Back in the market for a 1911 of some sort. Have had a couple Kimbers, and while I know they had some feeding and jamming problems early on, I never had an ounce of trouble out of either I previously owned. I sold them or traded them off in all my loonyism. Would like something small, easily carrying size in a .45. Haven't kept up with the times on the 1911's, so talk away.

Have several revolvers in different shapes and makes, but its not complete without a good 1911.

I never like it when I read that someone is looking for a 1911 and wants something small. You're asking for trouble right off the bat if you buy a chopped down 1911. The smallest I would ever recommend would be a Commander, i.e., 4.25" barrel. The shorter you go, the more critical timing becomes for reliability, i.e., the smaller the velocity window for the slide operation, which means the springs have to be just the right weight for everything to work just right to produce reliable function.

Commander slide with an alloy Officer's frame is the CCW 1911 ticket. If you think you need something smaller, you don't want a 1911,IMO. I would only buy a S&W if I were buying an alloy frame.

Kimber Pro Carry ll. Alloy frame 4 inch 45ACP with full size grip frame. I wish I still had mine.

Colt XSE Lightweight Commander in 45 ACP. I'll never sell mine.

Yeah...Im not thinking anything under 4 in on the barrel length. More than likely, the amount of time it would be used as a CCW would be minimal, but would like it to fit that role if I wanted to change flavors. I have a neat little SW Airweight that I like.

Most bang for the buck in my opinion would be the STI Spartan IV.

Kimber Pro Carry II if you want to spend the cash.

Can't go wrong either way but will have money leftover if you go the STI route.

Colt introduced the CCO (Concealed Carry Officers) some years ago, and attracted a lot of interest. It has the Commander slide on an officer frame, giving reliability with concealability.

Talo distributors commissioned a re-issue - they call it simply the Commander Lightweight:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=275803960

FWIW the Les Baer Stinger is also a Commander length slide with officers frame, although they cost a lot more. This is my Concept X, a limited edition of the Stinger:

I could "LEARN" to like that one!

My big mitts would have a hard time with the shortened grip frame, but for some - maybe even most - that might be the ticket. NICE looking pistola, Tex n Cal!

Yeah..would be a rough venture, but someones gotta do it. That is NICE for sure. Is the "old" Kimber feeding issue a thing of the past, something they have worked out or are some still having that issue. I say old, the last Kimber pistol I got rid of was 6-7 yrs ago, at that time it was blamed on "tight tolerances" that worked itself out with a little "break in" time.

A month or so ago I was in the local funshop, when a young man walked up to the 1911 counter. His new Kimber was jamming, and then the safety broke. They gave him his money back. Short answer, no I think Kimber still has issues. Some of them run fine, but I think other brands have better batting averages.

Thanks, it is indeed a remarkable piece. Hard chromed slide, Novak-style night sights, rear of slide serrated, alloy frame, ramped barrel to protect the frame, and typical Baer fit, finish, & trigger. What little I have shot it, it also ran 100%

The Kimber CDP II is very nice to carry also has the alloy frame.

Kimber Pro Crimson Carry II owner here. Love it!

I think I saw one of those at the gunshow last weekend. It may have been the full-size equivalent though. I forget. The guy had that and a Special Forces which was full-size.

I handled the S&W Gunsite Bobtail with Sc frame and it was a peach.

Wow! A Ford guy AND a Colt guy! Isn't it great to reach life's pinnacle?

Generally, I agree with the 4.25 minimum barrel length for a 1911 with one exception - Colt. Their 3 inch Defender series has received nothing but rave reviews on the 1911 forums. I also believe that Colt is currently turning out the finest 1911's in the company's history.

I own a Kimber Pro Carry. Been terrific and very accurate. Supercrewd -yeah I saw that SW Bobtail and do agree.

For the difference in price between the S&W bobtail & the Dan Wesson Guardian, I'd take the DW & I am a fan of S&W's 1911's.

MM

given that about 40 percent of the Kimber's dont run out of the box based on that survey on the 1911 website, (and I have a Kimber that works) I would go Colt or the E version of the Smith and Wesson scandium.

be careful buying used 1911s

....not doubting you jimmyp, but can you possibly give a link to that survey, I'd really like to have access to that info. Thanks.

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=252140

Read the first post to understand the survey, then scroll down to the second post for the summarized numbers.

Well, I have a hard time accepting that survey as being anything even CLOSE to valid. In the vernacular, it's about as useless as teats on a bull.

Self-report surveys are about the worst form of data gathering, statistically speaking, that you can get. People "misremember" according to their biases and prejudices (good and bad), for one thing; for another, the people who respond to self-report surveys tend to be cranky and dissatisfied compared to the general population.

But to address some specific problems with this particular survey:

1) There is NO definition of malfunction given, and no differentiation between TYPES of malfunctions. This point alone makes me want to puke all over the "study" and stop writing this post.

2) There is no provision for determining conditions. For example, was the gun field-stripped, cleaned, and lubricated properly prior to first firing? If so, how thoroughly? What type of lube was used?(I am AMAZED at the number of gun nuts who think WD40 is a good gun lube, as one observation.) At what temperature was the "testing" done? Was the gun cleaned sometime in between Round #1 and Round #300? If so, how? Was it relubed? Etc, etc, etc.

3) There is no provision for standardization of ammo. Cast bullet handloads using Bullseye or Unique are gonna gum up the works a lot quicker than WinClean.

4) There is no way to determine the experience or skill of the shooter. A tyro limp-wristing his first 1911 with hardball ammo has as much "say" in the survey as an expert armorer.

I could go on but I won't. I've already been accused by more than one 'Fire member of being a pompous, pontificating azzhole. But I make my living in a field that requires me to read a LOT of truly scientific, peer-reviewed material on a regular basis, and that requires me to sift through it critically; and even at this level, I have to throw out 80% of what I read in the journals as being useless crap, for reasons such as the brief summary I've written above.

So take my criticism of and absolute disdain for the 1911forums survey however you will. But if you use it to guide your choice in purchasing a firearm, you're going to get results that approximate the amount of thought you put into it when you read the "study", and don't come crying here when your choice turns out to be less than optimal.

Do yourself a favor. When you buy a new gun, ESPECIALLY an upper-end 1911, recognize that it's gonna have tight tolerances and it's gonna take you several hundred rounds to get the gun to work flawlessly. When you take it out of the box, strip it down and clean it thoroughly, then lube the crap out of it, fire a bunch of CLEAN ammo through it. Take it home, strip it down again, lube it again, and fire a bunch more CLEAN ammo through it. Keep doing that until you aren't experiencing any more malf's.

I wouldn't even DREAM of carrying a pistol for any kind of serious purpose, whether personal protection or competition, until I've put at least 200 bobble-free rounds through it. HINT: this means if it takes 800 rounds of ammo to get the frame-to-slide fit to settle in reliable, I'm not gonna carry it until I've put ANOTHER 200 trouble-free rounds through it.

End of rant...

...I have a Ford F250 with 303K on it and all my 1911s are Colts...do I qualify....

The Defender series are great guns. A friend has two .45s from the original run in 1997 and just took delivery of a 2010 vintage 9mm. One of the two original .45s had to go back to the factory for FTF issues but once back never hiccuped again. The #2 .45 was fine from day one.

If one is looking for a reasonably priced CCO size gun (aluminum Officers frame and 4.25" Commander side) just saw a Kimber for only $900 in a gun shop in Ct. Great balance and great price for what you get....

I believe it was this one....Compact Stainless II...

http://www.kimberamerica.com/1911/compact-ii-pro-carry-ii/compact-stainless-ii

Bob

This one never had trouble out of any box

A few others: EMP, Warthog, Defender

in general it seems in line my limited observations, I would "bet" more on an out of box Colt working well than an out of box Kimber. Your right tolerances have a lot to do with it, but again were talking out of the box reliability.

Well written post right there.

I shoot nothing but Unique in my .45's and haven't found it a problem with proper cleaning. But yes it isn't a near clean powder.

+1 colt is puting out good quality now

While I usually agree with most of your posts & comments, & I agree with your assessment of the accuracy of the 1911 Forum survey, I am going to rant and say that the above comments are almost entirely misguided & have generally (except for custom guns) come about as a way for commercial gun manufacturers to take themselves off the hook for new guns that perform at less than an optimum level.

I've built a lot of TIGHT match guns & have worked on countless other commercial guns & have bought several new guns from Colt, S&W, & Kimber for myself.

Tightness is rarely THE problem but is simply an excuse not to fix the issues that are really the culprit so the manufacturers can avoid service work, Kimber has this down to an art & has convinced the buying public of its validity.

Over the last 2-3 years I've bought 3 new new guns; in each case before the gun was ever fired, it was stripped, extractors were tuned, feed ramps, throats & chambers were polished to a mirror finish, slide stops checked to insure no interference with rounds so as to inadvertently lock back unexpectedly & the maximum diameter of a round (reloads) over the bullet near the case mouth, that will drop into the chamber is determined.

Barrel hood to slide fit is checked, bushing to barrel fit is checked.

Reliable magazines are selected; most OEM stuff is usually lacking. Not every magazine works equally well with every spring, extractor, gun combination.

Then when the time to shoot comes, as you so aptly said, the gun is kept well lubed.....slide/frame, barrel/bushing, barrel locking lugs/slide.

When all these steps (which sound like a lot) which are really quite simple, are taken, rarely will a new gun not be reliable, assuming good ammo.

The 3 recent guns have had exactly zero issues not attributable to either ammo or magazines & even those have been almost non-existent.

I have a 20 year old "parts" gun built with a Mark IV NM barrel that has NEVER, EVER had a single malfunction, & that slide was VERY TIGHTLY fitted to the frame.

So, most problems, IMO are not from tightness, per se, but usually other issues, but perhaps most 1911 users are not generally capable of either diagnosing nor fixing the real issues.

Rant over for me for now.

MM

some say that 40 percent of guns made today are defective from the factory. I believe it based on my recent purchases.

Montana, how do you check the fit between the hood and the slide? Other than the obvious method of just pushing on it to see if it locks up tight.

I like that part of your rant quite a lot, MM. As a non-gunsmith, I defer to your greater knowledge and expertise.

But I still won't carry a sidearm that hasn't given me 200 trouble-free rounds in one session.

I've had two pretty "high end" 1911's that were VERY tight. One a Mark Morris gun, has never given me a lick of trouble since the first round I fired through it. The second, a custom from a very well-known small-volume builder I won't name, came to me from the guy who bought it from said builder. My friend told me the builder had told him it was "very tight", and that he should expect it to bauble a lot of rounds, but that he should put at least 500 rounds through it before sending it back to the builder for final fine-tuning. I read that as the builder requiring the customer to do a significant part of the final fitting for him. I put 500 rounds through it all right, but it was 2 rounds here and 3 rounds there with Type 1 and Type 2 malfunctions all over the place. That gun went back to the builder for final fitting, I paid my friend an agreed-upon price significantly less than he'd paid, and I carried it off and on for a couple years before selling it to someone who was infatuated with the famous builder's name.

I currently run a Springfield Operator and Kimber TLE II as my "working" 1911's. Both came to me fresh from the factory and although a bit "tight", they worked just fine after initial cleaning. I lubed them liberally through the first few hundred rounds, but now they'll run just as well dirty as they will spanking new clean.

I've had more than a little bit of statistical training, and measurement method/quality management training, and I definitely get what you're saying about lack of controls in definitions & reporting of problems. No question you or I can design tests that are far more objective and repeatable. I'm sure it wouldn't cost us more than a few million dollars to run that test, by the time we bought all the guns, ammo, & time for the people involved And yes, some guys are going to exaggerate failures, limp wrist, use crappy ammo, have buyer's remorse, etc. And some guys will cut the gun some slack and under-report failures, if it's their fave brand. I think the Ayche und Kaye owners are all like Porsche owners, and will never admit a problem with their guns

Two points though - given enough data, the excessively favorable and excessively pessimistic reports will wash out one another, and useful trends can be spotted. Second, having owned 20+ 1911's, and shot a number more, the averages mirror my experience. In particular, I have owned or shot 6 different Kimbers, including 4 custom shop guns, and 3 of them were not reliable.

Dumping an S&W 1911 (15.9% problems) in favor of a Wilson 1911 (12.5% problems) or Baer (13.2% problems) solely based on the survey would be unwise, given the small differences and the limited amount of data. But when hundreds of reports are in on Colt (17%), Springfield (30%), and Kimber (44%), I believe those trends are informative.

It's also interesting that the Glocks ("which always work") are indeed very good, but 10.4% report problems, which is close to Wilson & Baer's batting average...

I agree with you tex, and I too studied experimental models and statistical analysis at both the undergraduate and Masters levels. While not strictly scientific, there's a lot of valuable data to be drawn from that simple survey, which would be foolish to just disregard. Additionally, like with you, it also pretty closely mirrors my experience, having owned dozens of 1911s over the years, to include two Kimbers, and one S&W. Additionally, a friend of mine owned two Kimbers, and his experience also mirrors the results. Neither of us any longer own any Kimbers, which should tell you something, and I have never had a failure of any sort from my S&W 1911 from day one, also consistent with the survey results.

Of the three Springfields I've owned, one was unreliable out of the box, and needed to be sent back, after which it was 100%, and the other two where 100% out of the box.

Of the two "modern era" Colts I've owned, one was marginally reliable, while the other was 100% reliable out of the box.

I have only owned two kimber 1911's and have never had a problem. I know atleast 30 guys that all swear by their Kimber 1911's. I have met one guy that had anything bad to say about Kimber's 1911's. When I asked him how many he has owned and which ones his answer, I have never owned any just heard they have a lot of problems. Now add the people I don't know but see at the range all the time shooting their Kimber 1911's probably close to another 30 maybe more. I never hear them b-tching and whining about their guns. Then there is the causal conversations with like minded shooters and still I don't hear all these problems. Rather the opposite is what I hear and how impressed they are with them. Nothing scientific about my findings just real world opinions from guys that I know shoot their guns. By the way I don't own any Kimber's at this time. But I would not think twice if one were to find a good deal on one that I liked.

walt501, it sure is nice up here. There's a lot of good company.

I still use my Star PD.

On anything other than match grade gun, I like to see around .005-.008" clearance around all the rear of the tang & the non-port side & and a couple more on the port side & see that there is no battering on the barrel face from the slide.

(With a match grade gun you would have started with an oversize tang & would have fitted it a little closer especially on the rear surface)

I also make sure that the underside of the tang is chamfered & polished so as not to impede a round going into the chamber.

With today's better commercial guns, the tang fit is rarely bad enough to be an issue.

Another area that usually needs some attention & can impact the barrel/slide returning to battery, especially on a new gun,is the corners of the locking lugs in the slide & on the barrel.

Assuming that the basic mating of the lugs allow good lockup, I always chamfer the back edges of the lug recess on the slide & the front of the lugs on the barrel.......doing this will allow the barrel to both unlock & return to battery easier.

This is accomplished with a file on the barrel lugs then polishing, & with a scraper on the slide.

The absolute max chamfer is 25% of the lug surface & usually about 15% is plenty sufficient.

MM

I completely agree, & 200 would be a minimum.......but I would qualify that & say not necessarily 200 straight rounds in one sitting.

I allow for cleaning at, say each 50 rounds or so.

Most CCW's are not going to run into a 200 round firefight with their pistol, even if they had that much ammo on them at the time.

MM

Honestly, Doc, I've never seen one that, absent a genuine dimensional or some similar defect, I couldn't make work.

Just a matter of ID'ing the root cause(s), as some have interactions, & then correcting it/them.

Always works best to do all that up front of course.

I just don't happen to believe that any 1911 should require 500 rounds to become reliable.

MM

Thanks MT man. Do you ever re-fit barrels buy adding a little weld and filing it down?

Yeah, Colt Mark IV NM barrels were made for Gold Cups & as such, had a narrower tang than a standard commercial or military slide, but the barrels were fairly cheap, readily available & they shoot really well.

In order to use them with standard commercial or military slides, the tang needs to be welded up & then fit to the slide.

A little work, but a cheap way to get a good shooting barrel so I've used quite a few of them.

MM

Great stuff, MM.

Probably the most common problem I see on 1911's nowadays is 'barrel bump', where the barrel legs impact the cross-pin causing FTF's. A several hundred round break-in will likely beat the parts into submission, but probably not without longer term consequences. On a new 1911, especially a blued one, barrel bump can be spotted after a few magazines.

My new pistol procedure is similar to yours with a few twists, but is shorter...due to my shorter talents.

Well, yeah, you're gonna HAVE to clean it every 50 rounds if you're gonna use Unique as your powder of choice!!!




Right. But there's a method to my madness, and I've taken it to some degree from experience.

A problem those of us who shoot a lot run into is having time to properly clean and lube our guns after a range session. Let's say you shoot your daily carry pistol in an IPSC match this weekend, but it's cold and gusty and gritty so that when you get home you break your usual routine and instead of cleaning your pistol you opt for a bowl of hot soup and a sandwich... then your honey suggests an afternoon nap, and before you know it it's time to get dressed to go out for that dinner engagement you've had planned for weeks...

... and before you know it you've holstered your tried and true faithful sidearm full of crud and dust and gunk from the match, and you have forgotten that because you religiously clean your guns after every match... except this one time.

Then a week later your worst nightmare comes to pass and you have to draw your sidearm to defend your life. Your sidearm, which has had 150 rounds of ammunition through it in a match and hasn't been cleaned and lubed. Will it fire and function as you need it to when the SHTF? You won't know unless you've proven it to yourself at some point.

I realize this hypothetical seems farfetched, but I know it's happened in at least one case. Fortunately, the firearm in question had met the 200 rounds test and although neither cleaned nor lubed, functioned flawlessly and ended the deadly force situation in a positive manner.

It also very nearly happened to me a few years ago.

thats why I never clean glocks, they work better dirty...

I have owned over my life time several different brands of 1911.
This is one I have found for the price range tough to beat. Fit and finish are on par with the higher priced Wilson, Night Hawk, and Brown. I like the fact that the company is owned by the employees, I think it speaks to the quality. If your take home check is dependent on what kind of product you put out, I think you are a little more anal about what goes out the door.
STI Ranger.

Doc,

I know that you know that there is only one answer to that dilemma, & it's an easy one at that..........you just need more qualified carry guns.

Poof..............dirty gun problem solved.

MM

Beat me to it!

BTW - to the OP...I think I'd put more time into what I want out of the gun and go from there. Not so much worried about finding one that is/will be reliable. As MM alluded to, I doubt there are many out there that can't be made to run - if they don't already (possible exception, and only from what I've read - the Kimbers with external extractors). But there are so many variations with so many different features, it's hard to imagine that you couldn't find exactly what you want just by looking.

How's that new Ruger doing?

MM

So far - great. Still 100% reliable, but I've only had time to put another 100 rounds of SWC through it. The trigger still feels like it could use a little work, but other than that I'm pretty happy with it.

Sights are regulated for 230gr. Soon as I get low on my current crop of 200gr SWC, I'm going to load 230gr for less-than serious needs. I think I'm gonna miss those nice clean holes...

Good Deal..............lotta gun for the $$$$.

MM

I find that the 230 grain makes nice round holes. Of course, I'm shooting hard ball.

Yessir. I have a pretty good inventory to put through the rotation, but wouldn't you know the ONE time I screwed it up...

Kinda figured you had a few.............

MM

DocRocket, Would "EB" be the initials of the cranky, needs 500 more rounds fired, don't bother me, gunmaker you write about?
If so, I hate to hear that as I've long planned on one. Recent learning may have me going a different direction.

No. Those would not be the initials.

Didn't mean to cause guessing games. I shouldn't have opened that door, and honesty is the best policy. It was Fred Craig who made that gun. I wouldn't say good or bad about him or his guns, I only heard about the troubles second-hand from the guy I bought the gun from. I know a lot of people speak well of Craig's guns, and I will say that after the gun in question came back from him after I'd run it in for my friend, it was rock solid and damn accurate as well as reliable.

Personally, I've only dealt with two custom 1911 guys to speak of: Mark Morris and Bill Wilson. Both of them are standup guys who make a good product. All my 1911 work for the past 8-9 years and for the foreseeable future goes to a guy who goes waaaay below the radar. That's all I know about 1911-smiths.

Doc, I agree the most important thing that a self defense firearm can do is go bang when required. I am much like Ross Seyfried in one regard and that is never trust a clean firearm. As Ross wrote that he shot his competition pistol until it literally "oozed" with gunk, before cleaning and that he never ever shot a match with a clean pistol and that he required a minimum of 200 rounds before a match

....trivia question for you jwp....as you know Ross was a devoted Pachmayr shooter. He didn't shoot a P-gun at the 2nd Bianchi Cup however---he did at the 3rd one and I don't remember if he shot the match again after that. Ross once said of this gunsmith, "nothing beats a Pachmayr, but (gunsmith's name) is the closest thing there is." Also, of this same gunsmith, Bill Wilson said that if he didn't build his own guns, he'd shoot one of this gunsmith's guns.

Question------who was this gunsmith??????? Anyone know????????

DF.

Thanks DocRocket. Gonna keep on keeping on. EB still on my short list.

I am taking a total guess and would say Armand Swenson. Ok I need to know the answer please!

I saw a few Swensons out in California, where he lived. Alas I never had the change to buy one. He influenced a lot of people with his designs. From I hear, his guns usually worked very well.

This is killing me, I need to know the "right" answer.

When it doubt, have one built or trick one out.

Springfield/ Clark Custom "Champion" 1911

JOG had it right.....it was Don Fisher.

Here's Ross, showing me his Fisher gun----it had a 6" ported barrel just like the Pachmayr that he shot the next year.



He introduced me to Don at the Bianchi Cup---Hackathorn also had one---Fisher did phenomenal work!! Here's Don shooting at the Bianchi Cup also:

Thats good trivia right there. Thanks

Swenson was a good guess----which leads to the next trivia question----anybody gets this one correct, I'll give them their choice of either a vintage Milt Sparks #1AT holster for a Govt. 5" OR a Gordon Davis "Realist" for a Commander. You pay shipping.

Question: According to Armand Swenson, who (single individual) did he build more guns for than any other person--i.e. who was his best(in terms of #'s) customer? Hint: he's not a famous shooter. Problem: As far as I know, this isn't written down anywhere--Swenson told me this personally, so you'll have to take my word for it.

Hardin?

My guess for Armand Swenson's best customer is me, JOG.

Of course that isn't remotely true, I just wanted to see our names in the same sentence.

WOW talk about next to impossible! Seeing that its not someone famous the likely hood of us knowing is slim to none. Most likely it is a Marine or LEO that Armand had a close relationship with.

Can I have three guesses?

1) way off the wall but hey. Edith Almeida
2) Sorta famous atleast in the shooting/LE world. John Pride
3) Maybe famous depends on what you call famous. Ray Chapman

Ok laugh all you want atleast I gave it a try!

Off the wall guess, since they were both in So Cal, and more or less contemporaries, I'll guess Bob Loveless.

That is a really good guess but and its a big BUT how much more famous can a knife maker be?

Sorry, all good answers but not what Armand told me.
It was......................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
...........a pastor from Berachah Church in Houston, Texas,
Col. R.B. Thieme, Jr. He was an unique pastor. He and Jeff Cooper
were buds----Cooper ran classes in Houston for folks from his church
and he had groups from the church go to Gunsite.


Good guesses all.

tex_n-cal the problem is the "not famous". Unless you/I/someone knew Swenson they aren't going to know this person, or they knew this person and knew they owned a bunch of Swenson's pistols.

ah, but the hint was "he's not a famous shooter"

edit to add I see we have the answer, now.

I wouldn't order a new 1911 custom to be done like one of Swenson's, with the squared trigger guard and S&W sights, but I sure would like to have one for the history of the thing.

Can I still get the Milt Sparks for postage? I put a lot of burnt brain cells to use just to come up with something.

I would have guessed Bob Peterson of Peterson Publishing---I'd have been wrong.

My first 1911 was a Colt. It just shot and I don't recall that gun ever failing to fire. I thought they all worked that way. A few years ago I decided to buy another 1911 and give IDPA shooting a try. I called Gunsite and asked their recommendation. The armorer I spoke with strongly suggested Colt or S&W as the production guns that were most reliable, in his experience. I bought a S&W PD Commander and liked it so much I bought a performance center Gov't. model as well. Both worked flawlessly, but I sold the PD after a printing incident in the grocery... it just didn't fit under my t-shirt as well as I hoped. One day I plan to replace my Kahr carry gun with another S&W CCO.