I beg ti differ. They do, indeed, make stainless MIM parts.
I stand corrected...
Yet, still unsure why this is even coming up (not you, but dahermit’s post). Sometimes I wonder why I even post here.
I beg ti differ. They do, indeed, make stainless MIM parts.
Ruger's first firearm was his .22 pistol (its shape was based on his earlier enterprise...an electric drill), with no investment cast parts. Also, his original .44 Carbine receiver was not an investment casting. So your statement that his whole "...business was built on investment casting..." is not totally correct. However, in latter years your statement would be more or less accurate."...cast frames..." Your vehicle's engine block is cast too. Ruger built their entire business on investment cast parts.
It most like due to nobody thinking of Ruger when they hear 1911/A1. Might have to do with the "most standard, aftermarket 1911 parts and accessories." though.
I know that Ruger does not make the MIM sights on the SR1911, but your post begs the question: Was that slide stop a MIM part as are the sights?As with Post 30, I had two front sights fracture while shooting. Ruger replaced both broken front sights. This earlier production Ruger 1911 wasn't sighted in well. I believe the later/current Ruger 1911s now have a different height front sight (hopefully doesn't break) and are sighted in better (I don't recall whether my POIs (points of impact) were too high or too low). Ruger uses its own dovetail dimensions and aftermarket front sights don't readily fit.
My slide stop lobe also broke off (@~10,000 rounds). I had another in my parts box (Kimber brand I think) which worked without additional fitting.
I replaced the rear sight with an adjustable Novak sight to dial in the POI. Not Ruger's fault, but this adjustable sight's adjustment screw later fractured while shooting sending its parts flying. I bought another.
My groups were just not as tight as I wanted. I replaced and fitted a new front bushing which tightened up my group a bit more, but still weren't to my liking. I later sold this 1911, but do miss the "Commander" size as I now only have three 5" 1911s left to use.
The parts breakages were inconvenient as it was ~month between each front sight breaking and getting the slide back from Ruger with a new front sight. I liked the integral plunger tube as I've had a plunger tube break on another brand of 1911 (again, very inconvenient with a 3 month turnaround for that one [Guncrafter Ind.]).
The main reason for selling it off was it was just not accurate enough for my expectation. I just couldn't keep it within 6" at 15 yards. I just decided I might as well carry my 5" 1911s for just an extra .75" of barrel length but with more confidence with my accuracy potential. Otherwise, the Ruger's feeding-reliability was fine as long as recoil spring were changed ~every 2000 to 2500 rounds.
Do investment cast frames and/or slides cause failure to feed?I chose the Springfield over the Ruger because it had a forged frame and slide. It turned out to be a great choice as it's never failed to feed, never.
Good question. Another good question is:Do investment cast frames and/or slides cause failure to feed?
"...it was better made than a couple of Colt 1911s I've owned." That is a subjective and or ambiguous statement. Can you explain exactly in what way it was "better made" than the Colts you have owned?I once owned a SR1911, in the "Commander" size, can't remember what they call it, and it was an exceptional 1911. No issues whatsoever. Frankly, it was better made than a couple of Colt 1911s I've owned.