MY PERSONAL PATH AWAY FROM THE 1911 (Hilton Yam)

[rhino]

A clean carry weapon is a safe weapon in terms of reliability. I personally will not carry a weapon that is not cleaned on a regular basis. That is just me, everyone else has their own ideas on a weapon. I guess that my experience has taught me to keep a weapon in tip top shape. My life may depend on it one day and I do not want a malfunction due to a dirty weapon. Inconsistency is a problem when you do not clean a 1911, it is not an AR.

If you're addressing me, please understand that I only have 20 years of experience with 1911s, so I'm sort of a novice. The Kimber I mentioned above only has 12,250 rounds through it, so it's essentially new. The 9mm Springfield has 31,162 rounds fired, so it's almost broken-in.

In general, I have no interest in firearms that won't function indefinitely when they are dirty. However, that is only a state they will achieve if they function reliably otherwise. The problems I've had with 1911s have nothing to do with being clean or not clean. They've been a result of grossly out of spec parts in some cases, tolerance stacking in others, poorly fitted parts in others, and sometimes just mysterious problems that some of the most experienced and talented 1911 pistolsmiths in the country have been unable to remedy.

I keep the guns I carry relatively clean, but they are never unfired. Cleaning a gun and failing to test it by firing is not something I'm willing to do.

So, I stand by my assertion of inconsistency being the prime issue in 1911 malfunctions. For instance, I acquired two Rock Island/Armscor 1911A1 in 9mm. At first, one seemed to work well for the first few hundred rounds. The other worked for a couple of magazines, then went down hard. Upon examination, the differences between corresponding parts in the two guns were so dramatic that they were visible to the naked eye. For example, the extractor channel was located at least 1/16" offset from the extractor channel in the other. Those things happen more or less frequently based on manufacturer, but all of them show inconsistencies that are much more prevalent than what you'd see coming off of the lines at a Glock factory for example. This is why at least some hand fitting is necessary for all 1911s. In some cases, the collection parts work well together indefinitely. Sometimes they work okay until some burrs get worn away by use. Some will never work well together, and none of this has anything to do with being dirty or clean.

 

[88E30M50]

The biggest problem with 1911s is that they get lumped together as one big entity. If a Rock Island is put together wrong, blanket statements about all 1911s being inconsistent are made. When you are buying from the budget end of manufacturers, you will experience inconsistency. When you pay more, you get a more consistent product. This is no different than happens with nuts and bolts. If you buy cheap, you don't get a consistent item. If you want a consistent item, you start going up the ladder of quality. An SAE bolt may be inspected and can be expected to function correctly. The threads are rolled and may vary somewhat. If you need better than that, you pay more for a bolt that's labeled airworthy. Those will still have rolled threads, but the QC is much higher and can be guaranteed to function correctly. If that is not enough, you get nuclear grade bolts which cost a mint. At that level, you are dealing with cut threads, eddy current or other inspections done to each and every bolt and are of the highest quality you can find.

Quality and consistency cost money in terms of inspections and higher levels of machine work to higher tolerances. You cannot knock the 1911 simply because the consumer grade manufacturers have a lower tolerance for individual parts. Eventually, if the Glock patent runs out and everybody and their uncle are producing Glocks, you'll see the same thing there. Some manufacturers will produce a top notch product that cost twice what an entry level Glock will cost. That entry level Glock will have molding issues that are considered good enough and the gun will be sold that way.

I suspect that the level of issues with guns is not too much different when you compare Glocks to Sig (or any professional level mfg here) 1911s instead of comparing them to all 1911s lumped together.

 

[Disposable Heart]

88E30M50, spot on.

The DESIGN is reliable, the permutations and adaptations to the design are not. The original 1911's design was reliable, rugged and passed the "test". GI feedlips, feeding ball ammo, the controlled feed situation was amazing: You could hold the weapon at any angle, dirty, etc... and it would fire.

However, people started whining. They wanted a change in the ammo, from a 200 grainer going 900 to a 230 grainer going 850. Okay, Browning obliged. Then they wanted a curved FP stop to make it "easier to cycle when on a horse". Okay, he obliged.

Then, we enter the mass production age, folks buying 1911s started demanding things from the original design that were deviations towards potential unreliability, "undiscovered country" if you will. Tweaking mags to feed wadcutters and hollows, full length guide rods, 8-round magazines and the most detrimental killer of all: cost. They wanted cheaper guns, they wanted "affordable" 1911s. Every manufacturer since then deviated from the design to make it "theirs" and thus we have to hand fit everything.

 

[SERparacord]

If you're addressing me, please understand that I only have 20 years of experience with 1911s, so I'm sort of a novice. The Kimber I mentioned above only has 12,250 rounds through it, so it's essentially new. The 9mm Springfield has 31,162 rounds fired, so it's almost broken-in.

In general, I have no interest in firearms that won't function indefinitely when they are dirty. However, that is only a state they will achieve if they function reliably otherwise. The problems I've had with 1911s have nothing to do with being clean or not clean. They've been a result of grossly out of spec parts in some cases, tolerance stacking in others, poorly fitted parts in others, and sometimes just mysterious problems that some of the most experienced and talented 1911 pistolsmiths in the country have been unable to remedy.

I keep the guns I carry relatively clean, but they are never unfired. Cleaning a gun and failing to test it by firing is not something I'm willing to do.

So, I stand by my assertion of inconsistency being the prime issue in 1911 malfunctions. For instance, I acquired two Rock Island/Armscor 1911A1 in 9mm. At first, one seemed to work well for the first few hundred rounds. The other worked for a couple of magazines, then went down hard. Upon examination, the differences between corresponding parts in the two guns were so dramatic that they were visible to the naked eye. For example, the extractor channel was located at least 1/16" offset from the extractor channel in the other. Those things happen more or less frequently based on manufacturer, but all of them show inconsistencies that are much more prevalent than what you'd see coming off of the lines at a Glock factory for example. This is why at least some hand fitting is necessary for all 1911s. In some cases, the collection parts work well together indefinitely. Sometimes they work okay until some burrs get worn away by use. Some will never work well together, and none of this has anything to do with being dirty or clean.

Makes it hard to believe you have 20 years experience.

 

[rockhopper46038]

My take on that article is that if you aren't willing or able to learn the platform in a more than superficial way, then you're better off with a "point and shoot" platform. This probably does apply to most folks. It almost certainly applies to most LEO agencies, if not each individual within that agency. Seems similar to photography in that regard. There are "point and shoot" cameras, and there is the Nikon D7100. I wouldn't know what to do with the latter, but I'm not going to kid myself that the former will produce results as good as a professional can with the Nikon.

 

[churchmouse]

If you're addressing me, please understand that I only have 20 years of experience with 1911s, so I'm sort of a novice. The Kimber I mentioned above only has 12,250 rounds through it, so it's essentially new. The 9mm Springfield has 31,162 rounds fired, so it's almost broken-in.

In general, I have no interest in firearms that won't function indefinitely when they are dirty. However, that is only a state they will achieve if they function reliably otherwise. The problems I've had with 1911s have nothing to do with being clean or not clean. They've been a result of grossly out of spec parts in some cases, tolerance stacking in others, poorly fitted parts in others, and sometimes just mysterious problems that some of the most experienced and talented 1911 pistolsmiths in the country have been unable to remedy.

I keep the guns I carry relatively clean, but they are never unfired. Cleaning a gun and failing to test it by firing is not something I'm willing to do.

So, I stand by my assertion of inconsistency being the prime issue in 1911 malfunctions. For instance, I acquired two Rock Island/Armscor 1911A1 in 9mm. At first, one seemed to work well for the first few hundred rounds. The other worked for a couple of magazines, then went down hard. Upon examination, the differences between corresponding parts in the two guns were so dramatic that they were visible to the naked eye. For example, the extractor channel was located at least 1/16" offset from the extractor channel in the other. Those things happen more or less frequently based on manufacturer, but all of them show inconsistencies that are much more prevalent than what you'd see coming off of the lines at a Glock factory for example. This is why at least some hand fitting is necessary for all 1911s. In some cases, the collection parts work well together indefinitely. Sometimes they work okay until some burrs get worn away by use. Some will never work well together, and none of this has anything to do with being dirty or clean.

2 of those cheap Armscor pieces....are you nuts. 1 is enough trouble so you thought 2 would offset the issues......

Just poking your pile Rhino. But you are right.

 

[88E30M50]

My take on that article is that if you aren't willing or able to learn the platform in a more than superficial way, then you're better off with a "point and shoot" platform. This probably does apply to most folks. It almost certainly applies to most LEO agencies, if not each individual within that agency. Seems similar to photography in that regard. There are "point and shoot" cameras, and there is the Nikon D7100. I wouldn't know what to do with the latter, but I'm not going to kid myself that the former will produce results as good as a professional can with the Nikon.

That's a good analogy. I have an ongoing argument with a friend from work who insists that the age of the consumer level digital SLR is over and that all anyone needs now days is an iPhone or Android to do the same work. I maintain that there will always be a place for a consumer grade digital SLR that enthusiasts can extend their photography skills with. Sure, they are not for everybody, but someone that wants to learn the intricacies of the platform will be better served by a digital SLR than they would with an iPhone.

For those that go down the 1911 rabbit hole, the platform can be remarkably rewarding. It's not for everyone though. Folks that dabble in the entry level can be frustrated if they get a gun that has a tolerance stack that makes them unreliable. If it's a range only gun that gets a box of .45 run through it once or twice a year, then it's probably Ok for them. If it's to be carried though, it can become expensive in terms of time and frustration to figure it out. If you are a 1911 enthusiast, then going over your gun with calipers and comparing specs to ordnance blueprints is a lot of fun but if not, it's sheer hell. Similarly, I swapped an engine from a late model BMW into an early one and there were lots of nights spent going over wiring diagrams to confirm the function of each and every wire needed to splice the late wiring harness into the early car. I loved every minute of it. Most folks would have hated every minute of it because they are just interested in using the car to get to work, not getting the car to work better.

 

[roadrunner681]

i see it this way if you want a 1911 and you know what is about then get a good one made by a manufacturer with a good reputation (colt, Springfield, STI) and you have to know what you want from it, i myself dont need 2 1/2" groups at 25 yards since theres no way i can shoot that good so im ok with a little rattle if works the way it was intended like the original 1911. i think theirs also a lot of gimmicks on them now like the full length guide rod, and the giant tacky serrations( my opinion). also there is massive number of 1911s around i would bet most people that have them have little issues and on the internet you hear about all the bad things that go wrong with them i would imagine that 9/10 work great.

 

[Vanguard.45]

. . . and one more thing!

Probably the most important reason I choose to carry the 1911 has nothing to do with it's weight, reliability, accuracy, ergonomics, or any other such thing.

I carry the 1911 because it is, quintessentially, an AMERICAN gun!

Someone walks down the street carrying a GLOCK or an HK or a Walther? They could be from anywhere.

Someone walks down the street toting a 1911? That's an American.

It's OUR gun. It shoots a big old .45 slug and puts our enemies on their a$$es. When it fires, you can hear the Star Spangled Banner off in the distance and smell apple pies cooling in a dozen windowsills all along Main Street. The 1911 is that crotchety old Korean War veteran sitting on his front porch drinking a six pack of Pabst and daring you to get on his lawn. You might say he's past his prime and shouldn't be out in public and has a bark louder than his bite. But you know what'll happen if you step foot on his lawn, now don't ya? A big old can of whoop-a$$ will be headed your way!

Is all that sentimentality a good enough reason to carry a gun that is possibly outdated and was designed over 100 years ago?

It is for me.

Yam can do what he likes. Probably voted for Obama. (Just kidding)

Vanguard.45

 

[drillsgt]

Makes it hard to believe you have 20 years experience.

Be careful when people say that, it could really mean just one year of exerience twenty times.

 

[drillsgt]

Probably the most important reason I choose to carry the 1911 has nothing to do with it's weight, reliability, accuracy, ergonomics, or any other such thing.

I carry the 1911 because it is, quintessentially, an AMERICAN gun!

Someone walks down the street carrying a GLOCK or an HK or a Walther? They could be from anywhere.

Someone walks down the street toting a 1911? That's an American.

It's OUR gun. It shoots a big old .45 slug and puts our enemies on their a$$es. When it fires, you can hear the Star Spangled Banner off in the distance and smell apple pies cooling in a dozen windowsills all along Main Street. The 1911 is that crotchety old Korean War veteran sitting on his front porch drinking a six pack of Pabst and daring you to get on his lawn. You might say he's past his prime and shouldn't be out in public and has a bark louder than his bite. But you know what'll happen if you step foot on his lawn, now don't ya? A big old can of whoop-a$$ will be headed your way!

Is all that sentimentality a good enough reason to carry a gun that is possibly outdated and was designed over 100 years ago?

It is for me.

Yam can do what he likes. Probably voted for Obama. (Just kidding)

Vanguard.45

Translation from the article is probably that I can make as much money on M&P's and they are easier to work on, plus I have a whole line of M&P parts I want to push instead of 1911 parts.

 

[rhino]

Be careful when people say that, it could really mean just one year of exerience twenty times.

Or in my case, one hour of experience 175,320 times.

​rhino out!

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Or in my case, one hour of experience 175,320 times.

​rhino out!

You aren't tricking me into doing math.

 

[rhino]

You aren't tricking me into doing math.

What I did there? You saw it. I also added five days for the leaps years.


​rhino out!