The whole 1911 reliability thing.

[Handy]

I know I'm making a terrible name for myself, but anyway.

There are two current threads about specific 1911 parts and their effect on reliability. There are many viewpoints, but I've kind of distilled them to this:

1. 1911 mags are tricky. Many posters trust ONLY the one high end aftermarket brand (Wilson), and throw out the stock mags that come with their Kimber, Colt, etc. Along with that, there are many tools and replacement followers offered to adjust the feeding of standard 1911 mags.

2. The one piece, flexing, internal extractor. Called by some "the weak link", this part usually works, but is entirely unusual in also being "tunable". Also, this part, like the mags, varies greatly in quality, and some even make the claim that there is only one aftermarket brand (C&S) that is of proper spring steel construction.

Add to that the other items that tend to be discussed when a 1911 reliability issue comes up, like breech face polish or throating.


And none of these things are issues with other very similar pistols. Consider, for instance, the .45 Sig 220 and Ruger P90. The best mag for both actually comes from the factory, but most aftermarkets work well too.

There is no way to "adjust" extraction in these guns. If these guns don't extract, it is because the extractor is dirty, or broken. Cleaning or replacement fixes the problem.

Nor have I ever heard anyone suggest that someone polish the breech face of a jamming Ruger, or throat its barrel.


I guess my question, which I pose for discussion, is how a pistol with so many variables relating to its reliability, gets a reputation for reliability. In other words, the 1911 will run well IF... and the list of IFs is kind of long.

My 'glass half empty' guess is that the typical 1911 isn't so reliable, but is so admired for its shooting/handling characteristics that a certain degree of finickyness is excused. People drive Jaguars, after all.

I do pose this mainly for the discussion; I've made my points. I'm also familiar with the 1911s performance in DOD use, but those weapons are not really available to the public anymore, so it might be best to discuss current models only. Thanks.

 

[444]

I can't answer your questions, but can only speak from my personal experience.
I have owned a number of 1911 handguns. I would guess about 10 over the years. I have owned AMT, Auto Ordiance, Colt, and Springfield Armory. I have owned both military and civilian versions. I have been issued a 1911 in the military. In the Colts I have owned a Gold Cup, a series 80 government model, a series 70 government model, and an Officers Model. In addition, I have fired countless 1911s owned by other people ranging from sub compact versions to $5000 IPSC race guns. I have fired all of them extensively using both handloads and factory ammo. In my handloads I have fired everything from 155 grain SWC to 255 grain cast bullets intended for use in the .45 Colt cartridge. I have fired SWC, HP, and FMJ in various weights. I have used my 1911s for carry, IDPA, IPSC, and have even used my Officers Model numerous times for coyote hunting. I have been shooting 1911s for probably 30 years. I have used USGI mags, Colt mags, Wilson Combat mags, Chip McCormick mags, and the factory mags that came with all the various guns I have owned. I have gone through maybe six extractors in my series 80 Colt. The extractors were replaced by wearing them out. At one time I was shooting several thousand rounds a month though that particular gun. Oh, one more thing. With the exception of my Springfield Armory, all my guns have been bone stock. If they had any parts replaced, they were replaced with factory parts. I have never sent a 1911 to a gunsmith other than the Springfield. I never changed the sights, trigger, nothing. I shot them just like they came from the factory. In fact the Colt Series 80 was shot at a match before ever taking the gun home. I shot an IPSC match coming directly from the store; I didn't clean it, I didn't lube it, I just loaded it up and shot it; and it functioned flawlessly.

I have never experienced any of the problems you describe. None.

The only problem I ever had with a 1911 that I owned was with my Springfield Armory. It exhibited what I considered to be substandard accuracy. I replaced the barrel, which solved the problem. I then went ahead and sent the gun to Clarks for a full accuracy job.
In addition, during the time I was active in the handgun action shooting sports, I never saw anyone else experience the problems you speak of.

 

[Dobe]

Handy the dragon slayer

Sometimes, I imagine your study with a giant picture of JMB on the wall. In that photo would be countless darts. Are you sure that he did not do some kind of disservice to a family member way-back-when?

Handy,
Look at the posters on this forum and others. The 1911 is a very popular pistol. There are many of these guns out there and have been longer than any other pistol for its popularity. Therefore, because there are so many of these handguns around, and because these handguns have such a strong following, people have accumilated a lot of knowledge concerning their useage and service.

Therefore, it is not uncommon for someone to diagnose a problem easily over the internet or via phone. It only makes sense. If Ruger or Sig or HK had these followings from this time period, then many of these handguns would not end up back at the factory. Those handguns would be (in many cases) tinkered and repaired by the owner, or by a local qualified gunsmith. Instead, one normally hears "I just sent my XYZ back to the factory."

You can get on any forum CZ, HK, etc. and find a number of problems that exist with these handguns. The 1911 is one of those rare handguns that has actually survived for generations, and has served many. Because of this long service, there is an abundance of information and informed people out there for this model of pistol. Its age is its blessings, not its demise.

On the extractor.
This has been beat to death. I personally think it is a matter of choice. I have no problem with the interanl extractor. If it were changed universally to an external, I would have no problems as long as I had access to quality parts. It would still be a 1911.

Take a rest my friend. Pick up that P7, and go to the range. Have a good time.

 

[BigG]

My considered opinion is you get what you pay for. So many so-called 1911s are made of reprocessed beer cans and sold for a bargain price. They give the pistol a bad name. I have never had so much as a burp out of any of my brand name 45 autos.

 

[Dobe]

BG,
That is part of the problem. There have been so many made, and by so many manufacturers, that quality control cannot be counted on by many of the manufacturers. There is no one entity that monitors the quality control for all the 1911's being produced. It is not the same as Ruger, who is solely responsible for a model.

Therefore, it is easy for someone to point to problems in a model made by many.

 

[Handy]

Dobe,

If Ruger or Sig or HK had these followings from this time period, then many of these handguns would not end up back at the factory. Those handguns would be (in many cases) tinkered and repaired by the owner, or by a local qualified gunsmith.

I think this is entirely fair. There is far more tinker's knowledge out there for the 1911 than ANY other gun.

But there are also a few people that reject any but a few parts. Their experience must have been greatly different from yours.


No dragons to slay, I just thought the parrallels between the two threads compelling.

 

[1911Tuner]

Reliability

Howdy again Handy,

You're not makin' a bad name...You've raised some legitimate
questions.

1911 reliability woes have come about largely because of design changes in an attempt to make the gun more reliable...I ask
you, is that a Catch 22 or what?

The thing that I have noticed most often is that overspringing
the gun contributes to about two thirds of the problems currently noted. Somebody reads something about slide to frame battering, and they run out and get a gorilla recoil spring,
not realizing that they are changing the slide velocity and
timing of the gun. A heavy spring doesn't alter the time of the
cycle very much...but what it does do is shifts it from one part to
the other. It slows it down in recoil, but slingshots it on the
trip back to battery. Either the magazine can't keep up, or the
upcoming round gets squirelly before the extractor can grab it.

Inferior small parts also have a role...and by far the extractors
are the ones to give up first. I have an old GI Colt that has had
over 75,000 rounds go through it since I tightened it up...with
the original spring steel extractor. Works like it did in '42...

Magazines that release the round early enable feeding of
hollowpoints...but under certain conditions, such as the oversprung issue...they release it too early and too abruptly.
The round isn't under full control any more, and things start happening...none of them good.

I had an experience in late 1991 with a Colt that was built in 1921...The owner had died in his sleep and his wife wrapped the
gun up and put it in the attic. When my stepfather inherited the
pistol, it was as she had left it, chambered round, cocked and locked. I cleared the chambered round...inspected the bore...
reloaded it, and fired it 7 times. The slide locked empty. The
kicker was that the owner died in 1929. The gun had lain fully
loaded, in condition one for 62 years...and it worked.

Throated barrels allow for smoother feeding, especially with
ammo other than ball...but the price is that the slide returns to
battery faster. The resistance of the round entering the chamber
has been cut in half...so the slidestop crosspin and the lower
barrel lug absorbs more shock. Result: The gun goes out of time
prematurely due to the delayed barrel linkdown, and ruined
locking lugs and slide are noted. The list can go on.

Ever since the first Navy armorer started tinkering with the 1911
to accurize it, people have been trying to outsmart old John Browning, and some of them really think that they have. By trying
to turn the pistol into something that it was never intended to be, they have created a monster. If they would just concede defeat, and return to the original design entirely, you would see a
pistol hit the ground running, and 2,000 rounds without so
much as cleaning the bore would be the norm. They have forgotten the Engineer's Rule of Thumb:

"Whenever a successful design is modified, three other things
must be modified to compensate for it." There just ain't any
gettin' around that one.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

Tuner

 

[garrettwc]

I think 1911 tuner hit it right on the head.

The "unreliability" comes from people tinkering with the original design. A 1911 in 5" length, .45ACP, with 7 round mags, standard spring, guide rod, and plug, with reasonable fitting is one of the most reliable pistols made.

Every change from that standard is an experiment in compromise.

You mentioned the Sig P220 and Ruger as examples. I submit that since there is very little in the way of aftermarket D-I-Y stuff for them, they tend to stay the way they were when the factory cooked em up.

I have two 1911s. One Colt, one Kimber. I have several Wilson mags, but they are no more reliable than the factory mags that came with the guns. Other than better sights on the Colt, I have made no changes to either gun. And I have yet to have a problem with either.

The extractor thing gets debated almost as much as 9mm vs. 45. I think they both work well. The external's advantage is that it requires no adjustments. The internal's advantage is that it is an easy repair in the field. And let's not forget that the 1911 was originally a "field" pistol.

The long list of "ifs" you mentioned could be boiled down to two:

1. If the manufacturer builds a quality product true to the original design

and,

2. If the consumer leaves it that way.

Just my humble opinion.

 

[Tecolote]

Anyone thinking of throwing out new Sprinfield, Kimber or Colt mags please send them to me. I'll even pay postage.

The 1911 is everyone's favorite model to kick around. Like others have said there are too many companies making too many models to make the design responsible for crappy workmanship. You probably won't have any problems with a quality 1911 from Springfield, Wilson, Kimber, ___ (insert your favorite maker here.)

Keep in mind that every company lets out lemons. It's not only companies making 1911 that have problems.

 

[1911Tuner]

Magazines

Tecolote...You can get all the magazines that you want much
cheaper than Colt, Springfield, or Kimber will sell'em to ya for.

Search for Metalform Company online. They supply magazines
for all three, and some others as well...Ever seen an OEM
Colt magazine with the horsie that has an M stamped on the
base? That's a Metalform.

The basic, blue 7-round mag with welded base and flat follower
will set you back 8 bucks and change if you order 10 or more,
and at the 50 count mark, you get down to about$7.50.
Order direct from them on their toll-free number and ask to speak
to Ginny. She is knowledgeable, and a delight to alk to. She will
get your magazines out the door same day if you call before noon.


Thought I'd pass that along...
Cheers!
Tuner

 

[Boats]

Since I know Handy enjoys hearing from me, I'll bite.

The 1911 is a universe unto itself. Here on THR, about wundernines for instance, we see "comparo" threads everyday: "Should I get Brand X, Y, Z, or A, B, or C?"

With 1911s, one can do that kind of thing without even leaving the general design. Cheap or high end, micro or government model, hi-cap or no, single or double action, external extractor or original, flat or round followers, seven or eight round mags, ramped barrel or no? The 1911 presents literally an endless menu of choices on every particular concerning country of origin, materials, fit and finish levels, warranty support, level of adherence to the original design, name it.

So within this self-contained galaxy it is not surprising to see the masses within it traveling in different orbits which sometimes collide. Then, not to mix a metaphor, we get the flaming comets from some other quadrant which travel through with much spectacle, but don't carry much weight or cast much light.

Most 1911 owners disagree with one another over a great many things about the pistol. However, the one thing that most of us share is a disdain for detractors who just repeat some myths. (This is not directed at you Handy). It is with undying surprise how many 1911 critics readily admit never living with one.

For every clueless Glocker who trumpets one publicized 9mm Glock going on "forever" with no parts breakage, we yawn. My one ship in the Navy had a couple of Colt 1911s like that, though they always had newer springs. They always performed too. Big whoop for Chuck's G17! For every Euro fan pointing to how they've gone 750 rounds so far this year without a failure, we can all point to 1911s we personally own or have seen that have gone further than that without fail inside a weekend.

Many of us have also seen a great many 1911s choke. However, most of know that doesn't happen very frequently at all to quality 1911s that are minimally modified and well-maintained. It is almost invariably the guy who can't help but tinker with the recoil spring without knowing what he is doing, or buying the GI surplus mags and not at least replacing the springs, or someone who can't or won't learn to trouble shoot their own pistol when they tinker with the obvious and then have non-obvious results. I was that guy back in the early 90s. Through constant tinkering, a decent work bench, adequate tools, and getting religion with Kunhausen's Vol. 2, I rarely turn to a "professional" for advice or modification any more. I have yet to encounter a DA/SA guy who wasn't already a current or former military or police armorer, who will do anything with their pistols other than send them to a smith or the factory. Glocks are the only exception I really know of. It seems when people can work on their own pistols, they do, even if the pistols don't need any work or "help."

No other pistol I am aware of, though the Glock is getting there, through its elegant design, virtually encourages its owners to become amateur gunsmiths. Though I can and have torn down Berettas and SIGs, the 1911 is the only one I never have to refer back to a manual to detail strip or reassemble. This has led me to replace parts on 1911s that I wanted for a "name brand disease" stage I went through once, or to just replace things because I thought they looked cooler.

To the uninitiated of course, I was dumping "hundreds of dollars and scores of hours" making my reliable 1911s "more combat worthy," or just "messing it up," depending on one's perspective.

That anyone can work on their 1911 is the upside and the downside of the design. It spawns fantastic myths in both directions. The truth of course is somewhere in the middle. One can and sometime does get 1911 factory lemons. The vast majority, just like any other pistol of reputable manufacture, work just fine. Unlike many pistols, a true 1911 lemon that cannot be salvaged into some mighty fine lemonade by a decent smith is rare.

That said, there is a joe in every town offering a $95.00 "reliability job" for that perfectly working 1911 you might have, that "needs massaging" to get the best performance.

I have never needed to throat polish, breechface polish, or do any other esoterica to get a 1911 to work right. Sometimes I have had to get a better recoil spring than the one the factory sold me, but springs are a cut corner that is common across firearms manufacturing and keeps a host of aftermarket companies in business for all sorts of pistols.

 

[Longbow]

BigG,
So, my Colts used to be beer cans?! No wonder it goes so well w/ chips! They weren't bargains though, but it choked more than a dozen times nonetheless.

 

[charleym3]

1911Tuner speaks well.

I've had many 1911s. AMT Long Slide, Colt Series 70, Series 80, 1991, SA Mil-Spec SA Loaded. SA Loaded 9mm I even built a franken-gun on an Essex frame and a GI green park slide. I've been in the action shooting sports for 20 years (scary how old I am). One thing has become clear to me. If you keep the 1911 close to design specs and run ball ammo, it will run and run and run. The one thing I have consistantly done is add a shock buffer. I have use military surplus mags, shooting star, CMC, wilson, nameless-faceless-whoknowswheretheyweremade magazines, magpacK 8 round conversions.

It's a great plaform to tinker with though. You will learm much about physics and mechanics by changing things.

 

[KMKeller]

Here's a website for those of you who wish to know more about 1911 reliability. Good info for us amateurs as well.

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/tech/reliability_secrets.htm

For those of you who are experienced tuners, how does this rate?

 

[Handy]

Essex frame and a GI green park slide

I have the same pistol. It was built by a Seal armorer (supposedly) and is one of the tightest fitting pistols I've seen, short of a bullseye gun.


Thank you for all your comments so far. This has turned out as a discussion, as I hoped, rather than a shooting match.

 

[Shmackey]

I have had *all sorts* of guns that didn't function 100% from the get-go. Only one of those was a 1911.

The only gun I've had that was perfect was a Ruger slabside .22 (which of course would occasionally get a total dud of a .22 cartridge). The other closest one was a Smith 29 in .44mag. I got it used and it had a basically unremovable ring in the cylinders from shooting specials, so extraction of mags was sometimes a pain. I know I wouldn't get a Sig, HK, Glock, 1911, or anything else and count on it right out of the box to save my life.

 

[Croyance]

Speaking from my own personal experience, I've owned 2 1911's, a Kimber Pro and a Para-Ordnance LDA.
The Kimber worked fine out of the box. Contrary to reports, the stock magazine works fine, every time. The only problem I have had is with Chip McCormick 10 round magazines. The only change I have made is for smooth, thin grips to make carrying more comfortable. Feeding, extraction, and reliability is fine.
The Para-Ordnance is also the model of consitancy. The one flaw is the bushing to slide fit, which is way too tight.
Neither has been finicky, and both are are completely stock, besides a change in grips. No reliability or accuracy jobs.
If the first 1911 I had owned had any issues, there would not have been a second. I am comfortable with DA/SA guns and would have gone that route.

 

[Old Fuff]

John Browning and Colt’s engineers designed the .45 Government Model pistol to work with a particular cartridge – 230 gr. “Hardball.†I say “particular†in terms of overall-length and bullet shape and construction. In a period covering three-quarters of a century it earned a well deserved reputation for outstanding reliability. But in those days most users had out-of-the-box guns that were built by highly skilled and motivated workers in Hartford, CT. In addition the parts weren’t cast, they were machined out of steel forgings or bar stock.

Unfortunately that kind of workmanship is prohibitively expensive today. So manufacturers either charge an arm-and-a-leg for a (hopefully) top quality piece, or cut corners to make something that is less expensive. Owners, as well as manufacturers trick-out their products with every gadget known to man, and pay less attention to things that will make Ol’ Slabsides work right. Some shooters go looking for extra trouble by demanding magazines that hold 8 rounds where 7 are supposed to fit.

I have several pre-1960’s Colt Government Models and a Lightweight Commander. When I use ball ammunition (or handloaded equivalent) they all work fine. Most of them will feed other ammunition of different configurations. Some will feed empty cases when the slide is hand-cycled. This is of no importance, but it is interesting. I think the reason many other automatics – particularly the better European ones – work like they should is because their owners are less likely to mess with them.

 

[1911Tuner]

..and the results are in...

The first rule...If it ain't broke, don't keep fixin' it until it is...

The recoil spring IS a potential trouble spot if the tinkerer
doesn't understand that it works in BOTH directions, and
that too much slide velocity during the feeding stroke will
cause problems eventually, even if the pistol will lock the
slide every time with a limp grip.

Ammo does matter. Vary too far from the recoil impetus
generated by Hardball-spec, and your pistol may choke.
on it, no matter what the bullet shape or what the gun rag
writer said it would eat. His test gun was armorer tuned
before he got it. Bet on it.

A 1911 pistol that hasn't been altered...one that is within Ordnance specs, will work when other designs are DOA
A 1911 that is fitted so tightly that there is no slide "rattle"
is too tight. Accept it. It may run fine, but you will have to
be dedicated to keeping it clean. 750 rounds without a malfunction? I've seen GI 1911's go 3,000 in a day, without
being cleaned...with the same results. Likewise for guns like
that fella's Essex/Frankengun. It's all in how you set'em up.
(Frankengun...I like that.)

There is no black magic involved. Tuning one is 10% knowledge and 90% patience and common sense. Understanding how
and why the pistol functions is half the battle. Accept also,
that John Moses Browning knew far more about the gun than
any expert alive today.

90% of all feeding malfunctions are ammo or magazine related.
90% of all extraction/ejection malfunctions are due to improper
extractor tension. It's a two-minute fix that will last for many
thousands of rounds if you have a good extractor. The magazine
can also be tweaked for reliable function, assuming that it's
not dented or bent out of shape, and made of good quality
sheet metal.

If anyone has a problem with an out of box 1911 that is built
to ordnance specifications...and most are...it is likely something
very simple that is the cause....and most often the fix isn't beyond
the abilities of the kitchen table hobby smith.

Okay...I feel better now...Take care all, and shoot straight!
Cheers1
T

 

[Tecolote]

1911Tuner,

Thanks for the info!

My offer to take new throw away mags is still open.

 

[Ky Larry]

The very facy that people are debating the reliability of a 90+ year old designed pistol seems to make the argument moot. If the pistol design in question wasn't reliable, no one would still be using it almost a century later. FWIW.

 

[1911Tuner]

The final word

Larry said:

The very facy that people are debating the reliability of a 90+ year old designed pistol seems to make the argument moot. If the pistol design in question wasn't reliable, no one would still be using it almost a century later.

Bravo! Bravo!

I'm Harlan County Ky born myself Larry. Bloody Harlan
for those who never heard of it.

 

[MikeJ]

I have two 1911's, both of them enhanced version Colts that I purchased in the early 90's. One is a polished blue Officers and the other is a stainless Commander. Neither one has given me any trouble and every time I pull the trigger they go bang and another round gets chambered until the mag is empty. I need to add that I am not a tinkerer; I live by the motto "if it ain't broke don't fix it." I do want to have a beavertail grip safety installed on my Commander and I still haven't gotten up the nerve to take it to the gunsmith that is highly respected and recommended around these parts. I have gone over to talk to him about it but just couldn't drop it off. Bottomline, from my experience and others I have known with 1911's, the problems seem more abundant on the internet than at the range. Mike

 

[mec]

I had a series 70 that wouldn't work. Two series 80s that worked just fine and were accurate with anything but ball. Two springfield armory's that were inferior and present one had to be comprehensively rebuilt to function correctly. have also had a couple of Remington Rand GIs that worked with ball. One was reasonably accurate and the other one came around with a Wilson-Dwyer group gripper.

A large distributor told me that just about every manufacturer of 1911s periodically abandons all pretense at quality control. The firm recently quit ordering Kimbers because of a 50% return rate.
The long term, overall problem seems to be that the various gun companies like to hear the cash register ring but don't give a flip whether their guns work or not. They start out ok, get some rave reviews and their good reputation way outlasts their committment to quality assurance.

magazines built by metalform (which probably includes wilson) are top quality. The McCormick shooting stars and colt stocks have been reliable in my guns.

Part of the reason for going to the external extractors may be that there is now a move toward supplying inferior traditional extractors with poor material selection or heat treating.- they tend to relax after a few hundred rounds. the wilson extractors are good replacements for these. There is little sense and less integrity in this as quality extractors are not all that expensive to produce.

A reliable 1911 is a joy to shoot and the knowlege and technology to make them work correctly is well understood. Unfortunately, key elements in the industry choose not to apply them or to apply them inconsistently.

 

[Deuce]

This has been a very informative thread for me.

I now know the difference between an amateur and a ... well ... non-amateur ... I guess.

An amateur is someone who's owned one or more 1911's which has PROVEN to be unreliable STOCK from the factory as compared to other semi-auto's they may own.

A non-amateur is someone who has NEVER owned a 1911 which has failed in any way ... except, of course, for replacing a spring, extractor, follower, and/or mag.

I've got two Colts which both had broken extractors ... the Defender broke inside of its first 100rds (to Colt's credit, it came back with a sweet trigger job at no request or extra charge). I've got a Kimber Eclipse which, one day, mysteriously, was found inside its case with the extended safety broken off ... the rest of the safety was not to be found (which makes me want to ask, does any big 1911 mfg'er make a 1911 with no MIM parts?). My Kimber Ultra CDP failed to go fully into battery once and the hammer came up to half-cock after firing with a new round in the chamber ... both during my CCW course inside of 49rds ... the instructor was a cop who touted Glocks as the best ... I was embarrassed by my 1911 ... maybe JMB never intended the Officer's 1911? And my Pro CDP failed to go into battery a couple times within 200rds (maybe 1911's require a break-in period). All with no smith-work and no fiddling on my part. But, you're bound to get a lemon once in a while ... right?

As for my Glocks and HKs, no jams, no broken parts, no problems, no lemons.

I guess I can only conclude that Colt and Kimber produce poor-quality 1911's. Which begs the question, just who does produce a quality 1911?

Despite my experience, I love my 1911's. They feel great in the hand while shooting or not and they are just plain a joy to shoot. However, despite my "amateur" status, I have a hard time trusting 'em for self-defense. Maybe someday that dark cloud over me will go away and I can enjoy one of those elusive 1911's that never fail for any reason? That would be nice ... for a change.

Ya know, if there's a problem with sub-standard mfg'ers of 1911's not staying true to JMB's engineering, maybe they should come up with a designation for the good ones so all 1911's don't suffer from the same reputation as the bad ones. Or, maybe someone could just tell me where to buy a good one ... or what the password is ... or whatever it is I have to do to get a good 1911.

Or, maybe I should just try a Sig 220. I don't hear many complaints about those.