Different types of 1911 mag feed lips

[JTQ]

Check this out, if you have not already:

Thanks for posting this. I had read it, but some folks watching this thread might not have seen it.

As soon as "controlled round feed" got mentioned in your OP, I was sure you had read that article.

While I appreciate all the hard work that went into writing that article, both part one and part two, most readers come away with erroneous take aways, primarily that Wilson Combat mags bypass "controlled round feed". The author makes that claim, but never proves it, even in part two where he slow motion, without a recoil spring, runs the slide cycle and shows the rounds feeding from different mags. If it were true, that Wilson mags by-passed controlled round feed, it would be because of the feed lips and nothing else, which as you mention in the OP, the vast majority of 1911 mags use wadcutter feed lips.

Edit to add: I'm not smart enough to know if Wilson mags do or don't by-pass controlled round feed, just that in spite of the claim, the author doesn't prove it, and nearly every other mag would also by-pass controlled round feed since almost all of them have the same wadcutter feed lips.

What most commonly happened when folks read those articles was they tell a forum they dropped their Wilson mags because of this information and switched to Chip McCormick (CMC) or Tripp mags to fix that problem, because of course there weren't CMC or Tripp mags in either article. The error of course is that CMC and Tripp also have wadcutter feed lips, and if loss of controlled round feed was a problem with Wilson mags, it would also be a problem with CMC, Tripp, ACT-Mag, and just about every other mag out there. It just doesn't seem to be the case.

I bought into the "hybrid feed lip" mania about 15 years ago, when I first joined M1911.org and subsequently read those "how-I-did-it" articles. I'm sure the late John Travis (1911Tuner) typically forgot more about 1911's while sleeping overnight, than I'll ever know, but what I found was, #1 my hybrid lipped CheckMate mags all caused inertia feed (1911Tuner told me to replace the springs with Wolff extra power springs since those early CheckMates came with a weak spring. It didn't fix the problem), #2 my 1980's era Colt (I'm the original owner) came with Metalform hybrid lipped (the hybrid lips are a Colt design) mags that have worked perfectly, #3 if you look at just about everybody that shoots a 1911 either professionally or trains folks professionally to shoot the 1911, or custom 1911 makers, almost all of them use mags with wadcutter feed lips, whether they prefer Wilson, or McCormick, or Tripp, or any other brand of mag.

The dimple/pimple on the follower also seems to gain a lot of traction. Sure it was there when Browning designed the gun and mags, but Browning's mags all had GI feed lips that hold the rounds less securely than wadcutter feed lips, and it really is only an advantage for the last round in the mag. If you have wadcutter feed lips, you probably don't need the dimple/pimple on the follower, but probably do with GI feed lipped mags.

I have versions of all feed lip styles. Sure, the GI and hybrids probably feed a little smoother, but the wadcutter feed lipped models will feed ball ammo just fine, but with a little "ker-chunk" feel, though that's kind of how I think a 1911 should probably feed. The top makers typically use wadcutter feed lips, and I get the feeling one reason is they are just easier and simpler to make, and because of this they are probably made correctly more consistently. Another thing to think about, of all your non-1911 mags, do any of them have any thing other than parallel (wadcutter) feed lips?

[JTQ]

Another point - I'm not bashing CheckMate mags. I like them and have a bunch of them, in GI, hybrid, and wadcutter varieties, their CheckMate Patented Follower (CMF) is a good design, and I often recommend their 1911 mags across a variety of forums. However, I've had the most success with their full size, 7 round, wadcutter feed lipped models.

This is one of my favorites https://www.topgunsupply.com/check-m...-magazine.html

I won't buy their non-extended tube 8 rounders, regardless of the feed lip style, because I don't think they are long enough for 8 rounds, their spring, and follower. They are just too difficult to insert with the slide forward, and the spring doesn't last very long. If you need an 8 rounder from CheckMate, choose their Extended tube variety.

[JTQ]

I also never recommend "Colt" mags. Not that they're bad, but Colt doesn't make mags, and they haven't made mags in probably 50 years, they contract them out. I believe CheckMate is the current supplier, but my factory Colt mags are Metalform.

The problem is CheckMate makes a huge variety of mags, as we've seen in this thread, they may be the only company that offer's all three feed lip styles, GI, hybrid, and wadcutter. They also have at least two different followers. There is almost no way of knowing what you are getting in a Colt mag, beyond capacity, and tube material, until it shows up at your house, and you take it out of the wrapper.

If you like a feature, whether it is feed lip style, or follower, or spring strength, buy it not as a Colt mag, but rather as a CheckMate from either Top Gun Supply or Thunder Mountain Custom, as both will list all the features on the mag and you'll know what you're getting.

Thunder Mountain Custom https://www.shop.1911parts.com/45-ACP-Magazines_c79.htm

[Mitch]

I use Wilson 47 7 round magazines, 230 grain ammo and have exactly zero problems with either ball or HSTs.

[oldtexan]

As soon as "controlled round feed" got mentioned in your OP, I was sure you had read that article.

While I appreciate all the hard work that went into writing that article, both part one and part two, most readers come away with erroneous take aways, primarily that Wilson Combat mags bypass "controlled round feed". The author makes that claim, but never proves it, even in part two where he slow motion, without a recoil spring, runs the slide cycle and shows the rounds feeding from different mags. If it were true, that Wilson mags by-passed controlled round feed, it would be because of the feed lips and nothing else, which as you mention in the OP, the vast majority of 1911 mags use wadcutter feed lips.

Edit to add: I'm not smart enough to know if Wilson mags do or don't by-pass controlled round feed, just that in spite of the claim, the author doesn't prove it, and nearly every other mag would also by-pass controlled round feed since almost all of them have the same wadcutter feed lips.

What most commonly happened when folks read those articles was they tell a forum they dropped their Wilson mags because of this information and switched to Chip McCormick (CMC) or Tripp mags to fix that problem, because of course there weren't CMC or Tripp mags in either article. The error of course is that CMC and Tripp also have wadcutter feed lips, and if loss of controlled round feed was a problem with Wilson mags, it would also be a problem with CMC, Tripp, ACT-Mag, and just about every other mag out there. It just doesn't seem to be the case.

I bought into the "hybrid feed lip" mania about 15 years ago, when I first joined M1911.org and subsequently read those "how-I-did-it" articles. I'm sure the late John Travis (1911Tuner) typically forgot more about 1911's while sleeping overnight, than I'll ever know, but what I found was, #1 my hybrid lipped CheckMate mags all caused inertia feed (1911Tuner told me to replace the springs with Wolff extra power springs since those early CheckMates came with a weak spring. It didn't fix the problem), #2 my 1980's era Colt (I'm the original owner) came with Metalform hybrid lipped (the hybrid lips are a Colt design) mags that have worked perfectly, #3 if you look at just about everybody that shoots a 1911 either professionally or trains folks professionally to shoot the 1911, or custom 1911 makers, almost all of them use mags with wadcutter feed lips, whether they prefer Wilson, or McCormick, or Tripp, or any other brand of mag.

The dimple/pimple on the follower also seems to gain a lot of traction. Sure it was there when Browning designed the gun and mags, but Browning's mags all had GI feed lips that hold the rounds less securely than wadcutter feed lips, and it really is only an advantage for the last round in the mag. If you have wadcutter feed lips, you probably don't need the dimple/pimple on the follower, but probably do with GI feed lipped mags.

I have versions of all feed lip styles. Sure, the GI and hybrids probably feed a little smoother, but the wadcutter feed lipped models will feed ball ammo just fine, but with a little "ker-chunk" feel, though that's kind of how I think a 1911 should probably feed. The top makers typically use wadcutter feed lips, and I get the feeling one reason is they are just easier and simpler to make, and because of this they are probably made correctly more consistently. Another thing to think about, of all your non-1911 mags, do any of them have any thing other than parallel (wadcutter) feed lips?

JTQ, great points and info!

[Trooper224]

Everything JTQ said.

I have a crap ton of the Checkmate 8 round, extended tube, hybrid feed lip mags and they've worked without issue, for years. They're starting to need new springs, but that's it. I have a crap ton of CMC 8 round PowerMags. They all run fine. Wilson ETMs are good, 47Ds are junk and it has nothing to do with feed lips. The 8 round in a 7 round mag tube CMCs are junk, as are every retrofitted 8 in 7 mag, regardless of manufacturer. I have more 7 round, welded floorplate mags, than I can count, from more manufacturers than I can remember. They all work fine, and I have no idea what the feed lip design is on most of them.

This is one of the things that make a fairly simple design like the 1911 seem like a rabbit hole. People on the interwebz thinking they know more about pistol magazines than people who manufacturer the same. People acting as if running the gun is akin to launching a rocket to Mars, or partical physics. Living with the 1911 isn't hard, but people seem to want to turn it into the equivalent of trying to use a Formula 1 car as a daily driver.

It's just a pistol, it's not the Rosetta Stone.

[JAH 3rd]

Sorry for the drift. Just curious. In a Ruger P90, has anyone taken a Tripp 7 round 45acp upgrade kit and tried it in the P90? The Ruger has a 7 round magazine converted to 8 round by I think the Devel follower. Just curious of any firsthand results. Thanks in advance.

[JTQ]

Sorry for the drift. Just curious. In a Ruger P90, has anyone taken a Tripp 7 round 45acp upgrade kit and tried it in the P90? The Ruger has a 7 round magazine converted to 8 round by I think the Devel follower. Just curious of any firsthand results. Thanks in advance.

I haven't done it, but Tripp's "Flex" follower is CheckMate's Patented follower (CMF). I'd probably use that one (probably follower and spring kit) over the Tripp "hybrid" follower, that probably would turn your P90 8 rounders into 7 rounders. The Flex/CMF probably will allow you to keep 8 rounds in your tube.

Tripp Flex follower https://www.trippresearchinc.com/sup...477.1685915763

The P90 does have an aluminum frame, and most recommend avoiding the Devel follower for 1911's with aluminum frames, because they can ding the 1911 feed ramp. However, the P90 has a ramped barrel and the ding from the Devel follower is usually below the bottom of the P90 feed ramp and therefore just a cosmetic issue, on the inside of the gun.

[JAH 3rd]

Thanks for your observations on my question. Us 1911 shooters just got to tinker!

[M2CattleCo]

I see that stupid how i did article is still up.

The main problem with the tapered feedlips of gi and hybrid mags is that they get deformed because the only point of contact of the cartridge is the case rim. It hammers the feelips out of spec or cracks them. It also makes them more susceptible to inertia feeds.

And.

Without a dimpled feedramp like a gi 1911 had, the cartridge doesn’t feed straight out of the mag, it rides one side or the other or goes down the middle. That changes the release point a little bit.

They generally work ok with ball ammo but if you want to feed any ammo into a throated barrel, and you have a throated barrel, wadcutter feedlips are better in every way.