How reliable is the 1911 platform?
- Thread starter Gunsmoker
- Start date
- Status
Well, I have this bookmarked. I will stop back and see the fur flown.
For my part, I say yes, the 1911A1, as designed by JM Browning is extraordinary. However, when modern-day manufacturers seek to streamline production with cheap materials and make them overly tight or use improperly measured parts, the 1911, like any firearm will fail. But, it will not fail per the design, it will fail per the failure to adhere to the original design.
When manufactured to the original design, the 1911 will fire 6,000+ rounds, with cooling and oiling every 1,000 rounds. That was the military's demand to "pass".
Doc2005
For my part, I say yes, the 1911A1, as designed by JM Browning is extraordinary. However, when modern-day manufacturers seek to streamline production with cheap materials and make them overly tight or use improperly measured parts, the 1911, like any firearm will fail. But, it will not fail per the design, it will fail per the failure to adhere to the original design.
When manufactured to the original design, the 1911 will fire 6,000+ rounds, with cooling and oiling every 1,000 rounds. That was the military's demand to "pass".
Doc2005
sm
member
Doc2005,
I am going back down to the Concession stand and I might step out to smoke.
Save my seat, and can I bring you anything back from the Concession before the show starts?
Man I wonder if this Gun-fight is going to be like The Wild Bunch
or more like The Good , The Bad and The Ugly ?
I would have to agree with Doc2005. The original design speaks for itself, IMHO. Sure like Doc said, modern 1911's can and do have problems, but alot of modern guns have different types of problems. My father has an original WWI colt army model that I believe was manufactured in 1913, it has a 5 digit serial number. The gun is a little rough looking, but it still functions great at about 94 years of age. Im sure some modern day 1911's function great too, and then there are other modern day 1911's that might be jam-o-matics. Just like the AR-15 platform, so many different makers, some better than others.
ugaarguy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 13,828
Doc has described the quandry perfectly. Asking about 1911 type pistols in general without specifying a maker is a question which cannot be accurately answered.
Imagine every pistol maker from Taurus to SIG to S&W to Auto Ordnance started making Glock clones, each with their own formula of tweaks to the design & manufacturing process. You'd find that some made accurate Glocks, some made reliable Glocks, and some made unreliable or innacurate Glocks.
It's a question without an answer. Ask about a specific brand, model, and caliber of 1911 and you can get meaningful answers.
Of the 1911s I own or have owned, all in .45 ACP, here's how they've performed:
-Springfield GI, Utterly reliable with all varieties of ammo.
-SIG GSR, slide stop out of spec, fat slide, very ammo sensitive.
-Colt XSE Combat Commander, recoil spring tunnel external radius machined out of round caused rub mark between it and frame before it was corrected, but it was cosmetic only. This gun also experienced a firing pin block plunger breakage after a detail strip reassembly, but the part took just a few minutes to replace. Those two issues aside it has zero failures to date shooting a variety of JHP, wadcutter, plated, and FMJ ammo.
-Kimber Classic Custom (Pre Series II), has been totally reliable with all ammo fed to it.
-Kimber Pro Carry (Pre Series II), was totally reliable, but I did not care for the bushingless recoil spring setup (personal preference).
-Springfield Loaded, recently traded the above Pro Carry for this, and plan to test fire extensively this week.
Imagine every pistol maker from Taurus to SIG to S&W to Auto Ordnance started making Glock clones, each with their own formula of tweaks to the design & manufacturing process. You'd find that some made accurate Glocks, some made reliable Glocks, and some made unreliable or innacurate Glocks.
It's a question without an answer. Ask about a specific brand, model, and caliber of 1911 and you can get meaningful answers.
Of the 1911s I own or have owned, all in .45 ACP, here's how they've performed:
-Springfield GI, Utterly reliable with all varieties of ammo.
-SIG GSR, slide stop out of spec, fat slide, very ammo sensitive.
-Colt XSE Combat Commander, recoil spring tunnel external radius machined out of round caused rub mark between it and frame before it was corrected, but it was cosmetic only. This gun also experienced a firing pin block plunger breakage after a detail strip reassembly, but the part took just a few minutes to replace. Those two issues aside it has zero failures to date shooting a variety of JHP, wadcutter, plated, and FMJ ammo.
-Kimber Classic Custom (Pre Series II), has been totally reliable with all ammo fed to it.
-Kimber Pro Carry (Pre Series II), was totally reliable, but I did not care for the bushingless recoil spring setup (personal preference).
-Springfield Loaded, recently traded the above Pro Carry for this, and plan to test fire extensively this week.
Black Majik
Member
So far, it's the luck of the draw. ALL 1911 manufacturers have had problems. S&W, Colt, Springfield, Kimber, Para Ordnance, Charles Daly, RIA, or Dan Wesson. I've seen many that have been going strong, but then I've seen some that have failed too.
But wait... I've seen Glocks, SIGs, and HKs fail too. Oh no...
But wait... I've seen Glocks, SIGs, and HKs fail too. Oh no...
Old Dog
Member
There aren't really that many bad 1911s; it's simply that there are many 1911 owners who can't figure out on their own how to keep 'em running right ...
greener
Member
How reliable is the 1911 platform? I don't know. We ought to give it some time. You really can't evaluate a new idea in gun design except by giving it time. Perhaps we should wait until it has been in two or three wars to see how reliable the platform is.
I think the 1911 platform has demonstrated reliability. I'm not sure that certain manufacturer's 1911's have demonstrated reliability. That is the real question.
I think the 1911 platform has demonstrated reliability. I'm not sure that certain manufacturer's 1911's have demonstrated reliability. That is the real question.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
As it was designed and produced in the day when it was ultimately headed for war? Extremely. As it's being produced now? It's pretty much a crapshoot.
As has been said...
It depends. The design itself is dead nuts reliable. The problem is in the execution. It's not like almost any other gun, which is designed, built and marketed by one company. The gun is churned out by every company under the sun. Some of them use substandard materials. Some of them use substandard QC. Some of them are blasphemers and depart from the design the prophet John Moses Browning has set forth. None of them will run well as a properly executed 1911.
Mike
It depends. The design itself is dead nuts reliable. The problem is in the execution. It's not like almost any other gun, which is designed, built and marketed by one company. The gun is churned out by every company under the sun. Some of them use substandard materials. Some of them use substandard QC. Some of them are blasphemers and depart from the design the prophet John Moses Browning has set forth.
None of them will run well as a properly executed 1911.Mike
Golddog
Member
Instead of hearing from the 1911 fans, how about some input from range workers, firearms instructors, gun dealers, gunsmiths and others who see all sorts of weapons in their line of work?
I'm pro-1911, because of triggers and ergos, and the ones I've owned or borrowed have been completely reliable, but when I hear from people who see lots of quality handguns, 1911's seem to be among the most likely to malfunction. The old canards about many manufacturers or modern changes seem irrelevant - do the damned things, in their many incarnations, work or not?
I'm pro-1911, because of triggers and ergos, and the ones I've owned or borrowed have been completely reliable, but when I hear from people who see lots of quality handguns, 1911's seem to be among the most likely to malfunction. The old canards about many manufacturers or modern changes seem irrelevant - do the damned things, in their many incarnations, work or not?
vanfunk
Member
As has been said, the 1911 is an inherently reliable design. I have a USGI Remington Rand that has fired over 125,000 rounds without a malfunction.
1911 guy
Member
The design is great.
The problem is with the recent manufacturers and their habit of outsourcing parts. All the parts are made by different manufacturers, rarely the rollmark on the pistol. Tolerances are stacked and you'll sometimes wind up with a gun that won't function properly because the parts cause problems in one area or another. This is why you very seldom hear of a high end maker (Brown, Yost/Bonitz, Les Baer, etc.) having problems. They single source parts, sometimes their own parts. They are then fitted rather than assembled.
The other point that others have made is there are just so darn many 1911 style pistols out there. Imagine if everyone you know drove a Model X car. Some would have problems and all you'd hear about are the problems with Model X car. The same thing would be an issue if someone (or a hundred someones) began making copies of the Glock 19, a very reliable handgun. Some would make it better than others.
The problem is with the recent manufacturers and their habit of outsourcing parts. All the parts are made by different manufacturers, rarely the rollmark on the pistol. Tolerances are stacked and you'll sometimes wind up with a gun that won't function properly because the parts cause problems in one area or another. This is why you very seldom hear of a high end maker (Brown, Yost/Bonitz, Les Baer, etc.) having problems. They single source parts, sometimes their own parts. They are then fitted rather than assembled.
The other point that others have made is there are just so darn many 1911 style pistols out there. Imagine if everyone you know drove a Model X car. Some would have problems and all you'd hear about are the problems with Model X car. The same thing would be an issue if someone (or a hundred someones) began making copies of the Glock 19, a very reliable handgun. Some would make it better than others.
Old Dog:
If you were right we'd never gotten through World Wars One & Two. Those guns had to run under the worst of circumstances, and their users couldn't tinker with, and baby them. I don't think on the whole, that 1911 pistol users in this generation are any dumber or incompetent then those in mine. But it's a pure fact that in my day they didn't have near the problems that those who are buying the current crop are. Even today you don't see owners of the older guns complaining, it's the new stuff that's the subject of so many negative threads and posts on this and other forums.
1911Tuner:
Tuner is dead on, and if you check you'll see that he has the credentials to back what he says. "Crapshoot" is an apt description for todays guns.
If you were right we'd never gotten through World Wars One & Two. Those guns had to run under the worst of circumstances, and their users couldn't tinker with, and baby them. I don't think on the whole, that 1911 pistol users in this generation are any dumber or incompetent then those in mine. But it's a pure fact that in my day they didn't have near the problems that those who are buying the current crop are. Even today you don't see owners of the older guns complaining, it's the new stuff that's the subject of so many negative threads and posts on this and other forums.
1911Tuner:
Tuner is dead on, and if you check you'll see that he has the credentials to back what he says. "Crapshoot" is an apt description for todays guns.
the 1911 is the PC of the gun world, as mentioned. Apple will claim their Mac's are more reliable (not my experience, btw, but that's another topic) but then THEY are the only one making them, whereas everyone and their brother makes 1911's, some try to build their own, and sometimes problems come about because of that.
That having been said, I have yet to get a bad 1911 personally. I own or have owned numerous Springer's, two Smith's, and a Colt. All have been totally reliable so far, and most have been much more accurate than the average autoloader (or I at least shoot them more accurately), with the two least accurate ones I have owned being comparable to the other auto's I have owned. I actually owned quite a number of other auto's before getting my first 1911, and I do still own others, but to me the 1911 is the king of the hill.
That having been said, I have yet to get a bad 1911 personally. I own or have owned numerous Springer's, two Smith's, and a Colt. All have been totally reliable so far, and most have been much more accurate than the average autoloader (or I at least shoot them more accurately), with the two least accurate ones I have owned being comparable to the other auto's I have owned. I actually owned quite a number of other auto's before getting my first 1911, and I do still own others, but to me the 1911 is the king of the hill.
jaysouth
Member
Mine all ran flawlessly until I started cruising the internet and reading gun mags. Ditto for 'limp wristing' and +P+ ammo blowing all my guns up n' skeering the wimmin n' childrun.
Oh for the good old days of mangled web of hand, lead bullets cast from wheelweights and Bullseye dipped with a cut down .38 case.
Oh for the good old days of mangled web of hand, lead bullets cast from wheelweights and Bullseye dipped with a cut down .38 case.
ccmdfd
Member
If I remember corectly, when the US Military held the M9 trials, they also tested some of their stock, old 1911's.
The 1911's were not quite as reliable as the 226 or 92 in the mean rounds until failure testing, but that only came out in "missions" lasting more than 20 rounds or so (or maybe it was 30). For a 7-15 round mission, they were neck and neck. The 1911 passed, and outperformed all other pistols, in the hostile environment testing.
Keep in mind those were old actual military issue guns, and the M9 trials weren't exactly the best executed study in the world.
I agree with others that lumping all 1911's together isn't going to work. Too many variables.
cc
The 1911's were not quite as reliable as the 226 or 92 in the mean rounds until failure testing, but that only came out in "missions" lasting more than 20 rounds or so (or maybe it was 30). For a 7-15 round mission, they were neck and neck. The 1911 passed, and outperformed all other pistols, in the hostile environment testing.
Keep in mind those were old actual military issue guns, and the M9 trials weren't exactly the best executed study in the world.
I agree with others that lumping all 1911's together isn't going to work. Too many variables.
cc
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Well...Since the newest of those had been in service for about 40 years, we can assume that they had a lot of use and abuse...wear and tear...and at least some mismatched parts, since armory personnel often disassembled 50-100 pistols at a time...tossed the parts in a bath...and reassembled them from whatever they grabbed from the basket.
After discussing this topic with several people in this thread, I have concluded that my next pistol needs to be an original production WWI or WWI Colt 1911A1, not a current reproduction or reissue. Over the many years that I have fired these grand old 1911s (friends own them), I have found there to exist a nearly inexplicable difference in fit, and even feel of the working (moving) parts.
While I love (notice how we Americans over-use this word) my current productions Colts, the only one that comes even close to the fit and feel of the original Colts is my Colt WWI reproduction. Sadly, I have discovered that even that limited edition Colt it is not the true-to-life original as I had told when I purchased it. Yes, it is a fine pistol, but I want a genuine, 100% accurate 1911A1. So, I am left with two means to acquire one: buy an original or have one custom-built. History, my friends, history. I will seek-out an original, but wow, have you seen the prices?!
Doc2005
While I love (notice how we Americans over-use this word) my current productions Colts, the only one that comes even close to the fit and feel of the original Colts is my Colt WWI reproduction. Sadly, I have discovered that even that limited edition Colt it is not the true-to-life original as I had told when I purchased it. Yes, it is a fine pistol, but I want a genuine, 100% accurate 1911A1. So, I am left with two means to acquire one: buy an original or have one custom-built. History, my friends, history. I will seek-out an original, but wow, have you seen the prices?!
Doc2005
I forsee this getting ugly and locked as soon as the Glockers get here. I've never had a bad 1911. I only buy Colts that I've handled and inspected before purchase. I know how to make one run that won't run, I'm nowhere in the league of Tuner, but I've got the Kuhnhausen book and some good files!
New 1911's are absolutely a crapshoot. The design does not lend itself at all to the current production method: outsource a bunch of parts, put it all together and hope it works. Most parts are MIM to boot. When these guns had that nice 'rattle', and were fitted by skilled craftsmen from real metal parts, they ran like a top.
To answer the OP: I'd buy a good used or new Colt or a distant second, a good used or new Springfield Armory, and save the extra 2-300 bucks for a good holster, ammo, any upgrades you think you need. Just my $0.02. Good luck.
New 1911's are absolutely a crapshoot. The design does not lend itself at all to the current production method: outsource a bunch of parts, put it all together and hope it works. Most parts are MIM to boot. When these guns had that nice 'rattle', and were fitted by skilled craftsmen from real metal parts, they ran like a top.
To answer the OP: I'd buy a good used or new Colt or a distant second, a good used or new Springfield Armory, and save the extra 2-300 bucks for a good holster, ammo, any upgrades you think you need. Just my $0.02. Good luck.
I ask this question because there are Kimber fanboys, Springer fanboys, S&W fanboys, etc.
I also make the arugment that any 1911 gun from any manufacturer ~ $900 is inherently the same (IN TERMS OF RELIABILITY). I've seen threads before asking for the most reliable 1911 gun for $900 and people recommend all sorts of companies. Some even say that there are problems with all manufactuers.
So far I've got some good info and don't want this to turn in to a flame thread because I'm looking to purcahse my next gun and I plan on buying a ~$800 1911.
So do you think the current production 1911 guns are less reliable than other platforms? Or is just because there are so many 1911 guns out there.
I also make the arugment that any 1911 gun from any manufacturer ~ $900 is inherently the same (IN TERMS OF RELIABILITY). I've seen threads before asking for the most reliable 1911 gun for $900 and people recommend all sorts of companies. Some even say that there are problems with all manufactuers.
So far I've got some good info and don't want this to turn in to a flame thread because I'm looking to purcahse my next gun and I plan on buying a ~$800 1911.
So do you think the current production 1911 guns are less reliable than other platforms? Or is just because there are so many 1911 guns out there.
In my testing, I found the 1911 to be as reliable as a Glock 17. Specifically, I present as fact of that matter, that I conducted a "3,000-round, no clean, torture-test" of a Colt Series 70 reissue and of a Glock 17. Over the course of a month, I fired 3,000 rounds through each pistol. I only added oil every 100 to 150 rounds, and never did any cleaning.
Neither pistol ever failed in any way, shape or form. My intent was not 3,000 rounds; my intent was to see when one would become so dirty that it would fail. Finally, at 3,000 rounds, they were filthy, that I merely could not stand to see my beautiful pistols so filthy. Not only did neither pistol have any form of failure, the accuracy was tip-top the whole duration.
That test does not compare to the military's old test of 6,000 rounds, but how many of us would normally have to go 3,000 rounds w/o cleaning? That's pretty good. By the way, that STS Colt Series 70 reissue cost me $749.00, and today can be bought for $850.00.
Edit to add: The STS Colt Series 70 reissue that I own is as loose as a baby rattle. It is seriously loose, and I love that fact! But, then it goes into battery, the barrel/bushing/slide is like a monolith of steel! The slide to receiver fit rattles, but wow is this li'l stallion runs!
You started an excellent thread Gunsmoker, thank-you! Thanks to all for keeping it professional and up-and-up.
Neither pistol ever failed in any way, shape or form. My intent was not 3,000 rounds; my intent was to see when one would become so dirty that it would fail. Finally, at 3,000 rounds, they were filthy, that I merely could not stand to see my beautiful pistols so filthy. Not only did neither pistol have any form of failure, the accuracy was tip-top the whole duration.
That test does not compare to the military's old test of 6,000 rounds, but how many of us would normally have to go 3,000 rounds w/o cleaning? That's pretty good. By the way, that STS Colt Series 70 reissue cost me $749.00, and today can be bought for $850.00.
Edit to add: The STS Colt Series 70 reissue that I own is as loose as a baby rattle. It is seriously loose, and I love that fact! But, then it goes into battery, the barrel/bushing/slide is like a monolith of steel! The slide to receiver fit rattles, but wow is this li'l stallion runs!
You started an excellent thread Gunsmoker, thank-you! Thanks to all for keeping it professional and up-and-up.
Gunsmoker:
Given the amount of cash you want to spend, I suggest the Colt Series 70 reissue. If you plan to carry it on your person, buy stainless. if you plan to carry it in a briefcase, etc, I would get blued steel. Of course desired fit in hand is different for each person, the backstrap of the series 70 reissue is extraordinary. As I have determined, it is due to the fact that it is not checkered, rather machined vertically. This machining allows the pistol to recoil, but recoils consistently and returns nicely back to target. Neither a smooth nor a checkered backstrap works as-well for me-as the machined vertically backstrap. I think you can see from my posts, that this is truly one of the finest pistols I have ever owned. Here is the list of excellent 1911 pistols I have owned:
Colt series 70 reissue .45 ACP
Colt WWI reproduction .45 ACP
Colt XSE .45 ACP Gov't
Colt Series 80 .38 Super Gov't
Kimber Warrior .45 ACP
Kimber Custom Target .45 ACP (9 of them, all internal extractor models)
At present, I buy only Colts because they have fewer MIM parts than Kimber. Also, due to the fact that Colt was the original, it simply feels like it has "history".
Doc2005
#3,200
Given the amount of cash you want to spend, I suggest the Colt Series 70 reissue. If you plan to carry it on your person, buy stainless. if you plan to carry it in a briefcase, etc, I would get blued steel. Of course desired fit in hand is different for each person, the backstrap of the series 70 reissue is extraordinary. As I have determined, it is due to the fact that it is not checkered, rather machined vertically. This machining allows the pistol to recoil, but recoils consistently and returns nicely back to target. Neither a smooth nor a checkered backstrap works as-well for me-as the machined vertically backstrap. I think you can see from my posts, that this is truly one of the finest pistols I have ever owned. Here is the list of excellent 1911 pistols I have owned:
Colt series 70 reissue .45 ACP
Colt WWI reproduction .45 ACP
Colt XSE .45 ACP Gov't
Colt Series 80 .38 Super Gov't
Kimber Warrior .45 ACP
Kimber Custom Target .45 ACP (9 of them, all internal extractor models)
At present, I buy only Colts because they have fewer MIM parts than Kimber. Also, due to the fact that Colt was the original, it simply feels like it has "history".
Doc2005
#3,200
- Status
