Latest 1911 article

[Dagga Boy]

This is my latest contribution to the Luckygunner Lounge. Chris has been great about giving me a platform to write on subjects I enjoy. I am sure I will empower some more folks to join the list of haters, but amongst those who have been down the 1911 road, I hope they will appreciate the content and have a place to refer folks venturing into the 1911 world.

http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/modifying-1911-service-use/

[Nephrology]

Great article & glad you are working with Chris to continue to put out quality information to counter the overwhelming tide of internet horseshit.

Related 1911 question: do you find that 1911 magazines/magazine springs have a shorter service life than magazines of comparable quality for 9mm service pistols (i.e. Mec-Gar SIG or Beretta mags)? Or will this vary too much from manufacturer to manufacturer to make a blanket statement like that?

[JAD]

a) I want that TJ Commander.

https://youtu.be/GDXYzUlv0S8

b) The article made me appreciate what a deal Dan Wessons seem to be, from my unqualified perspective.

[Dagga Boy]

Yes.....but nothing scientific. Here is the big issue. Glock magazines, until recently made by Glock for Glock. HK, same thing. Herrets and Sig have both suffered from a couple of outside places magazines. Then we look at the 1911 where there are untold numbers of magazines being made to feed a type of gun that there are dozens upon dozens of various folks making. His all leads to huge reliability issues with bunches of variables that can lead to failures in numerous portions of the cycle of operation. I have had good luck as of late with McCormick. Others can be great as well, but I have had problems with just about all the big names in one gun or another. Colt factory Maga will tend to always be fairly good in Colt's, especially the 7 rounders. Just trying to put 8 in them is always an issue all by itself. The key, do not get married to 1911 magazines, rotate them, and pay attention to them looking for any indication of feed lip spread and other issues.

[Dagga Boy]

a) I want that TJ Commander.
https://youtu.be/GDXYzUlv0S8

b) The article made me appreciate what a deal Dan Wessons seem to be, from my unqualified perspective.

That one is filled with way too much special, especially with its original owner dying recently. The guy was a walking encyclopedia of being a cop....both good and bad. Pete was a source of a large majority of my funny cop stories, and the best dope cop I have ever been around. He was always working narcotics, even when he was not working dope, and that 1911 is the gun he carried when he worked undercover. That gun also bonded a very long term friendship with TJ. It is hard to tell, but that gun does not have a single edge on it. It is literally a bar of soap, and every edge was rounded by hand with a file or Dremel. The hours of handwork in that gun to do it exactly how I wanted it was huge. It has been special for most of my adult life, or at least the last quarter century.

[breakingtime91]

Great article Nyeti. While I was too young to use the 1911 in any job related roll, I still admire them and find myself drawn to them.

[Dagga Boy]

Great article Nyeti. While I was too young to use the 1911 in any job related roll, I still admire them and find myself drawn to them.

They were not approved for duty till right about the time I retired. I had to find special details and off duty roles to carry one. My first gun was a series 70 Govt. (also bout an 870 with it). I look back and could have been fine a good 1911 and shotgun for the duration. Nothing in the auto world emotionally makes you feel like you are ready for a fight like a 1911 in the hand. My best friend had a nice saying, "I like to carry Glocks and fight win a 1911. I have one of his 1911's that has taken the souls of a lot of America's enemies and simply bad folks over the years.

[Trooper224]

An excellent and objective article. Thanks for sharing.

[SAWBONES]

Thanks for a very sensible, accurate and well written essay on the service 1911 pistol.

And as it happens, I certainly agree about your recommendations for "Colt" and "NP3" too, both of which apply to my CCW Gunsite CCO, and I agree as well about Steve Morrison's services, who's an old friend since nearly twenty years now, and done all eight of my 1911s. Always nice to see him get some good press.

[Totem Polar]

Nice work, Nyeti. A great, timeless article filled with sound advice and tips—and that's considering that no shortage of ink has been spent on these guns. I enjoyed that a lot.

[Redhat]

Good article and thanks for sharing. I have been a fan of the 1911 since I was a kid. Got my first one in my mid twenties, a Colt '70 series. The only mod I had was sights. Now that I'm in my 50's and had years to read and study a bit on the supposed "issues" , I've formed the opinion that the main problem is likely the differing specs of the multitude of guns built by various manufacturers...this includes magazines too. The original military spec design was pretty thoroughly tested so I had a hard time wrapping my head around the supposed reliability problems that crop up with the modern incarnations of this pistol and I think the design gets unfair rap. People tend to lump all 1911 like pistols into one huge group even though you have so many different 1911 like pistols being produced that may or may not adhere to original specs. If Glocks were being made by 100 companies who could change the specs, where would their reliability be?

Another question I have is when it is stated by some knowledgeable folks that 1911's need a high level of attention to keep running, I'd like to know why that should be so? Take recoil springs for instance...I've heard all kinds of recommendations on how often springs should be changed...why would the 1911 be any different than other pistols that operate basically the same way. I mean, slides goes back and forth on all, be it Glock, HK, Beretta and so on...why is the 1911 seen to need more attention than the others?

[Jeep]

Terrific article.

[Wondering Beard]

Good solid, common sense article. What else could one ask for? :-)

Oh yeah, more pics of 1911s ;-)

[StraitR]

Excellent article DB. Thank you for taking the time to write it up and share. It couldn't come at a more appropriate time for me personally.

Thanks to Chris as well.

ETA: I've been tossing around the idea of starting a new govt model longterm project for 100% pure enjoyment. I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that a Colt Wiley Clapp seems to be a great base gun to start. The WC pictured in your article kind of sealed the deal for me.

[LSP552]

Outstanding! Thank you!

[1slow]

DB, great article and mirrors my less extensive experience.

[Robinson]

Nyeti, thanks for sharing that excellent article. Very well done sir.

[JonInWA]

Excellent article. My 1911 experiences mirrors yours. My latest 1911 is a Colt stainless Series 70 repro-given to me by my wife for our anniversary. After cleaning and lubrication, it's accuracy is excellent-ditto regarding reliability. I'm using Colt/Check-Mate 7 rounders with it.

Your suggestion on having a qualified 1911 gunsmith got through one's 1911s is excellent. Regarding magazines, especially once you depart from the 5" government format, there are multiple points worthy of examination to establish reliability-basic tube fit, feedlip configuration, spring weight, follower type, welded baseplate vs. extended tube/removable baseplate, basepads I've found to be the critical variables, needing to be established for each individual 1911.

Best, Jon

[Dagga Boy]

Thanks for a very sensible, accurate and well written essay on the service 1911 pistol.

And as it happens, I certainly agree about your recommendations for "Colt" and "NP3" too, both of which apply to my CCW Gunsite CCO, and I agree as well about Steve Morrison's services, who's an old friend since nearly twenty years now, and done all eight of my 1911s. Always nice to see him get some good press.

I have a lot of MARS guns as well. You will like the article as the pictures were shot in Steve's shop. It is about why high end 1911's cost so much. Folks do not really understand the level and amount of work that goes into these. I was shocked at how long and how much work the golf balls were. It was an education for me that I want to pass on.

[Jim Watson]

I think Post #4 is the basis for all the checking and tuning and upgrading and gunsmiths' full employment program you and many others find needed for the multitude of guns lumped under "1911."

The old saying "Too many cooks spoil the broth." seems to apply. Not to mention cost cutting "innovations" and substitution of "features" for quality.

Jeff Cooper wrote that you need sights you can see, a trigger you can control, and removal of sharp corners that make handling unpleasant. He took reliability and reasonable accuracy for granted. But then all he had to work with were Colts and Army surplus, loaded with seven hardball.

[SAWBONES]

I have a lot of MARS guns as well. You will like the article as the pictures were shot in Steve's shop. It is about why high end 1911's cost so much. Folks do not really understand the level and amount of work that goes into these. I was shocked at how long and how much work the golf balls were. It was an education for me that I want to pass on.

Yeah, but some of us really do think they're worth the cost.

A functioning and fully reliable 1911 in .45 Auto is simply unexcelled as a personal defense CCW sidearm, IMNSHO, and if features like golf ball or chain-link treatments to the MSH and frontstrap enhance the personal ergonomics of your 1911, so much the better.

I'm one of those nerdy types who admires engineering design so much that I not infrequently disassemble and reassemble my 1911s and Glocks (both of which I consider genius-level designs, even though very different from each other) simply for the sake of enjoying their design features and parts-interactions. :o

While I couldn't operate an end-mill or drill press to save my life, I can nonetheless certainly appreciate Steve's work!

[JAD]

exactly how I wanted it.

As far as I can tell it is exactly what I think a defensive pistol should be. The Blues Brothers reference because I knew there was no chance I'd get you to part with it, but I do hope to see it some day.

[KG]

Nice article Nyeti. Why did you decide to change out the old style safety on your Wiley Clapp pistol? Just personal preference or something more that I may need to consider? I really like the little Wilson Combat safety that was added to my Ithaca. Also, have you seen any problems on Colt alloy frames after high use? Thanks.

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/Keith_Groen/Mobile%20Uploads/image_4.jpeg (http://s210.photobucket.com/user/Keith_Groen/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_4.jpeg.html)

[JonInWA]

Nice article Nyeti. Why did you decide to change out the old style safety on your Wiley Clapp pistol? Just personal preference or something more that I may need to consider? I really like the little Wilson Combat safety that was added to my Ithaca. Also, have you seen any problems on Colt alloy frames after high use? Thanks.

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/Keith_Groen/Mobile%20Uploads/image_4.jpeg (http://s210.photobucket.com/user/Keith_Groen/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_4.jpeg.html)

Keith, given the other features on your Ithaca, I'm curious as to why you chose the small short-shelf manual safety lever-why not at least the teardrop shape used by Colt on current production 70 Series? On my WWII vintage 1945 Remington-Rand, I personally find the short lever safety both difficult and uncomfortable to ride my thumb on top of. but I assume you had some cogent reasons for your choice, if you'd care to elaborate on.

Best, Jon

[Wondering Beard]

I can't speak for Keith but I find the small teardrop shape on modern Colts to be unusable, both for taking the safety off and putting it back on. The older nub-like safety is for some reason much easier to manipulate for my hands. Of course, the modern extended ones are a breeze to use but the old nub is nearly as good for me.

[Imaposer2]

This is my latest contribution to the Luckygunner Lounge. Chris has been great about giving me a platform to write on subjects I enjoy. I am sure I will empower some more folks to join the list of haters, but amongst those who have been down the 1911 road, I hope they will appreciate the content and have a place to refer folks venturing into the 1911 world.

http://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/modifying-1911-service-use/

You sir, are trouble.... First with all your revolver threads, and now this... Nice article, btw.



Good article and thanks for sharing. I have been a fan of the 1911 since I was a kid. Got my first one in my mid twenties, a Colt '70 series. The only mod I had was sights. Now that I'm in my 50's and had years to read and study a bit on the supposed "issues" , I've formed the opinion that the main problem is likely the differing specs of the multitude of guns built by various manufacturers...this includes magazines too. The original military spec design was pretty thoroughly tested so I had a hard time wrapping my head around the supposed reliability problems that crop up with the modern incarnations of this pistol and I think the design gets unfair rap. People tend to lump all 1911 like pistols into one huge group even though you have so many different 1911 like pistols being produced that may or may not adhere to original specs. If Glocks were being made by 100 companies who could change the specs, where would their reliability be?

Another question I have is when it is stated by some knowledgeable folks that 1911's need a high level of attention to keep running, I'd like to know why that should be so? Take recoil springs for instance...I've heard all kinds of recommendations on how often springs should be changed...why would the 1911 be any different than other pistols that operate basically the same way. I mean, slides goes back and forth on all, be it Glock, HK, Beretta and so on...why is the 1911 seen to need more attention than the others?

This brings a question to mind... Having been a rabid devourer of gun rags back in the pre-internet days, in the 80's with all the 9mm vs. .45 ACP raging debate, and all the old timers extolling the wonderfulness that was/is JMB and his perfect fighting pistol... I took it largely as the ravings of a bunch of old codgers clinging to the past and unwilling to accept the new... especially when Glock hit the scene and added in the hatred of the "plastic" pistol! Of course, being younger and in college then, I was an early adopter of the Glock and never really looked back...

Then, as I've matured, my tastes have evolved... First it was developing a growing appreciation for S&W revolvers in the early 90's right up through the present, then a few other things, including the 1911... Don't get me wrong, I still appreciate my Glocks, and own several. They are functional appliances that work as tools for the tasks I want them for. But sometimes there's much more to a gun than just being a tool.

So, all through the years I've read/heard repeatedly that the average 1911 wasn't necessarily the most reliable platform available. Lots of debate about that subject in the rags through the years as well of course...

But then I've read SO many stories about the original GI 1911s and how reliably they performed in adverse battle conditions, and how much they were loved by those that fought with them. I actually had a friend/coworker years ago (now deceased) that served in Vietnam... John was a smaller guy, and served as what many refer to as a "tunnel rat". His primary weapon of choice for this function was a 1911... That goes back to an earlier statement in this thread about the 1911 being a supreme close quarters battle handgun. If anyone knew about that subject it was John. But would it be, and would John have used it and survived, if it weren't reliable?

So, from those in the know, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the subject... Were the original military spec 1911s all that, or is that just more old codger BS and folklore?

If they WERE, was it something about the guns, or was it simply because they used hardball exclusively?

If it was related to the ammo that JMB designed the gun around, did the later stories of potential reliability issues revolve around HP ammo and the changes made to the gun's original spec in an attempt to get them function with ammo other than that which they were conceived and designed to use?

Reading Redhat's post above made me wonder, does anyone currently manufacture a 1911 to the ORIGINAL specs laid out by JMB's design drawings? I don't mean look alikes but rather internal mechanical specs. If so, how do they function out of the box? Sights, safety levers, grip safeties, and all that are functional enhancements, but what I'm interested in is functional reliability. And that functional reliability of course includes proper maintenance and upkeep.

[KG]

Keith, given the other features on your Ithaca, I'm curious as to why you chose the small short-shelf manual safety lever-why not at least the teardrop shape used by Colt on current production 70 Series? On my WWII vintage 1945 Remington-Rand, I personally find the short lever safety both difficult and uncomfortable to ride my thumb on top of. but I assume you had some cogent reasons for your choice, if you'd care to elaborate on.

Best, Jon

I've spent a lot of time in the woods carrying this pistol as a backup when hunting with my flintlock. The big safety that was on the pistol when new was great at the range, but too big to fit well in my leather holster and too easy to accidentally disengage. The smaller safety fits my thumb well, doesn't disengage by accident, and I find it very easy to engage/disengage when needed - even with gloves. Buckshot did a great job installing it and tuned it until it was just right for my tastes. Like Wondering Beard, it is easier for me to use than the Colt teardrop. The disadvantage to the small safety for me is that I can't really ride the safety when shooting as well as I could with the bigger safety. I like carrying the smaller safety and shooting with the bigger safety.

Personally, I think it is cool that the small safety makes the pistol look a bit more like the 1911s Ithaca made during WW II. I also like how Wilson Combat checkered both the top and bottom of the safety.

Keith

[StraitR]

I'll leave the meat and potatoes of Imaposer2's questioning to those more knowledgable than I, but for the sake of clarity, the M1911 wasn't technically designed around 45acp. The design originated (Colt Models 1902/1905 respectively) around a cartridge similar in dimensions to what is now 38 Super. When the Army solicited for an autoloader and specified a 45 caliber projectile to replace the woefully underpowered 38 Long Colt from the then common Colt M1889 revolvers, JMB then re-engineered the pistol for 45 ACP, 230gr ball, which JMB also designed.

A good breakdown on the background on M1911 - http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/background.htm

As far why they all the original M1911's seemed to work, I'd say because they were all manufactured based on one specification. It didn't matter who was manufacturing the gun (Colt, Remington Rand, Singer, Ithaca, Union-Switch), or simply parts of the gun, it was made to one specification. Those specifications are open source, and certainly can be produced today, but it wouldn't be what the average U.S. consumer demands from a 1911 these days as far as fit and finish.

[Imaposer2]

I'll leave the meat and potatoes of Imaposer2's questioning to those more knowledgable than I, but for the sake of clarity, the M1911 wasn't technically designed around 45acp. The design originated (Colt Models 1902/1905 respectively) around a cartridge similar in dimensions to what is now 38 Super. When the Army solicited for an autoloader and specified a 45 caliber projectile to replace the woefully underpowered 38 Long Colt from the then common Colt M1889 revolvers, JMB then re-engineered the pistol for 45 ACP, 230gr ball, which JMB also designed.

I was under the impression that the original design was for .45, although that the original cartridge design was for a 200gr projectile and that the army requested 230gr instead.




A good breakdown on the background on M1911 - http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/background.htm

As far why they all the original M1911's seemed to work, I'd say because they were all manufactured based on one specification. It didn't matter who was manufacturing the gun (Colt, Remington Rand, Singer, Ithaca, Union-Switch), or simply parts of the gun, it was made to one specification. Those specifications are open source, and certainly can be produced today, but it wouldn't be what the average U.S. consumer demands from a 1911 these days as far as fit and finish.

I don't care who makes them or where. We have the original design documents so anyone has the capability to manufacture to the original mechanical specs. Fit and finish, and accoutrements like sights, safety levers, etc, is independent of the aspects of design that lead to functional reliability. The issue as I see it is that the overall design does not lend itself well to mass production like a lot or more modern designs, and for proper function, requires a lot of skilled craftsmen for final fitting of components... Something that was commonplace in that era but that has sadly fallen my the wayside in the modern age of quick and cheap disposable products. Then again, modern manufacturing techniques have managed to overcome that to some degree. Look at S&W revolvers for an example... Same basic design overall, but whereas the earlier guns required a lot of hand fitting for final assembly, modern technology has allowed them to utilize the same basic design while eliminating a lot of the craftsman's skill.

So, without consideration of old vs new manufacturing technologies, my question was, and is, does anyone build the guns to the original mechanical specs, or are they all altered for some reason?

From some readings that I vaguely remember from the 70's, it seems that the original GI guns worked under adverse battlefield conditions and earned the reputation for reliable close quarters battle pistols, with "acceptable" accuracy for the task. Then, post war, you had all these returning veterans with a fondness for the 1911. Then that generation spawned the various shooting sports. This in turn made "accurizing" the 1911, to work for Bullseye and other games, into a growing cottage industry. It just seems that my reading over the past 30+ years may indicate that the original design was for functional reliability rather with corresponding generous tolerances. But the desire for "accuracy" required tightening of those tolerances. And making other changes so that the guns would function with semi wadcutter target ammo, etc... And then later, HP ammo... Etc, etc, etc... My thinking, in my original question, was/is, did this "evolution" lead to the various manufacturers making so many different versions of the 1911, as alluded to by Redhat's post earlier? And if so, did this deviation bring us to the point that for all intents and purposes we've "lost" the original 1911 as designed? As in... does anyone even make a quality version of the 1911 like the original anymore? Mechanically speaking...

[StraitR]

45acp didn't come until the 1905 Military. The 1905 Military was based on the 1902 Military (.38 auto) which was based on the Colt Automatic Pistol 1900 (also .38 auto). The major changes, not all, but most, came on the Model 1909. The changes where a single link tilting barrel, barrel bushing, grip safety, and thumb magazine release (vs butt). The Model 1910 (some say only 8 were ever made, others say 12-13) brought additional changes such as larger grip safety and change in grip angle. My point is, the design was an evolution, not a revelation, and it didn't start with 45acp. There is plenty more to it, but those are the high points.

The information is out there to find, but very few people are actually interested enough to look. Reading forums or watching videos is easier. Luckily, Ian does a great job of breaking down a lot of the lineage in his videos...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgOicEVA4u8


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0ij5ReIbis

[Dagga Boy]

I can't speak for Keith but I find the small teardrop shape on modern Colts to be unusable, both for taking the safety off and putting it back on. The older nub-like safety is for some reason much easier to manipulate for my hands. Of course, the modern extended ones are a breeze to use but the old nub is nearly as good for me.

This. The newer "old safety" on the Wiley Clapp guns I find totally unusable for efficient use in both putting it on and off rapidly and positively. Plus, I ride it on a 1911.


I'll leave the meat and potatoes of Imaposer2's questioning to those more knowledgable than I, but for the sake of clarity, the M1911 wasn't technically designed around 45acp. The design originated (Colt Models 1902/1905 respectively) around a cartridge similar in dimensions to what is now 38 Super. When the Army solicited for an autoloader and specified a 45 caliber projectile to replace the woefully underpowered 38 Long Colt from the then common Colt M1889 revolvers, JMB then re-engineered the pistol for 45 ACP, 230gr ball, which JMB also designed.

A good breakdown on the background on M1911 - http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/background.htm

As far why they all the original M1911's seemed to work, I'd say because they were all manufactured based on one specification. It didn't matter who was manufacturing the gun (Colt, Remington Rand, Singer, Ithaca, Union-Switch), or simply parts of the gun, it was made to one specification. Those specifications are open source, and certainly can be produced today, but it wouldn't be what the average U.S. consumer demands from a 1911 these days as far as fit and finish.

Part of the equation with all "the military used them forever with no issues" is that folks forget several things. All the spare parts were pre fitted with a set of go-no go gauges for every part before they got to the unit armorers. This kept stuff uniform and workable. Also, how the guns were used. A 1911 could go its entire service career without every having a safety put on. Loaded, shot for qualification and un loaded repetitively. All with standardized ball Ammo and with 7 round magazines. Different story today.

I was told I was getting hammered on the 1911 forum. Perfect, as it's the same place that has hammered folks like Hilton Yam, Larry Vickers, and Ken Hackathorn, so I feel like I am in good company. I would also venture my idea of hard use and daily carry is vastly different than many. I write this stuff for earth people, and I think the information was valid based on a lot of time and effort put into a gun I love. I also wonder how many multi day high end training classes many of these folks have been through. When I went through the 10-8 Consulting course taught by guys paid to maintain hundreds of daily carried 1911's, I believe my gun and one other were the only two that passed the evaluation testing they do to check for specific function through the entire cycle of operation. If you had asked any of the other students (who were all hard core 1911 users) if they thought their guns had issues before the class, every one of them would have said no. That was not the case.

[Joe in PNG]

There's a lot of Cargo Cult with the 1911- Sgt. John Frumm carried a Remington Rand during WWII, so obviously my new production Remington Rand will be just as good!

[HCM]

This. The newer "old safety" on the Wiley Clapp guns I find totally unusable for efficient use in both putting it on and off rapidly and positively. Plus, I ride it on a 1911.



Part of the equation with all "the military used them forever with no issues" is that folks forget several things. All the spare parts were pre fitted with a set of go-no go gauges for every part before they got to the unit armorers. This kept stuff uniform and workable. Also, how the guns were used. A 1911 could go its entire service career without every having a safety put on. Loaded, shot for qualification and un loaded repetitively. All with standardized ball Ammo and with 7 round magazines. Different story today.

I was told I was getting hammered on the 1911 forum. Perfect, as it's the same place that has hammered folks like Hilton Yam, Larry Vickers, and Ken Hackathorn, so I feel like I am in good company. I would also venture my idea of hard use and daily carry is vastly different than many. I write this stuff for earth people, and I think the information was valid based on a lot of time and effort put into a gun I love. I also wonder how many multi day high end training classes many of these folks have been through. When I went through the 10-8 Consulting course taught by guys paid to maintain hundreds of daily carried 1911's, I believe my gun and one other were the only two that passed the evaluation testing they do to check for specific function through the entire cycle of operation. If you had asked any of the other students (who were all hard core 1911 users) if they thought their guns had issues before the class, every one of them would have said no. That was not the case.

Nyeti's,

That was a great article. 1911 forum is primarily populated by what I term "gun fondlers" vs shooters. I wouldn't sweat it.

[StraitR]

Part of the equation with all "the military used them forever with no issues" is that folks forget several things. All the spare parts were pre fitted with a set of go-no go gauges for every part before they got to the unit armorers. This kept stuff uniform and workable. Also, how the guns were used. A 1911 could go its entire service career without every having a safety put on. Loaded, shot for qualification and un loaded repetitively. All with standardized ball Ammo and with 7 round magazines. Different story today.

I was told I was getting hammered on the 1911 forum. Perfect, as it's the same place that has hammered folks like Hilton Yam, Larry Vickers, and Ken Hackathorn, so I feel like I am in good company. I would also venture my idea of hard use and daily carry is vastly different than many. I write this stuff for earth people, and I think the information was valid based on a lot of time and effort put into a gun I love. I also wonder how many multi day high end training classes many of these folks have been through. When I went through the 10-8 Consulting course taught by guys paid to maintain hundreds of daily carried 1911's, I believe my gun and one other were the only two that passed the evaluation testing they do to check for specific function through the entire cycle of operation. If you had asked any of the other students (who were all hard core 1911 users) if they thought their guns had issues before the class, every one of them would have said no. That was not the case.

That's because only two types of people survive on 1911 forum, those that suffer from dementia and those that suffer from Dunning-Kruger. People dismiss the likes of Roscoe, Chuck, and Ned on a regular basis. I love 1911's as much as the next guy, but that place is a hot mess and makes glocktalk look like Lightfighter.

[KG]

When I went through the 10-8 Consulting course taught by guys paid to maintain hundreds of daily carried 1911's, I believe my gun and one other were the only two that passed the evaluation testing they do to check for specific function through the entire cycle of operation. If you had asked any of the other students (who were all hard core 1911 users) if they thought their guns had issues before the class, every one of them would have said no. That was not the case.

I'm familiar wth the 10-8 extractor test. What additional evaluation tests did you do to check operation?

[WobblyPossum]

Great article Nyeti! I enjoyed reading your take on the subject. I don't own any 1911s myself but I periodically consider buying one. It'll probably be a recent production Colt or Dan Wesson. The general consensus seems to be that these two companies are currently making the most reliable, best value 1911s. I know you hold a high opinion of Colt. Do you have any experience with the Dan Wesson pistols? If so, what's your take?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dagga Boy]

That's because only two types of people survive on 1911 forum, those that suffer from dementia and those that suffer from Dunning-Kruger. People dismiss the likes of Roscoe, Chuck, and Ned on a regular basis. I love 1911's as much as the next guy, but that place is a hot mess and makes glocktalk look like Lightfighter.

Yep. I made the mistake of looking at it out of curiosity. The only surprise was a member here was one of the more harsh ones, but hasn't posted here. I believe most failed to read paragraph one. It clearly laid out that I was talking about honest carried all day everyday guns, and ones being shot weekly (and that is usual a couple hundred rounds or more for me when I am working....that is a week, not in the guns lifetime), and that also means with perfrmance ammunition. These folks also forget when we are talking police duty guns you are talking open carri d in all weather conditions. Rain, mud, dust, oils and also sorts of other filth floating around that is attracted to lube, and bumping into crap, getting dropped, etc. I think it was KevH that posted exactly what I was talking about here recently. I find it funny that while accused of supporting my buddy gunsmith's, most also missed that the first gun of the what you need was essentially a dead stock gun function checked by a Colt factory Armorer, as well as indicating that several companies are making enhanced guns that have many of the recommended modifications already done. But....there is that whole reading thing. It's the Internet, and why I no longer participate in most of these forums. On 1911 I shop the Want to Sell ads daily along with he same at the Smith forum where I will also,post once in awhile in a couple of the sub forums dedicated to the older guns. Otherwise, I have found my time is better spent not on the brand specific forums where status is based on post count and not range time or experience daily using the gun being discussed.
What I love about he Luckygunner blog is it is geared for folks without high post counts on fan forums, but for people simply trying to gather solid information.


I'm familiar wth the 10-8 extractor test. What additional evaluation tests did you do to check operation?
The 10-8 Extractor test, plus the rest of the 50 round 10-8 test they do not publish. I ll also run a variety of the normal drills we do, and usually set the gun up for numerous speed reloads, both in and out of battery.

[Jeep]

Part of the equation with all "the military used them forever with no issues" is that folks forget several things. All the spare parts were pre fitted with a set of go-no go gauges for every part before they got to the unit armorers. This kept stuff uniform and workable. Also, how the guns were used. A 1911 could go its entire service career without every having a safety put on. Loaded, shot for qualification and un loaded repetitively. All with standardized ball Ammo and with 7 round magazines. Different story today.



Exactly. In addition, in order to keep them clean, many .45's in the arms rooms were basically never fired. A few would be taken out for fam fire occasionally (and qualification fire rarely), and many of the rest might go to the field (unloaded) from time to time, but they weren't fired for years on end.

Meanwhile, almost no Army 1911's saw high-round count practices. It just wasn't done and no one had the ammo budgets for it had they thought of such a thing. The very few Army units that fired their .45's much tended to have full time armorers.

I like those old Ithacas, Remington Rands and (occasionally) Colts, but the vast majority of them would not have taken the beating of a high round count class either. They were perfectly fine for firing a few magazines reliably. Firing 1,000 rounds in a day? They would have choked too, I believe.

[Poconnor]

Excellent article. My Dept issued 1911s for the last 25 years. I retired last year. The 1911 armorer/SME just retired so now they want to get rid of the 1911s and get something modern. The 1911 suits me fine. This year I traded for several 1911s to ride out the rest of my life. 1- engraved colt gov because life is too short not to have a work of art. 2- colt Wiley clapp LW commander, 3- colt Wiley clapp gov, 4- colt Wiley clapp SS commander, 5- colt 1911 combat unit. They are all Colts and they all will be gone over by a smith/armorer and be vetted. Now I just need to order new milt sparks leather for the above because the original milf Sparks holster I used for the last 20 years are pretty worn

[Robinson]

Nyeti's,

That was a great article. 1911 forum is primarily populated by what I term "gun fondlers" vs shooters. I wouldn't sweat it.

Truth. On rare occasions someone posts good information there, but it's by folks who are not regular posters on that forum. There has been a fellow who has posted information on a Colt Marine pistol and the new Combat Unit Rail Gun who puts serious round counts and other wear and tear on his guns because of his occupation. But 99% of the posts are not of that type.

[Redhat]

Exactly. In addition, in order to keep them clean, many .45's in the arms rooms were basically never fired. A few would be taken out for fam fire occasionally (and qualification fire rarely), and many of the rest might go to the field (unloaded) from time to time, but they weren't fired for years on end.

Meanwhile, almost no Army 1911's saw high-round count practices. It just wasn't done and no one had the ammo budgets for it had they thought of such a thing. The very few Army units that fired their .45's much tended to have full time armorers.

I like those old Ithacas, Remington Rands and (occasionally) Colts, but the vast majority of them would not have taken the beating of a high round count class either. They were perfectly fine for firing a few magazines reliably. Firing 1,000 rounds in a day? They would have choked too, I believe.

In your above post, where did you get the info that the guns weren't fired much and what time frame are you talking about? During WWI, WWII or after?

[Trooper224]

Nyeti's,

That was a great article. 1911 forum is primarily populated by what I term "gun fondlers" vs shooters. I wouldn't sweat it.

I've been a member of that forum since 2000, yet have less than a thousand posts in my count. There's a reason for that.

[JohnK]

When DB writes something, I have a tendency to read and absorb and read again. Especially if it is HK or 1911-related. It also says something to me that his name is put on it and out there for the world to see where you have those assholes that hide behind their handle on that forum.

I spend most of my Internet firearms time on this site. If I want to see pretty guns, I go on there. I have several friends that no longer post on their with any frequency, myself included.

For the record, I got into 1911s heavy about 4ish years ago. I switched to the P30 for various reasons last November. Thanks a lot for the timing of the article, that broke me and I am heading back to old slab sides again.

[Greg]

Nyeti's,

That was a great article. 1911 forum is primarily populated by what I term "gun fondlers" vs shooters. I wouldn't sweat it.

Almost every gun related forum is populated with fondlers. I saw a guy "review" a G17 on Glocktalk after an exhaustive 18 rounds.

I've never signed up to any 1911 related forum because I'm convinced all the garbage 1911s being made now brings out the 'tards in droves. I may be a dick for thinking that (actually, I am kind of a dick) but I do.

As Nyeti described, a duty gun is exposed to the elements, dust, crud and obstacles. Bruce Gray wrote a piece somewhere describing finding fingernail clippings (or something similar) in a Sig duty gun that he was asked to look over/ work on.

[TDA]

I went to 1911forum.com and looked for a thread on your article, but got derailed somewhere between "what if Spec Ops / Delta needed you as a firearms instructor?" and "concealed carry on recumbent bike."

[Dagga Boy]

Excellent article. My Dept issued 1911s for the last 25 years. I retired last year. The 1911 armorer/SME just retired so now they want to get rid of the 1911s and get something modern. The 1911 suits me fine. This year I traded for several 1911s to ride out the rest of my life. 1- engraved colt gov because life is too short not to have a work of art. 2- colt Wiley clapp LW commander, 3- colt Wiley clapp gov, 4- colt Wiley clapp SS commander, 5- colt 1911 combat unit. They are all Colts and they all will be gone over by a smith/armorer and be vetted. Now I just need to order new milt sparks leather for the above because the original milf Sparks holster I used for the last 20 years are pretty worn

I endorse this message. This is going to Steve Morrison to make sure it will run (I can already tell that the internals have some issues) and my leather guy is going to do a full floral Ranger style rig for it with a Texas dept. of Corrections 4 piece buckle set with the Sheriff's office logo where I train there SRT team. You simply should have something like this in life.

[Totem Polar]

^^^And there's the gun for your "legal in TX" dispensary guard gig from the other thread. Perfect. :D

[Dagga Boy]

Once it is all done, I will find an excuse to wear it......trust me.

[Jim Watson]

Two dots on the trigger.
Trigger shoe or divots where a trigger shoe was?

[Trooper224]

Two dots on the trigger.
Trigger shoe or divots where a trigger shoe was?

Might be an old GI trigger that's been refinished.

[richiecotite]

Nyeti,

Maybe you posted this elsewhere, but could you elaborate on why you think the 1911 is the best close quarter pistol ever made?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OnionsAndDragons]

Great article!

You guys are sorely tempting me to try and get a 9mm 1911 to run for me...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dagga Boy]

Might be an old GI trigger that's been refinished.

It is a Combat Elite. Whoever had the gun built must have liked "GI" stuff. Notice the safety. As much as the old school blue is cool, I think the slide stop, safety and trigger will all be replaced with top level components. This is good proof about how drop in 1911 parts are. I bought the gun because it's a Combat Elite and I like the engraving style and coverage. Now I need to get Steve on making it run.

[Jim Watson]

Around here, we say an advert for a "drop in part" means, "Drop in on the gunsmith and get it fitted."

I have changed mainspring housings and slide stops, got lucky on one safety that fit out of the baggie when I went from ambi to single.
Other safeties and triggers have had to be filed to fit.

On this gun, I would want stainless or plated small parts, I don't care for the "pinto" effect; and a fitted beavertail. Probably some sights I could see, be the only black on the gun.

[Trooper224]

It is a Combat Elite. Whoever had the gun built must have liked "GI" stuff. Notice the safety. As much as the old school blue is cool, I think the slide stop, safety and trigger will all be replaced with top level components. This is good proof about how drop in 1911 parts are. I bought the gun because it's a Combat Elite and I like the engraving style and coverage. Now I need to get Steve on making it run.

Have you thought about having the new parts fire blued? It really makes the gun pop. I hadn't used a GI safety in years, until I bought a CZ1911A1 a few months ago. That reminded me how badly those things suck for anything other than carrying around in a GI flap holster.

[Buckshot]

Nice article Nyeti. Why did you decide to change out the old style safety on your Wiley Clapp pistol? Just personal preference or something more that I may need to consider? I really like the little Wilson Combat safety that was added to my Ithaca. Also, have you seen any problems on Colt alloy frames after high use? Thanks.

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb245/Keith_Groen/Mobile%20Uploads/image_4.jpeg (http://s210.photobucket.com/user/Keith_Groen/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_4.jpeg.html)

Hey, I think I recognize that warhorse!

[Dagga Boy]

Around here, we say an advert for a "drop in part" means, "Drop in on the gunsmith and get it fitted."

I have changed mainspring housings and slide stops, got lucky on one safety that fit out of the baggie when I went from ambi to single.
Other safeties and triggers have had to be filed to fit.

On this gun, I would want stainless or plated small parts, I don't care for the "pinto" effect; and a fitted beavertail. Probably some sights I could see, be the only black on the gun.

Wouldn't those things be cosmetics, fads and fashion. As it sits is right out of 1969, except okay sights and a beavertail.

[HopetonBrown]

Great article. Jardine once looked over my $3.7k "high performance 1911 from a well-established firearms company" and pointed out it's failings. Specifically the angle on the extended ejector, the MIM grip safety that didn't have a piece of metal removed that he said "would've taken 2 minutes to do". He was really shocked by the sear and asked if it was the one that came with the gun.

[Tango]

Very well written article. There is a lot of garbage written on the internet about firearms. You clearly and succinctly explained the 1911 platform and what it as a fighting tool requires. I love that statement of, "I like carrying Glocks and fighting with 1911s".

[JohnK]

Nyeti,

Maybe you posted this elsewhere, but could you elaborate on why you think the 1911 is the best close quarter pistol ever made?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think he talked about it in his LEM article, but I have not looked. If not, I'd certainly like to hear his opinion as well!

[KG]

Hey, I think I recognize that warhorse!

That pistol has seen lots of use with zero issues since it was in your shop. Couldn't be happier with it.

[QuickStrike]

Nice to see the Wiley Clapp 5" get some love. I always thought them to be one of the best/only options right now if one wanted a colt, no firing pin safety, and with most of the necessary features without spending custom shop $$$.


Been thinking of selling my springfield PRO to buy 2 more. I actually enjoy shooting the WC more due to the undercut trigger guard and oval grips.

[Dagga Boy]

Nice to see the Wiley Clapp 5" get some love. I always thought them to be one of the best/only options right now if one wanted a colt, no firing pin safety, and with most of the necessary features without spending custom shop $$$.


Been thinking of selling my springfield PRO to buy 2 more. I actually enjoy shooting the WC more due to the undercut trigger guard and oval grips.

Other than hating the safety....I would agree. A couple of the other brands are also making some very nice upgraded guns as well. To be able to get a Colt with all of the features of the WC is what we have been bitching at Colt for years to make.

[StraitR]

Other than hating the safety....I would agree. A couple of the other brands are also making some very nice upgraded guns as well. To be able to get a Colt with all of the features of the WC is what we have been bitching at Colt for years to make.

Agreed. Aside from the WC line, the Combat Unit Rail Gun is the only other pistol that comes with front strap checkering from Colt for 2016. So, aside from buying a base gun for a custom project or something meant to be nostalgic, the WC series is a no-brainer.

[Jay585]

That's because only two types of people survive on 1911 forum, those that suffer from dementia and those that suffer from Dunning-Kruger. People dismiss the likes of Roscoe, Chuck, and Ned on a regular basis. I love 1911's as much as the next guy, but that place is a hot mess and makes glocktalk look like Lightfighter.

Have you found a better 1911-centric forum? I've been looking for one...

[StraitR]

Have you found a better 1911-centric forum? I've been looking for one...

https://www.1911addicts.com

It's only a few years old, but it stays pretty busy and is frequented by industry professionals. Far less shenanigans.

ETA: Don't get me wrong, I still drop by 1911forum regularly and browse through the gunsmithing and classified sections, as well as various picture threads. But, just like Trooper, I rarely participate. I joined in 2005 and have about 170 posts, the vast majority being in the first few years.

[Jay585]

Great, thanks!

[JSGlock34]

Thanks for the article - excellent stuff. Colt seems to be making more compelling offerings lately - I thought the limited 'Level 1/Level 2' Series 70 guns (O1970A1CSZ) from the Custom Shop were attractive (particularly at the price point). How do the higher end Colts compare? Does anyone have any experience with the Special Combat Government?

[Dagga Boy]

Nyeti,

Maybe you posted this elsewhere, but could you elaborate on why you think the 1911 is the best close quarter pistol ever made?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 1911...particularly a well set up gun has a couple of unique properties that in combination work very well in close quarters fights. First, grip configuration. They fit a majority of folks hands very well and help establish a solid grip on the gun right out of the gate. Because they become a virtual extension of the hand it tends to help get your sights aligned whether you can see them or not. It is one of the reasons I love some of the distinct patterns of grip treatments and why I spend good money on them. My original THUG gun has an amazing feel to the gun. I had two guys who are both serious world wide plague level killers who both are 1911 guys and usually of the variety that were fairly stock guns. Both said the gun was the best feeling 1911 they ever touched and were hugely impressed at how easy it was to get their grip established.

Second: the trigger. It is easy to press to the rear correctly. When I carry a 1911 it takes a while for me to shoot them well when I try because I am not used to a good trigger and tend to commit shooter errors. That immediately changes when shooting at speed and without the mental inputs to screw it up. The combination of grip and trigger tend to correct for a ton of things and in my case without conscious errors, I shoot them sub consciously with some serious performance gains. All of my personal sub .5 second draw to solid hit shots have come with a 1911. To be able to draw and get a solid high center chest hit in inder .5 seconds can be a major game changer in a few yard fight....where a lot of them occur. For trigger touchers, that trigger can be a detriment, but over the years I have found that highly dedicated solid 1911 shooters tend to have some of the best trigger finger discipline.....often learned via shooting something at home they didn't intend to and emphasizes to stay off it. Funniest at my old place was a guy who killed his waterbed with a 1911. He was much better on trigger discipline for it.

Then you have caliber. Say what you want, any .45 hollow point tends to simple work really well as a general thing especially in the distances involved. On the military side, "they all fall to hardball" is utter b.s., but it is night and day better than 9mm FMJ.

So, a unique combo to get solid hits out of the gate with a good caliber tends to make it very efficient. Also, the folks in the modern era carrying them tend to be more "gun people" and a bit better as a base of shooters.

[flyrodr]

A lot . . . a LOT . . . of wisdom in nyeti's post.

[Dagga Boy]

A lot . . . a LOT . . . of wisdom in nyeti's post.

Apparently, that is an opinion not shared by the 1911 experts on the Internet, but I am glad you think so. Took a lot of time, ammo money and spending time with real experts to figure all that out

[newt]

Nyeti, Good article and posts. it was your article some years ago and some comments I think you made on LF that got me into a MARS pistol I've only got one, and it was a loooong wait, but it's a hell of a great pistol. I also really like the golfballs as well.

Newt

[Trooper224]

but over the years I have found that highly dedicated solid 1911 shooters tend to have some of the best trigger finger discipline.....often learned via shooting something at home they didn't intend to and emphasizes to stay off it.

Yep, seen it. ;)

[Tango]

The 1911...particularly a well set up gun has a couple of unique properties that in combination work very well in close quarters fights. First, grip configuration. They fit a majority of folks hands very well and help establish a solid grip on the gun right out of the gate. Because they become a virtual extension of the hand it tends to help get your sights aligned whether you can see them or not. It is one of the reasons I love some of the distinct patterns of grip treatments and why I spend good money on them. My original THUG gun has an amazing feel to the gun. I had two guys who are both serious world wide plague level killers who both are 1911 guys and usually of the variety that were fairly stock guns. Both said the gun was the best feeling 1911 they ever touched and were hugely impressed at how easy it was to get their grip established.

Second: the trigger. It is easy to press to the rear correctly. When I carry a 1911 it takes a while for me to shoot them well when I try because I am not used to a good trigger and tend to commit shooter errors. That immediately changes when shooting at speed and without the mental inputs to screw it up. The combination of grip and trigger tend to correct for a ton of things and in my case without conscious errors, I shoot them sub consciously with some serious performance gains. All of my personal sub .5 second draw to solid hit shots have come with a 1911. To be able to draw and get a solid high center chest hit in inder .5 seconds can be a major game changer in a few yard fight....where a lot of them occur. For trigger touchers, that trigger can be a detriment, but over the years I have found that highly dedicated solid 1911 shooters tend to have some of the best trigger finger discipline.....often learned via shooting something at home they didn't intend to and emphasizes to stay off it. Funniest at my old place was a guy who killed his waterbed with a 1911. He was much better on trigger discipline for it.

Then you have caliber. Say what you want, any .45 hollow point tends to simple work really well as a general thing especially in the distances involved. On the military side, "they all fall to hardball" is utter b.s., but it is night and day better than 9mm FMJ.

So, a unique combo to get solid hits out of the gate with a good caliber tends to make it very efficient. Also, the folks in the modern era carrying them tend to be more "gun people" and a bit better as a base of shooters.

This is some outstanding writing. Proven design, that discharges a proven round, that continues to be used 100+ years since was designed. In Law Enforcment, they call that a clue.

[Nephrology]

The 1911...particularly a well set up gun has a couple of unique properties that in combination work very well in close quarters fights. First, grip configuration. They fit a majority of folks hands very well and help establish a solid grip on the gun right out of the gate. Because they become a virtual extension of the hand it tends to help get your sights aligned whether you can see them or not. It is one of the reasons I love some of the distinct patterns of grip treatments and why I spend good money on them. My original THUG gun has an amazing feel to the gun. I had two guys who are both serious world wide plague level killers who both are 1911 guys and usually of the variety that were fairly stock guns. Both said the gun was the best feeling 1911 they ever touched and were hugely impressed at how easy it was to get their grip established.

Second: the trigger. It is easy to press to the rear correctly. When I carry a 1911 it takes a while for me to shoot them well when I try because I am not used to a good trigger and tend to commit shooter errors. That immediately changes when shooting at speed and without the mental inputs to screw it up. The combination of grip and trigger tend to correct for a ton of things and in my case without conscious errors, I shoot them sub consciously with some serious performance gains. All of my personal sub .5 second draw to solid hit shots have come with a 1911. To be able to draw and get a solid high center chest hit in inder .5 seconds can be a major game changer in a few yard fight....where a lot of them occur. For trigger touchers, that trigger can be a detriment, but over the years I have found that highly dedicated solid 1911 shooters tend to have some of the best trigger finger discipline.....often learned via shooting something at home they didn't intend to and emphasizes to stay off it. Funniest at my old place was a guy who killed his waterbed with a 1911. He was much better on trigger discipline for it.

Then you have caliber. Say what you want, any .45 hollow point tends to simple work really well as a general thing especially in the distances involved. On the military side, "they all fall to hardball" is utter b.s., but it is night and day better than 9mm FMJ.

So, a unique combo to get solid hits out of the gate with a good caliber tends to make it very efficient. Also, the folks in the modern era carrying them tend to be more "gun people" and a bit better as a base of shooters.

What has your experience been with 9mm 1911s, if any? In terms of what works/what does not, is it a good idea to begin with, etc etc

[flyrodr]

What has your experience been with 9mm 1911s, if any? In terms of what works/what does not, is it a good idea to begin with, etc etc

Sample size of one, so take it accordingly. Bought a 5", all-steel Wilson CQB 9mm about two years ago, for use as a range gun. Pretty much used Tripp 10-rd. mags exclusively, as they had worked well in a similar .45 1911. Have run several thousand rounds of ball, and perhaps three boxes of various JHP rounds, through it. The only "failures" were operator-induced failures of the slide to lock back, when I had the left thumb resting on the slide lock. I think the Wilson advice to keep it well-lubed with only light oil, and to use the lighter of the two recoil springs enclosed with the gun during the initial break-in, is sound advice. The recoil impulse of the 9 is obviously considerably less than that of the .45, in a format designed around the latter. Oh, and I expect the ramped barrel helps too. Extremely soft-shooting, reliable pistol.

[Dagga Boy]

What has your experience been with 9mm 1911s, if any? In terms of what works/what does not, is it a good idea to begin with, etc etc

You mean the Browning High Power? I have a couple nice ones. If you mean a sub caliber trainer for an actual 1911...I have no use for them and not my thing. Way too many solid 9mm find out there. Essentially, never saw the juice being worth the squeeze. Simply cannot see anything in my world a 9mm 1911 would do that I wouldn't be better served with a P7M8.

[Nephrology]

You mean the Browning High Power? I have a couple nice ones. If you mean a sub caliber trainer for an actual 1911...I have no use for them and not my thing. Way too many solid 9mm find out there. Essentially, never saw the juice being worth the squeeze. Simply cannot see anything in my world a 9mm 1911 would do that I wouldn't be better served with a P7M8.

A fair point. Thanks for the input.

[SAWBONES]

Simply cannot see anything in my world a 9mm 1911 would do that I wouldn't be better served with a P7M8.

Now, ain't that the truth?

The P7M8 was my very first sidearm purchase, circa 1985.
Never exceeded in precision by any other readily carried and concealed handgun, IME.

1911s should be chambered in 45 Auto. :cool: (ducks and covers)

[dsa]

The 1911...particularly a well set up gun has a couple of unique properties that in combination work very well in close quarters fights. First, grip configuration. They fit a majority of folks hands very well and help establish a solid grip on the gun right out of the gate. Because they become a virtual extension of the hand it tends to help get your sights aligned whether you can see them or not. It is one of the reasons I love some of the distinct patterns of grip treatments and why I spend good money on them. My original THUG gun has an amazing feel to the gun. I had two guys who are both serious world wide plague level killers who both are 1911 guys and usually of the variety that were fairly stock guns. Both said the gun was the best feeling 1911 they ever touched and were hugely impressed at how easy it was to get their grip established.

Second: the trigger. It is easy to press to the rear correctly. When I carry a 1911 it takes a while for me to shoot them well when I try because I am not used to a good trigger and tend to commit shooter errors. That immediately changes when shooting at speed and without the mental inputs to screw it up. The combination of grip and trigger tend to correct for a ton of things and in my case without conscious errors, I shoot them sub consciously with some serious performance gains. All of my personal sub .5 second draw to solid hit shots have come with a 1911. To be able to draw and get a solid high center chest hit in inder .5 seconds can be a major game changer in a few yard fight....where a lot of them occur. For trigger touchers, that trigger can be a detriment, but over the years I have found that highly dedicated solid 1911 shooters tend to have some of the best trigger finger discipline.....often learned via shooting something at home they didn't intend to and emphasizes to stay off it. Funniest at my old place was a guy who killed his waterbed with a 1911. He was much better on trigger discipline for it.

Then you have caliber. Say what you want, any .45 hollow point tends to simple work really well as a general thing especially in the distances involved. On the military side, "they all fall to hardball" is utter b.s., but it is night and day better than 9mm FMJ.

So, a unique combo to get solid hits out of the gate with a good caliber tends to make it very efficient. Also, the folks in the modern era carrying them tend to be more "gun people" and a bit better as a base of shooters.

I couldn't agree with this more. I have a recent THUG build from Steve and the subtle things done to enhance the grip are indescribable.

[Jeep]

In your above post, where did you get the info that the guns weren't fired much and what time frame are you talking about? During WWI, WWII or after?

I can speak for the 1970's and early 1980's first hand, and have been told by people who were there in different decades that the same was true (for the Army at least) from WWII on. The MP's supposedly at least qualified on their .45 on a somewhat routine basis (though that depended on the unit), but to the Army as a whole it was only a pistol and every other weapon was more important. So it sat in the arms room, or was carried unloaded in a holster in the field by someone who was lucky enough not to be assigned something heavier. Most of our .45's weren't ever fired; whereas pretty much all of our machine guns and M-16's were fired at least once a year.

The basic idea back then seemed to be that since you would only use a pistol at extremely short range when everything else failed you didn't need to practice much with it. Which is why they were kept in arms rooms with slowly rusting mainsprings and trigger pulls of well over 10 pounds.

[Jim Watson]

You mean the Browning High Power? I have a couple nice ones. If you mean a sub caliber trainer for an actual 1911...I have no use for them and not my thing. Way too many solid 9mm find out there. Essentially, never saw the juice being worth the squeeze. Simply cannot see anything in my world a 9mm 1911 would do that I wouldn't be better served with a P7M8.


I shoot 9mm 1911oids because
1. I don't have the recoil tolerance I used to and
2. I have shot mostly 1911 for a long time and do better with it than other types.
3. Current 9mm ammo is not enough less powerful than .38 Super to matter. It does take more attention to magazine and gun than the .38 which is the proper length.
4. The Browning looks and feels good, too bad I cannot shoot it as well as the 1911. If I just had to pick a non-1911, it would be a CZ or even a Plastic M&P.


I had a P7. Great gun, if I shot nothing else. Trying to alternate with conventional action types, the squeeze cocker was hard to run right.

[Dagga Boy]

I couldn't agree with this more. I have a recent THUG build from Steve and the subtle things done to enhance the grip are indescribable.

Keep in mind, mine was one of the first and all done by hand. Both of those guys and I all had a similar reaction when gripping the gun for the first time. It was sort of magical in that you can't really see or notice what Steve does to the grip, you can certainly feel it.

[Redhat]

I can speak for the 1970's and early 1980's first hand, and have been told by people who were there in different decades that the same was true (for the Army at least) from WWII on. The MP's supposedly at least qualified on their .45 on a somewhat routine basis (though that depended on the unit), but to the Army as a whole it was only a pistol and every other weapon was more important. So it sat in the arms room, or was carried unloaded in a holster in the field by someone who was lucky enough not to be assigned something heavier. Most of our .45's weren't ever fired; whereas pretty much all of our machine guns and M-16's were fired at least once a year.

The basic idea back then seemed to be that since you would only use a pistol at extremely short range when everything else failed you didn't need to practice much with it. Which is why they were kept in arms rooms with slowly rusting mainsprings and trigger pulls of well over 10 pounds.

If all this is true, I can't see how failure to maintain a 30-40 (or more) year old pistol could be the fault of the gun itself...and makes it easy to understand how some would conclude the guns were unreliable, inaccurate, rattle-traps. Sorta the same rap I've heard for years about the M9.

FWIW, shooting the primary weapons once a year is hardly noteworthy. The '70's / 80's were bad times for training indeed.

[Dagga Boy]

I shoot 9mm 1911oids because
1. I don't have the recoil tolerance I used to and
2. I have shot mostly 1911 for a long time and do better with it than other types.
3. Current 9mm ammo is not enough less powerful than .38 Super to matter. It does take more attention to magazine and gun than the .38 which is the proper length.
4. The Browning looks and feels good, too bad I cannot shoot it as well as the 1911. If I just had to pick a non-1911, it would be a CZ or even a Plastic M&P.


I had a P7. Great gun, if I shot nothing else. Trying to alternate with conventional action types, the squeeze cocker was hard to run right.

I swear, compared to your comments on 1911forum and here......are you the same Jim Watson, or am I missing something.

[Jim Watson]

Same guy. Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

I do have the bad habit of posting everywhere under the same name. Mine.
Everywhere but one, I do have an alias on gunbroker. And SASS, but that is required by the rules.

[Dagga Boy]

Same guy. Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

I do have the bad habit of posting everywhere under the same name. Mine.
Everywhere but one, I do have an alias on gunbroker. And SASS, but that is required by the rules.

So.....on 1911forum, I am basically a suck ass to gunsmith's and a untouched US GI issued 1911 is all that is needed for a daily actually carried under all conditions, and shot weekly is good to go in the role as a primary weapon, and here it seems like you are agreeing with most of the discussion. Just want to confirm that if you were say a police officer carrying a duty 1911 today it would be a 1969 GI issued gun exactly as issued. Interesting.

[GJM]

Question for Tom Jones, can we complain about 1911forum during the PFestivus?

My favorite line from the thread over there:

That Darryl guy, does have a little ring of truth in what he says, though.

[Jim Watson]

Well what I SAID was:


So many cosmetics, fads, and fashions for his "service."
I just wonder how all those PFc cavalrymen managed.

and then


No, MY idea of a serviceable 1911 is straight out of 1969.
HIS idea of a serviceable 1911 seems to be a Gunsmith's Full Employment Program.

I read him on Pistol Forum and he is vastly experienced. But this piece is way out of character for him.

"Suck ass to gunsmiths?" No, just a real good customer with connections to some of the major names in the business People I read about but find to have multi-year waiting lists or just "Currently not taking new work till we have a better handle on turnaround times." I am too impatient and too old to play the waiting game. I'll use what I have or see if a local shop can scratch my itch. If any. My crude looking "Buzzard" - local guy's copy of a STI Hawk - shot reliably and accurately at the IDPA Masters yesterday. Unfortunately it shot right where I aimed it, even when my aim fell off the target, leading to a true mediocre performance, 48th percentile.


I shoot weekly and you shoot weekly and I figure a lot of gunboard posters are likely to shoot more than the average gun owner, policeman, or soldier.
But there are a whole lot of people out there who would not ever wear out a stock gun.

I graduated Georgia Tech in 1969 and my idea of a suitable 1911 was well beyond GI. My income wasn't, so I went a good while with an AA rework. It wouldn't feed Norma or Super Vel hollowpoints, so I went a good ways with a HP in the chamber and hardball in the magazine. I didn't shoot it weekly, that didn't happen until I could afford a Gold Cup, then a Commander. Oh, wait, the Commander was gunsmithed. A mild ramp cut to feed the Lyman SWCs I cheerfully paid a nickel for and a GI wide spur hammer so I could carry it Condition 2, then launch with a moderate pull on a military match aluminum trigger. Later fitted with King Hardball sights. No golfball.

[Corey]

I enjoyed the article, Nyeti. And that's coming from someone who has wrenched on more than a few hard use and high round count 1911's.

[Dagga Boy]

Well what I SAID was:



and then



"Suck ass to gunsmiths?" No, just a real good customer with connections to some of the major names in the business People I read about but find to have multi-year waiting lists or just "Currently not taking new work till we have a better handle on turnaround times." I am too impatient and too old to play the waiting game. I'll use what I have or see if a local shop can scratch my itch. If any. My crude looking "Buzzard" - local guy's copy of a STI Hawk - shot reliably and accurately at the IDPA Masters yesterday. Unfortunately it shot right where I aimed it, even when my aim fell off the target, leading to a true mediocre performance, 48th percentile.


I shoot weekly and you shoot weekly and I figure a lot of gunboard posters are likely to shoot more than the average gun owner, policeman, or soldier.
But there are a whole lot of people out there who would not ever wear out a stock gun.

I graduated Georgia Tech in 1969 and my idea of a suitable 1911 was well beyond GI. My income wasn't, so I went a good while with an AA rework. It wouldn't feed Norma or Super Vel hollowpoints, so I went a good ways with a HP in the chamber and hardball in the magazine. I didn't shoot it weekly, that didn't happen until I could afford a Gold Cup, then a Commander. Oh, wait, the Commander was gunsmithed. A mild ramp cut to feed the Lyman SWCs I cheerfully paid a nickel for and a GI wide spur hammer so I could carry it Condition 2, then launch with a moderate pull on a military match aluminum trigger. Later fitted with King Hardball sights. No golfball.

Back to the original question, and point of the article....which was clearly defined in paragraph one. Everyday for real carry on your body, shooting weekly, staking your life and the publics life on the gun, running high performance ammunition.....basically a 2016 LE duty gun....what should be the bare minimum to accomplish that, then mashing in to needs, and wants. In that order. I think setting the minimum bar at something like an Armorer inspected and function checked (not a gunsmith....properly trained Armorer) Wiley Clapp Colt 1911 (and I stated several other offerings from a company like Springfield Armory would be a good buy). So why is that wrong, especially since you obviously understand that parts need to be fitted and quality sights are important as well as being reliable with magazines and the rounds you are using. At some point folks "want" things like a grip tailored to better control in adverse conditions, and things like that was addressed. By the way, my retro guns are usually fitted with sights similar to the Kings.....just hard to enjoy them after a few hundred rounds with stock grip safety's.....as in the 1969 variety.

[Jim Watson]

I confess to making too fast a pass from "need" to "want" in the article. There is just so much more STUFF we can go on and on about that it tends to overshadow the need.

Where do you find an armorer? Which I understand to be somebody trained for maintenance of one or a few specific stock products. I don't know of any besides agency employees.
Gunsmiths are scarce too, as witness long backlogs and refusal of new work.
If as many guns as recommended on the internet were taken to be checked out, there would have to be a gunsmith - or armorer for current models - in every shopping center, common as liquor stores.

[Tango]

I can only speak from personal experience but ANY weapon that is entering service at my Agency receives a check from an approved armorer. I put a personally owned, brand new, 4th Gen G17 into the system last year. Glock certified armorer looked it over before it could be accepted for duty carry. Should be no different for a Colt/Springfield 1911. Unfortunately, time and $$$ might stop that from happening at smaller facilities.

If the 1911was put on my Agency's approved list, I would go that way. Colt's Rail Gun or CCU is looking really good these days. Word on the street is the 9MM CCU is a no recoil tack driver.

[Jim Watson]

I'll ask my Wilson packing SWATter what he had to do besides shoot a higher score on qual.

[Dagga Boy]

I confess to making too fast a pass from "need" to "want" in the article. There is just so much more STUFF we can go on and on about that it tends to overshadow the need.

Where do you find an armorer? Which I understand to be somebody trained for maintenance of one or a few specific stock products. I don't know of any besides agency employees.
Gunsmiths are scarce too, as witness long backlogs and refusal of new work.
If as many guns as recommended on the internet were taken to be checked out, there would have to be a gunsmith - or armorer for current models - in every shopping center, common as liquor stores.

I am a bit blessed right now having one of the guys who teaches Colt's Armorer classes as a business partner, so he was handy for the Wiley Clapp. With that said, when I lived in California I would simply ask around or use contacts to locate factory trained armorers, or local Smith's who were at least familiar with how to do proper checks of all portions of the cycle of operations. Colt has a robust training program for Armorers, there are a ton of former military armorers who have transitioned to LE or are working in shops that service LE guns. Tons of local Smith's are very good. You just have to invest a little effort and attempt to gain a bit of knowledge....thus why I write these articles to provide that.
TJ at TJ's Custom Gunworks was my local guy. I found him because I bought a series 70 Gold Cup in early 1990 and it was a series of problems shooting at the round count I was shooting and compared to my SIGs was an unreliable piece of crap. TJ diagnosed the issues and fixed them. He worked on almost all of my duty guns and built several guns for me from simple builds to open class race guns. Steve Morrison at MARS Armament was a total unknown when I found him. JT Timmons, again, not a household name but simply recommend by several cops in South Carolina I know. Larry Vickers...luckily got in on that before anyone outside the military had a clue. It's called research and genuine seeking of knowledge. People who mentored me taught me what to look and ask for. I am trying to pass that on. Stuff like Golf balls......cosmetic, maybe, but when you shoot 3-5 days straight with a lot of the styles of traditional checkering your hands pay. I found something I liked much better and it caught on. Those gunner grips originated through Rob Simonich and were used on the original USMC Det Pistols and became popular in the Recon community....who at the time were shooting a fricking ton of rounds through 1911's and were using them under harsh conditions. We can "learn" something from their experience or say "F it", Sgt York didn't need no fancy pants fad grips. They are called "choices", I laid out several and context for them and was bashed as an inexperienced dumb ass, of which you piled on with how "out of character" this was for me.....which I took as agreeing that I was clueless. After retirement, I lived the high threat protection world essentially full time. I could finally after a couple decades of police work carry what I wanted and that two tone MARS gun that was my retirement gift/ or my MARS THUG was on my person every waking minute of everyday...often 16-18 hour work days. They were shot weekly and in several multi day classes. I learned a lot, and I tried to pass that on. Some folks appreciated it, and the ones who should have really got it couldn't bother to read, only throw stones to gain awesome points on a forum.

[Jim Watson]

Research, got it. I will ask who the local PD uses Wednesday. And some storekeepers. I would ask FLG but he would get off into improvements greater than inspect and tune.

Traction: I like regular checkering with the diamonds flattened. But I have done much more shooting with ugly old Pachmayr rubber wraparounds.

[HCM]

So Nyeti inspired me to pull the Wiley Clapp Government model out of the safe for my 9/11 range trip. Long story short the slide stop pin broke after sbout 25 rounds.

Question now is do I call Colt or just get a Wilson Bulletproof ?

10424

10425

[GJM]

Probably unrelated to this part failure, but the thread is closed over on that other forum.

[DocGKR]

Hmmm....wonder what they think about what I wrote here: http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3563

[StraitR]

So Nyeti inspired me to pull the Wiley Clapp Government model out of the safe for my 9/11 range trip. Long story short the slide stop pin broke after sbout 25 rounds.

Question now is do I call Colt or just get a Wilson Bulletproof ?

I thought I saw somewhere (A documentary on Panteo maybe?) that Colt was using milled bar stock on their slide stops. Doesn't look that way, but could be the picture. Maybe a heat treating issue? Either way, I'd get a WC Bulletproof slide release and be done with it if you're comfortable with "dropping it in". :D

[Dagga Boy]

So Nyeti inspired me to pull the Wiley Clapp Government model out of the safe for my 9/11 range trip. Long story short the slide stop pin broke after sbout 25 rounds.

Question now is do I call Colt or just get a Wilson Bulletproof ?

100% absolutely call Colt. A. That should not happen....obviously. B. They need to know if there is an issue on a run of parts and C. It documents the issue. I ALWAYS let a company try to fix things first on brand spanking new guns with issues. Some have sucked, and because of it opened the door for my agency to approve two new brands of pistols and stop buying theirs exclusively in a record of one day. Another has gone from outstanding to mediocre to "limp wresting its your fault" until their LE rep saw the gun and how bad it was and had it replaced. Another was good, but it took awhile.....which tells me they have lots of things coming back, and another outstanding with a no questions asked "we'll fix it". It is good to find out how their customer service is. I would also forward a PM to Wayne Dobbs on here if he doesn't see this thread to pass on at Colt.



Probably unrelated to this part failure, but the thread is closed over on that other forum.

Mods who know me closed it. They did a good job of contacting me and were embarrassed by the personal attacks and response from their current membership at the forum. I feel bad for them as they have good folks as mods, but the membership has chased many of the top level end users and Smith's from the forum.


Hmmm....wonder what they think about what I wrote here: http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3563

In the past, anything from Modern Service Weapons has been met with worse than what I got. Basically........anyone with anything remotely negative to say about 1911's is a heretic. That is not everyone as a whole and do not want to paint with too broad a brush, but it is no longer just "that one guy" everyone knows is an idiot, it is a majority of the posts.

Again, my favorites (other than the stuff where the posters belittle those who are literally full time, long employed folks who use the stuff daily and responsible for maintaining large numbers of other daily use guns being internet pontificators and not anything special) are the "my $500 xxxxbrand will hold a magazine in the Q of an FBI target if I take my time". Yep, that is a gun I want to stake my life on....or.....maybe some of us prefer things like this (Morrison build on a Nighthawk Frame) so we have some room for error when we don't have much time. This was the first outing, this gun is really my beater and has been to several schools including the 10-8 1911 class where it also passed all of the function tests and inspections.

[GJM]

I don't know how they roll over there, but it seems to me, that no matter how well intended, absent some pretty extraordinary circumstances, that closing/deleting/modifying threads seems to create more problems than it solves.

[Trooper224]

I thought I saw somewhere (A documentary on Panteo maybe?) that Colt was using milled bar stock on their slide stops. Doesn't look that way, but could be the picture. Maybe a heat treating issue? Either way, I'd get a WC Bulletproof slide release and be done with it if you're comfortable with "dropping it in". :D

That looks like a heat treating issue to me. Stuff happens, sucks when it happens to you.

[Trooper224]

I've spent a lifetime with the 1911, including thirty years of professional use in the military and law enforcement. I'm not a professional gunsmith, but I've had friends who were and I've benefited from picking their brains. My knowledge of 1911 mechanics is a step or two above armorer level, which means I can fix anything this side of the major structural failure of something like a barrel or slide. I mention this to illustrate that I'm intimately familiar with the design. I find Nyeti's article to be pretty spot on and I think it's a shame it and he have been treated with such disdain by those who should know better. Recognizing a machines quirks and faults only teaches you to deal with them, thereby making both you and your machine better.

It's a shame that people get their ego so wrapped up in their stuff. That mindset is really poison. I don't post much on the 1911 forum. My tolerance is admittedly in short supply and the inmates running that asylum really stretch it to the limit. The anti-LEO sentiment that pervades the sight also turns me off. Comments like, "JMB didn't design it that way!" make my head spin. If JMB were here he'd be shocked we were still using the thing and would probably be designing pistols with polymer frames and strikers. To be fair, I see the same attitudes expressed on forums devoted to Glocks, AR15's, etc. The 1911 forum doesn't corner the market on ego driven BS. A while back I outlined my preference for the 1911 on this forum and was pretty much told I was an idiot, so stones, glass houses and all that. I've used the 1911 long enough and hard enough to know that things like GI grip and thumb safeties really suck ass and I question the experience of anyone who says they prefer those features. I know my handgun of choice isn't perfect. I've also used it long enough to know at what round count a given part will fail. Acknowledging these things only increases my knowledge base and helps me prevent failure. Admitting it isn't perfect doesn't threaten my manhood, it only makes myself and the machine more effective.

[Robinson]

What has your experience been with 9mm 1911s, if any? In terms of what works/what does not, is it a good idea to begin with, etc etc

I realize you were asking Nyeti, but I thought I'd add my two cents. .45ACP has become hard on my damaged ears and shooting subsonic 9mm is much easier on them at an indoor range. When several manufacturers somewhat recently started offering new designs for 9mm 1911 magazines I decided to try one out. I had owned a Springfield Armory Loaded 9mm model a few years back that passed the 2K challenge with flying colors so I knew 9mm 1911s could run, but I don't consider it a given.

So last year I bought a Colt Competition Pistol in 9mm and started the process of determining the best combination of ammunition and magazines for the gun. The 9-round mags that shipped with the gun worked 100% for ball ammo but I had one or two failures to feed in the first couple hundred rounds of hollow points I tried. I bought a few of the most recent Wilson Combat ETMs to try -- and they work great in the gun. So far no failures with ball or the 147gr HST rounds I use for carry.

I then bought a Colt Commander 9mm as I thought it would make for a nifty package. That gun would run with ball ammo all day long but was not reliable with hollow points. I traded it on another CCP which has also worked fine with the Wilson mags.

I'd say the main thing if you want to try out a 9mm 1911 is be ready to spend some time and money figuring out what ammo and magazine combinations work well in the gun. A lot of folks are having good luck with the latest Wilson ETMs and that is what I have found works best in my guns. The recent production 9mm Colt Rail Guns look to be pretty solid, I may pick one up to use as a HD pistol at some point. But if so the above mentioned vetting phase will be part of the process.

I guess one more observation is that the 147gr Federal American Eagle FMJ rounds are a good choice for practice ammo for those who use 147gr HST ammo for carry.

[Trooper224]

Earlier this year I purchased a 1911 in 9mm, mainly for use as a training gun and for when my arthritis flares up and I still want to shoot. I haven't had that much use from it as of yet since my wife has taken to it, but it's been largely trouble free for over 3k rounds. In spite of that, I'm still leery of using one for anything other than a range gun. You've essentially retro engineered the design to fire a round it was never designed for and that's never a good thing. I've also realized that the tolerances in which a 9mm 1911 will function are far more narrow than one in God's caliber. Things like extractor tension, magazine design, recoil spring weight, etc. all have a much more narrow range of tolerances in which they'll function. By comparison, a .45 has a far greater range. The requirement of a near perfect storm for reliable function makes me hesitate.

[Jim Watson]

I am shooting a lot of 1911oid 9mm for the lighter recoil.

I have not seen a lot of recoil spring effect, everything from Colt's 14 lb to SA's 9-10 lb is ok.
I have not seen a lot of extractor "tune" effect, but one that won't hold tension is probably worse than on a .45.

I have seen a magazine effect. Nine 9s seems the safest bet. The original rear spacer 9 shot and the Springfield/Metalform Front Ramp 9 shot have been reliable. The Metalform 38-297/797 .38 Super 9 shot with their rounded, fully guided follower feeds 9mm quite well, at least in five guns tried. A friend's Kimber would run with nothing else available at the time. It would be interesting to try it with newer designs but it has retreated to the owner's back shelf in favor of CZ and other.
If you want ten tries, you may have to do some mixing and matching. Wilson, Tripp, and CMC are the first to choose from. I am leaning CMC but not discarding Tripp and Wilson or even Metalform.

I have seen a barrel effect. I have come out of the Stone Age and concluded that integral ramp barrels are better for 9mm, if, IF, IFyou can get away from the "case head support" mantra of the overloaded racegun set. My SA with the integral ramp's angle eased a bit will feed more different bullet shapes from more different magazines than my Colt with 1929/1949 barrel design. Said Colt is probably going to be on a strict hardball diet.

[Robinson]

The requirement of a near perfect storm for reliable function makes me hesitate.

I guess I can't really blame you. I've considered switching to another type of pistol as I transition over to 9mm because there are many good choices. But I'm pretty confident in the guns I have right now. I liked shooting .45s in my 1911s but the bang is just too much for my ears at this point. The same thing has caused me to pretty much give up shooting revolvers -- at least at the indoor range. Plus the 9mm has turned out to be a cartridge with a lot going for it.

I did handle a brand new Hi-Power at the LGS the other day...

[breakingtime91]

For whatever its worth, quite a few people who seem to be in the know about 1911s are starting to say that 9mm is good to go in them (if you get a properly built gun and good magazines). Obviously its hard to decide whats what when you have someone like Nyeti stating he doesn't care for them. What a confusing world 1911 love is.

[GJM]

I think the 1911 market has changed as far as 9mm pistols.

In times previous, a 1911 was a .45, and if not .45, it was .38 Super. You kind of had a 9mm for practice, but knew not to rely on it for anything more than practice. When ammo prices shot sky high, lots more people started shooting 9mm for economy, and then they wanted to shoot it in a 1911.

Bill Wilson told me they had to focus on building 1911 pistols in 9mm to their reputation, as opposed to the previous "slap a 9mm barrel" in a regular 1911 approach. Now 1911 9mm pistols are a major part of their business. As to reliability, when Bill is not carrying a Beretta, he is carrying one of their 1911 9mm pistols. If you follow threads on PF of folks getting 1911 pistols and shooting them a lot, many of these now are in 9mm.

[JonInWA]

I've spent a lot of time in the woods carrying this pistol as a backup when hunting with my flintlock. The big safety that was on the pistol when new was great at the range, but too big to fit well in my leather holster and too easy to accidentally disengage. The smaller safety fits my thumb well, doesn't disengage by accident, and I find it very easy to engage/disengage when needed - even with gloves. Buckshot did a great job installing it and tuned it until it was just right for my tastes. Like Wondering Beard, it is easier for me to use than the Colt teardrop. The disadvantage to the small safety for me is that I can't really ride the safety when shooting as well as I could with the bigger safety. I like carrying the smaller safety and shooting with the bigger safety.

Personally, I think it is cool that the small safety makes the pistol look a bit more like the 1911s Ithaca made during WW II. I also like how Wilson Combat checkered both the top and bottom of the safety.

Keith

Very succinct answer-thanks. I also prefer a functional, but slightly retro look-unlike some of you, I actually prefer the Colt teardrop that's the OEM one on the Series 70 Repros, as I find it do-able to both activate and ride my thumb on. I have the 1911A1 short shelf safety on my 1945 Remington-Rand; it's easy enough to activate and de-activate, but somewhat uncomfortable to ride.

But I can certainly appreciate, understand, and respect your preference/choice. And thanks for the detailed response.

Best, Jon

[KG]

I'm thankful I have the luxury of considering attributes like aesthetics and retro look when setting up my 1911. I'm also thankful for those who have sacrificed to provide that luxury. I like my retro safety and some other aspects of my Ithaca, but if I really had to set one up for hard core duty it might look like the Wiley Clapp in Nyeti's article. I may take another look at my thumb safety choice after reading comments from Nyeti and Trooper224.

I read Nyeti's article the same way I read a flight manual for an airplane. As GJM can attest to, aviation manuals are filled with warnings that were often written in blood by those test pilots and operators who have gone before us. Ignore or criticize them at your own peril. Darryl's advice is written with that same nasty red ink. People actually criticize the idea of having a new 1911 inspected by the best available pistolsmith before serious use??? I wouldn't risk my life in an unfamiliar airplane without having the best available mechanic inspect it. When I was in the military, we certainly looked over each other's parachutes before jumping. The examples of inspecting critical equipment are endless. Maybe some don't really understand how serious it is when a piece of machinery is all that stands between living and dying.

[GJM]

Whether 1911 pistols, service pistols generally, AR rifles, or even scout rifles, there is a different mindset between a hobbyist playing and someone that is relying on these firearms for potentially life saving purposes. While I get that, and have some playing firearms, the more amazing thing to me is when people who should know better, treat their life saving firearms like a hobbyist would.

[TC215]

I've carried mainly 9mm 1911's on duty for about 5 years now. As mentioned, the big problem with them over the years has been making the shorter 9mm round work. Magazine progress over the years has helped a lot. The newer generation of Wilson Combat 9mm ETM mags are excellent.

I've said this before on this forum, but I think the best 9mm 1911 manufacturers are probably Wilson Combat and Dan Wesson. DW has been building them since before they were popular, and Bill Wilson has put a lot of time and research into designing them and the magazines.

I've had 5 DW 9mm 1911's with probably 10,000 rounds between them, and they've been excellent.

I've heard good things about the new Colts, but have no experience with them.

[Robinson]

I actually prefer the Colt teardrop that's the OEM one on the Series 70 Repros, as I find it do-able to both activate and ride my thumb on.

These are my preferred Colt thumb safeties as well. The extended safeties are fine and all but I certainly don't need them.

[Jeep]

If all this is true, I can't see how failure to maintain a 30-40 (or more) year old pistol could be the fault of the gun itself...and makes it easy to understand how some would conclude the guns were unreliable, inaccurate, rattle-traps. Sorta the same rap I've heard for years about the M9.

FWIW, shooting the primary weapons once a year is hardly noteworthy. The '70's / 80's were bad times for training indeed.

It started turning around soon after Reagan was elected. But post-Vietnam, budgets were very tight and during the Carter administration both ammunition and maintenance budgets were continually reduced. The money, after all, was need for important stuff like education and energy and beating poverty (you can see how far that spending got us in each of those areas).

So, the Army prioritized training. Important systems got more training time and money than less important one. Artillery units, for example, were likely to be able to fire their guns relatively more than their M-16's and pistols. It was, in my opinion, the correct decision but it meant that individual soldiers tended not to be very proficient with their personal weapons, which can be a bad thing when a war comes up.

[StraitR]

I think a combination of small design tweaks that manage slide speed, the addition of ramped barrels, and recent magazine advancements have really negated a lot of problems that once plagued 9mm 1911's.

[Jeep]

Hmmm....wonder what they think about what I wrote here: http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3563

It probably hurt a lot of sensitive feelings and they are muttering about "mall ninja dentists." And frankly I can understand having feelings for the 1911, but the amount of emotion, and the rejection of any contrary information, is staggering.

[flyrodr]

I'm a big, long time fan of the 1911. And as I said earlier, my full-size, all-steel 9mm 1911 is a great shooter. I use it a lot, on the range, and at training courses. It's pretty well vetted, and has been looked over by a reputable smith. With all that, it's not a pistol I'd want to carry all day, every day as a duty gun, simply because of its weight. There are plenty of reliable, accurate enough, greater capacity 9mms in polymer that are easier on the back, easier to fit replacement parts, etc. Or, there are quite a few 1911 variants with aluminum frames, shorter barrels and/or grips, which are easier to carry, if one insists on the 1911.

Back to nyeti's suggested tests for a real world carry gun. Some years ago, I attended a 1911 course run by LAV, which included most of a day of stripping the guns and running some simple checks. I had a 1911 built by a long time semi-custom maker, and it ran fine. But, it failed one of the extractor tests (easily remedied). Would that have caused the gun to "fail" in a real world situation? Not sure, but it was enough of a "clue" (as Larry likes to say) that I'd certainly want any serious, hard-use LEO-type weapon fully vetted, no matter whether it passed some XXXX round test or not. Same for contemporary or 1911 format guns.

[Dagga Boy]

I'm a big, long time fan of the 1911. And as I said earlier, my full-size, all-steel 9mm 1911 is a great shooter. I use it a lot, on the range, and at training courses. It's pretty well vetted, and has been looked over by a reputable smith. With all that, it's not a pistol I'd want to carry all day, every day as a duty gun, simply because of its weight. There are plenty of reliable, accurate enough, greater capacity 9mms in polymer that are easier on the back, easier to fit replacement parts, etc. Or, there are quite a few 1911 variants with aluminum frames, shorter barrels and/or grips, which are easier to carry, if one insists on the 1911.

Back to nyeti's suggested tests for a real world carry gun. Some years ago, I attended a 1911 course run by LAV, which included most of a day of stripping the guns and running some simple checks. I had a 1911 built by a long time semi-custom maker, and it ran fine. But, it failed one of the extractor tests (easily remedied). Would that have caused the gun to "fail" in a real world situation? Not sure, but it was enough of a "clue" (as Larry likes to say) that I'd certainly want any serious, hard-use LEO-type weapon fully vetted, no matter whether it passed some XXXX round test or not. Same for contemporary or 1911 format guns.

You obviously got the gist of the article. For a duty gun, or honest to gosh real daily care protection gun, ensuring some minor things like your extractor tension, magazine reliability, and some basic functions are solid right out of the gate on a quality gun with good sights and workable controls should be a bare minimum as far as I am concerned and am still a bit surprised that that opinion rates a heretic title amongst the 1911 Internet fans.

[El Cid]

Speaking of 1911's, it's time for me to contact some smiths and see about wait lists. I had discussed this project with Dave Berryhill a couple years ago (may he RIP), and I'm glad I did. He advised against getting some of the a la carte options from Caspian because a smith will want to do them in-house. Things like Novak sight cuts, checkering, etc.

I am focused on Caspian's frame because I can get a custom serial number that commemorates my military and LE service. I also like the Race Ready Recon with tactical cuts for the integral magwell.

Does anyone know if Caspian stopped making frames with integral plunger tubes? Their website doesn't list that as a feature any longer. I called but their phone number rang and rang until it stopped. No voicemail option. Is that an indicator of them not doing well? Do I need to look elsewhere, or are the phone gods angry today and I'm reading too much into that?

I've emailed MARS and Combat Precision. Any others I should inquire with who will provide a quality blaster that can be willed to kids, grandkids, etc? I'm more than willing to wait as this isn't a project I want rushed for obvious reasons.

Thanks!

[HCM]

Speaking of 1911's, it's time for me to contact some smiths and see about wait lists. I had discussed this project with Dave Berryhill a couple years ago (may he RIP), and I'm glad I did. He advised against getting some of the a la carte options from Caspian because a smith will want to do them in-house. Things like Novak sight cuts, checkering, etc.

I am focused on Caspian's frame because I can get a custom serial number that commemorates my military and LE service. I also like the Race Ready Recon with tactical cuts for the integral magwell.

Does anyone know if Caspian stopped making frames with integral plunger tubes? Their website doesn't list that as a feature any longer. I called but their phone number rang and rang until it stopped. No voicemail option. Is that an indicator of them not doing well? Do I need to look elsewhere, or are the phone gods angry today and I'm reading too much into that?

I've emailed MARS and Combat Precision. Any others I should inquire with who will provide a quality blaster that can be willed to kids, grandkids, etc? I'm more than willing to wait as this isn't a project I want rushed for obvious reasons.

Thanks!

It may be too late for Alchemy custom but Evolution Armory (Former Colt Custom shop) and Dave Laubert at Defensive Creations are worth a look.

I've seen Evolution's work first hand and Defensive creations comes highly recommended by Steve Fisher.

[Wondering Beard]

I've emailed MARS and Combat Precision. Any others I should inquire with who will provide a quality blaster that can be willed to kids, grandkids, etc? I'm more than willing to wait as this isn't a project I want rushed for obvious reasons.

Thanks!

Heirloom Precision (http://www.heirloomprecision.com/)

[Paul Sharp]

Whether 1911 pistols, service pistols generally, AR rifles, or even scout rifles, there is a different mindset between a hobbyist playing and someone that is relying on these firearms for potentially life saving purposes. While I get that, and have some playing firearms, the more amazing thing to me is when people who should know better, treat their life saving firearms like a hobbyist would.

Where there's a rule, there's a reason, and usually that reason has a name. In some professions that name will also involve an incident summary. Unfortunately.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[1slow]

Whether 1911 pistols, service pistols generally, AR rifles, or even scout rifles, there is a different mindset between a hobbyist playing and someone that is relying on these firearms for potentially life saving purposes. While I get that, and have some playing firearms, the more amazing thing to me is when people who should know better, treat their life saving firearms like a hobbyist would.

YES !!! People like that represent Dunning-Kruger to a disturbing degree.

[StraitR]

Heirloom Precision (http://www.heirloomprecision.com/)

Speaking of which, Jason just started a thread today at 1911 Addicts titled In progress shop photos... (https://www.1911addicts.com/threads/in-progress-shop-photos.30739/#post-415839). Fantastic stuff. Looking forward to seeing anything he's willing to share.

[JohnK]

I am glad someone recommended 1911 addicts. It seems to bridge the gap between the good stuff on here and the clownshoes on 1911forum. I do love me some hard-use 1911s. I've been looking through there a fair amount and may take the plunge on joining.

[Jim Watson]

I think a combination of small design tweaks that manage slide speed, the addition of ramped barrels, and recent magazine advancements have really negated a lot of problems that once plagued 9mm 1911's.

I think we have lost ground on the 9mm front.
You need the right springs, the right magazine, the right oil, the right ammo, and everything needs to be smooth and easy by premium manufacture or aftermarket adjustment so as to "kick that heavy slide back."
The slide did not used to be so heavy. In the first place, the original 9mm P Colt was the original Commander, 3/4" shorter. In the second place, there were discreet machine cuts inside the slide to get rid of some more recoiling mass. In the third place, the barrel was .5" O.D. instead of .580."
Small design tweaks are not always enough, we need a weight loss program without the Swiss cheese effect of a racegun.

I think 9 shot magazines are a functional advantage, too, but have succumbed to the search for the tenth (11th) shot as a competitive advantage.

I have lately concluded that the integral ramp barrel is a help, though.

[Jim Watson]

Does anyone know if Caspian stopped making frames with integral plunger tubes? Their website doesn't list that as a feature any longer.
Thanks!

That sounded strange so I looked around. It showed as a $30.04 option.
I don't know why they weren't answering the phone.

[El Cid]

That sounded strange so I looked around. It showed as a $30.04 option.
I don't know why they weren't answering the phone.

I saw the option for installed, not integral. Do you recall which frame you were looking at? The Foster frames show it, but they don't have the integral magwell or custom serial number. Thanks!

ETA: nevermind. Found it here: http://axiom.ipaperus.com/Caspian/2015/
It's not in the drop down though when ordering. I'll have to keep calling.

[El Cid]

Heirloom Precision (http://www.heirloomprecision.com/)


It may be too late for Alchemy custom but Evolution Armory (Former Colt Custom shop) and Dave Laubert at Defensive Creations are worth a look.

I've seen Evolution's work first hand and Defensive creations comes highly recommended by Steve Fisher.
Thanks gents! I've already heard back from Combat Precision and MARS. I'll see what they say before contacting anyone else.

[45dotACP]

You obviously got the gist of the article. For a duty gun, or honest to gosh real daily care protection gun, ensuring some minor things like your extractor tension, magazine reliability, and some basic functions are solid right out of the gate on a quality gun with good sights and workable controls should be a bare minimum as far as I am concerned and am still a bit surprised that that opinion rates a heretic title amongst the 1911 Internet fans.

Pretty much why I've avoided 1911forum...I spend more time on Luckygunner as they are fast becoming a my go to clearinghouse of solid gunformation. I disagree with nothing in the article you wrote. I've found that my 1911 taste leans towards .45s as well, typically in 5", though I feel that a Commander or smaller is best in 9mm. I need to get one with some solid checkering or at least some sort of frontstrap treatment. I don't carry my 1911 for duty...but I do carry it for personal protection...if it won't pass the 10-8 test, I won't carry it. If it won't feed my preferred ammo (230gr HST) I won't carry it and I avoid most of those "gunshow special" magazines.

I'd echo your suggestion of having an armorer or gunsmith around, but I might also add that it's probably worthwhile to take a 1911 operators/armorers course.

If one is an idiot such as myself, and willing to spend twice as much time sifting through internet bullshit, ruin twice as many parts and spend probably about the same, it's possible to build a knowledge base as an autodidact...if you choose your sources VERY carefully...and those sources are getting harder to find/trust.

I remember recently watching a series of youtube videos that were very high quality and very lengthy showing a thoughtful, cautious thinking man absolutely RUIN a bunch of high quality 1911 parts, including the frame and barrel. He sounded like he knew what he was doing and many people in the comments section praised his attention to detail and how beautifully his gun was coming along, but it was a total paperweight. I think he still keeps the vids up...despite many smiths suggesting he take them offline because so many people look at them and think he's doing it right.


As far as the 1911forum...they need a 1911festivus themselves...but I fear it would only result in some total fucking idiot taking the helm and driving out every last one of the knowledgeable smiths....and compared to some of the other 1911 forums out there, they aren't that bad. Maybe it's not a bad thing...I look at 1911pro from time to time, which is like the result of a few 1911forum members getting fed up and taking their toys elsewhere. I'll need to look at 1911addicts again. Browsed there a few times but never seriously browsed.

[GJM]

As to some of those comments, when a dumbass thinks you are dumb, the two dumbs cancel each other out, and actually turn it into a Like.

[Nephrology]

As to some of those comments, when a dumbass thinks you are dumb, the two dumbs cancel each other out, and actually turn it into a Like.

If the two cancel each other out, doesn't that just make them an ass man?

[Jason Burton]

The 1911...particularly a well set up gun has a couple of unique properties that in combination work very well in close quarters fights. First, grip configuration. They fit a majority of folks hands very well and help establish a solid grip on the gun right out of the gate. Because they become a virtual extension of the hand it tends to help get your sights aligned whether you can see them or not. It is one of the reasons I love some of the distinct patterns of grip treatments and why I spend good money on them. My original THUG gun has an amazing feel to the gun. I had two guys who are both serious world wide plague level killers who both are 1911 guys and usually of the variety that were fairly stock guns. Both said the gun was the best feeling 1911 they ever touched and were hugely impressed at how easy it was to get their grip established.

Second: the trigger. It is easy to press to the rear correctly. When I carry a 1911 it takes a while for me to shoot them well when I try because I am not used to a good trigger and tend to commit shooter errors. That immediately changes when shooting at speed and without the mental inputs to screw it up. The combination of grip and trigger tend to correct for a ton of things and in my case without conscious errors, I shoot them sub consciously with some serious performance gains. All of my personal sub .5 second draw to solid hit shots have come with a 1911. To be able to draw and get a solid high center chest hit in inder .5 seconds can be a major game changer in a few yard fight....where a lot of them occur. For trigger touchers, that trigger can be a detriment, but over the years I have found that highly dedicated solid 1911 shooters tend to have some of the best trigger finger discipline.....often learned via shooting something at home they didn't intend to and emphasizes to stay off it. Funniest at my old place was a guy who killed his waterbed with a 1911. He was much better on trigger discipline for it.

Then you have caliber. Say what you want, any .45 hollow point tends to simple work really well as a general thing especially in the distances involved. On the military side, "they all fall to hardball" is utter b.s., but it is night and day better than 9mm FMJ.

So, a unique combo to get solid hits out of the gate with a good caliber tends to make it very efficient. Also, the folks in the modern era carrying them tend to be more "gun people" and a bit better as a base of shooters.

I agree with all this... especially the part about the grip configuration. The layout of a 1911 grip is almost instinctive... but I could be biased.

[JAD]

I am focused on Caspian's frame because I can get a custom serial number that commemorates my military and LE service. I also like the Race Ready Recon with tactical cuts for the integral magwell.

For an Heirloom pistol I would use Heirloom or MARS, depending on the type of kid. My kid will get a MARS.

Steve and Jason may or may not point out that you could get a current Colt Series 70, which they to my knowledge strongly prefer to work on, and have it engraved.

[Dagga Boy]

I agree with all this... especially the part about the grip configuration. The layout of a 1911 grip is almost instinctive... but I could be biased.

Well now I feel better. Looking at the pictures I saw elsewhere of you working on those grip frames, and you obviously also understand the deep secret that the right folks with the right tools and skill can make that wonderful grip almost magical. I have a feeling that most of the folks who turn their nose up at the grip work I have done on my guns as some unnecessary crap that wasn't needed on their gun when they were in the Army three decades ago, are the same people who have never felt and shot a gun with the work that some high end Smith's are doing.

My next article for Luckygunner is to explain why very dollar custom 1911's cost as much as they do, let me know if you would like to provide some input on that...as you may have an opinion:cool:.

[Jason Burton]

Well now I feel better.

I aim to please... :p :cool: :p



My next article for Luckygunner is to explain why very dollar custom 1911's cost as much as they do, let me know if you would like to provide some input on that...as you may have an opinion:cool:.

I would be happy to do so.... ;)

[JohnK]

Well now I feel better. Looking at the pictures I saw elsewhere of you working on those grip frames, and you obviously also understand the deep secret that the right folks with the right tools and skill can make that wonderful grip almost magical. I have a feeling that most of the folks who turn their nose up at the grip work I have done on my guns as some unnecessary crap that wasn't needed on their gun when they were in the Army three decades ago, are the same people who have never felt and shot a gun with the work that some high end Smith's are doing.

My next article for Luckygunner is to explain why very dollar custom 1911's cost as much as they do, let me know if you would like to provide some input on that...as you may have an opinion:cool:.

Well I am looking forward to this collaboration :D

[StraitR]

My next article for Luckygunner is to explain why very dollar custom 1911's cost as much as they do, let me know if you would like to provide some input on that...as you may have an opinion:cool:.


I would be happy to do so.... ;)

This, excites me.

[Jim Watson]

Great potential... if it doesn't take too much time away from actually working on guns.

[Dagga Boy]

Well I am looking forward to this collaboration :D


This, excites me.

I spent several days in Steve Morrison's shop watching how my last gun was built and photographing some of the process. Now, I have been throwing enough money at gunsmith's over the years that several are now close friends. I had NO IDEA what went into doing some of these processes to do them CORRECTLY.....key word. From obvious trial and error, Steve explained everything that could go wrong, or the shortcuts people take that cause issues. Also got to see the tolerance differences between what factory guns are working with and what these guys are doing. I considered myself pretty up on stuff and found I wasn't, so I thought it would make for a good article for reader interest. It was supposed to be an in depth article for Combat Tactics before that went away. I have been in Jason's shop and he has a unique way of doing things that should provide for some interesting insight.

[JohnK]

I spent several days in Steve Morrison's shop watching how my last gun was built and photographing some of the process. Now, I have been throwing enough money at gunsmith's over the years that several are now close friends. I had NO IDEA what went into doing some of these processes to do them CORRECTLY.....key word. From obvious trial and error, Steve explained everything that could go wrong, or the shortcuts people take that cause issues. Also got to see the tolerance differences between what factory guns are working with and what these guys are doing. I considered myself pretty up on stuff and found I wasn't, so I thought it would make for a good article for reader interest. It was supposed to be an in depth article for Combat Tactics before that went away. I have been in Jason's shop and he has a unique way of doing things that should provide for some interesting insight.

Unless it is a chunk of the article, which I will wait with great anticipation to read, what are the tolerance differences? If you can't answer at this point, I understand. And frankly, I would like to see a Combat Tactics article as well - but I am speaking for myself here.

[Dagga Boy]

Unless it is a chunk of the article, which I will wait with great anticipation to read, what are the tolerance differences? If you can't answer at this point, I understand. And frankly, I would like to see a Combat Tactics article as well - but I am speaking for myself here.

As a "Regular Joe" on this stuff, I don't remember the exact numbers...I do remember that it surprised me to see the differences in things like "straight" and "flat" when measured with precision equipment. I am sure Jason has a take on this as well.

Combat Tactics magazine is dead based on everything I know. The Editor that made it what it was is no longer associated with it, and as a lower level editor I have not had anyone contact me for any content in a long time and have not seen anything on the newsstands since the last issue that was mostly a reprint of the previous one. For print stuff, I have a VP9 long term review of the VP9 coming out in a Guns &Ammo annual and they also picked up me doing a Frank Hamer guns article.

[Jason Burton]

I tell people all the time that the difference between a 95% gun and a 100% is twice as much work and of course that extra time, effort, expense is only truly realized when the pistol is considered as a whole.

Specifically regarding my shop and my work, this is one of the main reasons I only build full-house guns. It's not to say that a talented 'smith can't perform simple or individual modifications very well but rather that the gun is one cohesive unit and when all the parts, pieces, and modifications come together as a well presented package the result is much more than just the sum of the parts or the gathering of a few modifications or tweaks.

However, history has shown us that in order to accomplish this takes much more than just a cursory knowledge of the gun and how to assemble it. The physical skills such as the ability to push a file straight, measure and fixture parts, understand tolerance stacking, and probably most importantly problem solve are required elements. Many of these things can only be cultivated from experience and having seen things done both correctly and incorrectly... and shooting the guns regularly to see what truly works and what is durable is often the most valuable knowledge that can be gained.

[Dagga Boy]

Also, to add to Jason's post.....most of the really great gunsmith's also have a bunch of interesting tools and fixtures they have made, modified, or built that are often wonderous creations all by themselves. When folks are wide eyed at some of the pricing, they often forget the cost of equipment to get things perfect.

[Jason Burton]

Also, to add to Jason's post.....most of the really great gunsmith's also have a bunch of interesting tools and fixtures they have made, modified, or built that are often wonderous creations all by themselves. When folks are wide eyed at some of the pricing, they often forget the cost of equipment to get things perfect.

Very true... these are some of the things I’ve made to fixture or hold parts, make things with, or perform repeatable tasks.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8110/29719809155_653f096e04_c.jpg

[StraitR]

Thanks for a peak behind the Wizards curtain, Jason. Really glad to see you participating here.

And I like your Starlingear Barbarian hiding up top there.