Twin Cities Carry Forum Archive
http://forum.twincitiescarry.com/

Short-barrelled 1911 reliability?
http://forum.twincitiescarry.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=145		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  Lobotomy Boy [ Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:15 am ]
Post subject:  Short-barrelled 1911 reliability?
I notice a lot of people carry compact 1911s. I've tried a couple of Paras--an LDA Carry and a Warthog or whatever they call the compact SA 1911, and both had feeding issues. The LDA was brand new. I ran about 100 rounds through it and it was a jammamatic. The other Para was a well-used range slut, and that also had its share of feeding issues.

I may be limp-wristing them, but I haven't had problems with other compact autoloaders that have histories of being sensative to limp wristing, like the Kel-Tecs. I've read that the 1911 platform can become finicky when the barrel length gets too short. What are your experiences?
Author:  mobocracy [ Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:37 am ]
Post subject: 
The Warthog has been the subject of a recent thread on rec.guns, a lot of negatives. It was also featured in a recent Gun Tests magazine review, also negative.

Never shot it myself, so I have no experience. Para's LDA system seems interesting (although the doublestack Para I shot was too wide in the grip for my tastes), but I'm generally more of a 1911-for-target-shooting kind of a guy.

I'll stick with TDA myself for a carry gun.
Author:  Brewman [ Thu Sep 01, 2005 9:53 am ]
Post subject: 
Same here. I like my 1911 target pistol, which has a 6" barrel, and is built pretty "tight". The gun had trouble feeding my LSWC reloads until I started seating the bullets a tiny bit farther into the case, and now she runs like a watch.
I've also heard that compact 1911's may be a bit more subject to feeding issues than standard lengths. And then some guns just seem to like a certain typo of ammo more than others.
One of the things I like the best about the 1911 style is the single action trigger. I'm not really that drawn to Para's LDA's, thought in all honesty I've never fired one.
Author:  cobb [ Thu Sep 01, 2005 10:07 am ]
Post subject: 
I have a 2 Colt Defenders and one I have shot quit a bit, even used it in some IDPA BUG matches, using Wilson magazines, zero problems with the guns. The only issue I did have was with one Wilson magazine and jamming on the last round intermittently. Replaced the spring in that one mag, and now am back to zero problems, factory or handload ammo.
Author:  JDR [ Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:33 pm ]
Post subject: 
My current daily carry is a Warthog. I purchased it about three months ago. This particular auto loader needed to have about 300 rounds run through it before it stopped FTF. After the first 300 rounds, I polished the ramp. I then shot another 300 rounds through it, over time. I have not had one FTF or FTE with this gun since. I also have a Colt Officers Model (3” barrel). I have had this gun for an estimated 10 years and never had any problem. I have run plenty of ammo through this one. In addition, I have a Kimber Tactical Ultra Carry. This one is probably my most favorite piece. I have run over 800 rounds through this one. I have never had any issue at all. This gun I obtained from Kimber after the polymer double stack I had jammed with FTF and FTE in every magazine. I went through 3 different magazines and over 500 rounds documenting every malfunction. It went back to Kimer’s shop twice. They finally gave up, and offered to trade me another gun. I paid the difference for the Ultra . The manager of their custom shop said “ 1911’s aren’t meant to have a double stack”. Go figure….

I also often carry my Kahr P40. This gun has been a pleasure to own. It is small, and absolutely dependable. The only difficulty is the grip is to slim for me. I have a Hogue grip around it, with an “a-Grip” over that. I still want to over grip it, and that causes my shots to go off target. With single stacks, I carry a second magazine in my front pocket. With the Warthog I do not, although probably should. I carry deep cover and the double stack grip of the Warthog is not a problem, where the second magazine in my pocket can be. I am waiting for Kahr to come out with their 45 caliber model.

I guess to answer your question, I have always had short barrel 45’s. My three 1911’s I have are 3”. In fact all my handguns are, except for a Richardson’s Navy Colt conversion.

The only gun that did not function with absolute dependability after a small break end period was that first (double stack) Kimber. I am reasonable accurate at shot placement with these short barrel handguns and do not find any difficulty with a “weak wrist” syndrome (although Kimber’s Custom shop Forman tried to insinuate I was.
Author:  mnblaster [ Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:21 am ]
Post subject: 
I carry a Springfield Compact. The gun ran ball ammo like a champ but had trouble with most hollow point ammo. I sent the gun in and had it polished and tuned for better reliability with hollows, now it feeds with no problems.
Author:  CW Spook [ Thu Sep 08, 2005 1:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
There's been a lot of discussion over on the 1911forum about that issue. I thought I wanted an Ultra Compact as a BUG, but decided on a S&W 642 with Crimson Trace grips instead. I like the light weight and the CT's are awsome.
Author:  mo_the_mouse [ Tue Nov 01, 2005 11:02 am ]
Post subject: 
Total newby question....What makes a 1911 a 1911?

Update: Scratch that question. I found a history or the M1911 Here. Well written and informative if anyone want to take a look.
Author:  goalie [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:01 am ]
Post subject: 
John Moses Browning made the 1911 the way he did for a reason. Chopping it results in a completely different firearm that will sometimes work fine, and many times won't. If you go the super-small 1911 route, just be prepared to possibly spend a good chunk of you allowance to make it 100% reliable.
Author:  Pakrat [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:19 am ]
Post subject: 
If the 1911 design has been around for so long and it is considered a "standard", why the hell do they cost so much more?
Author:  JDR [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:22 am ]
Post subject: 
Pakrat wrote:
If the 1911 design has been around for so long and it is considered a "standard", why the hell do they cost so much more?


Because they are cool looking :wink:
Author:  mobocracy [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:05 am ]
Post subject: 
Pakrat wrote:
If the 1911 design has been around for so long and it is considered a "standard", why the hell do they cost so much more?


I think there's an "elite" status associated with them. Outside of a small number, most come with "enhanced" features (triggers/grips/checkering/slides) also used to justify higher prices.

They may also be more expensive to make, since they represent one of the few all-metal full-size guns in current production and have more machining and other time-consuming production steps than a polymer framed gun.

What's a Sig P220ST go for relative to a common stainless 1911? My S&W 1911 Target ran about what I would have paid for the Sig.
Author:  JonnyB [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 10:45 am ]
Post subject: 
Standard 1911 pistols are no more expensive than other reputable types. I bought a new Kimber Pro-Carry alloy several years ago for $559. Granted, it was priced at $700 at another shop...

Glocks were about 50 to 80 dollars less; Sigs at least as much as the Kimber and S&W autos comparable to Sig. Browning HiPowers are right up there as well.

Now, when you get into the 'special' units from custom suppliers, yes, they can run a couple thousand. Most of us aren't skillful enough to extract the full capability from these pistols.

Springfield's several offerings are reasonable in price. S&W has their own 1911 for a higher but still affordable tag. Paras are certainly affordable.

To get back to the original thread topic, the aforementioned Kimber has a 4" barrel; the shortest I personally would care for on a 1911. The reliability has been fine after an initial problem with the slide stop. The barrel isn't the hard part to conceal anyway, so a full-size 1911 is still easy to carry and conceal if you wish.

JB
Author:  westhope [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Springfield Micro Compact
My Springfield Micro Compact (3 inch barrel) just broke at an informal IPSIC match last night at the Burnsville Pistol Range when shooting a stage. The guide rod / recoil spring retainer broke off at the end near the recoil lug. This guide rod / retainer contains the inner and outer recoil springs. No other damage noticed. I stopped immediatly during shooting the stage when I noticed the guide rod protruding.

I had been shooting this gun in IDPA Back-Up Gun (BUG) matches all summer. I did originally have trouble with it feeding but this was curred by throating the chamber like any good 1911 should have. I replaced the recoil springs once. They weaken quickly as in any short barrel 1911. I know others have had problems with the Micros but mine has worked fine after throating until last night.

Carry gun reliability? Not so sure after last night. I usually carry a SW 642 38 Special or a 4 inch Kimber 1911. These have allways gone bang for me. Just replace the recoil spring in the Kimber every 1,000 to 2,000 rounds.

Will try to order replacement parts today from Springfield.
Author:  westhope [ Fri Nov 04, 2005 4:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Springfield Micro Compact
I just got off the phone with a nice lady at Springfield Armory customer service. I told her about the failure of the guide rod on my Micro Compact. She said she will ship out a complete guide rod / dual recoil spring assemby at no charge today. She requested I return the old parts when they arrive.

I asked about ordering extra recoil springs and she said they only sell the complete assembly ( at $35) and she recommended not to order it now. The standard one should last thousands of rounds and to order one when and if I need it.

I replaced the old springs and they seemed to correct the problems before. I will try to keep a record of how many rounds this new one lasts.

I got the replacement, springs only, from Wolff Springs before.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/