plastic/al '1911's
- Thread starter zahc
- Start date
- Status
Zak Smith
Member
Aluminum-framed 1911's work, but will exhibit frame cracks sooner than a steel frame because of the yield characteristics of aluminum vs. steel. Titanium splits the difference in weight and does not have the yield issue, since it is more elastic than steel. If you plan on absolutely shooting the **** out of the gun, get a steel frame instead of aluminum. Otherwise aluminum is fine.
There are multiple "plastic" 1911's, including the Wilson double-stack, Para-Ordnance, STI, SV, and probably others. The STI/SV frame design is the choice for IPSC/USPSA, so you can be assured that it is reliable. I don't know about the Para and Wilson, but the STI/SV frame design is actually modular such that the actual frame (and serial-number-bearing part) is the frame (steel), while the plastic grip itself is replacable. This removes all issues with putting up with high round count, stress, and wear.
If I were to go with a high-cap 1911 carry gun, it would be based on an STI/SV frame.
If you just want a lighter single stack 1911, you can get everything from an Officer (or Kimber Ultra Carry) size (3" slide and reduced mag capacity in the shorter grip) all the way up to a Government size with an aluminum frame. If you want to go titanium, you need to get a pistol built on a Caspian frame. S&W offers a Scandium-framed Commander-size, now, I believe.
FWIW, I had a titanium-framed Commander built up for the purpose of carrying, and shooting the heck out of.
[ link to LARGER image ]
Here's a representative STI/SV (short slide - just one configuration of many possible)
-z
There are multiple "plastic" 1911's, including the Wilson double-stack, Para-Ordnance, STI, SV, and probably others. The STI/SV frame design is the choice for IPSC/USPSA, so you can be assured that it is reliable. I don't know about the Para and Wilson, but the STI/SV frame design is actually modular such that the actual frame (and serial-number-bearing part) is the frame (steel), while the plastic grip itself is replacable. This removes all issues with putting up with high round count, stress, and wear.
If I were to go with a high-cap 1911 carry gun, it would be based on an STI/SV frame.
If you just want a lighter single stack 1911, you can get everything from an Officer (or Kimber Ultra Carry) size (3" slide and reduced mag capacity in the shorter grip) all the way up to a Government size with an aluminum frame. If you want to go titanium, you need to get a pistol built on a Caspian frame. S&W offers a Scandium-framed Commander-size, now, I believe.
FWIW, I had a titanium-framed Commander built up for the purpose of carrying, and shooting the heck out of.
[ link to LARGER image ]Here's a representative STI/SV (short slide - just one configuration of many possible)
-z
The aluminum ones are great. I have a stainless(w/ aluminum frame) Kimber Ultra Carry. It weighs hardly nothing compared to my other 1911's. I bought this gun to carry, not to put 1,000 rounds a month through it. In saying that I don't want to scare you about it wearing out really, really fast or scare you about the recoil. It is a very good, solid gun that is still pleasant to shoot despite its light weight. Even my wife, who doesn't even care for shooting all that much, doesn't mind firing it.
Kimber also makes two sizes of double stacked polymer framed 1911's. I had originally planned on getting one of these until I ran across the great deal my Ultra Carry.
Kimber also makes two sizes of double stacked polymer framed 1911's. I had originally planned on getting one of these until I ran across the great deal my Ultra Carry.
My choice would also be an STI, for the reasons Zak stated.
Consider, also, the USP. My department does not authorize STI, so I happily carry an HK USP45, which has a similar manual of arms as a 1911 (condition one, frame mounted thumb safety, up for safe).
Consider, also, the USP. My department does not authorize STI, so I happily carry an HK USP45, which has a similar manual of arms as a 1911 (condition one, frame mounted thumb safety, up for safe).
Zak Smith
Member
Here is some video of "sand" tests including the USP, two 1911's, a Kahr, and two Glocks (and some others, IIRC):
http://www.gandrtactical.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1667&start=0
Something to consider..
http://www.gandrtactical.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1667&start=0
Something to consider..
Technosavant
Member
I have a 5" aluminum framed Springfield Armory. I would highly recommend it; the ramped barrel will feed anything and it shoots like a dream. As for frame longetivity, I will wait and see how it holds up. Unless you are using very hot ammo, you should be fine. SA has a great lifetime warranty if you are concerned about cracks ever appearing.
Silent Bob
Member.
In my opinion, there is no such animal as a plastic 1911.
Zak Smith
Member
That added to the discussion. 
Dionysusigma
Member
As did that. 
Anyway, what is the comparison between, say, tungsten and steel? What if one were to come up with a tungsten-reinforced scandium-alloy 1911 frame? Granted, weight of the ammo might still be a problem, but...
Also, lightening cuts on the slide are something I've always wondered about. What if one were to go so far as to open up the entire top of the slide, a la Beretta 92FS and replace the springs with stiffer ones to help compensate?
Anyway, what is the comparison between, say, tungsten and steel? What if one were to come up with a tungsten-reinforced scandium-alloy 1911 frame? Granted, weight of the ammo might still be a problem, but...
Also, lightening cuts on the slide are something I've always wondered about. What if one were to go so far as to open up the entire top of the slide, a la Beretta 92FS and replace the springs with stiffer ones to help compensate?
wally
Member
Zak, can't see the videos in your linked thread.
For a "plastic" 1911 I like the Kimber/Bul BP series except for the lack of mags -- why they moved the mag catch up just enough to not work with Para mags was pure greed and stupidity! The grip thickness is the same as most single stack 1911 grips, its just more "square" and thick all around instead of only in the middle like a standard 1911.
--wally.
For a "plastic" 1911 I like the Kimber/Bul BP series except for the lack of mags -- why they moved the mag catch up just enough to not work with Para mags was pure greed and stupidity! The grip thickness is the same as most single stack 1911 grips, its just more "square" and thick all around instead of only in the middle like a standard 1911.
--wally.
Shootcraps
Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2004
- Messages
- 1,007
The videos in the link don't work. I can't see the usefullness of this "test" either. If "any" sidearm got drug through the sand and then you really needed it, you could fairly safely assume you were screwed. Then if it did go bang, you could consider yourself lucky and go buy a lottery ticket quick.
I have a Springfield V10 Ultr Compact and Kimber Stainless Pro Carry II and both have aluminum frames. Very satisfied with both. Because of their weight, they are carry guns and I don't use them at the range each weekend with several hundred rounds.
I have a Springfield V10 Ultr Compact and Kimber Stainless Pro Carry II and both have aluminum frames. Very satisfied with both. Because of their weight, they are carry guns and I don't use them at the range each weekend with several hundred rounds.
Zak Smith
Member
Sorry, I don't know why the links became invalid.
With regard to slide weight, there is some minimum amount of slide mass required for a 1911 pattern to operate with the cartridges we're talking about here. Caspian has made some titanium 1911 slides, but they were only meant for use with a P7-style gas system, not for the regular 1911 lockup.
In IPSC, it's pretty common to use a lightened slide, especially on "Open" class pistols. I don't believe heavier springs are used, since that would slow down the gun.
But, hey, I might just want to know if my firearm will work after I drop it on concrete, or spend a day rifle shooting prone in a sandy environment.
-z
With regard to slide weight, there is some minimum amount of slide mass required for a 1911 pattern to operate with the cartridges we're talking about here. Caspian has made some titanium 1911 slides, but they were only meant for use with a P7-style gas system, not for the regular 1911 lockup.
In IPSC, it's pretty common to use a lightened slide, especially on "Open" class pistols. I don't believe heavier springs are used, since that would slow down the gun.
That's a lame argument. You might as well say, "if any sidearm got dropped on a concrete floor, you could fairly safely assume you were screwed".
But, hey, I might just want to know if my firearm will work after I drop it on concrete, or spend a day rifle shooting prone in a sandy environment.
-z
wally
Member
I've heard its true. I'm loath to take a dremel to a $40-50 mag. CDNN has some Mecgar 13-round Para P14 mags for $19 I'm planning to order one and give it a try.
--wally.
Shootcraps
Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2004
- Messages
- 1,007
No, it's VERY lame to even consider being dunked in "play sand" as a criteria for selecting a gun. Maybe you spend too much time around playgrounds?
The videos don't work because the website they are supposedly from is for cabinet hardware. The original sight (arfcom) might have been taken over by ar15.com, but there's no reference to the posts there either.
You forgot the rest of my statement: "Then if it did go bang, you could consider yourself lucky and go buy a lottery ticket quick."
AND....those videos and the absurd test have nothing to do with this thread topic.
Zak Smith
Member
Inquiry has been sent regarding the videos.
In some rifle competitions I shoot, you're required to carry a sidearm throughout the courses. They are in the natural terrain in the high plains, where we tend to have lots of really fine red sand that gets everywhere, especially if you're shooting prone for example. What's your point, that a pistol easily redered useless by some sand is no worse than one that will consistently work in the same conditions?
It was actually in reference to (only) the HK USP.
Zach S
Member
It is.
I use a file, one side has had the teeth ground off and polished smooth so it doesnt make the mag catch wider while I'm making it taller...
Its got to be opened up about 1/16" IIRC. Be sure to use a really smooth file to finish up, or the burr on the newly opened hole will eat the shelf off of the plastic mag catch and youll start dropping mags. Para Tubes are a little wider, but thats not a problem in the BUL frames, I've heard they dont drop free from the polymers Kimber is cranking out now.
I've had several Kimber aluminum framed commander and Officer sized 1911's over the years and stainless full size Wilson Protector, but sold them all for my Wilson SDS Lightweight. By far it is the best shooting 1911 I've owned and I'll probably never part with it.
- Status
