S&W 1911 External Extractor

J

joe-lumber

New member
I was looking at a UTube on the S&W 1911 and the author was talking about the external Extractor pin that holds it in place might drop down after a lot of shots and prevent the slide from going back on firing the pistol. Well I have Sig 1911 which also has the external extractor and was wondering if that might be a problem in the future? Checking it when cleaning might be the best policy in the future. Was wondering if anyone might have experienced a problem with that pin dropping down after many shots?
 
I was looking at a UTube on the S&W 1911 and the author was talking about the external Extractor pin that holds it in place might drop down after a lot of shots and prevent the slide from going back on firing the pistol.
Click to expand...

Would you mind linking the source video?
 
External extractors have existed for a long, long time. Some people consider them blasphemy on a 1911 and create a list of reasons why they are spawn from hell. I can't think of why an external extractor on a 1911 would be more likely to have its pin drop through than the external extractors on countless other pistols that run just fine. YouTube is both great and awesome. Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it true.
 
I agree with Tunnel... External extractors have existed for a long time now and I don't here much of a fuss about dropped pins From them.

External extractors are hatred on 1911s almost as much as "billboarding" on a 1911 slide... And for similar reasons.
 
My M&P uses a pin to retain its external extractor too. Ol' Pookie doesn't know just how much force it takes to drive that pin out. One happening of it doesn't show a trend, Hilton Yam or not.
There were some problem on early production guns (note the video is from 2011) Smith&Wesson is now using a tighter interference fit, its not a problem.

Better to worry about the ejector coming loose, or the plunger tube coming unstaked, or the firing pin retaining plate falling out, or the fingers on the bushing breaking (for those still using that style bushing), or hitting the protrusion on the right side of the slide release while firing and having the slide release pop out.
((Seriously, there used to be this guy who worried about that being a 'design flaw'. Of course he advocated pulling the trigger with the middle finger with the forefinger laying on the frame.:rolleyes: ))
 
Last edited:
I generally have good opinions about VuurwapenBlog. I watched the section you are referring to.

As has been said, external extractors aren't typically an issue. In over 70 handguns owned at this point I really haven't had too many extractor issues, and not one of those was related to the pin (only 10 or so of those pistols had internal extractors).

I have to disagree with his assertion that a friction fit isn't enough. Frankly it should be. On a light enough pin that is sized properly to the hole, I can sit there and give it some pretty good wacks in order to get it to move. For instance my HKs require a good hammer strike on the punch before the pin will even start wiggling its way through.

It would appear to me, from what limited information I can gather in the video, that the pins S&W used in this instance were sized slightly too narrowly, allowing the recoil to walk them through the hole. Honestly that shouldn't happen. Frankly this appears to be a QC lapse on S&W's part more than anything related to external extractors.

Having never thought of it before, it strikes me that a roll pin may have some advantages over a solid pin in that you could likely oversize it for the hole just slightly, as it is capable of compressing. Just make sure the ends of the pin are beveled slightly (as they typically do on roll pins) and it can likely mitigate the issue. These are just my own thoughts.

So, what do you do? Well as noted in the video, watch for it. You know where your own extractor is on your SIG, and you can see the placement of the pin within that hole. At the end of your shooting sessions take a look if that pin is moving. If it isn't, you're golden! Any firearm you own should be tested for a certain period anyway. Now if it is moving, I'd try a little Blue (for the love of all that is holy NOT Red) Loctite on the pin and that should take care of it. If it develops into an issue, contact SIG and have them fix it on their dime.

As 4thPoint mentioned, there are a million areas of concern that could potentially be a problem with a handgun. Just stay aware of your firearm and relax. :cool:
 
I've had three 1911s (still have two of them) with an external extractor. One was a S&W.

None of them ever gave me an issue, let alone an extractor issue. And that's in addition to every other gun I own with an external extractor. Never had an issue with any of them.

That's more that I can say for 1911s with the supposedly "perfect, as JMB designed" internal extractor. There's no shortage of new 1911 owners who have had to study how to re-tension their extractors (and had to do it once myself with a Rock Island).

Yes, a properly adjusted internal will work great. So will a decently designed external, and most who use them have decently designed ones. The externals don't even need adjustment- the spring tension keeps them where they ought to be without having to bend the metal.
 
There are three reasons many dislike an external extractor: (1) they are non-standard 1911 parts and one of the attractions of the 1911 is standardized parts (which may have to be hand fit); (2) more difficult to replace a broken internal extractor; and (3) Kimber miserably failed in their implementation of an external extractor, so much so that they abandoned it.

On the plus side of the argument for external extractors is that the shooter doesn't have to worry about adjusting extractor tension. I personally prefer an internal extractor but I have a couple of 1911s with external extractors and have had no issue.
 
Browning used both external and internal extractors, depending on which type met his design need, so it is not a matter of "the master chose..."

The internal extractor was chosen for the 1911 mostly because the Army asked for a gun that could be disassembled in the field with minimal tools; a bench block and drift punch would not have met that requirement. Also the internal extractor lent itself to a long extractor reach, necessary for reliability with the Frankford Arsenal ammo of the day, which had sloppy case length specs.

Jim
 
I've owned an even dozen 1911's over the years, mostly Colts but also a WWll vintage Remington-Rand, as well as two Rugers. All had internal extractors with one failure in (I'm estimating here at over 50 yrs of shooting), 100,000 rounds of .45 ACP alone. That failure (the extractor hook broke) occurred on a much used and loved Colt Combat Commander at an estimated 7000 rounds.

I can't remember a single failure to extract in any of the above guns, with the exception of the breakage in the Combat Commander.

I now own a Sig RSC 1911 with an external extractor as well as a Sig 220 in .45 ACP similarly outfitted. Both have limited numbers of round counts (less than 5000 total) and neither has had a failure of any kind. Neither has had a failure to extract to date.

HTH's Rod
 
I don't have access to one of these S&W pistols to check for myself but looking at some on-line photos I wonder where that pin could go. If it was to move downwards would it not just ride on the frame?

I suppose recoil could cause it to jump up and out without your noticing it and I wonder if just a drop of clear nail polish or something similar would prevent even that from happening?

This has never been a problem with any of the external extractor guns I have owned.
 
The internal extractor was chosen for the 1911 mostly because the Army asked for a gun that could be disassembled in the field with minimal tools;
Click to expand...
The Army did not have to specify an internal extractor because the M1911 already had one,the 1903 which is the direct ancestor had an internal extractor.
John Browning re engineered and upgraded the 1903,a number of improvements were made to meet military requirements and the 1911 internal extractor was
an improvement over the 1903's which was truly internal.
Original 1910 patent drawings clearly show an internal extractor.
 
There's lots of parts in any gun; worrying about the failure of any single one of them is a waste of valuable range time.
Just shoot it 'til it breaks, if ever.
 
IMO the external extractor is superior to the internal, works both as a control feed and snap-over. Rounds extracted from the mag don’t always behave proper for a controlled feed.

I can image the pin of the external extractor can give issues but I have yet to experience any. The pin I do not remove for normal cleaning/lube.
 
The Army did not have to specify an internal extractor because the M1911 already had one,the 1903 which is the direct ancestor had an internal extractor.
John Browning re engineered and upgraded the 1903,a number of improvements were made to meet military requirements and the 1911 internal extractor was
an improvement over the 1903's which was truly internal.
Original 1910 patent drawings clearly show an internal extractor.
Click to expand...

Sounds good, except for the fact that when Mr Browning enlarged the parallel ruler action for .45 Rimless Smokeless in the model of 1905, he went to an external extractor, which he stayed with through the 1907 trials guns and the 1909 prototype. He returned to internal on the 1910, presumably at the request of the Army for an easier to dismount internal.

I used to shoot my 1918 vintage Colt a fair amount. The extractor was fine. I have seen the modern manufacturers' use of different materials and lack of artisanal attention blamed for most failures for the past 50 years or so since the clone labs started up.
 
Internal extractor,one part.
External three.And one of them seems to be this OP's issue.
An internal extractor made of the correct material and to ordnance specs when properly adjusted for tension,will last for thousands of cycles.
Dropping a round in an empty chamber and then releasing the slide because the
extractor has more flex.That is a curious reason to choose a system.
Military arms are subject to stressful use and no doubt in my mind that in all the
wars M1911's were there must have been a few occasions when the extractor rode over the rim but after all the use and misuse the internal extractor continues to be the standard to beat.Diff'rent strokes
 
Last edited:
enlarged the parallel ruler
Click to expand...
Ok,there have been so many iterations that it is hard to keep track and I'm sure
that one of them had an external unit.I mentioned the M1903 that'll be .38
but a little further back,the 1902 very much John Browning's creation had an
internal extractor.
Was that the Army too that made him change that cross bar arrangement?
just kidding
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top