Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns What are the 1911's weakness?

Caspian does do some frame changes to accommodate their ambidextrous safety. It is a fragile setup I think.

The 1911 was a thoroughly refined and tested design over a century ago, and was known for reliability under adverse conditions.

Then sometime around the early 80's they became very popular and very unreliable as they came from the factory.

What happened?

So every manufacturer started to arbitrarily "improve" the old design because the shooting public wanted higher capacity, customized 1911s, and they wanted to make money and here's a hint...if you don't change the design enough, you can't patent it to protect your profits.

McCormick and Wilson made millions selling their "improved" 8rd mags and "improved" parts and all the problems followed thereon.

That, and every manufacturer that could afford to import off-shore parts started "customizing" the specs and selling out-of-spec parts to the public...parts that would have been rejected by a US government inspector if they tried to sell them to the government.

JB had it figured out, but today's hot-shots are smarter than he was, but today there is no quality control system to protect the shooter from bad ideas that don't work...but at least you can't copy the defective designs, because of the patents.

Also, gov ball ammo has specific specs too. The shape of the round nose bullet itself is important to the function and is specified in the original drawings.

Anyway, none of your mags are correct for the 1911 and that is one reason why you are having problems. The last round popping up is a common problem with those mags and changing the follower to another one that is also not correct won't help.

The other specs like the ammo, frame and barrel and such would have to be inspected to figure it out. A lot of chambers and barrels are not cut correctly and will never run right.

You can't criticize the 1911 design for out-of-spec manufacturing. Glocks are more reliable out-of-the-box for several reasons...not the least of which is the fact that Glock patents are still in place and Glocks are made by one manufacturer...Glock.

Anyway, my 1911s run fine with several mags and different bullet nose shapes as long as the ammo is good...clean or dirty doesn't matter...but I wouldn't run those mags because of potential feeding problems and they tend to damage the extractor.

I built a few of my 1911s on original 80s Springfields and the only parts I kept were the frame and slide and grips were ok...most of the other parts were too far out-of-spec to fix or just too poorly made to waste my time with.

TopCat...you hit it right on the nose with your last paragraph about SA guns made in the 1980s... Great slides and frames...the internals were junk. Same with the Norincos... Ever see a slide release break...my friend's original broke...Norinco sent him a new one, it broke... He replaced with an American made part and it it is still running...

Bob

Wilson "Bullet Proof" parts are the best best made. No comparison.

I have bought magazines for 6 dollars at guns shows that feed fine in my 1911's. They would not fall free from the gun was a fault with them. A proper dimensioned feed ramp, slide and barrel should not be magazine sensitive.

I bought the two volume Gun Digest books on the 1911. Forget their titles, but they are by two different authors. I plan on reading them thoroughly after reading this post.

My current plans for my Colt XSE Gvt is for IDPA. Going to try handloading horndady 230gr FMJ-RN. This will be my trial by fire & initiation with the 1911.

I bought Milt sparks holster, mag holder, and one of their bellets. Also bought two Wilson 47D mags.

That is a good plan.

Right now you are like Nevada Smith. Soon you will be like Brian Keith in that movie.

Gibby, Thank you! It's a start.


Now that I'm home, here are the titles/authors"

Gun Digest: Shooter's Guide To The 1911 Robert K Campell

Gun Digest Book of The 1911. Vol2 by Patrick Sweeney.

Not sure if I got the correct two volumes. The second one seems more technical orientated.

I know i am going to get into trouble for this, but perhaps another thread on the glock's weakness. Think it would go 23 pages?

I'm up for it, I bought a Glock 19 today:)

in the 7 or 8 1911's I have owned over my lifetime, only two gave me trouble, one was a used Colt 70 series gunsmithed by a knucklehead. I paid him $350 for and I found out why, the second a new Kimber with the wrong spring in it from the factory. The biggest problem with the G19 is that the 9mm rings your ears a few dB's more than a .45ACP. , the biggest weakness with the 1911 I guess is that the shells are a bit more for the 45. Push come to shove either one works fine for me.

Yep, that's good chit right there. I like Brown's grip safety better, but other than that Wilson's Bullet Proof is about as good as money can buy.

A common "complaint" against the 1911 is that it's not the best pistol to start a novice.

Why not? Too complicated manual of arms?

I think the obvious answer is that something else is the best pistol to start a novice. One candidate for that might be my Browning Buckmark (unless you hold to the "revolver is best for beginners" theory). The only significant difference being the caliber and recoil. But then, you could dash all that by using a .22 conversion in the 1911.

I think maybe you are confusing "not the best for beginner" with "not the best for someone who isn't willing to practice regularly". And that would apply to a whole bunch of auto pistols. The usual comparison being so applied these days though is with a Glock or some other DAO pistol that doesn't require manipulation of an external safety.

That's 5 by my count ?

Which 1911 for a Duty Gun?
http://www.thesixgunjournal.net/which-1911-for-a-duty-gun/

I forgot about this thread. Glad to see it pop up again.

Since I'm left handed, I required the ambi safety which can wear out thus become possible liability.

Since posting this thread, I've done some research & it seems the plunger tube set-up/design gets criticized. Not sure what "Fix" is out there for that.

About the only thing, I want to add to my Colt XSE Gvt is night sights.

I may not be alone in this - I bought a new 30s Glock that refused to feed and fire. The Glock factory tech's sent me at least three different recoil spring assemblies; none cured the problem. Glock insisted I send the gun FedEx overnight express and refused to issue a call tag. I had to shell out $75 for shipping and they replaced the extractor. I am not saying that 1911's are 100% reliable out of the box either but most don't have the attitude that Glock shows to its customers.

a glock is a Toyota pickup, nada fancy, kinda plain, just works reliably


1911 more of a Range Rover, great platform and idea, but sometimes a higher degree of maintenance and or customization required


every Glock I've seen pretty much the same, every 1911 seems to have a bit more personality.


5" model 70 series, ran like a champ, with very little care. Well other than using a lewis lead remover when I was shooting cast bullets out of it.


but the vast majority of Glocks seem to run well.

but a Glock trigger vs. a good 1911 trigger is sorta the difference between kissin your grandma vs. Porch girl

Precisely. Well said.

Not necessarily. It can be contextual, too, such as the frequency of malfunctions when fired clean and lubed for a hundred rounds. This is a more practical test of functional reliability in the context of civilian self defense than would be a thousand round torture test. To increase the statistical reliability of the results, multiple repetitions could be performed, always starting with a clean and lubed gun. If, during a thousand round torture test, however, the 1911 only started bobbling after 700 rounds, and the Glock kept going to the end, the difference would be meaningless apart from a situation like being dropped behind enemy lines in a jungle environment. It would have nearly no relevance for anyone looking for a concealed carry gun.