Springfield vs. Smith Wesson 1911

[Balrog]

I prefer 1911-pattern pistols that can be repaired using the vast supply of 1911-pattern parts. To me, that's part of the allure of the 1911 platform - independence from a single vendor or source of supply.

So is your definition of a 1911 a gun that will interchange all parts with the original design?

Is a Series 80 Colt still a 1911?

Is a bull barrel 1911 still a 1911?

Other than the extractor, what parts of a S&W will not interchange?

 

[moe1942]

I like and have a SA 1911. The only part that I know isn't interchangeable on mine is the extractor. The Colt extractor is much shorter.

 

[rbernie]

So is your definition of a 1911 a gun that will interchange all parts with the original design?

The real criteria is that the parts should be brand and vendor agnostic, or (as I stated above) display independence from a single vendor or source of supply. I thought that my statement was fairly clear in that regard, no?

Is a Series 80 Colt still a 1911?

Yes, because the 'modified' parts are not brand-specific. Para, for example, also uses the same FP safety design as does Colt, and the parts for the safety are made by multiple vendors and available from multiple sources. I stock a basic Series 80 FP safety setup and Series 80 firing pins and extractors (which are backward compatible with Series 70 pistols) in my 1911 first aid kit, and I am covered for all my 1911's.

Is a bull barrel 1911 still a 1911?

I have no bull barrel pistols; I do not consider them desirable in much the same way that I do not consider a 1911 with an external extractor to be desirable. The barrel-to-slide fit is a high wear area and should be something that is repairable/renewable. The original 1911 design used a bushing for that reason, and I consider that reasoning to be sound.

Other than the extractor, what parts of a S&W will not interchange?

I have not looked at the internals of one to see how they do the FP safety. I am comfortable stating that the external extractor is my principal objection to them, since the extractor is such a high stress item and is unique to that pistol.

=================

Having said all of this - I will admit that I have owned multiple Kimbers and I accept that their FP safety is unique to their pistols (although Colt did use the same system for a while, way back when). I accept this because the FP safety is not an item that is commonly broken or a high wear item in the same sense that the extractor or the barrel bushing is.

 

[paul45]

1500 bucks to spend? Perhaps you should look a little higher, such as, Les Baer, Colt Special Combat, and others?

 

[DougDubya]

External extractors don't belong on 1911s because they totally change the design of the weapon. Calling an S&W 1911 a real 1911 is like calling a Ruger Speed Six a real K Frame. EE =/= 1911.

So, its control scheme and field stripping is exactly the same as a 1911...

I don't even know why I'm debating this. The designation of the firearm is SW1911. IE: It's a Smith and Wesson autoloader that has parts commonality with other 1911's, and an easier extractor to replace.

If the anger is over the designation, with the addition of an external extractor, then just realize that it's as DeepSouth sagely put it:

In my opinion S&W doesn't make a 1911, they make a gun that looks like a 1911, and I say that knowing almost everyone will disagree.

That has no bearing on whether the SW1911 works well, is accurate and reliable, and operates in the manner of the 1911.

 

[Demitrios]

You also might want to consider building your own from the ground up. Fusion makes a hell of a build from what I understand.

 

[rbernie]

That has no bearing on whether the SW1911 works well, is accurate and reliable, and operates in the manner of the 1911.

And by all accounts, the S&W 1911 works well, and my local gunsmith speaks very highly of them. But then again, so is true of the Springers.

And that's when the secondary criteria come into play, which is for me is as I have described above.

Frankly, for fifteen bills I'd not be looking at either. For that kind of cash, I'd probably get a decent Colt and have it modified to my personal taste.

 

[edSky]

I finally got over the external extractor and bought a S&W 1911 Pro 9mm. To put things in perspective I also have the following 1911s:

• A Springfield Loaded Target 9mm
• A Springfield EMP 9mm
• A Colt Special Government Combat
• A Nighthawk Custom Talon

The sloppiest pistol I have is the SA Loaded Target. The S&W had no failures out of the box and has been the tightest and most reliable (along with the Nighthawk Custom). The Colt SGC is right up there as well.

I am totally impressed with the S&W and look forward to getting the 1911 Pro in .45. Don't fret about the external extractor.

 

[DougDubya]

And by all accounts, the S&W 1911 works well, and my local gunsmith speaks very highly of them. But then again, so is true of the Springers.

And that's when the secondary criteria come into play, which is for me is as I have described above.

Frankly, for fifteen bills I'd not be looking at either. For that kind of cash, I'd probably get a decent Colt and have it modified to my personal taste.

And in that instance, chosing a mil-spec over the SW1911 makes oodles of sense. Spare parts from multiple proven sources does count as a bonus.

What wins Springfield over Smith and Wesson for me, however, is that their Loadeds come with the one extra paddle every Southpaw needs.

Most SW1911's don't come that way - though I find myself attracted to the SW1911DougKay. I wonder why...

 

[ugaarguy]

So, its control scheme and field stripping is exactly the same as a 1911...

Detail stripping isn't the same though.

I don't even know why I'm debating this. The designation of the firearm is SW1911. IE: It's a Smith and Wesson autoloader that has parts commonality with other 1911's, and an easier extractor to replace.

Not even close. The S&W external extractor is under extremely high tension, and must be removed & replaced at the factory. Even if it wasn't a factory job, it would still require specialized tools. The original internal extractor design requires nothing more than the pistol's hammer strut, or another field expedient punch, to replace. None of my 1911s have firing pin safeties either. I've had one plunger break and tie up the gun. That was one superfluous part breakage too many.

That has no bearing on whether the SW1911 works well, is accurate and reliable, and operates in the manner of the 1911.

True, but it's still a 1911 style pistol (as are most other so called 1911s on the market).

Frankly, for fifteen bills I'd not be looking at either. For that kind of cash, I'd probably get a decent Colt and have it modified to my personal taste.

Yep. $1500 covers a nice used Colt 70 series or SA GI / Mil Spec, and a trip to Yost-Bonitz or Alpha Precision. If you don't want to send it off a base gun the SA Custom Shop built TRP Operator is still a good value at that price point.

 

[Texasred]

Alright sorry for the uproar. I think that I'll just try the operator and possibly look at getting a used gun and like someone mentioned tune and build the way I like. The FUSION thing sounds interesting...

 

[DougDubya]

Actually, I think I was the one who caused the uproar by wondering aloud what, if anything, was wrong with the SW1911.

ugaarguy - Personally, I've never done the detail strip of a 1911, mostly because I know I can lose the small springs, especially on the plunger under the left grip.

And since we had Springfield Armory in the mix (which I did state preference for), SA doesn't use the Series 80 extra firing pin stuff that could potentially fail. If I'd had one that broke down like that on me, I'd trade in my post-80's Colts and my Para Ordnance guns (don't have any, so moot point) immediately.

Thank you, ugaarguy, for the edification.

Back to Texasred - I don't think you can get better than a Loaded Black Stainless, if you're interested in adjustable sights.

Still, rolling your own has its own great possibilities.

 

[ugaarguy]

Doug, I'm sorry if my tone came off harshly. I'm a 1911 addict, and somewhat of a purist as far as mechanical function. At the same time, I sometimes offend the most devout 1911 purists because I consider beavertail grip safeties, ring & skeletonized hammers, and light rails to be cosmetic modifications; since they don't change the way the pistol operates, or disassembles. I'm also anti FLGR, and anti bushingless slide bull barrel setup. A combination of research and personal experience lead me to my views.

 

[DougDubya]

As someone who literally was shouting at a comic book when Reed Richards put his friends in an extradimensional concentration camp, I understand purism.

Back on 1911's, I never saw the use for an FLGR. Sure, other guns have them, but those are those particular designs. I also never knew the SW1911's extractor was under so much pressure.

For me, all a good 1911 needs is nice readable sights and an ambidextrous safety. And even if the trigger's six or seven pounds, as long as it isn't gritty, I'd be cool with it anyway.

My one dream is to find a production, GI-spec 1911 with no forward serrations and a good little my-side lever.

(I'd install one myself, but those little plunger springs want to fly free, don't they?)

 

[Balrog]

It seems to me that the definition of what is and is not a 1911 is arbitrary, and up to the individual to determine what he thinks is a 1911. With that in mind, I have decided I will only consider a pistol to be a 1911 if it was personally built by John Browning to original specifications. Anything else is just a copy, after all.

I am curious though, could you put a S&W 1911 slide on a Colt frame?

 

[ugaarguy]

I am curious though, could you put a S&W 1911 slide on a Colt frame?

In theory, yes. In practice, though, the slide and frame are generally fitted to each other. There are tools out there, such as these that allow near perfect slide tightening to the frame. If the S&W slide was looser than a typical Colt factory slide, then the S&W slide could be tightened to the Colt frame. There are a couple of other caveats. First, you'd have to remove the FP block plunger from the S&W slide since the SW1911 series pistols use a Swartz safety. Second, you'd have to use a Colt 70 series (or earlier) frame, or an 80 series frame with the FP block levers removed, and replaced with the T.J.'s custom frame slot blank.

(I'd install one myself, but those little plunger springs want to fly free, don't they?)

I've personally never had the plunger fly off. The thumb safety plunger and slide stop plunger are actually pushed by opposite ends of the same spring. With the pistol field stripped (and by extension the slide stop out) the plunger spring is under much less pressure. You can always hold the gun inside an open box to help catch any potential flying parts. The more critical part of the thumb safety installation is fitting it correctly so that it firmly blocks the sear when engaged, but offers no interference to the sear when disengaged. It's not really difficult, but it does take a little time, and a bit of an understanding of how the safety operates.

 

[rbernie]

those little plunger springs want to fly free, don't they?)

The USGI spec for the spring calls for a kink in the center of it, to keep it in the plunger tube when the thumb safety is removed. The kink works.

First, you'd have to remove the FP block plunger from the S&W slide since the SW1911 series pistols use a Swartz safety.

Has anyone tried to compare the S&W and Kimber bits to see how close they are to each other, or the original Colt setup?

 

[Demitrios]

Definitely take a good a look at Fusion. Bob Serva, former president of Dan Wesson, is the top dog there and everything I've heard about his custom built pistols have been nothing short of superb. Some people have gone so far as to compare them to Nighthawk and Les Baer in terms of quality, although I think that may be a bit overboard, but what do I know. I have worked with Bob a few times for various other projects and he's a super nice guy he definitely knows what he's doing. Contact him and give him a call, see what he can do for you.

 

[DougDubya]

The USGI spec for the spring calls for a kink in the center of it, to keep it in the plunger tube when the thumb safety is removed. The kink works.

To quote Samuel Jackson in one of my favorite movies, "when you make an assumption, you make an *** out of you and umption."

Such was the assumption I made, especially after hearing about one of the purposes of the "high thumbs hold" being "blocking the plunger in case it sprung loose."

You know, umption's getting pretty tired of me dragging him down.

 

[Balrog]

So do you guys would a gun that looks like a 1911 but chambered in 38 super or 9mm still be a 1911? It would not interchange with the original design in all regards, so I do not see how it could be.

 

[purebred]

Buy A Colt...........

 

[LoneStarWings]

So do you guys would a gun that looks like a 1911 but chambered in 38 super or 9mm still be a 1911? It would not interchange with the original design in all regards, so I do not see how it could be.

Actually, the original 1911 design was for .38 colt, so by that logic I guess none of the .45 ACP "1911's" are really 1911's.

 

[ugaarguy]

Actually, the original 1911 design was for .38 colt, so by that logic I guess none of the .45 ACP "1911's" are really 1911's.

The pistol adopted as the M1911 was chambered in .45 ACP. .38 Colt is a revolver cartridge. .38 ACP is a cartridge used later in 1911s by the AMU. The original trials specified .45 ACP because of the .38 Colt's poor performance in the Philippines.

So do you guys would a gun that looks like a 1911 but chambered in 38 super or 9mm still be a 1911? It would not interchange with the original design in all regards, so I do not see how it could be.

There were commercial Colt GMs in .38 Super as early as the 1920s. AFAIK, going back and forth between .38 Super and .45 ACP requires changing only the barrel, barrel bushing, extractor, and magazine. Everything still functions identically though.

 

[Demitrios]

purebred says,

Buy A Colt...........

Thank you for the in-depth and informative post. Your argument was nothing short of pivotal.

 

[MT GUNNY]

+1 More on the S&W.