Hands on Reveiw of the 1911 Mechtech CCU

[mrcylinder]

I've been reading about and seeing these CCU’s popping up, I have no idea just how many of these CCU's are out there but they come in many varieties/calibers for Glock and 1911s. The first thing many will notice is the versatility and being able to adapt them and make it their own. The idea behind these is not new but the way they, Mechtech have done it, can most definitely be appreciated. You are not modifying your firearm receiver at all, just using the receiver and turning it into a carbine. Federally legal, as technically speaking, you are doing nothing more than changing the slide and or replacing a barrel. The barrel being long enough and other agendas are met not to be a SBR. Just field strip the gun, using a Glock block or a Para block if needed and slide the receiver onto the upper, lock it in place with the slide stop and you now have a carbine in the caliber you chose to order. It will appeal to many, much of this review will apply to all and as such, many of the checks, fixes or tweaks, whatever terminology you choose to use. If it doesn’t exactly apply to a problem you are having, use your imagination and put your thinking cap on and hopefully, along with this information, you might just come up with something, or take it to a gunsmith. You void your warranty when making changes, so changes and safety is your responsibility and yours alone, DO NOT attempt or do anything you are not willing to accept the responsibility for!
I ordered one to give it a try and a closer look. After receiving the one I ordered, I opened the box and all the accessories were there that I ordered with it. The outside finish appeared to be well done and coverage was good. The fore grip piece which is on the basic unit was not there, as I ordered the full quad rails, which they installed, so if you want it, you will have to tell them when you order it. I just called and it was sent out.
The first thing I noticed was in moving the bolt handle back and forth; there was a very gritty sounding dragging movement. No amount of oil did anything but mask the sound a bit. So a disassembly was in order to see why. I thought I’d find some residue, probably due to machining of parts but instead a texture on the inside of the tube assembly that resembled a sand blasted or other media blasted surface, see photo, The white specs are from the terry cloth rag I ran through it. The rough surface just pulled some off all the way up and down the upper unit.

Media blasting can embed small particles in the metal that has to be cleaned out. The upper assembly (Bolt channel sub assembly as they call it) was full of pits from using what appears to be a once rusted piece of metal to machine it out of, see photo,


even the firing pin block was made out of very badly pitted and once rusted out appearing metal. See photo, the small pin is what holds the extractor in the firing pin block part.


In my experience these pits could have also been caused by chemicals and or exposure to salt or any number of things but none the less, in my opinion, a bad choice for manufacturing anything out of from the get go. The outer tube assembly was slicked up with some steel wool inside, trying not to remove any material just take the rough scrapping residue off the surface and clean out any blasting residue, then a very thorough cleaning, not much can be done about the pitted metal except a fine polishing with some 1500/2000 wet sanding with a light oil. I did no more than clean up the rough surfaces, oil it, put it back together to try and fire it. Well the first thing was two bangs, a stove pipe, removed and it went bang three times and another stovepipe, changed magazines, changed ammo to +P and it went bang more but the stove pipes still occurred. I tried three different 1911s; series 70 single stack, commander size single stack and the Para high capacity, all had their share of stovepipe type malfunctions. I also noticed how the outside of the shells were being blackened very badly with blowback, see photo, (note: these are basic blowback operated devices so some more than normal blowback or darkening of the shell might be seen)

The first case is before any changes, the second is a factory Winchester after, the third is a Longshot +P reload after and the fourth is a factory Fiocchi after fixes for comparison.
I noticed too, how many of the shells were being smashed like they were being pinched in-between something, beside the damage from the stovepipes. So I put a video on the action and saw how the shell was being dropped by the extractor on the way back and the movement of the bolt channel sub assembly was trying to throw the shell out, knock it out, sometimes being caught in-between the next round in the magazine and the top of the chamber, sometimes making it out. We shot about 80 rounds before frustration took over and we called it quits. I went to work on a complete disassembly, measuring things and an up close inspection, using the 1911standards for doing the measuring, as that is what it was made to fire. The first thing, was why the dark blacking of the case, excessive blowback even in a Blowback design?

In most firearms, I've found this to be a clearance problem, or in other words a headspacing problem and the mouth of the shell is not in the chamber headspace deep enough for the shell to expand and seal the gases off, thereby too much is coming back towards the rear, instead of pushing the bullet out the barrel. This could also be caused by a chamber being cut to large. In this case, the shell was not forward enough to be in the sealing or mouth portion of the chamber, it was .022 thousandths too far away even after allowing the maximum standards and clearance for a dirty chamber for a 1911. The spacer and or front buffer pad they call it, see photo,

was so thick, that the barrel was sitting too far away from the breech face/recoil face of the firing pin block, leaving a large gap. This is only a polyvinyl piece and you can use your imagination to come up with a thinner one, I cut one with the proper material needed to bring this one in. You will have to do some measuring to determine how thick to make yours and pay close attention to the barrel to firing pin block spacing, breech recoil face spacing and headspacing in the barrel. See
photos,

Before with large gap

After
I allowed .004 between the barrel and firing pin block and it seems to be working well. Again, check to make sure you have adequate headspacing before removing any of this space. For those that don’t know what I’m talking about, in other words, when in full battery and ready to fire, the shell must have some room to move back and forth in the chamber some, this allows for differences in shell lengths and for a dirty chamber. If you use a go, no go gauge to check it no problem. You DO NOT want these surfaces to come into full force contact as you have a 2lb piece of metal slamming the two together, along with the tension from the recoil spring and that will translate into damage for sure, so allow a small bit of space. Just don't use any thing for this pad that will deteriorate like paper or even rubber, as oil can swell rubber and then the pounding will cause a quick deterioration of the pad. Use a similar material as to what is in there. Another problem that was encountered here, was the breech recoil surfaces of the firing pin block were not even, it wasn't square. One side was .011 longer, so after moving the barrel back toward it, one side of the breech recoil face would hit the barrel and the top lug of the barrel and the extractor side were still back away from it, so some squaring up was in order. This is easily checked by removing the front buffer pad and sliding the barrel into the Bolt channel sub assembly and seeing how it sits. Upon measuring the width of the breech face itself, it measured .021 to wide. This is one of the worst deviations from ordnance specifications I have ever personally measured for anything designed to fire a 45acp cartridge however not much can be done except welding it up, re-cutting and or making one from scratch, so it is what it is. Also the recoil pin block as they call it had a strange taper to it, the breech face measured .501 but as you measure out towards where the barrel would be, and where the case rides towards extraction, it tapers for no apparent reason other than poor machining and parts matching to .506. Again not much can be done other than remaking the piece. You can see it in the photos above if you look closely. Once the thing was squared up and things were sitting in position better it was on to the extractor.

First measuring the tension in order to have a starting point. Using a .475 tension gauge and a digital trigger scale I measured 17.6oz, too low for any 1911 I've ever had. Trying to re-tension the spring, even reshaping the spring on the extractor was futile and only measured 20.4 oz and that was all I could get it to retain. I tried to reposition the extractor spring forward to gain some tension on the shell and only got it up to 22.1oz. Note: that a single stack might work with that tension and 7 or 8 round magazines but I was working with a Para double stack and it has a lot more magazine spring tension. I measured the square cut out in the firing pin block. grabbed an old 1911 extractor to measure, it was close enough to remove a little material and I went on to shaping it, see photo.

What I ended up with was a extractor I could tension and it would hold all I gave it, I set it at 32.4 oz. No need to dwell further on that point, yes, it worked and hasn't failed me yet with almost 400 rounds, so that’s a go in my book. What you do have to make sure of in making one is, that the cuts for the shell to come up from underneath are present and that they are polished up slick and that the extractor can jump over the bottom lip of the shell if it misses it coming up out of the magazine, without damage to the extractor, otherwise you could break it and have to start all over. Just like fine tuning a regular 1911 extractor for reliability. Note too how far their extractor sticks out toward the barrel and the space, see photos. Before and after extractor replacement.

Before

After
All the space meant the shell could walk .026 thousandths back and forth on the extractor and this doesn’t include the gap between the barrel and firing pin block above. When the firing pin strikes, it has to push it forward into the chamber headspace, if it doesn't go off right away, (before the recoil/barrel pad fix above) stop when it hits the case mouth, or the extractor hook, when it goes bang, it throws it back against the breech face, not good. I believe in the past this was called firing on the extractor in a 1911!?! The extractor also stuck out so far that once it started the fired case backward it was over half way off the opposite side of the breech face edge so it didn't take much for it to just fall off the extractor before ever hitting the ejector, many times being knocked off or dragged off by the next round.
Note: The fired case in this design is acting like a piston to push the large metal piece backwards, (the bolt channel sub assembly) once it’s clear of the barrel however the extractor has to do its job of holding the case until ejection.
I went on to measuring the barrel, the head space, the chamber and what I found was fairly good for a lot of today’s go bang low end firearms. I only found a .002 thousandths to large taper difference in the chamber and a few minor low spots but livable. Headspaceing was a just shy of the “go” gauge by about .002, which is another reason I allowed the space mentioned above. All the other measurements were within limits of a 1911 measurements. The rifling and all was pretty well done and where evenly cut, the barrel had a good throat cut into it within the 1911 specs in this one, so I won't waste time there. The barrel has more case support than a standard 1911 pistol barrel which is a good thing.
The barrel ramps were shaped similar to some of the older 1911s I’ve had, most newer ones are cut a bit different within the ramp area.

The strange notch out on the right is to clear the extractor that sticks out so far it would hit otherwise. At least before I modified the extractor. The ramps were both polished up like one would do for any pistol. The barrel is supported well when mounted in the outer tube like piece, with a large aluminum part pinned to it and eight small bolts. The barrel did exhibit some forward/backward movement when bolted into the upper tube assembly. The bolt heads are suppose to hold it in place as they screw down against the barrel support and the round head of the bolt sits down into the holes to secure it. The clearances are such that there is movement present between the bolt heads and the tube outer assembly in this arrangement. If you use the full quad rails the support ring up front will stop this play and secure it tightly in position. The firing pin alignment to the primer in the shell was pretty well aligned, see photo, and was striking with enough force for positive ignition. I’ve seen worse.

On to the large metal piece they call the Bolt channel sub assembly. The whole part was full of pits, except for the machined portions. The machining was pretty rough with a lot of sharp edges that needed filing off, deep gouges and machining marks that needed polishing up using various grits of sand paper. Most of the machining marks couldn't ever be removed, as the lines are too deep and you would ruin the piece if you tried to remove them all, so don't. Some areas you might can address is the bottom of the firing pin block, just be careful, just like in a pistol you don't want to try and remove any deep lines but a little polishing can go a long way. Another is the ejection port, this one had some very sharp edges, almost knife sharp and jagged, I took them out with a fine diamond grit file and polished the whole area up so there was nothing for shells to grab onto and hiccup the extraction and ejection process. Another is where the barrel rubs in the top of this part and the whole exterior with some wet sanding/polishing up 2000 grit paper as mentioned earlier.
See Part II

 

[mrcylinder]

PartII Hands on reveiw of 1911Mechtech CCU

This piece weighs 1lb 11.6 oz without the firing pin block, about 2llbs with it. Once fired, this weight, along with the recoil spring tension and the initial drag of the just fired expanded case, is what keeps the fired case from pulling out of the barrel too fast, as the case is moving back while the bullet is moving down the barrel. There is no breech lock to hold it in position as it is a basic blowback design. Note: Reduced powder loads are not going to function this CCU very well and you will encounter problems if you try them. It’s not the upper unit per say but the design and it needs full power loads to cycle properly being a blow back unit.
Let me address a problem I remedied on another one, since it is in this parts area that fixed his. He was complaining that he had a twanging in his, a vibration, so for me, since a twanging or vibration doesn't mean much in terms of trouble shooting other than a big annoyance for sure, I put a few shells in it, walked out back and shot it. Yes, that was a twanging/vibration on every shot. It was literally like shooting a giant tuning fork and very annoying. What it is, is the recoil spring hitting and vibrating in the groove where it lays. The quick fix is to cut you a small piece of dense foam, about the same diameter as the inside of the spring and put it up inside the spring to absorb it. See photo.

Done deal for his and I did mine just so I wouldn't run into it in the future. Another way to fix it, might be to oil the inside of the spring up, take some of the expandable foam in a can and put a small amount up in the spring, let it dry, clean off all the excess and use it, although I haven’t used this method, I have used it in similar circumstances.
On to the recoil spring. Well if your familiar with them, it resembles a screen door spring, measuring on this 1911 upper, .042 wire size, 5.2 inches inside eye, 5.7 outside eye.

The tension in my measurements was around 10lb 5oz when mounted in its perches/pins and at the stretched recoil length around 17lbs. of spring tension and seems to be right for the set up. These are probably caliber specific, being that they are blowback design and each caliber is going to have its own set of parameters to work with, so you’re not likely to go to the hardware store and find a replacement that will work but anything is possible. You have to be very careful when taking these apart that the spring does not come off its pins, snap off, or you can cause the spring to lose it’s shape and strength and need replacing.
Now the ejector, you are going to have a go, no go situation here. If you have the previous problem of the extractor, address it first. Here I was working with the Para Ordnance high capacity pistol. The high caps have very long ejector, longer than most 1911s I’ve had or seen. On this one, after the extractor problem was fixed it was throwing shells all over the place, some getting dented/smashed but they were ejecting. Why is this important? Well that smashing and denting means interference somewhere which can cause problems, also if you reload, that brass is money so fix it, right? In the Para double stack I had to shape an ejector just for CCU use. see photo, You can also see how the thumb safety was shaped to work, I‘ll cover that later.


So now you end up with a nice pile of shells about 3 o’clock ready to clean and reload no smashing/denting. You could almost set a 5 gallon bucket down and collect them; it was great to have that outcome, if you know what I mean. The new shape did work on the pistol (no hiccups) but was hitting just above the upper cut out on the slide putting sharp dents in the side of the shells, (you can see this in one of the photos above) eventually this would also mark up the exterior, so I went back to the original one for pistol use. The smashing was the shell hitting on the upper portion of the ejection port in the CCU, the ejector being too long, put it trying to eject above the next round coming up the magazine, this normally wouldn’t be a problem in an open top type of ejection port like the 1911 or maybe in a single stack with weaker magazine springs but this is closed so it was, plus the pressure of the next round pressing on the mouth of the shell on the way out it was actually slightly smashing/denting them, showing that the modified 1911 extractor was sure not letting go until it hit the ejector. So for me, if I want my pistol back, I just punch the ejector pin out far enough to remove and replace it and back and forth no problem Just not something I would do daily as you can wear things out in doing so. Since this pistol was my purpose for the CCU upper and I have other 1911's I don't worry with it and leave well enough alone. Note: that the other receivers/lowers I tried ejected fine, their ejectors were much shorter than the Para's and shaped differently. The magazines are also different than the Para double stack. Note also, that many manufactures and people will apply a small amount of a locking compound to hold these down better. I have found in most cases, if the pin groove is positioned right, you really don’t need any as it pulls it down hard enough against the receiver, which is one reason I like to cut my own pin groove, it is however added peace of mind. You just don’t want any movement in this piece.
On to the Glock block and or the Para block they call it. One or the other will be needed if your 45 has a ramped barrel. The one I received with mine would not fit into the receiver without having to file the sharp edges down on the sides of the block. Once I did, it fit like it was suppose to. The problem here is that it's too soft of metal. So soft that the copper jacketed lead bullets are beating the shame out of it, denting the face and rounding/denting the top edge, see photo,

That’s after only those 80 first shots, the black line is the blow by from the fired cases. After reshaping it, giving it a bit more angle for the bullet nose, rounding the sharp upper edge where the bullets were favoring to strike, polishing it, I hardened it, see photo, its good to go so far. It looks black because of Harding, not bluing.

In the future I might get down to making one out of stainless, my two cents is, that's really what it should be made out of in the first place. This piece is taking the place of the barrels ramp and should be high quality metal. It also takes a beating and say you bought a ramped barrel 1911, opened it up for cleaning the first time and saw that the ramp was getting the stuffing beat out of it. You wouldn't be very happy, plus you would know that barrel was not going to last very long and the quality was, well, questionable.
Now on to the thumb safety. Most 1911s these days come with an extended type thumb safety. It will not work with the upper installed, it can’t cam over as it hits the round upper. You either have to replace the extended one with a short one or grind/file off a small amount on the upper inside portion in order for it to cam over and lock in the safety on position. See photo above. I cut this one to sit around the circumference of the tube. This causes no problem on the changing back to pistol form other than aesthetics and a little cold bluing covers it up well. If yours has an ambidextrous thumb safety it will have to be cut on both sides or replaced with a another type.
On to the exterior. Like I said above it looks pretty good. The exterior seems to be a Bakelite/powder coat, or similar surface however I was able to duplicate it pretty close using a spray bed liner, which many of us know is pretty tough stuff, see photo, I just grabbed a rusted piece of pipe out of my scrap pile, buffed it off and sprayed it.

If it is indeed a Bakelite/powder coat product type of finish, it's a pretty resilient finish but know that you can touch it up with the spray can bed liner and it will work well too. It measures .056 thick, some of which is the coating and the rough inner surface but that’s close. This part appears to be stamped out of sheet metal, then machine rolled into its final shape. It was just spot welded in the seams and mounting tab, when a full weld of the pieces would have been a better choice. They do appear to have adequate penetration in the welds and seeing that most pistol calibers are not going to recoil with enough force to cause damage to them probably adequate. Since the metal appearance I saw above on the other parts I buffed off a portion to see what lay underneath the coating, see photos, I found the same pitted appearing metal surface.


In this portion is also a recoil pad glued in near the rear made up of rubber and it does the job pretty well, I personally cut some off and replaced it with a more spongy piece at first contact point, see photo, afterward it was like shooting a 22 long rifle, making for quicker shot acquisition for follow-up shots.

Recoil was never bad at all though with out of the box factory ammunition.
The customizing ability here is great, you can do a lot. Rails, accessories, you name it, I found that the AR type sling adapters will work on the rear portion of the stock, both types and then you can use a bungee type sling to carry it around, see photo, leaving the rails for more important goodies like lights, lasers, sights, scope, bi pod just use your imagination. There are plenty of accessories that will fit. This is the area where you make it your own and who cares what Joe blow thinks, it's yours! You can find Holographic open dot sights which will co-witness well with the open sights.

Closing that gap up on the barrel to breech face recoil surface, on this 45acp was 41fps on the chronograph, so it’s worth addressing. It was an outcome I hadn’t figured into the equation but after going over the chronograph numbers I saw it and made perfect sense, especially in a blow back design. It was a 9mm version that had the tuning fork vibration going on but could be any of them. That's it; this is a definite fun factor piece. It can be tweaked like any firearm can. This one now works with any receiver I have put on it. Full size 1911, commander size, Para Hi-cap, I’ve tried five different ones, different makes, different ammunition, different magazines and they go bang as fast as the trigger finger will move. Considering the cost of these, that’s how all of them should function right out of the box. How much are you willing to pay for some fun or something different? That's your call. The fixes/tweaks I have applied to this one have made it a trust worthy tool. Granted, hopefully, not all will need them. Not everyone can perform the fixes/tweaks meaning they will have to seek out professional help to do so, which will run the cost up, maybe beyond the ownership cost for a lot of people. Yours may only have some of these issues or no issues at all, if it isn’t broke don't fix it, some say. Getting down to measurements will tell, as well as a good look see.
If you have a spare 1911 or Glock around, it might be a welcome option for a change. The unit does not field strip which is a drawback for a carbine in my opinion. If you use the Telestock like pictured, you can put additional grooves in it to accommodate a better hold position, just make sure you cut them square and not so deep as to weaken the rods. It does have a one year warranty but you’re paying the shipping. Many pistol caliber carbine makers offer lifetime warranty with theirs and the initial cost is cheaper from different makers, some even offer accessories already installed which is included in the cost and are still cheaper by comparison. With Mechtech they all cost extra. You have to weigh all the good and bad for yourself, its your money. I’m not posting cost as it can change rapidly with all manufactures.
I hope you found something useful in the article from my first hand experience with them.
Support those who believe in our constitution, or one day you might find you don’t have one! May your days be many and troubles be few, happy shooting!

 

[Robert]

And for those like me that had no earthly idea what he was on about:
http://www.mechtechsys.com/1911.php
It appears to be a kit to take a 1911 lower and mate and AR style upper to it.

 

[backbencher]

The MechTech always looked interesting until someone pointed out they're made of rusted metal, & badly machined. It's one of the few ways now to get a >7" pistol bbl by ordering the unit w/out a stock, & chopping the bbl to desired length.

 

[ambidextrous1]

Thanks for your detailed mod descriptions, Mrcylinder!

I purchased my CCU back in the '90s, when they first came out (I am an early adopter). My unit doesn't have the pitted surfaces on the machined parts that you describe, and the acction is very smooth, not "gritty". I haven't done anything to smooth the action, as it wasn't needed.

I will be implementing your extractor modification and a few others, as my CCU has always destroyed quite a few fired cases when ejecting them.

Regarding the "twanging" noise that occurs when the CCU is fired: That's an essential part of the persona of the CCU, and i'll be retaining that feature!

You didn't comment on the accuracy of the CCU; mine has always been very accurate!

I must say that my vintage CCU looks naked, when compared with the current models!

 

[mrcylinder]

Yes, I had to cut some out of the review for space considerations! The 16" barrel proved to be accurate, bench rest showed you could cover the holes with a quarter at 25 yards with most factory RN ammunition. The accuracy was better with +P reloads, we had no problem with putting fear on soda cans faces at 100 + yards. One person who had never fired any pistol caliber carbines made 123 yards shots while standing up and put them all in a 11" circle (paper plate), with the holographic scope which is sighted at 100 yards that is! So yes, they can be inherently accurate and I would expect it from the 16" barrel. As accurate as we are I guess you could say!

 

[flightsimmer]

That's all very interesting.
I bought mine many years ago in 10mm caliber and it has performed perfectly with factory ammo and my handloads.
My cases have never been damaged or blackened in any way and with jacketed bullets it shoots ragged one whole groups at 25 yards scoped.
Cast lead bullets are sometimes not so great though.
All in all I like it but I wish I had some of the new fangled attachments.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I have no idea if my two units (Large Frame Glock 10mm and .45) are diamonds in the rough or yours is a dog. All I know is that I am happy.

I did have a firing pin retaining clip break off and they sent me a replacement--no other problems. I will be testing with SBR barrels and suppressors when my damn stamps finally come (seriously it looks like it is going to be close to a year for the cans I ordered in Feb).

One thing that impressed me was that despite being simple blowback, the gun shoots cleaner than a recoil operated pistol. I think that is because the almost 3 lb mass of the bolt and bolt carrier (nearly half the weight of the gun) as well has the high per-tension spring gives more than enough delay in opening.

Unlike my 10mm which I lubed and used upon arrival, my .45 sat for a few weeks before I got to it and the internals were a bit rusty until I oiled them up. The pitting was flake-like and fairly minor, nothing like the round dimpling you saw on the internals and externals.

Mike

PS. My big pet peeve was the absurd length of the collapsible stock. Length of pull for the three extended positions were 14", 16" and 18". I am 6'3" and use a traditional bladed stance so 14" is perfect for me. I trimmed off the extra length of the rods. Shorter shooters and those who shoot more squared off to the target (to better present body armor or so I'm told) are going to want shorter positions than available without modification (or just opt for the M4 type stock instead).