Great article about the 1911, good and bad

[JTQ]

Can someone provide a link to a source of modifications necessary to make the 1911 reliable? I am new to 1911s and want to enjoy it (Series 80, GM) with SWC bullets, not hardball.

My initial assumption would be that your gun would be reliable without any modifications.

Notice the dimple on the barrel feed ramp Colt puts on their guns these days. They should feed most bullet profiles.

http://www.m1911.org/prodte26.htm

The most highly recommended 1911 magazines, from Chip McCormick, Wilson Combat, and Tripp Research all use wadcutter feed lips, which are all optimized for semi-wadcutter and hollow point bullets.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Can someone provide a link to a source of modifications necessary to make the 1911 reliable? I am new to 1911s and want to enjoy it (Series 80, GM) with SWC bullets, not hardball.

ANY factory 1991 had BETTER be "reliable". No firearms company will survive by manufacturing a firearm people will spend hundreds of dollars on and THEN have to pay MORE money just to get it to work reliably.

And that's been my (somewhat limited) experience. I've personally bought 4 1911's over the years, two for myself, two for a brother. Three of these were new Colt 1991A1's and the fourth, if I remember correctly, was a used Springfield. I later sold the Springfield at cost to a buddy, because I didn't need two and he had none.

Every one of these were, straight out of the box, absolutely reliable. The two that my brother and I own are still going strong to this day, unmodified, with only the slide springs replaced about every 5,000 rounds or so.


1911tuner can chime in on my opinion here, but it's my belief that the majority of reliability problems people have with 1911's are precisely BECAUSE someone has modified them.

 

[1911Tuner]

it's my belief that the majority of reliability problems people have with 1911's are precisely BECAUSE someone has modified them.

BAAAAM! There it is!

I'll follow with a funny little story.

Phone rings one fine Saturday and the guy tells me that his Colt won't feed.

The conversation went like this:

"I done me a killer ramp'n'throat job on'er...and she won't even feed ball!"

"Why did you do the work? Was it not feeding?"

"Oh, yeah. She fed fine. I just wanted to make'er feed better."

*blinkblink*



*sigh*

Turns out that the feed ramp was so thoroughly trashed that I couldn't adjust for it. He had to send it off for a frame insert.

 

[Delmar]

I think there has been more damage done to 1911 platforms on the bench than there ever was in battle. The original GI issue weapon is a marvel of a modular system. Like any machine, you are going to wear parts out at sometime or another. If you have spare parts of proper specification, you replace those worn parts with the PROPER replacement. The only non spare part of a 1911 is the frame, I think?

My issue 1911 was pretty loose and some parts had been replaced in the course of its life-a 1943 Ithaca, but it shot very well-probably still does if it survived the many arms room smittys it had to put up with. It had a Drake barrel installed sometime in the 1960s which I was told was a good thing.

I just received a brand new Colt model 01991 and I think its going to be a good one indeed. The slide play is very close to zero-the barrel bushing fits the slide with a slight drag fit and barrel to slide fitting is .002" by my calipers. The slide feels great, no hesitation in travel, and the only thing I could have done without is the firing pin safety, although the trigger feels nearly as good at my Gold Cup. Just a slight creep and nothing to be concerned about at all. It may well wear in with use and time. Its a Fathers Day present so I am not officially allowed to fire it until Sunday lol, but I did load up some old Speer flying ashtray rounds and cycled them from the magazine. No hitches or hesitations at all.
The proof will be on Sunday when I line it up against some uppity mealy mouths paper targets, but I suspect this one is going to be a winner.

There are those pistols out there which do it differently, but I don't think they do it any better. Its what fits YOU that counts.

 

[JR24]

Just put a few hundred more rounds through my Kimber Warrior. Mostly garbage 185 grain JHP and some less garbag 230 grain ball. And a few PDX to make sure it still runs em.

No issues, though cheap 185 grainers tend to shoot a few inches low for me. After a few months foray into Glocks I once again forgot how much I like the Warrior's stock trigger and how freaking accurate it can be if I take my time.

Good gun, just too band I can't find a CCW holster I like for it.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Can someone provide a link to a source of modifications necessary to make the 1911 reliable? I am new to 1911s and want to enjoy it (Series 80, GM) with SWC bullets, not hardball.

A stock M1911 from a reputable maker should be dead reliable out of the box. The only modifications I would endorse are better sights and a beavertail grip safety with a "speed bump."

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

That is the dumbest article I've read in a long time.

If you take a Glock, say, and screw with the barrel or the timing or the lugs the same way people do with 1911s, it would chuck, too! Heck, I've seen them not fire if you oiled the friggin' striker!



That one was something Pistolwrench fixed, I think. In the misguided quest for extreme lockup from the factory, lug bump is created and results in three-point-jams. He fixed it very nicely:



The fix was really nice.

Here's my Rock Island:



Daily carry.

I found this



after a failure I could not attribute to ammo.

Fairly common on production guns.

I reprofiled it with stones







and have tried to make it choke. It won't!

All timing is back in original 1911 (not a1!) spec.

Speaking of the a1, they messed that one up too, at the other extreme:



Yer stressing your link, son.

If you go to Google images and shop for 1911 barrels, you'll find a bunch with the link either so far forward or so far backward that it's impossible to tell whether the barrel is riding via the bottom lugs or the link. I suspect, but cannot prove of course, that it's because most of these ride the link back into battery.

Besides giving the barrel too steep a ride in to battery and therefore causing upchucks, this is a damned fine way to bust barrel links.

As long as you keep the timing the way it should be, it really doesn't matter what you do to the rest of the pistol. Just use good magazines.

By the way, I fit a "NM" barrel bushing to this pistol, along with bigger sights:



... and it does this with a bushing that is tighter than it probably should be:



Did I mention it never chokes?

I mean, c'mon guys, it started as a Rock Island. Excellent frame and slide (STI uses them!) but crap internals, mostly the cheapest cast and MIM that can be found.

Yet, they're really not too far off blueprint specs, these days anyway, and that's why I love 'em.

If you take a Kimber, Springfield, or any other production 1911 and bring it back into blueprint specs with a good magazine, it will run perfectly, too.

The 1911 has been "improved upon" way too much. Hell, ask Tuner how he learned to work on 'em. The military mucked them up.

I'll pit the 1911 against any modern pistol simply because they all work on the same principle, or danged near all of them. Sure, the Beretta 92 an a couple others drop a block to unlock, a few twist the barrels, and a couple are even gas-delayed blowback, but the swinging link and modified Browning are the two that have stayed with us and stayed the most popular.

You can't take the design out of specs and whine when it doesn't work right.

Josh

 

[Drail]

Every time I see a thread where at least 5 or 6 people tell the owner to "polish" the feed ramp I cringe.

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

Drail,

You know, I polished the feed ramp on mine.

Not because it needed it. They really don't most times. I just like shiny things and was able to do it without taking anything out of spec!

When I polish feed ramps, by the way, I use 2000 grit as a starting grit, then go to 3000, etc.

I also use my finger, not a Dremel. Rotary tools have their places, they really do, but they don't belong in unpracticed hands around pistol feed ramps.

In my opinion, the only time a feed ram really has to be messed with is in a Lightweight Commander or other brand of aluminum-framed 1911 that will see a steady diet of aggressive hollowpoints.

I really believe that a steel ramp insert is a must in that case. It involves machining the frame, though, and costs some money.

Regards,

Josh

 

[1911Tuner]

That one was something Pistolwrench worked on, I think. In the misguided quest for extreme lockup, lug bump is created

Whoa! Pistolwrench let one out of his shop doin' that? I find that a little hard to believe. Clarify please?

Hell, ask Tuner how he learned to work on 'em. The military mucked them up.

Actually, the USGI pistols that I encountered along the way gave the least trouble. It wasn't until the rise of the high-end customs started showin' up with mirror-polished feed and barrel ramps became the standard that things went haywire. Suddenly, every guy who had a Dremel was a master tuner.

The other part of the problem came with the appearance of this drawing showing the "proper" way to set up an extractor. If the tensioning wall is beveled to this extreme, most extractors will drop the case before it's even out of the chamber. If the channel and the extractor are to spec...especially the hook and the forward pad so that the amount of deflection is correct...about all that needs to be done is to just lightly break the corners on the lower part of the wall and the hook itself. And...If the channel and extractor are truly to spec...they'll usually drop in and fly. Few of them even need to be adjusted for tension.



These modifications are often done to counteract the problems that come with excessive deflection, shown in the picture below. The depth of engagement area shown to be filed actually encourage creating excessive deflection by failing to give enough information. That area should only be altered if the tensioning wall doesn't provide sufficient deflection.

This one is showing about twice as much of the tensioning wall in the breechface area as there should be. With the correct deflection...about .010-.012 inch...the pistol will tolerate a surprising level of tension. With as much as is shown here...if the thing would run at all...just a tiny bit too much would choke it.

All this depends on how far apart those two little guide blocks are. They'll usually vary between .482 and .486 inch. I like to see about .484 with deflection set at .010-.012 inch. Many tweakers will open the distance up to .490 inch, which means that they'll need to set the tensioning wall to protrude .015-.016 inch...which is my absolute maximum. I prefer less. YMMV

Finally...the diameter of the case rim itself is a factor. .473 is spec. I've noticed that a lot of the Russian .45 cases have a too-small rim for a to-spec extractor to get a proper grip on. A few that I've checked run as small as .468 with averages at .470 inch. Very few have been to spec.

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

Tuner,

NO, man! I was using that do demonstrate lug bump! This is after he fixed it:



I'm going back to clarify in the original post. My apologies to him!

Regards,

Josh

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

Tuner, will you talk a little about the link-ridin' ones you encountered?

Thank you,

Josh

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The M1911 is the classic example of, "If it ain't broke, fix it until it is."

 

[gun_with_a_view]

If my firearms history serves me right, the 1911 was designed for the Army to replicate the performance of the 45 Long Colt, which itself was intended to take down horses back when calvaries were the norm. That sounds like overkill for an anti-personnel handgun round, and indeed, John Browning was said to prefer another caliber, which I have never been able to ascertain. But he gave the Army what it demanded, something big and slow fired out of a gun as heavy as it's soldiers could carry and still shoot with accuracy.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

But John Browning was not a soldier nor a lawman. He never shot another man in his life.

On the other hand, American soldiers clearing trenches in WWI, or fighting the Japanese in WWII appreciated the M1911.

 

[1911Tuner]

f my firearms history serves me right, the 1911 was designed for the Army to replicate the performance of the 45 Long Colt.

It actually replicated the ballistics of the .45 Schofield, which fired a 230-grain lead RN bullet at an advertised 810 fps...in a Schofield chambered revolver. From a .45 Colt chamber, it was closer to 750 due to the longer jump to the barrel.

Tuner, will you talk a little about the link-ridin' ones you encountered?

Riding the link a little around the lug knee isn't an issue as long as it hands off support to the slidestop pin when it's in full battery. The problem comes when the barrel has been long-linked and causes the barrel to be supported by the link. The only ones that I've run into that do that have either been long-linked, or...less commonly...the lower lug is out of spec.

On the other hand, American soldiers clearing trenches in WWI, or fighting the Japanese in WWII appreciated the M1911.

And none of those pistols needed to be broken in or properly tuned by a competent gunsmith, either.

Who woulda thunkit?

 

[gun_with_a_view]

Interesting, 1911Tuner, about the Schofield background of the .45 ACP. Thanks for that.

Maybe you can put something else to rest: Did Browning intend for the 1911 to be carried on an empty chamber, or with one round cocked and locked?

 

[Joshua M. Smith]

I'm not Tuner, but here's the history I was taught:

The 1911 was intended to be carried chambered with the hammer down by the calvary.

The long spur hammer was to be cocked before combat by snagging it out the calvaryman's pants. This seems less-than-positive to me, but maybe with proper practice and the spur hammer it could be done. I just tried it with the elongated ring Wilson hammer on mine, and managed it easily enough.

The thumb safety was added so that the calvaryman could engage that safety while bringing his horse under control after a fight.

Josh

 

[TestPilot]

Let's not gild the lily, pistols in warfare aren't common. That's why whatever gun superceded the 1911 really doesn't make much difference. It's a showpiece of rank for officers and something easier to carry on street duty for an MP.

Wrong.

I carried pistol in war zones. I was an infantry man. I was neither a military officer nor an MP.

I hope people stop perpetuating that nonsense.

It does not matter what you are. If you have a pistol, it must work.

 

[postalnut25]

Just my two cents as a cop.

I went from the pro series M&P in 9mm to a 1911 in 45. The article was nothing but an opinion piece. The comments were even worse.

I buy my own duty guns & gear, and I have to maintain them myself as well. Therefore, I went with what I felt the best duty set-up was. And that is a full-size, heavy, durable pistol in a caliber I am comfortable with, that I feel confident in using should the need arise.

 

[1911Tuner]

Did Browning intend for the 1911 to be carried on an empty chamber, or with one round cocked and locked?

If Browning had any intent, it was likely to use the half cock as a carry safety since that's how he designed all his other exposed hammer guns. The '92 and '94 carbines and the Model 97 shotgun are examples.

US Army regulations specified hammer down/empty chamber unless a fight was looming...and that that point, the pistol could be readied by chambering a round and engaging the safety. Once the emergency had passed, the pistol was to be returned to hammer down on an empty chamber. The same rules applied to all weapons, from the pistol to the service rifle to the main gun on a tank. Hence the call: "Line of departure! Lock and load!"

The manual slide-locking safety was added in 1910 as the final modification on request of the US Cavalry to give the mounted trooper a faster, easier way to make the gun safe to reholster in a hurry...to free up both hands when he was trying to hang onto a frightened, unruly horse.

So, the pistol can be carried cocked and locked...but it wasn't meant specifically to be carried that way.

Browning designed it to be (relatively) safe in any one of four conditions, and left it to the US Army to determine the guidelines.

Beyond that, he probably didn't care one way or another.

"Here' ya go, Gen'rul. You can do this, this, this, or this.
Have a good'un. I'm goin' to Belgium."

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The 1911 was intended to be carried chambered with the hammer down by the calvary.

The M1911 was NOT intended to be carried chambered with the hammer down. The first instructions issued with the pistol in 1912 specifically forbade carry in Condition 2. The standard method of carry was Condition 3 (magazine loaded, chamber empty), but if a round was chambered and not immediately fired, the gun was to be carried in Condition 1 (cocked and locked.)

Browning originally offered the pistol with no safety, intending that it be made safe by lowering the hammer on a chambered round. The Army rejected that design. Browning added a grip safety in 1910. The Army rejected THAT design. Not until 1911, when the pistol had both safety lock and grip safety was is acceptable to the Army.

 

[1911Tuner]

Browning originally offered the pistol with no safety, intending that it be made safe by lowering the hammer on a chambered round. The Army rejected that design. Browning added a grip safety in 1910.

Browning's 1910 offering had the grip safety from the git-go. It had been there since the Model1907 when the barrel had two links and the slide dismounted from the rear.

The grip safety was a drop safety, necessary because of the heavy steel straight-line trigger.

The 1910 patents...before the manual safety...described the half cock as the safety position, and gave instruction for placing the hammer on half cock with one hand...made possible by the redesigned tang on the grip safety.

 

[1911Tuner]

Colt Model 1905. Twin links, non-tilting barrel with rear slide dismount. A few 1905s were fitted with tack-on grip safeties, and it was incorporated into the design in 1907.





Colt Model 1907. Aside from the grip safety, very little had changed from the 1905.



Colt Model 1909. Due to the angle, the grip safety is barely visible. The Model 1909 was a complete redesign. The single link, tilting barrel, and front slide dismount were in place. Here, we start to see what became the M1911.




The Colt Model 1910.

 

[peacebutready]

8 round magazines have a proven performance track record for reliability...

The extended tube 8 rounders do.