Well, I've been up springing my semi auto guns and some of the comments on this subject talk about enlarging the slide stop hole in the frame. I feel like the action of actually chambering a round should help take some of the shock away from the pin by slowing the slide before it slams home. What studies or anecdotal evidence can anyone offer regarding damage to slide stop pins or hole with springs up to 25 pounds? Changing out my 15 pound recoil spring to a 20 in my 4" kimber seemed to me a good move with hot rounds. I will have to get a spare 15 or 16 pounder for lighter loads to function my target rounds but with 124 grains at 1,300fps the 20 pound spring seems about right and my Kahr 9mm is factory sprung at 20 pounds. So I'm not seeing the damage potential here.
Slide Stop Assault and Battery
- Thread starter rc
- Start date
A few bad examples don't typify the entire industry. Factories make mistakes, but this forum and others are full of individual owners making more mistakes.
IMO the 1911 doesn't break the lockwork because it swings into position. Wear is the issue. The BHP type with the ramp totally on the barrel, more mass, transitions slower with more force, bangs/slams into position. Breakage is probable. Me thinks the slower transition makes for better cycling reliability 
Last edited:
Throwing out the rare exception of engineering flaws, I'm going to agree with Michael. Most manufactures employ capable engineers who are more qualified than your average hobbyist gunsmith.
Some guns may be slightly under-sprung. Said guns probably don't recommend +p ammo, and chose to use a lighter spring because a weaker metal was used. Said metal was probably chosen to meet a certain price point. With that, if you choose to put a heavier spring in because you insist on shooting ammo that is hotter than recommended by the manufacturer, you *could possibly* get more life than with beat in the gun up with hot ammo. Or... You could do more harm than good.
Some guns may be slightly under-sprung. Said guns probably don't recommend +p ammo, and chose to use a lighter spring because a weaker metal was used. Said metal was probably chosen to meet a certain price point. With that, if you choose to put a heavier spring in because you insist on shooting ammo that is hotter than recommended by the manufacturer, you *could possibly* get more life than with beat in the gun up with hot ammo. Or... You could do more harm than good.
In 38 super I used nickel starline brass, winchester small pistol primers, a bit over book max of WAP with 124 XTP. I think 8 gr. Speed was actually closer to 1275 with low flash but I was rounding 
I see no sign of pressure or stretching in the case. I bumped it up a bit to get closer to the advertised speed. I may save my last pound of WAP for this load. Some guys have been up springing 38 supers and shooting 9X23 so I think the 1911 properly sprung can handle it. The load did help wear down the original 15 pound spring. Nobody has offered anything other than opinion so far to give a good reason not to up spring a few pounds. I up sprung my CZ 75 in 40 to 20 pounds and feel it was a good move. The CZ factory 40 spring is about 16 while browing HP used a 20. Some of the factory guns are 14, some 16 and some 18.5 in the kimber line on the same basic frame so why would a 16 or 18 wear out a 9mm when an 18.5 is standard in a 10mm.
I see no sign of pressure or stretching in the case. I bumped it up a bit to get closer to the advertised speed. I may save my last pound of WAP for this load. Some guys have been up springing 38 supers and shooting 9X23 so I think the 1911 properly sprung can handle it. The load did help wear down the original 15 pound spring. Nobody has offered anything other than opinion so far to give a good reason not to up spring a few pounds. I up sprung my CZ 75 in 40 to 20 pounds and feel it was a good move. The CZ factory 40 spring is about 16 while browing HP used a 20. Some of the factory guns are 14, some 16 and some 18.5 in the kimber line on the same basic frame so why would a 16 or 18 wear out a 9mm when an 18.5 is standard in a 10mm.There are more than "a few bad examples." The industry has generated more turkeys than I can count. The factory doesn't always "know what it's doing."
Besides the two recent example I have provided, I can also name the Colt 2000, the Colt DA Govt. the Colt Cadet .22, and this is just picking on Colt, and not bringing up other firms.
The truly successful designs were from over 100 years ago in come cases, which means that the inventor knew what he was doing, not necessarily the company.
Some bozo at Kimber thought that adding an external extractor would make a super gun. Well, it didn't quite pan out that way; They were quietly replaced and their slides were replaced with traditional internal extractors after all the problems that were not well thought out.
Another bozo at Remington, said: "Hey let's make a 9mm version of a mediocre design that was also a failure." And so the R51 was born when it should have been aborted.
AMT introduces a .22 magnum pistols that only works with one specific brand of ammo. RIP. No longer with us.
Smith & Wesson 22A and S. Turkeys. Gone.
I could go on, but you can believe what you want.
Don't assume the factory knows "what it is doing."
Subpar designs exist in any field. As happened with those, time and the market weeded them out.
There are a number of 1911s these days with external extractors that work fine.
I don't see this the same as the factory choosing what weight recoil spring to use. Remington is grasping at straws to stay solvent and relevant and brought back an old design as it gave them something new without having to pay for substantial rounds of R&D.
I assume they know what they're doing more than the typical kitchen table gunsmith, from which I have seen some pretty bad results as has this forum and others like it. Can a gun owner replace parts successfully and make choices on his or her own? Of course. But they don't always need to and if I had to bet on the factory or the average Joe I bet on the factory. As you so aptly put it, believe what you want.
rc,
You mention you have a 4" Commander sized gun in 38 Super from Kimber. You also mention you are running that with a 15 pound recoil spring.
Is this correct?
Wolff gun springs states that the factory standard recoil spring for the 4 1/4" Commander in 38 Super is 16 pounds. Wolff also states that, with a few exceptions, Kimber uses the same spec springs for their guns as Colt does.
So 16 pounds for your gun in 38 Super is standard...not 15 pounds. You could easily go up two pounds from that with no harm done. The 38 Super do does 1375 fps with a 124 gr. pill
If your gun has an alloy frame I would leave off the heavier springs and use a steel gun for experimentation.
What they say about Kimber...
https://www.gunsprings.com/KIMBER/Compact & Pro Carry/cID1/mID32/dID413
The Colt springs discussed...
https://www.gunsprings.com/COLT/COMMANDER SERIES PISTOL/cID1/mID1/dID2
tipoc
You mention you have a 4" Commander sized gun in 38 Super from Kimber. You also mention you are running that with a 15 pound recoil spring.
Is this correct?
Wolff gun springs states that the factory standard recoil spring for the 4 1/4" Commander in 38 Super is 16 pounds. Wolff also states that, with a few exceptions, Kimber uses the same spec springs for their guns as Colt does.
So 16 pounds for your gun in 38 Super is standard...not 15 pounds. You could easily go up two pounds from that with no harm done. The 38 Super do does 1375 fps with a 124 gr. pill
If your gun has an alloy frame I would leave off the heavier springs and use a steel gun for experimentation.
What they say about Kimber...
https://www.gunsprings.com/KIMBER/Compact & Pro Carry/cID1/mID32/dID413
The Colt springs discussed...
https://www.gunsprings.com/COLT/COMMANDER SERIES PISTOL/cID1/mID1/dID2
tipoc
Walt Sherrill
New member
For 1911-style guns, John M. Browning (in the original patent documents for the 1911 design) described what we call the recoil spring as a spring used to cycle the slide -- there was no mention of it being used to protect the frame or manage recoil. With 1911s, 1911Tuner has demonstrated (and videos are available on YouTube) that you can fire a 1911 WITHOUT a recoil spring installed and not damage the gun. (It just won't cycle and load the next round!) Some other guns can be fired with the slide locked shut -- as when the military uses a suppressed/silence weapon in combat -- and the frame doesn't deteriorate.
With some gun designs, the folks who build them ARE concerned about slide velocity and adjust the slide design to deal with that issue rather than use a lighter or heavier recoil spring. Recoil springs heavy enough to control velocity can make the slide almost impossible to rack! Recently I found that the compact Glocks (19, 23, 32, and 38) using three very different rounds seem to use the same recoil spring assembly. The slides for the 19, 23, and 38 are different; not sure about the 32...
A lot of folks who go to heavier recoil springs do so with the intent of protecting the gun's frame (or in a few cases, the slide stop). Their efforts may be misguided. With hammer-fired guns, a heavier hammer spring may do more than a heavier recoil spring...and it won't cause the slide to return with greater force.
With guns that use a slide stop pin, a heavier recoil spring may reduce the rearward force of recoil noticeably, but that heavier spring can INCREASE the speed with which the slide slams back into battery. The slide stop pin may not be up to the extra force being applied over time! In THAT case, heavier recoil springs can do as much harm as good and probably won't protect anything. And, unless your gun doesn't cycle properly with a lighter, or worn/ tired recoil spring with the load you're using, it may be wasted money.
.
With some gun designs, the folks who build them ARE concerned about slide velocity and adjust the slide design to deal with that issue rather than use a lighter or heavier recoil spring. Recoil springs heavy enough to control velocity can make the slide almost impossible to rack! Recently I found that the compact Glocks (19, 23, 32, and 38) using three very different rounds seem to use the same recoil spring assembly. The slides for the 19, 23, and 38 are different; not sure about the 32...
A lot of folks who go to heavier recoil springs do so with the intent of protecting the gun's frame (or in a few cases, the slide stop). Their efforts may be misguided. With hammer-fired guns, a heavier hammer spring may do more than a heavier recoil spring...and it won't cause the slide to return with greater force.
With guns that use a slide stop pin, a heavier recoil spring may reduce the rearward force of recoil noticeably, but that heavier spring can INCREASE the speed with which the slide slams back into battery. The slide stop pin may not be up to the extra force being applied over time! In THAT case, heavier recoil springs can do as much harm as good and probably won't protect anything. And, unless your gun doesn't cycle properly with a lighter, or worn/ tired recoil spring with the load you're using, it may be wasted money.
.
Last edited:
I've seen that video mentioned many times on this forum, so I finally decided to check it out. The first thing that popped into my old skull full of mush is, why?
I noticed a couple more things that made me scratch my head.
I believe 1911Tuner bashes full length guide rods here, but he was using one in the video? Hummmm.
1911Tuner doesn't think shock buffers are necessary, and I believe has written so many times here in this forum. Okay, riddle me this.
Metal to metal contact, no matter how slight, will cause wear. Be it peening, flattening, galling, etc., metal will get moved or removed. May take one day, may take one year, may take one century, but the metal will be altered in some way. That is an undisputable fact. If you can stop metal to metal contact, you can stop the alteration of said metal. That's exactly what a shock buffer does, it stops the metal to metal contact. Even if the pistol was machined perfectly square in all dimensions (which is impossible) there is metal to metal contact, which in time will cause wear.
Do shock buffers break apart which can cause jamming? Sure. I wouldn't use one on a pistol I depended on to protect myself or my loved ones. But for a range gun, I don't leave home without a buffer installed. All of my semi auto firearms (rifles included) that are used for range use only have a shock buffer installed if one is available, and I do not have any problems what so ever with feeding or extraction. None.
I won't even bring up him putting his finger in front of the muzzle of a loaded firearm. Opps, guess I just did.
As someone that has owned a lot of used guns, they've typically been barely used. Many have been bought and kept in a safe. You do run into the occasional problem child, but the lgs near me has a 30 day warranty on used guns.
Anything metal eventually wears out with time. If not fatigue from abuse, then the environment can kill it as well. How many rounds can your typical 1911 go through before it is worn out? If you're a high volume competition shooter I can see maybe wanting one, but if the pistol won't wear out until 50,000 rds and you'll never personally put 50,000 rds through that particular pistol, it seems unnecessary. I admit I've never really looked into "shock buffers" before. I'll have to check it out.
polyphemus
New member
"Hummmm"?
First,I am certain that he(Tuner) has forgot more about those pistols than you'll
ever know.And I don't think he's forgot much.
Second,he did take pains to explain that the experiment in question had to be
done with a long guide rod to avoid damage.
And third,on account of what you bring him into this thread?
Walt Sherrill
New member
Re: metal wear and deterioration.
One of the things I've learned in these discussions and related reading s the great differences in the characteristics of steel used and aluminum alloys used in handguns.
Steel is strong but heavy, and it's a surprisingly resilient material. It has, by it's nature (which is a function of the mixture of the different materials used in it's makeup), the ability to flex or bend a bit and return to it's original position with limited degradation.
Aluminum alloys are a bit different. Aluminum is stronger in some ways than steel, and lighter -- but less forgiving if struck or bent or twisted. (When used inaircraft, for example, they have to make special design accomodations to take advantage of the lighter, stronger material.
Bridges made of steel may last for centuries, depending upon HOW they are used. Springs likewise -- but if the steel in either case is pushed too far, it may not last for a very long time. It doesn't have to be hit or smashed, etc. Just routine (almost unmeasurable flexing can do it.)
Aluminum can be used in gun frames because, believe it or not, the frame of the gun doesn't really suffer as much abuse as most people think. The slide -- which is typically made of steel -- suffers a LOT of abuse: the slide and the barrel and breech/bolt are the real weapon that must cope with battering and high pressures.
The frame is, so to speak, just the handle. Aluminum can handle frame tasks, as can polymer: the frame isn't asked to do that much, comparatively speaking.
One of the things I've learned in these discussions and related reading s the great differences in the characteristics of steel used and aluminum alloys used in handguns.
Steel is strong but heavy, and it's a surprisingly resilient material. It has, by it's nature (which is a function of the mixture of the different materials used in it's makeup), the ability to flex or bend a bit and return to it's original position with limited degradation.
Aluminum alloys are a bit different. Aluminum is stronger in some ways than steel, and lighter -- but less forgiving if struck or bent or twisted. (When used inaircraft, for example, they have to make special design accomodations to take advantage of the lighter, stronger material.
Bridges made of steel may last for centuries, depending upon HOW they are used. Springs likewise -- but if the steel in either case is pushed too far, it may not last for a very long time. It doesn't have to be hit or smashed, etc. Just routine (almost unmeasurable flexing can do it.)
Aluminum can be used in gun frames because, believe it or not, the frame of the gun doesn't really suffer as much abuse as most people think. The slide -- which is typically made of steel -- suffers a LOT of abuse: the slide and the barrel and breech/bolt are the real weapon that must cope with battering and high pressures.
The frame is, so to speak, just the handle. Aluminum can handle frame tasks, as can polymer: the frame isn't asked to do that much, comparatively speaking.
Ok, we seem to be running in circles with opinions but not dealing in anybody saying they stretched a slide stop hole or broke the actual slide stop pin from using a heavier spring. We have seen old surplus star pistols come into the U.S. with cracks in their slides from hard use and little maintenance. The only slide stop I've lost was with a factory spring in a 1991A1 and it broke the tab which the magazine pushes on. The pin itself was fine when it failed.
Now if a 22 pound recoil spring is right for a 4" 45s, why would one in a 38 super or a full size 9mm all of a sudden self destruct your gun with a 22 pound spring? Some of the arguments to me against a heavier spring seem a bit silly with no data to back up why this is bad juju. I actually am running a 20 pound spring in my 4" 38 super with an 18 on the way to improve reliability with lighter loads. The 22 pound spring would not function. I went to a 17.5 flat in a full size 1911, 16 pound in a 9mm full size and a 20 pound in my CZ75 40 cal. The only real problem I can see so far is compromised reliability with the softer shooting ammo but better reliability with the high velocity stuff that would otherwise slam the frame and throw brass 30 feet. A few extra pounds also can reduce the need to tap the back of the side when the gun gets dirty or with out of spec reloads. Slower extraction to keep the action cleaner of powder fouling is a plus and as the slide slams forward. I also feel the cartridge bobbling into the chamber will cushion the blow of the slide with the extractor and spring taking some of the force from the slide stop. rc
Now if a 22 pound recoil spring is right for a 4" 45s, why would one in a 38 super or a full size 9mm all of a sudden self destruct your gun with a 22 pound spring? Some of the arguments to me against a heavier spring seem a bit silly with no data to back up why this is bad juju. I actually am running a 20 pound spring in my 4" 38 super with an 18 on the way to improve reliability with lighter loads. The 22 pound spring would not function. I went to a 17.5 flat in a full size 1911, 16 pound in a 9mm full size and a 20 pound in my CZ75 40 cal. The only real problem I can see so far is compromised reliability with the softer shooting ammo but better reliability with the high velocity stuff that would otherwise slam the frame and throw brass 30 feet. A few extra pounds also can reduce the need to tap the back of the side when the gun gets dirty or with out of spec reloads. Slower extraction to keep the action cleaner of powder fouling is a plus and as the slide slams forward. I also feel the cartridge bobbling into the chamber will cushion the blow of the slide with the extractor and spring taking some of the force from the slide stop. rc