3inch 1911? Go or no go

[Pappabear]

Are any of the 3inch 1911 pistols made well and reliable. When I read about them, they seem to have reliablity issues. I would like a light weight 3 inch but have my doubts. Give me your thoughts ?

[maximus83]

I would say "no go." Yes, such tiny 1911's CAN be made reliable, but the odds of having issues with them are much greater.

I always go back to this insightful comment from Hilton Yam on his 10-8 site:

http://10-8performance.com/id8.html

"First off, if you are truly serious about running a 1911, it needs to be a full sized 5" gun in .45 ACP. There certainly are any number of examples of Commander and other compact 1911s that work or can be made to work just fine, and for CCW use they can be a viable option for some users. However, take a look at the history of unit issue service 1911s - LAPD SWAT, USSOCOM, USMC Det-1, USMC MEUSOC, FBI HRT, FBI SWAT, and let's not forget over 95 years with all the branches of the U.S. military - and you won't find ANY major units that use anything other than the original full sized gun. Why? After you field 50 or 350 guns at once and run thousands or even tens of thousands of rounds through them during training cycles, you'll figure it out. By virtue of their design, the shorter format 1911s reduce the window of functional opportunity for the magazine and slide to work together to feed, chamber, extract, and eject. This is an incontrovertible fact of life. "

[Longhorn]

I had a Para Warthog shortly after they came out. Put about ~2,000 rounds thru it and didn't have a hiccup. I sold it cuz I needed the money worse, and I already have a .45 that's proven reliable (P220)

Again MINE was reliable but it's a crap shoot. Some run, some don't. Change springs often and hopefully you'll stop a problem before it happens...but they're finicky lil SOBs if you really read up on them.

With what's out there, I probably wouldn't pick one up again for a carry gun. But for something a little different and a range toy - maybe...

[bkb0000]

i had a para ordnance p12 with a 3.5" barrel.. double-stack compact 1911 with 12 rounds of .45 in the magazine. i got the " limited match" model, with some upgrades.. i dont even remember what. ambi safety was one, adjustable trigger and high-speed hammer were a couple others.. "match" barrel.. etc. the ambi-safety was the bane of my existence with that gun- it was CONSTANTLY hot in my holster. i will never get ambi anything on a handgun ever again.

i took it to a local 1911 smith before i fired a single round and got a basic reliability package.. i also dont remember what that entailed, i was a pretty ignorant 1911 owner. it ran reliably for something like 6,000-8,000 rounds (didnt keep round counts back then), then i started to get some fail to feeds in the form of rounds getting stuck on the ramp and missed rounds.. in hindesight, these are magazine issues. but my 1911 smith told me it was time for an overhaul (and it probably was, even though my malfs were most definately mag induced) and it was gonna cost like $500 for everything he wanted to do, so i bought a USP 45 on sale for $630 instead. i kept the p12 for a while, rarely shooting it, then finally sold it to a local pistol trainer for $500 about two years ago. i paid $700 for it in 99 or 00, so it held some value.

para doesn't make the p12 anymore, and they certainly dont make it in the "limited" model.. furthermore, a pistol manufacturer can improve or go to shit in a decade- so i can't say if paras are any good these days. they're still kickin, and even have some LEA contracts with their LDA pistols.

i wouldn't buy another- not in 45, at least.. rapid fire was like bronc buckin', with that tiny little barrel. sure was nice to have 13 rounds of .45 in a compact, accurate, 1911 though.. if i still had it today, i'd go ahead and put some money into it.

[Army Chief]

I like the Defender concept, but it really is a toss-up whether or not you can get one to run (and stay running) well enough to stake your life on it. Whatever problems you may have heard people report with their Government Models, you can pretty much add to them by a factor of 2x for every inch you take off of the barrel.

The only 3" 1911 I would really trust completely is the Wilson Combat Sentinel; even then, this model has only recently been added this back to the lineup, because they aren't terribly cost-effective to build. Now, if a custom/semi-custom shop feels that it takes an inordinate amount of time to get one of these pistols to run correctly, you can imagine the potential problems associated with a standard production-grade variant. For my purposes, the Stealth offered a better compromise.

I wouldn't wave-off entirely, but I would choose very, very carefully.

AC

[JiMfraRED1911]

Are any of the 3inch 1911 pistols made well and reliable. When I read about them, they seem to have reliablity issues. I would like a light weight 3 inch but have my doubts. Give me your thoughts ?

No go. Save yourself the headaches.

[ChicagoTex]

Let me start off by saying that I disagree that Commander-length 1911s (4.25") are inherently less reliable, I've encountered many a production Commander-length that was as reliable as just about anything else I've shot (and I've shot a LOT of different brands/models).

With that said, 3.0-3.5"ers are a whole different story. I've only shot one of these in my life, an early Kimber CDP that ran fine for the one magazine I cared to run through it. I have large hands so I have an especially hard time hanging onto them, and their small size and lightweight aluminum frames are really no fun to shoot for me. I have a couple friends who carry these shorty 1911s, one has a Colt, one has an older pre-crap Kimber, both of them tell me they found reliability once they found the right carry ammo type to run in their gun (don't remember what exact loads they use now, sorry). I know that these smaller 1911s tend to actually work best with lighter bullets (i.e. 200gr or 180gr), I suppose because the recoil spring can only compensate so much for the lack of slide mass.

As other posters have said, it's a little bit of a crap shoot. You might wind up with a fundamentally unreliable one you can do nothing with no matter how hard you try. Even if you find a good one, it may be a time-consuming and expensive quest to find the right ammo for it (or you may get lucky on the first try). Even then, you may have trouble with practice ammo (though obviously this is less crucial).

My concealed carry experience has taught me that slide length doesn't matter all that much (within reason), but every 1/8 of an inch of grip length can be crucial. Because of this, I think if I was trying to hunt down the ultimate concealed carry 1911, I'd go with a commander-length slide and barrel on an officer's frame.

Best of luck, caveat emptor, and let us know what you end up deciding/doing.

[Robb Jensen]

John Browning designed the 1911 to be a 5" gun. Cutting almost 1/2 of the length off the slide and barrel is the good recipe for a paperweight. It was designed to be a 5" gun which is my two 1911s .45s and my 2011 .40 are 5" guns.

I would recommend nothing less than 4" or 4-1/4". 3" is just tempting fate.

[Business_Casual]

Dude, you buy a lot of guns.

As GotM4 noted, don't buy a 3" pistol in the 1911 pattern.

M_P

[Paul45]

I've had a couple of short barrel 1911's over the years. You can get them to work but it's not worth the time, effort, money or frustration.
Stick with the Commander or Government size.