I'm Giving Up On 1911s

[tomrkba]

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

Oh, that's rich!

Did you see all the magazine problems he had? The guns required trips to the gunsmith for remediation. It took him awhile to get technically used to the platform. Granted, he shot thousands of rounds during that time, but most people do not come close to the volume he puts through his guns. Overall, he is impressed with the guns, but keep in mind they are expensive custom pistols. They are not out of the box Springfield "Loaded" 1911's that cost $800-900 retail.

The good news is that Green documented the problems and solutions. We now have confirmation regarding which mags to use for a 1911 in 9mm. We also know what needs to be changed with the mags over time. This is a good thing because the experiment improves our knowledge of what is necessary to keep 9mm 1911's going.

 

[gc70]

If the 1911 platform isn't obsolete, we'd still be using in in LE & the military.

And please turn in all of your obsolete bolt-action rifles.

 

[Onward Allusion]

^^^ Not even apples to oranges here...

 

[MCMXI]

I don't have a huge collection of semi-auto pistols. All I have is 1911s and SIGs, with seven of the former and six of the latter. After a brief stint as an owner in the striker fired world (XD-S) I've realized that I have no wish or need to add to what I already have. If I ever feel the need or desire to thin the herd, the last to go would be two of the Ed Browns and two of the P220s.

 

[tarosean]

Oh, that's rich!

Yet it's better than your an your" evidence" you post every single time a 1911 is brought up..

Whereas I own six and they have proven to me that they are more reliable than the Glocks whom reside in the same safe.... ( well aware that my "evidence" is just as circumstantial as yours)....

 

[gc70]

Sorry, Onward Allusion, but the idea that bolt-action rifles are obsolete is perfectly aligned with the tired, old complaint that 1911s are obsolete because they aren't (supposedly) used by LE and military. In fact, LE and military do still use 1911s ... and bolt-action rifles.

If the 1911 was obsolete, a whole bunch of people didn't get the message. In 2011, there were 712K pistols larger than 9mm manufactured in the US. 190K, or 27%, of those pistols were produced by 1911-only makers like Colt, Kimber, and Remington - not even considering major companies like Ruger, S&W, Sig, Springfield that make 1911s and other large-caliber pistols.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

This first post needs to be installed in the Kimber threads right after somebody posts: Ditch the Kimber and get a reliable 1911 like a SIG.

3 1911s, 2 Colts and a Kimber and none of mine have ever malfunctioned.

 

[wheelyfun66]

I must be lucky......never had a bad 1911 (Colt/Sig/Dan Wesson/Springfield Armory)

I buy Wilson Combat magazines, use grease on the rails, and properly maintain them......

If the 1911 ain't for you.......plenty of other "platforms" available!

 

[Onward Allusion]

gc70
Sorry, Onward Allusion, but the idea that bolt-action rifles are obsolete is perfectly aligned with the tired, old complaint that 1911s are obsolete because they aren't (supposedly) used by LE and military. In fact, LE and military do still use 1911s ... and bolt-action rifles.

If the 1911 was obsolete, a whole bunch of people didn't get the message. In 2011, there were 712K pistols larger than 9mm manufactured in the US. 190K, or 27%, of those pistols were produced by 1911-only makers like Colt, Kimber, and Remington - not even considering major companies like Ruger, S&W, Sig, Springfield that make 1911s and other large-caliber pistols.

The 1911 design is obsolete for LE & Military. Yes, I know about the FBI & Special Forces...etc, but that doesn't make it any more of a modern design as a Mosin Nagant. The 1911 is a proven design. It's a classic. But most of all, it is finicky! I'm pretty sure gun makers have learned a thing or two in the last 100 years.

With regard to bolt action rifles, I never said that they were obsolete. They still have their niches in LE & military, but you don't see our military issuing Springfields or the Ruskies issuing MN's, do you?

Yes, some in LE & Military carry 1911's, sure - there will always be fans for the design. Just like there are fans of the Hi Point. No. A 1911 does not equal a Hi Point, but there will be fans of almost every model of firearm out there.

 

[WC145]

The 1911 design is obsolete for LE & Military. Yes, I know about the FBI & Special Forces...etc, but that doesn't make it any more of a modern design as a Mosin Nagant. The 1911 is a proven design. It's a classic. But most of all, it is finicky! I'm pretty sure gun makers have learned a thing or two in the last 100 years

With regard to bolt action rifles, I never said that they were obsolete. They still have their niches in LE & military, but you don't see our military issuing Springfields or the Ruskies issuing MN's, do you?

Yes, some in LE & Military carry 1911's, sure - there will always be fans for the design. Just like there are fans of the Hi Point. No. A 1911 does not equal a Hi Point, but there will be fans of almost every model of firearm out there.

The design does not make the gun finicky, current manufacturers deviating from the design have caused that problem. 100 years of reliable use under the worst of circumstances haven proven that the design works. A "1911" built to the proper specs and maintained appropriately is a reliable and effective sidearm. Never mind that most "modern designs" are based on guns that were designed 100 or more years ago.

The popularity of inexpensive polymer frame framed handguns, double digit capacity magazines, and smaller, less effective calibers than the .45acp doesn't mean that the 1911 is obsolete. It means that there is a perception of obsolescence because those things are "modern" so they must be an improvement. One the biggest drivers behind the popularity of polymer handguns is that they are cheap to manufacture and are practically given away to agencies because manufacturers can profit from volume and name recognition. Just as the car companies used to use the popularity of racing to sell cars - "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday" - Glock sells more guns to the private sector because of the popularity among LE agencies. They paid for that market by low balling their products to police depts. Other polymer framed handgun lines have since ridden Glock's coat tails to success.

As far as the military goes, the move away from the 1911 to the 9mm was prompted by many things, at the top of the list was ammo standardization with NATO and the idea that more little bullets were going to better than the 8 big bullets we'd been working with. We've seen how well that idea worked out with the switch to the M16 and 5.56mm rifle round, the lack of effectiveness of the 5.56mm round has been a complaint since it's inception. The war in Afghanistan has seen the military bringing the "obsolete" M14 out of mothballs and reissuing them due to the need for a more effective caliber. Capacity and volume of fire does not necessarily trump terminal effectiveness.

Today it seems that the general consensus on the 1911 is that is more difficult gun to master, a harder gun to maintain, and is best left to the experts. Nothing could be further from the truth, as millions of servicemen can attest. They learned to shoot and maintain the 1911 effectively through military training that is designed to make someone with absolutely no experience proficient with the least amount of time and effort. Certainly the average shooter today is capable of the same feat.

So, clearly, there is nothing obsolete about the 1911 design. Supporting that statement is the fact that the 1911 continues to be the sidearm of choice of so many special operations and SWAT type teams, as well as many more "average" agencies and individual officers. Those decisions are made based on what has been shown to work best for them, not simply because "it's a classic", that they are "fans" of the design, or that a manufacturers rep is offering 4 guns for the price of one quality 1911.

 

[miles1]

^.......A 1911 built to "proper specs" is the key term here.A $2000 colt seems to be what it cost for the spec ops to get that kind of reliability amd performance otherwise they would've gone with springfield or kimber I'm assuming of course.Glocks are in the LE because their easier to maintain and cost factors but they also just work and have a much better capacity.No one is debating that they are not as pretty as a 1911 mind you.

 

[Hometeached1]

Got to run and get more popcorn!

 

[EdLaver]

All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints? None of mine never did, and if all a 1911 shoots is ball ammo, that would make it rather obsolete in today's world. If you have a 1911 sub $1200 that runs hollows reliably, list the manufacturer and purchase year. I'm curious, not to be a prick, but because I DO like the feel and look of the 1911, but my experience hasnt been very good with the four I've owned.

 

[JTQ]

All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints? None of mine never did, and if all a 1911 shoots is ball ammo, that would make it rather obsolete in today's world. If you have a 1911 sub $1200 that runs hollows reliably, list the manufacturer and purchase year. I'm curious, not to be a prick, but because I DO like the feel and look of the 1911, but my experience hasnt been very good with the four I've owned.

Notice the dimple Colt puts in the barrel throat of their current barrels.

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

 

[Fiv3r]

My basic sub $900 Springfield "Loaded" will feed JHP just fine. I haven't shot a lot through it, but it feed 14 of them gun without an issue. I don't remember the brand or the type of HP it was as these were some loose rounds I had rolling around in my range bag from when I had a Glock 21.

Brass cased, steel cased, ball, and jhp, the Springer eats it up just fine.

While the 1911 isn't my absolutely favorite gun to carry simply due to the weight and size, I really don't see it as obsolete. To me, obsolescence is when something literally cannot hang with or offer comparable performance to the next item in line. Case in point, I found an 8 year old laptop in an office drawer the other day. THAT is obsolete. It cannot run the programs of today. Short of whatever is loaded on it as it sits, it cannot do anything today that a computer is called upon to do.

I don't see a 1911 as that. A handgun is generally a sidearm that will reliably act as a back up to your primary long arm, be used in close quarters combat, or as a reliable form of protection and a compliance tool by armed public servants for whom it would impractical to carry around a long arm.

I see 1911's as different. They are products of a time when war was fought a little differently and hardware was produced to a different scale and with a different mindset. Chosen firearms are 90% politics. Granted, they have to work and be effective, but guns are ordered based on dollars, cents, and promised favors.

Our local Sheriff's Department carry .45 GAP pistols. Why? Glock made them a deal they couldn't refuse. In town, the PD carry .40 Glocks. The next county over I think they use 9mm Sigs. In a 50 mile radius, you would think the criminal element would overlap enough that three different departments wouldn't need 3 different calibers if the gun made THAT much difference.

I know a couple of old cops who would carry a crusty old 1911 if they were allowed to. It's not obsolete or outdated. I just don't think a quality 1911 fits the perceived needs nor the limited budgets of LEOs. It's just cheaper to buy plastic and feed it little bullets. Once again, i like those plastic Wonder Nines, but I think the 1911 is still a very viable weapon if it fits the philosophy of the times.

 

[Old Dog]

If you have a 1911 sub $1200 that runs hollows reliably, list the manufacturer and purchase year.

Gosh, tough one, lemme think ... oh, how 'bout:

Colt's XSE LW Commander (SS), $1039, purchased 2011
Colt's Combat Commander, $899, purchased 2010
Colt's Series 70 Repro (SS), $929, purchased 2009
(2) Kimber Pro CDP II, $1049, purchased 2008
Kimber Custom TLE II, $799, purchased 2007
Kimber Pro Tactical II, $999, purchased 2007
Springfield Armory Loaded Champion (SS), $799, purchased 2005
Colt's (special run) NCO (SS), $799, purchased 2004 (approx.)
(2) Springfield Armory Loaded LW Micro-Compact, $939, purchased 2004
Springfield Armory Mil-Spec (SS), $569, purchased 2004
Springfield Armory (pre-Mil-Spec/GI) parkerized 1911A1, $369, 1991

Sorry, I think I've got only thirteen (13) 1991s that I still have the records on that reliably feed JHPs. Please note that these represent ONLY the pistols I bought new. There are a few 1911s from prior to 1991 that reliably feed JHPs. And there's probably a few in the back of one of the safes I am not remembering ...

And, of course, every 1911 I have that cost more than $1200 (at time of purchase) reliably feeds JHPs.

So, I guess -- either I am simply incredibly lucky -- or I have figured out the magic necessary to get these obsolete, heavy, low-capacity dinosaurs to run reliably. It ain't rocket science, boys; you just gotta commit to the platform. If you don't want to, don't go buying any classic Harleys, old airplanes, British motorcars ... I get that today's average gun-owner is pretty lazy and doesn't typically understand, nor want to understand, what makes his gun work or get involved in anything more than a casual field-stripping and occasional cleaning.

 

[2wheels]

My 2 Colts, a New Agent for $850 and a TALO CCO for $1100 both purchased in the last 5 years both could care less if they're running hollowpoints or FMJs.

In fact, I can't think of the last time I saw a 1911 that wouldn't run hollowpoints but was otherwise 100% reliable with FMJs... Of course I don't get to go out and test that many 1911s but still. My buddy got one of those Filipino 1911s a year or two ago and it runs JHPs just fine (although it required a new mag out of the box), another friend has a Ballester Molina (I know, not technically a 1911) and it's ancient, but it'll run JHPs!

 

[1911Tuner]

Just for the record...

I have a number of unaltered/untweaked, original/correct USGI and commercial Colt Government Models with DOBs ranging from 1913 to 1945 that can't tell the difference between hardball and hollowpoints and even cast SWCs of the H&G #68 design.

And they all feed'em from the old "Hardball" magazines as well as the newer Colt-designed 7 rounder with the tapered, timed release "hybrid" feed lips.

Colts and Remington Rands and Union Switches and Ithacas.

Nary a bobble.

And none of them rattle like a bucket of bolts, either.

The only hollowpoints that give trouble are the old Hydra-Shok and the Hornady XTPs with the same truncated cone profile...and not in all the guns.

The 1911 was designed to function. If it's built to spec and fed decent ammunition from a proper magazine, it will function. It's a machine. It doesn't have a choice.

 

[peacebutready]

And they all feed'em from the old "Hardball" magazines as well as the newer Colt-designed 7 rounder with the tapered, timed release "hybrid" feed lips.

The 1911 was designed to function. If it's built to spec and fed decent ammunition from a proper magazine, it will function. It's a machine. It doesn't have a choice.

I've wondered how much aggravation 1911 shooters have gone through due to parallel feed-lip mags; failure to feeds that would not have happened with tapered feel-lip mags.

 

[JTQ]

I've wondered how much aggravation 1911 shooters have gone through due to parallel feed-lip mags; failure to feeds that would not have happened with tapered feel-lip mags.

The most popular 1911 mags sold today all have parallel feed lips. McComick, Wilson, and Tripp all have parallel feed lips.

 

[tomrkba]

Yet it's better than your an your" evidence" you post every single time a 1911 is brought up..

Not at all. Green's guns have been tuned and are not production guns. He received direct support from Springfield for all problems. Mine were production guns and all but the Colts did not work out of the box. Mine were randomly offered at gun shows and in gun shops. I had mags from major manufacturers and took all the usual actions to get them running. Why have I not had problems with SIGs, Glocks and other service grade guns? What are those manufacturers doing differently in their non-1911 lines?

All threads like this show is there are some serious problems with consistency in the manufacture of 1911 pistols. Many manufacturers have the attitude that the customer will do the debugging. This is wrong especially given the high cost of many guns in this class. If I get another 1911, it will be a tuned gun from a major manufacturer such as Wilson Combat, Ed Brown or similar.

 

[Onward Allusion]

All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints?

That's the thing! If it was any other gun that required a fluff/buff/ramp polishing to function properly (ala Kel-Tec or Hi Point), you would have legions saying that it is a design/gun that wasn't ready for prime time or the manufacturer makes garbage because of crappy QA. BUT if it's a 1911, some of the same people will tell you that it should be expected...break in...polish ramp...whatever. Am I the only one who sees the hypocrisy?

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

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.

This is one of those Internet memes that get repeated and repeated until it becomes an echo chamber of people telling the same story.

It's hard to find an original Colt as it came from the factory in WWI or WWII. If you should ever get the chance to handle or shoot a nearly new 1911 from that period, you will find that they ARE NOT loose and do not rattle.

The military 1911's that rattle are the ones that have been used in WWII then the Korean war and then Vietnam and rebuilt a number of times; are worn out and rattle. That's what people seem to think is "normal" - it's not.

All of my 1911's are what people call "tight." That has nothing to do with reliability as loose guns just jam up on larger pieces of dirt while tightly fitted 1911's don't let the dirt get into the gun at all.

I generally clean my 1911's between 750 - 2,000 rounds depending upon the amount of time I have available for that task. If you keep the gun lubricated properly it will function just fine.

As for breaking in a 1911, the ONLY manufacturer that recommends that is Kimber. Wilson and Baer only recommend shooting the gun without cleaning it for a certain number of rounds. I have no problem with that.

I have a full custom built by Bob Marvel. Bob ran 200 rounds through it prior to shipment and then recommended running it wet and shooting another 200 rounds before using it for competition. He supplied a 4 oz bottle of Bob Marvel Custom Oil with the gun to ensure it was lubricated with the oil he preferred.

When I get a new 1911, I take it to the range and run 300 - 500 rounds through it just to get used to the gun and the way it works and how the sights work.

What you're doing by running the gun wet and not cleaning it for 200-500 rounds is letting the crud build up in the rails which acts as a lapping compound - it polishes the rails and ultimately, the gun will run better.

You don't want to do that - fine. But, unlike polymer guns, the 1911 has full length metal rails. The smoother the rails, the better the gun will run. That's the trick with a 1911 - shoot it a lot and it will work better.

That doesn't fit your personal philosophy on how guns should work - then don't buy a 1911.

I have had 1911's jam, and SIGs jam, and have witnessed Glocks jamming in competition to the point the shooter had to quit the stage and change guns for the next stage. It happens, they're all mechanical devices

 

[buckhorn_cortez]

All of you saying they run reliably for you, do they run with hollowpoints?

All of mine run with hollow points. But, here's the deal. The 1911 was originally designed to run with ball ammo - meaning the bullet has a round nose to it. If you're smart, you don't run a hollow point with a wide opening on the front that could catch on the barrel. However, IF the gun has been throated and ramped to run hollow points - you can be assured it will run whatever you want to use.

If you are unsure of the setup, there is a simple answer. Use Winchester PDX1 ammunition, virtually every 1911 will easily run that ammunition. The reason is that the contour of the bullet is nearly a duplicate of a round nose, with only a very small hollow point opening in the front. I use the PDX1 in all of my semi-autos and have NEVER had a malfunction with that ammunition. The bonus is that the cases are nickel plated and you can leave the ammunition in a magazine for extended periods of time without being concerned about the cases oxidizing, sticking together, etc.

 

[benzy2]

Lets be honest. Not all 1911's are created equal. Most times you get what you pay for and occasionally even the higher priced models run into snags.

Now, here's what I find funny. The OP mentioned that both of his Spartans were bought second hand, not new. Seems the bigger issue is in the desire to save a penny, the purchase of someone else's lemon presented. I'm all for used firearms, but I also accept the reason it went in on trade may have been a reliability issue. The second thing I find funny is that there has been no mention of sending the pistol in to STI for a check up. Part of your purchase is the quality of the warranty and STI seems to be regarded as towards the top of that list. I would give them a chance to fix it before giving up. If multiple trips are required, I would change my tune but even the best have one squeak out now and then. Plus, I'm not sure what all the boys in Texas inspect on each pistol of the Spartan line as it comes in from the Philippines.

As for the Sig, well again let's be honest, its not a "to spec" 1911. They do seem to have good quality and they are far from a budget pistol. If its having problems, I would try to dive deeper into how and why its jamming. Either fix the issue, send it in to be fixed, or send it down the road.

If I had to pick a pistol to go bang out of the box, it wouldn't be a 1911. That's not why I'm attracted to 1911's. If reliability is your main goal, I'd look elsewhere. The features it does present are more than enough for me to own what I do and continue to shop for other configurations. It won't be a carry gun for me, but they always go to the range with me.

To each their own. I do suggest letting STI give it a try once before throwing in the towel. Same with letting Sig have a go. I'm not going to defend the 1911 because its a 1911 but I'd also go through a few attempts to remedy any issues, regardless of being a 1911 or not, and see how that goes before losing faith in the type.