1911 a Jam-O-Matic?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mike Irwin

Staff
(I should have mentioned that this is a continuation of the closed post on 1911s and reliability.)

I mentioned my MilSpec by Springfield. I should have added this.

The ONLY problems I've ever had with it when shooting hardball ammo have been:

1. Magazine. I had one the other month popping two rounds out every time the action cycled. 10 seconds with a pliers, and the mag. functions perfectly again.

2. When I forgot to lubricate it after cleaning it. Can you say dry as a bone?

I think that it was still new enough at that point (fewer than 500 rounds) that there were still a lot of friction points.

I lubed, and no problems.

Given those two instances, and given the fact that I don't carry a 1911-type gun for personal protection, I'm perfectly happy shooting hardball through it with high reliability.

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.

[This message has been edited by Mike Irwin (edited August 14, 2000).]
 
Well I figured this was the second part.
1911 Ive Been around three of them, have a few but havent shot two of them. The three I have used have been 1 Seventy series, and two eighties series colts. The seventy series fed great but stove piped and ejected to forehead the other two ejected fine but need ramp and barrel polishing, now they all feed and eject reliably. 70 Series needed an oversized firing pin stop, a little heavy on the slide cutting machine at colt! Lowered and flaried the ejection port. Advantages to the 1911 is that almost anyone can take them down to all their individual parts easily, I doubt this can be done with the euro guns.

They are definityly reliable in a hot oven ;)

Yeah I hear of problems but also see very knowledgeable people who use this pattern, as good a shooter or better than all on this board.Clint Smith,Cooper,Piazza, and a slew of others. Last trip to front sight all but one instructor I saw had 1911's, only disenting had a glock.LAPD SWAT,HRT, and the list goes on, find it hard to believe that if the pistols have an inherent design fault all these combat and cometition experts and masters would be using the thing.
As has been said before, a dozen makers and lack of qc has done a diservice to this pistol.
I wish a competion could be done between 25 from each company, too bad John B isnt here to supply the pistols for it. I believe most of his demonstrations with his arms proved beyond a doubt they were as reliable as possible, considering they are made by an imperfect species such as humans.
 
My 1911's are so reliable, they will cycle a magazine full of empty brass without jamming.
Try it with yours.
It's an excellent way to quiet some of the "1911 experts" at the range who feel compelled to share their vast knowledge by telling you how "these inaccurate guns jam all the time".
 
Bottom Gun,

Next time I'm shooting at something with nothing, I'll remember that my gun might be able to feed empty brass. :)

Sorry, but I just don't see how that prooves a thing about the reliability of the 1911.

I can use the door hinge on my 1991 (straight 91 model, no A1) Plymouth Sundance to open beer bottles. Does that tell me anything about how good a car it is?

Now, who wants a beer? :D

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
Well, this past weekend, I was at the EOSM in Springfield, Missouri. Without any cleaning, the Steve Clark Custom 1911 cycled over 800 rounds with a jam. This "inaccurate" gun shot sub 1" groups for myself and many other shooters. Even several Glock guys shot little cloverleaf clusters.

I even tried shooting it @ 75 yards offhand just for kicks. Although the groups were HUGE, the rounds did hit the target.

Inaccurate? Yeah some, most are because of the shooters. Unreliable? Some due to faulty magazines. Some due to lemons. For the most part, the myth of a 1911 being outdated is just that; a myth.
 
Those magazines that come with the Springfields are my only gripe about the LOADED package. Those mags just plain suck.
While they may function just fine - they are less than ideal. The follower is the main problem. Wilsons or any other maker are much more disirable and load and strip much easier... with a slicker feel - so much so that I would bet money that they will aid in reliable cycling with poorer quality ammo.
 
Mike...if Bottom Gun's .45 will feed empty hulls, I think that is indeed significant. If it will feed them, it will feed anything from full wadcutters to ball. That can be important in a crunch situation.

Sam...my reload is nuther wheelgun, they shoot anything.
 
Sorry, CR, but I don't think that is necessarily the case at all. The length of what is being fed can also be a critical factor.

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
My 1911 (Caspian, of course) feeds ammo 100% when shooting.

It is reliable. That's why I carry it.

(I should probably add that I've spent enormous sums of U.S. dollars to get it that way, but it was actually worth it. Really.)

------------------
"All my ammo is factory ammo"
 
Well all I can say is that I have never had a single malfunction or feeding problem with either gun. They've digested everything from flying ashtrays to hardball.

The empty brass cycling may well be BS, as Mr Shipley says. I'm am only drawing from my own 30+ years of shooting a 1911.

I did have a Series 70 Mark IV which would not cycle empty brass. As it turned out, this one would jam occasionally with all types of ammo right up until the day I sold it.
Maybe there's a connection there, maybe not.
 
I have to say that in my experiance, the 1911 is the least reliable pistol I have ever shot. As an example, the Springfield I just bought has been to the factory twice, once for breakage, and once for reliability problems. Out of 1400 rounds of hardball, I estimate about 200 malfunctions. Compared to both of my Glocks, I have had exactly 5 malfunctions, and that is after about a total of 12,000 rounds. Add in the USP I had that never malfunctioned after 5000 rounds, and the Tokarev I have had that has over 1000 rounds and 0 malfs. At the IPSC and IDPA matches I shoot, both stock and racegun 1911s fail more often than the Glocks. Also, when I attended a course at Frontsight, all of the 1911s there had malfunctioned at least once, and my Glock never even hiccuped. While I believe a 1911 was at one time the best thing going, its reputation for reliability is something of a myth.

PS Piazza carries a G-22, not a 1911.
 
Hemp perhaps I am mistaken on him, though he did give a speech about his gunsite experience with cooper and maybe that is where his talk of the 1911 came from.
 
Oberkommando, Naish did talk about carrying a 1911, but look on his hip, and listen to what he does now. You will notice he uses a Glock 22.
Mr. Hill, that is your opinion, I have mine. From my limited experiance, I have found all pistols to be overrated in some way. I have personally had a slide on my Glock shatter because of poor quality control, so I know that no man made object is perfect. However, feel the Glock is the closet for my purposes. The 1911 may be for yours. To say one design is good for all applications is foolish. But I must again state that the 1911s reliability has been overrated in my experiance.
 
Hemphill,

A slide shattered!!!!!!??????? I hope you weren't injured.
Makes for kind of a slow follow-up shot when that happens, doesn't it? But if you say they're reliable. . . . .

In my opinion, I wouldn't trust a gun that jammed even once after the first 500 or so rounds unless I could definitely trace the jam to a magazine problem, which I would then replace.
I certainly wouldn't feel good about carrying it for a duty gun or as a self defense gun. The way I see it, 5 malfunctions are 5 malfunctions. Even if it was 5 out of 12,000, you still had 5 occurrences when the gun failed to work. That is not 100% reliability.

If we are talking about reliability as in carry guns, even 99.9 percent is unacceptable. If my auto weren't 100%, I'd carry a revolver. As it is, I carry one about half the time anyway, but I like the 1911 style design too.

Look how long the military used the 1911. It hasn't remained in production to this day because the design is flawed. True, you do run across a bad one now and then and it's unfortunate you had that experience. It truly is a good gun. I've never had anything break on mine. The 1911 was my first handgun and will probably be my last too.

Just my two cents,

Bottom Gun
 
Yes Mr Hemp - you do indeed have your own opinion... Mine is based on using 1911's for the majority of my pistol experience. Starting in the US ARMY. The Government Model has never failed me even in my most dire and admitedly dirty times. It and myself while covered in some of the most malodious gunk imaginable functioned as designed and put down a threat... I agree that other pistols could have done the same that day - like the USP .45 or the SIG P220... But lik emost men when facing combat for the first time... they dont know how they will really perform until they are neck deep as I was and its too late to change your mind.
Advances in pistol making have been mainly in matterials. Polymer is NOT BETTER than steel. You cant PROOVE that to me. Other new designs are simply different methods of mechanically busting that cap, and internal safeties. Most internal safeties are defeated by simply pulling the trigger.
If you remember the 4 Gun Commandments - thats a moot point anyway. Keep your finger off the trigger and these new designs wont fire. Neither will a 1911. Not unless the gun is in a serious state of disrepair - but then again so will Glocks and others.
You use what you trust my friend... you use what you trust. In my book trust is earned - not granted until prooven otherwise. Part of that trust is an understanding that you will do your part in keeping that pistol in good working order... cleaned, lubed, and questionable parts replaced. Do that - and most any modern pistol will work for you just fine. Even Ruger P series...
 
The 5 malfunctions I had with my Glocks were ammunition related, 2 of the rounds were undercharged, and 2 were out of spec reloads, and one was a factory load where the bullet was driven into the case.
With good ammo, the pistols performed flawlessly. The slide that broke on me had the breechface split and pieces fall out. When I returned it to Glock, they called me and said that it was an extreme aberration.
My stance on the 1911's reliability still is unchanged. Out of the many 1911s I have shot, the only one that I have never had any problems with was an old Remington Rand piece that had a barrel that would rattle in the barrel bushing. But, it would feed cases backwards if you tried it. But hitting a chest size target at 15 yards was a challenge.
Mr. Hill please don't take my criticism of your choice and an attack. I couldn't agree with you more reguarding building trust. I have bought a couple of 1911s and none have ever been very reliable. However, with other designs I have never had any problems. That is why I trust those designs. Also, my limited experiance in IPSC and IDPA has bolstered my opinion.
However, the 1911 excells at these sports because of its many merits. I personally shoot the 1911 a little faster and more accurately than a Glock, but I cannot personally trust them with my life. If Springfield fixes my pistol this time, I might consider carrying it. But even after then I will need to prove it.
 
This is somewhere around the umpteenth go-round on this topic.

At one time or another over the last 50+ years, I've shot just about everything there is of "mainstream" handguns.

None have ever failed to perform due to design flaws. Some were not as good as they might be, due to quality control--as near as I can tell. Only from what "they say" is it reasonable to believe that Colt's quality control has slipped. If so, avoid their new offerings. But I've never had any problems whatsoever with any early-1970s or older 1911s or 1911A1s. Never.

I did see a lot of half-baked efforts by self-styled gunsmiths in the early 1980s in IPSC guns where quite a few failures occurred. But that's no design flaw, nor Colt's fault.

FWIW, Art
 
Hey George,

If the 1911 was perfection, why did John Browning keep improving on it, and significantly alter the basic design? :)

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.

[This message has been edited by Mike Irwin (edited August 17, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top