Positive Externalities

Hilton Yam over at 10-8 performance has just set himself up for the 1911 based flaming of a lifetime, possibly without knowing it (though he probably does), in saying this:

"Almost every modern service pistol design features a spring loaded external extractor design. The 1911 still gets by using a spring tempered hook machined out of a straight piece of steel that is bent to achieve tension. It does surprisingly well with this, but it is certainly not the 21st century answer."

Of course, I have made this same argument, many, many times, in person and online...

Every single time, the logic and reasoning of the argument is utterly ignored, and I am roundly excoriated as both an idiot and a heretic to the church of the holy St. John Moses Browning.

In fact, just by posting this, I guarantee you that within the next day or two (it would be today, but I'm posting this on a Sunday, and almost no-one reads blogs on a Sunday) I will get comments saying exactly that... possibly entire threads on THR, TFL, and 1911forum.com dedicated to the concept that I am an idiot (since Hilton posted his a few hours ago, there may already be such a thread calling HIM an idiot).

The internal extractor fanatics always insist that (and it is almost always all five of these arguments... they seem to be speaking out of the same hymnal):

1. The design is utterly perfect as it is (false), and if it should have had an external extractor, John Browning would have designed it that way (ignoring the fact that initially, he did, but changed his mind later).
   
2. You give up controlled round feed with an external extractor (false... plus most of them have no idea what CRF is or how it works)
   
3. The internal extractor is far more reliable (false), so long as it is fitted and tuned by a REAL gunsmith (vs the external which requires little skill or precision. Why SHOULD you need a very good gunsmith just for proper functioning?)
   
4. No external extractor was ever reliable (false), because everyone who has tried it in a 1911 has failed (false)
   
5. It's worked for 100 years, why change it (fallacious if not false)

The fact that each point is provably false or fallacious, frequently with a cursory look at their own guns (if not an external extractor then a hand tuned Ed Brown hardcore or Wilson bulletproof, a lowered and flared ejection port, a trigger job, an extended ejector, beavertail, a beveled magwell etc...); doesn't seem to penetrate.

• Nor does the fact that Browning himself put an external extractor on almost all of his designs (including the 1903, 1906, 1908)
  
• Nor does the fact that the BHP itself had its internal extractor replaced with an external because the internal was unreliable, fragile, and difficult to manufacture and fit (they usually claim it was Dieudonne Saive who must have completed the design wrong... if they know who he is).
  
• Nor does the fact that almost all other semi-automatic pistols have external extractors (in fact, that seems to reinforce their feeling of self righteousness), including ones that are provable more reliable than the 1911 (though in practical terms, I generally agree, the difference between going 25,000 rounds without a failure to extract vs. 100,000 rounds is moot. At some point, it's "reliable enough").  

The fact is, the single greatest point of unreliability in a properly manufactured and maintained 1911 (other than springs and magazines, which are an issue for all semi-automatic weapons, not specific to the 1911) is the internal tension spring extractor. It is the only part on a 1911 (again other than springs) that regularly requires re-tuning or replacement; and frequently it's the first (sometimes only) part (other than springs) that gets replaced by a knowledgable shooter when they buy a factory gun.

Yes, there are guns that go 25,000 rounds, and guns that are now 95 years old, that have never had their extractors tuned or replaced; but those guns are rare, especially with the garbage metallurgy and heat treating you sometimes see on factory small parts these days.

Everyone knowledgable about the 1911 knows this... but for some reason when the superiority of the internal extractor is challenged, this knowledge somehow disappears, or for some reason doesn't fit into their mental model of argument.

The only disadvantage you can logically argue about an external extractor, is that an external spring and lever design provides less controlled feed and extraction than the internal tension spring design.

This can be true to a degree, but that superiority is primarily theorietical. As a practical application in the real world, I don't think the argument stands up.

On the feed side, the geometry and tension of the external extractor can be designed such that it has identical feed geometry and tension to the internal extractor. There is no need to design an external extractor that in normal feeding operation snaps over the rim on lockup as in a push feed rifle. An external extractor can accept rounds from the magazine and slot them into proper feed position just as well as an internal extractor.

This would provide identical function, excepting in a situation that would jam the internal extractor anyway (a deformed or out of spec rim for example, or a cartridge presented at a radical angle), where the external extractor might ride up and over the problem, or deflect enough then rebound, so that the problem is compensated for.

That could be an advantage or a disadvantage, in that the casing might fail to extract on that cycle; but at least the round would have fed and fired instead of jamming up on feed, and I can always rip-rack-rack to try to clear the failed extraction, without damaging my extractor (unlike an internal tension spring extractor, which can be damaged by snapping it over the rim; or which may jam the cartridge worse).

Some would rather clear the misfeed rather than the failure to extract; but I say there's a 50/50 it's going to extract anyway, and I'd rather have that round shot down the barrel at a bad guy and THEN clear a malf, than have to clear the malf then fire.

On the extraction side, the internal extractor in theory prevents doublefeeds and provides more positive extraction... but that's in theory.

The 1911 internal extractor is NOT the claw on a Mauser 98 or a pre-'64 model 70. It is strong, but it's not THAT strong, and anyone making that analogy should know better. 

The 1911s extractor will slip off rims, and it will also snap over rims, something that a CRF winchester won't do (in fact it will tear the rim off of most brass before it slips off).

In practical terms, if the hook is going to pull off the rim on a properly designed and tensioned external extractor, it's probably going to pull off with the internal extractor as well (and any experienced shooter of 1911s and other designs has probably seen plenty of both). Again, it's a matter of correct geometry and spring tension.

I've seen plenty of internal extractors slip off rims, or worse, tear off rims (either of which can damage or detension the extractor); though at least most of the time when that happens, they don't have the energy to doublefeed.

Yes, the external extractor is somewhat more likely to slip off a rim (though not much more if properly designed and manufactured), but I've never seen an external extractor tear a rim off unless the case was already defective; and I'd rather have an extractor I can snap over the rim and try again without damage.

So at best, it's a wash; and I really think that argument comes out favoring the external extractor.

A side note: I feel the same way for semi-automatic rifles as well. Having an extractor that provides or aids in controlled round feeding, while still allowing it to snap over the rim, is an advantage (a CRPF design); just because it compensates better for the foibles of semiautomatics. I say make your design a CRPF and get all the advantages; but if I have to choose, in a semi or full auto, I'll take the push feed over the controlled round feed, because it's generally going to cycle better; even though it won't cycle properly upside down etc...

For bolt action rifles, I see a marginal advantage to a full CRF design; but I also think that the hybrid CRPF designs work as well, and have their advantages. Either are marginally superior to a plain PF design.

...And remember, all this is coming from a dedicated and experienced 1911 shooter and armorer.

I've owned a number of Glocks, SIGs, HKs etc... and I keep selling them off. I've never sold a 1911 (though I have given a couple away, and had a couple stolen). In fact, right now, the only handguns I own are 1911s, and revolvers (oh and a little Kel-Tec, but thats mostly my wifes. I replaced it with a 340pd).

...But, as an engineer (by education), a shooter, and an armorer; I recognize that there is no real disadvantage to a properly designed and manufactured external extractor.

The external extractor is stronger, provides equal or superior functionality (if properly designed and manufactured), is easier to manufacture, is less prone to breakage or wear, is easier to repair when it does break or wear, and is far easier to fit, requiring less skill and time.

So... why is this even an argument?

Oh... ok... there is ONE argument I will concede the validity of:

The internal extractor is prettier than the external extractor.

Happy 1911 day

100 years ago on this day, March 29th, 1911; the United States Army officially adopted the J. Browning self loading pistol design of 1910, manufactured by Colt's firearms (with changes and specifications as amended by the Army ordnance board); as the Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, model of 1911.

And history was forever changed.

Over the past 100 years, the m1911, in all it's variants from all the many manufacturers producing them; has sold more than any other centerfire automatic pistol by far.... With at least 5 million sold.

There were 2 million 1911s made by military contract manufacturers for WW2 alone.

Including all variants and all manufacturers, the number is most likely far, far more than 5 million. I'd wager it's more like 10 million sold, given that we know (from excise tax records compiled by the ATF) we manufacture about 150,000 1911 variants every year in the U.S. alone, and have (or more) every year since the mid 80s (when the current 1911 boom began).

Really, no other single design even comes close... in fact, even at the lower estimates, the 1911 has probably sold more than the entire centerfire auto product line of any other manufacturer... or even any two manufacturers. 

(That's if we limit it to centerfire automatic pistols only. Otherwise S&W would have the 1911 beat with revolvers; and Ruger with .22s.  The Ruger Mark1/2/3 etc... .22 is by far the highest selling rimfire auto pistol; at around 3 million sold. Combine that with Rugers .22 revolvers and you've probably got over 5 million). 

Glock has sold about 3 million pistols of every model and variant world wide. S&W has sold around 12 million handguns, but less than 1/4 of those have been automatics (and at least a hundred thousand of them have been 1911s). Ruger has sold about 10 million handguns, but less than 1/4 of those are centerfire automatics. SIG and Berretta have both sold about 3 million handguns each.  HK has sold about a half million handguns (that's a very rough estimate based on internet sources, since they don't publish figures, and don't have the large military contracts that other manufacturers do, to allow for better estimates). Walther and other manufacturers made about a million p38s for WW2 (surprisingly, I dont think even 200,000 Lugers were made from 1908 til today).  Browning has sold about 2 million centerfire auto pistols, about half of which are hi-powers, and the majority of those to foreign militaries. 

Something like 7 million new guns are sold in the united states every year; about 1/8th of which are centerfire handguns (fully half are .22s; and about 3/4 overall are long guns), and about 3/4 of those automatics. So, out of about 660,000 total centerfire auto pistols sold every year, about 150,000, or one out of every 4.4, is a 1911. 

The 1911, has been issued to more soldiers, and been used to kill more of our nations enemies, than any other sidearm.

Although I have no hard numbers on the topic, I feel safe in saying it has defended more civilian lives, than any other hand gun... or at the very least any other automatic (the K frame smith might beat it).

Also, and there is absolutely no doubt about the numbers here: variants of the 1911 have won more competitions and championships than all other handguns COMBINED.

Is it a perfect weapon? No of course, there's no such thing; but it's a damn fine one.

The 1911 simply has the best trigger of any auto pistol, period. No other single action trigger can be made better than a well worked 1911 trigger; no matter how expert the smith (though 1950s S&W revolvers worked by a master can come close). It still has among the best, if not the best, feel in the hand and general ergonomics of any auto pistol.

The 1911 platform provides you a useful defensive handgun from the subcompact to the longslide size,  slimline short grip, or a full size doublestack holding up to 20 rounds; and it does it all looking great (ok, some of those doublestackers can be kinda funny lookin...).

Personally... the 1911 is my first choice for both a combat and a competition handgun (that is, for me personally. If choosing for a large military or police organization, I would choose differently, because the 1911 is for people who train a lot with their handguns. With lower standards of weapon handling, marksmanship, and weapon maintenance, the 1911 is a suboptimal choice). I carry one most every day; and most of the serious gunnies I know make the same choice (at least part time anyway).

I believe I've put more rounds downrange, by far, with 1911s than any other handgun; including .22s... (and I only make the handgun only qualification because of the number of machine gun rounds I've fired. If we're excluding full auto I'm pretty sure that includes rifles as well). 1911s, still make up the majority of my handgun shooting today.

The thought that a firearm designed 100 years ago, can still be the best selling handgun in the United States (and excluding military sales, the world), every single year... that's absolutely mind blowing.

So, happy 1911 day, and heres an unfortunately short selection of my writings on 1911s (short because for some reason most of my posts about 1911s aren't tagged properly):

http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/search/label/1911

Well, it only took 20,000 rounds or so....

That, would be my Yost Custom commander length 1911; built out of an early 2000s production stainless Springfield Champion.

I've had it for about 7 years now; and I'd estimate I've put 20,000 rounds through it. I'm on my 4th recoil spring, and as of a recent training class it was clear this one is shot out as well, as I had a failure to return to battery with no real cause except insufficient spring pressure (I've got a couple of replacement springs in the air as I write this).

I bought it some time in early 2004... around March, but I don't remember the exact date. It was the first 1911 I'd purchased since returning from Ireland (my first 1911 was a Wilson Combat 5" custom that I bought for myself in Kentucky, on my 21st birthday); and I bought it knowing I was going to mess with it.

I experimented with some parts and configurations, and with the assistance of Gunsmith Ted Yost came up with the final configuration of it in late 2005.

I've done rather a lot to it over and above a basic Commander. Some of the mods came with the Champion (an early 2000s production model when they were still using premium 3rd party components, instead of in house parts), some I did, some Yost did:

1. Ramped, throated, polished, and hand fitted, fully supported Nowlin match bull barrel
2. Titanium firing pin (there is no firing pin safety mechanism. It's a series 70 equivalent)
3. Yost Bonitz Custom Ignition System (sear, hammer, disconnector), just under 3# pull
4. Ed Brown, ultra short, ultra light, adjustable stop, serrated face trigger
5. Tuned Ed Brown Hardcore extractor
6. Tuned Wilson Bulletproof extended ejector
7. Dual captured recoil system (Wolff 24# primary spring and 8# secondary)
8. Full Wolff spring set
9. Tightened, trued, and machined frame and slide rails, with polished contact points
10. Smith and Alexander fine checkered arched mainspring housing
11. Smith and Alexander magwell, hand blended into the frame
12. Lowered and flared ejection port
13. Lowered, extended, and thinned Wilson safety (switched out an ambi because it caught on stuff)
14. Lowered, extended, and thinned Wilson slide stop
15. Mild dehorning and edge breaking
16. Slide and frame flats trued, polished, and brushed (the rounds are bead blasted)
17. Recessed angle cut muzzle crown
18. Novak lo-profile combat sights with tritium inserts.
19. Wilson mags (47d) with steel ultrathin base plates
20. Wraparound Hogue finger groove grips, with torx head grip screws (I've got big hands)

An aside: I plan on putting a set of the new 1911 Crimson Trace laser grips on it when they come out this March. I've been waiting for them to revise the line, and I really like the new lower profile configuration and look of them.  

I've had guide rod lasers before, and don't like their switching mechanism, and that they get very dirty and eventually obscured while firing. Now that the new laser grips are smaller, lower profile, and better looking, I'm going to pick up a set for each of my 1911s (when I can afford it anyway... they're about $300 a set).  

I like having a laser as a training aid, and for use in the dark; especially since I wear glasses. It's a lot easier and faster to pick up the laser dot, when your groggy at 3am, and you can't find your glasses; than to get a good sight picture with a set of tritium 3 dots. I don't advocate using a laser as your primary sighting method, but it's a nice extra to have.

The Champion was my daily carry gun from early 2004, until I picked up my Yost Custom Colt Defender in mid 2007 (with a similar set of modifications). From then I alternated between the Champion and the Defender (at least until I got my 340pd as a pocket gun in 2009. I generally feel adequately armed with a .357 in my pocket and don't need a .45 to go along with it)... but the Champion has been my number one shooting handgun the entire time I've owned it.

I just like commander length 1911s. I like the length, the feel, the look, and the balance of them. I actually prefer them over 5" guns... yes, I know, blasphemy, heresy etc... 4" guns (or 4.25") feel better in the hand, and better on the belt; at least to me.

The Commander has been around since 1951; I think 60 years is enough of a history to call the short models "traditional" as well.

Also, I don't currently have a 5" 1911 in .45 (... blasphemy again... I have a 5" gun, but it's in 10mm); so the Champion gets the majority of my .45acp practice. I shoot it probably five times as much as I do any other centerfire gun (and I have four .45s).

I shot probably 15k rounds through it in the first three years I owned it; and 5,000 in the last four (ammo prices, health, family issues etc...). Most of that was +p+ level carry ammo, or reloads designed to replicate the carry ammo. Think 185gr at 1150fps from a 4" barrel, or 200gr at 1100fps (I've gone back and forth between 185gr gold dot, and 200gr xtp, with my carry ammo preferences).

It seems that finally, after about 20,000 rounds, I've managed to shoot it loose.

I was detail stripping it on Friday; and I noticed, the lockup wasn't exactly rattly, but there was definitely more than "minimal discernable movement" when locked up. Worse, there's movement at both ends. Not much, but enough to feel it when specifically checking for it.

I have noticed a falloff in accuracy; but frankly, with as little practice as I've been getting lately that may be me... or it may not be, because I saw it even when I was firmly rested. It's not a huge difference, but it's a difference.

My first thought, is that my link is a little bit egged out and/or a little bit stretched; and that's causing the looseness. The muzzle end also seems a tiny bit too loose (it's a bushingless bull barrel), and the locking lugs maybe just a tiny bit too worn; but all that might just be the link.

Looking at the slide, it seems alright. The locking lug cuts are still crisp; and the muzzle end doesn't seem to be worn; all the wear seems to be in the barrel. It's noticeable, but doesn't LOOK to be excessive... it's just a tiny bit too much play in the lockup that makes me think it might be too worn...

Unfortunately, it being a conical bull barrel, at a "proprietary" length (Colt commanders are 4.25" this is 4" flat) with an integral Wilson/Nowlin type ramp, it would be somewhat difficult to replace.

I think storm lake does them now, but I don't know who else might have a replacement barrel for this configuration of Champion anymore (some production models use a standard bushinged barrel, some ramped, some with a standard frame ramp).

I'm thinking I might try a new, long link (It's currently fitted with a medium link; a #3 I think) and see if that fixes the lockup; but I may need to source and fit a new barrel.

The slide is properly cut for a bushing (since some variants of the champion and compact use bushings and some don't, and they all use the same slide) and I may end up finding a ramped, bushing barrel instead.

I'm ABSOLUTELY going to fix it though... this is still one of my favorite guns, and I want to make it right.

Now, some may say "you're having a problem after only 20,000 rounds... buy a Glock" or to the other extreme "Ehh, you're just being prissy. The gun runs fine, and a tiny bit of accuracy loss is no big deal; why bother".

Ok, valid points both...

To the first point:I do a lot of rapid fire, with very hot loads, from a 4" gun. In an average shooting session, I might put 150 rounds through the gun, in less than 30 minutes (I've got 10 mags, and I usually shoot through all of them, reload, and shoot through them all again except my two carry mags). Given that I'm shooting well outside the original design parameters of the weapon; frankly I'm surprised the barrel hasn't loosened up long before this.

I'm willing to bet that if I was just shooting 230gr hardball at 850fps, from a 5" gun, I'd have a barrel life measured in high fractions of infinite. That's not what I'm doing. This is a 4" gun. Colt Commanders had a barrel system (barrel, bushing, and link) design life of 10,000 rounds, with straight standard pressure hardball. I'm pushing that designs performance envelope with every round; it's not exactly surprising it will wear out eventually.

To the second point: like I said, the wear isn't severe. It's not causing the gun to malfunction (it just eats recoil springs every 5000 rounds, which is normal for a commander length gun shooting +p); it's just enough to be noticeable. I think the looseness is caused more by the link loosening up than the barrel to slide fit... but the barrel to slide fit definitely has noticeably loosened.

This is a high dollar custom buildup, done to my exact specs; any degradation in performance is unacceptable to me. I just don't like feeling that slop, even if it is just a tiny bit.

So yeah... I AM being a bit prissy... it's my gun and I'll be prissy if I want to.

...So anyway, I was thinking on it more; and I decided to do some testing at the coffee table tonight while watching Sunday night TV.

It seems that the slide is definitely not worn significantly; as there are only a few very small indications of wear-in on the inside of the mating area. There is however much more pronounced (not excessive, but definitely noticeable) wear-in on the barrel itself.

This is actually both an expected thing, and a good thing.

It's expected, because 1911 slides are hardened to between 45 and 52 rockwell c (depending on the manufacturer and the time period), most between 45 and 50; and 1911 barrels are generally hardened to between 40 and 45 hrc (other hard parts, such as pins, sears etc... are typically hardened to between 50 and 56 hrc).

Also it's expected because barrels are final machined and final fit after heat treating (leaving a slightly softer steel at the mating surfaces which are ground and polished for final fit); while slides on production guns are generally heat treated after final machining (custom guns are often hand fit on the slide, bushing, and barrel; all after final heat treating).

It's a good thing, because it means I have more options available to me if I have to replace the barrel.

As I noted above, the slide is properly cut for a bushing; and because the internal mating surfaces are not excessively worn, I can still very easily fit one. This means I can use either a replacement bull barrel, or I can fit a barrel with a standard bushing.

I verified that a standard bushing will still fit tonight, test fitting with a bushing and barrel from a different gun.

That's good, because it's actually rather difficult to find a 4" bull barrel that will work; and as this particular Champion is cut for a Wilson/Nowlin ramp, the potential selection of stocked parts is reduced even more.

I could get it directly from Springfield, but since I purchased my gun, they have moved barrel production away from Nowlin and Ed Brown (the two OEMs who did their outside barrels when the were still match grade. Mine is a Nowlin); first to several generic OEMs, then recently to Storm Lake (at least according to the various gun forums).

Now, there's certainly nothing wrong with parts from any of those manufacturers; but none of them stock the part for retail sale... and besides if I'm going to replace the barrel, I want to do it with a barrel of as high quality as I possibly can right?

With a standard bushing type barrel, you can pretty much get whatever length you want, and then cut it down, re-crown it, and fit it to a bushing. Unfortunately, because of the geometry: with a bull barrel, you have to find one that close to the right length to begin with. You can't cut down most 5" bull barrels, because the taper begins about 1/2"-3/4" behind the muzzle (some even less, just 1/4"). If you cut it down to 4" you'd already be in the conical section, with a reduced diameter and no flat mating surface for fitment to the slide.

There are however several manufacturers that sell commander length bull barrels that will work, as they are only .25" over (actually less than that, but it's .25" nominal) ; and while some manufacturers (Kimber and Wilson for example) only provide a little more than 1/4" of mating surface before they start to taper, most give more than 1/2", or even a full inch. I'll just need to have the barrel cut down to match the slide; something any gunsmith should be able to do for whatever their minimum charge is.

That said, I'm not sure if that's the best long term solution.

I'm really seriously considering moving to a bushing and standard barrel.

For one thing, it means I'll never have to worry about the slide itself wearing out. If there's a problem, it's most likely going to be with the bushing, not either the barrel or the slide; and the bushing is the easiest part to replace of the three.

Also, it just really widens my barrel choice.

Right now, the only Nowlin/Wilson ramped, commander length, bull barrels I can find stocked anywhere are from Briley, and Storm Lake.

That's not a bad thing, Briley makes excellent barrels and would certainly be on my list, and as I said above, I think Storm Lake also makes good barrels... but I don't like having just those two choices. Though, on the plus side, Storm Lake ramped bull barrels are only $160 (the Briley ramped bull barrel runs $200).

Oh and yes, even though Storm Lake OEMs the barrels for Springfield (or at least they did... they may have changed again since the last time I checked); they don't stock 4" barrels for retail sale.

Bar-sto will make one for me, but for a ramped bull Commander barrel they charge about $260, and have a minimum 16 week lead time (I checked, they don't stock the part)... though they will at least make it a 4" with a proper crown for me, so I don't have to go to a smith to get it done afterwards.

Wilson makes bull barrels, and ramped barrels, but they don't make a ramped bull barrel in Commander length (which is amazing, since they were the first to do it in the 80s). They even make a 4" bull barrel, but it's not ramped (it's for Kimber compacts).

Clark and Kart don't make bull barrels (they do make ramped barrels though). Nowlin (who made the original barrel for the gun) makes bull barrels, but not ramped bull barrels. Ed Brown no longer makes ramped OR bull barrels (at least not for retail sale. They use them in their own custom 1911s if ordered).

On the other hand, if I go with a bushing barrel, basically all of the major manufacturers except Ed Brown are available to me; again, with just a re-crown down to match the bushing, or possibly a 3/4" trim and then a re-crown; either of which any gunsmith can do.

... or for that matter, I could buy a threaded barrel and not worry about a re-crown; in case I feel like buying a .45 can (which I am thinking hard about doing at some point). Nowlin, Briley, and Storm Lake all stock threaded barrels for use with a bushing (and Bar-sto, Clark, and Kart will make one on request). Nobody but Schuemann stocks a threaded bull barrel (a few custom makers will make them, for threaded compensators though not cans), and they charge almost $400 for it; plus the threads are weird and incompatible with standard cans (because they're made for compensators), requiring a thread adapter.

Also, if I stay with a bull barrel, I'm restricted to keeping the current proprietary Springfield Champion double captured recoil spring setup. I happen to LIKE the recoil setup; but I can only get replacement bits from Springfield (though Wolff does stock the springs). If I switch to a bushing barrel, I can use any recoil spring and guide rod setup I please.

Now, I personally think an FLGR is a good thing for a commander length gun; especially if you're running a heavy spring for use with +p+ ammo (and I do; a 24lb spring in fact); so I'd probably stick with a full length rod, but there are a number of options out there if I want to change.

With a bushing, you need to use a spring plug that sticks out about 3/32" from the front of the slide, so that the plug engages the halfround cut in the base of the bushing, to keep it from rotating (as with a standard, non guide rod type spring plug). Thankfully, the hollow plugs used by full length guide rods (which engage the bushing) are now a standard part stocked by most anyone.

In Champion form, the recoil system uses a reverse cut spring plug (as do Colts bull barrels guns, Kimbers, and other manufacturers), which has a small flange that mates with a recess cut into the barrel hood, so the plug wont slide out forward; and the plug and guide rod are both trimmed to end flush with the slide. This plug style won't engage a bushing, so an alternate spring plug solution would need to be found. Thankfully, I verified with testing today, the original Springfield system works just fine with a standard hollow spring plug used with any standard guide rod and bushing setup.

Though actually, I'm thinking about doing something non-standard.

I'm actually very seriously considering a Briley Spherical bushing; not because I think they're more accurate than a well fitted standard bushing (it's been proven with repeated testing that they are as accurate, but not more so), but because they have very desirable wear and reliability characteristics.

With a spherical bushing, the wear point isn't a sharp edged fulcrum as it is with a standard bushing, it's a full on, low drag, smooth and flat, and independently gimballing bearing surface that can maintain a shear film (yes, that's correct. Not a "sheer" film; shear as in slicing off) of lube. Then, as things wear down, you don't need to replace the barrel, or the bushing; just replace the spherical ring (which they sell for about $20).

If I do go with Briley, I may just buy a matched barrel and bushing set from them. They fit the matched sets down to 1 thousandth (instead of the standard 2 thousandths for solid bushings on a standard barrel), and guarantee them as fully functional and reliable; and the set runs about $240, with minimal smithing required (I'm fully capable of - and have the tools necessary for- fitting my own barrel and bushing into a slide). Otherwise, the bushing alone (with a ring) runs about $60.

Given that a solid bushing runs between $10 and $20, and any gunsmith is going to charge at least a half hours labor to fit a bushing; and that I don't have the right tools to properly fit the inside of a bushing to a barrel (at least not at match grade tolerances... anyone can fit a "drop in" or "semi-drop-in" bushing, but you never know how accurate that will be) I do rather like that option.

And of course, with the Briley setup, I don't have to worry about precise multi-angle cuts as I would on a solid bushing (that would be the tooling I don't have); and I can just buy whatever barrel I want, mic it, and buy the Briley bushing that fits closest to two thousandths clearance.. or if the barrel is consistent enough, even down to a thousandth. Briley makes bushing rings with inside diameters between .577 and .583, in increments of a thousandth.

'course I can also just get a prefit barrel and bushing set from most any manufacturer, and not have to worry about the fitment... some will even fit it the barrel and bushing down to the same 1 thousandth as Briley.

I wouldn't do that with a standard solid bushing, because of the multi angle cuts at fairly tight tolerances required for proper match grade fitting (there are smiths that fit solid bushings to 1 thousandth, but you really should fit them to 2 thousandths to ensure reliability and prevent excess wear); but with the spherical bushing, you don't have to worry about binding or barrel spring, so as long as your barrel is of sufficient quality, you should be OK with a thousandth of clearance... just make sure you get a really good and consistent barrel measurement (another reason I may want to go with a matched set from Briley).

Quick and dirty method of averaging out the errors to make sure you get the right sized bushing: Make 10 measurements of your barrel, with the caliper/micrometer at different points around the circumference (but make 2 measurements at each spot... or as close to it as you can get); then drop the highest and lowest, and average the rest. 
If any of the normalized measurements is off from its pair by more than one thousandth, start all over again. If it's still off, either your instruments can't produce repeatable measurements, or you've got an issue with that barrel.

Oh and it's not really a major consideration; but bull barreled Commanders are not IDPA legal; because the IDPA considers a bull barrel in a 4.2" or longer gun to be a muzzle weight, and Commanders have a 4.25" barrel. Switching to a bushinged barrel, or as with a Champion having the barrel be under 4.2" (the exemption was actually explicitly created for the Champion, and the Kimber compact; both of which have 4" bull barrels) makes the gun IDPA legal for the enhanced service pistol class.

Originally, there was no exemption for guns under 4.2"; all bull/conical barreled guns were banned. The popularity of the Kimber compact, and the Springfield Champion as carry guns; and the creation of the special competitons for short barreled guns, where officers length bull barrels are very common (thus 3.8" or less bull barrels being legal in the "back up gun" category); caused a LOT of bitching. 

This eventually (it took years) forced the IDPA to re-evaluate and create the under 4.2" exemption (and yes, they deliberately left it at under 4.2" to exclude commanders with bull barrels... They've got 4.25" barrels by default; but can be cut down flush with the slide face to be legal IF the bull barrels was initially offered by the factory). 

Initially the exemption for barrels under 4.2" was only for the Custom Defensive Pistol class; but that ended up pitting compacts and Champions, against high end custom 5" competition guns; making them essentially useless for IDPA competition. 

Again this caused mutch bitching, and really didn't make any sense; so they finally extended the exemption down to ESP. 

Unfortunately, the IDPA still bans all true 1911s from the lowest "Stock Service Pistol" class, simply because they have a single action trigger (para-ordnance LDA pistols are SSP legal... showing just how non-sensical the limitation is).

I like my bull barrel...

I like the way it looks. I like the fewer parts involved in cycling the weapon, and there being one less bit to break. I like the tiny bit of extra rigidity of lockup it offers (when it's properly fit and isn't worn out). I like the little extra bit of muzzle weight to aid in recoil control. I like not having to deal with a stiff or stuck bushing; or with losing a bushing when field stripping. I like not having to worry about losing a spring plug, because the spring plug is captured in the slide (I think any long time 1911 shooter has lost at least one... flown across the room, or the range)...

... but maybe going to a bushing, especially with the Briley option; is the better choice for a replacement?

Hell... if it weren't for the ammo cost and availability (the reason why in three years, I've only managed to put about 1500 rounds through my 5" gun...) I'd use this as an opportunity to convert the thing to 10mm.

I don't hate Glocks

I've written many times in these pages about the pros and cons of various weapons; and on occasion I make fun of Glock and HK shooters.

Seriously, how can you not? The Counterstrike Commandos are so insane in their advocacy of their chosen weapons (most of whom have never fired one, and if they have, its usually the ONLY weapon they've ever fired) that they simply MUST be mocked.

Seriously, I don't actually hate Glocks, in fact I've owned... five I think; and I own an HK right now (a custom USP compact .45), probably my sixth or seventh.

I just like making fun of Glock zealots (or HK or 1911 zealots for that matter). As I said yesterday, chest beating for brand loyalty never made much sense to me.

I actually often recommend the G19 as a first concealed carry gun. It's small, it's relatively inexpensive, and it just works.

Thing is, I don't own any Glocks right now. I've owned them because they were good guns, but I alway end up selling them (same with my HKs, and I'm thinking of selling my current HK); because although they "just work", I just don't like them that much.

Why not?

• Even when worked on by experts, their triggers are at best mediocre.
  
  
• The 9mm versions are comfortable enough in the grip, but they're kinda big, thick, and bulky for 9mm. I have smaller 9mm pistols... hell, I've even got smaller .45s
  
  
• I have huge hands, and even for me, the grip frame for their .45 and 10mm guns is like gripping a 2x4.
  
  
• Have you ever looked at one? Seriously, they're ugly as hell. I mean, I firmly believe that form follows function, but some style, grace, elegance... might be nice.
  

I really wish they'd make more of their single stack models. Yes you'd lose capacity, but it would fix my biggest ergonomic complaint.

Basically, Glocks do everything competently, reliably, and without complaint; but other than reliability and durability, they don't do anything to the degree of excellence.

I don't mind paying a bit more, and taking a bit more effort, for excellence. Why have function alone, when you can have form AND function?

So, to my mind, the Glock is for somebody who wants to have a reliable gun, doesn't care how it looks, doesn't much care for "feel", and doesn't want to think about it too much.

That's a fair number of people... Some of whom will eventually graduate to 1911s.

See, I can't help it. The Glocknuts get so pissed when you do that to them.

... and like I said yesterday, don't even get me started on HK. It won't be pretty. Let's just say, they're good, but they aren't THAT good; they're expensive, they have horrible customer service, and they (and their partisans) have an attitude that makes Mac owners look apathetic.

Let me close with the words of Larry Correia:

HK - Because you suck, and we hate you.

So you want to buy a 1911? A basic primer

Arrighty then... You've just seen "Sin City", "Pulp Fiction", or "Last Man Standing"... or maybe you've been watching too many episodes of "The Unit", but you've got the itch.

You're a gun owner already, or at least you've shot before; and all the gun rags are full of them... but you don't know anything about them.

Maybe you've only shot your dads .22

Maybe, God forbid, you're a Glock shooter...

And now... you want the purest expression of personal defensive firearms perfection ever created. Gods gift to gunnies, through the genius of Holy St. John Moses Browning.

You need a 1911.

But, how do you get started? Who do you ask? Won't my counterstrike guild hate me for abandoning the church of St. Gaston? Won't the gun shop mafia laugh at me for not knowing about the holy hogleg?

Nay my son; the church of Browning is a forgiving church. We, like the Jesuits, understand that once presented with the light of truth; mans great gift from god of reason, will lead him to the righteous path.

We do not fear, or hate our misguided "safe action" brethren; for they know not what they do. We love and pray that they will see the light.

Now, in all seriousness, the 1911 is the most popular single model of handgun in the United States; and most likely, it's the second most manufactured centerfire handgun in the world ( the K frame S&W revolver being number one. I say "most likely", because the makarov may be close, but reliable production numbers of it, and all it's clones... who knows).

There's about a hundred years of history there; and there are literally hundreds of different manufacturers, gunsmiths, configurations, and variations to consider.

As 1911 guy, let me break down some of those major factors for you.

I. Size and configuration
II. Manufacturer (or smith)
III. Options
IV. Chambering

I. Size and Configuration

Ok, so first, there are three basic sizes, all originally introduced commercially by Colt, and thus canonically referred to by the Colt name (though technically "Commander" is a Colt trademark).

You may see a given model of 1911 referred to by the model it's manufacturer chose, or frequently, by the Colt designation:

1. Government Model: 5" barrel, full sized grip frame, 7 or 8 round magazine. Kimber calls this size "custom", Springfield calls it "full size", most everyone else just calls it a 1911, or a Government model.

2. Commander: 4" or 4.25" barrel, full sized grip frame, 7 or 8 rd. magazine. Kimber calls this size "Pro", Springfield calls this size "Champion", others often call this size "custom", "compact", or "carry".

3. Officers model: 3" or 3.5" barrel, shortened grip frame, 6 or 7rd magazine. Kimber calls this size "Ultra" , Springfield calls this "Micro-Compact" (or their 3.5" barrel the Ultra-Compact". Most others call it something like micro-carry, ultra-carry, ultra-compact, hideout, undercover etc...

Additionally, there are some other variations, including the long slide (typically a 6" barrel and slide), the CCO (commander barrel and slide on the officers frame), and a few have put an officers slide and barrel on a full sized frame, with several different names.

There is some controversy among Colt purists (irritating wankers for the most part) about whether a 4" gun should be classified as "commander" length, or a 3" gun as "Officers length", because technically the original Colt models were 4.25" and 3.5" respectively. Of course as of right now, the only officers length gun that Colt manufactures is the "Defender", and it's a 3" gun.

Oh and a note on names: Different manufacturers are inconsistent about what they call their different sized 1911s. In fact, sometimes the same manufacturer isn't consistent with model names. Kimber and Springfield have both changed what they call different sizes more than once.

II. Manufacturer or gunsmith

There are pretty much 4 tiers of 1911 manufacturer:

1. Discount 1911s: These are usually made in the Phillipines. Examples include Rock Island, Charles Daly etc... In general I would say avoid them.

Some people will rave all day about the excellent deal they got and how their gun was perfect etc... Unfortunately anecdote does not equal data; and from working in gunshops and doing gunsmith work, I can tell you that far more people have been very unhappy with their cut rate 1911s, than those who have been happy.

If you get a golden sample; great, you just saved $200; but honestly, is saving $200 worth the 80/20 shot you're going to get a lemon?

There are two exception to this rule:

Taurus, who sell one of the best 1911 for under $800. Theirs lists for $600 (a lot more than the Phillipine models, but a lot less than a Kimber or Springer of similar feature spec) and other than some early QC problems they've had (pretty much every Taurus has QC problems in the early production run), is just as good as any other production model 1911... Once you get any issues worked out... which may take a trip back to the factory.  They offer a lifetime warranty on all their guns, so all the guns with problems get fixed; but their customer service is less than great, so there were a lot of delays in shipping etc... 

Only one quality 1911 manufacturer offers a basic model at a much lower price point than their main line; STI, a small volume semi-custom maker. Their "Spartan" model, is a reasonably well featured 1911, made with offshore parts (Phillipine), but still high quality fitting and good quality control; and selling for $660 list (or around $600 retail). 

STI is a great company, who really support gun rights (they won't sell guns to some states because of their gun laws for example). Well... excellent but for one thing. Order a gun from them, and it may take three months to get to you. They're VERY busy, mostly producing high end competition 1911s.

If you're on a very limited budget, and you want a low priced 1911, I STRONGLY recommend you look at the Taurus, or the STI. 

Actually... honestly I recommend buying something other than a 1911 if you're shopping in this price range; unless this is your second or third gun. 

Expect to pay: $400 to $600 or so. Basically cheaper than a used top tier 1911 in good condition. Other than the Taurus or STI, I'd rather buy a better gun used though.

2. Factory standard: These include Colt, Kimber, Springfield Armory, Smith and Wesson, SIG, Para-Ordnance, Dan Wesson, and a few others (the ones I mentioned are combined, damn near 100% of the market)

Though there are brand partisans, mostly they are full of it. Chest beating for brand loyalty, which never made much sense to me. This is especially true of Colt, and Kimber; which to me seems mostly like people either fetishizing history, or working themselves up to feel better about the elevated price they paid (don't even get me started about the HK lunatics).

All the major manufacturers are roughly equivalent in quality for a given feature set. All use certain cast or MIM parts. Most of them have their frames and slides forged in Brazil or Argentina; and only final machined here in the U.S. (even though other than Springer, they don't label them as such).

Of this group, Para-Ord, S&W, SIG, and Dan Wesson are the only manufacturers doing their own forging, or at least using forgings done in the U.S. or Canada (Para-Ordnance used to be Canadian, and did their own forgings in Canada; but they moved to the US a couple years ago, and I'm not sure if they still do. At some point, all three of the others have used Caspian forgings, but again, they may have changed by now. Someone has reported to be that Paras U.S. frames are all cast in house now) for any models at all ; and I'm not even sure they're still doing that. I've heard from various sources that all of them have offshored or moved to investment casting (nothing wrong with a good casting, it's just hard to get right, and very easy to get wrong); but I haven't confirmed it.

So, what are the real differences?

S&W and Springfield cost a bit less than the others at a given feature level, and SIG, Colt and Kimber a bit more. Dan Wesson, S&W and SIG use slightly higher quality (Ed Brown, Les Baer, and Wilson Combat) small parts on all their guns. Kimber and Springfield use higher quality (in house) parts on their high end models.

Colt has excellent quality control, but poor customer service. Kimber has poor quality control, and awful customer service. Both S&W and Springer have excellent quality control and customer service.

Dan Wesson is now owned by CZ, who has a reputation for excellent quality control and customer service, but they are new to the 1911 business and the new Dan Wesson line hasn't had much time to build up a market history as of yet. That said, all indications so far are very good; especially since they have decided to use hard parts from STI and Ed Brown (two of the best custom manufacturers in the business). I almsot put DW in the "semi-custom" category because of this.

Oh and both Colt and Springfield offer some low end models, with the most basic features. If you don't like the "modern" 1911 features , you can get a Springfield Mil-Spec, or GI model; or a basic 1991 or a repro WW2 pistol from Colt. The Colts are still Colt expensive; but the Springers list out at $600.

Oh and one thing that almost all of the factory 1911s have, is poor magazines. It's one way for the factories to save money. If you think you've got an unreliable junker of a gun, try shooting it with a high quality magazine from Wilson Combat, or Chip McCormick and see if that fixes the problem.

If you buy a SIG, an S&W, or a Dan Wesson, you don't have that problem; because they come with Wilson or McCormick mags already.

Expect to pay from around $600 to around $1300.

3. The factory/semi customs: All the major manufacturers play in this space; but S&W, Kimber, Colt, and Springer all have a MAJOR production effort devoted to it (in fact, all Colts guns except the basic 1991 are "custom shop"). They use higher quality parts, and have their in house custom shops do the final machining, assembly, and QC.

Also, the larger custom manufacturers like Ed Brown, Les Baer, Wilson Combat, Rock River, STI, SVI, and Nighthawk all have offerings in this market position as well.

Amusingly, almost all of the factory/semi customs (except Kimber and Springfield armory), use parts from Ed Brown, Les Baer, Wilson Combat, or STI; and most of them (again, excepting Kimber and Springer) use frames and slides from Caspian or STI. So what you end up with when you order from one maker, are probably the same actual parts you would get if you ordered the same features from another maker. The only differences being the finishing, and the specifics of gunsmithing etc...

All are excellent; and they have any number of models and features to choose from, at several different price points.

Expect to pay: anywhere from around $1200 to around $2500.

4. Full custom: This is the domain of the custom manufacturers listed above; as well as a few high end custom gun smiths  (Ted Yost, Hank Fleming, Wayne Novak, Bill Laughridge, Clark Custom etc...).

They use the highest quality parts, and meticulous hand machining, fitting, final assembly, testing, and quality control. They also fit a gun specifically to you, with whatever features you want (and leaving off those you don't, which can be more important).

The gunsmiths who have good reputations in this business have it for a reason. They all do great work, and it's hard to say one is any better than another.

Expect to pay: anywhere from $1500 all the way up to $5000 for standard 1911s; without accounting for any fancy decoration, engraving etc... which can run into the five figures range.

III. Options

Whoooo boy this is a big one... The 1911 is easily the most customizable; and most customized pistol of the modern era. There are literally hundreds of thousands of different parts and options to deal with; and you can (and I have) write individual articles on each of them.

Let's just keep it to the basics shall we?

1. Frame materials: Most of the frame configurations mentioned above are available in several different frame materials. Traditional is of course carbon steel (usually blued), but most manufacturers also offer stainless steel, and lightweight aluminum options. Some even offer titanium, or polymer frames.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each choice:

• Carbon steel is strong, durable, and relatively cheap; but it is heavy, and has essentially no corrosion resistance.
  
• Titanium is light, strong, and corrosion resistant; but expensive to manufacture and machine, difficult to finish, and can crack easier than the others.
• Aluminum is light, corrosion resistant, and easy to machine; but not as strong or wear resistant as steel, and more expensive.
• Stainless is corrosion resistant, but more expensive than carbon steel, more difficult to machine finely, and to finish (you pretty much need one of the cured finishes)
• Polymer is cheap, easy to manufacture, and corrosion resistant; but it's hard to keep it to tight tolerances, durability for some parts is iffy (they usually put steel inserts in various places to help compensate), and it's ugly.

2. Single or double stack: Almost all manufacturers offer their frames in the traditional single stack configuration; which typically holds 6, 7, or 8 rounds (at least in .45 acp). Many manufacturers also make doublestack models, which as the name implies are thicker in the grip, and hold as many as 14 rounds (in .45 - as many as 18 in 9mm).

3. Trigger: different lengths, weights, faces, materials, and pull weights are available. Try a few, figure out what's comfortable, and go with that.

My personal preference is for a short, extra light, aluminum trigger, with a curved smooth face; but no-one makes them so I usually end up with serrated faces. Most people prefer long or extra long triggers, with serrated faces.

As to trigger feel, I like a trigger between 2.5# and 4.25# in weight, with little takeup, a crisp break, and no overtravel (all my triggers are adjustable for overtravel).

A lot of people find that trigger weight too light, and like a little bit of takeup (my wife for example), which lets them comfortably stage the trigger. A short and light trigger takes them by surprise. Personally I think that's a good thing, but that's just me.

4. Hammer: Again, you have different shapes, weights, and materials are available. There are three basic styles:

• The spur, which is long, narrow, and flat; and usually has a serrated or knurled cocking surface
  
  
• The rowell, which is round, has a hole through the center, and serrations. Sometimes called the commander hammer, or the HiPower hammer, because both configurations use this style by default.
  
  
• The skeleton: If you took the long part of the spur hammer, grafted the circle part of the rowel onto the tipl, and hollowed out the middle, you would have a skeleton hammer. This is the most popular style in premium and custom guns today.

There are also numerous other styles that involve bobbing off bits from one of the above, or changing the shape a bit one way or another.

As to material, I personally recommend going with a forged and machined tool steel part; but cast parts, MIM parts, even titanium hammers are available.

5. The grips: This is utterly a matter of personal preference. It effects both ergonomics and looks; but as with a trigger, try a few different styles and types out, see what you like, and go with it.

Also, you should remember, the grips are the single easist change you can make to a 1911. You can completely alter the look and feel of the gun with a simple $20 (or $200 or more depending on your tastes) grip change. So if you like a gun but don't like the grips, go for it, they're cheap and easy to change.

6. The grip safety: There two choices to make with a grip safety

• Beavertail or not. A beavertail allows you to grip the gun deeper into the web of your hand; and also prevents hammer bite. I recommend beavertails to most people for most guns. Without it, you have to have the gun sit a bit higher, which worsens recoil control. Some people simple dislike the way they look.
  
  
• Speedbump or not. A speed bump, is a bump, hump, or wedge shaped protrusion on the bottom back of the grip safety, that helps your hand more positively disengage the trigger blocking mechanism; and also helps you index your grip by feel a bit faster. Some people find them uncomfortable or awkward.

I personally recommend that people get a beavertail, with some kind of bump; because they really do improve ones grip and indexing; but some people just hate them.

Oh and some folks either pin the grip safety in the deactivated position; or replace it with a solid piece that has the same effect. I don't care for this option, simply for liability reasons; but if you really hate the grip safety, it's up to you.

Again as to materials there are several different available; but as the grip safety is not a stressed part, most just go with standard cast steel or aluminum.

6. The safety: Again there two choices to make here

• Single sided or ambidextrous. Some people prefer to have a safety on both sides of the gun for left or right handed use. Some people prefer to keep the safety right side only, both for looks, and to reduce points to snag on.
  
  
• The shape of the safety itself. There are several different shapes; wide, narrow, long, short, bobbed etc... Again some people don't like how various styles look or feel.

Honestly, there are advantages and disadvantages to whatever you chose; just go with what feels good in your hand.

Whatever you choose though; I HIGHLY recommend going with a forged and machined steel part here. I've had safeties fail on me due to accelerated wear from a poorly cast part. Being forged doesn't guarantee it's better; but you've got a much better shot as far as I'm concerned.

7. The sights: To my mind, the most critical option; the sights are your second most important interface with the weapon after the trigger... and only slightly less important at that.

There are many visual options here, including plain black, three dot, tritium (night sights), fiber optics; as well as several construction or style options like low profile, high profile, target style etc...

Basically, again, other than strongly recommending night sights on any gun intended for defense; it's a matter of personal preference, and what you intend to use the weapon for.


8. The barrel: There are two basic barrel styles here.

• Bull barrels have thicker metal machined in a cone-ish shape at the muzzle end, and engage the slide directly to lockup the muzzle end.
  
  
• Standard barrels keep approximately the metal the same thickness throughout, and engage a bushing in the slide to lockup.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both; it generally end up being a matter of personal preference again. The one big difference is that bull barrels tend to move the balance of the gun a bit further forward than bushinged barrels.

Either one can have either a "standard" aka "thumbnail" feed ramp; which uses a partial feed ramp built into the frame, and a partial thumbnail feedramp cut into the chamber; or they can be a fully ramped barrel; which cuts the feed ramp out of the frame, and builds it into the barrel.

Generally speaking, fully ramped barrels are stronger, and feed better, so I prefer them; but some do not (I'm not sure why, other than perhaps traditionalism).

9. Guide rods and Recoil control: This is probably the single most controversial option on 1911 type pistols (which is a bit odd, because they are standard on most other types of automatic pistol). The subject is a bit too long to go into in a paragraph. I wrote an entire article on the subject here: MuthaFLGR

Honestly, except for match guns, and guns shooting odd calibers, it makes little practical difference; so I say do what you like.

No matter what you do though, the first thing you should do when you get the gun broken in, is buy a couple of higher power main springs (from Wolff for example), and use the heaviest one that your weapon will cycle reliably with.

10. The finish: There are a lot of options here; with modern polymer based finishes, nearly anything you'd like in fact.

I personally prefer matte or brushed stainless steel; because it can't wear off, and you can machine it, or buff/brush/blast scratches out without refinishing. Others prefer traditional blued finishes, which are beautiful, but not very wear or corrosion resistant.

Many pistols are now coated with cured (heat, chemical, or both) ceramic, or polymer based finishes; which can be had in nearly any color. Some of them even have nickel, or teflon, or other materials embedded in them, to add wear and corrosion resistance.

My personal recommendation is to choose a wear resistant, and corrosion resistant finish (as I said, I generally prefer satin or matte stainless for this reason); that matches whatever aesthetic you prefer.

IV. Chambering

OK guys, no holy wars in comments here, take that to THR/TFL if you want.

The traditional, and still most popular chambering for the 1911 is .45acp. It represents a good balance between size, weight, power and wounding performance, shootability, and cost.

Most people will want their 1911 in .45

That said, there are many other options. My wife has 1911s in 9mm and .380acp for example (technically the .380 is a shrunken 1911 clone not a true 1911). I have a 1911 in 10mm (my favorite gun in fact). Also popular are .40S&W, .38 super, and several chamberings that are used in pistol competitions.

Pick whatever chambering works for you. It's your gun, enjoy it as you like.

Personally, I think everyone should have a 1911 in .45... if you want some in other calibers as well, go ahead; but always have the .45. It's what St. Browning would have wanted.

The one crack that doesn't mean a dead gun

A few weeks ago in "When not to buy a pistol" I wrote:

Oh, and a note for someone who isn't averse to a little gun smithing work, or a good bargain; there is one specific, common, very small crack that doesn't ruin a 1911: If there is a small crack in the bridge of metal over the slide stop notch (not the pin hole, the notch in front of the plunger tube), and that crack doesn't extend beyond the corners of the notch; the metal can be machined out, and the frame saved.

Yesterday, I wrote about rebuilding Kommanders pistol... well... funnily enough, I now have a perfect example of the problem I mentioned above:

Before we go any further, let me just make a note about the pictures here. I've deliberately blown out the contrast and sharpness on these pics to highlight the problems; the metal in no way looks this roughly machined, pitted etc... The photographic enhancement I've done kida makes it look like the surface of the moon, when in actuality its no worse a final machines surface than any other gun. Also, sorry for the focus issues. They all looked properly focused to the eye, but I didn't use the right depth of field. I don't have a very good short lens, and should have shot these with aperture priority and manual focus.

Anyway, what you see here is a classic example of the "slide stop notch bridge rail" crack (yes, seriously, the little piece is called the "slide stop notch bridge rail").

That one little spot is the weakest point on a 1911 frame; and it's a load bearing part. Not only that, but it just happens to be the point of greatest torsion and flexion in the frame... and to top it all off, they take a big bit out of the supporting structure below it, making a natural stress rise...

Let's just say it's not surprising to see a crack here. In fact it's so common, that many 1911 manufacturers and custom gunsmiths simply modify the frame to remove that section of the rail by default.

In the case of this 1911, the crack has probably been there for a while, but it was never noticed before. These cracks generally start small and thin; and they aren't always apparent with a basic field strip under the lube and light dirt (even a clean gun still has some grease, lube, particulate etc...). Often, you need to clean the gun off thoroughly and view the rails under a bright white or green (higher contrast) light to even see the crack; and if you don't know what your looking for, you might not even notice it.

In this case, the process of refinishing (heating the gun up to 200, degreasing it, repeating that; then heating the gun up to 350 degrees to cure the epoxy) probably very slightly widened the crack; then shooting it chipped the coating off, highlighting the crack perfectly as you see above.

That's why I call it a perfect example.

Now... repairing it. Aye, there's the rub.

I mentioned in that same piece that one of the most critical factors in accuracy in a 1911 is the rail fit and geometry. Well, we're about to chop a section of rail out here; it is ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL that in doing so, we don't change the fit of the rails, the geometry, or the surface hardness.

If you cut or grind too hard or too fast on the rails, you are going to differentially heat them, which will induce torsional warping, as well as de-temper the areas around the cut. It could reduce the hardness of the rails is some areas, increase it in others; and can cause both inaccuracy, and the premature failure of the frame.

The way you avoid that is to work quickly, at as low speed as possible, while maintaining a good clean cut that doesn't bind or bog down. As the part heats up (before it gets too hot to touch) you stop, move off the work piece, and come back to it after letting it cool.

Before we continue, let me make my standard disclaimer:

If you bugger up your gun based on any advice or information I give you; you are an idiot and you deserve whatever you get. I wash my hands of it.

...Now, what tools to use?

You could do this job very quickly with a number of different tools. A bench grinder would do it, a band saw, a die grinder; even an angle grinder; but I find that they all are lacking in fine and precise control; and they don't fit into the angles I want to get into (reader Mark also points out that the proper tool for the job is an end mill. Yes Mark, it is; but I don't have a mill... yet...)

Also, I think that a conventional die grinder, or a bench grinder would heat the work piece too much too fast.

I have a die grinder, but really a micro die grinder is what I think is called for here. Unfortunately I don't have one of those (I DO have all the other tools I mentioned above, just not a micro die grinder). What I do have, is a couple of different Dremel tools.

For this job I used a Dremel XPR (variable speed moto-tool) with a flex shaft, and a reinforced abrasive cutoff wheel:

These particular pieces are the favorites of gun butchers everywhere; but if you are careful, slow, and deliberate, you can do a very good job with them. Professional gunsmiths almost all use Foredoms flex shaft grinders (or the Chinese copies thereof) for their heavy duty work; but I don't know a single gunsmith that doesn't have a few Dremel tools around.

As I said above, the proper technique is to have the work piece properly braced, and your hands and tools properly braced in relation to it. Then go as slow as you can while maintaining a good cut; without getting too much heating of the piece, and at as low an rpm as possible.

If you see any more sparking than this, you're going to fast:

For any heavier work you'll generally want to clamp the frame in a padded vise; but in this case you aren't removing a lot of metal, and you're going to need to reposition a lot, and get into some tight spaces and angles; so I'm risking life and limb, and bracing the frame on my thigh and knee (with a flame resistant leather pad under it) with a solid hand grip.

Obviously you can't see here, but I am wearing safety glasses. Any time you're using power tools you should wear safety glasses; but this is especially true when you're cutting or grinding metal, and doubly so again when you're using a tool that's spinning at high speed. Those cutoff wheels throw off tiny bits of abrasive at very high speed, and they sometimes shatter catastrophically; believe me you want to be wearing safety glasses for that.

You might want to wear gloves for something like this.. it's probably a good idea; but I think you lose too much feel for fine metal work if you wear gloves. Also, my hands are so scarred up, burned, and calloused anyway (cooking, welding, shooting, knife and sword work, unarmed martial arts, and playing guitar)... I'm not too concerned about it.

What you want to do is to cut out the entire portion of the rail above the frame opening; and then cut the rails back a bit at a slight angle on both sides. You're probably going to want to take the cut in a couple passes, one to create a larger hole to work the cutoff wheel in (which reduces the heating) and then a final cut on both sides. Here it is after the first rough cut before finish grinding:

I'm showing the rough cuts here, because the final finished ground and polished surfaces don't photograph well.

What you're trying to do is eliminate and prevent any stress risers; which means no sharp corners. Heres a couple views from above showing the first steps in chamfering the ends of the rails:

From these rough cuts, what you do is refine the angles and surface grinds, using a hard rubber or compounded abrasive impregnated stone like this:

You don't want to be using a carbide, carborundum, or silica type stone here; they are too hard and abrasive, and they will heat the piece too much, as well as removing too much material.

What I did with this stone, is bevel the notch back to a shallow keyhole shape; and then I put a bevel on each of the sides of the rail (you can see the start of the bevel above). I broke and relieved all the edges, lightly radiused the square corners, then wire brushed and polished the edges.

Oh, and while I was at it, I also chamfered all the edges of the mag well, top and bottom (as you can see in the first overhead pic above), and just for the heck of it, I did a full ramp and throat job for him. His stock ramp and throat were pretty rough, and I had the Dremel out already so...

When you do a throat job, unless the angles are really bad, you don't want to mess with them. In this case, I didn't change the geometry at all, I just used a soft polishing stone to properly smoothly radius the whole thing, 'til a fingernail wouldn't catch on the feed path. I usually finish up with a fiber polishing swab and compoundl but this one was so smooth I didn't bother:

When it's done properly this repair doesn't compromise the strength of the gun at all, and actually INCREASES reliability; so not only is the gun fixed, it's better than it was before.

Rebuilding a Springfield Mil-Spec 1911

My friend Kommander bought his first 1911 about three years ago; a Springfield Armory Mil-Spec 1911; and since then he's put at least 10,000 rounds through the thing.

It's a perfectly good gun. It's always been reliable, but it was never very accurate, and it just wasn't quite "right". He did use it as his primary carry gun for much of that three year period, but he was never quite satisfied with it. I did a trigger job, and installed a new extended safety for him last year, and that helped a bit; but it still wasn't where he wanted it to be.

Well, a couple months back for his new gig as an armored car driver and guard, he picked up a new carry gun. His employer required that he have a DA/SA in 9mm or .40; so he bought himself a Sig P229 (on my recommendation as well as the recommendation of almost everyone else he talked to) ; and man, he was just blown away by it.

He like the feel in the hand, the ergonomics, the ease of recoil control; and mostly he really liked the accuracy. He was used to 4" rapid fire groups at 10 yards with his 1911, and he went down to under 2" groups at 10 yards with the SIG. He never really could get a good doubletap with the 1911, and the holes were touching with the SIG.

Well, we figured out a while back that part of the problem he had shooting the 1911 was his grip; he was holding the gun way too low, and without proper weak hand support. We've been working on correcting that, and he knows HOW to do it, but it's still not natural to him.

The other part of the problem though is the gun itself. Let me illustrate first with a stock Springfield Mil-Spec (which isn't actually a GI.45 - they have a model that is pretty close to the original actually called the GI - it's just their lowest end stripped down 1911 model)



Firstly, the grip thing.

Because of its grip shape, the SIG pretty much cannot be gripped improperly, while still keeping control of the weapon. The shape of the backstrap just kinda naturally puts your hand in the right place. The Mil-Spec 1911 on the other hand has an extended but not deep or flat grip safety tang, and it's quite uncomfortable for him to get a proper high and deep hold on the gun.

This isn't quite the original 1911 or 1911-a1 grip safety, it's a bit longer; but it's similar; and like millions of shooters before him, he cant get the proper high and forward grip established easily, and when he does the grip safety tang abrades his hand.

The Mil-Spec also has a conventional spur hammer, and with the high forward hold, again as millions before him; he gets hammerbite.

Finally, like most springers; the Mil-Spec has a curved serrated mainspring housing with an integrated lock that Springfield calls the ILS (integrated locking system). The serrated mainspring housing doesn't give very good grip (though he prefers the arched housing to the flat that most shooters prefer - as do I actually); and just on principle he doesn't like lawyer locks.

Oh, and after three years of daily carry, the original Parkerized finish was more than a little bit worn; in fact in some places there wasn't really any finish left at all.

Thankfully, we're talking about a 1911; and the wonderful marketplace has provided solutions for all of these problems. A few hours worth of work, and a $150 order from Brownells later; this is what he's got:

Step one - the refinish job:

Visually speaking, the biggest change was certainly the refinish job. It was also by far the most work, and the most difficult thing for a novice to do at home.

First, he completely stripped the pistol to the bare frame and slide (well... he left the sights on), then baked the pistol in the oven at 200 degrees for 45 minutes before completely degreasing the pistol. The heat makes the accumulated grease, oils, and crud leech out to the surface. Then after the pistol had completely cooled, he did the whole thing one more time just to make sure.

Before you refinish any part it must be COMPLETELY free of any and all oils or contaminants, including those from your bare skin; so use a good de-greaser, and wear gloves.

Next step, lightly hit the frame and slide with 000 (or finer) steel wool, and scrub every bit of both with de-greaser and a wire brush.

Are you getting the point that the gun has to be absolutely clean?

Next, fashion a heat resistant means of suspending the frame and slide (and any other parts you're going to re-finish) that doesn't mask out any area that you want to paint (most people use wire coat hangars or something similar); and deliberately mask out any areas you DON'T want to paint with a residue free masking product (blue painters tape is close enough).

It is important to note here that even if a coating product states you can use it on all internal parts, and that it goes on very thin etc... that it's still not a good idea to coat your barrel, the inside of your bushing, the locking lugs inside the top of the slide etc...

Basically, unless you plan on cleaning and polishing them off later, you should mask off any metal bearing surfaces. If your gun isn't TOO tight, you can probably get away with coating the lugs and rails, and then just shoot the gun (and be prepared for it to jam up a bunch of times) until the coating wears off; but I'd really prefer not to do that on the barrel lugs or feed ramp.

When I say "mask off any bearing surface", what I mean by that is any surface that has a metal to metal contact, and takes pressure and friction. Just any surface with metal to metal contact is different. The area under your thumb safety has metal to metal contact, and you want to coat that for example.

Make a clean, breeze free and dust free (but properly ventilated) area where you can spray the parts. They sell cheap portable spray boxes for doing this, but you can make one yourself from cardboard or plywood, and plastic sheeting.

There are several different coating technologies and products out there for the home user; the same basic prep steps I've described above apply to almost all of them (though some require more prep work); but you should follow manufacturers directions.

Kommander chose a rattlecan GunKote from Brownells (it also comes in a version for airbrushing) because it's relatively cheap, and very easy to apply without special tools. You can get a better finish by applying with an airbrush, but I think the rattlecan version does a good enough job for a carry gun.

One nice thing about GunKote; Brownells has free videos up about how to apply it (and their other spray on finished by the way), so you know what you're getting into before you buy it:

Intro
Metal prep
GunKote application

Those are flash videos hosted on youtube by the way; so if you can't get youtube or flash, sorry about that. They also sell a DVD with the instructions for a nominal fee.

The basic prep process for GunKote is pretty simple. Clean the part, then sandblast it with aluminum oxide. Gunkote should really be applied over sandblasted surfaces; but if your frame was media blased then parkerized, as the Mil-SPec was, then you should get decent results without re-blasting. Finally clean and degrease it again, and heat the parts up to between 100 and 120 degrees to prep for coating.

To coat, you want to go ahead and spray a light tack coat (just a light but uniform dusting of finish) over the whole piece, then hit it with a heat gun on low or a hair dryer on high to get the coating to flash over (when the surface gets a skin of lightly cured finish over it). Then repeat for a second tack coat, and hit the heat gun again.

What this does is effectively act like a primer for the finish coats. The finish coat sticks to the just barely there and just slightly dried coating much better than it does to bare metal. This helps give you a more uniform finish, and to avoid drips and runs.

Apply a third, full coat; and be careful to coat only as heavy as you have to, to avoid runs or drips; and again hit with the heat gun. Finally, apply a fourth finish skim coat (meaning the lightest coat possible that fully covers the piece), again being careful about drips; and hang it up to dry for about a half hour.

Once you've let the piece dry a bit, you place it into a preheated oven a 350 degrees for an hour; and then shut off the oven and let it cool.

DO NOT DO THIS IN YOUR HOME OVEN.

Seriously, this coating is going to outgas very nasty stuff as it cures; and it gets onto the metal permanently. You wouldn't want to eat food that had been sprayed with it; you don't want to use your food oven to cure it.

Kommander did, but the last time he used his oven was several months ago, and he accidentally set it on fire so...

You can make your own curing oven using a metal box, firebricks and/or kaowool, a store bought( or junk yard bought, or pawn shop bought) heating element, a thermostat, and a power supply. You can get most of those things from a salvaged toaster oven or radiant heater.

Hell, if you've got a spare 220 outlet, you can go buy a cheap old oven from the paper or craigslist or summat. You probably won't even pay $50 for it.

This was Kommanders first try at coating a gun, so it's a bit uneven. He got a couple runs, and had to sand them out and re-spray; so the slide and frame aren't quite uniform. When he's sure he's completely done messing with the gun, he's going to re-sand and re-coat the gun one more time just to even things out.

That said, I think it looks pretty good. Certainly a heck of a lot better than worn off Parkerizing (those shiny spots and streaks are lubricant, not problems with the finish).

He topped off the new finish with a set of Phillipine Mahogany double diamond checkered grips, that I'd say also look pretty darn good.

Step two - Mechanical Accuracy:

So, finishing addressed, we move on to accuracy (and the ergonomics of the gun, which have been adversely effecting it; but that's next section).

The Mil-Spec springer isn't an inaccurate by any means; but it is Springfields lowest end production gun. As such, the manufacturing tolerances are a bit looser, and the standards are just a bit lower.

Now, the Mil-Spec uses the same frame and slide forgings as Springfields' higher end loaded line; but on the Loaded line, they do fine final machining and surface prep in Illinois, on the Mil-Spec, they are done at IMBEL in Brazil, to a slightly lower standard (Kimber and Colt do the same thing by the way, so don't think it's just Springfield).

The same goes for the barrel and bushing. Springfield loaded guns use a Nowlin designed and specced barrel and bushing; and they finish them to Nowlins standards, in the US. The early loaded line guns actually had a Nowlin branded match barrel in them in fact. On the Mil-Spec and GI, the barrel and bushing are lower specced units, made in Brazil to a looser standard.

All of this is just fine for reliability; they are still good quality well made parts; but to save on cost, they aren't very closely fitted. They also aren't timed for optimum performance.

The single biggest determinant of the inherent accuracy of a semi-auto pistol is how consistent it's barrel lockup is. In a 1911 the barrel locks up in the rear at the lugs, and in the front at the bushing. The tightness of the lockup is determined by barrel to bushing fit, the fit of the barrel lugs into the slide lugs, and the fit of the slide rails to the frame rails. The timing of the lockup is determined by the tilting link. Both of the above are effected by the geometry of the rails, lugs, and bushings mechanical mating.

In a well fitted pistol, there should be very little play in between the barrel and bushing; and when the barrel is dry fitted into the slide lugs, there should be no more than about 1/64th" of motion from front to rear. The rails should slide freely and smoothly with no biding, and allow for a very little side to side play; but there should be no (or a very tiny amount at worst) vertical play.

In all three cases, a little play is necessary or the weapon wont lockup properly, unlock, or cycle when dirty; but as little as play possible while maintaining reliability is the goal.

On Kommanders gun, lockup was good, but a bit loose. The frame and slide rails had decent fit; but there was a lot of play between the barrel and bushing; and a bit more play in the lugs than I like to see. Also, although the gun was timed well enough to be safe and reliable; the link was a bit shorter than I would have liked for optimum lockup.

They sell matched "drop-in" match grade barrel and bushing sets, and link timing kits (which have three or four different length links); and I recommended he pick up one of each. He decided to get a new drop in bushing and the link kit, but to save money and time (drop in barrels are never really drop in, they always need some degree of fitting; unless they are made way too loose in the first place, in which case why bother?) he wanted to try and keep his existing barrel. I told him he would see some improvement, but that his barrel lugs just weren't a good enough fit (the slide lugs seem well cut and finished) to get any real accuracy out of the gun.

So, he put in his new bushing, went out and shot a bit; and it definitely made a difference, but not enough of one.

I'm gracious enough not to mention the obvious.

His next step is going to be to order a new match barrel (probably an Ed Brown as well)... and really he should just order the matched set, and I'll fit them for him. Barrel fitting of high quality parts (and Ed Brown certainly qualifies) really isn't that big a deal if you have the right tools and experience.

...I'm not going to hand lapp the lugs and bushing for him though; if he wants to do that he's welcome to spend the couple hours of mind numbing sloppy work it takes on his own.

It's good for the soul.

Step three - Ergonomics:

Now for the other changes you can see, and he can feel; the ergos. The fact is, if a gun isn't comfortable you wont shoot it well, it won't be accurate, and you want want to carry it (or shoot it for that matter).

First step hammer and trigger. I put a good quality (Ed Brown) sear, disconnector, and extractor in the gun when I did the trigger job on it a few months back; but Kommander wanted to keep the original hammer because he thought the rowel or skeleton hammers looked silly without a beavertail. I also changed him out to a longer solid Ed Brown trigger with overtravel adjustment (the original trigger was the super short 1911-A1 spec as pictured in the Springfield pic above); and a WIlson extended safety.

Unfortunately, with the new trigger and sear, the old MIM factory hammer was just not up to the job. The wear surfaces of the old MIM hammer wore in a bit too much against the harder sear, and the edges of the hammer hooks were starting to round. Combined with the heavier long, solid trigger, the pistol was occasionally getting trigger bounce (this is where the inertia of the trigger in recoil recovery, or when you drop the slide, makes it bounce against the sear and trip it).

So, to fix this, and to help with the hammer bite problem mentioned above, he did a full Wolff spring replacement (for the trigger bounce problem you only need to replace the sear spring, but the recoil spring was wearing out anyway) and put in a new Ed Brown speed hammer. This has the added benefit of reducing lock time, which improves accuracy.

The geometry of the hammer is good; and with the new parts in place, but with no additional fitting; the trigger pull is actually very crisp, with no creep, slop, stacking, or grit. The only issue is that it's a bit heavy at just about six pounds, but he says hes' fine with that, so we aren't going to mess with it.

Next step, reshaping the backstrap for better grip.

With some guns, reshaping the grip is a major chore, but in a 1911 it's a matter of two parts: the mainspring housing, and the grip safety.

Kommander wanted a checkered mainspring housing, and to add a beavertail; so he ordered a Wilson zero fit drop-in beavertail grip safety, and a Smith and Alexander arched checkered mainspring housing (I have the same housing on a couple of my guns) from Brownells:

Here's a better pic of the grip safety:

The only problem with those drop in grip safeties, is that in order to really be zero fitting needed; they need to leave a very large clearance for the grip frame; because different manufacturers have used different lengths and shapes of grip safety, and have shaped the rear of the frame slightly differently over the years; as you can see here:

They do make drop in models that will fit close for specific manufacturers models, but they still leave a fair bit of a gap. What he didn't realize was that the Springfield Mil-Spec you can fit a beavertail from a Springfield Loaded pistol with minimal machine work; because the frames are machined on the same fixtures (there are also several manufacturers that sell beavertails cut to that radius).

All you need to do is radius the horn (any die grinder or bench grinder with a fine wheel will do, for less than 1/8" material removed. Theres a jig from Brownells if you dont want to freehand it), then a little bit of final fitting, and it will fit quite nicely without that big gap (since he was doing a bake on anyway).

That big gap by the way chews up your hand; because the edges are crisp and sharp, unless of course you relieve the edges of the so called "drop-in" grip safety anyway... so there's really no point to the zero fit stuff for this gun (other guns may be different).

Now, the only thing it's missing to be 100% for him are night sights ( and unfortunately they are going to need a trip to the gun smith to mill a couple dovetails), and the new, better, barrel.

So Kommander is generally quite happy with the rebuild job. It's got a BIT more tweaking to do, but he's still spent a fair bit less than a brand new Loaded would have cost him, and now he's got a gun fitted and finished to his specifications; and the pride of having done it himself.

Once he's completely done it will have cost him just about the same as a Loaded (or maybe a bit more); but then he'll have a better gun, because he will have replaced all the factory hard parts with hand fitted premium components (no marshmallow immitating metal). Oh and none of those evil forward grip serrations.

Not bad I'd say.