View Full Version : Why do FLGRs exist?
Seems like the only thing they do is make it harder to take down a pistol, no?
I came across this article after I googled my question and it said that the accuracy advantage was not even true...
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BTT/is_147_24/ai_62655365/
Out of all the gunboards I post in, there is a reason I want to ask this here. ;)
FLGR's do provide additional forward weight, providing additional recoil control for competition. Personally, I would never put one on a defensive use 1911.
FLGR's do provide additional forward weight, providing additional recoil control for competition. Personally, I would never put one on a defensive use 1911.
Me either. :nono: Which is why I ask...
Competition, meh. Not my thing.
Me either. :nono: Which is why I ask...
Competition, meh. Not my thing.
The only competitions in which I have been involved had a permanent penalty for second place and the FLGR had no benefit.
Gimmicks like the FLGR come and go and will always have many fools flock to its banner. Reliable is a sole survivor and it lasts forever.
Littlelebowski
12-01-11, 07:50
The only competitions in which I have been involved had a permanent penalty for second place and the FLGR had no benefit.
Gimmicks like the FLGR come and go and will always have many fools flock to its banner. Reliable is a sole survivor and it lasts forever.
You had to go to a 1911 in combat?
The only competitions in which I have been involved had a permanent penalty for second place and the FLGR had no benefit.
Gimmicks like the FLGR come and go and will always have many fools flock to its banner. Reliable is a sole survivor and it lasts forever.
In my experience, FLGRs don't necessarily negatively affect function. In fact it may help keep the recoil spring from binding with the added benefit of more weight at the muzzle end for better recoil control. People's aversion to them seems to be rooted in the fact that you can't rack the slide from the muzzle one handed & that it takes more time and a "tool" (paperclip) to field strip the gun. IMO this is inconsequential since you can't rack the slide from the muzzle with most (if not all?) modern duty/defensive pistols (I prefer to use the rear use the rear sight method) and I don't forsee myself needing to field strip my guns when I wouldn't have:
A.) Time
B.) Tools
C.) Cleaning Gear
Other may disagree but the FLGR hate is overblown in my book. If I still shot 1911's, I'd take it either way.
In my experience, FLGRs don't necessarily negatively affect function. In fact it may help keep the recoil spring from binding with the added benefit of more weight at the muzzle end for better recoil control. People's aversion to them seems to be rooted in the fact that you can't rack the slide from the muzzle one handed & that it takes more time and a "tool" (paperclip) to field strip the gun. IMO this is inconsequential since you can't rack the slide from the muzzle with most (if not all?) modern duty/defensive pistols (I prefer to use the rear use the rear sight method) and I don't forsee myself needing to field strip my guns when I wouldn't have:
A.) Time
B.) Tools
C.) Cleaning Gear
Other may disagree but the FLGR hate is overblown in my book. If I still shot 1911's, I'd take it either way.
I don't hate the FLGR. I'm indifferent to it. It's OK if people like them and want to run them. I prefer to stay away from unnecessary additions to my tools.
FLGR's do provide additional forward weight, providing additional recoil control for competition. Personally, I would never put one on a defensive use 1911.
Why? Have they presented problems with reliability? If they provide additional recoil control for competition, would they not provide the same for any other use?
I've always had the same opinion as majority here - unnecessary addition. Then I took a class with PMac in October, you can check the multitude of AARs here. He had a 1911 that was a replica of his work pistol, a pistol he not only carried but took into action. That pistol was set up against all "rules of wisdom", including FLGR. That got me to think how entrenched and dogmatic a 1911 crowd is, voicing their opinions against mods that do not detract from reliability and at least MAY increase performance.
I have a tungsten FLGR coming in on Friday and I'll be doing some timed drills to see how much, if any, it adds to performance. Until then, I'll refrain from stating that it is useless, unnecessary etc etc.
John Holbrook
12-01-11, 13:36
Let me stir the mud a bit!!! This is a SW1911 that I de-enhanced!!! I removed the FLGR and replaced the hammer, MSH, grip safety, added the recoil spring guide and spring cap with all GI parts.. I also added the Colt rubber stocks and added Trijicon Night Sights. The trigger is GI 1911 type that has been skeletonized... In my opinion, the SW1911 is the best of the clones....
I prefer the external extractor. I have worked on 1911s for many years and have replaced many extractors with broken tips.. SW has used the external type very successfuly for a long time... Even the Hi Power uses this type now....
I have put a lot of rounds of all types through this .45 with ZERO malfunctions.... It will eat anything!!! I also have combat experience with a stock GI Colt M1911A1 and I have added a link to one of those incidents. There is NO second place in a gunfight!!!!!
The first rule of gunfighting is, BRING A GUN THAT WORKS!!!
http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/legends/serious.htm
http://fototime.com/%7BEA9BA37D-ABAC-4B6A-8FFC-301FF0627340%7D/origpict/SW%25201911.JPG
Below is the Colt that I used in Vietnam....
http://fototime.com/%7B2C3C5CB7-CD73-4F1C-A19F-791498BD32A6%7D/origpict/Colt%25202300270%2520Right.JPG
Glad you made it out of that.
Where you from in San Patricio Co?
That's where I live now!
John Holbrook
12-01-11, 21:53
Glad you made it out of that.
Where you from in San Patricio Co?
That's where I live now!
I was born and raised in Sinton. My father was the sheriff of the county from 1940 thru 1946. I still have many relatives in San Pat and Nueces Counties........ My sister lives in Corpus...
I seem to recall reading way back in the '90s that the main idea was to help the gun cycle and lock up consistently...sounded good to me right? So I installed one...gun shot fine but not any better (in my hands) than without so I took it out.
If it gives you more confidence then I say go for it as long as it doesn't affect reliability.
I do find it interesting that most modern pistol designs have one...
I've shot thousands of rounds through M1911A1s with tungsten guide rods, specifically made by Heinie and Wilson. I like the additional weight the rods add forward of the barrel link, however the caveat is I've had them fail at 5,000 rounds and at 100 rounds, fracturing and breaking off where the rod attaches to the steel guide head. I knew exactly when they happened because I heard them go clanking downrange on the concrete floors in indoor ranges.
I haven't used one in nearly 17 or 18 years.
They aren't necessary and for a combat weapon I would strongly recommend NOT using one. They will help reduce muzzle flip on a gun used for games and routine training, especially if shooting lighter 185-grain target loads.
If it breaks there's NOTHING guiding the spring and it starts to bind between the receiver "Dust cover," the bottom of the barrel, and the end of the slide and spring cap.
Do you remember what the original idea was behind them?
I've shot thousands of rounds through M1911A1s with tungsten guide rods, specifically made by Heinie and Wilson. I like the additional weight the rods add forward of the barrel link, however the caveat is I've had them fail at 5,000 rounds and at 100 rounds, fracturing and breaking off where the rod attaches to the steel guide head. I knew exactly when they happened because I heard them go clanking downrange on the concrete floors in indoor ranges.
I haven't used one in nearly 17 or 18 years.
They aren't necessary and for a combat weapon I would strongly recommend NOT using one. They will help reduce muzzle flip on a gun used for games and routine training, especially if shooting lighter 185-grain target loads.
If it breaks there's NOTHING guiding the spring and it starts to bind between the receiver "Dust cover," the bottom of the barrel, and the end of the slide and spring cap.
Well, if my experience repeats yours, we'll soon add EGW to the list of no-gos for tungsten rods. Then again, with current 45 ammo prices, who knows when I get to 5K rounds...
Travelingchild
12-02-11, 23:11
...that it takes more time and a "tool" (paperclip) to field strip the gun...
Other may disagree but the FLGR hate is overblown in my book. If I still shot 1911's, I'd take it either way.
Yes overblown, I have a EdBrown full size & SW PD Both came with FLGRs no problems over 11thousand in the PD & coming up on 7thousand the the EB.
Something must be wrong with mine because I've never needed a "TOOL" I simply press on the edge of the plug turn the bushing & field strip it like any other 1911.
Alaskapopo
12-02-11, 23:16
The only competitions in which I have been involved had a permanent penalty for second place and the FLGR had no benefit.
Gimmicks like the FLGR come and go and will always have many fools flock to its banner. Reliable is a sole survivor and it lasts forever.
Competition is a great way to hone and test your skill against other shooters with simulated stress. When I carried a 1911 I had versions with and without a FLGR and frankly its not a big deal either way. If you want the most recoil control get a full length guide rod. Furthermore the merits of a FLGR in an actual gun fight or the percieved disadvantges are not likely to be seen at all. The shooter not the gun is what mattes most.
Pat
Why? Have they presented problems with reliability? If they provide additional recoil control for competition, would they not provide the same for any other use?
I've always had the same opinion as majority here - unnecessary addition. Then I took a class with PMac in October, you can check the multitude of AARs here. He had a 1911 that was a replica of his work pistol, a pistol he not only carried but took into action. That pistol was set up against all "rules of wisdom", including FLGR. That got me to think how entrenched and dogmatic a 1911 crowd is, voicing their opinions against mods that do not detract from reliability and at least MAY increase performance.
I have a tungsten FLGR coming in on Friday and I'll be doing some timed drills to see how much, if any, it adds to performance. Until then, I'll refrain from stating that it is useless, unnecessary etc etc.
I had one break on and early Springfield Mil-Spec I had "upgraded". In 2004 I came in 3rd overall in CDP at the IDPA Nationals, behind Robbie Leatham and Greg Martin with a Wilson KZ-45. That gun didn't come from Wilson with a FLGR and I didn't feel that it needed one.
Gentlemen, thank you for the discussions.
While I won't lie that my tastes in 1911s lean more toward the traditional, I really did wonder why the rods got longer.
So I googled it, read that bit I posted in my OP and them came here for further discussion and enlightenment.
Say, are there any cases of springs binding at all with USGI length rods anyway?
wetidlerjr
12-03-11, 05:59
I have only one 1911 with a FLGR and it is a Colt Commander XSE. It doesn't require any special tools or any different technique to take it down and it has never caused me any problems. On the other hand, I have never had a recoil spring bind in any of my other 1911s that have standard guide rods. To me, a FLGR is something that neither adds or detracts from the operation of a 1911. I have no intention, at this time, to remove the FLGR from my Commander but I will not waste my time or money replacing a standard guide rod with one. YMMV :cool:
Gentlemen, thank you for the discussions.
While I won't lie that my tastes in 1911s lean more toward the traditional, I really did wonder why the rods got longer.
So I googled it, read that bit I posted in my OP and them came here for further discussion and enlightenment.
Say, are there any cases of springs binding at all with USGI length rods anyway?
I had one break on and early Springfield Mil-Spec I had "upgraded". In 2004 I came in 3rd overall in CDP at the IDPA Nationals, behind Robbie Leatham and Greg Martin with a Wilson KZ-45. That gun didn't come from Wilson with a FLGR and I didn't feel that it needed one.
Who knows, mebbe you would've beaten Leatham if you had a FLGR in your KZ...:D
Seriously, those bits info about rods breaking are important since reliability cannot be compromised. I had two guns with stainless steel FLGR, both Kimbers. The 5 inch one had about 300 rounds until I replaced it with regular guide. The 4 inch had a bull barrel and FLGR by design. That one had over 4K without any issues until I traded the gun.
John Holbrook
12-04-11, 09:17
This discussion kinda reminds me of a sign I posted by my home swimming pool when I lived in Austin, Texas.
Swimming attire is OPTIONAL.
If you need it wear it and if you don't, dont!!!
I have found no reason to use FLGRs, so I don't use them!!!
This discussion kinda reminds me of a sign I posted by my home swimming pool when I lived in Austin, Texas.
Swimming attire is OPTIONAL.
If you need it wear it and if you don't, dont!!!
So, it was you who started that whole "Keep Austin weird" thing, huh? :)
You never hear stories of a standard GI plug failing. That speaks volumes. For me it's no brainer really.
Littlelebowski
12-04-11, 10:44
I've never understood the whole "it will be easier to disassemble in the field" argument. Silly. However, I'm told that the GI assembly makes one handed racking easier?
I've never understood the whole "it will be easier to disassemble in the field" argument. Silly. However, I'm told that the GI assembly makes one handed racking easier?
With the GI length rod you could catch the front of the pistol on a table or other hard surface to rack the slide.
John Holbrook
12-04-11, 11:59
Once upon a time long, long ago in a land far far way I was crouched down in a rice paddy, and a Marine Captain handed me a Colt M1911A1. I whispered in his ear, "Is it loaded", and he said "Yes, there is a round in the chamber and 7 in the clip". Under the circumstances, I checked and used the technique in the photo to find out. I slid the slide back until I could see brass, and then let the slide lock forward quietly, and waited...... Shortly thereafter it became necessary to use the Colt for the purpose for which it was intended, and it performed flawlessly!!!!
http://fototime.com/%7B22C15934-19FD-4B50-BC36-CB6F3EAE1C7F%7D/origpict/Thumb%2520open...JPG
I've never understood the whole "it will be easier to disassemble in the field" argument. Silly. However, I'm told that the GI assembly makes one handed racking easier?
It requires less tools, theoretically, than two-piece guiderods which protrude from the front of the slide enough to prevent installation without disassembling the rod.
There are flush-fit guidrods, however, which will not cause this problem.
My understanding is that the original use of the FLGR is to add weight towards the muzzle to reduce flip.
John Holbrook
12-04-11, 12:28
Here is where the FLGRs that I have removed from guns that I have bought wind up..
http://fototime.com/%7B0CDDC8AD-0EA1-4762-A916-D07DE6B3A2D5%7D/origpict/FLGR%25201.JPG..
John Holbrook
12-04-11, 12:43
Now, here is a gadget that actually works!! It is called a Group Gripper and as you can see, it has a flat spring the helps barrel lockup by pushing against the link!!! I have had this one for years and I don't even know if they are still avaiable..
Yes they are!!!! And a very reasonable price!!!
http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Group-Gripper-Kit-Government/productinfo/12G/
http://fototime.com/%7B9DF9130B-442A-47EE-A3E9-39D1B34A0F88%7D/origpict/Group%2520Gripper.JPG
Now, here is a gadget that actually works!! It is called a Group Gripper and as you can see, it has a flat spring the helps barrel lockup by pushing against the link!!! I have had this one for years and I don't even know if they are still avaiable..
Yes they are!!!! And a very reasonable price!!!
http://shopwilsoncombat.com/Group-Gripper-Kit-Government/productinfo/12G/
http://fototime.com/%7B9DF9130B-442A-47EE-A3E9-39D1B34A0F88%7D/origpict/Group%2520Gripper.JPG
Only downside to those is that the Wilson version is full length, and they require a fairly hefty recoil spring to keep the gun in battery. i used one on a very loose Gi 1911 for a while before installing a proper barrel and bushing upgrade.
There are flush-fit guidrods, however, which will not cause this problem.
I have one of those and there is no time difference in assembly/take down comparing to a standard plug.
With the GI length rod you could catch the front of the pistol on a table or other hard surface to rack the slide.
Yep, that is it.
There is one proponent of full-length rod (a gunsmith) who lists FLGR preventing this possibility as a positive feature, quoting a LEO-involved incident.
Once upon a time long, long ago in a land far far way I was crouched down in a rice paddy, and a Marine Captain handed me a Colt M1911A1. I whispered in his ear, "Is it loaded", and he said "Yes, there is a round in the chamber and 7 in the clip". Under the circumstances, I checked and used the technique in the photo to find out. I slid the slide back until I could see brass, and then let the slide lock forward quietly, and waited...... Shortly thereafter it became necessary to use the Colt for the purpose for which it was intended, and it performed flawlessly!!!!
http://fototime.com/%7B22C15934-19FD-4B50-BC36-CB6F3EAE1C7F%7D/origpict/Thumb%2520open...JPG
So, correct me if I am wrong, you're press-checking with thumb fully inside the trigger guard?
So, correct me if I am wrong, you're press-checking with thumb fully inside the trigger guard?Lol! I've seen that technique before. A horrible practice IMO. You can press check a pistol with the slingshot technique MUCH more safely and it works on any auto other than race guns with optics (the reason front serrations came to be anyway). Inserting a thumb into the small guard of an off safe 1911 is extremely risky.
As for FLGR's... Pat McNamara has one in his and it's a replica of the gun he carried on active duty. That to me is worth far more than ten thousand Internet opinions.
As for FLGR's... Pat McNamara has one in his and it's a replica of the gun he carried on active duty. That to me is worth far more than ten thousand Internet opinions.
Yep, I alluded to this in my post on the first page. Tungsten one, too. In fairness, I was so preoccupied with asking him about adjustable sight on that pistol that I forgot to ask if FLGR was in fact on his work gun, or it was a later addition.
Between S&A magwell, adjustable sights, FLGR and oversized mag release button, his 1911 has enough stuff to give 1911 purist a stroke.
Robb Jensen
12-04-11, 13:41
I've only ever used one in my old custom built STI Limited division "race gun", tungsten for added muzzle weight.
I use a S&W M&P40 Pro 5" now for Limited.
Yep, I alluded to this in my post on the first page. Tungsten one, too. In fairness, I was so preoccupied with asking him about adjustable sight on that pistol that I forgot to ask if FLGR was in fact on his work gun, or it was a later addition.
Between S&A magwell, adjustable sights, FLGR and oversized mag release button, his 1911 has enough stuff to give 1911 purist a stroke.
Well, purists aside, I'm a strong believer that 1911s, like ARs, should be built to accommodate the user, and to be reliable. John Moses Browning's gun is great for the masses, just like a Glock is, but even Glocks get modified and upgraded to fit individuals.
I'll join the fun.
I dumped my Springfield Loaded's FLGR and have never looked back. I just hated having to have an allen wrench around to take down my 1911 mostly because it kept running away and hiding from me between take downs.
: )
I'll join the fun.
I dumped my Springfield Loaded's FLGR and have never looked back. I just hated having to have an allen wrench around to take down my 1911 mostly because it kept running away and hiding from me between take downs.
: )
No kidding - I saw that contraption and it was the first thing that I yanked off my Loaded.
John Holbrook
12-04-11, 14:03
I have one of those and there is no time difference in assembly/take down comparing to a standard plug.
Yep, that is it.
There is one proponent of full-length rod (a gunsmith) who lists FLGR preventing this possibility as a positive feature, quoting a LEO-involved incident.
So, correct me if I am wrong, you're press-checking with thumb fully inside the trigger guard?
NO, in the photo I had to use my entire thumb because I was taking the photo with the other hand!!! In practice, I was holding the Colt by the grip with my right hand. Remember, THIS HAPPENED IN ACTUAL COMBAT WITH 3 VC, about 3 meters away. I did not want to alert them, and I had better control over the slide using this way to check the chamber, besides I am used to doing it this way. TRAIN LIKE YOU FIGHT. Shooting people that can shoot back is a tad different than punching holes in paper. FIGHT THE WAY YOU TRAIN!!! Also, the Colt was muddy and was dripping water which made the slide slick. Under the circumsatnces, that proved the best way to check for a round in the chamber....
I do not want to seem condescending, that is the way I short rack the slide to check the chamber, and to check the disconnector operation etc...... I HAVE NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENTAL DISCHARGE IN OVER 70 years of shooting 1911s... My dad, who was a Texas sheriff, had me shooting his Government Model when I was about 8 years old.... That fact saved my life in combat because I got ZERO training in the Navy!!!!
Who knows, mebbe you would've beaten Leatham if you had a FLGR in your KZ...:D
Seriously, those bits info about rods breaking are important since reliability cannot be compromised. I had two guns with stainless steel FLGR, both Kimbers. The 5 inch one had about 300 rounds until I replaced it with regular guide. The 4 inch had a bull barrel and FLGR by design. That one had over 4K without any issues until I traded the gun.
HAHA! Yeah, he was about 30 full seconds ahead of me, so I doubt a FLGR would have made up the difference! :D
Thank You for your service, Mr. Holbrook.
Full-length guide rods had appeared in some non-US designs before WW2. Most were pocket-pistols, although there were exceptions like the Radom Vis and Obregon. I believe the first major US design to feature one was the S&W Model 39.
The earliest aftermarket full-length guide rod I've seen advertised for the M1911 goes back to the early 1960s. The marketer was the prolific inventor Max Atchisson. The patent covered two variants: one was conventional while the other extended beyond the muzzle. You'll note that Atchisson made some of the same claims for the guide rod that we still see today like smoother cycling and eliminating kinking of the recoil spring.
US Patent #3,122,061 - Recoil Spring Guide and Muzzle Weight (http://www.google.com/patents?id=uyhgAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&dq=Atchisson&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=0&as_miny_ap=&as_maxm_ap=0&as_maxy_ap=&as_drrb_is=b&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&f=false)
I felt like this is tangentially related and thus worth posting.
They do have a pic of the muzzle too, if anyone cares.
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/combat-handguns/jeff-coopers-1911-45acp/
personally i hate full length guide rods. My kimber and springfield came with one. Shot with them with no problems. Then got rid of them for GI length guide rods and can't tell the difference when shooting....only when taking it apart. So much easier to break down with GI rods.
Full-length guide rods had appeared in some non-US designs before WW2. Most were pocket-pistols, although there were exceptions like the Radom Vis and Obregon. I believe the first major US design to feature one was the S&W Model 39.
The earliest aftermarket full-length guide rod I've seen advertised for the M1911 goes back to the early 1960s. The marketer was the prolific inventor Max Atchisson. The patent covered two variants: one was conventional while the other extended beyond the muzzle. You'll note that Atchisson made some of the same claims for the guide rod that we still see today like smoother cycling and eliminating kinking of the recoil spring.
US Patent #3,122,061 - Recoil Spring Guide and Muzzle Weight (http://www.google.com/patents?id=uyhgAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&dq=Atchisson&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=0&as_miny_ap=&as_maxm_ap=0&as_maxy_ap=&as_drrb_is=b&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=2#v=onepage&f=false)
But that begs the question of whether there really is any kinking with a g.i. guide rod. Once compressed, the spring is contained inside the recoil spring plug and there may be 1/2 inch exposed between the plug and the guide rod?
But that begs the question of whether there really is any kinking with a g.i. guide rod. Once compressed, the spring is contained inside the recoil spring plug and there may be 1/2 inch exposed between the plug and the guide rod?
I've yet to see a 1911 recoil spring that was permanently kinked or any more "non-linear" than one run on a FLGR. My new Colt Rail Gun didn't come with a FLGR and I won't be adding one. I just don't see the need.
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s157/Glocktogo/DSC_1119.jpg
I dunno about anyone else, but FoLGeRs exists to wake me up in the morning. :D
I've yet to see a 1911 recoil spring that was permanently kinked or any more "non-linear" than one run on a FLGR. My new Colt Rail Gun didn't come with a FLGR and I won't be adding one. I just don't see the need.
Dude WTF? This is the second thread I have seen you post pics of that gun. You need to stop now, it serves no purpose other than to make poor guys like me start rummaging thru the house to see what I could sell to get one.
Dude WTF? This is the second thread I have seen you post pics of that gun. You need to stop now, it serves no purpose other than to make poor guys like me start rummaging thru the house to see what I could sell to get one.
Maybe we should start a collection.
But that begs the question of whether there really is any kinking with a g.i. guide rod. Once compressed, the spring is contained inside the recoil spring plug and there may be 1/2 inch exposed between the plug and the guide rod?
I suspect if recoil spring kinking was ever an issue, it came from phobic and compulsive Bullseye shooters who refuse turn the barrel bushing if the slide is in battery lest they cause wear to the fit between the bushing and barrel. The preferred method for disassembly was to pull the slide stop; remove the slide/barrel assembly; then the recoil spring, plug, and guide; and then move the barrel out of battery so they could turn the bushing.
The simple answer is because people are stupid. There's a few instances where they are necessary by design but other than that companies put them in there because they know their customers don't know any better and will see something "different" and think that therefore it must be better.
The handgun accessory business is a multimillion dollar one with plenty of folks whose job it is to come up with useless shit they can sell to the uninformed. This has brought us such items as pistol bayonets and tungsten guide rods. It has always been this way and always will be.
David Thomas
12-10-11, 23:49
The simple answer is because people are stupid. There's a few instances where they are necessary by design but other than that companies put them in there because they know their customers don't know any better and will see something "different" and think that therefore it must be better.
The handgun accessory business is a multimillion dollar one with plenty of folks whose job it is to come up with useless shit they can sell to the uninformed. This has brought us such items as pistol bayonets and tungsten guide rods. It has always been this way and always will be.
I do not think it wise or appropriate to call people stupid just because their opinion differs from yours. I know a couple of very experienced and smart shooters running 1911s with tungsten guide rods.
Alaskapopo
12-11-11, 00:17
I do not think it wise or appropriate to call people stupid just because their opinion differs from yours. I know a couple of very experienced and smart shooters running 1911s with tungsten guide rods.
A big +1 people not recognizing the obvious value of reduced muzzle flip and reduced recoil are also stupid.
Pat
I suspect if recoil spring kinking was ever an issue, it came from phobic and compulsive Bullseye shooters who refuse turn the barrel bushing if the slide is in battery lest they cause wear to the fit between the bushing and barrel. The preferred method for disassembly was to pull the slide stop; remove the slide/barrel assembly; then the recoil spring, plug, and guide; and then move the barrel out of battery so they could turn the bushing.
That is my preferred method as well.
The simple answer is because people are stupid. There's a few instances where they are necessary by design but other than that companies put them in there because they know their customers don't know any better and will see something "different" and think that therefore it must be better.
The handgun accessory business is a multimillion dollar one with plenty of folks whose job it is to come up with useless shit they can sell to the uninformed. This has brought us such items as pistol bayonets and tungsten guide rods. It has always been this way and always will be.
There is one change from JB's original design that I really like, especially for a 9mm 1911: The Aftec extractor.
There is one change from JB's original design that I really like, especially for a 9mm 1911: The Aftec extractor.
The aftec extractor?
The aftec extractor?
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=615
The simple answer is because people are stupid. There's a few instances where they are necessary by design but other than that companies put them in there because they know their customers don't know any better and will see something "different" and think that therefore it must be better.
The handgun accessory business is a multimillion dollar one with plenty of folks whose job it is to come up with useless shit they can sell to the uninformed. This has brought us such items as pistol bayonets and tungsten guide rods. It has always been this way and always will be.
but then again, back to the OP, I have a FLGR on my KZ-45. That's the way Wilson built it, and I see no need to change that. I have a g.i. guide rod on my old Colt Combat Government that I rebuilt and on the Caspian framed 9mm Commander I put together for my wife. go figure.
A big +1 people not recognizing the obvious value of reduced muzzle flip and reduced recoil are also stupid.
Pat
Feel free to show me a sample of shooters whose split times consistently decrease because they are using a tungsten guide rod. Till then it's filed under "gaming shit". You want to reduce recoil and muzzle flip, use a WML, not some stupid guide rod.
I do not think it wise or appropriate to call people stupid just because their opinion differs from yours. I know a couple of very experienced and smart shooters running 1911s with tungsten guide rods.
The ONLY benefit I've ever heard that made sense of running a FLGR is that the slide is less likely to be pushed out of battery on a contact shot. The accuracy claims have been proven bullshit. The weight difference is so infinitesimal as to be irrelevant. All it does is make it more difficult to disassemble and for the two piece variety gives it one more thing to unscrew and **** your gun up. If your gun comes with one I can see not caring enough to replace it. But someone that deliberately throws out a GI guide rod to replace it with a FL can't defend their actions with any evidence more solid than "uh, because I wanted to".
M4C strokes when people add stupid, useless shit to their AR's for no good reason but people still have love for stuff like this :confused:
There is one change from JB's original design that I really like, especially for a 9mm 1911: The Aftec extractor.
Agree, the 1911 extractor needed a revamping it never got until fairly recently. How much do you hear about extractors losing tension, not being "tuned" right, etc in 1911's? A lot. How often do you hear about High Power guys having a problem with theirs? Almost never. Think some people have tried coming up with a external extractor for them, but it's never been implemented right.
Feel free to show me a sample of shooters whose split times consistently decrease because they are using a tungsten guide rod. Till then it's filed under "gaming shit". You want to reduce recoil and muzzle flip, use a WML, not some stupid guide rod.
The ONLY benefit I've ever heard that made sense of running a FLGR is that the slide is less likely to be pushed out of battery on a contact shot. The accuracy claims have been proven bullshit. The weight difference is so infinitesimal as to be irrelevant. All it does is make it more difficult to disassemble and for the two piece variety gives it one more thing to unscrew and **** your gun up. If your gun comes with one I can see not caring enough to replace it. But someone that deliberately throws out a GI guide rod to replace it with a FL can't defend their actions with any evidence more solid than "uh, because I wanted to".
M4C strokes when people add stupid, useless shit to their AR's for no good reason but people still have love for stuff like this :confused:
Agree, the 1911 extractor needed a revamping it never got until fairly recently. How much do you hear about extractors losing tension, not being "tuned" right, etc in 1911's? A lot. How often do you hear about High Power guys having a problem with theirs? Almost never. Think some people have tried coming up with a external extractor for them, but it's never been implemented right.
First...amen. i agree.
Secondly, on the extractor, I've owned and shot several Sig 1911s with external extractors, and a couple of Smith and Wessons with external extractors. They all work well, but i have never noticed any difference between them and the standard 1911 with a properly tuned extractor.
The thing i wonder about with the aftec extractor/externals vs. the 1911 is...with the use of an added coil spring instead of using the standard spring of machined steel, will the coil spring, if you're doing a lot of shooting, lose tension faster than a solid machined part?
I'll qualify this by saying i've got over 200,000 rounds down range out of a 1911 with a regular extractor and have never suffered any issues with extractor tension or such.
First...amen. i agree.
Secondly, on the extractor, I've owned and shot several Sig 1911s with external extractors, and a couple of Smith and Wessons with external extractors. They all work well, but i have never noticed any difference between them and the standard 1911 with a properly tuned extractor.
The thing i wonder about with the aftec extractor/externals vs. the 1911 is...with the use of an added coil spring instead of using the standard spring of machined steel, will the coil spring, if you're doing a lot of shooting, lose tension faster than a solid machined part?
I'll qualify this by saying i've got over 200,000 rounds down range out of a 1911 with a regular extractor and have never suffered any issues with extractor tension or such.
I think for me it's more about just fixing an element of the 1911 design that is overly labor intensive. The extractor of almost every other service pistol on the market is very rarely a source of problems but yet is almost always a drop in part requiring little to no fitting or tuning. A well executed 1911 internal extractor (especially one of spring steel instead of barstock) will work for many many thousands of rounds but I'd like to see it done so that any schmoe can replace his if it loses tension or breaks by watching a Youtube video and switching it out with one he ordered through the mail instead of having to properly radius it, polish it and tension it.
I think for me it's more about just fixing an element of the 1911 design that is overly labor intensive. The extractor of almost every other service pistol on the market is very rarely a source of problems but yet is almost always a drop in part requiring little to no fitting or tuning. A well executed 1911 internal extractor (especially one of spring steel instead of barstock) will work for many many thousands of rounds but I'd like to see it done so that any schmoe can replace his if it loses tension or breaks by watching a Youtube video and switching it out with one he ordered through the mail instead of having to properly radius it, polish it and tension it.
There are a few parts out there that come pre-tensioned and radiused, etc, so this is largely moot.
There are a few parts out there that come pre-tensioned and radiused, etc, so this is largely moot.
Don't remember any that were fully drop in when I was running 1911's. Maybe that's changed now. You either bought one and did all the tuning yourself or gave one to a smith to tune to your gun. Some claimed they needed no work but they usually sure had lots of sharp edges and burrs that needed removing for being supposedly RTG. I'd just as soon buy a pre tuned 1911 extractor and trust it as I would one of those "drop in" 1911 barrels that had shit lug engagement (or no lug engagement), tight chambers or the wrong sized links.
Split times on 3x5 card at 7 yards, 230 grain Blazer ammo, starting position aimed at the card, Colt 5 inch pistol, two aimed shots at the buzzer. Only hits counted, pairs where the shot missed were thrown away, but number of attempts was counted. It took 30 attempts to get those 18 clean pairs, 5 misses with guide rod, 7 with standard, almost all misses were, predictably, shot faster and hit above the card. Some misses were due to degradation in trigger control or anticipation, can't say which one.
With EGW tungsten guide rod: n=8, range 0.40-0.57 sec, average 0.513 sec, median would've been between 0.50 and 0.53, mode is 0.57 (x3).
With Ed Brown standard setup: n=10, range 0.50-0.69, average 0.614, median would've been between 0.63 and 0.66, mode is 0.66 (x3).
Don't remember any that were fully drop in when I was running 1911's. Maybe that's changed now. You either bought one and did all the tuning yourself or gave one to a smith to tune to your gun. Some claimed they needed no work but they usually sure had lots of sharp edges and burrs that needed removing for being supposedly RTG. I'd just as soon buy a pre tuned 1911 extractor and trust it as I would one of those "drop in" 1911 barrels that had shit lug engagement (or no lug engagement), tight chambers or the wrong sized links.
Absolutely. I always check tension on these parts, and inspect for sharp edges and such, and never trust a drop-in part save for from Bar Sto with regards to barrels. I find that their barrels are still massively overside and need fitting, but they don't leave near as much meat on the thing as on a true gunsmith fit barrel. Never had any difference in terms of fit outcome comparing the two styles.
Either way, if my choice was drop-in-and-hope or fit-it-myself-and-make-sure-it's-proper, I'll go the route that is more labor intensive but more sure of a guaranteed fit.
Split times on 3x5 card at 7 yards, 230 grain Blazer ammo, starting position aimed at the card, Colt 5 inch pistol, two aimed shots at the buzzer. Only hits counted, pairs where the shot missed were thrown away, but number of attempts was counted. It took 30 attempts to get those 18 clean pairs, 5 misses with guide rod, 7 with standard, almost all misses were, predictably, shot faster and hit above the card. Some misses were due to degradation in trigger control or anticipation, can't say which one.
With EGW tungsten guide rod: n=8, range 0.40-0.57 sec, average 0.513 sec, median would've been between 0.50 and 0.53, mode is 0.57 (x3).
With Ed Brown standard setup: n=10, range 0.50-0.69, average 0.614, median would've been between 0.63 and 0.66, mode is 0.66 (x3).
Okay, what are we seeing here, data wise. Faster shots with the tungsten rod?
Im sure there is a reason why every other semi auto pistol being manufactured today has a full length guide rod and external extractor. What I dont understand is why these 2 parts get so much criticism on a 1911 when you wouldnt think of milling out a Glock or sig slide for a internal extractor or put a 1" long guide rod in them. Now I have seen barrel bushings on M9 slides but the other two items are getting way too much attention for what theyre worth.
Okay, what are we seeing here, data wise. Faster shots with the tungsten rod?
Yes, average split time on low-probability target increased by 0.10 sec, or 20%, when changing from tungsten rod to GI plug. I am too tired and, frankly, don't care to calculate if the difference was statistically significant.
I could've gone a bit further with testing, like looking at % clean hits with tungsten when shot at the average pace of GI setup. I actually think this is were the practical difference is. However, that would've required a lot more shooting, trying to get myself into a specific rhythm, etc. and I had better things to do.
What I dont understand is why these 2 parts get so much criticism on a 1911 .
'cause they can't get them right. I had a Kimber with external extractor, and that was very educational experience. I've seen a number of Sig 1911 not run well. There is a common belief that SW got external extractor on 1911 right, but some people think that SW 1911 has not gained enough popularity to bring out the real colors of its design, so to speak. This is a link to Hilton Yam's testing of current SW 1911 where he both describes historical issues with external unit and issue he had with his own new one. http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=94282&page=1
Im sure there is a reason why every other semi auto pistol being manufactured today has a full length guide rod and external extractor. What I dont understand is why these 2 parts get so much criticism on a 1911 when you wouldnt think of milling out a Glock or sig slide for a internal extractor or put a 1" long guide rod in them. Now I have seen barrel bushings on M9 slides but the other two items are getting way too much attention for what theyre worth.
You're forgetting that the 1911 slide specifically has a long recoil spring "tunnel", whereas a Glock or similar pistol only has a thin plate at the muzzle end for the FLGR to poke through. Apples & oranges.
Yes, average split time on low-probability target increased by 0.10 sec, or 20%, when changing from tungsten rod to GI plug. I am too tired and, frankly, don't care to calculate if the difference was statistically significant.
I could've gone a bit further with testing, like looking at % clean hits with tungsten when shot at the average pace of GI setup. I actually think this is were the practical difference is. However, that would've required a lot more shooting, trying to get myself into a specific rhythm, etc. and I had better things to do.
better things to do than shoot?!:eek:
better things to do than shoot?!:eek:
Well, I can think of one or two things better than shooting, but in this particular instance, I had better things to do at the range. I do realize that this is a 1911 sub-forum and shooting small undersized buhlits from a plasticky German pistol by definition cannot be considered a better activity than shooting a mighty 1911, but then again, my splits from P30 are faster...
You're forgetting that the 1911 slide specifically has a long recoil spring "tunnel", whereas a Glock or similar pistol only has a thin plate at the muzzle end for the FLGR to poke through. Apples & oranges.
I see your point there, the full length guide rods really arent neccessary on 1911s and hi powers due to slide design itself. The extractor on the other hand is one of those things that everyone else can get right for their semi auto pistol designs, what makes it so hard to do with a 1911 that companies like Sig and Kimber cannot perfect? Sigs already got a full lineup of pistols that are tried and true with perfectly working external extractors, why cant they modify it to their 1911 slides?
Alaskapopo
12-15-11, 23:56
I see your point there, the full length guide rods really arent neccessary on 1911s and hi powers due to slide design itself. The extractor on the other hand is one of those things that everyone else can get right for their semi auto pistol designs, what makes it so hard to do with a 1911 that companies like Sig and Kimber cannot perfect? Sigs already got a full lineup of pistols that are tried and true with perfectly working external extractors, why cant they modify it to their 1911 slides?
Entirely different animals.
I see your point there, the full length guide rods really arent neccessary on 1911s and hi powers due to slide design itself. The extractor on the other hand is one of those things that everyone else can get right for their semi auto pistol designs, what makes it so hard to do with a 1911 that companies like Sig and Kimber cannot perfect? Sigs already got a full lineup of pistols that are tried and true with perfectly working external extractors, why cant they modify it to their 1911 slides?
Hard to say. I had one of the early Wilson KZ-45's with an external extractor and had issues with it. I sent it back to Wilson with a very specific request, which they performed (very quickly I might add). After I got it back, no more issues in several thousand rounds on my way to a 1st in class and 3rd in division at the 2004 IDPA Nationals. That gun has continued to work perfectly since then.
I don't think it's so much that it can't be done as that it's re-engineering something that works well already, so long as it's properly tuned. One positive of the current internal extractor is field expedient replacement and tuning. I've "gross tuned" numerous 1911 extractors with nothing more than the edge of a plastic 55gal drum at matches. They've gone from choking numerous times in a single stage to finishing the match with no more malfs. Of course I tell the owners to have the extractor properly tuned by a competent smith before using it again, but they're pretty appreciative when they get to finish the match without wanting to throw their pistol over the berm. That's not something you can readily do with an external extractor gun on the fly.
...That's not something you can readily do with an external extractor gun on the fly.
Its also something that Ive never had to do with any other gun than my 1911. The majority of external extractors are a simple lever pivoting on a pin under spring tension. It cant be that hard...
Interesting discussion...I can add that I immediately removed the FLGR from my XSE Commander for the standard...but to the point...isn't discussing modification of the 1911 akin to politicians rewriting the constitution? or scientist' re-engineering the human body? I think JMB got it right the first time...everything else is building off an existing design :neo:
Interesting discussion...I can add that I immediately removed the FLGR from my XSE Commander for the standard...but to the point...isn't discussing modification of the 1911 akin to politicians rewriting the constitution? or scientist' re-engineering the human body? I think JMB got it right the first time...everything else is building off an existing design :neo:
I don't know, I like beaver tail grip safeties and better sights.
I don't know, I like beaver tail grip safeties and better sights.
I'd agree with this.
I don't know, I like beaver tail grip safeties and better sights.
+1
Same here.
Vis a vis the whole external versus internal extractor and why nobody seems to have "perfected" the external extractor on a 1911 is because it just doesn't work. External extractors weren't unknown to Browning, most of his prior pistol designs (including the daddy of the 1911, the 1905) had external extractors. Is it possible that this very brilliant gun designer tried the idea and it just didn't scale to the pistol design very well? Given that some big players in the gun business have been trying for the last couple decades to make an external extractor 1911 and have seen at best marginal success I'm inclined to believe that Browning may have had a pretty good idea what he was doing.
FLGRs have always seemed the fad to me. I admit, I played. I realized it really didn't make a big difference so I went back to standard guides on all my 1911s.
In my experience, full length guide rods make series 80 pistols much more easier to disassemble. I have a Colt with Colt FLGR, I dislike the FLGR's that require a tool to disassemble.
wetidlerjr
12-28-11, 07:52
In my experience, full length guide rods make series 80 pistols much more easier to disassemble...
:confused: In what way? I have never found that to be the case. :cool:
That comment left me scratching my head as well, when I dumped the FLGR in my Springfield Loaded, disassembly became a breeze. Kind of funny, for when I read that comment, my experience was just the opposite. I found reassembling the 1911 a tad easier with the FLGR for some reason.
That comment left me scratching my head as well, when I dumped the FLGR in my Springfield Loaded, disassembly became a breeze. Kind of funny, for when I read that comment, my experience was just the opposite. I found reassembling the 1911 a tad easier with the FLGR for some reason.
Depends on the method of take-down. For a 1911, if you just want the top-end off, the FLGR does make it easier, as like a glock or anythig else, the top end stays together. However, to take the barrel out, you still would need to depress the recoil spring plug to turn the bushing, remove the spring and plug, then remove the bushing and barrel. This is easiest to do with the top end still on the gun for everything but removing the barrel.
I'm just a bit dense, I guess, but I honestly can't see how a FLGR makes taking down a 1911 easier.
I just don't see any really proven reason to prefer a FLGR to the standard GI system.
But, to each his own. It's a free country and all that good stuff.
Cheers.
:dance3:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.