Detonics Handguns - Opinions?
- Thread starter 45Seventy
- Start date
- Status
Whirlwind06
Member
IMO. When they first came out in the 80s They were the only micro 1911's around. Now they are one of many on the market with a hefty price tag. I would buy one if I could afford it.
They are very nicely made and very important they are designed to by carried hammer down on a loaded chamber besides cocked and locked. This form a carry like cocked and locked is not for everyone but is a legitimate. The rear site is moved forward about half an inch and the slide area to the rear of the site is shaved down to aid in thumb cocking of the hammer.
orionengnr
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 5,712
panzer
____ Closer to an inch, and why? Detonic's shortening of the sight radius on an already short barreled pistol is sheer idiocy.
My thumb has never hit the rear sight of a 1911 while cocking. I can find no logic in this design.
I suspect Detonic's sales do (and will continue to) reflect this marketing "genius".
____ Closer to an inch, and why? Detonic's shortening of the sight radius on an already short barreled pistol is sheer idiocy.
My thumb has never hit the rear sight of a 1911 while cocking. I can find no logic in this design.
I suspect Detonic's sales do (and will continue to) reflect this marketing "genius".
Last edited by a moderator:
That short tang and grip make it oncomfortable to shoot... I have a friend that has an older one.
I understand the 'scooped' slide was strictly to make it look substantively different than a Colt in the 70's.
I understand the 'scooped' slide was strictly to make it look substantively different than a Colt in the 70's.
PUNISHER56
Member
Detonic's,why?
Looks to me like that the rear sight would interfere
with any type of good,tight fitting holster. It probably
would have a snag issue.
Looks to me like that the rear sight would interfere
with any type of good,tight fitting holster. It probably
would have a snag issue.
Panzermk2 is correct. Some like this feature, and others don't. It does work for the purpose intended. The original concern was carrying the pistol in a pocket, cocked and locked. Most holsters are cut so that the rear sight rides above the leather. Considering this gun's intended use and purpose, sight radius is a moot point. It isn't made for target shooting. 
the shaving of the rear of the slide it is not for looks but for function. Rex Applegate created it's design. As in Fairbanks/Applegate I think he new a thing or two about combat arms. You complain about the sight radius. How does that matter with a compact like this? Kimber has removed them completly on one of thier new compacts using only a channel cut into the slide. If that loss of sight radius affects your shooting you need more help then that "inch" of sight radius
When the Detonics first came out it was before the big wave of common 45/1911 custom parts and such in the world. This was the era of the S&W Devells. There were not alot of compact anything. Back then most if not all 1911's carried for duty etc. had factory rear sights. These were good for some skin shaving when thumb cocking a 1911. I had one worked great sold it to get something else. I can't remember what for but I regret getting rid of it.
Check out thier sight for more info. As to thier sales I would have to check ATF's numbers but when we have one at the store they aren't around long before a 45 aficionado buys it
http://www.detonicsusa.com/
When the Detonics first came out it was before the big wave of common 45/1911 custom parts and such in the world. This was the era of the S&W Devells. There were not alot of compact anything. Back then most if not all 1911's carried for duty etc. had factory rear sights. These were good for some skin shaving when thumb cocking a 1911. I had one worked great sold it to get something else. I can't remember what for but I regret getting rid of it.
Check out thier sight for more info. As to thier sales I would have to check ATF's numbers but when we have one at the store they aren't around long before a 45 aficionado buys it
http://www.detonicsusa.com/
They have standard styles
The there is this "bobbed" model
Features Historically Pioneered by Detonics:
Functional reliability in a 1911-style pistol which was smaller than any ever manufactured before;
Cone-shaped barrel which required no bushing;
Recoil system with counter-recoiling multiple springs;
Recoil spring guide rod with buffer;
Springs easily removable for disassembly because they are not loaded under tension;
Ejection port lowered and scalloped for more positive ejection and to spare damage to brass;
First stainless steel semi-automatic pistol to overcome the metallurgical problem known as galling;
First semi-automatic to use a 3-Dot Sighting System
Loaded magazine indicator
Repositioned (forward) rear sight and sloped rear of slide in order to facilitate thumb cocking when the pistol is carried hammer down;
Heavier firing pin spring than conventional 1911-style pistols introduced as a safety feature against the pistol being dropped on a hard surface, thus helping guard against accidental discharge;
Feed ramp polished to mirror finish and chamber orifice rounded in order to enhance feeding;
Rugged internal extractor.
The there is this "bobbed" model
Features Historically Pioneered by Detonics:
Functional reliability in a 1911-style pistol which was smaller than any ever manufactured before;
Cone-shaped barrel which required no bushing;
Recoil system with counter-recoiling multiple springs;
Recoil spring guide rod with buffer;
Springs easily removable for disassembly because they are not loaded under tension;
Ejection port lowered and scalloped for more positive ejection and to spare damage to brass;
First stainless steel semi-automatic pistol to overcome the metallurgical problem known as galling;
First semi-automatic to use a 3-Dot Sighting System
Loaded magazine indicator
Repositioned (forward) rear sight and sloped rear of slide in order to facilitate thumb cocking when the pistol is carried hammer down;
Heavier firing pin spring than conventional 1911-style pistols introduced as a safety feature against the pistol being dropped on a hard surface, thus helping guard against accidental discharge;
Feed ramp polished to mirror finish and chamber orifice rounded in order to enhance feeding;
Rugged internal extractor.
orionengnr
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Messages
- 5,712
to each his own...
I'll stick with my 3" Kimber.
"Functional Reliability" is just fine, thank you. And I have shot it at 50 yards with surprising (for my old eyes) results.
I'll stick with my 3" Kimber.
"Functional Reliability" is just fine, thank you. And I have shot it at 50 yards with surprising (for my old eyes) results.
Several good features I've noticed from their website.
Finally, someone pinned the useless grip safety, , the 3 1/2 barrel, that's short enough, and the captured recoil spring system that is easily removed and lasts, unlike the others I've seen. All good features IMHO.
I wouldn't mind another model with a standard 3 1/2" slide, pinned grip safety, "Officer sized" frame.
Finally, someone pinned the useless grip safety,
, the 3 1/2 barrel, that's short enough, and the captured recoil spring system that is easily removed and lasts, unlike the others I've seen. All good features IMHO.I wouldn't mind another model with a standard 3 1/2" slide, pinned grip safety, "Officer sized" frame.
gyp_c2
Member
yup
I think the first batch was actually cut down from Colt frames and slides. Great little gun for the times. There was nothin' else around when they first started. Heck of a lot better than the pop gun alternatives...I know that every place I showed mine someone made an offer for it...I really liked the fact that it had no grip safety
I haven't handled the new companys' wares yet. There are lots of alternatives now though.
I think the first batch was actually cut down from Colt frames and slides. Great little gun for the times. There was nothin' else around when they first started. Heck of a lot better than the pop gun alternatives...I know that every place I showed mine someone made an offer for it...I really liked the fact that it had no grip safety
I haven't handled the new companys' wares yet. There are lots of alternatives now though.
Steve2237
Member
Detonics
I really dig the Full size model, I think it's called the Scoremaster Tactical.
I really dig the Full size model, I think it's called the Scoremaster Tactical.
I read up, out of curiousity... no mention of Applegate here...
http://www.biggerhammer.net/detonics/
The first patents for Detonics Inc. reflect a filing date of June 3, 1976 and were submitted by Patrick Yates, Sidney Woodcock, and Jeffrey Bealls.
So I stand corrected! I thought it was all about not stepping on Colt's patent, as this was well before the attack of the CLONES.
Last edited:
You are correct and I stand corrected. I know Sid designed them but from what I have read over the years Rex's freindship with Sid played a roll in the design
They were friends from what I understand and have read, from Detonics webpage the current owner of the company refferring to how he met Rex through Sid
"I got to know Rex through my old pal Sid Woodcock, Sid, of course, the designer of the original Detonics CombatMaster and Detonics USA's vice-President for Research and Development."
The fact is the reason it was first cut down was function
Going to a near-vertical spur eliminates the bite altogether and makes the hammer much easier to control and cock as well as lightening it a bit.
They were friends from what I understand and have read, from Detonics webpage the current owner of the company refferring to how he met Rex through Sid
"I got to know Rex through my old pal Sid Woodcock, Sid, of course, the designer of the original Detonics CombatMaster and Detonics USA's vice-President for Research and Development."
The fact is the reason it was first cut down was function
Going to a near-vertical spur eliminates the bite altogether and makes the hammer much easier to control and cock as well as lightening it a bit.
I'm not looking for info on the old pistols, just the new. From people that actually own them. The new Detonics are made by an entirely new manufacturer, and owner. They share the same name and some of the same design concepts.
What do you guys think of the new "Detonics" line, specifically the model "9-11-01" model?
What do you guys think of the new "Detonics" line, specifically the model "9-11-01" model?
I will always remember Ahern from a gunrag looking 'baleful' whatever that means, while he modeled the "Chicago Combo" a .45 and a .38.
The article was about carrying 2 handguns, and he was a fan of Detonics back then, showing how to pack a standard and short frame/barrel versions. Both could use the longer mags of the standard. Turns out he liked 'em enough to buy the company!
The article was about carrying 2 handguns, and he was a fan of Detonics back then, showing how to pack a standard and short frame/barrel versions. Both could use the longer mags of the standard. Turns out he liked 'em enough to buy the company!
Cthulhu
Member
Love or hate that scooped rear slide, sight radius isn't much of an issue with the Combat Master. My copy, an early blued version, is exceedingly accurate out to 25+yds. The sights are large and very clear, resembling the retro rear sight that Yost offers. Due to the chopped grip, slide cut, and minimal grip tang, the Detonics is actually slightly shorter in OAL and height than a Micro Compact/Ultra Carry, while having a 0.5" longer barrel. It is also easier to field strip as there are no tools/paperclips needed to remove the guide rod.
Many 3" 1911s are simply not reliable. Some run flawlessly while others barely make it through their magazine load. I have had precisely 0 malfunctions with the Detonics, even with hollowpoint loads that were not available in the era it was built (late 70s). +P rounds did cause accelerated wear, but it was confined exclusively to my hands. I attribute its function mostly to longer bbl/slide travel and good overall design. Dumb luck too, as I've heard of Combat Masters with issues, especially those produced during Detonics series of financial hard times.
The Streetmaster is so purpose built for CCW, how could one think it ugly? Short grip for easy concealment, fullsize bbl for ballistics and reliability.
Many 3" 1911s are simply not reliable. Some run flawlessly while others barely make it through their magazine load. I have had precisely 0 malfunctions with the Detonics, even with hollowpoint loads that were not available in the era it was built (late 70s). +P rounds did cause accelerated wear, but it was confined exclusively to my hands. I attribute its function mostly to longer bbl/slide travel and good overall design. Dumb luck too, as I've heard of Combat Masters with issues, especially those produced during Detonics series of financial hard times.
The Streetmaster is so purpose built for CCW, how could one think it ugly? Short grip for easy concealment, fullsize bbl for ballistics and reliability.
Cthulhu
Member
Can't sleep, so I thought I'd expound a bit.
Many features of the Detonics were ahead of their time, and greatly contributed to the modern compact 1911s. Two features that are usually not recognized and would likely be of value to 1911s of all sizes are:
Modified extractor.
The extractor tunnel is relieved near the breechface, allowing the extractor to flex along its length to a larger degree than conventional extractors. This allows the claw to get a better grip on the rim, and the extractor to last longer before losing tension.
Recoil spring guide
Detonics Combat Masters (not sure about their larger guns) have a captive tri spring guide rod that is designed to butt against the slide stop rather than the frame of the pistol. This design allows the springs to have a longer travel than a conventional design. They are fully captive, user servicible, and also under noticebly less tension when the slide is fully forward than other designs.
Downsides of Detonics have historically been their high price, heavy weight, and hit or miss quality control as various Detonics companies began to fail economically.
Today their prices aren't out of line for US made pistols containing no "cheap" parts made of MIM or other reduced cost materials.
I for one would like to see an Aluminum (Scandium, eh S&W?) framed Combat Master. Should stop any weight criticisms right there.
Maybe a Streetmaster with Alloy Frame, and a Commander slide?
Many features of the Detonics were ahead of their time, and greatly contributed to the modern compact 1911s. Two features that are usually not recognized and would likely be of value to 1911s of all sizes are:
Modified extractor.
The extractor tunnel is relieved near the breechface, allowing the extractor to flex along its length to a larger degree than conventional extractors. This allows the claw to get a better grip on the rim, and the extractor to last longer before losing tension.
Recoil spring guide
Detonics Combat Masters (not sure about their larger guns) have a captive tri spring guide rod that is designed to butt against the slide stop rather than the frame of the pistol. This design allows the springs to have a longer travel than a conventional design. They are fully captive, user servicible, and also under noticebly less tension when the slide is fully forward than other designs.
Downsides of Detonics have historically been their high price, heavy weight, and hit or miss quality control as various Detonics companies began to fail economically.
Today their prices aren't out of line for US made pistols containing no "cheap" parts made of MIM or other reduced cost materials.
I for one would like to see an Aluminum (Scandium, eh S&W?) framed Combat Master. Should stop any weight criticisms right there.
Maybe a Streetmaster with Alloy Frame, and a Commander slide?
Gripus
Member
They must be selling well...
We have already had three orders for custom grips for them this month.
Joe
http://www.gripus.com
We have already had three orders for custom grips for them this month.
Joe
http://www.gripus.com
- Status
