Colt Series 70 Stainless Repro 1911A1 Update

[JonInWA]

Last weekend I campaigned my 2015 vintage Colt Series 70 Stainless Reproduction in our IDPA Washington State Championship match-and while I didn't fare all that well on the scoring ladder, I had an absolute great time.

https://i.imgur.com/s5e21SMh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/EwZiNdZh.jpg?1

The match was a 10 stage+a warm-up and cool-down stage (which counted), and I launched about 225 rounds throughout the day.

Some equipment points and lessons learned:

- The Colt Series 70 Repro was a viable gun for the match, with some minor upgrades: VZ Colt-logo G10 tapered grips, VS front strap rubber grip tape, and a BH Spring Solutions/RDIH extended slide release

https://i.imgur.com/zrJMdzSh.jpg

- Magazines where Check-Mate's 7 round, welded baseplate, hybrid feed lip, skirted and dimpled follower, and with extra power springs. I ran 2 sets; a stainless steel set and a carbon steel set. For my initial loading at each stage, for a "Barney" magazine, I used a Check-Mate 10 round extended tube magazine.

- Holster was a Privateer Leather OWB, and magazine pouches were Tactical Tailor's triple Magna pouch; my Barney magazine and initial magazine were held in a Tactical Tailor double Magna pouch.

The Colt and equipment ran superbly; lubrication was TW25B on metal-on-metal reciprocating components, while general lubrication was with Lucas Extreme Gun Oil. No additional lubrication was applied throughout the day; I like how TW25B generally does not burn off, evaporate or migrate.

- Ammunition was High Desert Cartridge Company's 230 gr remanufactured ball, which I've found to be exceptionally consistent and accurate. Each individual round was checked using a cartridge checking block prior to the match, and there were no rounds rejected out to the 250 round lot used.

I had a choice of using 7 round or 8 round magazines, and I chose to use the 7 rounders for several reasons; First, I felt that a traditional gun called for more traditional magazines (at least capacity-wise); in IDPA, if choosing to use 7 round magazines in the CDP division, you're allowed the initially loaded magazine (plus an additional round in the chamber) plus 3 reload magazines, for a total of 29 available cartridges per stage. If using 8 round magazines, you're allowed the initial magazine but only 2 reload magazines, for a total of 25 available cartridges per stage.

So while using the 7 rounder allows for mor on-board ammunition, it also required more diligent cartridge/magazine management in terms of reloads and tactical reloads. Since in IDPA the stage basic maximum minimum is 18 rounds, in reality during the match it was relatively rarely that I actually needed to go to the third reload magazine; the initial plus two reloads were normally sufficient.

Another factor in my decision was that the 7 rounders in a welded baseplate format provided a bit less cartridge compression (as compared to 8 round welded baseplate magazine), making for easier reloading when the slide was in battery during a reload, and potentially greater overall reliability. If I was going to go the 8 round 1911 magazine route, I would definitely recommend going with an extended tube for greater volume and ease of reloads.

Hiccups encountered-about 3, all minor. Twice when reloading from slidelock, the top round was hesitant in going fully into battery, but nudging the slide completed the reload cycle. Once I simply ejected the stubborn cartridge and proceeded with the next one. As each cartridge was case checked, I'm reluctant to blame the ammunition. Perhaps the feed ramp was a bit grungy from use, or there might have been some sligher feed lip spread (all three issues occurred with the stainless steel magazines, nione with the carbon steel blued ones). Reloads from slidelock were completed by using the BH SS/RDIH extended slide release to get the slide into battery-I really appreciated the ease and ergonomics of this component throughout the match, as it definitely facilitated faster reloading.

One other note: The Series 70 is a vintage magwell, so greater care is required in positioning and inserting the magazine in the receiver during the reload process. While I'll maintain the gun as it is, on a more purely oriented competition 1911 I can definitely see merit in an extended magazine well for speedier reloads.

I also appreciated the VZ Black/Gray Colt logo tapered bottom G10 grips. They not only provided a upscale appearance, but their checkering and chalkiness inherent to the G10 material definitely provided excellent grippiness. The VZ rubber frontstrap grip tape significantly increased the grippiness as well-more so than 25 LPI metal checkering. One caveat-watch your gun weight with your grips, particularly if you're using G10 or metal grips; mine weighed in at 43 ounces, which is right on the IDPA weight limit for a CDP pistol.

https://i.imgur.com/K6UXxHGh.jpg?1

I did notice in some of the videos that were taken of me that while the cartridge ejection appeared distance-wise to be pretty consistent, it was pretty much all over the place from around 4 to 7 o'clock. I may talk to my gunsmith about some further extractor tuning, but things really don't seem to be broken per se. Prior to the match the extractor passed the Jason Burton extractor tests, but I encountered some inconsistencies with the 10-8 extractor test....

I had a great time, and was with a great squad throughout the day. It was one of, if not my most enjoyable State IDPA matches, and while my choice of a traditional Colt 1911 might not have been my most competitive platform choice, that wasn't my intent.

All the ancillary gear worked well. Wes Dahl makes superb holsters, and I've used his for both EDC and match use.

Fun times!

Best, Jon


https://i.imgur.com/tR9ob8Gh.jpg

[sierra 223]

Enjoyed the write up. Glad you had fun.

[MolonLabe416]

I shot IDPA in the early days in Memphis and even attended the Nationals at John Shawn’s old place in Mississippi.

I was always in the middle, as I am in most classes (my 270 being a notable exception). I never even look at the score.

[RJ]

That was a fun read Jon.

Can you please expand on the VZ front strap tape? How rubbery is that?

[JonInWA]

That was a fun read Jon.

Can you please expand on the VZ front strap tape? How rubbery is that?

Sure, I'll be happy to.

https://vzgrips.com/products/front-strap-tape-rubber.html

https://vzgrips.com/products/front-strap-tape-black-grit.html

Here are the two VZ frontstrap applications, rubber and grit.

https://i.imgur.com/GGeFf7ah.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/wswcUVFh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/8ZH5gLvh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/lWVymNUh.jpg

The gray rubber is on the Colt Series 70, along with a set of VZ Colt logo G10 black/gray grips, and the black grit is on my FN High Power Mk III, along with VZ Recon 2/Simovich G10 grips.

The rubber is the thicker of the two, and does have a bit of a rubbery give; the black grit is thinner, and has slightly more "grab" to the surface texture. I am pleased with both; frankly, the gray color worked best with the bead-blasted silver of the Colt, and the black grit with the black FN epoxy finish on the High Power, so initially aesthetics drove the application choice train.

The slightly flatter and broader front strap radius of the High Power works well with the tape, it applied flush with no edge splay. On the gray rubber, when applied to the thinner, more curved Colt frontstrap, there is some edge splay/lift-off on the vertical edges, but operationally it's of absolutely non consequence. However, if I replace it (or if my OCD kicks in), I'll trim about 1/8th" or less from each vertical side of the rubber if used with the Colt 1911. I was considering replacing, but then when I started to peel it off, I realized that while I easily could remove and replace with a more fitted piece, the original's adhesive really was effectively anchoring it in place, and the tape's edge give worked well with my gripping hand, so for the time being at least I'll leave well enough alone.

Both are extraordinarily effective frontstrap treatments-and a huge value.

Best, Jon

[MandoWookie]

Sure, I'll be happy to.

https://vzgrips.com/products/front-strap-tape-rubber.html

https://vzgrips.com/products/front-strap-tape-black-grit.html

Here are the two VZ frontstrap applications, rubber and grit.

https://i.imgur.com/GGeFf7ah.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/wswcUVFh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/8ZH5gLvh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/lWVymNUh.jpg

The gray rubber is on the Colt Series 70, along with a set of VZ Colt logo G10 black/gray grips, and the black grit is on my FN High Power Mk III, along with VZ Recon 2/Simovich G10 grips.

The rubber is the thicker of the two, and does have a bit of a rubbery give; the black grit is thinner, and has slightly more "grab" to the surface texture. I am pleased with both; frankly, the gray color worked best with the bead-blasted silver of the Colt, and the black grit with the black FN epoxy finish on the High Power, so initially aesthetics drove the application choice train.

The slightly flatter and broader front strap radius of the High Power works well with the tape, it applied flush with no edge splay. On the gray rubber, when applied to the thinner, more curved Colt frontstrap, there is some edge splay/lift-off on the vertical edges, but operationally it's of absolutely non consequence. However, if I replace it (or if my OCD kicks in), I'll trim about 1/8th" or less from each vertical side of the rubber if used with the Colt 1911. I was considering replacing, but then when I started to peel it off, I realized that while I easily could remove and replace with a more fitted piece, the original's adhesive really was effectively anchoring it in place, and the tape's edge give worked well with my gripping hand, so for the time being at least I'll leave well enough alone.

Both are extraordinarily effective frontstrap treatments-and a huge value.

Best, Jon

I did the same with just a piece of cut to fit material from Talon grips, they sell patches of their rubberized or grit tape in addition to the pre-fitted product.

[Jim Watson]

Back when we had a real lumber yard here, I could buy 3M rubberized tread tape for 50 cents a foot.
It looked and felt an awful lot like Talon rubber.

[JonInWA]

Since one of the p-f members had also recommended Traction Grips, I decided to try a set of their Gray Rubber frontstraps.

https://instantstipple.com/product/grip-tape-for-1911-front-strap/

Ordered from Amazon, it came quickly.

After removing the VZ rubber frontstrap, and cleaning/prepping the surface with isopropyl alcohol and drying thoroughly, the Traction Grip tape was easily initially applied and positioned, and then per their instructions, heat from a hairdryer was methodically applied and the tape was snugged in and bubbles removed by application of pressure on the bubble and rolling it out; the hairdryer is essential to getting the tape to form and fix around the curved surfaces flushly.

It's recommended that after application, that the gun sit for 24 hours for the adhesive solvent to thoroughly set.

The tape is thinner and a bit slicker/less grippy than the VZ, and rises higher on the frontstrap area to immediately below the triggerguard; operationally, either the Traction Grip or VZ approaches work fine.

I'll see how it performs in actual use; so far, I think the VZ is more aggressive, which I think I prefer. Aesthetically, both are a good match to the brushed and matte stainless steel finish on the Colt.

Best, Jon

https://i.imgur.com/nx1XQ4Ph.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/j2774qvh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/HzyEjNhh.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Jf2dqnxh.jpg

[Timbonez]

Great read! I used to own a few different Colt 1911s but they've all moved on... just a SAA I ordered with some personalization from the Colt Custom Shop and 2 Pythons. How has yours treated you?

Every time I handle one now, I'm disappointed in the fit of their 1911s. While the bulk of my 1911s are ACWs and a Nighthawk, I do own some production level guns akin to the production Colt price range, and they outshine everything I'm seeing right now from Colt (1911-wise). I wouldn't mind owning a solidly built one simply because it's Colt, but I can't get around what I would consider subpar build quality for their price.

[M2CattleCo]

Erratic ejection is usually extractor clocking.

Those hybrid feedlips are pretty delicate and get beat up on slide lock reloads. The metal baseplates will also get bent down and let the top round hit the ejector on a slide lock reload.

[JonInWA]

My frustration continues. After having a great conversation with my gunsmiths, Nick and Chris at C.a.R in Kent WA, we discussed the 10-8 tes issues and the sporadic ejection pattern; fortunately I had 1 excellent and 2 pretty good videos of 3 stages at our Washington State Championship IDPA match (the best one for diagnosis was the one where I was mounted on a fake horse, and the ejections were clearly visible throughout.

While not exhaustive, after our normal Saturday match (were I was also the match director), my good (and patient) friend Scott and I set up in an open bay to observe and measure the gun in static firing (standing offhand unsupported).

I used 2 sets of magazines, both blued carbon steel : 1. Check-Mate's hybrid feedlip, skirted/dimpled follower, extra strength spring, 7 round capacity, and 2. Check-Mate's GI configuration blued carbon steel 7 round magazines, with standard/dimpled follower, and wadcutter/semi-wadcutter feed lip configuration, and standard strength spring.

I ran a full load through each magazine, and then went for the "load one round, eject magazine, fire" 10-8 test with each magazine, for a total of 4 magazines being used throughout.

Before the testing, I replaced the OEM recoil spring with a 16# BH Spring Solutions conventional spring, and the firing pin spring with a new extra power Wolff one. I also slightly bent the extractor to ideally increase the extractor tension and cartridge rim positioning and grip.

In the 10-8 testing the CM Hybrid feed lip magazines, the gun functioned 100%, with the average cartridge ejection distance being some 3.77' but the ejection pattern averaged around 4 o'clock. (with two head hits-that is, with two ejected cases bonking me in the head).

With the GM GI magazines, things got more dramatic and interesting-not necessarily in a good way. Forst, all cartridges from the fully loaded magazine firing went to the left of the gun with an average distance of 4.71 feet. I encountered on failure to feed from slide lock (when activating the slide release to get from slide lock into battery), and when I went to perform the 10-8 test, I encountered 2 more failures to successfully feed. In all three failure to feed situations, nudging the slide did not resolve the feed failure-the cartridge had to be ejected from the gun to allow the following cartridge to be chambered. All 3 cartridges were re-loaded and successfully loaded and fired later in the test.

So: Both magazines fail the 10-8 test, in that the ejected cartridges do not land between 2 o'clock and 5 o'clock. The extracted cartridges' extraction distance I can more or less live with, but I did observe several just pretty much dribbling out of the ejection port with the GI magazines, and there were the 2 Hybrid ones that beaned me at the top of my head.

Here are my thoughts so far: One, the Series 70 Repros are basically GI guns made with more modern, more thoroughly hardened and treated steels, with CNC machinery for certain components, and while fit is better than a WWII 1911A1, they are certainly not hard-fit tackdriver competition guns (although mine is more than acceptably accurate). I'm suspecting that key causal factors are"

1. Extractor needing tuning-both in terms of finishing (especially at and around the hook) and tensility;

2. The firing pin retaining plate might be a bit loose in use, allowing for some "clocking" of the extractor

My appreciation for the gun centers around it being reliable and viable for defensive use and IDPA; I'm not expecting perfectly landing cartridges on ejection. But I do expect that there might be a tad more consistence in the pattern, and the failure to feed issues need to be determined.

At this point, my plan is to share the videos and research notw with my gunsmiths at C.a. R. and let them dive into things; I'm hoping for the least intrusive solution, which seemingly would involve extractor polishing, perhaps slightly reconfiguring, and adjusting tensility. We'll see what they come up with...

Best, Jon

[45dotACP]

My frustration continues. After having a great conversation with my gunsmiths, Nick and Chris at C.a.R in Kent WA, we discussed the 10-8 tes issues and the sporadic ejection pattern; fortunately I had 1 excellent and 2 pretty good videos of 3 stages at our Washington State Championship IDPA match (the best one for diagnosis was the one where I was mounted on a fake horse, and the ejections were clearly visible throughout.

While not exhaustive, after our normal Saturday match (were I was also the match director), my good (and patient) friend Scott and I set up in an open bay to observe and measure the gun in static firing (standing offhand unsupported).

I used 2 sets of magazines, both blued carbon steel : 1. Check-Mate's hybrid feedlip, skirted/dimpled follower, extra strength spring, 7 round capacity, and 2. Check-Mate's GI configuration blued carbon steel 7 round magazines, with standard/dimpled follower, and wadcutter/semi-wadcutter feed lip configuration, and standard strength spring.

I ran a full load through each magazine, and then went for the "load one round, eject magazine, fire" 10-8 test with each magazine, for a total of 4 magazines being used throughout.

Before the testing, I replaced the OEM recoil spring with a 16# BH Spring Solutions conventional spring, and the firing pin spring with a new extra power Wolff one. I also slightly bent the extractor to ideally increase the extractor tension and cartridge rim positioning and grip.

In the 10-8 testing the CM Hubrid feed lip magazines, the gun functioned 100%, with the average cartridge ejection distance being some 3.77' but the ejection pattern averaged around 4 o'clock. (with two head hits).

With the GM GI magazines, things got more dramatic and interesting-not necessarily in a good way. Forst, all cartridges from the fully loaded magazine firing went to the left of the gun with an average distance of 4.71 feet. I encountered on failure to feed from slide lock (when activating the slide release to get from slide lock into battery), and when I went to perform the 10-8 test, I encountered 2 more failures to successfully feed. In all three failure to feed situations, nudging the slide did not resolve the feed failure-the cartridge had to be ejected from the gun to allow the following cartridge to be chambered. All 3 cartridges were re-loaded and successfully loaded and fired later in the test.

So: Both magazines fail the 10-8 test, in that the ejected cartridges do not land between 2 o'clock and 5 o'clock. The extracted cartridges' extraction distance I can more or less live with, but I did observe several just pretty much dribbling out of the ejection port with the GI magazines, and there were the 2 Hybrid ones that beaned me at the top of my head.

Here are my thoughts so far: One, the Series 70 Repros are basically GI guns made with more modern, more thoroughly hardened and treated steels, with CNC machinery for certain components, and while fit is better than a WWII 1911A1, they are certainly not hard-fit tackdriver competition guns (although mine is more than acceptably accurate). I'm suspecting that key causal factors are"

1. Extractor needing tuning-both in terms of finishing (especially at and around the hook) and tensility;

2. The firing pin retaining plate might be a bit loose in use, allowing for some "clocking" of the extractor

My appreciation for the gun centers around it being reliable and viable for defensive use and IDPA; I'm not expecting perfectly landing cartridges on ejection. But I do expect that there might be a tad more consistence in the pattern, and the failure to feed issues need to be determined.

At this point, my plan is to share the videos and research notw with my gunsmiths at C.a. R. and let them dive into things; I'm hoping for the least intrusive solution, which seemingly would involve extractor polishing, perhaps slightly reconfiguring, and adjusting tensility. We'll see what they come up with...

Best, Jon

If you want your gunsmiths to dive into a current production Colt 1911 you may wind up with more than you asked for.

If it's not clocking then you have an issue with extractor deflection being inappropriate. This was my experience with a Colt 9mm Commander.

I have only ever owned one Colt 1911, and that gun was the reason.

The gun was poorly fitted, extremely inaccurate, unreliable, gritty, poorly sprung, and rattled like a baby rattle.

If it's any indicator of the 1911s Colt makes, I'd put them below any and all 1911 makers currently in production and that includes Kimber, Tisas, Armscor....all of them.

I would place Colt in dead last place.

Shame too, because the Python I got from them was pretty dope.

Hope it gets sorted for you. But I'd ask them to check extractor deflection for sure. Being that it's a very important facet of fitting an extractor correctly, I'd expect Colt fucked it up.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[M2CattleCo]

A modern Colt like you have does not have the same feedway as GI gun.

GI, and even the tapered hybrid lip magazines do not function the same in a gun that has been throated for bullets other than ball.

Colt generally gets feed ramp angle and depth pretty right and their extractors are good quality. A 1911 extractor is supposed to be a spring..

Get rid of the Checkmate mags. They are not doing you any favors.

For baseline reliability stay away from any 8 round mags, and mags with tapered feedlips. Try Wilson 47+p mags. It’s a 7 round 47 mag with a 10 round spring and follower. Tripp Cobra 7 round mags and Super 7 kits in Wilson, Tripp, or CMC Powermag bodies are also very good. Genuine GI followers under a Wolff extra power spring in CMC Powermag body are insanely reliable but not a likely found thing anymore.

Paralell feedlips work better with all bullet profiles in a throated gun!

Fit a Harrison or EGW firing pin stop and cut the bottom radius at as to 5/64” as you can. This will alleviate inertia feeds by slowing the slide down.

Use a 14 or 15lb recoil spring. Or the factory Colt spring which is 13-14lbs.

[Robinson]

The gun was poorly fitted, extremely inaccurate, unreliable, gritty, poorly sprung, and rattled like a baby rattle.

If it's any indicator of the 1911s Colt makes, I'd put them below any and all 1911 makers currently in production and that includes Kimber, Tisas, Armscor....all of them.

I would place Colt in dead last place.

Colt makes some good guns. Their problem is inconsistent manufacturing and assembly quality. You can examine three new Colts, two of them will be just fine and the third will be a disaster. That's not a good percentage.

The guns hand built by the Custom Shop remain of high quality.

[JTQ]

I used 2 sets of magazines, both blued carbon steel : 1. Check-Mate's hybrid feedlip, skirted/dimpled follower, extra strength spring, 7 round capacity, and 2. Check-Mate's GI configuration blued carbon steel 7 round magazines, with standard/dimpled follower, and wadcutter/semi-wadcutter feed lip configuration, and standard strength spring.

Best, Jon
For clarity, since CheckMate offers a mag with GI feed lips, it bothers me when mags with wadcutter feed lips are referred to as "GI mags" since a "GI mag" wouldn't have wadcutter feed lips.

[JonInWA]

For clarity, since CheckMate offers a mag with GI feed lips, it bothers me when mags with wadcutter feed lips are referred to as "GI mags" since a "GI mag" wouldn't have wadcutter feed lips.

Well alrighty then. It's this one....https://checkmatemagazines.com/product/1911-45-acp-magazine/

Here's a good explanation for the differentiations:
https://how-i-did-it.org/magazines2/read-my-lips.html#:~:text=Ultimately%2C%20though%2C%201911 %20magazines%20would%20come%20to%20be,referred%20t o%20as%20%22wadcutter%22%20magazines%20or%20feed%2 0lips.


Best, Jon

[JTQ]

Well alrighty then. It's this one....https://checkmatemagazines.com/product/1911-45-acp-magazine/

Best, Jon
CheckMate's current website is bad. They no longer list the features other than capacity and color of the mag.

Note the confusion when you mentioned "GI mag" and there was a recommendation to stop using tapered feed lipped magazines and use wadcutter mags. If your description is correct, you have a 7 round wadcutter feed lipped mag, unless it is actually a "GI mag".

[JTQ]

Here's a good explanation for the differentiations:
https://how-i-did-it.org/magazines2/read-my-lips.html#:~:text=Ultimately%2C%20though%2C%201911 %20magazines%20would%20come%20to%20be,referred%20t o%20as%20%22wadcutter%22%20magazines%20or%20feed%2 0lips.


Best, Jon

I know the differences, that's why I brought it up.

A blue, 7 round mag, with a flush base plate, with wadcutter feed lips, isn't a "GI mag". It is just a blue, flush fit 7 rounder.

[JTQ]

Per your description you probably have this mag with wadcutter feed lips https://1911parts.com/product/check-mate-45acp-7rd-blue-wadcutter-full-size-1911/

and not this mag, which is a "GI mag", because it has GI feed lips https://1911parts.com/product/check-mate-7-round-gi-magazine-blued/

[M2CattleCo]

Well alrighty then. It's this one....https://checkmatemagazines.com/product/1911-45-acp-magazine/

Here's a good explanation for the differentiations:
https://how-i-did-it.org/magazines2/read-my-lips.html#:~:text=Ultimately%2C%20though%2C%201911 %20magazines%20would%20come%20to%20be,referred%20t o%20as%20%22wadcutter%22%20magazines%20or%20feed%2 0lips.


Best, Jon


That how I did it article sold more bad magazines than anything. I have seen guys have the same problem you’re having since that rubbish was posted years ago.

I like the original extractor and firing pin design, and the original spring weights, but will take a throated barrel over a dimpled barrel any day.

If you want to run GI or hybrid feedlip mags you need a dimpled barrel and 230gr ball bullets. That’s the only way to make them work. And be very tender doing slkde lock reloads because the case rim hits the back kf the feedlips and beats them out.

Wadcutter / paralell lips are just a better mousetrap.

[JTQ]

That how I did it article sold more bad magazines than anything.
While I appreciate the hard work that went into those two articles, and I apologize if the writer is here as a member, but those two articles are truly a disservice to 1911 users.

[Elwin]

I’m not a huge fan of hybrid feed lips but I’m not sure they’re quite that bad. I have a set of 12 Ed Brown branded Checkmate mags I’ve been using as my primary range mags for thousands of rounds with no feeding issues in throated barrel guns. I got them because I did the mag exchange program before knowing they weren’t wadcutter profile.

Rounds have included ball profile as well as big lead flat point, JHP, and lead SWC. I even discovered that my frustration with them losing rounds while not in the gun was alleviated (not totally fixed) by a switch away from the big flat point bullet which had a lot of lead sticking out the front of the case moving the round’s center of gravity forward.

I’m not going to use anything other than Wilson 47s and ETMs for carry mags, but at this point the Brown/Checkmates are working fine. Especially since when the feed lips have eventually spread too much I can trade them in for all new mags at $10 each.

[JonInWA]

The magazines are fine in my opinion; obviously I'm inclined towards them as I'm sponsored by Check-Mate, and the head of the factory team, but it's a financially uncompensated position, and one brought about by an exceptionally rewarding use of their magazines in multiple platforms over a 17 year period. While I don't see myself as inevitably wedded to their 1911 magazines, I've had enough satisfactory experiences with them over years worth of use and enough endorsement of them from shooters that I respect to lead me to remain with and endorse them to others.

More importantly, I had my 1911 gunsmith, Nick at C.a.R. Firearms in Kent WA go through the gun, after sharing with him the videos of my testing with both sets of the Check-Mate blued 7 round magazines, and the detailed notes from that testing and the 10-8 test I did with both sets of the magazines. His diagnosis was primarily lack of extractor tension; he tuned the extractor and dressed the extractor hook. He found that there was also a little excessive play in the BH Spring Solutions/RDIH extended slide release, but unlikely enough to cause any issues, but I'm keeping that component on watch; if there are any further issues with feeding from slidelock when I activate it to get the slide into battery on reloads, I'll replace it with the OEM Colt slide release.

Hopefully, problems solved. My goal is to have a well functioning 1911, not necessarily puts all ejected cartridge cases in a perfect little pile in a given location; after, all, the Series 70 Reproductions are essentially an metallurgically improved service 1911A1 (along with an improved dimpled feed ramp and larger, eminently more usable sights and improved manufacturing processes). I'll repeat my testing in my next session with the gun. Thanks to everyone here for their input and suggestions.

Hey, it's a 1911-inevitably there'll be a journey involved....but that's part of the intrigue inherent to 1911 ownership, and achieving satisfaction in it's use.

Best, Jon

[JTQ]

I'm not knocking CheckMate mags. I have a bunch of them, I like them, and often recommend them depending on what type of mag somebody is looking for. My point was I was just clarifying terminology.

Regarding that "How-I-did-It" article and the information in that article, is what prompted me to learn as much a I could about 1911 mags. I certainly don't know everything about 1911 mags, but I usually discourage folks, especially those new to 1911 from reading those articles.

[JonInWA]

Fair enough, guys. What would be helpful is a comparative side-by-side image of the various feed lip configurations for all of us to clearly see if you have any or can take one.

Best, Jon

[JTQ]

1911forum has a picture of the three different feed lip styles.

https://www.1911forum.com/threads/gi-hybrid-and-wadcutter-45-magazines.896722/

The pictures you had in the "How-I-did-It" article were fine, it's just the statements that are made and conclusions that are drawn from those articles that I have a problem with.

[JonInWA]

Hmmm....schooling has occurred. It looks like the ones that Check-Mate designates "1911 GI" are actually with wadcutter feedlips, featuring a somewhat splayed early release, compared to the true "GI" ones, which have longer, tapered but not truncated lips.

I'll get some clarification from Check-Mate as to why and what they're marketing.

Thanks for everyone's patience. And while at the end of the day I doubt that my carbon steel magazines were a causal factor, I'm more suspicious regarding my stainless steel ones, which are all going back to Check-Mate for a run through the sizing die and/or replacement as necessary. The stainless ones simply do not retain their tensility over time as well as the carbon steel ones do-and that's a finding directly from a recent specific discussion about carbon versus stainless steel tubes from the CM mothership.

However, if the stainless ones do spread, there's a retained metal memory, so if they're sent through the sizing/stamping die again, they'll regain their original position/tensility. Which is why all of mine will be going through this process, rather than simply disposing and replacing.

FYI, Check-Mate does have a true lifetime guarantee on their magazines.

Best, Jon

[farscott]

Thanks for everyone's patience. And while at the end of the day I doubt that my carbon steel magazines were a causal factor, I'm more suspicious regarding my stainless steel ones, which are all going back to Check-Mate for a run through the sizing die and/or replacement as necessary. The stainless ones simply do not retain their tensility over time as well as the carbon steel ones do-and that's a finding directly from a recent specific discussion about carbon versus stainless steel tubes from the CM mothership.

However, if the stainless ones do spread, there's a retained metal memory, so if they're sent through the sizing/stamping die again, they'll regain their original position/tensility. Which is why all of mine will be going through this process, rather than simply disposing and replacing.

Not convinced another trip through a sizing/stamping die is a good idea. Depending upon the alloy, the heat treatment, and the part geometry, the net result may be work hardening and an increase of tensile strength of the magazine. I would not expect the original tensile strength and ductility of the magazine to return. The increase in tensile strength may be helpful or it may further retard the release of a round from the magazine. Some basic info is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_hardening

Interesting experiment, but I would relegate the stainless magazines to practice sessions and use magazines not made from stainless alloys for shooting of consequence.

[JonInWA]

Not convinced another trip through a sizing/stamping die is a good idea. Depending upon the alloy, the heat treatment, and the part geometry, the net result may be work hardening and an increase of tensile strength of the magazine. I would not expect the original tensile strength and ductility of the magazine to return. The increase in tensile strength may be helpful or it may further retard the release of a round from the magazine. Some basic info is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_hardening

Interesting experiment, but I would relegate the stainless magazines to practice sessions and use magazines not made from stainless alloys for shooting of consequence.

Regarding magazines for EDC, etc,. already made the complete switch to carbon steel tubes. I'll keep an open mind about the rejuvenated/replaced stainless tubes; it'll be interesting to see what the ratio of replacement to rejuvenated will be, and how they'll hold up.

My 1911 season foray has turned out to be much more interesting than anticipated. The good thing is that the gun performed exceptionally well in a Tier III IDPA State match, but I'm glad the hiccups drove me to go down the trail to correct things that could well have become much more significant over time. And my 1911 knowledge has significantly expanded.

Best. Jon

[JTQ]

Hilton Yam says he just chuck's mags when the feed lips go.

I've used some carbon steel mags, but I've had less favorable results with them.

When manufactured, their dimensions are the same as the stainless mags, and then they have to be coated with "something". Depending on the "something", that could add to those dimensions which can make the outside of the tube larger and the inside of the tube smaller, not by a lot, but by some measurement. In addition, some of those "somethings" can be less slick than their stainless counterparts.

What that means to the outside of the blue mag, they insert into the mag well less smoothly and come out not as smoothly. On a tight kydex mag pouch, they also can drag.

On the inside of the tube, and this can especially be an issue with a follower like the CheckMate Patented Follower (CMF) that has a lot of surface area, they can cause drag on the follower.

In my experience, stainless mags are slicker, both inside and outside. The followers move freer, and they come in and out of mag pouches and mag wells smoother. Of course, they are also less prone to rust. Other than a need for "tactical" black on a mag, I don't see an advantage to a carbon steel mag.

[JTQ]

I'll get some clarification from Check-Mate as to why and what they're marketing.

Best, Jon

Their website is just bad. They used to clearly show the differences on their old website, but retail isn't their strong suit.

I always encouraged folks that were interested in CheckMate mags not to buy direct from CheckMate, but rather from either Top Gun Supply or Thunder Mountain Custom, two excellent retailers that are knowledgeable about the product, and list the features of the mags on their site. In addition, they ship very quickly. You can get a Top Gun Supply oder to your door in a couple of days. Folks have reported orders from CheckMate direct taking over a month for delivery.

My go to place for CheckMate mags, and I guess it still is, is Top Gun Supply. The downside is Top Gun Supply's inventory of CheckMate mags has shrunk precipitously since COVID. They used to carry just about every option CheckMate made and they were all clearly identified to include feed lip style, follower, and spring strength.

As bad as the current CheckMate website is, where you can't see all the options, and CheckMate has a lot of options, from feed lips, to followers, to spring strength, to tube length, I wouldn't order direct from CheckMate unless it was my only option.

For the same reason I always try to talk folks out of ordering "Colt" magazines. Colt hasn't made magazines since perhaps the 1970's. They contract them out. CheckMate is the current supplier, and if you like a particular mag feature, I haven't seen any retailer that lists all the features of a Colt mag. Other than material, capacity and perhaps tube length, you'll never know what a Colt mag has until you get it in your hand.

[JonInWA]

I've beaten them over the head on the website and retail opportunity deficits.....

Best results for direct magazine ordering (other than going the Top Gun, etc. third party approach would be to call Check-Mate directly and ask for Brandon Vitulli, who handles their retail side. Brandon works out of their Georgia factory.

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

After some discussions with my friend and 1911 Illuminati Rick B,. I decided to at least temporarily switch back to the Colt OEM slide stop/slide release. The pin miked out to a perfect .20, while the pin on the BH Spring Solutions/RDIH extended slide stop pin was nominally smaller-and my gunsmith said that he noticed a bit of slop that could affect the barrel set-up in the reciprocation process with it...I'm thinking of the failures to feed/fully chamber that I encountered.

Replacing the slide stop with the OEM Colt one will at least take things back to the starting point-if feeding issues persist, I'll be in a better position to isolate the causal factor now. Dang-I really liked the BH SS/RDIH extended slide release, but we'll see how things work.

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

Hilton Yam says he just chuck's mags when the feed lips go.

I've used some carbon steel mags, but I've had less favorable results with them.

When manufactured, their dimensions are the same as the stainless mags, and then they have to be coated with "something". Depending on the "something", that could add to those dimensions which can make the outside of the tube larger and the inside of the tube smaller, not by a lot, but by some measurement. In addition, some of those "somethings" can be less slick than their stainless counterparts.

What that means to the outside of the blue mag, they insert into the mag well less smoothly and come out not as smoothly. On a tight kydex mag pouch, they also can drag.

On the inside of the tube, and this can especially be an issue with a follower like the CheckMate Patented Follower (CMF) that has a lot of surface area, they can cause drag on the follower.

In my experience, stainless mags are slicker, both inside and outside. The followers move freer, and they come in and out of mag pouches and mag wells smoother. Of course, they are also less prone to rust. Other than a need for "tactical" black on a mag, I don't see an advantage to a carbon steel mag.

While I normally don't use them with my Series 70 Repro, I do have 2 sets of CM 8 round carbon steel extended tube magazines with experimental finishes, one that is black Teflon coated and one that has a beautiful gloss black proprietary finish; both are notably smoother to insert. I normally use them with my Gen 2 SIG GSR XO.

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

I shot the gun in our local Tier 1 club IDPA match on Saturday, using High Desert Cartridge Company's 230 gr TMJ ball ammunition, in Check-Mate 7rd welded baseplate hybrid feed lip, skirted and dimpled follower carbon steel magazines. This was the first excursion with the extractor tuned by my gunsmith Nick, at C.a.R. Firearms in Kent, WA.

https://i.imgur.com/InpxfVGh.jpg

The gun performed flawlessly throughout the match, although observers noted that ejection seemed a bit erratic; ejection distance was decent, but casings ejected around the clock.

After the match, I did a detailed 10-8 magazine test; with 4 Check-Mate magazines (all carbon steel, welded baseplate 7 rounders); 2 with hybrid feed lips and skirted/dimpled followers, 2 with semi-wadcutter feedlips and non-skirted but dimpled followers.

Each magazine was loaded to capacity and fired. One of the semi-wadcutter/non;skirted follower magazines had 2 failures to fully chamber cartridges. The other 3 had no issues, and cases ejected with a decent distance, but around the clock (usually between 5 o'clock and 6 o'clock, but with some wild variations in between 1, 7 and 11 o'clock observed)

https://i.imgur.com/oqTxpZ2h.jpg

The 10-8 test then proceeded with 1 round magazine loaded, magazine removed, then gun fired. Rinse and repeat 6 more times per magazine.All rounds ejected out of the gun-no stovepiping or down-the-magwell ejections noted.

The problematic magazine has been set aside for a trip to Check-Mate (their magazine all have a lifetime warranty).

I also removed the OEM Colt Firing Pin Retaining Plate and installed a slightly thicker/wider replacement Colt FPRP provided to me by my friend Rick B., to eliminate any potential extractor clocking (I tested and found no clocking, but hey, I'll check things out for science). It'll be interesting to see if it affects the ejected case landing pattern at all. If it does, great-if not, I've got a spare FPRP incase one cracks in the future.

My tentative conclusions:

With decent magazines and a tuned extractor, the Colt is reliable and suitable for EDC, duty, and matches. I'm going to discuss and shot the videos of the ejected casings in the full magazine test to my gunsmith, but I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that the 10-8 criteria that the cartridge ejection pattern be between 2 o'clock and 5 o'clock is more applicable to tuned long-nosed ejectors than it is to my non-nosed GI profile ejector. So as long as the expended cartridges are chambering, firing, extracting and ejecting smoothly and without incident, and empty cases are extracting and then ejecting from the gun with a decent amount of distance, I'm pretty much prepared to call things good.

And yes, I'm aware that the ejector can be tuned by reshaping the bevel angles, or replaced with a extended nosed ejector, but that's not where I want to go with this gun, which is essentially a slightly modernized 1911A1 (i.e., with better sights, better/more thorough-hardened steel components, tighete component tolerencing due to CNC production techniques, a dimpled feed ramp, and modernized/improved 7 round magazines).

Best, Jon