Objectively, no fan boy crap, what mags wouldn't you use. Again, give a solid reason, not because of looks or because "everyone knows Tripp is the best."
Most 'modern' pistols function similarly to a fungo bat. The cartridge is popped into the air and wacked into the chamber by the breech face. Without sufficient slide velocity or orientation, the cartridge will fall to the floor. Even under normal conditions the chunk-chunk-chunk operation feels like an engine that's missing on a cylinder or two.
A critical design element of the 1911 is controlled feed - as the cartridge is handed off from the magazine to the chamber it is always supported by at least two points. This control is the foundation of the smooth action and reliability of a properly set-up 1911. The pistol will chamber a round at any speed or orientation and runs like an oiled gear. The length (to the ogive) of the cartridge and the release timing of magazine must be synchronized for optimum controlled feed. Manufacturers have thoroughly dicked with magazine release timing in an attempt ensure reliability with evolving bullet designs (truncated, wadcutter, short hollowpoint, etc.).
I won’t settle for anything less than controlled feed in a 1911, so any magazine that bypasses it in a needless stab at reliability doesn’t make the cut. Wilson 47D and others, you’re out. I don’t mind plastic followers, but I want metal in contact with the slide stop. Wilson 47D, strike four.
I won’t use magazines that lack skirted followers or otherwise allow the pointed follower tip to mash into the frame ramp. Chip McCormick (old style) and others, you’re out.
The overall quality of the magazine has to pass the ‘heft test’ - you pick it up, you know.
The magazine has to demonstrate complete reliability, provide controlled feed, skirted follower, metal in contact with the slide stop, and pass the heft test: Tripp Research.
All of the above, except a USGI/tapered lips magazine for hardball: Metalform.
