Recoil spring replacement

"Replace as necessary" suggests that you wait for the gun to stop functioning and then replace the spring?
Whether shooting for fun or for truth, you probably want to keep the gun running.
A friend who used to work for a very high-end 1911 maker said that they have had to reject entire lots of springs, so there's no guarantee that a new spring is a good one, either.
I've replaced a lot of recoil springs, but the vast majority were to test different ratings, or different spring materials, rather than because of round count.
My compact .45 got new springs annually, even if I'd fired only 400-500 rounds, as the springs seemed to hit a "cliff" and go from working perfectly to failing spectacularly and I didn't want to wait for the latter.
 
Not too long after I bought my 10mm Kimber Eclipse, I asked Kimber customer support if I should use a stronger recoil spring for shooting full-spec 10mm ammo (Underwood or DoubleTap). They said "no, just change the spring more often". They didn't say how MUCH more often, but my experience leads me to believe the correct answer is "LOTS more often".
 
Not too long after I bought my 10mm Kimber Eclipse, I asked Kimber customer support if I should use a stronger recoil spring for shooting full-spec 10mm ammo (Underwood or DoubleTap). They said "no, just change the spring more often". They didn't say how MUCH more often, but my experience leads me to believe the correct answer is "LOTS more often".
Click to expand...



Too strong a recoil spring can cause more damage to a 1911 than a weaker or worn out one. The main spring does much more to dampen the recoil forces than the recoil spring anyway.
 
1911 spring

Had a low price 1911 that ran for years on the factory spring.

Then i started to have problems FTF ....etc

Replaced the spring and it ran like a new gun .

PS: I did order a variety pack of spring weights (5 in total) , don't bother because the heaviest springs were unusable

Just replace with the recommended spring weight.
 
I recently bought new recoil springs to have on hand for my most frequently shot pistols. You boys are making me think I wasted my money! :D
 
TailGaor said:
I recently bought new recoil springs to have on hand for my most frequently shot pistols. You boys are making me think I wasted my money!
Click to expand...

It really depends on the gun design and HOW that design uses the spring.

With some full-sizeguns, when the slide is fully to the rear, the gun design will almost (but not quite) stack the spring. When that happens, that spring may be near it's elastic limit, but unless it's held there for long periods, the wear (actually micro-fractures in the spring material) may not happen or not happen enough to quickly degrade the spring. If the spring (i.e., the slide is locked back) is held in that position for long-term storage, the spring in some designs may degrade pretty quickly. That's not how most gun are stored, so it's not likely to be a problem.

For most full-size guns, the gun designers build in enough space so
that the spring can have a long life. But for compact or sub-compact guns, they aren't as free to do that, and the springs become "reneweable resources" -- and must be replaced more frequently. (It's the only way to get the size and functionality needed in those smaller guns.)

The Rohrbaugh R9, arguably the smallest of 9mm semi-autos, has a recoil spring that should be replaced every 250 rounds (according to Rohrbaugh). If you have a compact or sub-compact, it may be money well spent.
 
Lots of great responses on this thread so the OP should be good to go. I myself put lots of faith in the newer flat springs used in modern manufactures and since I don't shoot ANY of my guns enough to merit many spring changes, they will probably be okay to shoot for as long as I'm alive. I would only change springs if there is noticeable battering of your frame or you feel like it's just too easy to rack your slide. I do have an old Norinco type 54, for instance, that I believe could use a spring change. However, I never shoot it and keep it around as mostly a topic of discussion so it's not a priority. If it is a duty use gun that is shot very frequently, changing your springs at whatever interval you choose should be just fine. They are very inexpensive and provide cheap peace of mind.
 
RinSpeed said:
The main spring does much more to dampen the recoil forces than the recoil spring anyway.
Click to expand...

When I got my 10mm Kimber Eclipse, I installed a flat-bottomed firing-pin-stop, and (one step at a time) started increasing the hammer spring (mainspring), up to the max available 28 lb. I also (one step at a time) increased the recoil spring from the stock 18.5 lb up to 22 lbs. I couldn't see ANY difference in the distance it threw the brass, or in the recoil feel. The ONLY difference I observed was that my trigger-pull increased ... and as I decreased the hammer spring (in steps) down to the 18 lb where I originally had it (below Kimber's stock 20 lb mainspring, and most 1911's stock 22 lb mainsprings), the trigger pull didn't return to the nice 2-1/4 lb where I had it until I made the final mainspring reduction from 20 lb to 18 lb ... very little effect on trigger pull between 28 lbs and 20 lbs. I like a very light trigger, so I've left the hammer spring at 18 lbs. (I also returned to the stock 18.5 lb recoil spring, but I eventually (maybe a year or so later) upped that to 20 lbs, because the full-spec 10mm rounds were visibly starting to batter my gun.)
 
I'd like to add the recoil spring state/condition on striker fired is more important if not critical compared to hammered. A full sized hammered will likely run with a very weak spring while the striker fired will likely misfire.
 
745SW said:
I'd like to add the recoil spring state/condition on striker fired is more important if not critical compared to hammered. A full sized hammered will likely run with a very weak spring while the striker fired will likely misfire.
Click to expand...

Not saying you're wrong, but I would appreciate a theoretical or practical explanation as to WHY your statement above might be true. A misfire seems to have more to do with striker- or hammer-spring weaknesses than recoil spring issues -- as that assumes the round has been chambered and the primer wasn't ignited.

That has NOT been my experience with both hammer-fired and striker-fired guns. In my experience, the problem tends to be an inability to feed the next round -- with either type of these types of handguns.

It seems to me that if the recoil spring is too weak, it won't store enough force to cycle the slide and chamber the next round; and, if the recoil spring is too strong, the round won't have enough force to overcome the recoil spring and cycle the slide far enough to pick up the next round... Neither of those will likely result in a misfire.

Of course, as is often the case, I may be overlooking something obvious.
 
The striker spring works against recoil spring. Example, RSA (recoil spring assy) removed from a Glock and the slide in battery, pulling the trigger causes the slide to move/unlock away from the barrel. Low parts count may look good on paper but it usually means every part becomes more important or critical.
 
I recently bought new recoil springs to have on hand for my most frequently shot pistols. You boys are making me think I wasted my money!
Click to expand...

Somehow, I don't think you wasted all that much.

Old saying: "Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."
 
Somehow, I don't think you wasted all that much.

Old saying: "Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."
Click to expand...

Agreed on both counts. There was a big goofy grin emoticon on my post, because no, I didn't spend much, and yes, it feels better to have them around for when I need them.
 
745SW said:
The striker spring works against recoil spring. Example, RSA (recoil spring assy) removed from a Glock and the slide in battery, pulling the trigger causes the slide to move/unlock away from the barrel. Low parts count may look good on paper but it usually means every part becomes more important or critical.
Click to expand...

I know that the slide can move with a number of striker-fired guns when the guide-rod assembly is REMOVED, but that's not the same as a gun not functioning with a weakened recoil spring.

I'm not sure that the gun would even chamber a round if the recoil spring was so weak as to allow the slide to move out of battery when pulling the trigger.

I guess it's a possibility, but don't know of any way to really test that point without destroying a captive recoil assembly.
 
Last edited:
I've seen a functioning Glock's slide move as the trigger was pulled.
It was a competition gun that had the springs fiddled, but if the recoil spring is no stronger than the striker spring it's a possibility.
 
Everyone gets concerned over the recoil spring but forgets that most guns have other springs that can fail as well. What I should do is locate complete spring sets for the guns I use most.

However, the only spring I've ever had fail was on an AMT 45 Backup. It just wasn't chambering the round consistently and a new spring solved that problem.
 
I wouldst be concerned about the springs, the amount of rounds you say the gun has doesn't warrant it, you probably still have tens of thousands of rounds to go. That being said, I will never discourage anyone from having spare parts on hand, especially in these days of potential shortages:(
 
I've experienced the Murphy effect back in the 70s with the AR15 rifle. Back then it was only Colt and I stocked parts that never got use. Sold the AR, parts and stuff to fund my o/u shotgun I still have today. That o/u cost more than any arm I've ever owned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top