I have recently been researching a bit to learn more about the 1911's history and have not found much about performance tests done by the military when it was in service. I have read of a lot of the "stress/reliability/punishing" type tests done to HK's and other firearms and how well they survive, but how did the 'ol 1911 fair in various environments?
1911 reliability tests
- Thread starter Strabs
- Start date
They lasted from the Phillipines thru the trenches of WWI to fighting on 3 continents of WWII & Vietnam. They have recently been re-chosen as the fighting pistols of the FBI's Hostage Rescue team. They are still the principal choice of many service/LE personnel.
H&Ks are great guns (I have 3), but 1911 pistols have been around longer in the real world. Just take care of them like you would any other firearm.
H&Ks are great guns (I have 3), but 1911 pistols have been around longer in the real world. Just take care of them like you would any other firearm.
Dfariswheel
New member
As I recall the original test weapons were the Colt 1911 and a Savage 45 auto. The test was 6000 rounds. (This was quite a lot in 1911). The Colt fired the entire 6000 rounds with no malfs.
We had tested the Luger, but it was rejected. I seem to remember that rust, dust, mud, and water tests were also done.
We had tested the Luger, but it was rejected. I seem to remember that rust, dust, mud, and water tests were also done.
It's also the weapon of choice for Army Special Forces Operators.
Over the course of time, many fly by night joints and various companies try to "better" the original design by making it tighter or using junk parts. The after effect was(still is!) a ton of junk or unreliable 1911's floating around. Hence, the rumors that 1911's are unreliable. It's simply a design but people tend to group all the firearms out there together as the 1911 instead of Kimber, Colt, Springfield, Chuck Daly, Norinco, Les Baer, Wilson Combat, etc etc etc.
Try shooting 230 grain FMJ ammo through an old Colt, Springfield, Singer (if you can afford or find one) or Mil-Spec Springfield and count how many malfunctions you'll have. ZERO.
Over the course of time, many fly by night joints and various companies try to "better" the original design by making it tighter or using junk parts. The after effect was(still is!) a ton of junk or unreliable 1911's floating around. Hence, the rumors that 1911's are unreliable. It's simply a design but people tend to group all the firearms out there together as the 1911 instead of Kimber, Colt, Springfield, Chuck Daly, Norinco, Les Baer, Wilson Combat, etc etc etc.
Try shooting 230 grain FMJ ammo through an old Colt, Springfield, Singer (if you can afford or find one) or Mil-Spec Springfield and count how many malfunctions you'll have. ZERO.
I agree with Son: There are so many wannabe Colt 45 Automatic Pistols out there they have given the original a bad name. Buy the original and you will be well served.
The military had the 1911/1911A1 designated pistols. Colt built the commercial models alongside the military production.
In the 80s and later every Tom, Dick, and Harry began to build copies. Springfield Armory (the fake one) even had the gall to copyright the army nomenclature "1911A1."
Seems to have deceived quite a number of people but the word is getting out.
That is why you have so many questionable 45 Autos out there.
The military had the 1911/1911A1 designated pistols. Colt built the commercial models alongside the military production.
In the 80s and later every Tom, Dick, and Harry began to build copies. Springfield Armory (the fake one) even had the gall to copyright the army nomenclature "1911A1."
Seems to have deceived quite a number of people but the word is getting out. That is why you have so many questionable 45 Autos out there.
No Browning Design Ever Failed
It speaks volumes that every Tom, Dick, and Harry CAN manufacture a 1911 clone, and the damned thing will work!
It's not suprisng though. No design ever submitted to the Military by John Moses Browning EVER failed the testing procedure! As I recall, the .30 Cal BMG fired tripple the number of required rounds at JMB's insistance.
Like cockroaches and VW Beetles, Browning's designs will outlive us all.
Yr. Obt. Svnt.
It speaks volumes that every Tom, Dick, and Harry CAN manufacture a 1911 clone, and the damned thing will work!
It's not suprisng though. No design ever submitted to the Military by John Moses Browning EVER failed the testing procedure! As I recall, the .30 Cal BMG fired tripple the number of required rounds at JMB's insistance.
Like cockroaches and VW Beetles, Browning's designs will outlive us all.
Yr. Obt. Svnt.
Wild Romanian
Moderator
Strab also the 1911 can be stripped down to the frame with no tools in a matter of seconds and reassembled with no damage to the pistol. Try doing that with a lot of modern pistols and you will need an arsenal of special tools and spare parts to put it back together (like the cheap roll pins many of them use.). Many of the newer pistols are easily damaged when reassembled if estreme care is not taken in the reassembly process. WE are not talking about just taking the slide off but are speaking of completely stripping the frame. The 1911 can easily be maintained in the field. Most other pistols just do not fall into this catagory. In fact damn few do.
As an added bonus if you have a good quality pistol it can always be gunsmithed into a super target gun tha leaves the competition so far behind in the accuracy game it is not even worth talking about. W.R.
As an added bonus if you have a good quality pistol it can always be gunsmithed into a super target gun tha leaves the competition so far behind in the accuracy game it is not even worth talking about. W.R.
Brian Busch
New member
From Para-Ordnance:
On 15 March 1911, an endurance test was held to chose a pistol for the US Army. The test involved firing 6000 rounds, with cleaning after every one hundred shots fired, then allowing them to cool for 5 minutes. After every 1000 rounds, the pistol would be cleaned and oiled. After firing those 6000 rounds, the pistols were then tested with deformed cartridges, rusted in acid or submerged in sand and mud.
Only one pistol, a weapon designed by John Browning, had NO malfunctions and on 28 March 1911, the U.S. Army finally adopted the Browning-designed pistol as the United States Pistol, Caliber .45, Model 1911, beginning an eighty-five year relationship with the US Military.
In 1924 the design was updated and renamed the M1911A1.
It should be noted no mechanical changes have ever been made to the pistol since first adopted by the military. The M1911A1 was and is the finest pistol of its type in the world. It is the Gold Standard by which all other pistols must be judged.
On 15 March 1911, an endurance test was held to chose a pistol for the US Army. The test involved firing 6000 rounds, with cleaning after every one hundred shots fired, then allowing them to cool for 5 minutes. After every 1000 rounds, the pistol would be cleaned and oiled. After firing those 6000 rounds, the pistols were then tested with deformed cartridges, rusted in acid or submerged in sand and mud.
Only one pistol, a weapon designed by John Browning, had NO malfunctions and on 28 March 1911, the U.S. Army finally adopted the Browning-designed pistol as the United States Pistol, Caliber .45, Model 1911, beginning an eighty-five year relationship with the US Military.
In 1924 the design was updated and renamed the M1911A1.
It should be noted no mechanical changes have ever been made to the pistol since first adopted by the military. The M1911A1 was and is the finest pistol of its type in the world. It is the Gold Standard by which all other pistols must be judged.
1911 reliabilty
Well, I don't own nor have I shot a 1911 or copy therof, but logic dictates that if the US Armed Forces used something for 80+ years, it must have done something right. I did own, however Mr. Browning's other progeny, The P-35, also known as the High Power, it too is simple to maintain and accurate and was and in some countries is, still the sidearm of choice. The reasons why I got the High Power as opposed to the 1911, was I fired a .45 ACP pistol, (non-1911) I couldn't hit anything with it. I'm decent shot with .38 9mm, .357 magnum and 9x18mm Makarov, and hence, thats what I use.
Well, I don't own nor have I shot a 1911 or copy therof, but logic dictates that if the US Armed Forces used something for 80+ years, it must have done something right. I did own, however Mr. Browning's other progeny, The P-35, also known as the High Power, it too is simple to maintain and accurate and was and in some countries is, still the sidearm of choice. The reasons why I got the High Power as opposed to the 1911, was I fired a .45 ACP pistol, (non-1911) I couldn't hit anything with it. I'm decent shot with .38 9mm, .357 magnum and 9x18mm Makarov, and hence, thats what I use.
Let's not forget the "Saturday Night Special" tests conducted in the 1970's by the Treasury Dept. It was a 3,000 round test where one jam disqualified the weapon, and in the end out of dozens of guns only the two test 1911s and one Hi-Power made it! Both Browning designs too, I might add. 
Even during the JSAAP tests in the late 70's to find a new Service 9mm the test M1911A1s chugged along right alongside the newer designs. And they were 40 years old too, compared to the brand-new 9mm samples.
I agree 100% with the others in that reliabilty problems with the 1911 are mostly the result of manufacturers taking shortcuts or incompetent modifications to the gun. The worst that can be said of the basic design reliability-wise is that the plunger tube and extractor need paying close attention to, but of course they're both small and easily-replaced parts.
Even during the JSAAP tests in the late 70's to find a new Service 9mm the test M1911A1s chugged along right alongside the newer designs. And they were 40 years old too, compared to the brand-new 9mm samples.
I agree 100% with the others in that reliabilty problems with the 1911 are mostly the result of manufacturers taking shortcuts or incompetent modifications to the gun. The worst that can be said of the basic design reliability-wise is that the plunger tube and extractor need paying close attention to, but of course they're both small and easily-replaced parts.
I once tried to jam up a Sistema Colt 1911 Copy by shooting AND not cleaning the gun FOR A YEAR!
The only maintenance done at all was wiping the exterior down with a oily rag, absolutly NO other maintenance was done.
After a year and about 1000 rounds it had still not malfunctioned once.
Try THAT! with a M-16.
The only maintenance done at all was wiping the exterior down with a oily rag, absolutly NO other maintenance was done.
After a year and about 1000 rounds it had still not malfunctioned once.
Try THAT! with a M-16.
teufelmann55
New member
If memory seves me right the ordnance dept. tests were along these criteria.
1 Fire 6000 rounds without any breakages,malfunctions or stoppages. 100rds fired then let cool for 5 minutes. After every 1000rds cleaned and oiled. When pistol became too hot too hold it was doused with water.
2 Then fire deformed and dented mis-shaped ctgs. also ctgs. thats' bullets were seated to deeply or not deep enough.
3 Then the pistol was intentionally corroded with some form of acid and fired for reliability.
4 Lastly the pistol was coated and filled with a fine silt like dust and the operator had a set amount of time to clean the gun without any tools or dissambly and fire it for reliability.
I wonder how many "modern" guns would pass such tests?
1 Fire 6000 rounds without any breakages,malfunctions or stoppages. 100rds fired then let cool for 5 minutes. After every 1000rds cleaned and oiled. When pistol became too hot too hold it was doused with water.
2 Then fire deformed and dented mis-shaped ctgs. also ctgs. thats' bullets were seated to deeply or not deep enough.
3 Then the pistol was intentionally corroded with some form of acid and fired for reliability.
4 Lastly the pistol was coated and filled with a fine silt like dust and the operator had a set amount of time to clean the gun without any tools or dissambly and fire it for reliability.
I wonder how many "modern" guns would pass such tests?
BrokenArrow
New member
In the early XM9 JSSAP tests, the reliability benchmark set by the 40 year old M1911A1s used as a reference was 1/450.
When the Beretta was slected as the M9, it scored 1/2000, the other "technically acceptable" pistol was the SIG P226 at 1/1000.
Some of the latest t&e results have the M9 up to 1/30,000 and the M11 (SIG228) at 1/15,000, the HK 45 at 1/15,000.
FBI SWAT 1911s had to meet a std of 1/2500. IIRC, 4 guns fired 20K each for a total of 80K w 7 or 8 jams. The Glock 40s fired a total of 120K (20K x 6) with 0 jams.
When the Beretta was slected as the M9, it scored 1/2000, the other "technically acceptable" pistol was the SIG P226 at 1/1000.
Some of the latest t&e results have the M9 up to 1/30,000 and the M11 (SIG228) at 1/15,000, the HK 45 at 1/15,000.
FBI SWAT 1911s had to meet a std of 1/2500. IIRC, 4 guns fired 20K each for a total of 80K w 7 or 8 jams. The Glock 40s fired a total of 120K (20K x 6) with 0 jams.
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
FWIW, I have a Series 80 Government model with just a little over 70K through it with no malfunctions attributable to the weapon. Still have the original barrel-have replaced the barrel bushing a few times as they wear, but were still functional. Have replaced the recoil spring once. And all without that $1500 "reliability package" all the know-nothings say you absolutely have to have. Friend of mine who works at an indoor range locally talks about a Series 70, complete with the collet bushing-replaced once in 350,000 rounds, and its still running. Anyone else?
Mike Irwin
Staff
I've got a commercial Springfield MilSpec 1911-A1 that I use mainly for bowling pin shooting.
I've run a couple thousand total rounds through it, both handloads and factory.
I've had a number of malfunctions, ALL of which can be directly traced back to MY actions, not any deficiency in the gun.
The first round of malfunctions was at a bowling pin match.
The more I shot the gun, the more it would hang up. Couldn't figure it out, until I took it apart, and realized that I had, the week previously, cleaned it, walked away for awhile, then come back and reassembled it WITHOUT lubricating the slide rails.
No wonder it was malfunctioning as it got dirty.
The second round of malfunctions was at the NRA Range several weeks ago, shooting my handloads.
I started having failures to chamber with my loads, and had to slap the back of the slide.
Turns out that I had messed up in setting my seating/crimping die, and the case mouths were slighly oversized.
The rounds wouldn't chamber in my Model 1917 S&W revolver, but the 1911 WAS chambering about 70% of these rounds simply by brute force.
A slight die adjustment to rework the unfired rounds, a trip back to the NRA range, and 100% reliability. Except for the fact that one of my cheap-ass aftermarket magazines has soft feed lips and is ejecting rounds out the top port. Kind of funny to be shooting and realize that TWO cases have just ejected, one fired, one loaded!
That magazine's in the trash. I've got bad luck with .45 Mags. Dropped one last year and totally mucked it up, and now this.
But, Mr. James has some new Springfield magazines for me, which I need to pick up from him...
I've run a couple thousand total rounds through it, both handloads and factory.
I've had a number of malfunctions, ALL of which can be directly traced back to MY actions, not any deficiency in the gun.
The first round of malfunctions was at a bowling pin match.
The more I shot the gun, the more it would hang up. Couldn't figure it out, until I took it apart, and realized that I had, the week previously, cleaned it, walked away for awhile, then come back and reassembled it WITHOUT lubricating the slide rails.
No wonder it was malfunctioning as it got dirty.
The second round of malfunctions was at the NRA Range several weeks ago, shooting my handloads.
I started having failures to chamber with my loads, and had to slap the back of the slide.
Turns out that I had messed up in setting my seating/crimping die, and the case mouths were slighly oversized.
The rounds wouldn't chamber in my Model 1917 S&W revolver, but the 1911 WAS chambering about 70% of these rounds simply by brute force.
A slight die adjustment to rework the unfired rounds, a trip back to the NRA range, and 100% reliability. Except for the fact that one of my cheap-ass aftermarket magazines has soft feed lips and is ejecting rounds out the top port. Kind of funny to be shooting and realize that TWO cases have just ejected, one fired, one loaded!
That magazine's in the trash. I've got bad luck with .45 Mags. Dropped one last year and totally mucked it up, and now this.
But, Mr. James has some new Springfield magazines for me, which I need to pick up from him...
Art Eatman
Staff in Memoriam
By and large, the WW II period saw a lessening of the importance of the 1911A1 in the mind of the Army leadership. That's why we got the M1 Carbine and the "Greasegun" for officers and truckdrivers and such folks. Pistol training, generally, was nil.
Even so, the MPs had to have pistols.
When the Beretta was adopted, there was some mumbling about unfair testing, etc. Allegedly the tests were slanted to favor the Beretta. I don't know. What I DO know, however, is that at that time we were the only country in NATO which did not use any armaments produced by another NATO country. Our change to the Beretta was the least disruptive of any change in weaponry.
FWIW, Art
Even so, the MPs had to have pistols.
When the Beretta was adopted, there was some mumbling about unfair testing, etc. Allegedly the tests were slanted to favor the Beretta. I don't know. What I DO know, however, is that at that time we were the only country in NATO which did not use any armaments produced by another NATO country. Our change to the Beretta was the least disruptive of any change in weaponry.
FWIW, Art