Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns 1911s are Not Reliable.

At my current count I've got seven 1911s, and access to five more my dad and brother have. All of them are the standard barrel setup as JMB designed it, and they all work great. Half of them have been slicked up by a good smith, and the others are stock. Only one of those dozen guns has a ramped barrel. It's a Commander that I had built with a Nowlin barrel. It usually works OK, but not 100%. I went with the ramped barrel because JHPs tend to dig up the aluminum ramps in the frame, and I didn't want to have to go back and fix that problem later. I'm sure I could have the ramp angle changed and the problem fixed, but I just wanted to point out that there's nothing inherently wrong with the standard unsuported barrel system.
222

222Rem,

"Inherently wrong" is way too harsh a phrase, so suffice to say a ramped and fully supported barrel is always better than the standard set-up. It might not be necessary or too costly, but it is a better design.

I have a mid 1970's Colt Light Weight Commander since 1977 and the only fails to feed I've had with it were the magazines fault. The gun is a bullet spitting machine. kwg

Kwg020,

Since your pistol is a Colt, I'd blame the magazines too.

It does bring up an interesting point about 1911 magazines though. While it can be a source of trouble, the magazine often takes more than its fair share of the blame.

It�s not uncommon to see a shooter searching through 1911 magazine to find out which ones function in his particular pistol. Sometimes an out-of-spec pistol is the true culprit, and the �good� magazines are out-of-spec too � everything just happens to line up.

There are few things cheesier than some of the government issue magazines, and yet a properly spec�d pistol will gobble the ammo out of one like there�s no tomorrow. If a 1911 chokes on a �mil-spec� magazine sometimes the �better� magazine that provides the cure is actually �worse�.

Sorry for the harsh phraseology. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
I'll agree that the ramped barrel is more expensive, and is used in every other autoloader I can think of, (with great success usually), but I'm not convinced that it's better than the standard setup like JMB designed. If wellmade 1911s operate with 100% reliability using the standard set-up, how can it be said that the ramp is an improvement? I understand the supported chamber idea, and for those who reload their brass forever, and risk blowing a case, that has some merit. But part of the beauty of the .45acp is the fact that it's such a low pressure round, which is easier to shoot, easier on the gun, and easier on the brass. For all other centerfire auto cartridges I'd say it's worth going with the ramp. But in the .45, I don't see the ramp as an improvement.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the ramped barrel idea in the 1911 start with the hot .38 Super loads used in IPSC?
222

I worked one time at a LE agency, that the POS dept. weapons instr. wouldn't allow anyone to qualify with a single action weapon ie. 1911 type weapons, as an off duty weapon. I thought it was BS myself.

i reckon that reliability was not as much an issue as liability..... not to many street cops that should be turned loose with a single action auto in tense situations

222Rem,

You're right - in a full size 1911 a ramped barrel probably doesn't increase the reliability much. As you said, the benefit is strength.

My understanding of ramped barrel is that the Commander and shorter slides unlock with the barrel faster than a full size and the barrel doesn't tilt as much during the recoil cycle. Pistols with short slides often use the same magazines as their big brothers, so suddenly the feed and extraction geometry can be less than optimum (JMB didn't design the Commander <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />).

A ramped barrel can fix all that on some pistols.

I don't have personal experience with 1911's, but I have owned (notice past tense) two pistols that weren't reliable.
The first was a Star Firestar M40. It kept breaking ejectors. I got free parts until Star and Interarms went out of business.
Next I bought a Taurus PT 140. It never fed properly from multiple magazines. Rounds tended to "nosedive" and jam against feed ramp. Even returned to Taurus for tuning at a shipping cost of $51! Still no good. Traded in for a Sig P239. End of problem. Every pull of trigger goes bang. I also have an early H&K USP40. 8,000 rounds. Always, always fires.
I wonder why the 1911 manufacturers don't look at the Sig, which has a split feed ramp and figure out what Sig does right.
I also had a Glock 22. It always fired, but hurt the hell out of my trigger finger so I sold it, too.
BTW: All revolvers I've owned have been 100% reliable.

Sigs are super reliable. I've owned and extensively fired three of them.Again, super reliable. I have one USP 45 and it goes band every time.Put together correctly, there is nothing wrong with the 1911 design. It was designed, however, when everything was made and fitted by hand, i.e., there were no stamped metal or plastic parts that just went together out of a manufacturing machine. The design doesn't do as well with mass manufacture techniques. The 1911s made in the 50s and prior are as rock solid reliable as any Glock or Sig or H&K made today.You are lucky. I must have owned fifty revolvers from major manufacturors over the past 25 years and about one quarter of them have failed to fire (for reasons other than ammo) at least once.

I have owned enough 1911 pistols over 2+ decades that I am not sure if I remember them all. The all-steel 5-inch barreled pistols were all reliable, whereas the ones with shorter barrels, and especially the ones with alloy frames, seemed to have some issues with reliability. Tight pistols can be reliable; my Les Baer Thunder Ranch Special has yet to malfunction, though I have heard the Baer TRS is not fitted quite as tightly as the other models in the line. Due to the way the trigger guard fairs into the front strap, just about all my other 1911 pistols have been sold or traded; the Baer grip frame fits me so much better that it is like a different species.

Norm,Anybody.who.makes.that.statement.after.two.world.wars.and.upteen''police.actions''and.other.tests.must.be.lacking.in.experience[quite.possible!?]ignorant..?There.are.unreliable.1911's.but.not.by.design.by.substandard.parts-yes.bypeople.tweaking.them-yes.and.by.''experts''making.them.better.BIG.yes.get.yourself.a.plain.jane.1911.it'll.work.everytime.Shootrj2003