stans
Member
Everyone says the S&W 645/4506 is built like a tank and will outlast the 1911. Anyone have any proof?
Durability: 1911 vs. 4506
- Thread starter stans
- Start date
- Status
ny32182
Member
I have a 1006 which is the same gun in 10mm. "Built like a tank" is an understatement.
stans
Member
Yep, built like a tank, that's what everyone says and for me the grip feels like I am holding a tank.
Ok, anyone ever compare the surface of the slide that impacts the frame during recoil? You know, on the 1911 it is called the recoil spring plug tunnel. The 1911 has a much larger area, both width and thickness, than the 4506, ie: the 1911 has more surface area taking the impact forces. Maybe the 1006 is different? But the 645/4506 this area is pretty thin.
Where do most slides crack? At the junction of the recoil spring tunnel and slide rails. Just something that makes me go "hmmm..."
Ok, anyone ever compare the surface of the slide that impacts the frame during recoil? You know, on the 1911 it is called the recoil spring plug tunnel. The 1911 has a much larger area, both width and thickness, than the 4506, ie: the 1911 has more surface area taking the impact forces. Maybe the 1006 is different? But the 645/4506 this area is pretty thin.
Where do most slides crack? At the junction of the recoil spring tunnel and slide rails. Just something that makes me go "hmmm..."
1911 vs. 4506.
Not only are S&W's 10XX-series and 45XX-series pistols built like tanks, there's also their great out-of-the-box reliability to consider.
The 4506 is durable, but my experience with them has been that they've all run problem-free without any "modifications" and without any "break-in" period.
Not so with various makes of 1911s I've shot over the same time period. Some 1911s run fine right out of the box. Some don't, at least not without being "tweaked."
Something to think about.
Not only are S&W's 10XX-series and 45XX-series pistols built like tanks, there's also their great out-of-the-box reliability to consider.
The 4506 is durable, but my experience with them has been that they've all run problem-free without any "modifications" and without any "break-in" period.
Not so with various makes of 1911s I've shot over the same time period. Some 1911s run fine right out of the box. Some don't, at least not without being "tweaked."
Something to think about.
Last edited:
stans
Member
Not speaking of reliability here, by the way, my 1911's all run reliably. I'm just talking about the built like a tank thing. What makes them "built like a tank"? Yeah, by the way, the 4506 slide is 1 ounce heavier than a 1911. I'm looking for some emperical evidence here, not gunwriter's myth.
Well not sure how empirical it is but Colt 10mm 1911's had a rep for going down pretty fast, S/W 10mm's (same frame as 4506) didn't.
Also know Triton ammo was using a 4506 as the test and evaluation gun for thier hot 450 SMC round. As 4506's are much less common than 1911's I suspect thier is a reason for that...
Not that I think 1911's are weak or anything, just seems trying to prove conventional wisdom wrong to add laurel number 3,458 to the 1911 might be kinda hard in this case
Also know Triton ammo was using a 4506 as the test and evaluation gun for thier hot 450 SMC round. As 4506's are much less common than 1911's I suspect thier is a reason for that...
Not that I think 1911's are weak or anything, just seems trying to prove conventional wisdom wrong to add laurel number 3,458 to the 1911 might be kinda hard in this case
grendelbane
Member
I agree, however, 1911's now come from a large number of manufacturers, with an even larger number of parts vendors. Overall, I think the success of the design, given these factors is amazing.
The Smith, coming from a single manufacturer, (and probably a simple handful of parts vendors), has an edge in this area.
It will be intersting to see what the situation is in another 20 years.
I am just barely old enough to remember when if you wanted a new .45 auto, you bought a Colt. Times certainly have changed. (Yes, I am well aware of how many Gov't contractors manufactured .45s over the years.)
ny32182
Member
If the grip doesn't work for you, then it doesn't work. Get the 1911. Sounds like you want to anyway.
S&W actually offered two different factory grips for it--a straight backstrap and a curved backstrap. Hogue also offers the monogrip for. If you look, you can probably find a grip that works for you (but it's still a BIG pistol). I think the 4566 balanced better.
stans
Member
Yep, frame cracks on the first edition series, Colt fixed it by milling away the unsupported portion of the frame rail where the magazine tab on the slide stop passe through the frame. The other weakness was the plastic recoil spring guide rod, I, like most, fixed that with a steel replacement.
Come on now, I am not talking about ergonomics or reliability, I am talking durability. The U.S. Army could wring 100,000 rounds out of their 1911's. I know, barrels, hammers, sears and disconnectors had to be replaced, I am talking about frames and slides, the big and really expensive parts. Today's 1911's, at least the quality ones, are made from steels that are superior to those used on the military's 1911's. So what makes the 645 and 4506 "built like a tank" other than the fact that they are larger. A lot of that size is just due to the S&W double action design.
Fed168
Member
Having both, I think the 4506 wins in my experience. My 4506 was used when I got it, and after 15K rounds it has had three small parts wear out. But none of those parts shut the gun down, they just wore out after heavy use.
Comparing that to two new 1911s I owned from a company in New York which did not run as advertised, even after coming back from the factory.
Comparing that to two new 1911s I owned from a company in New York which did not run as advertised, even after coming back from the factory.
Marshall
Member
glocksman
Member
Let's put it this way: I traded my 4506 for a Colt 1991A1 and after shooting the thing, I begged for my 4506 back until the other guy gave in.
I don't know if the 4506 will go 100,000 rounds or more, but I do know its never jammed on me after 12 years and thousands of rounds. The Colt jammed on the first magazine I shot through it.
My 4506 is back home for good.
I don't know if the 4506 will go 100,000 rounds or more, but I do know its never jammed on me after 12 years and thousands of rounds. The Colt jammed on the first magazine I shot through it.
My 4506 is back home for good.
DesertRat
Member
The 4506 is a nice gun, but the triggers suck, in my opinion, when compared to the 1911. The ergonomics of the big 4506 also leave alot to be desired as well. Other than those two complaints, it is a big, durable gun that would work great in a humid, salty environments for those living in costal areas.
The 4506 almost became my second .45ACP purchase, but I passed it over on my 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th .45ACP purchases in favor of the 1911. Perhaps I'll buy one yet, someday; however, Arizona doesn't have much in the way of salt water or humidity.
The 4506 almost became my second .45ACP purchase, but I passed it over on my 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th .45ACP purchases in favor of the 1911. Perhaps I'll buy one yet, someday; however, Arizona doesn't have much in the way of salt water or humidity.
Durability: 1911 vs. 4506
Quote,
"Everyone says the S&W 645/4506 is built like a tank and will outlast the 1911. Anyone have any proof?"
Don't know about that but use it for the next 75+ years in military/combat service and then report back to us.
Quote,
"Everyone says the S&W 645/4506 is built like a tank and will outlast the 1911. Anyone have any proof?"
Don't know about that but use it for the next 75+ years in military/combat service and then report back to us.
I have two 1911's one of which is the new SW1911. I also own a Smith and Wesson Model 4505 which is the blued version of the 4506-1. I have not owned the 4505 long enough to honestly comment on the durability from personal experience. I bought the gun used and had a strange click in the trigger during single action pull. I contacted Smith and they sent several trigger parts free of charge and my Dept. armorer installed them. The trigger pull is now slick as glass. I plan on installing the hogue rubber grips. So far the Smith seems built tough. If my other 3rd gen. Smith's are any indication I should have a reliable pistol for years and rounds to come. As for my 1911's, I feel they are strong durable pistols also.
My 4506 is as durable and reliable as they come. A former duty-gun that I brought back into service. Several thousand rounds through it and still running strong. I can shoot it all day with a hiccup. The 4506 made me into a large frame S&W fan in a hurry. I would put my $400 4506 up against any $400 1911.
mlk18
mlk18
The Reverend
Member
Durability: 4506 vs. 1911
Not to be presumptuous... but that is just funny
Whie the 1911 design did indeed serve for a long period of time, that does not prove anything in light of the question asked. I own a 4506-1, and it indeed is a very strong design. I would elevate the "built like a tank" comment to say that it is over engineered. With the pressure and energy of the .45acp being what they are in most factory offereings, the reality of an all SS construction (or all carbon steel in the 4505), coupled with a modern design would seem to give the 45xx design the edge.
Someone with more knowledge of the specific internals of both designs may want to comment here. We are all aware that the 1911 has some weak spots, as most firearm designs do. To me the question is whether the 4506 design, being a newer design than the 1911 takes advantage of the lessons learned over the 65 or so years that seperate the two.
Donning my flame-retardant suit...thanks
Be Well, God Bless
Not to be presumptuous... but that is just funny
Whie the 1911 design did indeed serve for a long period of time, that does not prove anything in light of the question asked. I own a 4506-1, and it indeed is a very strong design. I would elevate the "built like a tank" comment to say that it is over engineered. With the pressure and energy of the .45acp being what they are in most factory offereings, the reality of an all SS construction (or all carbon steel in the 4505), coupled with a modern design would seem to give the 45xx design the edge.
Someone with more knowledge of the specific internals of both designs may want to comment here. We are all aware that the 1911 has some weak spots, as most firearm designs do. To me the question is whether the 4506 design, being a newer design than the 1911 takes advantage of the lessons learned over the 65 or so years that seperate the two.
Donning my flame-retardant suit...thanks
Be Well, God Bless
ny32182
Member
When I get around to getting another handgun, it will probably be either a 4506 or P220ST... just can't decide which one.
I currently carry a 226/.40, which shares holsters with the 220. That would be a plus. If I intended to carry the 4506 or 1006, I imagine those share holsters as well, though I would have to buy some new ones. Don't have any holsters for the 1006, and it is currently a range queen.
I currently carry a 226/.40, which shares holsters with the 220. That would be a plus. If I intended to carry the 4506 or 1006, I imagine those share holsters as well, though I would have to buy some new ones. Don't have any holsters for the 1006, and it is currently a range queen.
- Status
