1911's are confusing

[Ron]

I have full size Springfield and a 4 1/4" Rock River Arms 1911

The Springer has in the neighborhood of 40k rounds through it, countless thousands of dry fires,  been a good gun. I've only had to replace the extractor and a few springs during the course of its life. Currently the grip safety is worn out and no longer locks out the trigger. The RRA has maybe just under 10k through it, no problems at all.

Both have flat mainspring housings. I removed the full length guide rod from the Springfield long ago. The Springer came with a flared mag well and I ended up installing one on the RRA because I missed having it when using that gun.

[Perd Hapley]

From what I hear tell, it may pay to look at something that is true mil-spec. Problems avoided, not picky on ammo, reliable.

From everything I've read, the old mil-spec recipe is meant only for hard-ball ammo.  It is the more modern 1911 that's designed to use a wider variety of ammo types. 

[Gewehr98]

Be wary of those who consider themselves prophets of John Moses Browning (PBUH).  As a 1911 type for the last 20+ years, I've learned that history can and usually will prove them wrong.

Even the grip safety was something the U.S. Army foisted upon JMB as an afterthought.  He didn't want it, nor did he consider it necessary. In that respect, the Ballester-Molina (a damned fine gun in its own right) is actually more true to our beloved 1911 inventor's wishes than anything made by Colt, Remington Rand, Ithaca, Singer, or Union Switch & Signal.  

I do take exception to the misinformation about the Colt Model 1991 posted earlier in this thread.

I've owned several.

They have Series 80 lockwork with plastic triggers and mainspring housings to boot.  I'll take pictures of the firing pin plungers in the slides and the corresponding levers in the frames if y'all don't believe me. The 1991 is a Series 80 gun, no doubt about it.

Uncle Sam had no intentions whatsoever of buying Colt 1991 series guns for Desert Shield/Desert Storm.  The DoD was already well underway with issuing Beretta M9s to us "lucky" GIs by then, a process that had begun in January of 1985.  If 1911s were required by folks like Spec Ops, they simply requisitioned the folks in depot level storage to pull older 1911A1s back into the fray.  

[Hawkmoon]

A subtlety that I really like is that the Colt XSE models all have undercut trigger guards.  Springers don't.  Helps the shooter to get their hand high and tight into the grip for best control.  I first experienced it on a Colt Gold Cup (first 1911 I ever shot) and didn't know what it was until I DIDN'T experience it on other 1911's I owned later (Charles Daly and Sig).

...

Next would be a Colt Commander.  The XSE's come with the undercut trigger.  The 1991's don't.  A blued one (not parkerized) would be good, and you could cold-blue the small undercut area easily enough.  It's a carry gun, not a BBQ queen.  No one would notice unless they looked really close, at which point they'll see the kydex or leather scuffs from carrying, too.  The only aluminum alloy framed one is the XSE. 

The XSEs have the trigger guard undercut (which I do NOT like), but they also have those execrable front cocking serrations, that are universally acknowledged to be holster shredders with no real functional value. Colt includes them because so many "custom" makers have them, but the M1911 managed to survive for at least 60 or 70 years before such nonsense became popular so they obviously are not "necessary."

My pick of the litter would be a blued Colt 1991 Commander. Second choice would be the same pistol in stainless, but it has that funky "duckbill" grip safety that just cries out to be replaced by something -- ANYTHING -- else. Fortunately, a Wilson Combat drop-in beavertail is an excellent fit and, as much as any part for a 1911 can, does actually drop in.

[Perd Hapley]

The XSEs have the trigger guard undercut (which I do NOT like), but they also have those execrable front cocking serrations, that are universally acknowledged to be holster shredders with no real functional value.

The front serrations are also very ugly.

[alex_trebek]

From everything I've read, the old mil-spec recipe is meant only for hard-ball ammo.  It is the more modern 1911 that's designed to use a wider variety of ammo types. 

this is more or less true. The original design has a partial feed ramp on the barrel join with one built into the lower receiver.

Some hollow points will hang on the seam between the barrel and lower receiver. A newer design has the feed ramp built into the barrel, like most modern handguns.

I have had luck with hydrashocks, I think the bullet is more rounded so it won't catch. I think horandy's HP is a more conical shape for this reason.

My final solution was to switch to hard ball ammo, .45acp generally doesn't overpenetrate anyway.

[AZRedhawk44]

They have Series 80 lockwork with plastic triggers and mainspring housings to boot.  I'll take pictures of the firing pin plungers in the slides and the corresponding levers in the frames if y'all don't believe me. The 1991 is a Series 80 gun, no doubt about it.

Yep.  1991's are series 80's.

The XSEs have the trigger guard undercut (which I do NOT like), but they also have those execrable front cocking serrations, that are universally acknowledged to be holster shredders with no real functional value. Colt includes them because so many "custom" makers have them, but the M1911 managed to survive for at least 60 or 70 years before such nonsense became popular so they obviously are not "necessary."

I have noticed that they are rather sharp.  They have taken a bit off my kydex IWB holster, too.  Every edge on the XSE is sharp and could stand with some rounding, filing or contouring.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

this is more or less true. The original design has a partial feed ramp on the barrel join with one built into the lower receiver.

Some hollow points will hang on the seam between the barrel and lower receiver. A newer design has the feed ramp built into the barrel, like most modern handguns.

A standard 1911 with the throat and ramp properly formed will have no problems with hollow points hanging up while chambering.  There's no advantage to the ramped barrels whatsoever. 

Caveat:  This assumes normal-ish 1911s.  Tiny guns, oddball calibers, doublestack guns, etc are another story entirely.

[SADShooter]

Just to qualify what HTG wrote, it's certainly true of .45 ACP. However, as he alludes, cartridges with different feed angles like .40 and 9x19 can benefit from ramped barrels. There is also the issue of extra chamber support for higher pressure loads.                                                                                                       

[alex_trebek]

A standard 1911 with the throat and ramp properly formed will have no problems with hollow points hanging up while chambering.  There's no advantage to the ramped barrels whatsoever. 

Caveat:  This assumes normal-ish 1911s.  Tiny guns, oddball calibers, doublestack guns, etc are another story entirely.

I have personally witnessed HP rounds hang on my SA GI .45 government size at the feed ramp.  Multiple times, enough to where I didn't trust it to carry HP. AFAIK it is normal with no obvious QC flaws, and as I have alluded to it has a decent amount of rounds through it.

I think most would consider that a normalish 1911. Maybe I got a bad one, maybe not IDK.

[zahc]

Besides making takedown harder, full length guide rods also complicate slide-racking. With a normal guide rod, you can rack the slide by pushing the front of the gun against something, even your shoe or leg. Not generally recommended, but could be important some day if you only have one hand.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I have personally witnessed HP rounds hang on my SA GI .45 government size at the feed ramp.  Multiple times, enough to where I didn't trust it to carry HP. AFAIK it is normal with no obvious QC flaws, and as I have alluded to it has a decent amount of rounds through it.

I think most would consider that a normalish 1911. Maybe I got a bad one, maybe not IDK.

Check your feed ramp and throat geometry.  And check your magazines.

[charby]

I like my full length guide rod, wide thumb safety and my front cut slide.

All I need is a mag well and I'd be set.

[Ron]

I like my full length guide rod, wide thumb safety and my front cut slide.

All I need is a mag well and I'd be set.

On my Springfield the FLGR meant it required a hex wrench to disassemble. I put a standard plug in the gun just to avoid the extra inconvenience. No noticeable difference in dependability or accuracy without the guide rod, YMMV and all that though :)

I flubbed reloads with the RRA's a couple times due to the lack of a wide magwell.

[Perd Hapley]

I flubbed reloads with the RRA's a couple times due to the lack of a wide magwell.

I am so sorry, you are not a real American.  Go buy a Glock.   

[seeker_two]

1911's are great....the only flaw to the design is that most are chambered in .45ACP instead of .38Super or 10mm.....

[Jamisjockey]

You can get those calibers if your little heart desires.

[Hawkmoon]

I have personally witnessed HP rounds hang on my SA GI .45 government size at the feed ramp.  Multiple times, enough to where I didn't trust it to carry HP. AFAIK it is normal with no obvious QC flaws, and as I have alluded to it has a decent amount of rounds through it.

I think most would consider that a normalish 1911. Maybe I got a bad one, maybe not IDK.

Yep. You got a bad one.

I've tested a great number of 1911s from most of the major manufacturers over the past six or so years, and every single one has handled commercial JHP ammunition pretty much without fail. If yours won't -- there's a problem either with your pistol or with your magazine(s).

[seeker_two]

You can get those calibers if your little heart desires.

Gee....thanks Dad....but can I get them for less than a grand?....kinda hard to do...but you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an inexpensive 1911 in .45acp.....I'm just calling for a little equality for the good calibers, here.... 

[Gewehr98]

Gee....thanks Dad....but can I get them for less than a grand?....kinda hard to do...but you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an inexpensive 1911 in .45acp.....I'm just calling for a little equality for the good calibers, here....

Before somebody else here says it...

Why do you hate JMB so much?

Next thing, you'll be wanting a 1911 in 9mm Parabellum or something.  

(Still have my first-run stainless Delta Elite in 10mm, so I'm also one of those on the outside looking in.)

[Balog]

RIA made .38 Super 1911's inexpensively.

[Jamisjockey]

Gee....thanks Dad....but can I get them for less than a grand?....kinda hard to do...but you can't swing a dead cat without hitting an inexpensive 1911 in .45acp.....I'm just calling for a little equality for the good calibers, here.... 

Keep your eyes on the high road's handguns for sale.  A guy in VA had/has a nice 1911 in .38 super for $700 something not too long ago.  Been a few others in non-.45acp for sale recently, too, for under a grand. 

I *almost* went the 9mm route.  If I had, it'd have been a glock, though.  Ammo is much cheaper for shizzle.

[roo_ster]

9mm & .38Super
My wife's Springer Ultra Compact Ltwt is in 9mm.

The magazines are Chip McCormick .38Supers with a block welded into the rear of the mag.  If I were a playing man and wanted .38super, I am a chamber reamer and a new magazine away.

But, then I think, "Self, if I want .38Super numbers out of that 9mm 1911, I'd just stoke it with 9mm+P+ and get a stronger recoil spring."

I suspect any 9mm 1911 could be treated in this fashion.

.45ACP, .45ACP +P, .45Super, .45SMC --> 10mm
If I had or could only find .45ACP 1911s and I wanted a 10mm, the first place I'd look is at .45Super & .45SMC (Same Mike-foxtrot Cartridge as .45Super).  Similar KE for given bullet weights, but with heavier projectiles to play with at the top end.

However, the conversion cost will run the princely sum of one meelion dollars $8 per 1911 you want to change from .45ACP to .45Super/.45SMC:
http://www.realguns.com/archives/020.htm


Do go on over to THR's 'smithing sub-forum and search.  Some of the old-school smiths there are wary of anything with more pressure than the .45ACP in JMB's creation.  They think pretty much all of the usual suspects of higher-pressure rounds in a 1911 will cause premature failure and are a Bad Idea.  I don; recall them opining on the .40S&W and .357SIG, but I think they would be considered in the same boat, since their pressures and performance are similar to some of the previously mentioned cartridges.

Personally, I doubt I'll ever run hot stuff in my wife's SA UCLW, as it is a defensive arm that we have spent time on to find the right premium SD ammo for my wife's use (premium + reliable + ejected brass doesn't hit her on top of the head).  I'm not going to much with the CCW/SD weapon my wife is most familiar with.

I might run .45Super in my SW1911 5", but not until I have another GM or Cdr sized 1911 to serve as my primary CCW.  I do not want to play with spring swaps going from Super to ACP CCW/SD ammo.

If I ever felt the "need" for a 10mm, I'll likely just buy a 5" steel 1911, go the $8 conversion route, and call it good.

[Ryan in Maine]

Do go on over to THR's 'smithing sub-forum and search.  Some of the old-school smiths there are wary of anything with more pressure than the .45ACP in JMB's creation.  They think pretty much all of the usual suspects of higher-pressure rounds in a 1911 will cause premature failure and are a Bad Idea.  I don; recall them opining on the .40S&W and .357SIG, but I think they would be considered in the same boat, since their pressures and performance are similar to some of the previously mentioned cartridges.

1911 in .357SIG? Want. A few smiths makes very well respected conversions for .357SIG. Terry Tussey comes to mind.

[roo_ster]

1911 in .357SIG? Want. A few smiths makes very well respected conversions for .357SIG. Terry Tussey comes to mind.

So, what will .357SIG get you that 9mm+P+ won't?  Lesser magazine capacity? 

I have handled and shot several 1911 & 1911-ish pistols (B-M, Llama, & another latin make that escapes me) and I tend to think the 9mm is a more reliable feeder than even the .45ACP in the 1911.

9x23 & 9x25 seem like a real step up in performance that might make going to some trouble worth while. 

I was never a big 9mm booster, but what they have done with 9mm+P+ is purty impressive and makes .38Super and .357Sig superfluous.

Maybe it is my inherent distaste for the .40S&W and its derivatives that colors my perceptions in the case of the .357Sig.