interesting 1911 discussion

[chutestrate]

Met a gentleman at my local club, and we got to talking about 1911's. Told him my sig gsr was great weapon, and never let me down. He was a consultant for police agencies, foreign military and police agencies. Since the 70's he spent time in different countries and had seen a lot of trends. Our designers in WW2 had the right ideas about the 1911 at the time. They could go into any environment and function well. Now they had been tightened up, and didn't function as well in harsh environments. Apparently Kimber had to eat 150k 1911's that were built for the Marines because the tolerances were too tight and didn't work well in the sand box. I haven't verified his information yet, but I don't have any reason to doubt his validity.

In his opinion advances in technology made a lot of other weapons better choices for people. It made some sense, but I still love my sig.

 

[Russ Jackson]

I love unverified information that slams a US arms manufacturer. Prior to slamming a company on the internet don't you think it would be well advised to get the facts? This is the type of stuff that can really hurt a company. Very irresponsible in my opinion. Recalls take place in all industries. How they are handled is the real issue. ...Russ

 

[chutestrate]

Ok, buddy you might want to stay away from whatever you are drinking at the moment. It's only a discussion item, not a slam. Breathe deeply, and start again.

If my little comment hurts Kimber they have a lot more problems than just me.

 

[Russ Jackson]

Quote from chutestrate: Apparently Kimber had to eat 150k 1911's that were built for the Marines because the tolerances were too tight and didn't work well in the sand box. I haven't verified his information yet, but I don't have any reason to doubt his validity.

What do you call this statement?
Hopefully the mods will remove the thread. Hey it was just My Opinion. If I am in the wrong the Mods will tell me. I was just trying to stop something before it did damage....Russ

 

[chutestrate]

I call that statement repeating something I was told, not a derogatory statement about anything.

Why remove the thread because I personally just caused all of the Kimber's stock to go into the crapper?

Ok, we return to our regularly scheduled programming, sorry for the distraction to the world. Now with this new power I am going to require all beautiful women to serve me.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I don't think the OP is slamming a manufacturer with his statement.

He spoke with someone who offered opinion/knowledge, he gave that person's qualifications as they were known to him at the time and offered his opinion of that person's credibility (not the accuracy of the statement).

The OP has come here to ask for verification or rebuttal from the forums knowledge base...that is what we are here for.

I would think he is referring to the ICQB/MCSOCOM Det 1 Pistol...the commercial version would be the Warrior Series (which I've heard, from serious users, is one of the few Kimbers they would consider for hard use)

Let the discussion continue

 

[Oyeboten]

In WWII, the slide and maybe some other tolerances for the 1911 did appear to loosen up for anticipating mud and sand and so on, compared to the Commercial Models of the 1911, which tended to be very 'tight' or very close fit.


Accuracy remained very good, but range of function in adverse condtions would have been widened.


Mud and or Sand are a tough challenge for any Hand Gun to put up with.

 

[9mmepiphany]

This is very true.

Which is what makes the fact that both the Sig 226 and Beretta 92FS passed the military test even more impressive. They took advantage of modern manufacturing to produce guns that were adverse condition capable and still offer accuracy at a lower cost than the 1911, of comparable ability, can be produced for.

The 1911 can be an excellent platform for many uses, but the user has to carefully evaluate their needs, conditions and their dedication to maintaining the platform.

It is like the US Military increasing the cleaning routine of their M16/M4 platforms to keep them running in the sand, of flour consistency, environment of Saudi Arabia

 

[Zerodefect]

There was plenty of 1911 problems in WW1, WW2 and Nam. We will allways have plenty of fubar guns no matter what war we're in, it's the nature of the beast.

You can't leave anything in the "sandbox" for long before it fails.
Some guys can't get anything to work reliably, while the soldier right next to them never has any problems.............old saying about "blameing tools" might fit.

The .mil still buys alot of 1911's to this day. 2 of my friends carry them.

 

[Old Fuff]

The principal behind the USGI 1911/1911A1 pistol's parts dimensions and tolerances was to insure that all parts could be exchanged between guns regardless of what contractor or sub-contractor made them. Prior to World War Two this wasn't always true, and at times slides were serial numbered to a particular frame, with the number located behind the firing pin stop.

This kind of fitting also tended to increase the reliability of the piece, but still retained reasonable accuracy - at least for a service pistol. Besides it should be obvious that during wartime one couldn't fire 200 or so rounds through each pistol to break it in.

Today most pistols of this kind are made to match standards, and are admittedly tight - requiring a break in before they (hopefully) function as they should. Those who want a true service pistol will more likely be found carrying Glocks, SIG's, Beretta's, recent Smith & Wesson’s and Ruger’s - to name a few of the more popular brands.

On the other hand, most buyers of today's 1911 platform guns worship tightness, and demand it. Understandably the manufacturers comply.