Dan Wesson ECO - initial reaction

J

JWT

New member
Just took delivery on a new in the box Dan Wesson 1911 ECO 9mm. I own several other 1911s, including one other Dan Wesson, all .45ACPs. My initial reaction is that I like this gun better than all of the others.

It is tight, has very good sights, the trigger is exceptional right out of the box, and it is very accurate (even with my aging eyes and not too steady hands).

I've put several hundred rounds through it since getting it last week. The initial 100 rounds were Blazer aluminum with two early FTF and no further problems after that. The second 100 rounds were PMC and I had about 10 failures to eject with the first 25 rounds. I changed magazines and the problem disappeared almost immediately. The gun functioned fine for the last 75 rounds.

The trigger pull is great, the sights are very nice, and the gun has no noticeable recoil. It is a joy to shoot.

Overall I am extremely impressed with the ECO. Definitely a winner in my opinion. More Dan Wessons are sure to join it in the safe.
 
Congratulations on a good looking gun. But, 27 failures in the first 200 rounds! A 13.5% failure rate!! And you are positively impressed? Did you buy the gun for looks or utility? For looks you have a winner; for utility you have a dog.

I understand that high end 1911s are built to tight tolerances for the sake of accuracy enhancement, and that a break-in period is recommended. What does your DW User's Manual recommend for the break-in period? Based on your initial results I hope it's more than 200 rounds. If not, see if you can get your money back.

Is it possible to build a 1911 that is reliable out of the box? Supposedly JM Browning did just that a century ago, but he did not have a fetish about super tight tolerances.
 
Limnophile said:
Congratulations on a good looking gun. But, 27 failures in the first 200 rounds! A 13.5% failure rate!! And you are positively impressed? Did you buy the gun for looks or utility? For looks you have a winner; for utility you have a dog.

I understand that high end 1911s are built to tight tolerances for the sake of accuracy enhancement, and that a break-in period is recommended. What does your DW User's Manual recommend for the break-in period? Based on your initial results I hope it's more than 200 rounds. If not, see if you can get your money back.

Is it possible to build a 1911 that is reliable out of the box? Supposedly JM Browning did just that a century ago, but he did not have a fetish about super tight tolerances.
Click to expand...

This is what he said. There were 2 early FTF and then 10 failures to eject.

My "new" math skills tell me that is 12 failures out of 200. That is a 6% failure not a 13.5% failure rate. It is still too high IMHO.

JWT said:
I've put several hundred rounds through it since getting it last week. The initial 100 rounds were Blazer aluminum with two early FTF and no further problems after that. The second 100 rounds were PMC and I had about 10 failures to eject with the first 25 rounds. I changed magazines and the problem disappeared almost immediately. The gun functioned fine for the last 75 rounds.
Click to expand...

After the last 10 failures he changed the mag and had no issues. Sounds like a mag issue to me. The OP does not stated what mags are being used. If they were the OEM mags which IIRC are Checkmates or is they were aftermarket.

DWs are tight but they are still production guns. Dan Wesson states in the manual:

"In the manual, it says to expect FTF's during the first 300-500 rounds during the break in process."
 
Congrats on the new ECO. Throw out any results with Blazer aluminum ammo. A lot of semi-autos, especially 1911s, don't like them. I won't shoot them in semi-autos, only in revolvers. It also seems you're onto something with the magazine and the failure to eject. I would hope to get a couple of hundred trouble-free rounds through the gun before pronouncing it good to go.
 
Keep us posted man. I've been toying with the idea of getting a 1911 and that's one of the ones on my list. I'm thinking one of those or a Springfield EMP. I read a lot of things that kinda scared me about the Eco being unreliable after shooting a couple hundred rounds. I tend to shoot more than 200 on a range trip so that would be a deal breaker for me. From the sounds of it, that may be accurate. If the mag change was all that was needed please report back!
 
Limnophile, understand your negative comments on the ECO, but must disagree with them.

DW recommends break-in of 300 to 500 rounds before The gun is combat/competitive ready. They also recommend cleaning and re-liube after each 50 break-in rounds (not done).

To suggest the gun is for looks, but a 'dog' based on 200 rounds is not at all reasonable IMO. The mag change (DW supplied mags) appears to have corrected the issues. Ran into somewhat similar issues with my CBOB when it was new and it is now flawless. Not at all concerned at this time.
 
JWT,

I'm not bashing your ECO. In fact, I'm envious. But, I'm trying to wrap my head about a 6% failure rate seemingly being regarded as acceptable. (Thanks, WV, for correcting my Common Core math.)

It helps to know that DW says the gun won't be reliable until you have sent 500 rounds through it and relube 11 times in the process (number subject to revision should my Common Core training mislead me). That's fair enough because they are being up front about it, but leaves me wondering why such an extensive break-in is needed.

I can understand the validity of a break-in period for any SD gun, to familiarize the shooter with the firearm and to prove the reliability of the carry ammo. With a manufacturer saying 500 rounds are required before the gun can be considered reliable, that means carry ammo reliability testing can't fairly begin until round 501. That's an expensive break-in/reliability testing process.

Are looser 1911s, more in line with JMB's specs, reliable out of the box?
 
Are looser 1911s, more in line with JMB's specs, reliable out of the box?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. 1911's can malfunction for a number of reasons such as: the barrel link is the wrong length, feed ramp is cut incorrectly, extractor is not tensioned correctly, or feed ramp to barrel throat gap is incorrect.

None of that has to do with "loose" or "tight" fitting of the slide to frame or barrel lugs to slide, etc.

I had a Colt in the mid '80's that was "Colt loose" and unreliable. At that time, Colt had "Warranty Stations" instead of sending the gun back to Colt. The warranty station was a gun shop and the 'smith could not get the gun functioning reliably - I finally sold it.

One of the most reliable guns I have is a Les Baer Heavyweight Monolith. Extremely tightly fit - and it hasn't failed in 5k rounds. I have a Dan Wesson Valor that I ran close to 1900 rounds without cleaning and it never failed to operate.

The difference between a tightly fit gun and a loose gun is that the tight gun may require some number of rounds through it to achieve the final fitting.

People bag on expensive 1911's because of this and "For that price it should come from the factory already broken in." The gun could come from the factory totally smoothed out if you're willing to pay the manufacturer additional money to achieve the same thing you can do by just shooting the gun, learning its operation, sights, etc.

I fail to see a problem in having to shoot a gun.

1911's aren't the only gun that can benefit from being used. My HK VP9 trigger has gotten markedly better after 1,000 rounds for the same reason - the trigger parts have self polished. I suppose I could whine about HK etc. - but for what purpose? Shooting the gun is fun, I don't mind the "problem."
 
Last edited:
Limnophile

500 rounds seems to be more and more common in a 1911 break in period. I would also dismiss the Blazer Ammo so we are now at 5%. then not following the recommended break in cleanings doesn't help. 500 rounds is a short break in that would be less than 2 trips for me. My wife is just about to finish here break in period on her Kimber. According to her she has seen a major change in just the first 350 rounds. How much better it might get is anyone's guess. But no failures in the past 250 rounds.

I have had to break in 3 1911's that each ask for 500 rounds each. I'm currently working on a 10mm 1911. I'm just waiting for my brass to arrive so I can increase the round count faster.

JWT

Congrats on the new 1911. I have a Pointman 1 and love it.
 
I have two Dan Wessons. One Valor and one PM9.

The Valor did have some issues early on. The gun was very tight and would fail to load without a nudge forward for the first hundred rounds or so. Liberal lube on the slide enabled the gun to rid itself of small amounts of material being lapped off by the action. It also had a pretty tight chamber. Those days are long gone and the gun runs fine. I use full power 230 gr loads from a variety of manufacturers. I do keep it clean.

The gun is a great performer and I would buy it again in a heartbeat.

The PM9 has just been super from the get go. Smoothest 9mm in a 1911 I have ever shot.
 
My CCO has only ftf'd 3 times....all bottom of the barrel reloading "over runs"....uh set up rounds.

With loads made for it or factory 100%. As in never including the first 100 factory and first 50 Gold Dots.
 
500 rounds seems to be more and more common in a 1911 break in period.
Click to expand...

That's a daunting break-in period. Assuming I'm considering buying a DW chambered in .45 Auto, I'd likely have to pay at least $1,300 for it. Assuming I'd like to carry it loaded with 230-gr HST, I'd want to reliability test the gun with each of my three magazines (I assume I'd have to buy the third), I need 177 rounds for the test (59 rounds per mag, so I can be 95% confident that the ammo is at least 95% reliable, assuming no failures during the test), then an additional 25 rounds to top off my three mags and load the chamber so as to be ready to carry it with confidence. Ammoseek tells me I would need to spend at least $147.25 (before tax and shipping) for the five 50-round boxes of HST needed to get to this point. However, my reliability testing cannot begin until my break-in period is completed.

For the break-in period I'd like to use Federal American Eagle 230-gr FMJ, because it's more affordable while having external ballistics essentially equal to my chosen carry round. Ammoseek tells me I have to pay at least $165.00 for the required 500 rounds.

Thus, I've sunk a total of at least $312.25 on ammo to get to the point where I can carry the gun with confidence, about 24% of the price of the gun. Is there nothing a manufacture can do, other than to conduct the break-in shooting and reliability testing himself, to reduce the consumer's cost of break-in and reliability testing? I realize if the manufacturer does all that shooting the cost of the gun will be increased almost certainly more than the retail price of the ammo.

Or, does the consumer have a more cost-effective way to break in a pistol? For example, dry firing will smooth out a trigger over time (just as shooting it a lot will, but dry firing costs essentially nothing). Could cycling the slide manually substitute for an expensive live-fire break-in?
 
I want an ECO in 45acp. I've had zero issues with multiple 5", 3.5" and 3" model 1911s right out of the box. I have a Valor, but the price of the ECO is keeping me from buying one.
 
"In the manual, it says to expect FTF's during the first 300-500 rounds during the break in process."
Click to expand...

Even though I have a DW Valor I think the above comment is total garbage. My DW Valor came with 2 CMC Shooting Star mags which caused a few problems when I first bought this gun used. I don't like these Shooting Stars although the CMC Power Mags aren't bad. So I just use my Wilson 47D's and the Shooting Stars stay parked in the DW box where they belong. No further problems.
 
Aren't 9mm 1911s notoriously unreliable? There seem to be a few exceptions like the Springfield EMP, but for the most part it seems like 9mm has issued in the 1911 platform.
 
I have had a Colt Defender in 9mm since 2010. It has been 100% with all sorts of ammo including Russian steel cased stuff and Aluminum cased stuff and whatever is cheapest at Wally World. Nice little pistol.
 
Aren't 9mm 1911s notoriously unreliable? There seem to be a few exceptions like the Springfield EMP, but for the most part it seems like 9mm has issued in the 1911 platform.
Click to expand...

I would welcome you to shoot the 9mm I own and see for yourself.

I have the Dan Wesson PM9, Smith and Wesson Pro Series, Springfield M1911-A1 and they do NOT have a problem. 124 gr, 147 gr, 115 gr, hollow point or fmj. They will run until you get tired of shooting them.
 
I have the Dan Wesson PM9, Smith and Wesson Pro Series, Springfield M1911-A1 and they do NOT have a problem. 124 gr, 147 gr, 115 gr, hollow point or fmj. They will run until you get tired of shooting them.
Click to expand...

I had a Springfield Loaded 9mm and I now have an STI Trojan 9mm. These are guns you can let anybody shoot and have fun with. Recoil is negligible since you have extra muzzle weight with the thicker 9mm chambered barrel, and they have that wonderful 1911 trigger pull that everyone loves. The Wilson ETM aftermarket mags made a big difference in both guns. The Trojan definitely likes 147 grain ammo better, it does tend to shoot the lighter loads A bit low. Nothing I can't live with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top