Broken Ejector on a Colt 70 series 1911 45acp

[44 AMP]

.I hope there's no harm in changing to the extended version ,

PROBABLY not, but you need to check to be sure. And you need proper dummy ammo, NOT snap caps. Live ammo can be used, but one needs to use proper safety precautions (safe backstop, etc.) Removing the firing pin isn't a bad idea, when using live ammo to test feed & ejection cycling.

I say not to use snap caps for a reason. They aren't "trustworthy" enough.

Sometimes the stars line up just right and something that should work ok, doesn't, or doesn't in certain conditions while working ok, otherwise.

A friend got a 1911, from a "name" shop, not a 1911A1, a 1911, reproduction of a 1918 gun, down to the period correct markings....

Had the gun about 6 months, took it to the range 3 or 4 times, no problems. My friend also uses snapcaps, and odds are about 90% or more of his guns have a snap cap in the chamber when stored. He cleared the gun before handing it to me, snap cap ejected as expected.

I was looking at it, and noticed something "odd" about the ejector. It seemed too long. I was an Army Small Arms repairman in the 70s when the 1911/1911A1 was still the service pistol, and I know what the GI ejector looks like. The one in his gun wasn't "right" for that "period piece".

It was one of the long, "extended" ejectors. My friends range time with the gun was firing two magazines shooting to slide lock each time. Gun ran fine, ejected empties normally. We got to "playing" with it, testing different things, and discovered a curious problem. Empties ejected normally. Hollowpoints ejected normally. Snap Caps ejected normally.

230gr RN GI ball ammo would not eject a loaded round!!! The nose of the bullet would jam against the slide just below the ejection port!


This was due, I believe to a "stars lined up" combination of size (and weight) of the loaded round, too long an ejector, and the "small" ejection port of the original 1911 design slide. My friend had never noticed it, as, until we began testing, he had never tried to eject a loaded 230gr ball round.

He called the shop, described the problem, they said, "hmm that's odd, send it in..." Sent the gun on Tuesday, got it back Thursday the week after, with the proper ejector. All shipping and work done on their dime. Shop apologized, said "it never should have gone out the door that way..."

I mention this to point out that while an extended ejector PROBABLY won't be an issue in your gun, it MIGHT be, if the stars line up just "right".

 

[cw308]

44 AMP
Hopefully the stars will line up , I was premature in changing the ejector , wasn't familiar with the 70 series Government ejector looked like , thought all ejectors had that nub . Anyway the install went very easy , tested with snap caps and empty cases with no for seen problems but the real test will be Thursday . The gun is very tight , I have to cock the hammer first to chamber the first round , trigger is very good , changed all the springs to standard weights to start fresh .

 

[Steve in Allentown]

44 AMP is right about a too long ejector not being able to eject a live round.

If you haven't heard it already, let me be the first to advise you that there are precious few 1911 parts that can be considered "drop-in". Nearly every part must be massaged in some way in order for it to fit and function optimally.

The ejector is no exception.

I prefer to whittle my ejectors from an EGW XXL Ejector Block. I leave the nose as long as possible and then begin the process of shortening it until a factory 230gr FMJ will eject.

Below is a comparison picture. The one on top is a from Colt Commander. The one in the middle represents the beginning length of an ejector that I whittled out of the EGW blank which is on the bottom.

I stick the ejector into the frame without the crosspin then assemble the barrel, slide (with extractor installed), slide stop pin, and frame. Next I slip a factory round under the extractor and gently close the slide until the cartridge is fully seated in the chamber. Then I slowly pull the slide rearward until the cartridge makes hard contact with the underside of the barrel hood.

The next picture shows hard contact between the cartridge and the underside of the barrel hood. At this point the slide will not move any further back and I disassemble the pistol so I can shorten the ejector nose a bit.

I continue to reassemble, test for clearance, and shorten until the nose of the bullet will just barely clear the barrel hood. On shorter than 5" pistols as the length of the ejector is getting close to allowing the cartridge to clear the hood, I will forcefully pull the slide to the rear. At some point the cartridge will eject even if there appears to be no clearance. On these short pistols I may lower the ejection port and/or carefully relieve the hood to allow for the longest possible ejector nose.

I start out with a perfectly flat ejector nose and am prepared to angle it appropriately if live firing uncovers an ejection problem. Below is a picture of the now fitted ejector coming through the breechface. Note how well it fills the slide's ejector cut out. This is one of the advantages of using the grossly oversized EGW ejector blank. Lately, I have very good luck with perfectly flat noses and have not needed to angle them in any way to achieve perfect ejection.

The close fit of the ejector to the slide cut out can also be seen from the rear.

My advice is to go ahead and fit the new ejector as I described above reducing the length of the nose just enough to allow for live round (230gr FMJ) ejection. You will still have plenty of material on the nose so you can experiment with nose profiles to attain clean ejection of the empty cases.

I like to get the empty cases out of the pistol as soon as possible which is why my ejectors are generally not of the same pattern as those in the pistols I carried in the 1970s courtesy of Uncle Sam.

 

[cw308]

Steve
Your pictures are worth a thousand words , Thank You . I have ordered parts from EGW for my carry piece , it's a Colt New Agent , changed to their recoil assembly , much stronger and top shelf quality . The ejector I ordered from Brownells looks like your photo of the Commander only flat not angled . One thing I didn't check that your pictures showed was the area at the stop plate , I think it's a flat all the way to the front , will check after I finish writing . I did the checks with a bummy bullet , snap caps and empty case all ejected but the real test will be Thursday .

I'm also going to change out the disconnector , when pushing down on the disconnector I feel the roughness , when looking at the contact areas all look good , no wear or burrs but at the disconnector OD is very rough , looks like it was made that way . EGW has a ball type and Wlison has the standard both look well made and very smooth . Didn't order yet , looks like a no brainier . Thanks Again .

Chris

 

[Steve in Allentown]

I'm also going to change out the disconnector , when pushing down on the disconnector I feel the roughness . . .

The EGW ball head disconnector is an excellent choice. Still, polishing the contact points of the disconnector wouldn't be a bad idea.

 

[Reloadron]

Steve,
Many thanks for sharing and the excellent images.

Thanks
Ron

 

[cw308]

Ordered part . I for sure will let you know on each step how it went. I can't thank all of you enough for all your time and helpful information . Great kicking the can down the road with all of you , if the gun doesn't shoot , heck it's nice to look at . If you believe that , I have a bridge for sale if anyone's interested .

Chris

 

[Steve in Allentown]

Areas to polish on a disconnector. You should also polish the tip of the middle leaf of the sear spring where it contacts the disconnector, the rear of the trigger where it contacts the disconnector, and the disconnector rail of the slide .

 

[cw308]

Just love those diagrams .

Chris

 

[44 AMP]

Polish, but don't remove any metal from the disconnector's contact with the slide. You need it full length to allow for normal wear over time, and if you "polish" it too short, it won't do its job properly.

Hand tools /stones don't use power tools, its too easy to take off too much before you realize it.

Also make sure the frame tunnel is smooth and free of grit.

If you haven't heard it already, let me be the first to advise you that there are precious few 1911 parts that can be considered "drop-in". Nearly every part must be massaged in some way in order for it to fit and function optimally.

I won't argue with this at all. But because I worked on GI guns for the Army, I must point out that "optimally" and "fully serviceable" are different things.

 

[cw308]

44
I only polish by hand with Mothers Polish very mild polish . The 1911 is a great pistol to dissemble , no little pins to loose in a rug or fly across the room . When seeing how it opperates it gives you a good understanding what's going on , not into modifying things . I received a barrel and action for a Springfield 1903 30-06 , no sights , stock just a stripped barrel & bolt from a family member that brought it back from the Korean war . Cost me almost four hundred dollars to order every pin screws and sights mount or trigger . Once I had all the parts I told my wife I was going in the basement to assemble and would see her in two weeks . It took one hour if that all the parts fit like a well made puzzle . First time I shot it was alittle scary but the weapon grouped at 100 yards so tight , the barrel looked brand new . Let my Son in Law use it on his first deer hunt and shot a 8 pointer first time out go figure . Let him keep the rifle he loved it so much . After making this short story long . Hope the 1911 parts are made the same way.

 

[Steve in Allentown]

But because I worked on GI guns for the Army, I must point out that "optimally" and "fully serviceable" are different things.

Quite right. As a tanker in the 70s and 80s I am well familiar with "serviceable" 1911s. They would rattle and shake but always go bang. Bullseye pistols they were not. I was pretty sure I could hit bad guys on the front slope or on the back deck. Bad guys further away than that were the responsibility of the coax (M73).

These days I'm into "optimal" fitting 1911s. I like them to function as smooth as snot on a door knob, as accurate as I can hold out to 100 yards, and 100% reliable with any ammo I can stuff in 'em.

 

[44 AMP]

Bad guys further away than that were the responsibility of the coax (M73).

Mention of the M73 brings back many memories...
Including what a piece of over designed crap they were...
The took out some parts and called it M73A1...
Then they took out some more parts and called it the M219...
which worked kind of, when it felt liked, until it broke...
I got to see some of the tests run when they replaced it with the M240...night and day, man,..night and day...

They would rattle and shake but always go bang. Bullseye pistols they were not

Considering the last new 1911s in GI service were bought in 1945 before they canceled the contracts with the end of the war, I think them still being serviceable n the 70s and 80s is quite the testament to their design and construction.

The 1911 is a great pistol to dissemble , no little pins to loose in a rug or fly across the room .

There are a couple pins you might lose for a while in deep shag, but they are really small...and I've seen trainees, shoot the recoil spring plug across the room. We used to joke it was the "8th shot" in a 1911A1 (GI mags standard 7 shot, there were no others in those days). DON'T get your face in front of it!

Here's one of the beautiful things about the GI 1911A1 design, you can detail strip the pistol using the pistol's parts as tools.

 

[Steve in Allentown]

Mention of the M73 brings back many memories...

Completely agree that they were crap as was the M85 .50 in the TC cupola. We'd go to extreme lengths trying to make these things run including squirting 30W oil over the ammo after it was loaded into the trays and only running the M85 on its high rate of fire setting. We'd often swap machine guns around among the tanks so that whichever crew was making its Tank Table 8 run would have functioning ones.

Here's one of the beautiful things about the GI 1911A1 design, you can detail strip the pistol using the pistol's parts as tools.

Been there done that many times. Of course, you could always just shake them and they'd disassemble themselves

Hope the 1911 parts are made the same way.

And here's the key statement. They are not all made to the same specs and tolerences. Unlike Glocks, 1911s and their parts are made by a multitude of companies each with their own manufacturing processes. Hence the need to almost always fit a replacement part to the specific pistol.

 

[cw308]

Too bad , most combat weapons are designed to be able to easily swap parts and get back in the fight , would think the 1911 Government would be the same .

 

[Steve in Allentown]

Too bad , most combat weapons are designed to be able to easily swap parts and get back in the fight , would think the 1911 Government would be the same .

The 1911s manufactured through the end of WWII under contract with the U.S. Government were as you described. You could put a box full of parts for 100 of them on the floor, pick out parts at random to assemble a pistol, and the resulting pistol would go bang.

These days there's not a 1911 pistol or parts manufacturer that is held to a single blueprint standard by a U.S. Govt contract so you get what you get.

 

[cw308]

Too bad , companies could sell parts in spec and parts that could be oversized to fit for guns with wear . If you have the skills and equipment it's no big deal . I completely break down every gun I own , that's just me . I like knowing how it opperates , most cases it's easier to take apart then put together . I once changed the trigger return spring on my S&W 65 3" revolver , had to modify a screw driver to install the new spring or it was impossible . There's a right tool every job , I seem to start the hard way , now I know better .

 

[44 AMP]

The 1911s manufactured through the end of WWII under contract with the U.S. Government were as you described. You could put a box full of parts for 100 of them on the floor, pick out parts at random to assemble a pistol, and the resulting pistol would go bang.

These days there's not a 1911 pistol or parts manufacturer that is held to a single blueprint standard by a U.S. Govt contract so you get what you get.

This is exactly the situation we have today. The WWII guns were made for government contract, and had to be made to govt specs, and there were govt INSPECTORS at each of the subcontractor's plants, to ensure things met required specs.

And that's why all the parts for a serviceable 1911A1 were "plug and play", no fitting required. And I can assure you that if a part didn't just drop in and work, it wasn't "fitted", it was tossed, and another part from the bin was used, a process repeated until a drop in fit and function was obtained. Did it myself in the 70s. The only time we ever "fitted" any part was when there wasn't another replacement part available. Never a problem with the 45, or most of the small arms, but was an issue with mortars (81mm & 4.2") in Europe in the later 70s. We could actually order a complete mortar and get it faster than we got certain mortar PARTS. (and this on an 02 priority, the highest available when not in actual combat! )

Today, seems like everybody and their Uncle Max are making 1911 PATTERN guns and parts, some holding to GI specs, many to their own "improved" specs, and expecting you to fit their parts instead of having them just drop in and work.

Other than talking direct to the makers to find out what philosophy they adhere to, its a dice roll.

 

[cw308]

44 AMP
You are right on . Ordered a few parts from Wilson combat the part that didn't drop in was the new sear , the sear looked great but the problem was the bottom hooks that rest on the disconnector are too long , cleaned up the original sear and reinstalled . The pistol is a pleasure to shoot

Chris

 

[44 AMP]

Glad you got it running cw308!

There are a lot of people who's answer to an issue is "go buy X from Mr Green's shop. its the best, it will fix your problem!.."

it might, or it might not. Some folks seem to think you need to replace everything with "custom" fitted parts or its not worth doing.

I think differently, if the gun runs reliably and is at least "minute of man" at desired range, its good enough for me. People knock the GI guns for being "loose and sloppy" and not able to hit anything...not bothering to think about how the newest of the GI guns was made in 1945, and they were never made to be match guns, to begin with.

I've got my Dad's Govt Model. Somebody who knew what they were doing tuned it for match shooting in the 60s. Gun still does 5 shots in one ragged hole at 25 yards, if the shooter is up to that. Had a 1943 Remington-Rand that would do 3-5 inches with ball ammo at 25yds. Not the greatest, but serviceable.