I'm Giving Up On 1911s

[tarosean]

It's not the design. Its the manufacturer. "1911's" is such a vague term anymore that it's almost inappropriate to use in itself to describe a specific gun.

This. Only the AR world comes close to comparison. Literally dozens and dozens of manufactures from bargain basement imports/knockoffs to high end customs and all points between. All built to differing "specs" out of differing materials using components from an even larger list of manufactures. Yet always refereed to just a "1911"

The design has been around for over a hundred years.. If it was that bad it would have fallen by the wayside some time ago.

 

[2wheels]

That's too bad. I do understand how a bad experience or two can give you a bad taste in your mouth. Maybe someday you'll give 1911s another chance, and you might not be disappointed.

I guess I was lucky that my first 1911 worked flawlessly from the day I got it, and still works. And it's not some high priced fancy 1911. It's an parts gun with a WW2 era slide and an Auto Ordnance frame. It runs even with $5 no name mags.

The 2 Colts and 1 Springfield I've bought since then have treated me well, there will definitely be more 1911s in my future.

 

[gym]

There are good and bad with every gun. No one particular type that is problem free, and has all the features you want. That's why Glock is so popular , they came the closest to building a reliable reasonable weapon that fires at a higher percentage rate than any mass produced gun out of the box, "or at least did". They just may not be everyone's cup of tea. There are always going to be haters, but out of all the guns I have owned in 44 years, I would have to say that a 23, 19, 30 or 26, 27 are almost a sure thing to fire every time.
I want a ppq next but only because I have enough other guns.

 

[peacebutready]

Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?

It's the later guns, made by lord knows how many manufacturers who tweek things to make the pistol tighter or easier to make. In itself, tightness isn't bad, but it requires careful attention by an experienced 'smith that's seldom seen in a mass produced product.

This is why I'm not a fan of tight 1911s. I'll take the looser one that gives up an inch in grouping at 25 yards. I'm skeptical of even a well made, massaged, tight 1911 firing hundreds of rounds of ball ammo in a day reliably or firing multiple types of hollow-points reliably for one box.

What we see today are pistols that (sort of) look like the real thing, but aren't. Most can be made to work, but don't expect it out-of-the-box.

A sad situation, but that's the way it is. :banghead:

This is why I wouldn't buy most of them out there but am a fan of the platform.

 

[peacebutready]

My first was a Paraordnance P12-45. I've shot the hell out of it and it works great.

Third gun was one of those Phillipines-made government models. I sold it because the hammer bit my hand and I hated the sights. It ran like a top though.

The Para sounds like one from the 90s.

The Filipino one had relatively loose tolerances.

 

[peacebutready]

Most 1911s need a break-in. I think they should come out of the box broken in, but such is life.

Something I'm curious of is if a 1911 needs of break-in for the first few hundred rounds or so, then seems to be reliable, will it be as reliable as a 1911 that never had any jams from round one.

 

[el Godfather]

I tried so very hard to become a 1911 fiend. But I'm giving up on them. Last night did it for me. A friend of mine bought one of the latest Sig 1911s (a nearby shop had a deal on them) and we met up after work to try it out. I hadn't brought my problem child Spartan (I have two, one works great, the other needs work and time I haven't been able to bring myself to put into it), instead I only brought my S&W 15-3 and Rossi 462.

My friend supposedly oiled the gun and everything so it was wet. I could feel a film of oil on the gun when I picked it up. We got two magazines into it and then the headaches started. A stove pipe, easy to clear, a few shots, then a a lock back there was an empty mag but there were rounds left. Then jam, then jam, a couple shots, then jam.

Out of a hundred rounds it jammed at least two dozen times. We got through three mags without issues and it started again. I vice gripped the damn gun thinking maybe it was limp writing but it did it on me too. Then I tried each hand to see if maybe when I was shooting left handed I was knocking the slide catch somehow.

This did not inspire confidence. My buddy hadn't shot it before last night, the mags were what came with it. Maybe he got one of the bad ones and Sig will make it right but after two different 1911s giving me problems. My faith is shaken something awful.

I flat give up on 1911s. I'm going to Glock for .45 ACP needs via a Glock 21. I'd been playing with the idea for a bit and thought about the Sig 220 but after so many easy years with my Glock 20, I'm just going to do the Glock 21.

I'm sure I'll eventually get my second Spartan running right but I won't trust it, so it'll get converted to .38 Super and used as a range toy. And I've got plenty range toys, no danger of a shortage there my friend. My Ruger 90 has been solid as a bank vault when it comes to reliability and while it's not the best shooter I've ever fired in .45 ACP, it'll still get fifty rounds on a 11"x8" piece of paper at fifty yards. Though the groupings may not be tight or pretty, the gun goes bang every time.

The pursuit of the 1911 was fun but....it wasn't me. I'm a Magnum Dweeb. It's all about hand cannons and ridiculous velocities. Spend a little more time with my Ruger SRH .454 Casull. Get a few more revolvers, and stop pursuing semis after 2014 (after getting a Glock 21 and Remington R51).

Oh 1911, I tried to love you but like a feral mutt brought in from the cold, you turned and bit me with malice where I only wanted to welcome you. So alas two of your platform shall reside in my safe. One .45 ACP, one .38 Super. And while I will take you to the range and perhaps smile after a good day of shooting. I will still in my heart, fear your unreliable streak waiting for when I should need you most and so I will not carry you to where I am not at the range. Adieu.

Ok.

However, problem is not platform specific.

 

[WC145]

The root of the problems with "1911s" is that too many companies are building/selling they're version or interpretation of the design. SIG is actually a good example, they brought out their "1911" but it has some squared off "SIGesque" slide profile and an external extractor. That's not a 1911, that is they're interpretation of one. If someone wants to alter a design that is known to function reliably, they need to put in all of the time and effort necessary to ensure that their alterations don't screw things up. A pistol is a machine, start changing the shape/size/weight of parts, tolerances, spring rates, etc and you're inviting problems. If 25 companies took Glock 19 blueprints and started building G19 clones, most with their own little twist on the design to set them apart from others, you'd see the same complaints and failures that "1911s" (yes, I'm using the term generically) have become known for over the last 20 years.

The AR-15 world has the same issues, some companies are known for building reliable guns, others aren't. It's all a matter of their interpretations on the design and the effort they put into making them correct from the start.

 

[miles1]

Doesn't that make it a crap shoot as far as deciding what 1911 to get?Especially for those new to the 1911?

 

[DT Guy]

Only if your only criteria for buying a 1911 is that it's a 1911; most folks research the makers, as well.

I agree with the OP, though-the 1911 is not a friendly beginner platform, and requires more technical knowledge to get, and keep, running than a Glock. Tweaking an extractor, throating, all that stuff is part of running a 1911, IMHO.


Larry

 

[tomrkba]

Quote:
Anybody notice that we seldom see malfunction complaints about 1911 platform pistols that were made to the original government/Colt blueprints and material specifications prior to about 1975 or '80?

Why does Michael Bane frequently say that in the 1970's and 80's the SOP was to buy a Colt pistol and to send it to a gunsmith to make it run?

Do not believe the mythology. The 1911 must be tuned properly in order to work, just like any other gun. Some designs allow more "slop" and others, such as the 1911, have far less. Kahr pistols seem to be almost as finicky, at least in my experience with the K9 and three PM9's that I have owned. I have seen friends' problem Kahrs too--five or six instances where the gun was not trustworthy at 1,000 rounds.

This whole mythos surrounding magazine reliability seems to be exacerbated by 1911's. Hilton Yam stated that the bodies and lips on 1911 mags seem to wear out in 18-24 months of continuous duty use. My SIG and Glock magazines have been exceptionally reliably despite neglect and heavy use. I *finally* threw out a second generation Glock 19 magazine after 15 years of use because a chunk of plastic broke on the front of it. The other one shows no sign of cracking. My gen 3 mags have a metal liner that goes all the way up the front of the mag and I expect I will get many years of use out of them. My SIG P220 mags have always been good. I do occasionally work on all my magazines, but a 24 month lifespan is not acceptable to me now that quality 1911 magazine prices are approaching $30-40 per magazine.

To be fair to the design: If someone has a 1911 for duty and/or competition and the technical skills, tools, money and patience to maintain it, then I see no reason not to use one. However, most people, including myself, lack the technical skills to properly tune and maintain a 1911 pistol. I would not be so hesitant to buy another 1911 if I had those skills. After spending thousands of dollars on shoddy 1911's (and the additional thousands of dollars in gunsmithing, range fees, test ammo, parts and so on), I have lost interest in acquiring those skills. Maybe one day I will buy a custom 1911 and take an armorer's class. Until then, I am content to shoot Glocks, SIGs and revolvers.

 

[Tony k]

To each their own. I have a Taurus PT1911. I Love it. After seven years and over 5000 rounds the thumb safety broke, so it's back a Taurus right now. I can't wait to get it back because it it by far my favorite gun to shoot.

When I first got in to reloading I had some feed issues, but that was an issue with my reloads, not the gun.

I'm not so sure I can get on board with those middle price range, super tight models (I'm thinking Kimber, STI Spartans, etc). It seems to me that if you're gonna build a tackdriver 1911, it's gonna probably take some quality smithing to ensure reliability. That just doesn't sound like something I want to do right now. I'd like to get a compact 1911, but I don't need it to be a bullseye shooter. I think I like em loose and rattley.

Follow your gun bliss and don't worry about it.

 

[Vodoun da Vinci]

I dunno. My Wife and I have had several Colts in the 1911 style....all stock guns. A Colt Government, 2 Colt Combat Commanders, and the only one we still have now is a Colt Officers ACP...series 80.

None of them ever missed a lick. Never needed to see a gunsmith - never experienced any failures of any kind. I do/did polish the ramp but I polish the ramp on every gun I ever owned except my Glock 26 and my Beretta PX4 which both feed anything without a hiccup.

Then again all I ever shot was ball, Flat nose lead/FMJ, and the occasional off the shelf hollow points of unremembered manufacture in my Colts. I think people push them too hard and get upset that they don't feed exotic ammunition or buy fancy guns (not of Colt origin and design) and have troubles.

I'd bet my life on my Wife's series 80 Officers ACP any day with my hand loads or ball. Accurate and dependable and all Colt - Even the extra mags. Sucks when folks have problems but then some folks have problems with all kinds of things I never had problems with. I can't imagine "giving up" on the 1911 platform when it has been so successful and so emulated and copied for over a century.

VooDoo

 

[WinThePennant]

In my mind, every gun owner should own an American made 1911. It's just the thing to do.

I love my Ruger SR1911. It's a range and safe queen, however. The real work is done with my Glocks and M&Ps.

 

[SDGlock23]

I really like the 1911, but I don't own them any longer. I started with Glock and it's what I like best, the Gen4 G21 is my favorite of all .45's.

 

[TexasPatriot.308]

the U.S. military tried to give up on the 1911....troops that experienced the 9mm especially most special forces want and got their 1911s back....9mm=hammer, .45 acp= sledge hammer....maybe it aint your cup of tea...if my life depends on it and I got a choice....I'll pick up the 1911 anytime....maybe in time you will realize this too....if not, good luck.

 

[tarosean]

Lets look at some hard evidence instead of anecdotal stories.
From Todd Greens Endurance tests. http://pistol-training.com/

SA 1911 (9mm)
64,579rds 15 Stoppages 0 malfunctions 5 Parts Breakages
*Barrel shot out

Glock 17 Gen4
71,260rds 19 Stoppages (+1 non LCI) 0 malfunctions 3 Parts Breakages
*Breachface damage

S&W M&P9
62,333rds 2 Stoppages 0 malfunctions 3 Parts Breakages
*Cracked Slide

H&K P30
91,322rds 13 Stoppages 0 malfunctions 5 Parts Breakages
*Broken Frame

H&K45
50,000rds 1 Stoppages 1 malfunctions 1 Parts Breakage
*unknown why he stopped the test..

You will see that the 1911 used in his testing was average with the others.

Another interesting tid bit was that Glock had the quickest stoppage at round 62 and the HK45 went the longest to round 31,523.

 

[miles1]

the U.S. military tried to give up on the 1911....troops that experienced the 9mm especially most special forces want and got their 1911s back....9mm=hammer, .45 acp= sledge hammer....maybe it aint your cup of tea...if my life depends on it and I got a choice....I'll pick up the 1911 anytime....maybe in time you will realize this too....if not, good luck.

With all due respect TexasPatriot. I don' think this a caliber debate.There are many that were in the military including myself that liked the 9 as well as the 45.The spec ops that you are referring to I believe are using the Colt M45A1 Close Quarters Battle Pistol (CQBP) which retails to the rest of the public for around $2000.A finely tuned 1911 made by a reputable company.Personally I would love to have that Colt CQBP as well.But alas....most of us average joe's don't have that kind of money to buy such an iconic weapon.With regards to the OP's bad luck with the 1911...I'm guessing his 1911's didn't cost as much as one of the Colt's the spec ops purchased in bulk.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I too have had bad luck with 1911s. A P-O P12, a Colt (used, early 1990s manufactured) and a SIG were all lemons. But this isn't the fault of the original design. It's the fault of deviation from the original design and poor quality control. I like the trigger, the pointing, balance and other handling qualities of Commander-length guns and the slenderness, but I just can't be sure of getting a good one. Also, .45 Auto (the original cartridge they were designed around) target/range ammo is quite costly these days. But I still can't resist picking up and handling a Ruger Commander when I see one.

 

[Tcruse]

If you want an "out of the box" 1911 at a reasonable price with a company that will stand behind it, probably the Ruger SR1911 should be top of your list
If you want a gun that will be your protection, get a Glock (or S&W M&P)

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Nothing wrong with giving up on something that doesn't work for you if you have a viable alternative.

 

[hdbiker]

My Loaded Target Springfield is over 8,000 rounds of home brew ammo and has had no stovepipes, and only one FTF,(my fault, setback, not enough crimp) in 5 years. Each to his own. hdbiker

 

[Onward Allusion]

Ya know, there are some folks here that get totally bent when anything negative is mentioned about the 1911 platform, including some of the mods.

The truth is that the old original design was good 'cause the thing was so dang loose and only ate ball ammo. Fast forward 80 years and you got all kinds of manufacturers trying to make so called race guns on that platform. Tight tolerances, smooth triggers, polished ramps, beaver tails, ambi safeties, extended slide lock releases...etc...etc...etc...that costs thousands. It's like trying to make a silk purse... <gasp!!!> Oh the sacrilege!!!

There are much better modern guns out there in 45 ACP that holds more rounds, are more accurate out of the box, comes in SA/DA or DAO with smoother triggers out of the box...etc...etc. If the 1911 platform isn't obsolete, we'd still be using in in LE & the military. No. I'm not talking about the few guys who carries it. I'm talking about it being the standard.

I can't even count the number of times I've heard people complain their 1911 isn't performing out of the box. They're usually told to let it break-in. Run a thousand rounds through it. Polish the ramp...etc...etc... Ya know, lots of people say the same about a Hi Point and those same folks will tell you that a Hi Point is a turd because it doesn't work out of the box!!!

I've had 3 1911's so far. A Norinco, a Taurus, & a Kimber. Both the Taurus and the Kimber were pieces of garbage. The Norinco rattle and was loose but performed out of the box.

The 1911 is a fine platform for competitions, collections, & range, but it would definitely not be in my top 10 for self-defense.

 

[SSN Vet]

The custom 1911 makers have successfully sold the myth that tighter is better.

But in the 1911 platform, reliability comes naturally with mil-spec clearances.

Tighter than that and you (or the mfg) will likely have to work hard to achieve reliability.

My S-80 Colt has never had an issue with the factory mags and the trigger (despite all the official internet report) is awesome.

 

[Old Fuff]

The truth is that the old original design was good 'cause the thing was so dang loose and only ate ball ammo.

Which is another myth. I've got several older, unmodified Colt's - both USGI and commercial - that will even hand feed empty cases. All that was required was to insure correct extractor tension and some adjustments to the magazine lips. Otherwise short cartridge overall length (common in some hollow point/light bullet, ammunition) can cause problems.

I would point out that most of the later-day service pistols are usually used with the manufacturer's magazines. When it comes to reliability this can be important.