So you think the 1911 extractor needs improving?

[wally]

Hope you didn't believe the hype in all the full page ads:

http://www.1911forum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132547

JMB got it right the first time.

My new Armscor 1911 widebody 45 (P14 clone) has an external extractor. No issues so far, great gun for the price ($380!) but barely over 1000 rounds yet. Looks like they've used the Tanfoglio/EAA "Witness" extractor instead of "inventing" their own, but I'd have prefered they stuck with the standard extractor.

--wally.

 

[Inline_6]

I still trust my Para's (only one is new enough to have the PXT). Most folks who have guns that work w/o a hitch don't post about it the way people who are upset do. No mechanical device can be perfect no matter which company has its name on the side.

 

[Old Fuff]

The original extractor as designed by John Browning is supposed to be a leaf spring, machined from "real steel" and heat treated. Some companies today use a similar part made by metal injected molding (MIM) or investment casting to save money. Neither can be spring tempered, and over time will not work right.

An external extractor is pinned so that it can pivot, with a hook at the front, and a coil spring unter the tail at the back to tension it. This being the case it doesn't have to be spring tempered.

In various models, Browning used both kinds, but he used the internal style in the 1911 pistol because it could be removed and reassembled without tools - something that the Army considered to be important at the time.

Browning first way is the best, but only if the extractor is made correctely. When that isn't the case the external kind is probably better.