FBI 1911

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shoot the 500 rounds and use the grease. If this doesn't work, try an 18lb Wolff recoil spring. If you still have problems, call SA customer service and ask for Lisa or Frank. They are both very helpful. They will pay shipping both ways and will have your gun back to you in 3-4 weeks working 100%. I have had great results with SA customer service. It is outstanding.


Regards,
Frank
 
Ditto what faiello said. Springfields come quite tight and need a good break in. Be sure to keep your gun well lubricated and reasonably clean (though IMO, there is no reason to be fanatic about it when it comes to pistols.)

RE: Trijicon Sights

I think these are about the most overrated accessories on the market today. While there is no doubt they have their place, they are of limited use. If it is too dark to see your sights, it is more than likely too dark to identify your target (so what the heck are you shooting?) Remember Rule #4. A good handheld light (SureFire 6Z/6P or M2/M3) and a bunch of training are superior investments.

Tim
http://www.streetpro.com
Street Smart Professional Equipment
 
The sights I put on my TRP model is the Ashley Express sights... I recomend them highly and found that they helped improve my shooting by about 25%... more so when shooting quickly. There is no degredation of precision either as some may say... Quite the oposite...
 
George Hill--I detect a little skepticism in your post regarding accuracy... Apparently the Springfield was the only factory weapon that could fire Golden Sabre ammo to the 1.5" group that they were asking for. There were, by the way, at least two of the eight bidders that lodged protests over either the specifications or the way the judging was done.

If I'm not mistaken, don't the Springfield Professional Models (the Bureau model equivalent) come with Nowlin match grade barrels? That's probably got something to do with the increase accuracy...

------------------
Take the long way home...
 
George: I have to disagree with the reliability statement. As many dollars that were spent on these guns, they should be reliable out of the box. If not, another gun design or manufacturer should be chosen. Sling Shot
 
Usually they are very accurate AND reliable.
And no - no skeptisism there about accuracy! I am a big Springfield fan and I was just thinking about how KIMBER didnt even try for that.

Any gun should go through a wear in period before it's christend DUTY READY. ANY GUN. That goes for HK GLOCK and SIG as well.
After 500 rounds of wear in - your or any Springfield shoulf be right on the money... if not then there is a problem.
I might add that there are very few problems after a wear in period - but sometimes it happens. Just like witih Glocks and HKs or any other gun maker - sometimes a product off the line has a few glitches that need to get fixed. Like a spring - or a little deburring in the slide areas... it happens.
I still say Springfield is the best 1911 maker out there. You want to spend 1,000 MORE for a 1911 - then your going to get a mighty fine gun... No question. But that simple 1911A1 LOADED will be just as fine after you shoot it a lot and give it a little TLC.
 
Take a $500 Springfield loaded gov't model and send it off to the experienced smith of our preference for anywhere from $250 to $500 dollars worth of work and you can have a pistol which arguably ranks among the best, regardless of price.

Then again, in practical terms, that $500 pistol is arguably better than most to begin with, all hype and marketing aside.

On accuracy: I have never owned any pistol which if I did my part would not create one ragged hole in the target.

[This message has been edited by Erik (edited June 21, 2000).]
 
I believe the 1911 was chosen because of what I refer to as the "old-timer factor". I have a tendency to think that HRU teams do need a fast, accurate handgun. Field conditions do not neccessarily apply. Mostly what HRU teams face are concrete and steel, not mud and rain, and dirt and snow, etc. So, a 1911 might not be a bad idea.

Now, my Glock, my Ruger, my Beretta have ALL been reliable out of the box. I still have a challenge out to any 1911er: put it in the mud, and step on it. Then take it out, make sure nothing is obstructing the barrel, and then shoot it. Does it jam? If it's a 1911, it more than likely will. Nobody has answered my challenge where I work, and just about everyone but me carries a 1911. Boy, some of them are 2000. dollar guns, bet that sucks knowing that a 300. dollar Ruger is more reliable than their expensive gun.

------------------
"Vote with a Bullet."
 
claemore--I don't disagree that my Ruger P series has experienced fewer failure to feed's than my Springfield. The Ruger has had zero and the Springfield has had three (all three in the first 100 rounds through the gun).

The Ruger has never been able to group five shots within 3 inches. The Springfield will do that every time.

I have never had reason to stand in the mud and pouring down rain in order to make a shot that could save my life--if I anticipated that type of environment, I would take along my Ruger GP100 before I would take along my P series. It, too, has never failed to fire and shoots groups inside of 2 inches routinely.

Most of the time, I carry a weapon to ease my mind as I travel about the rougher parts of the city. In the asphalt jungle, I'd just as soon have the Springfield in my hand as the Ruger--if I've got to count on putting one, big, slow bullet in a spot where it's gonna end a threat, gimme the Springfield 'cocked and locked'. That first shot ain't gonna misfire and, if it's placed right, will end the threat then and there.

The Ruger P series is less likely to hit where I'm aiming--the odd's are more likely carrying the P series that I am going to need that second shot because the first one missed the mark.

Just my experience with my two guns.

------------------
Take the long way home...
 
"The Ruger has had zero and the Springfield has had three (all three in the first 100 rounds through the gun)."

And I have seen 2 Rugers BREAK before finishing the first MAGAZINE.

The 1st hundred huh? What have I been saying? Fire 400 more and then test it's reliability.
 
George--I've already got my 500 shots through it and the only three I had were in the first 100. I guess it would be more appropriate to say, I've shot the Springfield without a problem for over 400 rounds...

------------------
Take the long way home...
 
Claemore, I would take your challenge. But, I am new to the 1911 and don't know how to detail strip the gun for cleaning after the "test". Once I learn, I'll take you up on it. Would you be satisfied if it was just dirt rather than mud? :-)
 
Dirt can't work because it will not work its way into the grooves and what not like mud can. The gun I did this with was a Glock 19 (my favorite pistol) but I traded it for employment reasons. Anyway, I'm reasonably certain my current Ruger P97 will do the same. Also, as far as Rugers breaking, the old Rugers had the tendency to be POSs, but the new ones are more accurate, and a lot more durable. The P95 for example was rated for more than 20,000 +P rounds. A higher impulse round than the .45 to begin with.
The P90 was originally designed to be a 10mm, then when popularity of the 10 died down, they turned it into a .45. The 10mm was notorious for breaking 1911s. The Ruger, HK, Glock, and a few others all do the job better than the 1911. Wake up and smell the cordite! Not trying to make anybody mad, so don't troll me or anything, ok?

------------------
"Vote with a Bullet."
 
When is the last time anyone here was covered in mud to the extent mentioned? I have spent a fair share of time in the woods, and while I have been wet, snow covered, and somewhat dirty, I do not recall wading through mud. Let alone "normal" carry conditions. Has anyone left for work in the morning and found themselves covered in mud by the end of the day?

Also, how come older vets typically praise the 1911 for its durability and its dependability? They often found themselves covered in mud, firing weapons.

[This message has been edited by Erik (edited June 22, 2000).]
 
Some folks do go to work clean and come home dirty, muddy, etc, having faced inclement conditions as part of the job.

A friend of mine on a SWAT team during training crawled through dirt and mud, and since it was training couldn't have a magazine in their Glocks. Well after crawling for several hours, dirt was impacted into the mag well of the Glock. He knocked the dirt out, because the next part of training required shooting- no jams. He also has extensive firearms experience, and has seen no 1911 go through crap like that and still shoot.

Like I said before, if all you have to worry about is steel and concrete, go with a 1911, they are nice looking guns, they are accurate, but if it comes down to combat, go with a good, reliable gun, that holds more ammo than a Taurus revolver. No combat team in the world today issues 1911s. Berettas, Glocks, but not 1911s. I'm going to put my Ruger and my Beretta to the test I am proposing and will report the results. And no I haven't put 1000 extra dollars into my guns to make them reliable.

------------------
"Vote with a Bullet."
 
$1000? I have a $500 SA that has replaced my HKUSP and Glocks. It would be arguably even better with $1000 worth of work, perhaps. But it doesn't need it in terms of practical shooting, i.e. accuracy and reliablity.
 
My SA 1911 and Kimber have replaced my HKs for everyday carry guns. They are super reliable and serve me very well. My stock "loaded" SA 1911A1 was reliable enough for me to win the "Warrior of the Year" competition at Mad Dog's Knifegnugen last year. I must admit that I am having it worked on: hard chrome/TiN (two tone), trigger job, and dehorn.

Tim
http://www.streetpro.com
Street Smart Professional Equipment
 
I'm a wheel gunner from way back.(Revolvers were our only choice back then for a duty gun.) Our motto was that if ya couldn't get it done with six shots, you weren't going to get it done. Period! That first shot is the one that really counts. If you place the first shot you won't need to worry about a second shot. No matter how accurate a gun they have been issued it is only going to be accurate if the person has practiced and is competent with the weapon. My model 13 S&W had fixed sights and I could shoot 2 inch groups with it. But I worked hard to accuire that skill. More important than issuing tack driving weapons is to teach them how to use them. They need to learn instictive shooting for those situations where it will be needed. Only then will those super accurate guns be of any use. Just my opinion.

------------------
Torpedo ( Life is great if you can survive it!)
 
The quality and reliability of your weapon and the cartridge you fire is one of the very few things you have some control over up front...so why not maximize the little you can? If all you need is that perfect first shot, why not a TC Contender in .308 or .223? :) Because there's always the possibility that you'll need more than that, and for a myriad other reasons it just makes no sense. It's a system of comprimises. At what point are you spending too much to eek out that last .5" for the group? It depends on how much $ you have and the possibilty of that enhancement making a difference (which is an educated guess and mission specific). But if you have the $, then why not? Who knows if you'll need that last .5", or that 5,001th jam-free round, or 13 rounds in the mag instead of just 12, but if you do... And like Torpedo said the mission is everyday life ;)).

And as far weapon selection goes, I doubt there is, nor will there ever be, the perfect pistol for all scenarios. If the strengths of the 1911 platform make more sense in your particular environment, than I say go for it. If the Glock's strengths apply more directly to your situation, there you go. If a 6-shot revolver hits all the points you need, then carry it. I think weapon selection has everything to do with how an individual's life is structured and the environment they're in.


- gabe

PS: Does anyone have any data on reliability of single-stack vs. dbl stack mags? The 1911 platform is all I can think of where you get either and everything else stays the same. Just curious. Carry on :) [pun intended]

[This message has been edited by GRD (edited June 25, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top