1911s - Some Thoughts

[BLR]

Objective: begin dispelling myths and misconceptions about short recoil operated pistols, and 1911s in particular.

Requests from the Author: Please do not quote authorities of the 1911 out of context. If they care to chime in, great. Chances are they are simplifying an observation and quoting them will not do justice to their insight. Please don’t simply say “my experience with 1911s has been poor.” It adds nothing to the discussion. In other words, I’m going to spend more than a few “unbilled” hours on this, so please don’t turn it into every other 1911 thread out there.

I stated previously that for Browning Tilt Barrel Short Recoil Operated pistols, the magazine is the primary concern. For background, and to dispel Myth 1 (1911s have a more torturous feed path), please consider the following pictures. Picture 1 is of a Sig P220 with current generation magazines.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_093039_zpsaf9zp5ni.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_093039_zpsaf9zp5ni.jpg.html)

Picture 1. Sig P220 Feeding Angle

Notice the nearly horizontal angle of the round in the magazine. I don’t believe anyone will argue that the P220 isn’t a reliable design and I’ve never heard anyone say it had a difficult feed path or that it was the “King of the Feedway Stoppage.” Now let us take a look at a Colt. First up, in Picture 2, a typical 7 round magazine with tapered feed lips.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_094340_zpskggrveio.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_094340_zpskggrveio.jpg.html)

Picture 2. Colt S70 of Recent Manufacture and a 7 Round Magazine of Recent Manufacture

Now it seems appropriate to look at a more modern magazine. In Picture 3, a Wilson ETM is shown in the same Colt S70.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_094254_zps199a1vx4.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_094254_zps199a1vx4.jpg.html)

Picture 3. Colt S70 of Recent Manufacture and an 8 Round Wilson Combat ETM Magazine

Obviously, there is no indication in these pictures of a more tortuous feed path when compared with a Sig P220. There does exist a distinct and significant difference between a P220 mag and even an ETM mag. For the sake of argument, lets carry this line a bit further before broaching that difference. In Picture 4, the “Benchmark of Modern Design and Reliability” – a 3rd Generation G17 with a factory magazine.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_093910_zpsyiato3nz.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_093910_zpsyiato3nz.jpg.html)

Picture 4. 3rd Gen G17 with Factory 17rd Magazine

I don’t believe that to be a significant improvement in cartridge position over the 7 round 1911 combination, but that begs the question – What is significant? Picture 5 is of a “Short Extractor” P226 Elite Dark, using factory (MecGar) magazines.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_092617_zpsyufqdlyy.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_092617_zpsyufqdlyy.jpg.html)

Picture 5. Sig P226 Elite Dark with Factory Magazine

Picture 5 shows similar position relative to the chamber as the G17 in Picture 4. Picture 6 shows a MkIII P35 with a factory (MecGar) 13rnd magazine.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_093241_zps755xgwwz.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_093241_zps755xgwwz.jpg.html)

Picture 6. MkIII P35 with Factory 13rd Magazine.

Finally, Picture 7 shows a Beretta M9A1 with the new PVD coated magazine.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_093724_zpsekoaxpjz.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_093724_zpsekoaxpjz.jpg.html)

Picture 7. Beretta M9A1 with PVD Coated Factory Magazine.

As can be seen, the largest departures of magazine position to chamber position are with the P220 and the M9A1, both highly regarded for reliability. By logical conclusion, another factor(s) is at play.

First, let us see if we can agree on a principal of mechanical reliability. That is reliability a function of consistency. If the ammunition is identical round to round, the firearms operation (excepting the magazine) identical round to round, the firearm is held the same, then reliability must stem from the magazine. That is not to say reliability is a function of the magazine and magazine alone, but we must understand the components before the system. In that light, it seems appropriate to look for indications of variation in how the round is presented to the feedramp/chamber. Picture 8 shows the feedramp of a 10mm Nighthawk Custom Falcon using the factory 8 round magazine (Checkmate welded base) and fresh recoil spring and Hornady 155gr factory loads.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/20131223_134739_zps7d782bdd.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/20131223_134739_zps7d782bdd.jpg.html)

Picture 8. NHC Falcon in 10mm Feedramp Markings

Inspection of the feedramp indications inconsistent presentation of the round. The firearm to date has been reliable. Figure 9 shows the feedramp of a Springfield Armory Professional Model of recent manufacture using “tuned” Wilson ETM magazines and 200gr LSWC ammunition.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/20131222_165726_zps661b6c12.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/20131222_165726_zps661b6c12.jpg.html)

Picture 9. SACS Professional Model with Tuned ETM 8rd Magazine

As can be seen in Picture 9, a much more consistent, higher in position to the bore centerline mark can be seen. To investigate this further, 4 Wilson ETM 8rd magazines were modified with new followers, base plates, and springs (springs were stock, but tuned to modify the load distribution on the followers). The result is shown in Figure 10.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/20131117_143134_zps76b50a8a.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/20131117_143134_zps76b50a8a.jpg.html)

Picture 10. Wilson CQB (WCOO range) using Modified ETM Magazines.

As can be seen in the Picture 10, nearly no contact with the feedramp is indicated. Picture 11 shows the same magazines used in the S70 Colt from above.

[BLR]

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/20131101_093545_zpsd2e0f8d8.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/20131101_093545_zpsd2e0f8d8.jpg.html)

Picture 11. S70 Colt using Modified ETM Magazines.
To contrast this, Picture 12 shows the feed ramp of the M9A1, clearly showing contact points on the barrel as well as the frame cut.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140124_093715_zpsewryhao4.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140124_093715_zpsewryhao4.jpg.html)

Picture 12. Beretta M9A1 using Factory PVD Magazine.

[Super77]

Bill thanks for your posts. This is an interesting topic that doesn't get as much attention as it deserves. Is there a way to quantify the different factors at play here to find out which really matter? There are obvious ones such as the cartridge angle as it sits in the magazine and the distance from the top of the mag to the bore line. I also notice different designs place the tip of the cartridge at varying distances from the breach. Does the angle at which the barrel tilts to unlock from the slide affect consistency across different pistol designs? I know you're intent was to keep this 1911-centric but there's a fair amount of variation even within that species. Unlike say Glock pistols there are a number of aftermarket magazines available for 1911s that have design tweaks meant to improve on the original. For instance I seem to remember that Tripp Research CobraMags supposedly have modified feed geometries. Do you have any insight on how manufacturers tweak the original design to improve feeding?

[JHC]

In the other recent thread you said the BHP had the best orientation. What makes it so? The Sig seemed most direct into the chamber.

Pretty neat thread already.

[BLR]

Bill thanks for your posts. This is an interesting topic that doesn't get as much attention as it deserves. Is there a way to quantify the different factors at play here to find out which really matter? There are obvious ones such as the cartridge angle as it sits in the magazine and the distance from the top of the mag to the bore line. I also notice different designs place the tip of the cartridge at varying distances from the breach. Does the angle at which the barrel tilts to unlock from the slide affect consistency across different pistol designs? I know you're intent was to keep this 1911-centric but there's a fair amount of variation even within that species. Unlike say Glock pistols there are a number of aftermarket magazines available for 1911s that have design tweaks meant to improve on the original. For instance I seem to remember that Tripp Research CobraMags supposedly have modified feed geometries. Do you have any insight on how manufacturers tweak the original design to improve feeding?

Yup! Kinematics. Factors include static and sliding friction of the round in the magazine and on the feedramp, position and attitude departure, and distribution of spring pressure along the cartridge/feed lips.

First, a definition of the problem needs to exist, and I don't think one exists. Then definition of the design operating envelope (min/max allowable friction, angles, etc), which I know doesn't exist.

I'm unaware of a magazine design for the 1911 that was approached scientifically.

Like I said, it's all about the magazine. In so far as the how of tuning? In a later post. I think we, as in all of us, need to reach some common ground first.

[BLR]

In the other recent thread you said the BHP had the best orientation. What makes it so? The Sig seemed most direct into the chamber.

Pretty neat thread already.

Yep, orientation means more than initial position relative to the chamber, though.

[45dotACP]

Very interesting! I have always wondered about whether or not it was a bad thing for a 1911 to "nose dive" when feeding. It was my understanding that it was necessary for the bullet to strike the frame ramp, which was angled just such that the cartridge will "bounce" into the chamber. Seems to be the case with a couple of more modern guns too. My personal Caspian has strike marks all over the frame ramp. Never has had any problems with feeding the rounds other than when the rounds are loaded too long and hit the slide stop lobe and locked the gun open. But there have never been any feedway stoppages with factory ammo...

[JodyH]

Please don’t simply say “my experience with 1911s has been poor.” It adds nothing to the discussion. In other words, I’m going to spend more than a few “unbilled” hours on this, so please don’t turn it into every other 1911 thread out there.
"Let's not turn a thread that's already just like every other 1911 thread into every other 1911 thread".
Ok... Thank you for not billing us for this information.

[BLR]

Very interesting! I have always wondered about whether or not it was a bad thing for a 1911 to "nose dive" when feeding. It was my understanding that it was necessary for the bullet to strike the frame ramp, which was angled just such that the cartridge will "bounce" into the chamber. Seems to be the case with a couple of more modern guns too. My personal Caspian has strike marks all over the frame ramp. Never has had any problems with feeding the rounds other than when the rounds are loaded too long and hit the slide stop lobe and locked the gun open. But there have never been any feedway stoppages with factory ammo...

That's not a good thing.

And that highlights a number of issues and misconceptions around the 1911. The cartridge need not, and should not, bounce around when feeding. It should be fed in a controlled manner, just like a P30 or G17 or P226. After all, functionally, they are identical mechanisms. All short recoil magazine fed designs, right?

Marks all over the feed ramp (typically) indicate different motions for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and so on, round. I would expect that if you fed just the top round in a full magazine, then just the last round in a magazine, you'd have two distinct marks on the feed ramp at the extremes.

[45dotACP]

That's not a good thing.

And that highlights a number of issues and misconceptions around the 1911. The cartridge need not, and should not, bounce around when feeding. It should be fed in a controlled manner, just like a P30 or G17 or P226. After all, functionally, they are identical mechanisms. All short recoil magazine fed designs, right?

Marks all over the feed ramp (typically) indicate different motions for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and so on, round. I would expect that if you fed just the top round in a full magazine, then just the last round in a magazine, you'd have two distinct marks on the feed ramp at the extremes.

I'll try what you suggest. It might be the result of all the various different brands of 8 round magazines I use :o

[HCM]

Yep, orientation means more than initial position relative to the chamber, though.

Ok - in looking at Picture 2 vs picture 3, it appears the 7 round mag in picture 2 has a better orientation. It that a function of differences in the feed lips or of other factors necessary to get 8 rounds into a 1911 magazine ?

[HCM]

Yep, orientation means more than initial position relative to the chamber, though.

Also, Re: picture 1, is there is difference in orientation between the 7 round and 8 round SIG P-220 Mags ?

[DacoRoman]

Very interesting thread.

One problem that I see with the 1911 is that the feeding path of the rounds changes depending on the amount of rounds in the magazine, that is to say the more the rounds deplete in the magazine the less supported they become by the round underneath tending to result in their nosediving and striking the feed ramp lower. With a 7 round mag, for example, the top round almost has a straight shot into the chamber, as does a single round supported by a properly designed magazine follower (for example a good 1911 will feed an empty case into the chamber, as does my Wilson CQB).

I think that if all rounds were supported in the mag like rounds are usually supported in a double column magazine as found in the more modern modified browning designs, ala H&K, Glock, etc., there would be less inherent problems. However some say that double column magazine 1911 designs are not particularly reliable, but I'm not sure that this is correct, and if it is correct, I am not sure why.

[TheTrevor]

HK USP 40 full-size showing presentation of a fully loaded mag of HPs and the feed ramp. Apologies for the grunge, this gun is partway through a 2k challenge run.

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/01/25/manugy6e.jpg

That was a surpringly challenging pic to take. If that last one hadn't come out well I was going to have to grab a real camera and a tripod to do better. As it was I used my nose to tell my iphone where to focus because both hands were fully occupied!

ETA: the good thing about it being dirty is that you can see where the shoulder of the round contacts the ramp about halfway up, and then slides upwards until the round chambers. I've never seen any indication that the nose of any bullet profile makes significant contact with the ramp, even conical flat-nose FMJ 180gr.

[45dotACP]

Very interesting thread.

One problem that I see with the 1911 is that the feeding path of the rounds changes depending on the amount of rounds in the magazine, that is to say the more the rounds deplete in the magazine the less supported they become by the round underneath tending to result in their nosediving and striking the feed ramp lower. With a 7 round mag, for example, the top round almost has a straight shot into the chamber, as does a single round supported by a properly designed magazine follower (for example a good 1911 will feed an empty case into the chamber, as does my Wilson CQB).

I think that if all rounds were supported in the mag like rounds are usually supported in a double column magazine as found in the more modern modified browning designs, ala H&K, Glock, etc., there would be less inherent problems. However some say that double column magazine 1911 designs are not particularly reliable, but I'm not sure that this is correct, and if it is correct, I am not sure why.

Correct me if I'm wrong (which is a very real possibility because I am out of my scientific depth here) but I think what he's trying to get at is that they shouldn't strike the frame ramp at different places (or at all?) in a properly tuned 1911 magazine.

[jholen]

Bill,

Are these the new flat-wire ETMs? Interested in seeing where this goes - currently using Chip McCormick's stainless 8 rounders in my Springfield RO. Will definitely be checking the internals tonight when cleaning. Thanks for the post and the work you put into all things 1911 related! Appreciate it!

[YVK]

Nice thread, interesting. I wanted to say something about coaxial orientation of chamber and top round on those pics of reputably reliable guns/mags, but I am not sure it matters.

[Haraise]

Going to contribute my own gun here, a 9x19 2011. Slide stop in, barrel back.

http://i41.tinypic.com/2v9q9uv.jpg

[DacoRoman]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which is a very real possibility because I am out of my scientific depth here) but I think what he's trying to get at is that they shouldn't strike the frame ramp at different places (or at all?) in a properly tuned 1911 magazine.

I am just a guy that has a 1911, and that did some reading on these topics, so I'll try to stay in my lane, but here it goes.

Good magazines can make the difference yes, but for a proper discussion of "feed geometry", topics such as:
- number of rounds in the mag/mag capacity
- magazine feed lips as in GI, vs Hybrid, vs Wadcutter design and the various effect on controlled feeding, versus the round being "uncontrolled" and allowing push feeds.
- mag follower design

then you have to also look at
- breech face geometry
- extractor tension
- ramp geometry
- barrel to ramp gap

- different mag designs also sit higher or lower in the gun also affecting how direct the feed path is.

Bottom line is that it is complex. And a magazine that doesn't do controlled feed well and looses control of the round and sometimes even push feeds can be reliable, and even perhaps show consistent strikes on the feed ramp but there is a school of thought that would say that that 1911 isn't functioning properly, because it is not displaying controlled feeding.

Wilson magazines have traditionally been considered to circumvent the controlled feed principle to a certain point, and allow less controlled feeding ala a more wadcutter lip design. In a sense this, in a sense ironically to 1911 traditionalists that worship at the altar of controlled feeding, can result in increased reliability even in guns that don't have all the geometries absolutely correct. But push feeds that can occur with non GI or hybrid feed lips can put undue stresses on the extractor and may result in a lack of reliability if the gun isn't held upright according to the, again let's call them 1911 traditionalists.

Anyway I'm starting to feel like I'm veering into oncoming traffic, so back to my lane I go. But I guess the point I'm trying to make is that not everyone agrees what a "well tuned magazine is". Some will insist that a hybrid feed lip design like I think Colt still uses is the only way to go, and that the gun has to be built to proper specs to allow these mags and therefore controlled feeding to remain inviolate.

[1slow]

My understanding, maybe wrong, is that:
Controlled feed means that: as the cartridge feeds the back of the cartridge slides up a flat breech, or bolt face (1911, Mauser 98 bolt action etc...). The cartridge rim slides under under the extractor hook and stays there through being fully chambered and extracted. It is under the control of the extractor the whole feed and extraction cycle.

Push feed means that the cartridge is pushed into the chamber by the face of the slide, or bolt ( AR 15, Remington 700 etc...), then the extractor snaps over the case rim as the cartridge chambers. These actions usually fully surround the cartridge head like a AR 15. Because these actions fully surround the case head the metal that surrounds the case head sticks out as far as the extractor. The extractor does not engage the cartridge rim until the cartridge is fully chambered

I do not see how a 1911 can push feed as the flat breech face contacts the back of the cartridge first and is pushing the cartridge forward up the feed ramp and then it slides under the extractor.
I may be not understanding this completely.

[LSP552]

Thanks Bill. I really appreciate the ongoing 1911 education.

Ken

[joshs]

Pistols can push feed if the feed lips release the round before it is picked up by the extractor. This can happen when the slide impacts the rear of the cartridge and the feed lips allow the round to be knocked forward in front of the extractor.

[45dotACP]

I am just a guy that has a 1911, and that did some reading on these topics, so I'll try to stay in my lane, but here it goes.

Good magazines can make the difference yes, but for a proper discussion of "feed geometry", topics such as:
- number of rounds in the mag/mag capacity
- magazine feed lips as in GI, vs Hybrid, vs Wadcutter design and the various effect on controlled feeding, versus the round being "uncontrolled" and allowing push feeds.
- mag follower design

then you have to also look at
- breech face geometry
- extractor tension
- ramp geometry
- barrel to ramp gap

- different mag designs also sit higher or lower in the gun also affecting how direct the feed path is.

Bottom line is that it is complex. And a magazine that doesn't do controlled feed well and looses control of the round and sometimes even push feeds can be reliable, and even perhaps show consistent strikes on the feed ramp but there is a school of thought that would say that that 1911 isn't functioning properly, because it is not displaying controlled feeding.

Wilson magazines have traditionally been considered to circumvent the controlled feed principle to a certain point, and allow less controlled feeding ala a more wadcutter lip design. In a sense this, in a sense ironically to 1911 traditionalists that worship at the altar of controlled feeding, can result in increased reliability even in guns that don't have all the geometries absolutely correct. But push feeds that can occur with non GI or hybrid feed lips can put undue stresses on the extractor and may result in a lack of reliability if the gun isn't held upright according to the, again let's call them 1911 traditionalists.

Anyway I'm starting to feel like I'm veering into oncoming traffic, so back to my lane I go. But I guess the point I'm trying to make is that not everyone agrees what a "well tuned magazine is". Some will insist that a hybrid feed lip design like I think Colt still uses is the only way to go, and that the gun has to be built to proper specs to allow these mags and therefore controlled feeding to remain inviolate.

I'm fairly certain your understanding of it is correct...I read an article put forth by a gentleman who compared different magazines here
http://how-i-did-it.org/magazines/
This guy has done a few different writeups on controlled round feed and the links he has are also worth looking at.

I'm pretty certain that's how the controlled round feed works. Obviously, even a 1911 that uses CRF will not have as tortous a feed path as some guns (like that Sig 220), but it seems to be that Bill has found a way to circumvent the need for the round to be controlled by the frame ramp? Thus my interest is piqued. But I too, feel I should stay in my lane. I will watch this thread with interest....

[1slow]

Pistols can push feed if the feed lips release the round before it is picked up by the extractor. This can happen when the slide impacts the rear of the cartridge and the feed lips allow the round to be knocked forward in front of the extractor.

That makes sense.

[Jason F]

I can't wait to see where this goes. Thank you Bill for your time, efforts, and your insights.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Going to contribute my own gun here, a 9x19 2011. Slide stop in, barrel back.

http://i41.tinypic.com/2v9q9uv.jpg

Wow. That's direct. Is there even any marks on your frame ramp? Or does it just bypass it completely during the cycle?

[Haraise]

Wow. That's direct. Is there even any marks on your frame ramp? Or does it just bypass it completely during the cycle?

I'll have to take a picture after a few more rounds. But that picture might not be representative. I tried to simulate natural placement by putting the slide stop pin in, since I don't have a frame cut to line up with, so I can't be confident I have the same placement of the 1911's earlier in the thread. But in feeding, there is remarkably small friction, when compared to my other 1911ish guns, for as little as that means.

[DacoRoman]

I'm fairly certain your understanding of it is correct...I read an article put forth by a gentleman who compared different magazines here
http://how-i-did-it.org/magazines/
This guy has done a few different writeups on controlled round feed and the links he has are also worth looking at.


great link, thank you

[1slow]

I really appreciate your linking to the .45 1911 magazine article, very informative.

[WilsonCombatRep]

I'll have to take a picture after a few more rounds. But that picture might not be representative. I tried to simulate natural placement by putting the slide stop pin in, since I don't have a frame cut to line up with, so I can't be confident I have the same placement of the 1911's earlier in the thread. But in feeding, there is remarkably small friction, when compared to my other 1911ish guns, for as little as that means.

Well, don't take this as criticism but that is not a 1911-it is a double column 2011 high cap and the feed dynamics are somewhat different than a single column 1911. The magazines for example are better suited to 9mm in my experience.

[Haraise]

Well, don't take this as criticism but that is not a 1911-it is a double column 2011 high cap and the feed dynamics are somewhat different than a single column 1911. The magazines for example are better suited to 9mm in my experience.

Didn't say it was a 1911. Just comparing it to pictures of the 1911s on here.

But yeah, they say .45 is the worst suited round for S_I mags.

[Don Gwinn]

This is a little over my head, but fascinating stuff.
Because of this thread, as I was trying out a defensive load in an XD on Saturday and got some malfunctions, I downloaded to six rounds each in 13-round magazines just to see what would happen, and voila! No malfunctions. Next full magazines again, and the same two magazines failed again. Wasn't sure what to make of it until someone suggested here that XD's are known for weak magazine springs. Now I suspect that's the problem, but I'm not sure I'd have caught this if not for this thread. I'd been loading only what I needed for whatever drill I was shooting most of the time.
So, thanks. Information about some basic principles here was useful even for someone who wasn't shooting a 1911 and is not really qualified to tinker with one.

[klewis]

Well, don't take this as criticism but that is not a 1911-it is a double column 2011 high cap and the feed dynamics are somewhat different than a single column 1911. The magazines for example are better suited to 9mm in my experience.

So, to take your comment totally out of context ;) and to add some info from this blog post by Bruce Gray (http://grayguns.com/physics-and-short-45-caliber-pistols-a-discussion/), if you want a Commander-sized 2011 to run, make it a 9mm (because that's less demanding for feed timing being a shorter cartridge, feeds better from 2011 mags, and being a Commander-sized slide the 9mm has to move less slide mass)?

/end total tangent

[Magic_Salad0892]

Well, don't take this as criticism but that is not a 1911-it is a double column 2011 high cap and the feed dynamics are somewhat different than a single column 1911. The magazines for example are better suited to 9mm in my experience.

The magazines are better suited to a 9x19mm than a single stack magazine? Or the magazines are better suited to a 9x19mm than a .45ACP?

[JBP55]

Didn't say it was a 1911. Just comparing it to pictures of the 1911s on here.

But yeah, they say .45 is the worst suited round for S_I mags.

Looks like 147gr. HST in your pistol.

[Haraise]

So, to take your comment totally out of context ;) and to add some info from this blog post by Bruce Gray (http://grayguns.com/physics-and-short-45-caliber-pistols-a-discussion/), if you want a Commander-sized 2011 to run, make it a 9mm (because that's less demanding for feed timing being a shorter cartridge, feeds better from 2011 mags, and being a Commander-sized slide the 9mm has to move less slide mass)?

/end total tangent

Well, my gun is a commander 9mm 2011, and no failures yet, but most people will say go with a long loaded .40 for reliability. Why? Just because that's what most 2011s are built for, shooting .40 major. There's something to be said about getting the most refined product, though SVI will say they can make reliability in many calibers.


The magazines are better suited to a 9x19mm than a single stack magazine? Or the magazines are better suited to a 9x19mm than a .45ACP?

The magazines are better suited to 9mm than .45 in a 2011. The 2011 was born from competition, where there's absolutely no reason to shoot a double stack .45, and people who carry it are generally on the bleeding edge of tech, so they go with a better double stack caliber like 9 or .40, so, it's just the purpose of the gun. .45 is an awesome single stack round. Just doesn't double stack for capacity well so it's less popular in 2011 than 1911.


Looks like 147gr. HST in your pistol.

Right on the money!

[jetfire]

I was trying out a defensive load in an XD

Well, there's your problem.

;-)

[texasaggie2005]

This is a little over my head, but fascinating stuff.
Because of this thread, as I was trying out a defensive load in an XD on Saturday and got some malfunctions, I downloaded to six rounds each in 13-round magazines just to see what would happen, and voila! No malfunctions. Next full magazines again, and the same two magazines failed again. Wasn't sure what to make of it until someone suggested here that XD's are known for weak magazine springs. Now I suspect that's the problem, but I'm not sure I'd have caught this if not for this thread. I'd been loading only what I needed for whatever drill I was shooting most of the time.
So, thanks. Information about some basic principles here was useful even for someone who wasn't shooting a 1911 and is not really qualified to tinker with one.

Best upgrade I ever did to my XD45 was sell it, and buy a M&P 45. I got tired of the XD's issues.

[Don Gwinn]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_EXCOIZzZvoA/TQGM0zK5SuI/AAAAAAAABiI/hoWBdNeouxk/s1600/Mr.%2BPeabody.jpg

(Edited to Add: Not you, texasaggie2005. You're probably good people . . . :D )

I know, I know. I'll start a thread where people can argue Glock 19 vs Glock 17 vs. M&P9 on my behalf before I go buy a Hi-Power (well . . . maybe an FEG. I'm not made of money.) ;)

But this thread is useful, so I'm going to try not to derail it.

[Drang]

Bill: Thanks for sharing. As I related on the blog the other day (not that either of my regular readers are members here) I've been debating lately whether to stick with the 1911 (-ish, since what I carry is a Combat Commander) or switch to something else, probably Sig.
Still debating, but I ran across a Colt Rail Gun in a local store this weekend...

[BLR]

I am carrying a Commander much more often nowadays.

Why do you want to switch?

CRGs are great starting material.

[Drang]

I'd still carry the Commander, but I've come to the conclusion that a spare gun would be a Good Thing, and I decided that a 5" model, preferably with a rail for mounting laser for training (or light for home defense) would be a good idea, too.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

Okay, to liven things up - how 'bout internal vs. external extractors?

A talk with a couple of 1911 mechanics convinced me of the problems of internal extractors. They discussed the black art of tuning an internal, their relatively short working lives, and the susceptibility to damage.

As I was buying the 1911 for SASS Wild Bunch competitions, and expected a high round count, I went with the Smith and Wesson 1911 and its external extractor. I've never had a reason to regret my decision. It's only failures have been MY fault; with too light ammo or new Chip mags with the shipping smutz fouling their workings. Extraction is VERY positive, and brass is thrown everywhere in creation (a very minor issue.)

I've been called a heretic for my SW1911, but my next pistol, be it Hi-Power, Glock, SIG, XD or hopefully a SW1911 Series E, will certainly have the modern external extractor.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Really hoping Bill will take the time to convert his rage into words.


I used to believe in the short lifespan of internal extractors. I don't anymore.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Okay, to liven things up - how 'bout internal vs. external extractors?

A talk with a couple of 1911 mechanics convinced me of the problems of internal extractors. They discussed the black art of tuning an internal, their relatively short working lives, and the susceptibility to damage.

As I was buying the 1911 for SASS Wild Bunch competitions, and expected a high round count, I went with the Smith and Wesson 1911 and its external extractor. I've never had a reason to regret my decision. It's only failures have been MY fault; with too light ammo or new Chip mags with the shipping smutz fouling their workings. Extraction is VERY positive, and brass is thrown everywhere in creation (a very minor issue.)

I've been called a heretic for my SW1911, but my next pistol, be it Hi-Power, Glock, SIG, XD or hopefully a SW1911 Series E, will certainly have the modern external extractor.

S&W got their external extractor to work.

Internals work very well if you have a good one like an EGW HD, AFTEC, or a Wilson BP.

[NETim]

Okay, to liven things up - how 'bout internal vs. external extractors?

A talk with a couple of 1911 mechanics convinced me of the problems of internal extractors. They discussed the black art of tuning an internal, their relatively short working lives, and the susceptibility to damage.

As I was buying the 1911 for SASS Wild Bunch competitions, and expected a high round count, I went with the Smith and Wesson 1911. I've never had a reason to regret my decision. It's only failures have been MY fault; with too light ammo or new mags with the shipping smutz fouling their workings. Extraction is VERY positive, and brass is thrown everywhere in creation (a very minor issue.)

I've been called a heretic for my SW1911, but my next pistol, be it Hi-Power, Glock, SIG, XD or hopefully a SW1911 Series E, will certainly have the modern external extractor.

My older S&W with the older "thin" extractor is losing its grip. Often times the last round is ejected with a severely dented case mouth. I'll have to send it back to S&W to get it fixed eventually. I can live with it right now. It serves primarily as the "dry fire" gun and malfunction drill gun. (It also has to suffer through my feeble attempts at sight replacements and the like.)

My other guns, internal guns, have the Wilson BP extractor in them. The oldest one, vintage ought-seven, has many, many thousands of rounds and has suffered some, not a lot, but some, abuse in the form of dropping the slide on a chambered round during malfunction clearance drills at TR. It's still running strong.

[joshs]

Really hoping Bill will take the time to convert his rage into words.


I used to believe in the short lifespan of internal extractors. I don't anymore.

Especially after Todd's SACS gun still had too much extractor tension after firing 50,000 rounds.

[BLR]

Re-considering my response.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

My older S&W with the older "thin" extractor is losing its grip. Often times the last round is ejected with a severely dented case mouth. I'll have to send it back to S&W to get it fixed eventually. I can live with it right now. It serves primarily as the "dry fire" gun and malfunction drill gun. (It also has to suffer through my feeble attempts at sight replacements and the like.)


How many rounds through your Smidt, NETim? S&W did appreciably increase the size of the extractor in their follow on E Series. Heard good things about SW Customer Service. I've been fairly impressed (good work - but it took 4 weeks) and my SW service center is only 20 miles away. I'd be very interested in how your problem is solved.

[NETim]

How many rounds through your Smidt, NETim? S&W did appreciably increase the size of the extractor in their follow on E Series. Heard good things about SW Customer Service. I've been fairly impressed (good work - but it took 4 weeks) and my SW service center is only 20 miles away. I'd be very interested in how your problem is solved.

Not a lot. Probably 2000'ish. The newer guns with the thicker extractor are okay from what I hear.

[45dotACP]

Like many, I've always held that external extractors were not kosher in a 1911. This after a brutal experience with a certain species of Kimber.
But even guys like Hilton Yam have said good things about the S&W E series 1911's so I might have to give one a shot (heh heh heh)

But mostly I maintain that the internal extractor is still capable of great reliability. Use a good quality part and don't single feed a round and your luck will be fine.
I think there's even a jig from Weigand that will tension the extractor for you if you don't feel comfortable with your ability to tension it yourself, though I haven't heard much about those.

[Haraise]

Personally, I'd love an external extractor on any 1911. Failing that, I don't think I'll use other than an AFTEC. Anything that can modernize the design would be welcome.

[JonInWA]

I've had a Bruce Gray external extractor on my 2006-vintage SIGARMS GSR XO since April of 2009. While I haven't amassed a huge roundcount on it (1067 rounds to date), the extractor has performed flawlessly. On my Nighthawk Custom Talon II with a standard 1911 internal extractor, which I've had since since Sept 2008, I've put 2428 rounds through it to date-with zero extraction issues.

While I personally think that a properly executed and installed external extractor is simpler and capable of greater longevity, with less juju, I have no real qualms with a properly executed and installed internal extractor.

Obviously, the devil in the details with both/either extractor type is in the "properly executed and installed" concept...Welcome to the merry world of the 1911...

Best, Jon

[farscott]

My issue with the AFTEC is removal for cleaning the extractor channel. I tend to lose those springs unless I disassemble inside a plastic baggy. The assembly process with the AFTEC is also a bit painful for me, especially with the 9mm family due to where the hook sits.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

Not a lot. Probably 2000'ish. The newer guns with the thicker extractor are okay from what I hear.

Hmmm. North of 2k in mine with no indications of a problem. Still flinging brass with great abandon. I'll keep watch for the issue.

[Dave Berryhill]

The AFTEC is easier to install if you rotate it 180 degrees before you insert the extractor & springs into the slide. Once you get the springs and pad into the channel, rotate it 180 degrees back to the correct orientation and push it all the way into the slide.

[farscott]

The AFTEC is easier to install if you rotate it 180 degrees before you insert the extractor & springs into the slide. Once you get the springs and pad into the channel, rotate it 180 degrees back to the correct orientation and push it all the way into the slide.

Thanks for the advice. I will give that a try.

[SecondsCount]

When someone can prove to me that a quality internal extractor is inferior to an external design, then I will listen.

I will say that I have a friend who has an E-Series S&W and that gun has an awesome ejection pattern.

[Drang]

When someone can prove to me that a quality internal extractor is inferior to an external design, then I will listen.

I don't understand how I was shooting 1911s, reading about 1911s, talking about 1911s, for years and never heard anyone say that the internal extracter was a weakness until Painted Ordinance came out with the Power XTractor line, and suddenly it was the internal extractor that prevented the 1911 from rising any higher as a combat weapon than the HiPoint. "Get a Nambu!"

[Pistol Pete]

I'm still chomping at the bit waiting to hear Bill wxain how to tune mags!!!

[BLR]

I'm still chomping at the bit waiting to hear Bill wxain how to tune mags!!!

Working on it. The first post in this had to be "dictated" by one of our co-ops. Times a precious thing right now.

[Gary1911A1]

Very good thread. I love the 1911. Carry one almost every day, but need to learn more about it so I'll be following this thread closely. Thanks for starting this discussion.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Bill, I thought you didn't like Commanders?

[BLR]

Bill, I thought you didn't like Commanders?

I'm a tad. ...... flighty.

[Magic_Salad0892]

I'm a tad. ...... flighty.

Any modifications that you'd make to make a Commander more reliable?

And what do you think of flat bottomed firing pin stops, as opposed to the standard ones? (I run the EGW one.)

[Drang]

Bill, I thought you didn't like Commanders?

I'm a tad. ...... flighty.
Say rather

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
Walt Whitman (http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/26914.html)

What I'm wondering about is replacing followers and springs on (what are marked as) GI mags. I have two Pachmeyr stainless mags I bought with my Commander, a kitten load of ex-GI mags (at least two are legit GI, the armorer was ordered to get rid of them, she gifted them to everyone who had a 1911 POW) and a few Colt mags. Pachmeyr replacement followers go for $25.00, which is more than I paid for the Pachmeyr mags in the first place. Any reason to spend those ducats?

I also seem to have stumbled onto some mis-priced Pachmayr mag bumpers, the ones for a 1911 I bought were priced like ones that attach with double sided tape, which are half the cost of the 1911 ones, which screw on, and come with a jig for drilling. (But only one set, darn it!)

[BLR]

Quite so, old man. Quite so.

[BLR]

Any modifications that you'd make to make a Commander more reliable?

And what do you think of flat bottomed firing pin stops, as opposed to the standard ones? (I run the EGW one.)

Mod's - just making sure everything is proper. No secret to it at all. Much like extractors, the sub-5" bit is grossly overplayed.

I insist on FB FPS. Insist.

[1slow]

It's been a while since I was using 1911s heavily. My impression was that the 5" ran best, that Commander length guns ran well, and anything shorter was much less reliable. Officers models seemed very problematic.

[45dotACP]

I'm still chomping at the bit waiting to hear Bill wxain how to tune mags!!!

Same. The suspense is killing me!

[WilsonCombatRep]

I would put a properly sprung 4" gun over a bushing barreled commander any day. The heavier bull barrel aids reliability by delaying unlocking. Short slide guns (4.25" and under) are timing critical. Magazines must be optimum with heavy springs. Recoil springs must have adequate closing tension in battery. Flat bottom stop and heavy hammer spring is also part of it.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Mod's - just making sure everything is proper. No secret to it at all. Much like extractors, the sub-5" bit is grossly overplayed.

I insist on FB FPS. Insist.

Thanks, Mr. Riehl.

WilsonCombatRep, and the rest:

Well this thread got awesome.

I have some more questions:

Why does a heavier bull barrel delay unlocking? Is it just the weight? Or is it a dimensional difference?

Wouldn't a thick flange barrel bushing delay unlocking as well? As would a FB FPS?

How can you tell if a spring has adequate closing tension when in battery? (Besides being the proper length when measured.)

[JAD]

I would put a properly sprung 4" gun over a bushing barreled commander any day. The heavier bull barrel aids reliability by delaying unlocking. Short slide guns (4.25" and under) are timing critical. Magazines must be optimum with heavy springs. Recoil springs must have adequate closing tension in battery. Flat bottom stop and heavy hammer spring is also part of it.

This contradicts my limited experience. I have only had 3 4.25" guns -- a colt / Wilson, a colt / robar, and a colt / MARS -- but even when ancient mags are used, as long as they're Wilson's, the guns run fine. I have yet to see a finicky Commander.

[BLR]

Thanks, Mr. Riehl.

WilsonCombatRep, and the rest:

Well this thread got awesome.

I have some more questions:

Why does a heavier bull barrel delay unlocking? Is it just the weight? Or is it a dimensional difference?

Wouldn't a thick flange barrel bushing delay unlocking as well? As would a FB FPS?

How can you tell if a spring has adequate closing tension when in battery? (Besides being the proper length when measured.)

A heavier barrel adds mass to the inertia (recoil) operating system. So, no to the dimensional change (which would be a lower lug modification). The original design incorporated a flat bottom FPS, a 14# recoil spring, and served just wonderfully. In fact something like half, and by the original design more like 75%, of the energy/momentum of the recoiling slide was eaten up by cocking the gun. The easier to cock FPS was a DoD idea to help troops manipulate the slide (along with the arched MSH, short trigger, etc). Levers and moment arms used artfully.

It wasn't until those changes, and some "tweeking" by the after market that we arrived at the "recoil" spring. Originally, it was the "reaction" spring, and it's main purpose was to feed the next round, not control slide velocity to the degree we are using it today.

The big advantage to the Wilson "Elite" barrel (the flanged bull barrel) is that the extra mass is added to the recoiling assembly, but does not take significant part in the full travel. So you get the drop in slide velocity you want, but not the muzzle rise associated with a heavier slide.

I agree with WCR - a 4" gun with a big fat barrel will be better from this perspective than a 4.25" bushing gun. But the bushing gun can be great too. I like Commanders with bull barrels.

When I build or have built 10mms, I'm very particular with the hammer, hammer spring/main spring, lower lug fit, and FPS for a reason. Tuning a 1911 is more than tweeking the extractor, polishing the feed ramp, and using Wilson mags. Tuning a 1911 is matching the recoil system (principally the reaction spring and firing system) to the load to be used, and ensuring proper barrel timing. For 230g ball profile bullets in a 5" 45, the recipe is well known, and very tolerant.

FWIW, 0892, I've been getting all Commander-y lately. Mostly because I've run out of 1911 variations...and Magnum PI carried a Commander.

Food for thought (or argument?): we've all heard dropping the slide on a 1911 damages the hammer-sear interface because it "bounces" and that stripping a round from the magazine slows the slide just enough, right? That's a truly asinine statement. Doing so shows poor breeding, but that's all. Especially so with modern "tool steel" hammers and sears. If that statement had any validity whatsoever, a 10mm with a 22# recoil spring would beat the hammer-sear to a pulp in short order. Not to mention the hammer is over cocked every time the gun is fired, meaning the hammer spring smacks the hammer and sear together with full force every time the gun is shot.

[NETim]

A heavier barrel adds mass to the inertia (recoil) operating system. So, no to the dimensional change (which would be a lower lug modification). The original design incorporated a flat bottom FPS, a 14# recoil spring, and served just wonderfully. In fact something like half, and by the original design more like 75%, of the energy/momentum of the recoiling slide was eaten up by cocking the gun. The easier to cock FPS was a DoD idea to help troops manipulate the slide (along with the arched MSH, short trigger, etc). Levers and moment arms used artfully.

It wasn't until those changes, and some "tweeking" by the after market that we arrived at the "recoil" spring. Originally, it was the "reaction" spring, and it's main purpose was to feed the next round, not control slide velocity to the degree we are using it today.

The big advantage to the Wilson "Elite" barrel (the flanged bull barrel) is that the extra mass is added to the recoiling assembly, but does not take significant part in the full travel. So you get the drop in slide velocity you want, but not the muzzle rise associated with a heavier slide.

I agree with WCR - a 4" gun with a big fat barrel will be better from this perspective than a 4.25" bushing gun. But the bushing gun can be great too. I like Commanders with bull barrels.

When I build or have built 10mms, I'm very particular with the hammer, hammer spring/main spring, lower lug fit, and FPS for a reason. Tuning a 1911 is more than tweeking the extractor, polishing the feed ramp, and using Wilson mags. Tuning a 1911 is matching the recoil system (principally the reaction spring and firing system) to the load to be used, and ensuring proper barrel timing. For 230g ball profile bullets in a 5" 45, the recipe is well known, and very tolerant.

FWIW, 0892, I've been getting all Commander-y lately. Mostly because I've run out of 1911 variations...and Magnum PI carried a Commander.

Food for thought (or argument?): we've all heard dropping the slide on a 1911 damages the hammer-sear interface because it "bounces" and that stripping a round from the magazine slows the slide just enough, right? That's a truly asinine statement. Doing so shows poor breeding, but that's all. Especially so with modern "tool steel" hammers and sears. If that statement had any validity whatsoever, a 10mm with a 22# recoil spring would beat the hammer-sear to a pulp in short order. Not to mention the hammer is over cocked every time the gun is fired, meaning the hammer spring smacks the hammer and sear together with full force every time the gun is shot.

And so does Chief Jesse Stone.

[Dagga Boy]

This contradicts my limited experience. I have only had 3 4.25" guns -- a colt / Wilson, a colt / robar, and a colt / MARS -- but even when ancient mags are used, as long as they're Wilson's, the guns run fine. I have yet to see a finicky Commander.

Great minds....one of my favorite pistols is a TJ Custom Colt LW Commander that Robar finished and Steve (MARS) and I are working sort of a 10 year anniversary of my THUG pistol that I am sure you will love that should address several of the small gun issues.

[JHC]

This contradicts my limited experience. I have only had 3 4.25" guns -- a colt / Wilson, a colt / robar, and a colt / MARS -- but even when ancient mags are used, as long as they're Wilson's, the guns run fine. I have yet to see a finicky Commander.

Same goes for my three Colts. I'd have never guessed they didn't totally share the GM's reputation were not reading this in the last decade.

[Dagga Boy]

The biggest thing I found with Commanders was staying on top of magazines and magazine springs. I found that they were more sensitive than the 5 inch guns with magazine performance. After a lot of experimentation, stock Colt stainless 7 rounders in my Commanders in good condition made for a very reliable set up. It just got to the point that all the messing around with trying to find an 8 round magazine that worked over the long haul and also worked well when left loaded over long periods was not worth the effort for one round. Just my end user observation.

[JHC]

Magnum carried a GM. A GI GM no less. What gives?

[JAD]

Same goes for my three Colts. I'd have never guessed they didn't totally share the GM's reputation were not reading this in the last decade.
Well, I knew from a theoretical perspective that there was less to work with. For professional reasons I have a deep seated interest in compliance dynamics and specifically over travel, so I get it. I should have written more, because it looks like I'm contradicting WCR which is nuts. In short, I think that at the edges of the reliability envelope I can totally understand that a commander would be less reliable than a GM (I have no standing with bull barrels and can't comment). I just think those edges are pretty far from what a competent shop (Colt) produces as a nominal product (1968, 1997, and 2005 examples).

The subject could be explored if we knew what ruger users have experienced with the two SR1911s. I have looked and can't tell.

[JAD]

The biggest thing I found with Commanders was staying on top of magazines and magazine springs. I found that they were more sensitive than the 5 inch guns with magazine performance. After a lot of experimentation, stock Colt stainless 7 rounders in my Commanders in good condition made for a very reliable set up. It just got to the point that all the messing around with trying to find an 8 round magazine that worked over the long haul and also worked well when left loaded over long periods was not worth the effort for one round. Just my end user observation.

With respect I have 47ds that have been loaded since 1996 that run fine in two commanders, as do the 8 round colts that came with my first LWC. The third commander's .38 super mags have only been loaded since 2005.


Jon
KC

[DocGKR]

Over the years I had ONE Colt LWC that ran reliably enough for my to fully trust and that was only when 7 rd Colt/Metalform/GI type mags were used. I had ONE Colt LWOM I used as a BUG for a while that ran OK with 6 rd mags. Both had several trips to Bill Laughridge at C&S to get to run right...

[Dagga Boy]

I have tried more 47Ds than I know why to do with with very mixed results. The key is "consistent", and I will have the argument that all the differences in various 1911 magazines, followers, feed lip geometry, etc. is why many 1911's have issues. Especially when folks are going "mix and match", or worse..."whatever was on sale". I ran my competition 1911 with 47d's and it was reliable, yet my insanely reliable THUG doesn't like them, but is utterly reliable with two full sets of McCormicks, as is my current beater 1911 that has two full sets of the black McCormick powermags with 10-8 bases. I have found that some guns just seem to do better with specific mags. The same 47d's that my THUG had issues with will run in a buddies Kimber....which coincidently has issues with the CMC's. In custom 1911 world, nothing is really a given.

[YVK]

The biggest thing I found with Commanders was staying on top of magazines and magazine springs.

The biggest thing I found runninig the same 4 inch Kimber for one year was a recoil spring. Had to change it every 800 rounds.

[DocGKR]

Yup--the LWC needed new ones frequently, the LWOM was even worse.

Of course all that are some of the reasons I run Glocks/M&P's now...

[Magic_Salad0892]

A heavier barrel adds mass to the inertia (recoil) operating system. So, no to the dimensional change (which would be a lower lug modification). The original design incorporated a flat bottom FPS, a 14# recoil spring, and served just wonderfully. In fact something like half, and by the original design more like 75%, of the energy/momentum of the recoiling slide was eaten up by cocking the gun. The easier to cock FPS was a DoD idea to help troops manipulate the slide (along with the arched MSH, short trigger, etc). Levers and moment arms used artfully.

It wasn't until those changes, and some "tweeking" by the after market that we arrived at the "recoil" spring. Originally, it was the "reaction" spring, and it's main purpose was to feed the next round, not control slide velocity to the degree we are using it today.

The big advantage to the Wilson "Elite" barrel (the flanged bull barrel) is that the extra mass is added to the recoiling assembly, but does not take significant part in the full travel. So you get the drop in slide velocity you want, but not the muzzle rise associated with a heavier slide.

I agree with WCR - a 4" gun with a big fat barrel will be better from this perspective than a 4.25" bushing gun. But the bushing gun can be great too. I like Commanders with bull barrels.

When I build or have built 10mms, I'm very particular with the hammer, hammer spring/main spring, lower lug fit, and FPS for a reason. Tuning a 1911 is more than tweeking the extractor, polishing the feed ramp, and using Wilson mags. Tuning a 1911 is matching the recoil system (principally the reaction spring and firing system) to the load to be used, and ensuring proper barrel timing. For 230g ball profile bullets in a 5" 45, the recipe is well known, and very tolerant.

FWIW, 0892, I've been getting all Commander-y lately. Mostly because I've run out of 1911 variations...and Magnum PI carried a Commander.

Food for thought (or argument?): we've all heard dropping the slide on a 1911 damages the hammer-sear interface because it "bounces" and that stripping a round from the magazine slows the slide just enough, right? That's a truly asinine statement. Doing so shows poor breeding, but that's all. Especially so with modern "tool steel" hammers and sears. If that statement had any validity whatsoever, a 10mm with a 22# recoil spring would beat the hammer-sear to a pulp in short order. Not to mention the hammer is over cocked every time the gun is fired, meaning the hammer spring smacks the hammer and sear together with full force every time the gun is shot.

Awesome response, Mr. Reihl. But I still have more questions:

First off, it's convenient that you're all Commander-y, as Commanders are my favorite 1911 variant. Even if I don't wear Hawaiian shirts.

I a 22 lb. recoil/reaction spring in my Commander. While the heavier recoil springs batter the frame less, would you say that it speeds up the speed that the slide returns to battery so much that it doesn't allow as much time for feeding as a light spring? If yes: Would a different magazine help?

You statement on dropping the slide on an empty chamber makes sense. I've never thought of it that way.

Regarding bull barrels again: (I'm learning a bunch of new stuff here, so I'm all excited.)

I've head that a bull barrel wears rifling out slower, and doesn't lose accuracy as fast as a standard barrel because of the thickness of the barrel. How true is that?

Also, with the standard system, if the barrel loses accuracy, but isn't shot out, you can fit another bushing, and it should help. (I've never done it, but it's my understanding.) Would you say that the bull barrel not being able to do this is a disadvantage?

Also, maybe I'm just short bus retarded, and you answered this, but I missed it: would a thick flange barrel bushing delay unlocking? And would a very tight barrel bushing delay unlocking?

WilsonCombatRep: I'd love to hear your answers too!

[JonInWA]

I recently discussed (and achieved a fix) for my 7 round magazine woes with my 4.25" bushing-barreled Nighthawk Custom Talon II and Check-Mate hybrid feed lip magazines and GI followers/normal strength magazines; the fix was to go with the full skirted followers and extra strength springs with the hybrids-to date, all is well; I'll be running the gun with these magazines in our upcoming IDPA match next week.

I've had excellent results for years running this gun with Check-Mate's stainless steel 8 round hybrid feed lip/skirted/dimpled/extra strength spring welded baseplate magazines. A previous Colt Series 80 MK IV Combat Commander that had been outfitted by/through the Custom Shop (apparently as a ramp-up to what eventually became the XSE series) was also sporadically problematic with OEM and Chip McCormick magazines (and the OEM ones had Chip McCormick followers)-until the OEM springs were weplaced with the appropriate Wolff +5% or 10% (I forget which...) springs-then it ran like a champ.

My tentative conclusions, based on my empirical experiences with my 4.35" and 5" 1911s is that the 4.25" 1911s are more sensitive to followers and magazine springing, and that dimpled/skirted followers and extra power springing may well be a critical factor, along with my preference towards hybrid feed lips. Quality factory ammunition is a strong plus, but the tailored follower/springing concept seems to work well with today's less-than perfectly QC'd factory .45 ACP ammunition.

Best, Jon

[BLR]

Awesome response, Mr. Reihl. But I still have more questions:

First off, it's convenient that you're all Commander-y, as Commanders are my favorite 1911 variant. Even if I don't wear Hawaiian shirts.

I a 22 lb. recoil/reaction spring in my Commander. While the heavier recoil springs batter the frame less, would you say that it speeds up the speed that the slide returns to battery so much that it doesn't allow as much time for feeding as a light spring? If yes: Would a different magazine help?

You statement on dropping the slide on an empty chamber makes sense. I've never thought of it that way.

Regarding bull barrels again: (I'm learning a bunch of new stuff here, so I'm all excited.)

I've head that a bull barrel wears rifling out slower, and doesn't lose accuracy as fast as a standard barrel because of the thickness of the barrel. How true is that?

Also, with the standard system, if the barrel loses accuracy, but isn't shot out, you can fit another bushing, and it should help. (I've never done it, but it's my understanding.) Would you say that the bull barrel not being able to do this is a disadvantage?

Also, maybe I'm just short bus retarded, and you answered this, but I missed it: would a thick flange barrel bushing delay unlocking? And would a very tight barrel bushing delay unlocking?

WilsonCombatRep: I'd love to hear your answers too!

Ok, first off, please, just Bill (I'm a Dr, not a Mr).

You'll need to provide more detail with regard to the recoil spring/magazine question. I use, in Commanders, 7 round +P Wilsons exclusively. Most of my Commanders run 18lb recoil springs, flat bottom FPS, and 23lb mainspring.

RE bull barrels: Rifling - does that even make sense? How could the rifling even know the difference. Whoever said that was full of it. Regarding bushings - I'd not bet money on it working that way. On unlocking - are you asking if a very tight lockup will aid in slowing the slide down? If so, it's not the bushing, but the lower lug. A hard fit will eat up energy like a break. The bushing would have to be grossly mis-fit to have that happen. But a good USA Marksmanship type hard fit barrel will help some. And that can, and is done, often with bull barrels.

FWIW, one way to make this happen is a screw on flange like Baer uses on the Prowler.

For Commanders, bull bbl=good. Flanged bbl = extra good.

[BLR]

I recently discussed (and achieved a fix) for my 7 round magazine woes with my 4.25" bushing-barreled Nighthawk Custom Talon II and Check-Mate hybrid feed lip magazines and GI followers/normal strength magazines; the fix was to go with the full skirted followers and extra strength springs with the hybrids-to date, all is well; I'll be running the gun with these magazines in our upcoming IDPA match next week.

I've had excellent results for years running this gun with Check-Mate's stainless steel 8 round hybrid feed lip/skirted/dimpled/extra strength spring welded baseplate magazines. A previous Colt Series 80 MK IV Combat Commander that had been outfitted by/through the Custom Shop (apparently as a ramp-up to what eventually became the XSE series) was also sporadically problematic with OEM and Chip McCormick magazines (and the OEM ones had Chip McCormick followers)-until the OEM springs were weplaced with the appropriate Wolff +5% or 10% (I forget which...) springs-then it ran like a champ.

My tentative conclusions, based on my empirical experiences with my 4.35" and 5" 1911s is that the 4.25" 1911s are more sensitive to followers and magazine springing, and that dimpled/skirted followers and extra power springing may well be a critical factor, along with my preference towards hybrid feed lips. Quality factory ammunition is a strong plus, but the tailored follower/springing concept seems to work well with today's less-than perfectly QC'd factory .45 ACP ammunition.

Best, Jon

Emphasis mine -

Spot on Jon.

[JHC]

Just sayin' http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kZymelyGQsA/UCnX5LMBFMI/AAAAAAAAMMs/dYLYLbmuf2Q/s1600/Magnum+PI+gun.jpg

[Magic_Salad0892]

Ok, first off, please, just Bill (I'm a Dr, not a Mr).

Lol. Sorry about that.


You'll need to provide more detail with regard to the recoil spring/magazine question. I use, in Commanders, 7 round +P Wilsons exclusively. Most of my Commanders run 18lb recoil springs, flat bottom FPS, and 23lb mainspring.

Yeah, I guess I wasn't exactly clear. I was asking if a heavier magazine spring would help make sure that the slide didn't outrun the magazine with a heavy recoil spring.

Also, does your preference for the 7 round magazines come from magazine tube length, or how the bullet sits at the top of the magazine?


RE bull barrels: Rifling - does that even make sense? How could the rifling even know the difference. Whoever said that was full of it. Regarding bushings - I'd not bet money on it working that way. On unlocking - are you asking if a very tight lockup will aid in slowing the slide down? If so, it's not the bushing, but the lower lug. A hard fit will eat up energy like a break. The bushing would have to be grossly mis-fit to have that happen. But a good USA Marksmanship type hard fit barrel will help some. And that can, and is done, often with bull barrels.

RE: Rifling. I don't know. That's why I asked. I figured that it had something to do with heat dissipation. Seemed weird to me. Good to know that it's false.

RE: Unlocking. That makes sense. And yes, I was asking if a tight lock up would slow the slide down.



FWIW, one way to make this happen is a screw on flange like Baer uses on the Prowler.

For Commanders, bull bbl=good. Flanged bbl = extra good.

Thanks for the clarification.

[TimSchoenborn]

Interesting link based on the Magnum PI conversation

http://magnum-mania.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1470

[BLR]

Lol. Sorry about that.



Yeah, I guess I wasn't exactly clear. I was asking if a heavier magazine spring would help make sure that the slide didn't outrun the magazine with a heavy recoil spring.

Also, does your preference for the 7 round magazines come from magazine tube length, or how the bullet sits at the top of the magazine?



RE: Rifling. I don't know. That's why I asked. I figured that it had something to do with heat dissipation. Seemed weird to me. Good to know that it's false.

RE: Unlocking. That makes sense. And yes, I was asking if a tight lock up would slow the slide down.



Thanks for the clarification.

Just to be clear, I didn't mean to sound abrupt.

7 rounder because of the first round from the mag, less ammo column weight and therefore better feeding in a more time sensitive situation.

No sweat.

------------------

Didn't Magnum use a 9mm Commander on camera? Because 45 blanks sucked?

Hell, that's 3/4 of the reason I'm expecting a pile of Commanders! (No poodle shooters)

[JonInWA]

The biggest thing I found runninig the same 4 inch Kimber for one year was a recoil spring. Had to change it every 800 rounds.

I've run into exactly the same necessary recoil spring replacement interval with my Nighthawk Custom Talon II....5+ years and 2428 rounds later...

I've considered switching to the flat recoil spring/Marvel setup due to their extended lifespan, but having to go to a full-length recoil spring guide rod and the cost of the flat springs themselves have dissuaded me so far-I simply keep a stock of the far less expensive conventional replacement recoil springs on-hand...

Best, Jon

[NETim]

So Bill, where do the mighty ETM HD/+P mags fit in here? Are they acceptable in Commanders? Mine seem to run fine in my Wilson Pro (after the Wilson break-in regimen that is) but I'm still well short of 1K rounds into the experiment.

And for the 4" guns, IMHO the Wilson flat wire recoil spring is a Godsend.

[BLR]

So Bill, where do the mighty ETM HD/+P mags fit in here? Are they acceptable in Commanders? Mine seem to run fine in my Wilson Pro but I'm still well short of 1K rounds into the experiment.

And for the 4" guns, IMHO the Wilson flat wire recoil spring is a Godsend.

Best full size frame mags made today. Easily.

You can load it with 7 rounds. I do frequently.

[NETim]

Best full size frame mags made today. Easily.

You can load it with 7 rounds. I do frequently.

So that's to say, don't load 'em to 8???

[Magic_Salad0892]

Just to be clear, I didn't mean to sound abrupt.


I know. No problem here.

[HCM]

Just sayin' http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kZymelyGQsA/UCnX5LMBFMI/AAAAAAAAMMs/dYLYLbmuf2Q/s1600/Magnum+PI+gun.jpg

BLR may be a DR, but Magnum PI most certainly used a 5" Government model. I seem to recall something about the actual gun used in filming ( or one of them) being a series 70 in 9mm due to function issues with blanks.

[JSGlock34]

BLR may be a DR, but Magnum PI most certainly used a 5" Government model. I seem to recall something about the actual gun used in filming ( or one of them) being a series 70 in 9mm due to function issues with blanks.

Here's the Magnum P.I. 1911 entry from the National Firearms Museum.

http://www.nramuseum.org/the-museum/the-galleries/william-b-ruger-special-exhibits/hollywood-guns-3/magnum,-pi-(1980-1988)-colt.aspx

http://www.nramuseum.org/umbraco/ImageGen.ashx?image=/media/938715/selleckimage_8693.jpg&class=FlashViewer

Magnum, PI (1980 - 1988)
Tom Selleck as Thomas Magnum
Colt Mark IV/Series 70 - 9mm
One of Tom Selleck's most celebrated roles came as the Hawaii-based private investigator Thomas Magnum. This Colt 1911 pistol was used by Selleck on-screen as a trusty sidearm. The actual gun is surprisingly not a .45 but a 9mm that has been adapted to fire blanks.

[Pistol Pete]

I've run into exactly the same necessary recoil spring replacement interval with my Nighthawk Custom Talon II....5+ years and 2428 rounds later...

I've considered switching to the flat recoil spring/Marvel setup due to their extended lifespan, but having to go to a full-length recoil spring guide rod and the cost of the flat springs themselves have dissuaded me so far-I simply keep a stock of the far less expensive conventional replacement recoil springs on-hand...

Best, Jon

Jon,
I didn't pay close enough attention to determine if your NH has a bushing barrel or not. If not, you can use the WC flat wire kit and avoid the FLGR. If it's a bull barrel, the WC flat wire kit for compacts still isn't a completely full length guide rod. As far as springs, the flat wire springs are the same as used on Glocks and are actually cheaper than conventional springs. Use Glock 17/22 springs for a 5" gun and 19/23 springs for a 4" gun. I get mine from www.ilovemyglock.com.

[JonInWA]

Mine is a bushing barrel, Pete-but thanks for the info.

Best, Jon

[NETim]

Just sayin' http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kZymelyGQsA/UCnX5LMBFMI/AAAAAAAAMMs/dYLYLbmuf2Q/s1600/Magnum+PI+gun.jpg


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=T7vW1oEKP1k

[BLR]

BLR may be a DR, but Magnum PI most certainly used a 5" Government model. I seem to recall something about the actual gun used in filming ( or one of them) being a series 70 in 9mm due to function issues with blanks.

So you know, I'm not ignoring my online correction.

I'm quietly evaluating a significant purchase as a result of your life outlook changing revelation.

[Don Gwinn]

NETim, you just blew my mind. I've never seen that scene before. It's like Magnum was on a . . . a . . . some kind of a . . . . rampage.

[JHC]

NETim, you just blew my mind. I've never seen that scene before. It's like Magnum was on a . . . a . . . some kind of a . . . . rampage.

Me neither. Thanks!

[NETim]

NETim, you just blew my mind. I've never seen that scene before. It's like Magnum was on a . . . a . . . some kind of a . . . . rampage.

See, there are advantages to being an old geezer. Not many, but some. :) When that episode aired (part II of a two parter) it was HUGE. Magnum always was kind of a clown of sorts, not a tough guy.

That scene was totally out of character for him. The guy he shot was a sadistic Russian bastard that Magnum owed from 'Nam.

One of the better episodes of Magnum IMHO.

[HCM]

So you know, I'm not ignoring my online correction.

I'm quietly evaluating a significant purchase as a result of your life outlook changing revelation.

You're buying a red Ferrari ?

[HCM]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=T7vW1oEKP1k

One of my favorite episodes .... Good does not always equal nice.

[Chuck Whitlock]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=T7vW1oEKP1k


NETim, you just blew my mind. I've never seen that scene before. It's like Magnum was on a . . . a . . . some kind of a . . . . rampage.


Me neither. Thanks!


See, there are advantages to being an old geezer. Not many, but some. :) When that episode aired (part II of a two parter) it was HUGE. Magnum always was kind of a clown of sorts, not a tough guy.

That scene was totally out of character for him. The guy he shot was a sadistic Russian bastard that Magnum owed from 'Nam.

One of the better episodes of Magnum IMHO.

My favorite episode by far!

For those of you not in the know, earlier in the episode Magnum's friend (Naval Intel guy), had jumped into the driver's seat of the Ferrari and said, "Hey, let's go to (wherever) and watch the sunrise." just before turning the ignition and blowing himself up, via a bomb that Ivan had planted to kill Thomas.

[JimmyB62]

So you know, I'm not ignoring my online correction.

I'm quietly evaluating a significant purchase as a result of your life outlook changing revelation.

Before you get too broken up keep in mind that there were probably many prop guns used in that show (or any show). Some were probably 5" 9mm models for use with blanks. Others were probably 45 cal for use in certain camera angles, and were not fired. As someone who watched that show occasionally, I'm pretty sure he made reference to his gun as being a "45." or Higgins did. Sorry, gettin off topic but it's your thread.

[R0CKETMAN]

My 1911 passion was first influenced by Magnum PI



You're buying a red Ferrari ?

That's funny


Before you get too broken up keep in mind that there were probably many prop guns used in that show (or any show). Some were probably 5" 9mm models for use with blanks. Others were probably 45 cal for use in certain camera angles, and were not fired. As someone who watched that show occasionally, I'm pretty sure he made reference to his gun as being a "45." or Higgins did. Sorry, gettin off topic but it's your thread.

"Probably" X 3=fail ÷ by pretty sure = no clue

[JAD]

"Probably" X 3=fail ÷ by pretty sure = no clue

The magnum wiki lists three references in dialogue to his ".45". The 9x19 was a 'prop,' I.e. a substitute, for the real thing, which in that fictional universe is a .45.

[Tamara]

When that episode aired (part II of a two parter) it was HUGE.

Wow, I hadn't seen that in... well, a long time, and just seeing the title of the YouTube clip brought the scene right back before I even hit "play". That was probably Magnum's Crowning Moment of Awesome (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SugarWiki/MomentOfAwesome?from=Main.CrowningMomentOfAwesome) .

ETA: But of course it is (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Awesome/MagnumPI). :D

[HCM]

The magnum wiki lists three references in dialogue to his ".45". The 9x19 was a 'prop,' I.e. a substitute, for the real thing, which in that fictional universe is a .45.

This is common in film and TV series due to challenges getting .45 caliber 1911's to function with blanks. For example, Parker and Longbaughs 1911's in "the Way of the Gun" were also 9mm 1911's. http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Way_of_the_Gun,_The

PS: There are some awesome characters in film and TV who used Commanders http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/M1911_pistol_series#Colt_Commander including Bennie in "Bring me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Bring_Me_the_Head_of_Alfredo_Garcia

[Don Gwinn]

I don't think it's the caliber that has Bill rethinking his life. I think he'd long considered Magnum's gun a Commander, and now he finds that it was a Government Model, and . . . and . . . what is real anymore?
If only he had a full-size 1911 . . .

[JeffJ]

I think you mean, "If only he had a ridiculous reason to justify an amazingly large collection of Commanders to photograph on his tailgate while smoking a pipe"

[Don Gwinn]

YES! Thank you. It was on the tip of my tongue.
:D

[justintime]

and suddenly a new archer reference makes sense to me

[Don Gwinn]

Right?

[BLR]

I don't think it's the caliber that has Bill rethinking his life. I think he'd long considered Magnum's gun a Commander, and now he finds that it was a Government Model, and . . . and . . . what is real anymore?
If only he had a full-size 1911 . . .

Exactly right.

It's like I'm in this fog.

[NETim]

It's like "The Crying Game" only with 1911's!

[Dagga Boy]

I have a feeling the issue for Bill is not so much the Commanders, it is all the Commander pictures on the back deck of the Ferrrari that is the issue. We only get to see the tail-gate pictures here. Bill uses the Ferrari pictures on the "Magnum PI fan forums".

In all honesty its okay. You still have Segal in Above the Law (before he was.....well.....whatever it is he has become), James Caan in Theif, and Denzel Washington in Man on Fire. Still good stuff.

[Drang]

In all honesty its okay. You still have Segal in Above the Law (before he was.....well.....whatever it is he has become), James Caan in Theif, and Denzel Washington in Man on Fire. Still good stuff.

Burt Reynolds in Sharkey's Machine.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

It's like "The Crying Game" only with 1911's!

Totally. Surprise! More barrel than you were expecting!

[BLR]

Wasn't the feature pistol in Man on Fire a (snear) Glock?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

[Erik]

Totally. Surprise! More barrel than you were expecting!

Please don't be funny anymore. I have the flu and it makes me cough.

[SteveK]

Wasn't the feature pistol in Man on Fire a (snear) Glock?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

Yes, I'm a huge fan of that movie and Denzel packed Glocks. Greatest Commander movie...Stallone in Cobra gets my vote. The 50 Mercury didn't hurt either.

[HCM]

Burt Reynolds in Sharkey's Machine.

Sorry - Sharkey, Arch and Papa all had 5" GMs.

[HCM]

Wasn't the feature pistol in Man on Fire a (snear) Glock?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

Mostly Glock, but there was a SIG 226 as well as a Commander and of course the Colt Gold Cup .....
"On to the next life for you, my friend. I guarantee you, you won't be lonely."

[NETim]

Hey now! Vincent Hanna.

[JSGlock34]

Hey now! Vincent Hanna.

Officer's Model...

http://www.imfdb.org/images/9/9e/Series80Heat.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

[NETim]

Officer's Model...

http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:Series80Heat.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1)

Still a 1911 even if it is on the runty side.

[Dagga Boy]

Yes, I'm a huge fan of that movie and Denzel packed Glocks. Greatest Commander movie...Stallone in Cobra gets my vote. The 50 Mercury didn't hurt either.

When things got serious Creasy bought some 1911's and used those for executing some bad guys.......cause .45 is simply awesome, especially in the movies. Yea, you had to love a lot about Cobra.......other than the acting;).

[Dagga Boy]

Still a 1911 even if it is on the runty side.

My next build with Steve Morrison at MARS is going to be a steel Officers frame with a Combat Commander slide........so it won't be as runty and it will have a soul.

[NETim]

http://www.frontiernet.net/~netim/IMG_0092.JPG

5" gun, the choice of the real pros.

[NETim]

My next build with Steve Morrison at MARS is going to be a steel Officers frame with a Combat Commander slide........so it won't be as runty and it will have a soul.

Well hopefully you'll post pics.

[JSGlock34]

I thought T2 had a few good 1911 scenes. I liked how Cameron drew the subtle distinction between the untrained biker in the bar who kept the 1911 in Condition Three and Sarah who carried Condition One. Though the pistol wasn't a real Combat Elite (it was a Colt/Detonics build) , I suspect the two tone 1911 in the movie left a permanent stamp on my brain. I occasionally surf over to militarymorons and state wistfully at his MARS Armament two-tone (http://www.militarymorons.com/weapons/pistols.html#mars)...

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/2/2b/T2JDColtonics-11.jpg/800px-T2JDColtonics-11.jpg

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/3/35/T2JDColtonics-10.jpg/800px-T2JDColtonics-10.jpg

http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/2/22/T2JDColtonics-7.jpg/800px-T2JDColtonics-7.jpg


This is common in film and TV series due to challenges getting .45 caliber 1911's to function with blanks. For example, Parker and Longbaughs 1911's in "the Way of the Gun" were also 9mm 1911's. http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Way_of_the_Gun,_The

Not an issue limited to 1911s...Crockett's Bren Ten in Miami Vice was actually a custom model designed to use .45 blanks, as 10mm blanks were hard to come by in 1984! Unfortunately when Crockett had his "Did you see the sunrise?" homage, he had moved on to the S&Ws...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTSJ0s1A20s

Sorry for the derail...back to your regularly scheduled 1911 discussion...

[Magic_Salad0892]

No one mentioned RED? Or Saving Private Ryan?

[Dagga Boy]

JSGlock......little back story to the Military Morons gun. My finished THUG was in the case at the SAR show. What was also in the case was a Two Tone Colt Govt. with a factory stainless frame and black slide. As a very 80's kind of guy, I had to have Steve do a build on it. That was my retirement gun and Steve Morrison took it from that show to do the work. It is very similar to Military Moron's gun (no mag well on mine). It was a much better retirement gift than a stupid party where the admin guys who hated my guts say nice things and a big glass clock with my badge and service dates engraved on it that would have sat in a box on the floor of the garage:cool:.

[JAD]

Officer's Model...

Coolest gun in cinema. Mann can even make a Megastar look cool, though.

[JSGlock34]

JSGlock......little back story to the Military Morons gun. My finished THUG was in the case at the SAR show. What was also in the case was a Two Tone Colt Govt. with a factory stainless frame and black slide. As a very 80's kind of guy, I had to have Steve do a build on it. That was my retirement gun and Steve Morrison took it from that show to do the work. It is very similar to Military Moron's gun (no mag well on mine). It was a much better retirement gift than a stupid party where the admin guys who hated my guts say nice things and a big glass clock with my badge and service dates engraved on it that would have sat in a box on the floor of the garage:cool:.


That sounds like a pistol I'd like to see...just something about the two-tone that always caught my eye. Got any pics? I've certainly read the article on your THUG - Steve's work is fantastic.

[Erik]

NETim, you just blew my mind. I've never seen that scene before. It's like Magnum was on a . . . a . . . some kind of a . . . . rampage.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnJN_aixrVY

[theJanitor]

Working on it. The first post in this had to be "dictated" by one of our co-ops. Times a precious thing right now.

I'm patiently waiting for the magazine mod thread, too. In the meantime, Bill, what is your opinion on the use of mag catches specifically designed to hold the mag higher in the frame (like the EGW)? Is .020" insignificant? Or does every little bit count, when the ultimate goal is to give the round a more direct path into the chamber?

[Trukinjp13]

What happened to the thread lol! One page I'm searching 1911 mags and the next I'm watching magnum PI :) good stuff either way, just thought that was funny

[BLR]

What happened to the thread lol! One page I'm searching 1911 mags and the next I'm watching magnum PI :) good stuff either way, just thought that was funny

Working on an extractor post.

[BLR]

What is spring steel?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

[Dave Berryhill]

What is spring steel?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk
Silly boy. Don't you know that it's the magical stuff that GI extractors were made from?

[Wayne Dobbs]

Working on an extractor post.

Standing by for some useful information!

[BLR]

Did you know proper extractor tension varies with ejector geometry?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

[WilsonCombatRep]

Can't you make a spring out of almost any steel? :)

[WilsonCombatRep]

Did you know proper extractor tension varies with ejector geometry?

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk

Proper extractor tension is the amount of tension required to hold an empty case at 90 degrees to the breech. Thats about it. People make way too much of it.

[1slow]

Is this mainly in relation to the bevel on the bottom edge of the extractor groove, where the case slides under the extractor, vs. extractor tension ?
This relationship would seem similar to the one involving how much bevel or rounding is on the bottom of the firing pin retention plate vs. recoil spring tension.
It would seem the more bevel the more tension you would use if I am looking at this right.

[JAD]

Can't you make a spring out of almost any steel? :)

Or any metal, really. Hmm. A BeCu extractor would be pretty cool. There's my awesome solution to a nonexistent problem for the week.

[BLR]

Proper extractor tension is the amount of tension required to hold an empty case at 90 degrees to the breech. Thats about it. People make way too much of it.

Depends on your objectives, I suppose.

Recently...when I had a couple hours on my hands...I put my most consistent 1911 (my SS WC CQB-E in 45) into a Ransom Rest and played around with extractor tension. And did the same with a GI type ejector, and extended ejectors perpendicular and angled in relationship to the top of the frames datum. The results were interesting, if almost entirely academic.

Well, academic like just about everything, until you run into a problem.

[BLR]

As drawn 1095 (aka music wire) is definitely "spring" steel. So is passivated 17-7 with a straw temper. But they are worlds apart in performance and application.

What's the main failure mechanism for a 1911 extractor? Loss of tension? Or broken hooks?

[45dotACP]

As drawn 1095 (aka music wire) is definitely "spring" steel. So is passivated 17-7 with a straw temper. But they are worlds apart in performance and application.

What's the main failure mechanism for a 1911 extractor? Loss of tension? Or broken hooks?

Probably depends on if you single load rounds into the chamber and drop the slide on them :cool:

[JonInWA]

Depends on your objectives, I suppose.

Recently...when I had a couple hours on my hands...I put my most consistent 1911 (my SS WC CQB-E in 45) into a Ransom Rest and played around with extractor tension. And did the same with a GI type ejector, and extended ejectors perpendicular and angled in relationship to the top of the frames datum. The results were interesting, if almost entirely academic.

Well, academic like just about everything, until you run into a problem.

Bill, what were the results of your ejector tests? Several years ago, the OEM extended ejector on my SIGARMS GSR XO had the "extended" arm fracture-the ejector assumed an almost perfect GI profile; both Bruce Gray and Mike Guarnieri (SIG's senior tech) recommended that I simply dress the fracture line and drive on-which I did; the ejector functioned impeccably in it's GI profile incarnation for several years. Wen the plunger tube subsequently became loose at the rear staking stud and the gun was sent to SIG, they noticed the ejector and replaced it with an OEM one-probably unnecessary, but thaey did it gratis, and I appreciated their attention to detail. To date (several years later) it's functioned flawlessly, but I really had no problems with the GI profile one.

Best, Jon

[Magic_Salad0892]

As drawn 1095 (aka music wire) is definitely "spring" steel. So is passivated 17-7 with a straw temper. But they are worlds apart in performance and application.

What's the main failure mechanism for a 1911 extractor? Loss of tension? Or broken hooks?

Worn/broken hooks. A good extractor will last 30k rounds or more.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Bill, what were the results of your ejector tests? Several years ago, the OEM extended ejector on my SIGARMS GSR XO had the "extended" arm fracture-the ejector assumed an almost perfect GI profile; both Bruce Gray and Mike Guarnieri (SIG's senior tech) recommended that I simply dress the fracture line and drive on-which I did; the ejector functioned impeccably in it's GI profile incarnation for several years. Wen the plunger tube subsequently became loose at the rear staking stud and the gun was sent to SIG, they noticed the ejector and replaced it with an OEM one-probably unnecessary, but thaey did it gratis, and I appreciated their attention to detail. To date (several years later) it's functioned flawlessly, but I really had no problems with the GI profile one.

Best, Jon

Was it a 5'' or a 4.25''?

[JonInWA]

Was it a 5'' or a 4.25''?

It's a 5"

Best, Jon

[Magic_Salad0892]

It's a 5"

Best, Jon

Ah. That's why it was fine with a GI length ejector then.

[JonInWA]

Yep. Actually, I was completely satisfied with the self-morphed GI profile ejector-SIG replaced it unasked during a service, and the new extended ejector has performed without a hiccup (or self-morphing) since, so I'm fine with it. But I certainly wouldn't have any qualms about going to a true GI ejector either.

Best, Jon

[JAD]

Ah. That's why it was fine with a GI length ejector then.

All of my 4" and 4.25" guns, including my Super, have GI ejectors and work fine.

[Chris James]

Oh if I could only reply as informative as Bill does in a such a great technical manor. One skill I have not.

Bill call me sometime and we can discuss this and then you can translate my southern slang into words the masses could follow.


Chris

[Magic_Salad0892]

All of my 4" and 4.25" guns, including my Super, have GI ejectors and work fine.

That's strange. I've only ever heard of problems with 'em in sub 5'' guns.

[BLR]

To continue the look at extractors -

I took some pictures of a, so far, reliable 1911. Rather than get into brand discussions, I just picked one of my better examples. Then I grabbed 3 new in the bag extractors, all Brown Hard Core, because that is what I had on hand.

It seems to be universally accepted that the EB extractors shouldn't even fit in the gun without a laborious fitting process, right? And even if the did, they'd still need to be tensioned, right? Lets take a look at some pictures first, then some numbers, and then we can draw some conclusions worth further discussion.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_091649_zpse3oymdob.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_091649_zpse3oymdob.jpg.html)

The difficult to machine hole. Truth be told, cutting the breechface and locking lug recesses really are a weak link in 1911 design. Not that hole so much, though.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_091717_zpswxu4ey9f.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_091717_zpswxu4ey9f.jpg.html)

Stock extractor.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_091728_zpsixmbbwga.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_091728_zpsixmbbwga.jpg.html)

Had a couple bubba loads. Well, it had 25,000.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_091743_zpszqnvh9zy.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_091743_zpszqnvh9zy.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_091820_zpsezhwh2fa.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_091820_zpsezhwh2fa.jpg.html)

Compared with an Ed Brown Hard Core.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_092934_zpsg9liw317.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_092934_zpsg9liw317.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_092942_zpscmzklob3.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_092942_zpscmzklob3.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_093037_zpsv4k7rjfd.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_093037_zpsv4k7rjfd.jpg.html)

Anyone really surprised all 3 Brown extractors dropped right in w/o fitting? Crazy, right?

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_093121_zpsjohghhok.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_093121_zpsjohghhok.jpg.html)

Visual cue of stock extractor tension.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140307_093208_zpsgesvgfn0.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140307_093208_zpsgesvgfn0.jpg.html)

Visual cue of all 3 Brown extractor tension...Without any adjustment in the gun.

Granted, the extractors hang out of the back of the slide, but that doesn't affect function in the least.

Now, some numbers.

I took the extractor, secured it into a mill vice to and put in a 4 flute end mill. The mill was run in reverse, deflecting the extractor 1.5mm for each flute. I ran the mill in reverse at 25RPM for a little over 6 hours yesterday. Total change in deflection of the fitting pad relative to the center line of the extractor: 0.0027" as indicated by a tenths test indicator. This should come as no surprise, as Ned Christensen did something very similar about a decade ago on Pistolsmith.com. Was this test really needed? Only sort of. And this is why I asked the question: What is spring steel? And, forgive the blasphemy, but is spring steel still the "correct" steel to choose? I would suggest no, as I have yet to see an actual tension issue develop. However, I have broken and seen broken extractor hooks. As a result, I'd suggest the use of a good high alloy steel. Which is what some of the best current extractors are made from. So, why was the test needed? Well, we don't know the exact steel being used. With that, we could have simply measured the strain of the extractor during maximum deflection as it snaps over the case rim from any number of verified and accurate flexural fatigue tests published in any number of refereed journals (the same ones people use as references to design aircraft ). That, and this provides a very visual, easily duplicatable "test."

It also is important to realize the 1911 was designed with an external extractor to begin with, and the internal one was chosen for reduced parts number and simplicity.

[BLR]

So is the extractor really the weak link so often cited? No, not really. If you start with a good gun and good parts, this is a greatly overplayed bit.

So, why can't we have external extractor 1911s? What causes the problem?

[45dotACP]

So is the extractor really the weak link so often cited? No, not really. If you start with a good gun and good parts, this is a greatly overplayed bit.

So, why can't we have external extractor 1911s? What causes the problem?

Hilton Yam had an interesting article about that. Apparently the latest Smith and Wesson E series has a fairly decent external extractor.

[BLR]

Hilton Yam had an interesting article about that. Apparently the latest Smith and Wesson E series has a fairly decent external extractor.

I read MSW pretty religiously, objectively, and remember that article quite well if you are refering to this: http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=213

That said, my question was more rhetorical than actual question looking for guidance.

[Don Gwinn]

I feel like Tardy the Turtle in this thread, too. I'm so excited and fascinated but I know I don't really understand half of what's happening in front of me.

I am learning, Gill! Yay!

[Tamara]

Granted, the extractors hang out of the back of the slide, but that doesn't affect function in the least.

...but oh, God, it makes me itch just thinking about it.

Everyone has their irrational pet peeves and you've just found mine. :D

[BLR]

...but oh, God, it makes me itch just thinking about it.

Everyone has their irrational pet peeves and you've just found mine. :D

Believe it or not, there's a whole host of people who won't talk guns with me because of my multitude of....issues. Pet peeve doesn't really cover it.

[Mark]

Bill, I can't tell you how much I appreciate your posts on the 1911. You explain in objective terms things I have seen through experience that I could never explain. That and you confirm that I'm not living in some parallel universe since I've never experienced 1911's that don't have parts randomly breaking off if they're not supported by an expert after every 50 rounds fired. I look forward to your next post.

[Drang]

It also is important to realize the 1911 was designed with an external extractor to begin with, and the internal one was chosen for reduced parts number and simplicity.

Thanks for that, I did not know that.
I'm pretty sure the first time I ever heard of any issues with the internal extractor, and allegations that an external was superior, was when Para Ordnance introduced the "Power XTractor", or whatever their marketers called it.

[Gary1911A1]

I just put a Ed Brown Extractor in 40/10MM into a 10MM longslide I'm building mostly because it was the only extractor forte 10MM I could find. I decided to see how well it worked with some dummy rounds. It worded find with no problems. I had to fit a Firingpin stop, but otherwise no problems.

[TheNewbie]

A couple of quick questions.

1. Do the 1911s with a Firing Pin Safety actually make the gun much safer? How risky is it to not have one?

2. If one was forced to pick a 1911 with an external extractor, which would be your best bet? Or at this point is it still best to go with the internal extractor?

Thank you.

[1slow]

Bill, Thanks hugely for this thread it explains many things.

[BLR]

A point of clarification - I dropped a few untouched extractors into a gun, and they fit fairly well. But that's as far as you can take that little experiment. That is, I am not implying that one could do that at random and expect similar results. Rest assured, a RIA slide will be different than an Imbel, than a Kimber, than a Wilson. These just happen to be about right.

It really boils down to the dollar. You really need to spend about $1k on a plastic gun, and $2k on a metal one in order to have something nice, and you can't judge the gun by the price tag alone.

When an expert says "external extractors are the way to go," what they are describing is symptomatic of the manufacturing process. It's a whole lot easier to maintain proper extractor-breech face - FPS geometry on a Glock than it is on a 1911. And even Glock/SIG/S&W are screwing that interplay up. It's not that external extractors are inherently better. They aren't. It's that it's easier once the right geometries are found to repeatably make the machine cuts on an external extractor. That's the advantage. That's the reason to have an external extractor. It's easier, but not easy to do that on a SIG type breech face . That's why some long extractor SIGs have trouble, why M&Ps have trouble, why Gen4 Glocks have trouble, but they have a lower incidence of trouble than a 1911 (broadly encompassing of 1911s. That is to say the general "1911")

[Mark]

A point of clarification - I dropped a few untouched extractors into a gun, and they fit fairly well. But that's as far as you can take that little experiment. That is, I am not implying that one could do that at random and expect similar results. Rest assured, a RIA slide will be different than an Imbel, than a Kimber, than a Wilson. These just happen to be about right.

It really boils down to the dollar. You really need to spend about $1k on a plastic gun, and $2k on a metal one in order to have something nice, and you can't judge the gun by the price tag alone.

When an expert says "external extractors are the way to go," what they are describing is symptomatic of the manufacturing process. It's a whole lot easier to maintain proper extractor-breech face - FPS geometry on a Glock than it is on a 1911. And even Glock/SIG/S&W are screwing that interplay up. It's not that external extractors are inherently better. They aren't. It's that it's easier once the right geometries are found to repeatably make the machine cuts on an external extractor. That's the advantage. That's the reason to have an external extractor. It's easier, but not easy to do that on a SIG type breech face . That's why some long extractor SIGs have trouble, why M&Ps have trouble, why Gen4 Glocks have trouble, but they have a lower incidence of trouble than a 1911 (broadly encompassing of 1911s. That is to say the general "1911")

When you say $1000 to have a nice plastic gun, do you mean you have to spend say $500 on an m&p and then ship it off for $500 worth of work or do you mean you just need to start with something like an HK P30 from the start?

[BLR]

When you say $1000 to have a nice plastic gun, do you mean you have to spend say $500 on an m&p and then ship it off for $500 worth of work or do you mean you just need to start with something like an HK P30 from the start?

There's a bit of hyperbole in my statement.

Could go either way.

But 1911s are more complicated than that statement leads on.

And that assumes the M&P is one of the fixable ones.

[45dotACP]

A point of clarification - I dropped a few untouched extractors into a gun, and they fit fairly well. But that's as far as you can take that little experiment. That is, I am not implying that one could do that at random and expect similar results. Rest assured, a RIA slide will be different than an Imbel, than a Kimber, than a Wilson. These just happen to be about right.

It really boils down to the dollar. You really need to spend about $1k on a plastic gun, and $2k on a metal one in order to have something nice, and you can't judge the gun by the price tag alone.

When an expert says "external extractors are the way to go," what they are describing is symptomatic of the manufacturing process. It's a whole lot easier to maintain proper extractor-breech face - FPS geometry on a Glock than it is on a 1911. And even Glock/SIG/S&W are screwing that interplay up. It's not that external extractors are inherently better. They aren't. It's that it's easier once the right geometries are found to repeatably make the machine cuts on an external extractor. That's the advantage. That's the reason to have an external extractor. It's easier, but not easy to do that on a SIG type breech face . That's why some long extractor SIGs have trouble, why M&Ps have trouble, why Gen4 Glocks have trouble, but they have a lower incidence of trouble than a 1911 (broadly encompassing of 1911s. That is to say the general "1911")

The thought of you having a RIA is mildly funny...but I don't know why.

It would be interesting seeing you compare the manufacturing differences between something like a RIA or Imbel as compared to some of your nicer pieces like Nighthawk, or Wilson Combat.

[Bill Wilson]

I haven't read this entire lengthy thread so this may have already been mentioned/covered, but a properly designed, top quality and properly fitted extractor is a major factor in 1911 feeding. You could say it's the "heart" of a reliable 1911.

The extractor hook must pick up the cartridge rim properly and a 1911 MUST be capable of push feeding. The 1911 is designed to control round feed, but I've never seen one that doesn't occasionally push feed. This is especially true of 4 1/4" and shorter guns.

Basically to get a 1911 to run reliably you need:

Basic feed ramp to barrel throat fitting, does not have to be perfect

Properly fitted quality extractor

Good quality magazine

Good ammo (I'm not talking about some of the crap 230gr ball being produced these days)

Humm maybe I should start a thread about "good" 1911 ammo :)

[ToddG]

Humm maybe I should start a thread about "good" 1911 ammo :)

I think what you really need to do is find someone to prove your Signature Match works just as well out of something completely oddball, like a SIG P229. Find someone who is going to do, say, a fifty thousand round test this year and... well, it's just an idea. :cool:

[BLR]

I haven't read this entire lengthy thread so this may have already been mentioned/covered, but a properly designed, top quality and properly fitted extractor is a major factor in 1911 feeding. You could say it's the "heart" of a reliable 1911.

The extractor hook must pick up the cartridge rim properly and a 1911 MUST be capable of push feeding. The 1911 is designed to control round feed, but I've never seen one that doesn't occasionally push feed. This is especially true of 4 1/4" and shorter guns.

Basically to get a 1911 to run reliably you need:

Basic feed ramp to barrel throat fitting, does not have to be perfect

Properly fitted quality extractor

Good quality magazine

Good ammo (I'm not talking about some of the crap 230gr ball being produced these days)

Humm maybe I should start a thread about "good" 1911 ammo :)

I'd look forward to that immensely.

Though, to the rest of your points - I'd have difficulty naming a gun, not just a pistol, that didn't need those things just as much as a 1911 ;)

[Drang]

How would one tell if ones pistol was push feeding?

[Clobbersaurus]

I'd be interested to hear Bills thoughts on the Aftec extractor.

[klewis]

Dibs on the first 1911 The Bills decide to produce together and then give away! ;)

(Not counting the ones that Bill made that the other Bill now owns, of course.)

[Magic_Salad0892]

I'd be curious as to what Bill (Reihl or Wilson) thinks about the EGW magazine catch that makes the mag sit higher. I know somebody mentioned it, but I don't know if it was this thread or not. I'm curious about it now. (I think it was developed for double stack guns, but I wanna consider it for a single stack, maybe a 9x19mm commander.)

[BLR]

Now that I got done saying extractors aren't a big deal....a friends new custom piece:

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140309_111732_zpst7wr9orh.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140309_111732_zpst7wr9orh.jpg.html)

Now THAT is zero extractor tension, and it caused the gun to fail to eject regularly (one out of twenty rounds or so got hung up in the ejection port, lots of brass kisses on the front of the ejection port).

And that wasn't the extent of the fleas.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140309_111011_zpssq2cyt9n.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140309_111011_zpssq2cyt9n.jpg.html)

Not even a bevel on the bottom of the EGW Heavy Duty extractor. Nothing but Wilson Bullet Proofs from here on out.

And, the hook is WAY too far from the rim. WAY too far.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Nothing but Wilson Bullet Proofs from here on out.


I take it that you don't like EGW HD extractors? I remember Hilton Yam speaking high of them.

[BLR]

I take it that you don't like EGW HD extractors? I remember Hilton Yam speaking high of them.

Mine are ok. I don't like the full diameter until the mid point. That doesn't help the extractor maintain tension like people think. In fact, just the opposite. It forces all the bending to be at the front half, increasing the strain. Which in turn makes it loose tension to a greater extent than if the entire length is allowed to bend. I'm guessing this one slipped out w/o the bevel.

This extractor is destined to fail at the hook prematurely, largely due to the hook sitting so far out.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Mine are ok. I don't like the full diameter until the mid point. That doesn't help the extractor maintain tension like people think. In fact, just the opposite. It forces all the bending to be at the front half, increasing the strain. Which in turn makes it loose tension to a greater extent than if the entire length is allowed to bend. I'm guessing this one slipped out w/o the bevel.

This extractor is destined to fail at the hook prematurely, largely due to the hook sitting so far out.

Huh. I didn't know that. Thanks, Bill!

What do you think about mag catches that make the mag sit higher? Do you think they'd help with reliability? (Or push feeding?)

[BLR]

The key to making a 1911 run reliably is not getting the mag to sit higher in the gun. It's getting the rounds to feed from the magazine the same way every time. The mag catch isn't the solution.

An experiment everyone getting into 1911s should do: Go get two magazines, one a HD ETM, the other a 8 round conversion mag. Load 8 rounds into them, taking careful note of how the force on the ammo column changes with each round. You see, after about 4 or 5 rounds, the majority of spring pressure is exerted on the rim of the cartridge. In fact, by round 6 or 7, you see a gap developing between the top two rounds. Solve this, you'll have an autoloader on your hands with unequaled feeding reliability. That imbalance of pressure is what causes the first round from a full mag to crash into the feedramp, and the last to slip right into the chamber smooth as silk.

That, my friend, is the key to 1911s. That is why Hackathorn rightly calls "1911s" the King of the Feedway Stoppage. That difference between the first and last round. Get that ammo column to move up smooth, fast and consistently, and the King will be dethroned. It's not a 1911 issue. It's a mag issue. And there are solutions to the problem.

Making the mag sit higher in the gun doesn't fix this. It treats some symptoms, but does not address the actual issue at hand.

Boland and Kesly knew this, and worked to a solution.


*ETA: "1911s" are generic 1911s. That is to say, all encompassing from AMT to Wilson Combat.

[Magic_Salad0892]

The key to making a 1911 run reliably is not getting the mag to sit higher in the gun. It's getting the rounds to feed from the magazine the same way every time. The mag catch isn't the solution.

An experiment everyone getting into 1911s should do: Go get two magazines, one a HD ETM, the other a 8 round conversion mag. Load 8 rounds into them, taking careful note of how the force on the ammo column changes with each round. You see, after about 4 or 5 rounds, the majority of spring pressure is exerted on the rim of the cartridge. In fact, by round 6 or 7, you see a gap developing between the top two rounds. Solve this, you'll have an autoloader on your hands with unequaled feeding reliability. That imbalance of pressure is what causes the first round from a full mag to crash into the feedramp, and the last to slip right into the chamber smooth as silk.

That, my friend, is the key to 1911s. That is why Hackathorn rightly calls "1911s" the King of the Feedway Stoppage. That difference between the first and last round. Get that ammo column to move up smooth, fast and consistently, and the King will be dethroned. It's not a 1911 issue. It's a mag issue. And there are solutions to the problem.

Making the mag sit higher in the gun doesn't fix this. It treats some symptoms, but does not address the actual issue at hand.

Boland and Kesly knew this, and worked to a solution.

I'll bite. What was the solution?

And I conclude from your post that they can help, but aren't "solving" the problem, right?

[BLR]

I'll bite. What was the solution?

Easy. Fix the magazine ;)

[Magic_Salad0892]

Easy. Fix the magazine ;)

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/1911-Elite-Tactical-Magazine-45-ACP-HD_P-Full-Size-8-Round-Lo-Profile-Steel-Base-Pad-Black/productinfo/500BC-HD/

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/856687/colt-magazine-1911-government-commander-45-acp-7-round-steel-blue

http://www.trippresearch.com/store/store_1911.html

I think that happened already. :p

[BLR]

http://shopwilsoncombat.com/1911-Elite-Tactical-Magazine-45-ACP-HD_P-Full-Size-8-Round-Lo-Profile-Steel-Base-Pad-Black/productinfo/500BC-HD/

http://www.midwayusa.com/product/856687/colt-magazine-1911-government-commander-45-acp-7-round-steel-blue

http://www.trippresearch.com/store/store_1911.html

I think that happened already. :p

If Bill Wilson and WCR saw what I've done to their ETMs, they'd have a conniption fit.

[Magic_Salad0892]

If Bill Wilson and WCR saw what I've done to their ETMs, they'd have a conniption fit.

Now you can't just say a thing like that without a description...

[BLR]

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?10137-King-of-the-Feedway-Stoppage

Notice the difference in bullet contact on the feedramp? That is a magazine only difference.

[Magic_Salad0892]

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?10137-King-of-the-Feedway-Stoppage

Notice the difference in bullet contact on the feedramp? That is a magazine only difference.

How much contact would you say is desired on the feed ramp?

ETA: When you mentioned what you do to the ETM mags... you take a Wilson 8 round ETM, and stick a Tripp Super 8 kit in 'em for an extra long mag body and 7 rounds? :p

[BLR]

Now you can't just say a thing like that without a description...

I'm actually going to do a literature search and see if the changes are patentable, if no, I'll show what I'm doing fully.

[Magic_Salad0892]

I'm actually going to do a literature search and see if the changes are patentable, if no, I'll show what I'm doing fully.

That good, huh? I can't wait.

[BLR]

How much contact would you say is desired on the feed ramp?

If you are hitting all of them on the top third or forth of the frame, you are doing really good. Like I said though, it's all about consistency. If they all smacked the feedramp right in the middle, it would be a non problem. What is a problem, or at least what reduces the operating window, is the fact that the first and last round smack totally different places on the feed ramp.

[Magic_Salad0892]

If you are hitting all of them on the top third or forth of the frame, you are doing really good. Like I said though, it's all about consistency. If they all smacked the feedramp right in the middle, it would be a non problem. What is a problem, or at least what reduces the operating window, is the fact that the first and last round smack totally different places on the feed ramp.

What if they start near the middle but work their way up? But it feeds the same way every time? Would you consider that consistency reliable?

[BLR]

What if they start near the middle but work their way up? But it feeds the same way every time? Would you consider that consistency reliable?

Probably a reliable gun, actually.

That said, as this thread and it's purpose is to academically evaluate the 1911, keep in mind that if you are impacting different areas of the ramp, you really aren't feeding the same way each time.

Mechanical reliability is all about consistency. The slide, barrel and frame (when compared with the magazine) do exactly the same thing every time the gun goes off. Exactly. You need to present the round the same each time. The better you do that, the more reliable the gun will be. It really is as simple as that. If you manage that, then the tolerance to dirt in the magazine, lack of lubrication, and so on goes up.

[Magic_Salad0892]

Probably a reliable gun, actually.

That said, as this thread and it's purpose is to academically evaluate the 1911, keep in mind that if you are impacting different areas of the ramp, you really aren't feeding the same way each time.

Mechanical reliability is all about consistency. The slide, barrel and frame (when compared with the magazine) do exactly the same thing every time the gun goes off. Exactly. You need to present the round the same each time. The better you do that, the more reliable the gun will be. It really is as simple as that. If you manage that, then the tolerance to dirt in the magazine, lack of lubrication, and so on goes up.

Bill said in his article about compact 1911s that lighter weight rounds put less strain on the magazine. Would you say that a 8 round mag tube with a 7 round conversion kit like the Trip, paired with 185gr rounds is something of a "dream match up" in terms of mag strength, as long as it was consistent? (Compact or full size gun.)

[BLR]

Bill said in his article about compact 1911s that lighter weight rounds put less strain on the magazine. Would you say that a 8 round mag tube with a 7 round conversion kit like the Trip, paired with 185gr rounds is something of a "dream match up" in terms of mag strength, as long as it was consistent? (Compact or full size gun.)

185s will make the column weigh less.

[hossb7]

Is it only 1911 magazines that have this problem? I'm not as well versed in as many platforms as other members might be, but saying, "this is a magazine problem and not a 1911 problem" when it SEEMS that 1911 magazines are the only ones that have the problem in the first place is disingenuous - unless I'm misunderstanding the thread/post. Do magazines for other single stack 45acp guns have this problem? The first that come to mind are the Sig P220, Glock 30, and a number of Gen 3 S&W's and I don't recall magazine failure being tied to them in the same way as it's tied to the aforementioned "king of feedway stoppages".

Also, the last few pages of the thread (if not the whole thing) seem to embody the recent post Hilton Yam made on Modern Service Weapons regarding the 1911, especially this part, "If you enjoy the craftsmanship of a finely built 1911 or you enjoy tinkering on your own, by all means continue to enjoy them. However, if training, shooting, and performance is your primary goal and you lack the resources, time, patience, or knowledge to keep after a 1911, then be realistic and choose something more modern."

[Drang]

I'm actually going to do a literature search and see if the changes are patentable, if no, I'll show what I'm doing fully.
In the meantime, Bill, what, if anything, can the mechanically declined do to improve the function of magazines we already have? Ass-you-me'ing that the mag tubes are in good shape, will replacing springs and followers pay off?

[Lomshek]

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140309_111732_zpst7wr9orh.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140309_111732_zpst7wr9orh.jpg.html)

Now THAT is zero extractor tension, and it caused the gun to fail to eject regularly (one out of twenty rounds or so got hung up in the ejection port, lots of brass kisses on the front of the ejection port).

And, the hook is WAY too far from the rim. WAY too far.

Bill,

I'm trying to reduce extractor "end shake" or slop for lack of a better term as your photo depicts on a project gun. Do you have a suggested clearance the hook should stand off from the case rim? I'm guessing a gap the thickness of a case rim is way too much.

[BLR]

hossb7, I'm not sure if I'm reading you right.

[BLR]

Bill,

I'm trying to reduce extractor "end shake" or slop for lack of a better term as your photo depicts on a project gun. Do you have a suggested clearance the hook should stand off from the case rim? I'm guessing a gap the thickness of a case rim is way too much.

I really don't. I haven't actually tested it yet, mostly because I haven't had time to modify the extractor yet.

[hossb7]

hossb7, I'm not sure if I'm reading you right.

Yeah, I realized I could have made my post more clear.

Earlier you mentioned that the key to 1911 reliability is even upward pressure on rounds in the magazine, hence it being a magazine issue NOT a 1911 issue.

I'm asking if this problem exists with other single stack 45 magazines or just the 1911 magazine. The platforms I listed have no known (at least to me) knowledge of "uneven" upward pressure on the rounds in their magazines.

If that's the case, then it IS a 1911 problem, or at least a 1911 magazine problem - but that's the same since 1911s are the only handguns that use 1911 magazines.

[BLR]

Is it only 1911 magazines that have this problem? I'm not as well versed in as many platforms as other members might be, but saying, "this is a magazine problem and not a 1911 problem" when it SEEMS that 1911 magazines are the only ones that have the problem in the first place is disingenuous - unless I'm misunderstanding the thread/post. Do magazines for other single stack 45acp guns have this problem? The first that come to mind are the Sig P220, Glock 30, and a number of Gen 3 S&W's and I don't recall magazine failure being tied to them in the same way as it's tied to the aforementioned "king of feedway stoppages".

Also, the last few pages of the thread (if not the whole thing) seem to embody the recent post Hilton Yam made on Modern Service Weapons regarding the 1911, especially this part, "If you enjoy the craftsmanship of a finely built 1911 or you enjoy tinkering on your own, by all means continue to enjoy them. However, if training, shooting, and performance is your primary goal and you lack the resources, time, patience, or knowledge to keep after a 1911, then be realistic and choose something more modern."

8 round conversion from generic "1911" 7 round surplus magazines are the worst (to my knowledge) offenders. I think you might be misreading my statement, so let me rephrase it. This problem isn't inherent with the design of the gun, rather inherent with the magazine as currently thought of. There are a number of tweeks that can be used to create an evenly loaded, smoothly moving ammunition column. The old P220 magazines weren't so great in that respect.

Is it a "1911" problem or a magazine problem? Well, is it a CQB-ETM HD problem or is it a RIA-Cheap Gun Show problem. Or some mix of that? There are no "1911s" IMO. There are Wilson 1911s. There are SA 1911s. There are Double Star 1911s. And so on. There are no "1911" magazines. There are ETMs. There are a whole slew of MecGars. And Checkmates. And Tripps. And CMCs. And so on. There are CQBs and there are Spartans. There are Hardballers and there are Matchmasters and there are Professionals.

Depending on the audience, saying "1911s" aren't reliable (or they are this or that) can generate applause, or eye rolling.

[hossb7]

Gotcha. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense (re: manufacturer) regarding both gun and magazine.

[BLR]

FWIW, if you could get the magazine to do this:

http://www.m1911.org/loader.swf

The 1911 wouldn't be the King of the Feedway Stoppage anymore.

[Super77]

I have a semi-custom whose extractor is positioned about like the one shown in the above picture. I've thought of having a new one fit with the hook closer to the breach face but one thing is holding me back: how close should the hook be? I shoot a lot of range pick up brass and I understand that a 1911 can be set up to effectively headspace off the case rim by fitting the extractor to hold the case against the breach face. I'm not sure if this is advisable or if I'd even see a performance gain. Either way this thread has reinforced my suspicion that the hook is too far from the breachface and should probably be rectified.

[Magic_Salad0892]

FWIW, if you could get the magazine to do this:

http://www.m1911.org/loader.swf

The 1911 wouldn't be the King of the Feedway Stoppage anymore.

What do you mean exactly?

[BLR]

What do you mean exactly?

Watch how the ammo column moves.

As a monolithic column. That's key.

[Eternal24k]

I'd be interested to hear Bills thoughts on the Aftec extractor.

Also would like to hear

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Tuesday]

Watch how the ammo column moves.

As a monolithic column. That's key.

Spring the front and the back of the stack at different rates.

[BLR]

Spring the front and the back of the stack at different rates.

If only it were so easy.

Tapered (though, not too tapered) cartridges in a straight tube, with varying column weight, varying spring pressure, this problem won't be solved correctly, but the symptoms can be treated better than they are.

[BLR]

Some machine tool snobery -

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/1911%20Pics/20140311_100701_zps2ksjft5z.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/1911%20Pics/20140311_100701_zps2ksjft5z.jpg.html)

How do you true the lines of a 1911? Why, a horizontal mill of course. Movable quills are for drilling holes and power tapping. And that is all.

[45dotACP]

If only it were so easy.

Tapered (though, not too tapered) cartridges in a straight tube, with varying column weight, varying spring pressure, this problem won't be solved correctly, but the symptoms can be treated better than they are.

To somewhat throw back to the beginning of the thread...is that what Sig got right with the P220? After all, the 220 seems to have a "better" reputation for reliability than would a "brand X" 1911, so what makes their magazines that much better? They would have the same constraints as far as spring pressure, tapered cartridge, and straight tube no?

[WilsonCombatRep]

To somewhat throw back to the beginning of the thread...is that what Sig got right with the P220? After all, the 220 seems to have a "better" reputation for reliability than would a "brand X" 1911, so what makes their magazines that much better? They would have the same constraints as far as spring pressure, tapered cartridge, and straight tube no?

Maybe. They also have a different grip and feed angle and a ramp integral to the barrel. Lots of differences.

[45dotACP]

Maybe. They also have a different grip and feed angle and a ramp integral to the barrel. Lots of differences.

This is true. I was mostly curious as to the differences between the magazines that made them more reliable. I suspected they might have been a "little different" (The difference in reliability speaks for itself). So is it pretty much everything that's different other than the fact that they are both single stack magazines?

[tomr]

Quote Originally Posted by WilsonCombatRep View Post
Maybe. They also have a different grip and feed angle and a ramp integral to the barrel. Lots of differences.


This is true. I was mostly curious as to the differences between the magazines that made them more reliable. I suspected they might have been a "little different" (The difference in reliability speaks for itself). So is it pretty much everything that's different other than the fact that they are both single stack magazines?

If Ive been reading this correctly, BLR's take away has been, there's nothing particularly weird about the 1911 feed way or magical about other good pistol designs, (like the Sig, etc.) I believe that's what Bill's pictures attempted to illustrate. The reputational problem of the 1911, e.g.. "king of the feed way stoppage" is traceable to the facts that the 1911 has been made by many companies for over a hundred years, each with their own idea of what the pistol was supposed to do or maybe more important sell for, ($). Gi issued rattle traps are an example of one extreme, while a modern example like a CQB are slick, tight enough, in the right places, with better steels that holdup to wear and tear better. There are many stops in between. All these various 1911s have had to deal with as much or more variation in magazines. Not all mate well. Sig, Glock, HK, etc don't have this problem. While there may be aftermarket magazines, the choice is smaller and I suspect most people don't stray very far from the brand of the pistol, for their mags, for these.

There are other reasons to think of alternatives to the 1911 for modern service use, (well described on this forum), but the reputation for "speedway stoppages" if one controls for a quality pistol and magazine combination doesn't seem to be one of those.

How'm I doing Bill?

[TheTrevor]

Some machine tool snobery -

How do you true the lines of a 1911? Why, a horizontal mill of course. Movable quills are for drilling holes and power tapping. And that is all.

Nice enough, I guess, but it's no Deckel (http://www.lathes.co.uk/deckel/).

I kid, I kid. Very nice VN. I've heard them described as the perfect pistolsmith's mill.

[BLR]

Nice enough, I guess, but it's no Deckel (http://www.lathes.co.uk/deckel/).

I kid, I kid. Very nice VN. I've heard them described as the perfect pistolsmith's mill.

This ones getting converted to a CNC EDM machine :D

You need to meet my older brother. He geeks out on this stuff like I do on precision rifles and aircraft.

[BLR]

This is true. I was mostly curious as to the differences between the magazines that made them more reliable. I suspected they might have been a "little different" (The difference in reliability speaks for itself). So is it pretty much everything that's different other than the fact that they are both single stack magazines?

Oh, I don't know about that.

There are a lot of parallels IMO.

[BLR]

P220 as compared to an ETM

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140312_102506_zps7qkpsn3z.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140312_102506_zps7qkpsn3z.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140312_102606_zpswjtfogqd.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140312_102606_zpswjtfogqd.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140312_102638_zpsyit2cm0v.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140312_102638_zpsyit2cm0v.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140312_102703_zps8dbk5prr.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140312_102703_zps8dbk5prr.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140312_102726_zpsehon4vby.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140312_102726_zpsehon4vby.jpg.html)

I would caution anyone to not draw conclusions from this alone.

And for the pilots -

Scuzzy weather:

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140312_083214_zpsb4ltuang.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140312_083214_zpsb4ltuang.jpg.html)

[Magic_Salad0892]

What's with that dimple near the top of the SIG mag, near the rear of the cartridge?

[ToddG]

It was a running change made to the mags shortly after Ernest Langdon and I got involved in developing what was supposed to be a possible MARSOC (and/or SOCOM) variant of the P220. The original mags will hang in the magwell after the gun has been fired because the top round moves forward and the nose of the bullet touches the inside of the frame. The dimple blocks the rim from moving forward just enough to keep the bullet in place and the mags will drop free.

[Magic_Salad0892]

It was a running change made to the mags shortly after Ernest Langdon and I got involved in developing what was supposed to be a possible MARSOC (and/or SOCOM) variant of the P220. The original mags will hang in the magwell after the gun has been fired because the top round moves forward and the nose of the bullet touches the inside of the frame. The dimple blocks the rim from moving forward just enough to keep the bullet in place and the mags will drop free.

That makes sense. Do you know why the original 220 magazines had that issue?

[KneeShot]

Bill, will you please enlighten me with how much pressure you believe to be ideal inbetween the slide stop and slide stop plunger when the slide stop is being activated by an empty magazine follower.

A "smooth" elevation?
A "small click" - not activating the thumb safety kind of click, just a small one?
Should the slide stop "float" into stopping the slide?

I was looking at my magazine, feed ramp and chamber alignment with the slide off and slide stop installed on a few of my Dan Wesson's (comparing to the pics in your first post). I dropped in a WC BP slide stop on both guns. I get a small "snick" sound and can ever so slightly feel it. The manufactur's slide stop was smooth in comparison...

Thanks for your time. I have read each post of this thread (sorry if I missed the slide stop info). I appreciate your knowledge and sharing it with us. If I need to ask this question under the "Armorer" sub forum please say the word....

I also have a malfunction question that I cannot figure out...but I will wait to see if my first post here is acceptable.

[ToddG]

That makes sense. Do you know why the original 220 magazines had that issue?

Because it didn't have the dimple. :cool:

[Magic_Salad0892]

Because it didn't have the dimple. :cool:

I ran right into that one. :p

[45dotACP]

Because it didn't have the dimple. :cool:

Silly Sig! Dimples are for followers!

[1slow]

Kix reference, awful cereal.

[NETim]

Kix reference, awful cereal.

Trix? As in "Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids!"

[WilsonCombatRep]

Silly Sig! Dimples are for followers!


This is a different kind of dimple. Its to keep the second from top round from moving forward in the tube while feeding the top round..a dimple on the follower serves to keep the last round from moving out of the tube ahead of the breechface.

[45dotACP]

This is a different kind of dimple. Its to keep the second from top round from moving forward in the tube while feeding the top round..a dimple on the follower serves to keep the last round from moving out of the tube ahead of the breechface.

To prevent live round doublefeeds right? Was this mostly a problem with weak magazine springs?

A little different problem than a mag not ejecting I will admit.

My 1911 knowledge notwithstanding, I will stand by the assertion that Trix are the shizzle :D

[WilsonCombatRep]

To prevent live round doublefeeds right? Was this mostly a problem with weak magazine springs?

A little different problem than a mag not ejecting I will admit.

My 1911 knowledge notwithstanding, I will stand by the assertion that Trix are the shizzle :D

Follower dimples help prevent last round failures to feed by delaying the top rounds release from the lips. And yes Trix are amazing.

[1slow]

Trix? As in "Silly rabbit, Trix are for kids!"
Yes, typing while tired, sorry.

[NETim]

Yes, typing while tired, sorry.

See, this is what happens when you don't eat enough sugar sparkled sugar bombs, like Trix. :)

[SAWBONES]

This is a different kind of dimple.

'Cause it's a pimple (convex), not a dimple (concave)? :p

[BLR]

Some comparisons -

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140316_141001_zpsac6wuycl.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140316_141001_zpsac6wuycl.jpg.html)

Notice the Beretta 92 mag shows no nose dive? But all the others do? Every single stack mag has the top round catching the extractor groove of the round underneath it in a very significant way. Enough to cause much of the nose dive seen.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140316_140952_zpsrqsoiv7j.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140316_140952_zpsrqsoiv7j.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140315_164452_zpshtxryhi7.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140315_164452_zpshtxryhi7.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140315_164444_zps8ukftykm.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140315_164444_zps8ukftykm.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140315_164432_zpsd58obvvr.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140315_164432_zpsd58obvvr.jpg.html)

And this is most pronounced on the first 3 to 4 rounds. The condition is lessened somewhat in the P220 mag.

This, IMO, is the biggest problem to solve with that 1911.

[Eternal24k]

It was a running change made to the mags shortly after Ernest Langdon and I got involved in developing what was supposed to be a possible MARSOC (and/or SOCOM) variant of the P220. The original mags will hang in the magwell after the gun has been fired because the top round moves forward and the nose of the bullet touches the inside of the frame. The dimple blocks the rim from moving forward just enough to keep the bullet in place and the mags will drop free.

Very cool, it's the simple bits of ingenuity I can appreciate

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[MSparks909]

Some comparisons -

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140316_141001_zpsac6wuycl.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140316_141001_zpsac6wuycl.jpg.html)

Notice the Beretta 92 mag shows no nose dive? But all the others do? Every single stack mag has the top round catching the extractor groove of the round underneath it in a very significant way. Enough to cause much of the nose dive seen.

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140316_140952_zpsrqsoiv7j.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140316_140952_zpsrqsoiv7j.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140315_164452_zpshtxryhi7.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140315_164452_zpshtxryhi7.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140315_164444_zps8ukftykm.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140315_164444_zps8ukftykm.jpg.html)

http://i1277.photobucket.com/albums/y491/feral45/Gunsmithing/20140315_164432_zpsd58obvvr.jpg (http://s1277.photobucket.com/user/feral45/media/Gunsmithing/20140315_164432_zpsd58obvvr.jpg.html)

And this is most pronounced on the first 3 to 4 rounds. The condition is lessened somewhat in the P220 mag.

This, IMO, is the biggest problem to solve with that 1911.

Is the pronounced nosediving present in single stack 1911 9mm magazines as well?