View Full Version : The disgusting state of 1911 mfg's in 2007
I'm going to start off this post by saying that I'm really not the type of person that just goes off on internet tangets, ranting about every little thing but when it comes to the current crop of 1911's on the market I just have to stop and look at the research I've done and ask "What the hell?"
Going back in time a ways to when I turned 21 I was fortunate enough to have a job where I made enough money to buy and trade a lot of handguns. I loved 1911's and had owned them and had them in my family for my whole life. I went through a dozen different models of Colt .45 autos and never, not even once, did I have reliability issues with any of them. I just got them sale or trade, pulled them out of the box and started blasting away with them until I found something different I felt like trading for. No extractor this, or ejector that, or anything.
By the mid nineties I'd gotten primarily into Sig's, Glocks, Berettas, etc. and wound up only keeping one nice Springfield Armory full size pistol that I'd had customized. So here we are in 2007 and I'm working plain clothes LE and decided I'd really like to get back to a 1911 in .45 acp. But the problem now is finding something that I have confidence in paying good money for that will function reliably and get me through a worst case social encounter should things ever come to that.
The Sig 1911 gets numerous complaints even on the boards focusing on Sig, The Kimbers I feel are seriously hit and miss. I realize they're LAPD SWAT issue and USMC limited issue but I have a close friend who's a dept. instructor on a local PD in the county I work in, we shoot together multiple times a week and he went through four different extractors in his full size pistol. Finally he had to send the entire thing in and over twelve weeks later got back the gun with a new internal extractor slide on it. (It does function well now.)
So I start looking around and doing research on light weight 1911's, preferably of Commander sized length. I come across a Smith and Wesson 1911PD in a shop in Tulsa yesterday. A lot of nice features, a few simple things I'd change out like guide rod and hex head grip screws but overall a nice pistol in appearance with current features I like such as high sweep beavertail, flat mspg. housing, extended thumb safety, etc. Then I roll it over and there's a freaking external extractor.
So, given my misgivings about external extractor 1911's I noted the price (Which I thought was more or less reasonable enough.) and came home and spent most of last night researching the pistol. Sure enough as usual a lot of decent reviews but also a lot of complaints about...Their extractors...All of which contained the usual writings about the hassle of sending the gun in and a few with the customary "It had to be sent in several times". Totally unacceptable to me.
I can't understand why these companies can't seem to get it right. So, I guess I'm taking some cold cash with me to the next big gunshow in about a month and a half and seeing what I can come up with in a Series 70 or 80 Colt Light weight commander. Or possibly a new XSE Commander.
As a side note I've also thrown myself into researching Colt frame cracking and the history surrounding that phenomenon...As far as I can tell the frame might possibly develop an 1/8th inch or so crack but at least it'll likely fire and function.
Am I a solo act in feeling this way?
Is there really more problems or is their just reported problems?
I've always believed that the number of problems you hear about probably pales in comparison the actual number or problems.
I purchased a newer Colt Commander in Feb of this year. I experienced multiple FTF/FTE during my initial range visits when using Wilson Combat 7-round magazines (note: ran fine with factory Colt 7-round magazines).
Box stock accuracy was acceptable:
http://mysite.verizon.net/tlinderman/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/dsc02014.jpg
and tightened up considerably with the addition of a fitted Ed Brown bushing:
http://mysite.verizon.net/tlinderman/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/dsc02110.jpg
I'm still amazed at how well the factory barrel shoots in this pistol.
I sent the pistol off to for a little more work, and now she runs like a champ (Ed Brown hardcore slide stop and Tripp follower/spring kits in the Wilson mags solved the feed/eject issues).
http://mysite.verizon.net/tlinderman/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fletcher_colt_3.jpg
http://mysite.verizon.net/tlinderman/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fletcher_colt_1.jpg
good luck in your hunt!
That's a beautiful piece. Wilson's magazines are something else I won't ever use again. After reading years of rave reviews on them I picked up several in the early 2000's. Three of the four consistently failed to lock the slide back on the last round and when I received replacement parts for them one of the three never would function correctly.
On each of them the polymer follower wore down to where they wouldn't engage any more. (Each of the initial three failing ones that is.)
Factory 7 round magazines have never given me problems in a lifetime of shooting these pistols since I was a kid.
And I realize that current Colt's have some issues as well as other brands. A Detective on my dept. approached me about "fixing" his broken Colt Defender carry gun.
The magazine button had broken completely in two in the frame during a qualification run. That was a new one to me. I installed an old 80's vintage piece to replace it that I had laying around a parts box and it's ran fine since.
I am also disappointed with the overall QA/QC of 1911-pattern pistols today, but I also believe that overall (aside from the advent of some MIM parts) the situation is a lot better than it was 10 or 15 years ago. Nowadays you stand a good chance of getting a gun that runs out of the box from most of the better known manufacturers. The Colt's I saw in the mid 1990s were almost always crap until they very briefly got smart and release the XS (not XSE) series, but then they discontinued the best guns they ever made.
There are also a lot more choices today. The competition really kicked-up a notch when Kimber hit the market and was selling essentially hand-built guns for a steal. So we have more variety and I think that most of the companies are producing better guns more consistently now.
Awhile back I took a 1911 Operators course by Hilton Yam and Ken Hackathorn.
Hiltons take, the 1911 was originally designed and manufactured when labor was cheap and technology was expensive, today the opposite is true.
The 1911, essentially needs to be handfit, and that costs money.
Matt, who recently returned from LAVs 1911 class, if I understand correctly, says the situation today, almost forces it, also. With the numbe of manufactures of guns, mags, and every part, all to various specs, leads to a situation where the gun has to be handfit, to get the most out of it.
I don't think its a "1911" problem, as much as its a manufacture problem.
There is alot of good 1911 info at his sight 10-8performance.
FWIW, he doesn't care for the Firing pin safety in the S&W's. The problem with most external extractors is, they sit to high in the slide, he was working on a fix, but I'm not sure where he is on it.
Bob
. With the numbe of manufactures of guns, mags, and every part, all to various specs, leads to a situation where the gun has to be handfit, to get the most out of it.
I don't think its a "1911" problem, as much as its a manufacture problem.
Good points. I believe a lot of manufacturers believe they know more than JMB did and in reality they probably don't.
I participate at M1911.ORG and there are sub-forums for several current 1911 manufacturers. What surprises me is this idea of "break-in." Several manufacturers have advised members to shoot X number of break-in rounds through their guns whcih they say will shake out all the bugs from the gun.
Call me crazy, but I thought they were supposed to run right out of the box.. I did have one FTE with my 07 produced 1991A1 due to an out of spec extractor claw. I suppose anyone can let a bad part get past QC.
I don't think its a "1911" problem, as much as its a manufacture problem.
That quote is exactly my point.
And I'm sure that Hilton is correct in what he's saying about the cost of labor today vs the early 1900's. And believing that to be part of the case I think that if modern manufacturers aren't willing to pay the labor cost to have the pistol built correctly then they shouldn't be playing in the market place game at all.
Jay Cunningham
09-03-07, 12:53
Good points. I believe a lot of manufacturers believe they know more than JMB did and in reality they probably don't.
I participate at M1911.ORG and there are sub-forums for several current 1911 manufacturers. What surprises me is this idea of "break-in." Several manufacturers have advised members to shoot X number of break-in rounds through their guns whcih they say will shake out all the bugs from the gun.
Call me crazy, but I thought they were supposed to run right out of the box.. I did have one FTE with my 07 produced 1991A1 due to an out of spec extractor claw. I suppose anyone can let a bad part get past QC.
Not a 1911 guy, but it's been my experience that pretty much everything except a Glock benefits from a break-in period.
The craftsmen that put together Colt and S&W handguns in the '50s and '60s and even earlier are all retired now. Both companies went downhill in the '70s and now most handgun mfgs. just look for ways to make them less expensive to build. Add the fear of liability and we have the 1911 of today. Cheaper parts and extra safeties do not make a good 1911. The only plus is CNC has tightened up some of the tolerances and we get better sights and ergo features. What ever you decide to get, have an experienced 1911 mechanic check it over and get it set up correctly for you.
:( Billy
Matt Edwards
09-04-07, 00:01
My Glock 19 also benifited from a "break in period".
I'm with Bob. In a way, 1911 makers and 1911 parts makers are "digging their own grave." There are so meny parts from so meny venders and every vender thinks their spec is the way to go. The only way to make sure you are GTG is to get it "fit" or get a gun built by a reliable maker. As Bob states, it is not the gun, but everything else.
Matt
Since I got into handguns, I have always had two anchors; the Glock 17, and a quality 1911. One is a modern service pistol, the other is a timeless design that can be easily conformed to meet an individual shooter's needs. I have never confused the two. I rarely look at my Glock or it's magazines, but I always inspect my various 1911s and their seemingly endless magazines. I detail strip them regularly, inspect sear angles, barrrel feet, links, and safeties. I havent detail stripped my Glock in years. Have you ever heard of a shooter or gunsmith refer to a Glock's "timing"? That's laughable!
I don't care about the state of current 1911 manufacture because, frankly, it doesn't affect me. I don't buy production guns, nor do I recommend them. Buy a base gun, a "semi" custom, or a custom 1911 if you are a true 1911 afficianado. If you aren't willing to commit to the money, or the time to learn and truly understand the design, than you should buy something else. I am not being a snob, just being honest. The gun industry is pushing 1911s because they are huge money makers, but they are not for everyone. Be honest with yourself and make the best decision for you.
dubb I think you completely have the wrong picture of me. Of the two 1911's I presently own one is a 1941 vintage Colt A1 and the other is a custom built Springfield Armory that I sank well over 1k into back in 1997. I'm sure it would cost far more to duplicate it today but mindset wise it's there.
My point has nothing at all to do with not wanting to put money into something. My point is it's unacceptable to me to put something on the market and expect anyone to plunk down their money for it and it not run correctly.
That '41 Colt has had absolutely nothing changed on it or done to it and it runs just as well in today as it did then.
All I want is a simple Lightweight Commander that fires and functions out of the box. I don't think I'm asking too much.
My post was not a reflection of you, but a reflection of the current state of affairs when it comes to 1911s. When I typed "you" it was in the general sense, I was not referring to "one on Grant's forum". OK? Most production 1911s are shit, and it is totally unacceptable, but it really doesn't affect me. That's the Reader's Digest version.;)
I don't care about the state of current 1911 manufacture because, frankly, it doesn't affect me. I don't buy production guns, nor do I recommend them.
Same here...
Mace
I personally think 1911 manufacturing is at a golden age. However one has to PAY to get one. There are a number of excellent 'smiths/shops that put out an outstanding product.
And even for the hobbyist builder - there are a great deal of parts and information out there to help.
I personally would not trust ANY handgun without a "break-in" period of a few hundred rounds (ideally 1k). Sure odds are a Glock19 will run out of the box - but before I stake my life on something I personally want to know it will run.
I'm not sure... but are you complaining about a problem or problems that you haven't actually experienced yet? Don't believe half of the Internet hype, for every guy on the net complaining there are hundreds, perhaps even thousands of satisfied customers.
If I were to buy another 1911 I would look at a traditional Colt Series 70 or 80, or perhaps the enhanced XSE series is a light weight Commander was in the cards.
I have a couple of Series 80 Colts, a Government and a Commander that have run perfectly with original factory components for tens of thousands of rounds.
Cameron
olds442tyguy
09-04-07, 20:07
Why does the 1911 market suck?
Because no one has filled the void between production and custom. Semi custom simply doesn't exist, though some claim it does.
I just wish someone offered a 1911 with a basic fit, tool steel internals, and a fair price tag. If you can buy a production 1911 with a basic fit and crap internals for $700-$800, tool steel internals for $200-$300, why can't someone offer a no frills 1911 with decent parts for $1200-$1400.
Then again, this all coming from the guy who's dream 1911 uses stuff like a 4.25" BBL, a light rail, an integral plunger tube, and a big honking external extractor. :p
Grant is a S&W dealer and seems to like their EE if any 1911 is going to have one. Kimber's EEs didn't fare to well as your smithy friend noted so they switched back to internal.
I'd like to have an EE model but I went with Kimber and the IE will suffice just fine. :cool:
...why can't someone offer a no frills 1911 with decent parts for $1200-$1400.
Steve has built several. His 1911s are basic workhorses that should be offered by companies all over. You won't see them advertised, you have to drop an e-mail to inquire. Contact me or Steve directly.
I'm STILL waiting on Grant's 1911's!
Matt Edwards
09-05-07, 10:07
I think Damian kinda sums it up. It doesn't effect me. The "issues" that guys like Hilton and Lav mention in "units" does not apply for my TWO 1911s.
I have to say though, I do not maintain my 1911s any more then any other guns I have. I ONLY take them apart 'cause I "feel" like it.
olds442tyguy
09-05-07, 15:07
Steve has built several. His 1911s are basic workhorses that should be offered by companies all over. You won't see them advertised, you have to drop an e-mail to inquire. Contact me or Steve directly.
I don't think I'm ready to jump back on the 1911 bandwagon just yet, but when I do I'll definitely keep that in mind. :)
Not to be nosy Matt, but what is your other 1911?
a couple of years ago I bought a kimber TLE, one with the external extractor which was being sported as a great improvement to the weapon. my best friend bought one later that same week from a different dealer. neither would run, we could'nt even burn one full mag with out ejection problems. neither one of us wanted to admit that we each had a 1000 dollar paper weight. we tryed various magazines, different brands of ammo, etc. two other guys in my company had also bought EE kimbers, and they admitted the same. the numbers were stacking up, all were pointing to the extractor. i sent my kimber back to the factory and 4 weeks after i mailed it out, i got it back with a new "classic" slide. 3,000 rounds later all i've changed is the springs, with no malfunctions except for faulty mags. My friend did the same, and got his kimber back equally quick. I'm on my second kimber, with almost 1k through it , zero problems. I have'nt even cleaned it yet. i'm curious to see how long this holds out. kimber dumped alot of money and time replacing slides. they almost lost their reputation completely. i think they learned their lesson, and are putting out a better product because it. the 1911 is not a Glock. I like what Larry Vickers said about ithe 1911 being like a high maintance woman, because its very true. My advice is stay away from ANY EE 1911. its a shame that you don't always get what you pay for with firearms.
I wouldnt mind a kimber tactical pro or a Kimber CDP pro right out of the box(of course with internal extractors), i would give them a break in period of at least 250-300 rounds first but i wouldnt have any issues with it. i have seen more than a few of them that have run flawlessly even after multiple thousands of rounds.
One, you metioned a gun that you could use in case things went south in a hurry? for that i would say get a Glock, for as much as i love 1911's even now i know that the most reliable piece of gear out there right now is a Glock. but if you do want a 1911 for the money i think you cant beat a Kimber, just stay on top of the maintance.
JMHO
Joseywales
09-05-07, 20:15
I own and carry a Springfield Compact 1911 from back in the 90's. Since I have purchased it I have never had a problem. I have had the slide modified for Novak Tritium sights. HRBTS added to the frame. I just changed out the mainspring housing for a Wilson's speed chute. The plunger I cut myself with a drill and installed a guide rod. All of my parts are Wilson's. I have used Wilson mags, Shooting Star, and Colt. The key is to use quality parts.
Secondly, my 1911 is a steel frame and slide. I am not a fan of aluminum alloys. I have heard several people say that their Kimbers suck. I have heard many people brag about them. I have never heard anyone say that their Ed Brown or Wilson Combat sucks. But for $2300, it should come with a BJ or a free class at Front Site. Oh well, your life is worth it.
In other news, my friend recently purchased an XD-40. It jammed upon no end and new mags did not fix the problem. So he is selling it. He purchased a Ruger 454 Casull. It had problems as well. So he sent it back. It works well now.
I purchased a beretta M9, EAA 45 Colt, CZ75, HK USP45, and HK SOCOM 45. None have them have ever jammed with factory ammo. My reloaded lead ammo was slightly out of spec from time to time (bullet MFG error).
I just purchased a CZ Ringneck SXS Shotgun. After 8 rounds of trap, the right barrel wouldn't fire. For the past 180 years people have been making SxS shotguns. To make one today without flawless performance is inexcusable and unforgivable.
For the past 98 years people have been making 1911 type designs. I agree that the same can be said about 1911s.
The bottom line is that our world is full of people who have no pride in their work or their reputation. They worship at the altar of the almighty dollar and will sell their reputation to make a buck. Unless you are working with someone to be 100% committed to personal excellence, you will likely be disappointed at some point.
Good luck finding a perfect gun. I suggest a Wilson Combat CQB-LR. Another alternative is the HK USP (if you have large hands).
I feel the 1911 situation is like the AR situation. They are popular, and therfore there is money to be made in this market both in the sale of new firearms, and their related acessories and aftermarket parts. These are two of the most popular weapons platforms and also two of the most customized.
With so many people getting into the business of their manufacture there are bound to be those with good products and those with bad. Those with good QC and those without. Just like with AR's you may get a cheap parts gun that runs from day one, and you may get a factory one that doesn't.
Speaking from my statistical sample of exactly one, :D, I have to say that I have had no more malfunctions with my 1911 than with the other handguns I have owned. My Glock went to the Dept armorer more than my 1911 has been back to Springfield. I did have one FTE issue, which I notified SA of. I returned it on their dime and it came back after a very quick turnaround fixed and utterly reliable. I have had zero malfunctions since.
That being said I have to agree that the 1911 platform isn't for everyone. But it is for me. I like Glocks. I own and shoot Glocks. I want a G21. But I love 1911's. It is my go to handgun.
I don't think you have to buy a full house custom to get a reliable 1911, but like AR's, or any other platform, you should buy from a reputable manufacturer.
-RD62
I bought/sold/traded a sh*tload of 1911's during the 1990's and early 2000's. There were a couple of Kimbers along with a SA and S&W, but the majority were various Series-80 Colts.
These latter came without most of the now-standard features such as beavertail grip safeties, checkered backstraps, quality grips, recoil-spring rods, extended thumb safeties, mag wells, etc., which I had to add via aftermarket sources -- Ed Brown got a lot of my money back then, along with S&A and several others. For me though, this was half the fun. Put together a few handsome looking pistols, if'n I do say so myself.
Also though, they were universally loose-as-the-proverbial-goose by current standards. Lots of slide-to-frame play, along with even a tiny but detectable amount of barrel bushing wobble. My work usually included a replacement trigger to reduce/eliminate creep (which even a little really bugs me in a 1911), along with the outside stuff to make more ergonomic, but I always left the slide/frame/barrel as-was.
What these guns did in return was eat each and every round I fed them -- of all kinds of ammo and including lots of down-loaded match lead semi-wadcutters -- without malfunctions of any kind. Although bench accuracy was no-doubt less than the current crop of tight-@ss 1911's, mine were as-much/more accurate as I was as operator, especially in the kind of close-up action stuff I was using them for (IPSC and IDPA), so I never felt a sacrifice there.
Lessons ? ? ?:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Well, we could do a chart, like the M4 comparison chart. But after it was completed, there would be no 1911 brand left standing. :eek:
I agree the retail market for stock 1911's is a poor state of affairs. The major gun manufacturers remind me of US car makeers. The companies must not be run by gun guys, but wall street boys. They don't care what you want, but rather tell you what you want. Who wanted Kimber to install a series 80 type safety or external extractor?
If you're going to buy an off the shelf 1911 do so, but then send it to a trusted smith, like Ted Yost or Springfield Armory's Custom Shop and have them do a "reliability package" on it. Without this I wouldn't trust my life to them.
IMO the only other alternatives are to buy a Les Baer or Rock River 1911 which will run out of the box. I've seen Baers for as low at $1470. Or you can scan the gun boards and your club's bulletin board for used series I Kimbers which should require a lot less tweaking than a new gun.
CarlosDJackal
09-06-07, 16:50
I personally own 2 1911-style pistols that I could probably trust my life on. On is a Kimber Custom Royale that I bought off a guy a couple of years ago. This gun has worked flawlesly with teh Chip McCormick "Shooting Star", 8-round magazines I use. It does not like the Colt mags. My second is a Para Ordinance P 14-45 LDA. Except for the bump on its grip safety, I really enjoy shooting it.
However, IMHO both of these pistols are way too heavy to be carried for duty or off-duty. That and their size makes them Safe Queens. The primary pistol I carry for both on and off-duty are Glocks. I trust my life to these because they are very reliable and robust. Plus, they are not very heavy.
My first experience with the 1991s was when I was in the Army (1984-1988). The one they issued me a was a piece of crap!! It had a broken grip safety and a bent barrel. I used to leave it in my (locked) wall locker whenever we went to the field. In its place, I carried a taped-over water pistol. :D
The fact of the matter is, the 1911's technology is 100-years old (give ot take)!! Expecting a design that is that old to be perfect in comparison to the newer designs is not really fair. While this gun seems to be holding up very well in terms of its popularity (primarily because of its ergonomics); I personally prefer to carry the plastic gun on my hip.
It's akin to manual transmissions versus automatics. While some of the "purists" out there prefer to have a clutch pedal right beside their brake pedals; most of the population prefer automatics because (a) Clutching in bumper-to-bumper traffic is a real bitch (I drove one when I worked in Northern VA and DC)!! and (b) The current generation of automatic transmissions are just as reliable as the manual ones. Plus, they are actually better optimized to the style of driving as the vehicle they are designed for.
Personally, I have never seen 1911-type pistol make it through a a 2-day Handgun Course that I have attended without a single malfunction (or in a couple of instances, break). While other shooters have told me that either their 1911 (usually very heavily modified by a competent pistolsmith) or they have seen 1911s make it through such classes; I can only base my opinion on what I have personally observed. YMMV.
The one they issued me a was a piece of crap!! It had a broken grip safety and a bent barrel.
Uh, you couldnt even hand cycle the slide if the barrel was "bent."
Secondly, my 1911 is a steel frame and slide. I am not a fan of aluminum alloys. I have heard several people say that their Kimbers suck. I have heard many people brag about them. I have never heard anyone say that their Ed Brown or Wilson Combat sucks. But for $2300, it should come with a BJ or a free class at Front Site. Oh well, your life is worth it.
well i know of more than a couple of cases were a wilson combat and night hawks, that have not worked smoothly out of the box? i do like them but damm if i am paying 2000+ dollars for a 1911 it better tham run out of the bow, now needless to say there costumer service was awesome but i dont have a lifetime warranty, and just because my gun does it doesnt cover me.
If i most have a 1911 i would choose a Yost-Bonitz over anything else.
H&ks are awsome guns but they are really bulky unless you are talking about a P2000, for a carry i will besides a glock i also recomend a Kahr.
Why does the 1911 market suck?
Because no one has filled the void between production and custom. Semi custom simply doesn't exist, though some claim it does.
I just wish someone offered a 1911 with a basic fit, tool steel internals, and a fair price tag. If you can buy a production 1911 with a basic fit and crap internals for $700-$800, tool steel internals for $200-$300, why can't someone offer a no frills 1911 with decent parts for $1200-$1400.
Then again, this all coming from the guy who's dream 1911 uses stuff like a 4.25" BBL, a light rail, an integral plunger tube, and a big honking external extractor. :p
It's because the guys that CAN do that end up putting a little extra detail here and there or some gimmicks and end up wanting to call their pistols full custom anyway...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Iraq%201911/Range13Jun008.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Iraq%201911/1911-Iraq047.jpg
It was a Colt/Ithaca USGI
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Weapons/1911-Iraq004.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Weapons/1911-Iraq002.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Iraq%201911/1911-Iraq011.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Weapons/1911-Iraq.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v193/EvilKev/Iraq%201911/1911-Iraq025.jpg
Now your right - it took some doing. But the fact is the 1911 is about the only gun you can take a 1943 built gun and modernize to being a modern combat gun.
I have a total of 13 stoppages with it -- all FTF due to old ammo with dead primers (I use 230gr JHP for duty - but will shooting anything for training).
For civilian 1911 issues - I note that the majority of guns that have problems are from either people shooting poor ammo -- or adding shitty parts/mags.
Kinda like a M16FOW.
John_Wayne777
09-07-07, 12:03
Personally, I have never seen 1911-type pistol make it through a a 2-day Handgun Course that I have attended without a single malfunction (or in a couple of instances, break). While other shooters have told me that either their 1911 (usually very heavily modified by a competent pistolsmith) or they have seen 1911s make it through such classes; I can only base my opinion on what I have personally observed. YMMV.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y16/jwayne_777/mini-Les.jpg?t=1189183156
You've seen one now.
It's been through the Tactical Pistol II course at Blackwater twice.
5 day course. 2500-3000 rounds fired.
No cleaning. Sloppily added lubrication at the beginning of each day. A tough course on the equipment especially when done in the mud and the rain.
Ran like a top. Zero malfunctions. One slight issue with 10 round Wilson magazines that fed fine but didn't want to leave the weapon when I tried to eject it. I just kept an appropriate amount of lube on her and darned if she didn't just run like the Energizer bunny.
In fact, in the entire time I have owned it, it's had exactly one malfunction. A stovepipe on the third round I ever fired from it during a 400 round breakin period. That was probably my fault for limp-wristing a tight gun.
A properly built 1911 will easily survive a 2 day course....or a 5 day course....or a couple of 5 day courses sandwiched back to back....etc.
Properly built and sensibly maintained a 1911 will easily survive longer than the person who owns it.
Issues with the 1911 have nothing to do with how old the design is. It has to do with what it is made of and how it is made.
Who wanted Kimber to install a series 80 type safety or external extractor?
Kimbers don't have the Series 80 firing pin block, they chose to use the old Swartz style.
Kimber Safety
http://mysite.verizon.net/od45/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/kimbersafety.jpg
Colt Series 80
http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb274/OD1911/Series80.jpg
You've seen one now.
Yup! I just took my Les Baer TR through LMS Pistol I last weekend and she PERFORMED. :D
Mace
Submariner
09-07-07, 18:57
I just sent payment for the Colt Gunsite Concealed Carry Officer's Model which Obiwan posted for sale on the sale board. (http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6753) Here is the opinion of someone I trust on the matter:
I've got 2 and they will be the last 1911 I ever get rid of!!!! For the size of the gun there is no recoil, they are accurate beyond belief and I have never had a malfunction with them. If he is sending the Colt mags throw them away! They are trash. Replace the recoil spring every 1000 rds. faithfully with Brownells 18 lbs. variable power spring or a Wolff 18 lbs. Commander spring. Buy Wilson mags.
Looking forward to shooting/carrying it.
If you do throw out the Colt magazines, throw them my way.
The same companies that make Wilson's for them, make Colt's.
John_Wayne777
09-07-07, 20:21
Yup! I just took my Les Baer TR through LMS Pistol I last weekend and she PERFORMED. :D
Mace
My Baer has been a superb weapon. Most Baer owners I've talked to seem to be pretty happy with their purchase.
My only complaint is that she's a mighty expensive date, and she's kind of expensive to feed.
Thus I have been in the process of looking to find a weapon that is as easy to use as she is. Thusfar I'm impressed with my Burwell customized M&P. I got her for 400 bucks. Add the 50 bucks for the Burwell trigger job and I've got one heck of a sweet shooting pistol for less than an off the shelf staple-gun triggered Glock.
Score!
....of course all that has made me do is want an M&P9c and the M&P .45...:D
the1911fan
09-07-07, 20:39
Personally, I have never seen 1911-type pistol make it through a a 2-day Handgun Course that I have attended without a single malfunction (or in a couple of instances, break). While other shooters have told me that either their 1911 (usually very heavily modified by a competent pistolsmith) or they have seen 1911s make it through such classes; I can only base my opinion on what I have personally observed. YMMV.
Mine did very well at the Vickers course we attended...it only choked when using those crappy Wilson 10 round mags...according to Ken H. ALL 10 round mags are range mags only ....He's right
The Checkmate 7-rounder with the flat dimpled follower and Wolff 11# mag springs have never so much as hiccuped in any of my Colts.
I think Ones post about researching current 1911's and hearing about all the problems that so many have after spending big bucks is the same thing you will find on any forum, retailer feedback sites, and about any product you are looking to buy. Whether it be computer parts, a new LCD TV, motorcycles, ect..you hear the horror stories and it makes it damn near imposible to choose until you wade through the info, find people you know who have em, or just take the dive and buy.
Like the 2nd poster said, on the internet, if thats where you are doing alot of the research, which many do, you tend to hear most of the negatives out there and the percentages of problems verses how many actual units are out there may in fact be pretty small. A whole lot of people buy stuff, it works great and never go to these sites or bother to post positive stuff. Problem is, it's hard to know until you end up buying and see for yourself.
I guess the worst case scenario is you buy what you think is best for you...test it, run the hell out of it and if it ends up being fubar you dump it and move on to the next one.....or it ends up being just what you thought it was - and great, it works, you can depend on it...hooray
Or you can do some of the small fixes needed to make em work like they should....the Devil is in the details..
jmho
Ken
I have a Les Baer Police Special, a Les Baer TRS, a Wilson CQB, a Tibbets Colt, a LaRocca Colt, and two Greg Derr Caspians that haven't had any failures of any kind. I have a Glock 23 that is completely reliable and a Kahr PM9 that was a jam-o-matic until it had a little work and a few hundred rounds down the tube.
I believe that the quality of custom and limited production 1911 pistols can be terrific, but the surge in 1911 popularity encouraged mass-production and mass-consumption of inferior or mediocre products.
If I could only own one pistol and it had to cost less than $500.00, it would not be a new production 1911 (such as RIA, Taurus, Armscor, etc.).
I have a Les Baer Police Special, a Les Baer TRS, a Wilson CQB, a Tibbets Colt, a LaRocca Colt, and two Greg Derr Caspians that haven't had any failures of any kind. I have a Glock 23 that is completely reliable and a Kahr PM9 that was a jam-o-matic until it had a little work and a few hundred rounds down the tube.
I believe that the quality of custom and limited production 1911 pistols can be terrific, but the surge in 1911 popularity encouraged mass-production and mass-consumption of inferior or mediocre products.
If I could only own one pistol and it had to cost less than $500.00, it would not be a new production 1911 (such as RIA, Taurus, Armscor, etc.).
I agree that most likely any high end custom should run flawlessly, I think the original sentiment of the post is 'back in the day' you could buy off the shelf Colts for a reasonable cost and it ran like hell all day long, year after year without having to have it massaged into a $2000 gun.
It does seem kinda crazy to have to spend 2 or 3 grand to have a good running 1911 when the damn thing has been around a hundred years. :p
Matt Edwards
09-07-07, 23:10
My "primary" Wilson has made it through mutiple classes with out a glich. I went to a class a while back where I saw so meny "stoppages" it gave me pause. They were NOT with 1911s however.
If I was buying 1911s for a "unit", the current state of affairs may bother me. (even though it has very little to do with the gun and more to do with the manufactures) I am not a "unit". I'm just "Matt". "Matt" does not have much of an issue with his 1911s. At least not any more then anything else he has owned.
I agree that most likely any high end custom should run flawlessly, I think the original sentiment of the post is 'back in the day' you could buy off the shelf Colts for a reasonable cost and it ran like hell all day long, year after year without having to have it massaged into a $2000 gun.
It does seem kinda crazy to have to spend 2 or 3 grand to have a good running 1911 when the damn thing has been around a hundred years. :p
That's the pure essence of everything I meant to convey.
But, I think "back in the day", a factory Colt was the equivelent, fitting and part quality wise, of the high end guns. As the cost of skilled labor rose, short cuts, cheaper parts, etc took over, and whalla, here we are.
Bob
Yep. Minus some of the ridiculously tight fits that have become popular, I think you're right on.
But, I think "back in the day", a factory Colt was the equivelent, fitting and part quality wise, of the high end guns. As the cost of skilled labor rose, short cuts, cheaper parts, etc took over, and whalla, here we are.
Bob
I had the privilege of touring the Colt plant this past 18 July, they have no machines that "fit" their pistols and revolvers, it's still done by hand. They use two "cheaper" part's in their 1911 platform;
MIM
sear
disconnector
CAST
Thumb safety
grip safety
mag catch
FORGED
slide
receiver
barrel
slide stop
MACHINED from bar stock
hammer
all pins
bbl link
bbl bushing
trigger finger piece
ejector
firing pin
firing pin stop
extractor
plunger tube
Submariner
09-08-07, 13:22
You wouldn't happen to have a similar list for AR parts (and which are done in house), would you?
You wouldn't happen to have a similar list for AR parts (and which are done in house), would you?
No sir, all I have is this;
http://ar15barrels.com/tech/m4chart.gif
OD,
I did not mean to imply that Colts are that way, though most will observe that while todays Colts are good, they are not what they were in the '30's.
Actually, I think you kind made my point, Colts do have more hand fitting, and quality parts, and they generally cost more then the other high volume manufacturers.
Alot of people confuse features with quality, this is why you here " it cost to much for what you get". The quality fitting and parts don't count in the "what you get" department, only the hifh speed site, grip safety, etc etc. Regardless of the quality of the part and its fitting.
Bob
ETA....I think back in the early 1/2 of the last century Colt 1911 were the equivelent of the Glock. One manufacturer, with very few variables in the equation. as more manufactures entered into the fray, and shooters wanting their guns to do more, we ended up where we are today.
I also think, before long we'll see the same with Glocks. We already have different manufactures of slides and frames, and a variety of aftermarket small parts. The standard advice is to leave Glocks alone. You think we'll start to see the same trends and problems when everybody is making Glock's? How about an Ed Brown Glock, and you'll be called "tactikewl" for owning it.
Bob
We agree far more than we disagree, Bob. ;)
Submariner
09-09-07, 05:53
Thank you, OD*.
Army Chief
09-09-07, 08:37
Not to take anything away from the points already raised here, but I think at least part of what we're seeing in the 1911 world right now was wholly predictable, given market forces at work.
Once the high-capacity magazine ban went into effect, as we all know, a lot of people started looking back to the 1911. The logic there was sound: if you could no longer carry 15+ rounds of 9mm, then it made sense to move to fewer rounds of a more powerful cartridge -- hence the resurgence of the .45 ACP, and with it, the venerable 1911.
The problem with this is that, while the 1911 was becoming popular in a whole new way, it was increasingly finding its way into the hands of people who were not terribly famliar with the design, and often not very committed to learning how to keep it operating at peak efficiency. In other words, what was once the sidearm of professionals and dedicated pistoleros was increasingly being chosen by hobbyists and weekenders. Since it was never designed to conform to modern-day "idiot proof" pistol design standards, it should not surprise us that casual handgunners should be coming forward with new complaints about reliability and the 1911's (perceived) temperamental nature. This is probably more suggestive of operator ignorance and error than anything else, but we can afford to concede the point.
The other thing that didn't help the 1911 much was that, in response to this popular resurgence, most every serious arms manufacturer seemed to take a crack at offering one. Some of these turned out far better than others, but it was soon evident that even some of the best manufacturers in the business can fall well short when making a 1911 pistol. What might account for that? As stated elsewhere, the 1911 is as an engineering product of a bygone era, and it simply doesn't fare well in a semi-skilled, mass-assembly situation. Getting Old Slabsides to run like a sewing maching requires a skilled hand, a certain artisandship, and top-shelf materials.
SIG has learned that you can't just slap the parts together and make a 1911 work. Kimber has learned (and is still learning) that the short-term cost savings associated with inferior metallurgy will create long-term headaches. S&W's component quality is certainly decent, but they too have built more than a few problem pistols. Springfield has steadily improved over the years, but their best pistols are now priced with the likes of Brown, Wilson and other high-end operations. Colt remains the very best-bet for a production-grade 1911 that can consistently perform, and yet, even they have struggled with QC issues in the modern era.
What are the real lessons here? First, avoid budget-priced 1911s. It takes skilled hands to build a good one, and bench time is expensive. Second, familiarize yourself with the things that can bring a 1911 to its knees: bad magazines, poorly-adjusted extractors, bad magazines, garbage ammo, bad magazines, improperly-installed "add ons," bad magazines ... you get the idea.
The truth is that a properly set-up and properly employed 1911 is still one of the finest fighting handguns in the world, but those are two vitally-important caveats. There are no shortcuts.
Chief
The problem with this is that, while the 1911 was becoming popular in a whole new way, it was increasingly finding its way into the hands of people who were not terribly famliar with the design, and often not very committed to learning how to keep it operating at peak efficiency. In other words, what was once the sidearm of professionals and dedicated pistoleros was increasingly being chosen by hobbyists and weekenders. Since it was never designed to conform to modern-day "idiot proof" pistol design standards, it should not surprise us that casual handgunners should be coming forward with new complaints about reliability and the 1911's (perceived) temperamental nature. This is probably more suggestive of operator ignorance and error than anything else, but we can afford to concede the point.
It shouldn't be up to the hobbyist or weekender to maintain the damn thing other than to purchase serviceable magazines and keep the weapon properly cleaned and lubed. The end user shouldn't need armorer skills.
The other thing that didn't help the 1911 much was that, in response to this popular resurgence, most every serious arms manufacturer seemed to take a crack at offering one. Some of these turned out far better than others, but it was soon evident that even some of the best manufacturers in the business can fall well short when making a 1911 pistol. What might account for that? As stated elsewhere, the 1911 is as an engineering product of a bygone era, and it simply doesn't fare well in a semi-skilled, mass-assembly situation. Getting Old Slabsides to run like a sewing maching requires a skilled hand, a certain artisandship, and top-shelf materials.
This is the core point that needs to be repeated and understood.
Thank you, OD*.
You're welcome Sir. Sorry I couldn't be of more help.
It shouldn't be up to the hobbyist or weekender to maintain the damn thing other than to purchase serviceable magazines and keep the weapon properly cleaned and lubed. The end user shouldn't need armorer skills.
You don't need to be an armorer, IF the pistol is built correctly the first time.
As Army Chief stated, everybody and their brother builds a copy of the Colt 1911, not all do it well. Some are even arrogant enough to think they know more about the pistol than John Moses did.
You don't need to be an armorer, IF the pistol is built correctly the first time.
Agreed. So fundamentally it's a reverse engineering and manufacturing issue, and those clearly are out of the hands of the end user.
Agreed. So fundamentally it's a reverse engineering and manufacturing issue, and those clearly are out of the hands of the end user.
In many cases, yes it is a manufacturing issue, we know after nearly a century of service, it isn't a design issue.
Army Chief
09-09-07, 12:47
It shouldn't be up to the hobbyist or weekender to maintain the damn thing other than to purchase serviceable magazines and keep the weapon properly cleaned and lubed. The end user shouldn't need armorer skills.
I would certainly agree with that. That said, I've seen guys struggle with otherwise functional weapons because they couldn't figure out that they needed to peel stickers off of their magazines. Others can't seem to grasp the concept that, just because Chip McCormick will sell that new safety to you does not mean that you actually know how to install it. Still others will do things like investing in thin profile grips, and then try to attach them with standard screws. The list could go on and on, but the point is that there are so many options (of widely varied utility) that it is easy for an amateur to wade it over his head and "improve" a 1911 to the point where it will no longer even function. :)
Chief
It shouldn't be up to the hobbyist or weekender to maintain the damn thing other than to purchase serviceable magazines and keep the weapon properly cleaned and lubed. The end user shouldn't need armorer skills..
To quote Ken Hackathorn "If you're going to treat your gun the way most men treat their lawnmowers, buy a Glock."
The 1911 is an enthusiasit's weapon. You have to WANT to spend the time and effort learning about it and how to maintian it if you want it to perform to it's highest potential. It's like owning a Ducati or dating a supermodel...it's going to take a bit more effort, but the ride is worth it to some people!
It's like ... dating a supermodel...it's going to take a bit more effort, but the ride is worth it to some people!
In some ways, that might require less effort.
So.....
It sounds like we're all mostly in agreement, that its the market that's made the 1911 the PITA;) that it is. And, not the 1911 design itself.
Unless you count the necessity of the design for handfitting.
I do like a good 1911, but sometimes, you feel like your chasing your tail with them.
Bob
Army Chief
09-10-07, 00:38
I don't think you're too far from the mark, Bob. As others have observed, anything made by human hands has become exponentially more expensive in the modern era, and that has pushed the price point for a decent 1911 far above what most people are accustomed to paying when Glocks, SIGs, Berettas, HK, and S&Ws (et al) can all be had for far less.
Joe R. got it right: the 1911 remains a weapon that will serve an enthusiast (who is willing to become something of a student of the design) far better than a casual handgunner.
Chief
I don't know, I always considered the 1911 as a battle gun, something that can be thrown around and abused and still function. It is a heavy junk of steel and shoots a nice heavy round.
I never thought of it as a high end weapon, something that needs to be handled like a finicky bike like the Ducati with desmo valve adjustments every few miles, or a high strung car or even a high maintainence girl.
It is a basic design.
Seems like a lot of the problems occur from failure to feed and magazines....and if that is the case, it needs attention in the ramp area and proper spring tension, good mags and good selection of ammo type.
Have no idea why it would be so hard to figure how to produce one that works fine if built properly.
if built properly.
Thats the problem. most of them aren't.
Bob
After using and carrying 1911s for almost 30 years all I can say is that I'm sorry I waited as long as I did to get my Les Baer TRS (got it 4 years ago). This is a weapon I feel completely comfortable staking my and my loved ones lives on. (photo in pic thread)
Most of the varieties I had (Colts-Gov't, Commander, Officers ACP) worked all of the time, a few worked some of the time, 2 that barely worked at all. Those required the services of a quality 'smith before I felt comfortable shooting and then selling them.
With the continued popularity of the 1911, as has been pointed out it is a platform that requires intimate knowledge of it's manual of arms, with as long as they've been made there really shouldn't be any problems with them. However show me any mechanical device that doesn't have problems now & then.
Have no idea why it would be so hard to figure how to produce one that works fine if built properly.
There are several companies still building them correctly. Baer and Colt are two of them I have first hand experience with.
Thats the problem. most of them aren't.
Bob
You are problably right.
And shame on any manufacturer ( there are many, not only weapons) that shouldn't take pride on the function and quality of what they produce, especially weapons though.
No matter how cheap it is or expensive, if it doesn't work right it is worthless.
There are several companies still building them correctly. Baer and Colt are two of them I have first hand experience with.
The 2 Colts I owned worked flawlessly.
The Detonics I have has not malfunctioned in 20 years.
The new SA I bought seems to work perfect - more rounds will tell.
So it can be a great platform, by far my favorite, but that also has to do with how it feels in my hand verses almost any other type, how thin it is for conceal carry, 45acp, and it just is a fine looking pistol :D
I figure the military changed from 1911 due to wanting higher round mags and standard 9mm nato round, not because of reliability....just a guess on my part.
I figure the military changed from 1911 due to wanting higher round mags and standard 9mm nato round, not because of reliability....just a guess on my part.
Good guess in my opinion. ;)
I'm old enough to remember when every new "combat" (that's what we called the really cool stuff long before everything became "tactical" :p ) handgun that was introduced was compare to the big Colt as far as reliability was concerned.
I think reliabilty was an issue to some extent, but only due to the fact we were using the same pistols that rolled off the line in WWII. When selecting a new pistol, one option was a basic refurbishment plan to fix all the old 1911's, which was tanked in favor of a new pistol. One of my buddies' dad was a small arms trainer during WWII. He said the 1911's they used were from WWI and one of the stock pistols had six notches cut into the butt.
Don't forget these other factors in the choosing of a 9mm handgun.
- Commonality of caliber with NATO allies, 9mm.
- Soldiers then and now come into the military with very little or no previous experience with guns much less BB guns. A larger caliber would have required more training.
- Growing number of women entering the armed services, common wisdom said women couldn't handle a 45. (Try telling that to my wife who leaves 9mm's at home in favor of her Nighthawk 45).
These were factors that I recall hearing about.
The US began looking for a replacement after WW2 and into the '50's. THats where the Commander came from.
Rechambering them to 9mm was also considered. But, as Striker pointed out, the guns were old and worn out. NOt even from shooting like everyone likes to believe, but from and endless amount of fieldstripping, cleaning, and general neglect in the field.
And as Mike poited to, other consideration had to be taken into account, including advancements in manufacturing, etc.
It was time to move on, maybe they didn't go in the best direction, but something had to be done.
Bob
Army Chief
09-11-07, 10:18
- Soldiers then and now come into the military with very little or no previous experience with guns ...
The prevailing wisdom at the time was that NATO standardization was the single most compelling reason for the adoption of a 9mm platform; after all, we were still very much feeling the Cold War chill when the M9 was fielded in favor of the 1911. Since we assumed a showdown in the Fulda Gap was largely just a matter of time, it made sense to adopt the 9x19 catridge our allies were stockpiling.
The decision to change to a double action, high capacity design was also a sign of the times, I suppose. That said, there is truth to the notion that training issues were also a part of this, as a DA pistol definitely streamlines the learning curve for inexperienced shooters. One could make the case that, even in the old days, most recruits didn't enter the service as accomplished 1911 shooters, but what they did enter with was more overall familiarity with the proper handling and employment of firearms in general.
Finally, not much is made of the fact that the military hadn't issued a contract for 1911 pistols since the Second World War, but I consider it relevant. By the 80's, every 1911 in servce was 40+ years old. It is often suggested that serviceability was a major issue by then (though we had purchased 1911s in sufficient numbers so as to weaken this argument somewhat), though I would contend the GAO was just far more interested in investing in a new pistol (at the beginning of its service life), than in spending a lot of additional money to extend the life of an old one.
Chief
Finally, not much is made of the fact that the military hadn't issued a contract for 1911 pistols since the Second World War,
Actuatly they have, a least two small ones, 150 Springer's and 100 Kimbers.
Army Chief
09-11-07, 14:53
Hence my use of the word "hadn't" (i.e. from 1945 to 1985, for example), instead of "haven't" (i.e. to the present). ;)
Of course, we're really just talking about large-scale acquisition and fielding here, and not small/special unit buys; otherwise, the list would surely be larger than those 250 off-the-shelf pistols.
Chief
toddackerman
09-11-07, 17:24
I'm going to start off this post by saying that I'm really not the type of person that just goes off on internet tangets, ranting about every little thing but when it comes to the current crop of 1911's on the market I just have to stop and look at the research I've done and ask "What the hell?"
Going back in time a ways to when I turned 21 I was fortunate enough to have a job where I made enough money to buy and trade a lot of handguns. I loved 1911's and had owned them and had them in my family for my whole life. I went through a dozen different models of Colt .45 autos and never, not even once, did I have reliability issues with any of them. I just got them sale or trade, pulled them out of the box and started blasting away with them until I found something different I felt like trading for. No extractor this, or ejector that, or anything.
By the mid nineties I'd gotten primarily into Sig's, Glocks, Berettas, etc. and wound up only keeping one nice Springfield Armory full size pistol that I'd had customized. So here we are in 2007 and I'm working plain clothes LE and decided I'd really like to get back to a 1911 in .45 acp. But the problem now is finding something that I have confidence in paying good money for that will function reliably and get me through a worst case social encounter should things ever come to that.
The Sig 1911 gets numerous complaints even on the boards focusing on Sig, The Kimbers I feel are seriously hit and miss. I realize they're LAPD SWAT issue and USMC limited issue but I have a close friend who's a dept. instructor on a local PD in the county I work in, we shoot together multiple times a week and he went through four different extractors in his full size pistol. Finally he had to send the entire thing in and over twelve weeks later got back the gun with a new internal extractor slide on it. (It does function well now.)
So I start looking around and doing research on light weight 1911's, preferably of Commander sized length. I come across a Smith and Wesson 1911PD in a shop in Tulsa yesterday. A lot of nice features, a few simple things I'd change out like guide rod and hex head grip screws but overall a nice pistol in appearance with current features I like such as high sweep beavertail, flat mspg. housing, extended thumb safety, etc. Then I roll it over and there's a freaking external extractor.
So, given my misgivings about external extractor 1911's I noted the price (Which I thought was more or less reasonable enough.) and came home and spent most of last night researching the pistol. Sure enough as usual a lot of decent reviews but also a lot of complaints about...Their extractors...All of which contained the usual writings about the hassle of sending the gun in and a few with the customary "It had to be sent in several times". Totally unacceptable to me.
I can't understand why these companies can't seem to get it right. So, I guess I'm taking some cold cash with me to the next big gunshow in about a month and a half and seeing what I can come up with in a Series 70 or 80 Colt Light weight commander. Or possibly a new XSE Commander.
As a side note I've also thrown myself into researching Colt frame cracking and the history surrounding that phenomenon...As far as I can tell the frame might possibly develop an 1/8th inch or so crack but at least it'll likely fire and function.
Am I a solo act in feeling this way?
First...let me address the "Cracked Frame issue. I have had 4 Govt. Models, and 3 Commanders and have cracked every frame on every gun. I use to hold "Very Hard" shooting IPSC in the late 70's and early 90's. I recently had a Springfield TRP that was flawless that I didn't have enough rounds through to crack it, but who knows if I would have or not?
I was told many years ago by a Gunsmith at Pachmayer in L.A., that it had to do with the radius in the frame where the spring guide mates up to the frame. It is a 90 degree angle, which is the worst for any impact or vibration scenario. Supposedly that's why they don't use right angles on planes etc.
Some have tried to eliminate these cracks and just overall wear with things like the Wilson "Shok-Buff".
Regarding your other comments...I couldn't agree more! There is so much crap on the market today that it is unbelievable!
The TRP I spoke of was a very good pistol after I replaced some lesser quality parts with a quality sear, hammer, disconnector, slide stop and extractor. Yup...I replaced every one of those parts on a brand new gun. Sights, checkering, slide fit, barrel fit, Beaver Tail, and mag well were all done very well at the factory.....and then I sold it! Arghhhhh!!!!!!!!
IF money and time are not an issue, I would try to find a Series 70 Govt. Model (even if it was used without any modifications) and send it to one of the excellent pistol smiths out there. Hilton Yam at 10-8 comes to mind. Just beautiful work!!!! From what I have gathered from his writings and the testimonies of others who know him personally he can build anything you want, and doesn't believe in selling you something that you don't need.
I personally don't prefer the larger "Mass Custom Shops" , but that's just my opinion. Too much$$$ for what you get. But you're going to get a lot of opinions on this topic because every 'Semi-Custom" mass produced manufacturer has their following. Wilson, Kimber, Colt, Para Ordinance, S&W, Springfield Armory etc., and yes...IMHO these are "Semi-Custom Mass Produced pistols.
Good luck with your decision and purchase. Let us know what you finaly decide on.
Tack
Tim McBride
09-12-07, 03:30
Am I a solo act in feeling this way?
No you are not alone in this feeling.
The issue I've seen is that the manufactures are trying to do the wrong thing, they are trying to make a factory gun that is tight, accurate and reliable. I'd say that this is impossible in a factory run 1911. To make a 1911 all of these will require a good investment in time and money by a true smith. The 1911 should be coming from the factory with one thing in mind, reliability. Everything else is cake; IMHO. In a combat sidearm(what the 1911 was meant for) reliability is the key factor.
I am constantly amazed when I see gun rags talk up how 'tight' the gun is or what new whiz bang gizmo they added. The 1911 has a wide tolerance range; I could care less how sloppy the slide to frame fit is if the gun will hit minute of man and function 100%. No need to change or add things to the design; if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
This thread was statrted so long ago, the OP may not even realize it's still going.
In any case, the answer seems to be in the original post. Find a used Colt. Specific to the OP, he seems to have enough experience with Colt 1911s to know how to spot a good one and combing the used markets for an older 70-, or 80- series pistol may skip all the off-spec stuff out there.
My best 1911s have been the ones I got used. I would never trade my S-80 Combat Elite for an XSE CE.
In the end, the junk's out there because people buy it.
http://pic.phyrefile.com/s/st/stevanford/2009/11/16/holy20thread20resurrection.jpg
I think it's rather odd that you rehash an almost 3 year old thread for your 1st post after you've been a member here for 2 years. :confused:
Looks like Oscar beat me to it ;)
No you are not alone in this feeling.
The issue I've seen is that the manufactures are trying to do the wrong thing, they are trying to make a factory gun that is tight, accurate and reliable. I'd say that this is impossible in a factory run 1911. To make a 1911 all of these will require a good investment in time and money by a true smith. The 1911 should be coming from the factory with one thing in mind, reliability. Everything else is cake; IMHO. In a combat sidearm(what the 1911 was meant for) reliability is the key factor.
I am constantly amazed when I see gun rags talk up how 'tight' the gun is or what new whiz bang gizmo they added. The 1911 has a wide tolerance range; I could care less how sloppy the slide to frame fit is if the gun will hit minute of man and function 100%. No need to change or add things to the design; if it ain't broke, don't fix it!
Yes they can. Relax the slide to frame tolerances and the barrel bushing fit. Maintain the tight lockup of the barrel. Both my Springfield TRP and Les Baer TRS have been "properly loosened" and appropriate internal parts installed, fitted, etc.
Actually I'm apparantly still linked to the thread via e mail notifications as this one came through. I'd actually forgotten all about it.
In any event I did eventually solve the problem. I even made the solution my sig line.
Still, I will always have 1911's in the back of my mind. Right now I'm getting ready to contact the gunsmith at the US Shooting academy down in Tulsa to see about getting my Jarvis threaded barrel fitted. We'll see how it all goes from there.
I have one CZ, and the rest are 1911s, BHPs, and pre-lock S&Ws.
Just as a general observation, the pistols made in the late 1970s and 80s seemed to go downhill. The 90s were a crap shoot. But the more recent firearms are pretty good. CNC (Colt) and better casting (BHP) has allowed the quality to rise. The price of a new Colt is not that much different than a Kimber or upper end Springfield.
For the most part, casting technology has improved a great deal. The new BHPs are probably better than the forged pistols. And the CNC Colt Series 70 is more precisely milled than the 1970s pistol. And probably takes fewer man-hours to make.
The fact is that you are not going to get a new, high quality US or German made metal-framed pistol for less than $900 +/-. But it is not that hard to tweak a Springfield Mil Spec or Colt 1991 into a good pistol, if the frame and slide are good.
Still, this is only about function. A friend has a 1928 Colt Officer's Target .38. It is a standard production run pistol. And it is the nicest piece of metal workmanship I have ever seen. A perfect jewel. The guy that made it has been dead for a long time. So have his skills.
Perhaps I will be sending my TRP in for some work after all.
thopkins22
06-29-10, 14:45
I think it's rather odd that you rehash an almost 3 year old thread for your 1st post after you've been a member here for 2 years. :confused:
Looks like Oscar beat me to it ;)
Frankly I'm impressed and refreshed by it. We encourage people to search and find old threads rather than create multiple identical threads and then complain when a post appears in one of them.:confused:
ETA:With that said the post was a little off track as the thread was not still going.
I, at least find it interesting how my opinions have changed over just the last couple of years.
Bob
The original poster made his assessment in 2007.
One thing many of the posters miss(ed) is the GI gun was made (and inspected for acceptance) off a set of US Government drawings and prints with acceptable tolerances. If the guns were meant for Uncle (WWI, inter-war, or WWII) they were compared and proofed against the drawings and the acceptance criteria (the "Technical Data Package" and "MILSPEC" in today's terms). The inspector then stamped his initials on the frame as proof Uncle got what he paid for:
WGP Monogram: Walter G. Penfield, Major Colt S/N 1-101,500
GHS Monogram: Gilbert H. Stewart. Found on Colt M1911s SN 101,500 to 230,000, M1907, M1917, M1903, and M1 rifles at different periods.
JMG Monogram: J.M. Gilbert found on Colt 1911s from 1917 to 1918 SN 230,001 to 302,000.
Eagle/Number: This replaced the personalized monograms about S/N 300,000 to end of WWI production (1919)
FJA: Frank J. Atwood. Found on Remington Rand and Ithaca 1911A1s (entire production).
EEC: Edmund E. Chapman Remington UMC S/N 1-21676
WTG: Walter T Gorton Colt S/N 700,000-710,000
CSR: Charles S Reed Colt S/N 717,282-723,000
RS: Robert Sears Colt S/N 723,000 to 750,500
WB: Waldemar Broberg Colt S/N 750,500 to 861,000
GHD: Guy H. Drewry Colt S/N 845,000 to 2,360,600
JSB: John S. Begley, very late 1945 Colt 1911 A1 to end of WWII production (1945-Very rare)
EB: "RIA" for Rock Island Arsenal and "EB" for Elmer Bjerke.
FK: Frank Krack "FK" as well as "RIA".
A USGI contract barrel or slide made by IMI in 1985 or another sub in 1993 will fit a GI pistol made in 1918, 1943, or even a new production pistol in 2013.
There are now dozens of Government Model clone manufacturers. Not quite sure how many make them off the original drawings and specs (even Colt has replaced parts with MIM and plastic). Until the Series 70 re-issue everything coming out of Hartford had Series 80 guts.
In the AR/M4/M16 world there aren't a whole lot of manufacturers working off USGI TDPs, and there are hundreds of variants and subs producing better-than-GI to "You gotta be shitting me" quality.
Busting on GI M1911A1s is like busting on M16s and M4s. Eventually you get worn-out guns that no number of brand-new parts is gonna fix.
Uncle OWNS the USGI TDP. If he wanted to, today, he could put out a new A1 contract for bid. What would we get, and what would we have to pay per gun (no MIM, no plastic, no Series 80 guts)?
How do you think it works when FN makes M16s and M4s while Colt is pumping out M240s?
Disassemble a dozen GI guns, throw the parts in a tub, reassemble at random, go to war.
Disassemble a dozen from off tables at the SHOT Show, repeat the drill, what do you get?
I'm going to start off this post by saying that I'm really not the type of person that just goes off on internet tangets, ranting about every little thing but when it comes to the current crop of 1911's on the market I just have to stop and look at the research I've done and ask "What the hell?"
[truncated]
As a side note I've also thrown myself into researching Colt frame cracking and the history surrounding that phenomenon...As far as I can tell the frame might possibly develop an 1/8th inch or so crack but at least it'll likely fire and function.
Am I a solo act in feeling this way?
No, I am in the same boat as you. I purchased my first 1911 in 2005 and I think it went back to SA 8 times approximately, and the last time it came back it looked like it was dragged by a truck.
I have bought other 1911 pattern pistols since then. I purchased an EMP which was so plagued with issues, the best customer service in the world couldn't fix it. I had a Colt that worked well out of the box, but was pretty basic.
It isn't worth it anymore, imho. The 1911 is a lot of fun to own, shoot and customize, but I don't have enough time to drive to the FedEx hubs anymore. I keep my original 1911, but I shoot Glock now.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.