As far as I know Colt has never released that info. I've seen 19.5# talked about (for 45s), but I can't confirm it. I do think the dual springs work well in the 45s but make the 9mm guns a bit over-sprung.Originally Posted by 03RN
As far as I know Colt has never released that info. I've seen 19.5# talked about (for 45s), but I can't confirm it. I do think the dual springs work well in the 45s but make the 9mm guns a bit over-sprung.
I’ve been carrying a 1911 since they were authorized in 2007. Mine is a 2007 built WC CQB. I clean it after I shoot, keep it lubed, replace springs as needed, run good mags (current mags are ETM HD’s) and I have yet to have the gun not go through it’s full cycle of operations as it should. I’m not sure why we all act like the 1911 is this super difficult to run gun. Along the way I’ve played with Gen 4 and Gen 5 Glocks and I got tired of getting beaned in the face with brass....but they were reliable. I also tried M&P....to call the accuracy inconsistent is being generous. At the end of each experiment I just got tired of issues with the guns and just wanted to go back to something that would just work right....hence the 1911 in my holster.
For one, all Glock's are made by Glock and all 1911's are not Wilson's.
For another, there are probably four or five companies making Glock mags, and pretty much everybody knows which ones are bad, and most simply buy Glock mags. Conversely, over the life-span of the 1911 there have probably been 50 -100 companies that have made 1911 mags, and everybody seems to think that $10 mag from the gun show should run just as well as your Wilson ETM/HD.
Did you try M&P Gen 1, Gen 2, or both? I'm a 1911 fan too, so won't try to talk you out of your WC. But I upgraded to M&P Gen 2 compact recently, and noticed a drastic improvement in trigger and accuracy.
The consensus is that accuracy problems were pretty much confined to the 9x19 1.0s. Issues were rare with .40s and .45s of that generation, and with 2.0s across the board.
My experience matched that. Several Gen 1's in 9mm, a Gen 1 mid-size .45, and recently sold the Gen 1's and started running a Gen 2 compact 4". An interesting thing was the Gen 1 .45 was surprisingly accurate for a striker fired pistol--most accurate of any caliber SF that I've owned. You'd hear that from other Gen 1 .45 M&P owners too, so it wasn't a one-off. Too bad S&W were unable to transfer what they learned in the .45's to the Gen 1 9mm's--if they had, they might have a higher number of folks that would've stayed with that platform vs switching to other options. Still regret selling that .45 off, but went to all 9mm for carry so it made sense at the time.
At the risk of going slightly off topic, I bought a trade in m&p40 for $229 and then bought an Apex gunsmith barrel and found the accuracy was outstanding. It shot well with all loads and with loads it liked it wasn't abnormal to print 1.5 to 2 inch five shot groups at 25 yards.
Bringing it back to 1911s however, my Frank&P is still not as accurate as my RRA Poly 1911 or my Springfield RO. Nor as reliable, as it has choked on the occasional WWB. In spite of needing metal bushing wrench to remove the RRA 1911s bushing, nobody told the gun that tight tolerances mean it'll jam because the gun runs like a sewing machine.
People act like tuning a 1911 means I sacrifice a goat to it every equinox and rub it on a whetstone every night. I just use the right springs, mags and extractor setup. 9 or .45 that is the key to success.
Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk
I went to an LGS, to handle a Wilson Combat Hackathorn Special, as it had the newest Bulletproof ambi safety, and the relatively new compact grip safety/hammer combo. (The grip safety and hammer must be used together.) I certainly liked the feel of the compact grip safety, and believe it would help concealability.
The ambi safety, however, was relatively stiff and gritty in operation, especially trying to move it on-safe with my left thumb. This being a pre-owned sample, I cannot be sure whether this ambi safety unit was fitted at Wilson Combat, but regardless, this reinforces my disdain for ambi thumb safety levers on 1911 pistols, as being a work-around that rarely satisfies.
Perhaps I am too picky, but, this has vexed me since the Eighties. Even though I am a natural left-hander, I elected to carry at 0300 in 1983, for several practical and tactical reasons, and trained to be functionally ambidextrous with most handguns. As I age, however, my right shoulder has lost some range of motion, and my right thumb, wrist, and hand do not always work so well, so eventually switching to left-side carry is a consideration; therefore a renewed interest in a 1911 with ambi thumb safety levers. (I have one 1911 with ambi thumb levers, a Les Baer Monolith, and dislike the amount of flex, and the left thumb’s lever is positioned too high for my taste, both problems with some other ambi safeties I have handled.)
Sigh.
Last edited by Rex G; 09-17-2019 at 11:29 PM.
Retar’d LE. Kinesthetic dufus.
Don’t tread on volcanos!
My favorite thumb safety is actually the standard Colt teardrop style, not likely because it is superior but more likely because I've just been using them for so long.
As for extended safeties, Colt's work fine but their ambi safety rubs against the knuckle on my shooting hand in a way that isn't comfortable because it sits low on the frame. I've come to like the ambi safety on my Special Combat Government though -- Colt equips these with the Novak ambi and so far it seems to work well for me. Plus it doesn't require an ambi cut in the right side grip panel.
Every 1911 ambi-safety I've ever even held irritated the hell out of my right hand index finger knuckle and operated for shit left handed; weak engagement and/or too much flex. That said, I haven't tried them all and I still want to find one I like and trust. I've meant to ask in the STI thread if they've found a better method.
Reply With Quote