Length of ownership of a gun is not a testament to it's reliability. What you've done with it during that time is.Originally Posted by Corvus
Length of ownership of a gun is not a testament to it's reliability. What you've done with it during that time is.
We bought them for Facebook pics , what else ?
Now you're talkin'!
Congrats on the new acquisition. Let us know how it does after you let it go through its 1st 1000 rounds. So what if it isn't a $2500 gun...sounds like you're happy and have pretty sound expectations for it's going to be used for. Also Ruger has an excellent customer service if you need it fixed. So rock on.
I'm just a noobie to handguns. The intent of my post was just to share a little excitement that I encountered after shooting a new gun and of a particular style for the first time. Nothing more.
Cost (of a gun) vs accuracy/reliability (over time) is a very interesting comparison to me. I've read several sr1911 reviews (certainly not all) some of those that I've read elude to what you're suggesting regarding accuracy but not so much from the jam-o-matic perspective. Guess time and continued learning will tell for me.
The amount that I shoot this gun will be primarily regulated by cost unfortunately, not lack of interest. Some day I hope to take classes like you're referring to but at this time it's just not feasible for me. Regardless, thanks for the feedback.
You're welcome. Totally understand the $ limits, we all run into them.
The best explanation I've heard for 1911 reliability issues is that the design comes from an era when handguns were fitted by hand. Because of this, the tolerances of the design are less forgiving than others. When you have a pistol produced on an assembly line with no attention from a gunsmith, the probability of getting parts matched which don't fit perfectly increases. Not all of these production 1911s will have issues, but if your standard polymer striker pistol has a 2% failure rate, 1911s might be closer to 8-10%. (I am making up these numbers to illustrate the point). Most 1911 owners will still be happy, but the odds of a problem increase.
Another approach is to make 1911s that are very loose to compensate for the propensity of poor-fitting parts. This results in a gun that is not as accurate but will be more likely to be reliable.
Finally, the most important component to good feeding is the magazine. The mags that come with most 1911s seem to be the weakest link. Pick up some CMC or Wilson Combat mags if you have issues.
I would say that if you can shoot 500 rounds through your gun including hollowpoints, without any issues, you are probably good to go. This is the same test that should be performed on any handgun by the way. As soon as there is an issue, the count resets until you can do the full 500. Some people do 500 hollowpoints, some people want to see 1000-2000 rounds through the gun. Modify as you see fit.
And there is nothing wrong with not shooting tons of ammo, just keep in mind one of Jeff Cooper's gems: "Owning a firearm doesn't make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician". The gun is a tool, the weapon is you.
Just thought I'd mention, since it seemed as if the OP has cleaned his gun more than once since purchasing it, that the 500-2,000 round reliability test should be done without cleaning the gun. As a side note to the OP, concerning cleaning in general; most of the regular pistol shooters on this forum don't clean their guns after every range session, instead shooting a few thousand rounds before worrying about it. If the gun is solid, this will have no adverse effects.
From what I hear, the ruger is definitely not the worst choice for a sub 1,000 dollar 1911. Bear in mind, if you plan on shooting a 1911 extensively, you'll want to know how to fix/diagnose problems with reliability. I'd say learn how to tune your extractor and buy some good magazines. My preference is CMC or Wilson ETM's. The 47D is a nice magazine, but in my experience, the springs lose tension faster than the ETM's. Wilson makes the most popular 1911 mags for a reason. They really are good. Then take them out, shoot a lot of rounds through them and let us know how the gun does after 2,000 rounds and no cleaning.
If I was going to buy factory 1911 that didn't say Colt or Springfield on the slide, I'd climb over a mountain of Taurus', Kimbers, and other assorted guns to get the Ruger. Hilton at 10-8 has said good things about the Ruger's general construction, and the fact that Ruger owns their own casting process really helps.
Reply With Quote