machinists. Many were called to work on the line and pump out parts as fast as they possibly could. During the war when most of these fine firearms were produced lacked quality too. I have a 1943 Springfield Garand that looks as if a 5-year-old with a file did the finish work. Winchester collectors prize just how 'messed' up their rifles are. My Great uncle talked about what a POS the M1 Carbine was and how the front band wouldn't stay put because it was out of spec. Another uncle talked about the 1911 he had and how it wouldn't hit a barn at 10 feet, broke the slide release and putting the pistol out of commission. And by the way, that was a TOOL steel release.

At various points, all milsurps have been classified as junk by someone. I can't think of one milsurp (including the old 1911's everyone lusts over) that wasn't considered junk, pumped out in the millions to serve a purpose. You want to talk about mass produced being junk, I find it hard to believe that any of the modern manufacturers are getting close to the number of milsurps pumped out.

As far as companies cutting corners or trying to find faster means of producing firearms, look through the history of Springfield Armory (it is the first one to come to mind, there are others) to find all the ways parts were changed to make it faster or easier to produce firearms. Many of the old Milsurps were viewed as 'junk' when they came back. It wasn't until supply outstripped demand that this stuff was revered and almost viewed as legendary.

Quality control was worse in the 'good ole days' than it is now. It could be argued that quality was worse too. The mathematical and engineering geniuses were not out pumping parts out everyday, that work was done by unskilled laborers. My grandfather was a screw machine operator and machinist who told me how stupid some of those individuals were on the line.

The new guns being pumped out right now may stand the test of time, but only time will tell. One thing is for certain, if you don't maintain it, it will fail. Remember that parts break, springs loose their 'sprong' and every tool if used will wear out.

I would have loved to have an old 1911 that I could tinker with and customize at the height of the importation of them in the 60's and 70's. I am left, however, with the new guns and they are serving my purposes very well. The new safe queens are the old milsurp 1911's of our fathers, grandfathers and even great-grandfathers.

As far as the round count and how little people fire their guns is also exaggerated. Ammo sales are higher now then they have been in years. The Millions if not Billions of rounds produced are going somewhere and I can't believe that everyone is sitting on them.

You guys are too romantic. Stop lusting over what was and enjoy today. My kids will be talking about how great I have it right now.

 

[MCMXI]

A easier test would be a 1911's ability to run through a 1000-1500 round course/class in a long weekend. This doesn't mean 500 rounds in a day, a lot of guns can do this. It means 500/day for 3 days in a roll, without more than just a wipe down and a bore snake...plus added lube on the rails. A good USPSA match would do it too...just do it all season, cleaning between matches, and see how long you gun holds up.

So how is this important? What is it testing? How does it relate to real-world use other than taking a three day class? Are you carrying 1,500 rounds on your person? If you carry a 1911 for self defense, it needs to work flawlessly for X number of rounds, under the conditions that you're likely to use it, day in and day out. If you shoot a typical IPSC or IDPA match on a regular basis and your 1911 has no failures shooting 100 to 200 rounds each time, surely this a reasonable test for a pistol intended or used for self defense. In other words, how is the 1911 that makes it through 1,500 rounds in three days superior to the one that makes it through 150 rounds for ten matches? There's a good chance that both will work when needed, and for many, that's what matters.

 

[9mmepiphany]

So how is this important? What is it testing?

In other words, how is the 1911 that makes it through 1,500 rounds in three days superior to the one that makes it through 150 rounds for ten matches?

It is just a more practical test of correct fitting and reliability than testing to failure. It is much like car manufacturers testing door hinges and window lift or cabinet manufacturers testing drawer pulls. Ideally, someone would take one of every 1911 produced and test each to failure...then anyone could look at the results and make an objective determination of the cost-benefit based on expected useful life of their selection. My personal choices are pretty mid-priced...what I consider the sweet spot in the market.

The 1500 rounds in 3 days is much like leaving on electronic equipment for the first 24-48 hours when first purchased. If anything is going to go wrong, it will likely show up (I believe it is 90%+) in that time.

There's a good chance that both will work when needed, and for many, that's what matters.

A good chance is all that many want, that is the beauty of a free market. You have to decide for yourself how much you are willing to pay to improve your chances that a 1911 will work when needed.

This equation would not be an applicable comparison when you introduce other platforms into the discussion

 

[NWcityguy2]

That doesn't hold water in my book either. Shooting 500 rounds a day for 3 days is the exact same as shooting 150 rounds a day for 10 days. Your gun doesn't know or care about the elapsed time between shooting sessions. As soon as it returns to battery and dissipates any heat it could sit for a minute, a day or a month and not know the difference. The only things that would stop it from doing so are common sense related like cleaning it and oiling it.

 

[9mmepiphany]

By that logic, firing 50 rounds a day for 30 days would be the same...as would firing 10 rounds a day for 5 months.

I'm actually not saying it isn't the same, I'm just saying that doing it in one weekend would give you an answer faster and wouldn't leave you with a false sense of reliability while waiting to reach the round count that your gun will fail at. In my experience it is better to know sooner if something isn't going to continue to work...especially with something you are counting on to protect you.

 

[BushyGuy]

Nighthawk custom 1911 are the best 1911 out there, the worst i would say are taurus and kimber, they are either a hit or miss.

RIA do have some occasional lemons now and then but not as many as Taurus or Kimber.

 

[NWcityguy2]

By that logic, firing 50 rounds a day for 30 days would be the same...as would firing 10 rounds a day for 5 months.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I'm just saying that doing it in one weekend would give you an answer faster and wouldn't leave you with a false sense of reliability while waiting to reach the round count

So are you saying this, or this...

A easier test would be a 1911's ability to run through a 1000-1500 round course/class in a long weekend. This doesn't mean 500 rounds in a day, a lot of guns can do this. It means 500/day for 3 days in a roll

 

[9mmepiphany]

I don't see a conflict in the statements...did I not state it clearly, sometimes I know what I mean to post, but it seems more clear to me than to a reader.

1500 rounds during a long weekend would give you the answer faster than drawing it out over an extended period.

I picked a long weekend because that is the length of classes I have attended and 1500 rounds was the class requirement. You could shoot 1500 rounds in a day and get the answer even quicker...but I doubt it would be as much fun as taking a 3 day class.

As I posted earlier, ideally all 1911s (even multiples) would be tested to failure and the results publish so that folks could make an informed decision...it's just not very practical. But I have known shooters who have put 50k rounds through their 1911 in a year in practice and that is where the data for what modifications work or will hold up come from...this was back in the 80s

 

[Mitch from LA]

Nighthawk custom 1911 are the best 1911 out there, the worst i would say are taurus and kimber, they are either a hit or miss.

RIA do have some occasional lemons now and then but not as many as Taurus or Kimber.

Out of curiosity, how did you come to that conclusion?

 

[mooner]

I think this conversation has degenerated a bit. A lot of hypothetical arguments that really don't go anywhere. I may as well add a couple.....

Wouldn't it really be interesting to see a "torture test" done on some of the lesser quality and higher quality 1911's to see where they really fail and what it takes to get them going again? They do them on other guns, but I personally haven't seen one on a budget (I prefer sanely priced) 1911. Anybody else seen one?

I really like the 1911 and it's design is truly ahead of it's time. However, it does say something when a $500 plastic piece of junk is expected to last longer than a $500 all steel masterpiece. Maybe firearm designs really have progressed in the last 100 years. Maybe the 1911, as beautiful and significant as it is, is not the end all be all in semi auto pistols. I mean, if it has to cost $2000 to be as good as a $500 Glock, that is not saying much. Ouch that smarts!

For the record I like 1911's better than Glocks.

 

[Ala Dan]

From The TV Show "The Best Defense"

The truth 'bout 3" 1911's is that you need to watch the recoil springs in these
weapons. They seem to wear a lot faster, than say a 5" 1911.