Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 169

Thread: Anyone Checked Out The Colt Marine 1911...?

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by BBossman View Post
    "needs of the Corps", not needs of Marines?

    Sent from my Proctor Silex Toaster Oven using Tapatalk 2.
    Well they had been trying to place the MEU-SOC and later M45s for around 13 years with no success because every time they ran the testing they ended up with a stack of broken guns.

    So this time they ended with the same but just waived many of the requirements to get new weapons while funds would be available to buy something.

    Instead of changing the requirements and widening the net allowing a non-1911 to compete "the must use 1911 mags" (we have around 50,000 on hand) we naturally kept testing 1911s always with the same results. Unfortunately after this selection was made, it turned out a large portion of those on hand mags will have to be replaced anyway because they don't function properly with the new guns.
    Last edited by R0N; 06-06-13 at 18:22.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    815
    Feedback Score
    0
    Rana

    My recommendation is if you want to continue to have full confidence in the SIG 226 then I would avoid the current offerings of that gun

    Save yourself the heartache brother

    Be safe

    LAV

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    172
    Feedback Score
    0
    I got a chance to shoot my friends M45 last weekend and all I can say is wow.

    First, the gun runs. Mag after mag, it runs. No malfunctions.

    Second, the accuracy is there. Colt NM barrels are highly underrated. The fact that they are hand fit in the custom shop helps too. It was really easy to duplicate the test target that came with the pistol. (1 inch rested)

    Third, the trigger. Under 4 pounds and the Cerakote on the hammer gives it a slight roll. It was very smooth and the pull weight felt great. Not target gun light or carry gun heavy. Just right for my taste.

    Also, the combination of the weight of the rail, the Cerakote and the recoil system makes this gun really easy to shoot. It really eats up recoil.

    If I had 2 grand I wanted to part with, I would buy one but for now, I am just as happy to shoot my friends gun.
    Last edited by SigSlave; 06-06-13 at 21:19.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    172
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gary1911A1 View Post
    I have seem on other forums pictures of cracks in the slide on test samples. Colt claims they have fixed this. I also understand it's a Series 80. Bet those parts disappear soon in the Marine's 1911s'.
    These pictures were taken out of context. You do realize that some tests are designed to actually break what is being tested, right. You abuse a test subject to find weakness. Then you make modifications to strengthen the breaking point. All things break. The important thing is to find out where that point is and improve things to go beyond that point.

    Run any 1911 for several thousand rounds with no lube and a worn out recoil spring and see what happens.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,795
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by SteyrAUG View Post
    http://www.coltsmfg.com/Catalog/Colt...inePistol.aspx



    I still don't have a 1911 with a rail. I was planning on getting a Series 70 since they started making them again but this one does look interesting.
    There was a pretty significant in depth thread on here quite a while ago about this very gun, with lots of documented info on the gun parts breaking, fractures in the slide, etc...during testing, but I'm unable to find it.


    Quote Originally Posted by R0N View Post
    The M45s are hand built PWS made guns, they are being removed from the system at this time. The Colt made guns are M45A1s.

    It was my personnel opinion that many facets of the selection process were waived in order to get a weapon now vice getting something that met the requirements
    I was wondering whether Colt fixed those issues or the requirement was changed. I'm still wondering why they didn't go with a more modern design like an HK45, M&P or Glock.
    For God and the soldier we adore, In time of danger, not before! The danger passed, and all things righted, God is forgotten and the soldier slighted." - Rudyard Kipling

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    VABeach
    Posts
    255
    Feedback Score
    0

    Anyone Checked Out The Colt Marine 1911...?

    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Vickers View Post
    Rana

    My recommendation is if you want to continue to have full confidence in the SIG 226 then I would avoid the current offerings of that gun

    Save yourself the heartache brother

    Be safe

    LAV
    It is what is issued in the P226 and P239 Flavors (both 9mm) and in the case of the P226, in service since 1989. Not any complaints from the end users in my ear shot.

    Are we getting different guns?

    Sorry in advance to drift off topic. I own 1 personal SIG Sauer P226 ( 9mm) and it has performed as predicted with the expected maintenance and repair at the corresponding round count. It is a 2003 P226...

    To stay on topic-

    I will probably pick up one of the Commercial Colt M45A1's- I like 1911's and I like Colt, this one has a specialty niche that doesn't come along very often. Now if I could find one at MSRP? That will be the challenge.

    If anyone has a line on a Colt M45A1at MSRP shoot me an IM. Please.

    Thanks for the 45C BTW LAV. It is the ideal NSW gun. Perfect for the knuckle dragging "gun go bang... gun good" Team Guy.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by SigSlave View Post
    These pictures were taken out of context. You do realize that some tests are designed to actually break what is being tested, right. You abuse a test subject to find weakness. Then you make modifications to strengthen the breaking point. All things break. The important thing is to find out where that point is and improve things to go beyond that point.

    Run any 1911 for several thousand rounds with no lube and a worn out recoil spring and see what happens.
    Actually no, that is the spin put out by the people defending the selection. The intent of the test was not destruction but to determine if the pistol could meet MRBF requirements because the previous phase was an interchangeability test (which none of the 3 competitors passed 100 percent of the time). The weapons cleaned and lubed at a designated interval and springs were actually replaced because it was through the manufacture supplied under power springs which were causing the high number of stoppages.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    129
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Wow I just read the about all the tests done on the m45a1. Did the damn thing pass any test. That was a long read and it was full of fail. I'd rather lug around another M4 then carry that thing as my backup.
    All of this is just advice. You go out and do whatever the f&<€ you want to do.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    129
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    TEST REPORT FOR THE CQBP BID SAMPLES, PHASE II
    1. SUMMARY
    This test report summarizes testing conducted from 24 May - 28 July, 2011 at Quantico, VA,
    in support of the Close Quarters Battle Pistol (CQBP) program. The objective of this test was
    to continue the verification of Colt CQBP bid samples that had been started during the previous
    Phase I testing and Limited User Evaluation.
    The following events were conducted as part of this test effort:
    · System Reliability
    · Dispersion
    · Compatibility with current M45 magazines
    · Functionality in various orientations
    · Functionality in adverse environmental conditions
    All testing was completed, and the results can be found in the body of this report.

    2. INTRODUCTION
    2.1 PURPOSE
    The intent of the Close Quarters Battle Pistol (CQBP) Bid Samples, Phase II testing was to
    evaluate bid samples submitted in response to solicitation number M67854-11-R-1006.
    2.2 SCOPE
    This report summarizes the information collected on Colt’s bid samples (Proposal B) by the
    Ordnance Test Facility during the CQBP Phase II testing. This test event was conducted at
    Quantico, VA, from 24 May - 28 July, 2011.
    2.3 ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS
    CQBP – Close Quarters Battle Pistol
    DFD – Double Feed
    DoD – Department of Defense
    DODIC – Department Of Defense Identification Code
    FEJ – Failure to Eject
    FFD – Failure to Feed
    FSR – Failure of Slide to Lock to the Rear
    FTC – Failure to Chamber
    FTL – Failure to Lock
    FXT – Failure to Extract
    IAW – In Accordance With
    IW – Infantry Weapons
    MCSC – Marine Corps Systems Command
    OTF – Ordnance Test Facility
    OTH – Other Failure
    PM – Program Manager
    SLR – Slide Locked to the Rear
    TP – Test Plan
    TR – Test Report
    UUT – Unit Under Test

    Failure Definition:
    A failure is any of the following, when attributable to the weapon:
    1. A stoppage in weapon function
    2. A failure to stop firing when the trigger is released
    3. A malfunction where the weapon does not operate in accordance with design intent
    (including failure of the slide to lock to the rear on an empty magazine)
    4. A visually observed crack in the slide or barrelwhile following prescribed immediate action procedures.

    Class II. A failure that may be operator clearable requiring more than 10 seconds. Only the
    equipment and tools issued with the weapon may be used to clear the weapon.

    Class III A failure of a severe nature. The failure cannot be corrected by an operator because
    it requires higher level of maintenance or the use of tools and parts that the operator is not
    authorized to carry on his person.

    3. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
    The following documents are referenced in this report:
    a. TP/11/PM-IW/001 – Test Procedure for the Close Quarters Battle Pistol (CQBP) Bid
    Samples, Phase II, 1 Dec 2010
    b. TR/11/OTF/002 – Test Report for the Close Quarters Battle Pistol (CQBP), Proposal “B”
    Bid Samples, 12 Jan 2011
    c. MIL-STD-1913 – Dimensioning of Accessory Mounting Rail for Small Arms Weapons,
    3 Feb 1995
    d. Army TOP 3-2-045 – Automatic Weapons, Machineguns, Hand and Shoulder Weapons,
    17 Sep 2007
    e. Colt’s Model O Armorer’s Manual

    4. TEST LIMITATIONS AND DEVIATIONS

    4.1 TEST LIMITATIONS
    a. Due to cracks which developed in the pistol slides during Reliability Testing, that test
    was not able to be completed as planned. Testing was planned for 15,000 rounds per
    pistol, but stopped early at 12,000 rounds.
    b. The available UID reader during Indoctrination could not read the UID labels.
    c. Time and resource constraints required us to utilize E-Labs in Fredericksburg, VA, for
    the sand/dust chamber needed for the Blowing Sand/Dust Test. Due to ammunition
    regulations and safety concerns, ammunition was not placed in the sand/dust chamber as
    originally planned.
    d. Some of the chemical substances for the Chemical Compatibility testing were not
    available to use.
    4.2 DEVIATIONS
    a. Trigger pulls at 3,000 rounds during Reliability Testing were not measured.
    b. Instead of using spare magazines during Dispersion Testing, magazines labeled #1 for
    each pistol were used.
    c. Due to repetitive failures of the trigger to reset during firing, one pistol only fired 28
    rounds instead of the planned 120 rounds for the Salt Fog Test.
    d. Pistols were immersed in the salt water solution during the Salt Water Test in Condition 3
    instead of Condition 2
    e. The pistols placed in the sand/dust chamber for the Blowing Sand/Dust Test were not
    loaded, and no ammunition was exposed to the sand/dust environment. After the pistols
    and magazines were taken to the range, they were then loaded with ammunition.
    f. Decontaminating agents DS2 and STB were not available, so they were not used in the
    Chemical Compatibility test. Instead of submersing the non-metallic components in
    RSDL and Insect Repellant, these chemicals were liberally applied to the exterior of the
    non-metallic components.

    5. TEST EVENTS
    5.1 INDOCTRINATION AND TECHNICAL INSPECTION AND BASELINE
    Ten new pistols were received by Colt for the Phase II test effort. These new pistols were
    assigned Unit Under Test (UUT) designations of 11B11 through 11B20. The new pistols were
    used for the majority of Phase II testing, however some of the original pistols (11B01 through
    11B10) were used in specific test events (identified in individual test sections).
    5.1.1 Indoctrination and Initial Inspection
    The Indoctrination and Initial Inspections for the original 10 UUTs was conducted during Phase
    I CQBP testing. The results are recorded in TR/11/OTF/002, Test Report for the Close Quarters
    Battle Pistol (CQBP), Proposal “B” Bid Samples. Indoctrination and Initial Inspections for the
    updated 10 UUTs is recorded here.
    5.1.1.1 Procedure
    The new UUTs were inspected for any physical changes from the original UUTs.
    5.1.1.2 Results
    The new UUTs that Colt provided were mostly the same as the original UUTs, but they
    incorporated the following changes:
    · Plunger tube. This was modified in order to ensure the plunger tubes would remain
    securely attached for a longer duration.
    · Accessory rail profile. This was changed in order to meet the dimensions from
    MIL-STD-1913.

    The new accessory rail profile met MIL-STD-1913 specifications for the dimensions that we
    were able to measure with calipers, except for the .617-.010 dimension (see Figure 2). All
    the UUTs measured between .618 and .620 for that dimension. This may have been due to
    the coating Colt used on their pistols. The AN/PEQ-6As that we mounted were initially tight
    and difficult to slide on the rail. After multiple times on and off, the coating appeared to wear
    enough that the AN/PEQ-6As would then slide easier.

    5.1.2 System Characteristics
    This inspection was conducted to verify system characteristics of the new UUTs.
    5.1.2.1 Procedure
    The UUTs were function checked in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. The
    UUTs were also inspected for the presence and/or functioning of the following components:
    · Magazine
    · Thumb and grip safeties
    · Magazine release
    · Slide catch
    · Iron sights
    · Lanyard loop
    · Magazine well beveling
    · Ridged surface on hammer
    · Texturing on slide
    5.1.2.2 Results
    All UUTs passed the function checks. All inspected components were included and operated the
    same as the original UUTs. See TR/11/OTF/002 for more detailed information.

    5.1.3 Weight
    This inspection was conducted to verify the weight of the new UUTs.
    5.1.3.1 Procedure
    All of the new UUTs were weighed with an empty magazine.
    5.1.3.2 Results
    The UUTs weighed 2.5 pounds.
    5.1.4 Weapon Identification / Marking
    This inspection was conducted to verify UUT markings.
    5.1.4.1 Procedure
    The UUTs were inspected for the presence and location of UID markings, manufacturer
    identification, nomenclature, serial numbers, “U.S.” marking, and proof markings. We
    attempted to read the UID markings and verify it matched the serial number on the UUT.
    5.1.4.2 Results
    The UUTs contained all of the required markings. The UID markings, serial numbers,
    and “U.S.” marking were located on the receiver. The manufacturer’s name and UUT
    nomenclature were located on the side of the slide. We were not able to read the UID marking
    with our UID reader. This could be a problem with the reader as it is an older version.
    5.2 PERFORMANCE TESTS
    5.2.1 Magazine Compatibility
    This test was conducted to determine the compatibility of the UUTs with the current M45
    magazine (NSN: 1005-01-373-2774). This test was conducted on UUTs 11B16, 11B17, and
    11B18. A total of 1,500 rounds (500 per UUT) were fired for this test.
    5.2.1.1 Test Procedure
    One shooter was assigned to each UUT and fired 500 rounds at a rate of 2-3 magazines per
    minute. Six M45 magazines were used with each UUT. All UUTs were cleaned after firing 300
    rounds.
    5.2.1.2 Results
    The UUTs functioned with the current M45 magazine. All rounds were fired from each UUT
    with the following malfunctions:
    · 11B16 – Five Failures to Feed (Class I)
    · 11B17 – Three Failures to Feed (Class I) and one Double Feed (Class I)
    · 11B18 – One Slide Locked to the Rear (Class I)
    Overall, the Mean Rounds Between Class I Failures was 150 with the current M45 magazines

    5.2.2 Orientation
    This test was conducted to determine the reliable functioning of the UUTs when fired from the
    following orientations: top-down, right-side up, and left-side up. This test was conducted on
    UUTs 11B16, 11B17, and 11B18. A total of 315 rounds (105 per UUT) were fired for this test.
    5.2.2.1 Test Procedure
    One shooter fired 35 rounds through each UUT in each of the following orientations: top-down,
    right-side up, and left-side up.
    5.2.2.2 Results
    All rounds were fired in each orientation with no issues or malfunctions experienced.
    5.2.3 IUID Inspection
    This test was performed after all environmental tests were completed to determine the continued
    readability of the 2D Data Matrix. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B16, 11B17, 11B18,
    11B19, and 11B20.
    5.2.3.1 Test Procedure
    After all of the environmental tests had been completed, we attempted to read the UID markings
    on the UUTs with a UID reader.
    5.2.3.2 Results
    Except for some labels that were damaged when removing ice during the icing/freezing rain test
    (see 5.4.3.2), the UID labels still appeared in good condition.

    5.3 ENDURANCE TEST
    5.3.1 System Reliability
    This test was conducted to determine the reliability of the UUTs at standard ambient temperature
    (77 ± 18°F), as well as cold (-25°F) and hot (120°F). New bid samples were used for this
    test. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B11, 11B12, 11B14, and 11B15. Originally, 11B13
    started this test, but it experienced an unusual failure early on which led to the pistol being
    unserviceable (see below for more details). It was removed from this test, and 11B15 took its
    place. A total of 48,000 rounds (12,000 per UUT) were fired for this test for record. This test
    was scheduled for 60,000 rounds total, but cracked slides led to an early finish to the test. See
    results in 5.3.1.2 for more information.
    5.3.1.1 Test Procedure
    Three shooters rotated through the UUTs firing the following:
    · 5,000 rounds at standard ambient (77 ± 18°F)
    · 1,000 rounds at -25°F
    · 3,000 rounds at 120°F, and
    · 3,000 additional rounds at standard ambient (77 ± 18°F)
    Shooting was conducted at a rate of 2-3 magazines per minute, and cleaning of the UUTs was
    performed every 300 rounds. Each UUT was assigned 22 magazines for this test, and the 22
    magazines were loaded twice during each 300 round firing cycle. UUTs were conditioned at
    the hot and cold temperatures for a minimum of 3 hours prior to firing, and then reconditioned
    if removed from the environment (e.g. for cleaning during cold firing). AN/PEQ-6A Integrated
    Laser Light Pointers were mounted to the UUTs 50% of the time. They were mounted/removed
    at every cleaning cycle. Trigger pull and dispersion were measured every 3,000 rounds (see
    5.3.2 and 5.3.3), and Non-Destructive Testing was performed prior to firing and after 6,000
    rounds fired (see 5.3.4).
    5.3.1.2 Results
    UUT 11B13 only fired 600 rounds before it became unserviceable due to its recoil spring
    binding with something internally and not allowing the slide to cycle. The spring binding during
    operation of the UUT caused the recoil spring to receive a significant permanent bend in it (see
    Figure 3). This also caused the recoil spring guide to become damaged to the point of being
    unusable (see Figure 4). No spare recoil spring guides were provided by Colt, so a decision was
    made to remove 11B13 from this test and to replace it with 11B15. The rounds fired from UUT
    11B13 are not included in the results of this test.

    UUTs 11B11, 11B12, 11B14, and 11B15 each fired 12,000 rounds before being deadlined due to
    visible safety-critical cracks found in the slides (see Figure 5 through Figure 9). Each slide had
    cracks in the same location, but they varied in size.

    The reliability results presented here are preliminary and subject to failure scoring conducted
    by the source selection evaluation board. Detailed information on all reliability failures and
    preliminary scoring by the test activity is provided in Appendix A: Reliability Test Data. The
    numbers presented in the tables below are based on this preliminary scoring.
    Table 1. Total Failures
    Class I Class II Class III
    84 2 18
    Table 2. Class I Failures by Type
    SLR FEJ FFD FTC
    15 1 60 8
    SLR = Slide Locked to the Rear
    FEJ = Failure to Eject
    FFD = Failure to Feed
    FTC = Failure to Chamber
    Table 3. Class I Failures by UUT
    11B11 11B12 11B14 11B15
    3 15 26 40
    Below is a summary of broken or cracked components produced as a result of this reliability test:
    · 6 broken slide stops
    · 5 broken ejectors (legs sheared)
    · 4 cracked slides
    · 3 broken thumb safeties
    · 2 broken front sights
    · 1 cracked frame at the accessory rail
    · 1 broken extractor
    · 1 broken plunger tube (legs sheared)

    5.3.1.3 Test Observations
    The following are some test observations made during the reliability test effort.
    1) Roughly 10 times more Class I failures were experienced when no accessory was
    mounted to the UUTs vs. when the AN/PEQ-6As were mounted.
    2) Operators noted that the recoil from the UUTs was noticeably sharper and/or heavier than
    the recoil from the current MEU(SOC) .45 pistol. Most attributed this to a weak recoil
    spring.
    3) There were a few instances of UUTs with high Class I failure rates that were corrected by
    replacing the recoil spring with a new one (UUTs 11B14 and 11B15).
    4) After firing 150 rounds, the recoil springs reduced in length from 7.32 inches to 6.46
    inches. After 450 rounds, the recoil springs measured approximately 6.38 inches in
    length. After 4,500 rounds, the recoil springs measured approximately 5.94 inches in
    length.
    5) On multiple occasions when replacing the recoil spring with a new one, the new recoil
    spring would kink and bind the slide so that it would not cycle (similar to what occurred
    with UUT 11B13). Pulling out the new spring would reveal that it had received a
    permanent bend as a result of this binding (see Figure 10). Depending on the severity
    of the set in the spring, some of the “new” recoil springs had to be replaced again
    without ever firing a round so that the slide could move without binding. The assembly
    procedure used by the personnel replacing the recoil springs was verified to be as
    specified in Colt’s provided Armorer’s manual, so this was not attributed to operator
    error.
    6) After a few thousand rounds through each UUT, grip screws began to loosen regularly
    and required retightening. In addition, three grip screw bushings had stripped out
    completely from the receiver frame by the time the UUTs had completed their 12,000
    rounds fired.
    7) Eighteen AN/PEQ-6As broke during this test. The UUTs with the highest Class I failure
    rates also tended to have the highest rates for breaking AN/PEQ-6As.
    8) The UUTs with the highest Class I failure rates had the most severe slide cracks.
    9) UUT 11B12 had a crack which developed in the receiver at the accessory rail (see Figure
    11). This crack was discovered after firing 9,000 rounds. The crack was determined not
    to be safety critical at its current length, so firing continued with this UUT.
    10) Recoil spring plugs on three of the UUTs were cracked by 12,000 rounds (see Figure 12
    through Figure 14). The cracks had no apparent effect on the performance of the UUTs
    to this point.
    11) Magazines were filled 80 times each during this test, and none were replaced due to
    unserviceability.

    5.3.2 Trigger Pull
    Trigger pull testing was conducted periodically during system reliability testing in order to
    ensure proper trigger operation.
    5.3.2.1 Test Procedure
    Three trigger pull measurements were taken for each UUT at initial inspection, at 6,000 rounds,
    and at 9,000 rounds into the System Reliability test. Trigger pull measurements were planned to
    be taken at 3,000 rounds as well, but those measurements were missed.
    5.3.2.2 Results
    Each trigger pull measured was within the specification of 5 ± 1 lbs. Trigger pull measurements
    are recorded in Appendix B: Trigger Pull Measurements.
    5.3.3 Dispersion
    Dispersion was tested every 3,000 rounds during system reliability testing in order to gage the
    life of the barrels in relation to accuracy.
    5.3.3.1 Test Procedure
    Five 5-shot groups were fired at targets located 25 yards out. The vertical and horizontal
    extreme spreads of the shot groups were measured and recorded.
    5.3.3.2 Results
    The average vertical and horizontal extreme spreads during this test are shown in Table 4 below.

    Table 4. Average Vertical and Horizontal Spreads
    Rounds
    Fired
    Average
    Vertical
    Spread
    (in.)
    Average
    Horizontal
    Spread
    (in.)
    Initial 3.2 2.5
    3,000 3.0 2.9
    6,000 3.0 3.4
    9,000 2.7 4.0
    Complete vertical and horizontal extreme spread measurements are shown in Appendix C:
    Dispersion Measurements.
    5.3.4 Non-Destructive Testing/Inspection
    Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) was performed prior to conducting endurance firing and after all
    UUTs had fired 6,000 rounds. This test was performed in order to monitor for cracks in critical
    pistol components.
    5.3.4.1 Test Procedure
    All UUTs were cleaned, and the barrels, slides and receivers were inspected with a Magnaflux
    machine. All components were visually inspected for cracks and other visible problems.
    5.3.4.2 Results
    At 0 and 6,000 rounds, no cracks were discovered when performing NDT on the endurance
    UUTs. However, cracks were visibly discovered after more rounds had been fired (see 5.3.1.2
    and 5.3.1.3).
    5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL TESTS
    5.4.1 Rain
    This test was conducted to determine the effects of heavy rainfall on UUT performance. This
    test was conducted on UUTs 11B16, 11B17, and 11B18.
    5.4.1.1 Test Procedure
    Three UUTs were fired in a rain (water spray) environment, with the water spray falling at a
    rate of approximately 4.0 in/hr. Fourteen magazines were filled with A475 ammunition and
    subjected to the water spray during firing of each UUT. The sequence of water spray exposure
    and firing is shown in Table 5. The UUTs were wiped down between firing cycles, and they
    were cleaned after the second firing cycle (196 rounds fired per UUT).

    Table 5. Water Spray Test Sequence
    Test Condition Exposure
    Time,
    min
    UUT Horizontal (top facing up) in
    Condition 3
    12
    Fire 14 fully filled magazines 6
    UUT Horizontal in Condition 3 12
    Fire 14 fully filled magazines 6
    UUT Muzzle-Down in Condition 3 12
    Turn UUT Horizontal (top facing up),
    and fire 14 fully filled magazines
    6
    UUT Muzzle-Down in Condition 3 12
    Turn UUT Horizontal, and fire 14
    fully filled magazines
    6
    5.4.1.2 Results
    All rounds were fired from each UUT with the following malfunctions:
    · 11B16 – One Failure to Feed (Class I)
    · 11B17 – No failures
    · 11B18 – One Failure to Chamber (Class I)
    5.4.2 Salt Water
    This test was conducted to determine the effects of immersion of the UUTs in salt water on
    subsequent firing. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B16, 11B17, and 11B18.
    5.4.2.1 Test Procedure
    Three UUTs were loaded with a full magazine and immersed in a salt water solution (5% salt by
    weight) for one minute. They were then drained for 5 seconds, the slide was racked in order to
    chamber a round, and all rounds from the magazine were fired.
    5.4.2.2 Results
    All rounds were fired from each UUT with no issues or malfunctions.
    5.4.3 Icing/Freezing Rain
    This test was conducted to determine the operability of the UUTs after exposure to icing
    produced by freezing rain. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B03, 11B06, and 11B07.
    5.4.3.1 Test Procedure
    Three UUTs had their muzzles and ejection ports taped to prevent ice accumulation inside
    the barrel. They were loaded with one completely filled magazine and then placed in a 0°F
    environment for 4 hours. Then the air temperature was raised to 20°F, and the UUTs were
    sprayed with a light water spray until approximately 3mm of ice had accumulated on the top

    surface. The muzzle tape was removed, and ice was removed from the UUTs enough to allow a
    round to be chambered and the remaining rounds fired from each UUT.
    5.4.3.2 Results
    All pistols required the use of a combat knife to remove sufficient ice to free the slide from
    the receiver and allow the hammer to move. After sufficient ice was removed, the UUTs were
    functioned with the following issues:
    · 11B03 – Three Class I failures were experienced during firing (Failures to Chamber).
    · 11B06 – The UUT would not fire because it had been incorrectly assembled without
    the Trigger Bar Lever (a series 80 part) during a previous cleaning. The Test Director
    believed the UUT would have fired had it been assembled properly.
    · 11B07 – All rounds fired. No issues.
    During ice removal with the combat knife, the UID labels on the UUTs were damaged (see
    Figure 15). This UID damage was not directly attributable to the icing environment.

    5.4.4 Blowing Sand/Dust
    This test was conducted to determine the effects of blowing sand and dust on weapon
    performance. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B16, 11B17, and 11B18.
    5.4.4.1 Test Procedure
    Three UUTs along with 4 magazines each were subjected to a blowing sand/dust environment
    as described in Army TOP 3-2-045, paragraph 4.5.4.b(4). The UUTs and magazines were not
    loaded during sand/dust exposure. After exposure, the UUTs and magazines were transported to
    the firing range, the magazines were filled, and the UUTs fired all of the rounds (28 rounds per
    UUT).
    5.4.4.2 Results
    All rounds were fired from each UUT with the following issues:
    · 11B16 – One Failure to Feed (Class I) and eleven Failures to Chamber (Class I)
    · 11B17 – One Failure to Chamber (Class I)

    5.4.5 Mud
    This test was conducted to determine the effects of mud on UUT performance. This test was
    conducted on UUTs 11B03, 11B06, and 11B07.
    5.4.5.1 Test Procedure
    A mud mixture was created in accordance with Army TOP 3-2-045, paragraph 4.5.5.b(1). Three
    UUTs were loaded with one full magazine, and their muzzles were taped. The UUTs were
    then immersed in the mud mixture for 60 seconds, removed from the mixture, and wiped with
    bare hands to remove excess mud. The UUTs then fired all of the rounds from the magazine (7
    rounds). After thoroughly cleaning the UUTs, this process was repeated, except that the UUTs
    were allowed to dry for 4 hours after being immersed in the mud mixture. They then fired a full
    magazine of rounds (7 rounds).
    5.4.5.2 Results
    All rounds were fired from each UUT with no issues or failures.
    5.4.6 Salt Fog
    This test was conducted to determine the effects of salt fog on UUT performance. This test was
    conducted on UUTs 11B10, 11B19, and 11B20.
    5.4.6.1 Test Procedure
    Three UUTs were conditioned to a temperature of 95°F for 2 hours. They were loaded with an
    empty magazine, and the slide was placed in the forward position. The UUTs were placed in
    the salt fog chamber with one UUT on its right side, one on its left side, and one in the upright
    position. The salt fog chamber was operated in accordance with MIL-STD-810G, Method 509.4,
    and the UUTs exposed to the salt fog for 24 hours. The UUTs were then removed from the salt
    fog environment for 24 hours and stored at ambient temperature. The UUTs then were subjected
    to another 24 hour salt fog environment followed by 24 hours outside of the salt fog chamber.
    The UUTs were taken to the firing range, and they fired 120 rounds each.
    5.4.6.2 Results
    After completing the salt fog exposures, the UUTs only showed significant amounts of corrosion
    on the iron sights and on the exposed portion of the magazines. The rest of the UUTs showed
    little to no corrosion.
    All rounds were fired from each UUT with no issues or malfunctions, except for UUT 11B10.
    This UUT experienced a failure of the trigger to reset with every round fired. The shooter had to
    hit the bottom of the magazine in order to get the trigger to reset for the next round. Because of
    this consistent failure, firing of UUT 11B10 was stopped after 28 rounds had been fired.
    5.4.7 Unpackaged Drop
    This test was conducted to determine the safe functioning of the UUTs after being dropped in
    multiple orientations from a 1.7 meter height onto a smooth concrete surface at temperatures
    ranging from -25º Fahrenheit (F) to 120º F. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B10, 11B19

    and 11B20.
    5.4.7.1 Test Procedure
    Three UUTs were loaded with a primed .45 cartridge (that was otherwise empty), and then
    conditioned at standard ambient temperature (77 ± 18°F) for 4 hours. They were then dropped
    from the following orientations:
    · Standard firing orientation
    · Muzzle up
    · Muzzle down
    · Muzzle up – 45° angle
    · Muzzle down – 45° angle
    The UUTs then fired the chambered primed round.
    This drop procedure was repeated after conditioning the UUTs to 125°F and -25°F. After all
    drops were complete, the UUTs each fired one magazine full of ammunition (7 rounds) to ensure
    continued functionality
    5.4.7.2 Results
    The primed rounds did not fire during any drops of this test. After all drops had been completed,
    the primed rounds were fired and 7 live rounds were fired from each UUT with no issues. There
    was a common jam that occurred in many of the drop orientations. The left side thumb safety
    would pull out just enough for the slide to come out of battery and jam on the thumb safety (see
    Figure 16). This jam was operator correctable, and the UUTs remained functional.

    5.4.8 Chemical Resistance
    This test was conducted to determine the effects of common battlefield chemicals on nonmetallic
    components of the UUTs. This test was conducted on UUTs 11B11-11B20.
    5.4.8.1 Test Procedure
    The pistol grips were identified as the only non-metallic components of the UUTs. The
    dimensions and weights of the grips were recorded, and then one set of grips (left and right side)
    from each UUT were submersed in the following chemical solutions for 8 hours:
    1) Reactive Skin Decontamination Lotion (RSDL)
    2) Cleaning compound, solvent; MIL-L-372B Bore cleaner
    3) Dry cleaning solvent; P-D-680, type I or equivalent (naphtha solvent)
    4) Lubricant, semi-fluid, automatic weapons; MIL-L-46000B (LSA)
    5) Lubricant, cleaner, and preservative; MIL-L-63460A (CLP)
    6) Lubricating oil, weapons; MIL-L-14107 (LAW)
    7) Turbine fuel (JP-8); MIL-T-83133
    8) Insect repellent; 0-I-503E
    9) Decontaminating agent
    All of this is just advice. You go out and do whatever the f&<€ you want to do.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Pentagon
    Posts
    497
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Colt did fix the breaking problem but the guns tested failed to meet other requirements and required those to be waived.

Page 5 of 17 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •