1911 Magazine Analysis [Archive]

S.R.Custom

06-06-2010, 04:01 AM

Two quotes are particularly... "interesting":

My favorite discovery to come out of this whole experiment was the performance of USGI feed lips with ball ammo. The rounded profile of FMJ bullets works perfectly with the angles of the full-length feed lips to produce an unbelievably smooth feed. Chambering a round feels like you're dropping the slide on an empty chamber.

Gee. Ball ammo out of mil-spec magazines worked the most reliably. Who would've guessed that? (Besides JMB himself, I mean...)

But here's the money quote:

Such well-controlled feeding produced one unanticipated side-effect: My groups shrank when using ball ammo in USGI mags. The cartridges were making it to the chamber with enough reproducibility in their motion that it knocked a healthy 25% off my group sizes.

So mil-spec magazine lips produce better... accuracy? I'd like to see the white paper on that one...

Groo

06-06-2010, 02:33 PM

Groo here
The accuricy will come from the fact that the slide speed/ feed is similar
and all those moving parts are in a similar place..
The tighter the gun is the LESS this will be seen as the parts in motion
will have less operating room and therefor be closer to the same place.
This will not be observed much in a pistol with a fixed barrel..

GeneT

06-06-2010, 03:07 PM

While examining feed lips, he used almost identical followers. The mec-gar/novak/act-mag follower makes a huge difference, IMO and is one of the most reliable. (I recognize that there have been other problems associated with, at least, the mec-gar 10 round mags, but they are unrelated to the follower or feed lips). IME, the best magazines for the 1911, when expected to feed any round are mec-gar 7-round magazines, or Novak/ACT-mag 8-round. (I think all are really mec-gar). Wilson-Rogers are a close second.

GsT

jwp475

06-06-2010, 04:03 PM

I like the McCormack Power Mags, they have served me very well

35remington

06-07-2010, 09:38 PM

Ball magazines were designed to feed ball. This single mindedness of purpose has not been seen in quite some time in the magazine selections for the 1911 that most users think of as "proper." A tapered lip magazine meant for ball is more reliable than any of the "premium" magazines are with ANY ammo. It is also smoother feeding as it presents the cartridge with a straighter shot to the chamber. The fact that reliability follows should hardly be surprising, but we've forgotten that in our rush to buy what the big dollar advertisers are selling.

What most here don't know, and what the magazine peddlers won't tell you, is that most of the "popular" magazines don't feed the 1911 the way it was meant to be fed.

It was meant to be fed from a tapered lip magazine. Period. As per JMB's original intent.

Some types such as the McCormick steepen the feed angle, and the Power Mags have a nosediving prone follower in the interest of sticking that eighth round in a flush fit magazine, and the extra round wasn't worth it. This follower type also damages aluminum frames. If it was such a good magazine, why the need for the "upgraded" Power Mag Plus? The Wilson type also bypasses some of the controlled round feed principles the 1911 was designed to work with.

Most of us are using nonstandard magazines that have considerable faults inherent to their design, and are paying a premium price to do so! Marketing at its finest, truly!

MtGun44

06-08-2010, 01:28 PM

Anybody know of a source of a good quality REAL ball tapered feed lips mag today?

I see one in Checkmate's line that says it is, but many others say they are "GI" and
obviously have the short WC release point in the pictures.

Bill

Edubya

06-08-2010, 03:04 PM

Bill, I'm not totally sold on all that he is proposing but I'm willing to try a couple of the USGI mags with tapered lips to see for myself if I can distinguish any improvements. I'm just rummaging around in the used bin to see if I can find any. No success yet but for as much as the manufacturers hyped their hybrid mags and people are willing to try the latest, greatest tactical offerings, I suspect that I'll find a few soon enough.

EW

35remington

06-08-2010, 06:41 PM

I know of a source.

Two weeks ago I got more (I have nine so far with the addition of three recently purchased) Checkmate's CM-7-B-GI-XP's, which is their seven round blued GI feed lips with the Wolff extra power springs. I don't recommend anything but the Wolff extra power springs as they're only about a 2.50 premium whereas they'll cost you six to seven bucks to buy them aftermarket. So configured the magazines run about 25.00 apiece.

The Wolffs are a necessity for any mag receiving heavy use or constant carry fully compressed in a CCW pistol with the eighth round up the spout. This compresses the spring stack to its maximum. Even after the spring takes its set, these have ample power to bring the round up to feed even given heavier loads that bounce the pistol around and slide velocities that try to outrun ordinary magazine springs. These Checkmate supplied XP Wolff springs definitely have some nuts!......very noticeably more than standard springs, and that's a very good thing. Checkmate will ship within a couple of days of ordering.

Release point of the Checkmate GI's is just touching the front of the dimple, which means they have a slightly earlier release than some other GI "on the long side of spec" magazines (some of which release rather late in several of the old 60's GI's that I have) which makes them suitable for more than just ball. (However, this release point is correct in that it is like a proper GI configuration, not a short WC). They will also feed the HG pattern SWC's at around 1.250" and also the longer hollowpoints like the Remington Golden Saber which come from the factory in my samples at an average length of 1.238" on a number of those checked recently.

As always, your gun is the final determinant of what it likes, but using the design the gun was designed to work with is something most other magazine configurations for the 1911 cannot claim, and is IMO a more correct route to proper functioning than most of the magazine alternatives available today.

We have truly forgotten how to make a 1911 run, and what's worse is that most of us don't know it......we just buy magazines without questioning the design changes they embody that often have a reliability downside.

After all, a magazine is just a magazine, right? And we know better than John Browning what should work in it just because we're modern, and who cares if he did design the pistol.......we can outsmart a guy that's been dead for eighty years!

Such thinking got us where we are today. It is truly a pity it is so.

On edit: if ordering the XP springs, you must specify on your order, as they do not show up on the current website's options. Ask for them. They are available.

BTW, tapered feed lips as found on GI magazines and Colt's variant are not the "latest, greatest tactical offerings"........ they've been a part of the correct 1911 magazine design since the beginning, forgotten by everyone except the military and Colt. We were lured away by the other designs that billed themselves as the "latest and greatest" and we found out to our sorrow that they weren't.

Reading stuff like Patrick Sweeny's two volume work on the 1911 pistol just continues the misleading propaganda about magazines, and Mr. Sweeny speaks not a whisper about the inherent problems of the "big name" magazines featured in his books. He's as beholden to advertisers and cronyism as most writers are that give the partial truth are these days. If he is generally ignorant of how magazines are designed to work in the 1911 that's not a good recommendation for one who promotes himself as expert enough to write a book.

MtGun44

06-08-2010, 07:43 PM

35 Rem,

Thanks for the info. I have asked Checkmate for a good pic of their lips.

Bill

35remington

06-08-2010, 08:51 PM

I can reassure you......they're the real deal.

This from a guy that has many GI magazines of WW1 and WW2 manufacture like Little, Risdon, Scoville and others, and also some Checkmate manufactured GI's that date from the 60's. I know one when I've seen one.

Here's a photo of mine, with the XP springs.....zoom in if you need more detail.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/johnnyrem/magazine1.jpg

MtGun44

06-08-2010, 09:10 PM

Checkmate came thru!

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/picture.php?albumid=161&pictureid=2355

I'm going to purchase one or two to try out.

Bill

35remington

06-08-2010, 09:39 PM

This is probably for others reading this rather than you, as you likely know better, but the GI's are not for short rounds, as they have a certain length they were meant to work with. A too short, target type round won't work through them.

This doesn't mean anything is wrong with the magazines, just that the round is not of the proper type. True controlled feed needs the right length round combined with the right release point. Early for short rounds, later for longer ones. There is a range of length that is proper for each type. .

The hybrid type on the right combines the tapered feed lips of the GI with the earlier release point of the WC magazine (thus making it suitable for shorter rounds, but not the very shortest) but it's a slight bit later than most WC magazines. It is a decent compromise that is of a type Colt has offered since the 70's, and it is an improvement in smoother feeding as compared to the WC McCormick type, and is more likely to have a good chance of feeding in a wider range of typical 1911's. A tapered lip magazine cannot have the shortest release point as there must be space and time for the taper to work in releasing the round at a straighter angle as opposed to the straight lip WC type. Having a short release point defeats its purpose, so the most controlled feed cannot occur with the shortest overall length rounds.

The dimple on the follower is needed with both GI and hybrid types of tapered lip magazine. The follower on the hybrid pictured above looks like Checkmate's proprietary Bull-Nose follower, which has a front skirt. It is a good follower, but the standard dimpled follower as found on the GI is just as good for all practical purposes and will not damage aluminum frames, nor is it prone to nosediving like McCormick Power Mag followers are. The hybrid may be had with either type follower. The hybrid is also available in an extended length eight shot magazine which avoids the spring problems found in flush fit eight shotters.

35remington

06-08-2010, 09:58 PM

I've also posted this before, but this photo shows the benefits of a tapered lip magazine and why they feed straighter and more smoothly than the WC types. McCormick on the left, one of the first of the Checkmate hybrid tapered lip magazines on the right (I got in on a group buy of about 3 thousand for a ridiculously low price).

Both cartridges are at their respective release points. The tapered mag on the right lets the rear of the round rise as it goes forward, making a straighter shot to the chamber, and also ensuring that the rim is nearly under the extractor before it is released. Since the rim has to feed under the extractor from below it's a smoother, more reliably feeding magazine in most guns. It's like shooting free throws from 10 feet as opposed to the halfcourt line. Closer to the extractor at release is better and increases the odds that the rim will find its way under it as it should.

The McCormick makes the round climb the feed ramp at a steeper angle, and the rim is at more of an angle to the extractor and further away when it's released (Ka-Chunkier feeding) which is what 'ol Chip neglects to mention in his advertising.

Can't say I blame him. If I had to sell his magazine design I wouldn't mention it either.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/johnnyrem/Feedlips.jpg

On the right (or top) is a stainless steel tapered lip hybrid with dimple and folded metal follower compared to a WC McCormick type. The hybrid has tapered feed lips, the McCormick, straight ones. The same magazines as pictured above except the hybrids are carbon steel in the other photo.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/johnnyrem/DSC02139.jpg

trickyasafox

06-09-2010, 08:18 PM

I think checkmate does pretty big price breaks on bulk orders. Maybe we should consider a group buy on magazines? I think the minimum for the best pricing is around 100 magazines.

35remington

06-09-2010, 09:32 PM

Good idea, if you can generate the interest. I would be in for some more myself, either hybrid or GI with XP springs. I would get, at minimum, three more myself, probably two hybrid and one more GI.

But I believe Checkmate will let you mix and match on their orders. We've done it before.

MtGun44

06-09-2010, 11:11 PM

I'd be up for some if we could get a group buy going. Also have some friends that
may be interested, too.

Interesting, point. I bought about 10 "GI" mags about 30 yrs ago for $3 each. Seem kinda
light metal, only used them for practice mags all these years. BUT, I've never had a jam
or crack in them, even tho they feel thin.

Bill

35remington

06-10-2010, 01:07 AM

I have some fake Colt mags in the hybrid style......I bought two of them many years ago. The metal was light and the springs are very weak, and they didn't prove the worth of the design because they were poorly executed. A tapered lip hybrid can puke the last round out the ejection port instead of feeding it, despite the dimple, if the springs are quite weak. These were.

Because of these shoddy magazines (and I didn't know they were shoddy at the time; I figured a magazine was a magazine) I kept trying various 1911 magazine designs. Now I've come back full circle, with a better executed hybrid and GI as my idea of what a 1911 magazine should be. I wish I could say I came up with this on my own, but I ignored what I was seeing with my magazines that proved reliable and kept trying the big name brands with decidedly mixed results. I needed someone to point out the obvious before I saw the light. I hadn't been paying attention.

Years ago, at least in the 60's, it must have been somewhat popular to modify the feed lips of GI's with some sort of mandrel to give the lips a slight flare like a hybrid and make an earlier release point for rounds other than ball. This retained the taper of the magazine (unlike the mandrel and yoke type sold by Brownell's which changes a GI to a straight wadcutter configuration). I also have examples of this mandrel formed taper lip hybrid type on hand, inherited from Dad along with a bunch of other GI magazines, some modified, most not.

Colt apparently took things a step further in the 70's in offering the hybrid type magazine with a defined release point.

The tapered lip hybrid can be botched, too, as my earlier experience shows. With the XP Wolff springs I feel they've optimized it as much as possible. I will caution that even the hybrid will choke with rounds much under 1.190" so some of the shortest target rounds are out, but then these short semiwadcutters weren't that reliable in a lot of guns anyway. I like the HG 68 style of semiwadcutter better anyhow. It's okay to say some rounds are just too short if you're trying for controlled feed. Besides, most standard power rounds are longer than 1.20" anyway; truncated cones, hollowpoints, ball, etc. That's about 99 percent of what most guys shoot.

GI's can have too late of a release point, too, if the manufacturer is the lowest bidder and hurriedly bangs them out without checking the feed lips. I've picked up some at gun shows that were quite late, and had them modified to feed better. When properly executed I think quite a lot of them, and the Checkmates I have seem pretty good.

Some of the gripes I had with GI's and the fake hybrids were no doubt what drove many to McCormicks and Wilsons and such, but I now think these magazines have driven us down the wrong path, and they've done more harm than good to the 1911's reputation for reliability.

Offering the Shooting Star magazines without explaining that they have a high propensity for jamming with standard ammo, for instance, did no one a service. This magazine should have been dropped from production; ironically they still manufacture it.

Caveat emptor.

Some of the "improvements" made in 1911 magazines suck, quite frankly. What's a crime is that this isn't more widely known, but then most guys don't get that deeply into magazines and how they work.

That's my experience, hard won over 30 plus years. I'm unlikely to change my opinions now, having come full circle. I've seen the other side and been burned too many times to go back now.

Edubya

06-10-2010, 05:54 AM

Hey 35remington, I sure do appreciate you sharing all of those years of experience with us. I feel enlightened and I'm gonna copy a couple of your post and share them with a couple of my friends.
Thanks,
EW

MtGun44

06-10-2010, 01:46 PM

Just as a sidelight. I had a hilarious (because it was the last round in a match, it would NOT
be hilarious in real life!) happenstance. I have one McCormick super mag or whatever the
plated 8 rd ones with the numbered holes are, salvaged from a friend that blew a case and
slightly bulged the mag, so he was throwing it out, I have fixed these by filling with ammo and
putting on a board and bumping with a 3 lb rubber hammer - works great -ONLY for practice
or 'who cares' matches, tho.

In any case, I was shooting the gun dry, and did - but the gun wasn't locked back at the
end of the match, as expected - just partway back. I dropped the mag but had to pull
it out manually and it came out 'bumpy', clearly the spring was staying in the gun. I looked
and the FOLLOWER was 3/4 of the way into the chamber. The lips had spread a bit and that
short tailed 8 rd Devel follower had gotten high enough to feed into the chamber, hanging up
the spring.

SO - I can honestly say the the McCormick power mag will feed ANYTHING, including the
follower ! LOL!

Still open for a group buy on some Checkmate mags if someone wants to run it, I am WAY
too busy for a couple months at least.

Bill

35remington

06-10-2010, 08:46 PM

Just thought I'd show this to show differences in release points.

All cartridges are very, very, near their release points. Moving them even a little bit forward will cause them to launch out of the magazine.

Top is a GI that is on the late releasing side. Note the distance between the dimple and the base of the cartridge.

Middle is a GI with a late release like the one above modified by John Travis. This is similar to the current Checkmate production GI's to barely a hair earlier releasing. Such a release is more generally useful and tends to smoothly feed. The way John does it you cannot visually distinguish between the magazines as to "before" and "after." He does not put a flare in the feedlips at the release point, so it releases gradually rather than abruptly.

This could be termed a "earlier gradual release." A GI would be "later gradual release." A hybrid would be "earlier more abrupt release."

Bottom is a hybrid. Once the rim hits the wide spot in the feed lips it will be released.

The top two magazines are fully tapered; the hybrid is tapered with a flare. It's mostly a GI magazine with a somewhat less severe SWC flare.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/johnnyrem/DSC02133.jpg

35remington

06-10-2010, 09:14 PM

More differences, and a modified magazine in the middle that predated the "hybrid" style long before Colt offered it in the 70's. Someone modified it to release earlier than a GI and made sure they retained the taper before the release point.

On the left is a current production Checkmate hybrid.

The middle is a GI magazine modified with a mandrel of some sort but that left the taper intact. Function is identical to the hybrid but with a more subtle, more gradual flare in the feedlips than the hybrid. Release point is the same. It is visually different than the GI with the slight flare visible. While visible, the flare is not quite so sharp as the hybrid's and much less sharp than on a McCormick. This magazine dates to the 60's. The mandrel that formed it obviously had a taper to it. This is my famous "Number 1" that worked every time even though I didn't know why.

Now I know. The magazine has seen considerable use and is semi retired. With a new follower (the slide stop shelf is getting worn) it would be good to go for another gazillion rounds.

The mandrel that Brownell's sells to change a GI to a SWC magazine makes the rear of the feedlips straight rather than tapered. A magazine so modified works more like the SWC magazines produced for sale by several firms.

The right is a fully tapered no flare GI by Checkmate. Release point is touching the front side of the dimple to maybe the barest hair past.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/johnnyrem/hybridMGiGi.jpg

MtGun44

06-11-2010, 12:44 AM

What is the dimple for?

Bill

35remington

06-11-2010, 08:33 AM

Keeping the round from jarriing loose of the feedlips as the slide strikes the frame on the last shot. This would cause a misfeed if it were to occur.

It's a backup to an adequate spring to hold the bullet in place under heavy slide/frame impact, and it achieves the redundancy needed for reliability typical of JMB's design philosophy.

When you get a magazine of this type, slide the last round forward with your thumb. The dimple stops it when the dimple hits the rim.....just how it's supposed to work. An adequate spring will do it, but this ensures no round passes even if the spring starts to get a little weak.

S.R.Custom

06-11-2010, 12:42 PM

Finally, a definitive (and believable) explanation for that dimple. Have heard a lot of BS over the years concerning that. Thank you.

mroliver77

06-12-2010, 09:42 PM

Checkmates website lists a "Group Buy rates" for clubs and internet forums already. No details on quanity but dealers price needs 100 mags.
I am interested in some mags also. I might be encouraged to do some footwork as contacting them for prices and terms etc.

flinchnjerk

06-13-2010, 12:43 AM

Checkmates website lists a "Group Buy rates" for clubs and internet forums already. No details on quanity but dealers price needs 100 mags.
" I am interested in some mags also. I might be encouraged to do some footwork as contacting them for prices and terms etc.
I'm encouraged by your being encouraged; I'd be in for half a dozen.
To expand on 35rem's explanation of the "dimple"or "tit"... combine early abrupt release mag lips, a spring that's too weak by design and a smooth plastic concave follower with no dimple and you get the "seventh round jumps out the ejection port rather than chambering, and the slide's locked back with the eighth round lying on the follower" misfeed or its variant "seventh round jumps out the ejection port, eighth round chambers and fires, but you notice that some of your hulls' rims are getting a bit rough and ragged."

Oyeboten

06-13-2010, 02:50 AM

Really interesting article.

The only 1911 I have any time in with, is a 1914 Commercial I used to shoot and reload for a lot in the 1980s.

I only used original Lanyard Loop Magazines which were still easy and reasonable to get then, and, it fed anything and everything, Silver Tips, old weird Wad-Cutters of various kinds, RNL, Hardball, ancient unknown reloads with 'rounded' UMC Vertregri Primers and white oxide 'blooms' ( I would not do that now!) , never had any FTF with any shape Bullet.

In storage now, I will go dig it up and examine some of the Magazines...though I imagine they would be the same as the early-ish GI ones far as the Lips.

I used to see other .45 Auto Shooters have problems with FTFs and I was always proud of mine never doing that.

I have a 'Star' Model B 9mm P-'08 which has feed troubles...tending to have the round below the one being chambered, sneak up under and a little behind it, and jam things.

This is a very similar design to the Colt 1911, and I could not figure out what the trouble was.

I will study it some more, and, be better informed now to examine the Magazine Lips, and, see if there is yes or no a 'dot' on the Follower also.

trickyasafox

06-15-2010, 10:55 AM

beat ya to the punch.

Emailed checkmate and got their pricing structure. Mix and match allowed.

Also emailed metalform and got their pricing structure, but they are getting back to me on their feed lip styles.

The GI mag from checkmate at gb pricing goes to 18.53 for blued and 20.14 for stainless.
if metalform has the lips we want mags will go in the 10 to 11 dollar range

Waiting on an email back. I'll see if I can edit this post to attach the pdf and excel sheet for all to see

edited. . . .

K made a viewable google shared folder. Excel sheet is checkmate pdf is metalform

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BwD8ELCHSx1FMDI2NjJiMDItYTM0MC00ZGRkLTg5M TUtNDRkZTZlZDUwNWE5&hl=en

35remington

06-15-2010, 07:50 PM

For those interested in the 7 shot Checkmates, I'd very strongly recommend the XP springs. These are a no excuses type spring that will hold up for a long time and will be the most satisfactory even with heavy loads that bounce the pistol hard from slide/frame impact. This type of spring is the kind that can be heavily used or left loaded to maximum compression and will still function as intended.

A proper spring of this type, combined with the dimple, will allow the most in redundancy as per JMB's intent with the magazine design and gives the best odds of reliable function in most guns.

The finish on both the hybrid and the GI have a brushed surface on the back of the magazine that eliminates the appearance of the welding mark.

Trickyasafox, I'm in and will place an order for more Checkmate magazines if this gets off the ground.
For both hybrid and GI. I might point out that the price for these in a group buy format is considerably less than the "tactical" magazines now being offered.

35remington

06-15-2010, 08:47 PM

Magazine types Redux:

On the left, a McCormick Power Mag with SWC feedlips.....straight rear lips with an abrupt release point and wide flare.

In the middle, a Checkmate hybrid with a dimpled follower. Tapered feed lips with an earlier release than a GI.

On the right, a Checkmate GI. Tapered feed lips and a slightly later release point.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y228/johnnyrem/magazinetypes.jpg

Why should I care what type of magazine my 1911 uses?

You don't have to care.....but if you want to feed the 1911 the way it was meant to be fed, with a more controlled feed and a straighter shot to the chamber with a positive rise into the extractor before the rim is let go, perhaps you should care!

The hybrid is essentially a GI with an earlier release point, meant to feed somewhat shorter rounds than a GI. GI magazines feed ball and the 1.250" OAL HG 68 clones well, at least as Checkmate produces them. The taper lets the rear of the round rise more fully under the extractor before it is released, and the rim is at less of an angle to the extractor as well. This is a good thing.

However, you must not expect that these magazines will feed the very shortest rounds like the button nosed SWC's popular with target shooters. Controlled feed is incompatible with the shortest rounds. Generally the hybrids should be used with cartridges that have an OAL of 1.200" or longer. 1.210" to 1.220" is more ideal, and covers the greater part of most 45 ACP handloads and factory loads used today. For best function a rounded type ogive is usually preferred. Most factory hollowpoints like the Remington Golden Saber, Winchester Ranger, Federal HST, etc. are of this type.

Why all the provisos when some other magazine brands don't specify? Because we're trying to get the pistol to feed rounds compatible with the more reliable controlled feed principle, rather than attempting to make the pistol feed rounds it was not meant to feed and trying to pass that off as reliability. Several popular magazine brands abandon the controlled round feed principle designed into the 1911 by JMB.

The hybrid offers a less angled feed and releases the rim closer to the extractor than the straight lip SWC type.

If for general use within the parameters described, the hybrid is the best magazine for all around use. The GI is for ball, HG 68 SWC's (if from Checkmate) and can be tuned as to the proper release point if desired (as the previously shown John Travis modified 60's GI Checkmate proves, as well as the mandrel altered, taper lipped GI pictured above).

35remington

06-15-2010, 09:08 PM

http://forum.m1911.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53

The link posted above gives valuable information in the stickies at the top of the forum on 1911 magazine function, including the function of the dimple, the effects of magazine timing on reliability, different followers, common magazine problems, and the hybrid magazine defined.

Here we find thinking that's "back to basics" when it comes to what is designed to work in a 1911.

I'm sure you'll find the topics and explanations enlightening.

I sure did.

It's been very long overdue that this information is not more commonly known.

Char-Gar

06-20-2010, 02:50 PM

I probably should just let this thread pass without comment, but I never did have good sense in such things.

I am 50 years deep into the 1911 pistol in 45 ACP caliber, with a score or two of pistols and hundreds of thousands of rounds (mostly cast bullets) being fired.

I have used the famous H&G 200 SWC, The Lyman, RCBS, Cramer and SAECO 230 RN, and Lyman 452460 and Lyman 452423. I have never had any problems feeding any of these from any 7 round magazine that was not damaged. All of this feed lip design and reliase point seems to be irrelevant to me.

Now many of these 8 rn. mags are an abomination. Barrel throating and ejector length will have an effect on function, for sure and for certain. I have never had any kind of extractor problem.

There is just something about the human animal that does not allow him to accept sucess without question or examination. The results is majoring on the minor.

I just wish folks would give as close an examination to their morals and human relationships as they do their freaking pistol magazines.

35remington

06-20-2010, 03:54 PM

Chargar, I've also had quite a bit of experience with the 1911, and I'm one of those guys who is not blessed with flawless functioning for that experience. Success leads one to inquire no further. Failure will leave you rightly questioning why.

Running the pistol the way it was meant to run has made a considerable difference, and this data in this post is presented with the hope that it can make a difference for others as well.

Some of this information seems like it should be self evident, but with some of the magazine choices we have today it is obvious that to many it is not. Feed lip design and release point alter how the 1911 feeds, and in some guns different feed function affects the reliability of the piece. I'm glad yours are flawless no matter what you do. Many I've shot are not. Improper bullet design often hasn't helped.

Thus the considerable explanation of the why's and the how's. If magazine function was more clearly understood we'd have less issues with feeding 1911's.

Since I didn't get to "accept success" with the 1911, but rather had to endure misfeeds and unreliability due to magazine weaknesses, I've cast a more critical eye on 1911 magazine design than most, and the study has been quite worth it. Positive results have been major, not minor.

And my morals and human relationships have not suffered in so doing.

Oyeboten

06-21-2010, 04:56 AM

I dug out two of my early Colt Lanyard Loop Magazines, and, made images of their details, but I am having trouble with the floppy reader accesssory drive.

Their Lips appear to be each a little different, but intermediate between the Magazines shown center and right, in the Post No. 32.

Or, they both appear similar to the so called 'Checkmate Hybrid' seen in Post No. 23, on the left, if having thinner edges to the Lips than it does.

I do not have any 'Key Hole' Magazines, which would be earlier yet...but the several I do have are roughly 1914 or 1915 anyway. Some of mine are Commercial, some U.S. Military issue.

I have a few more somewhere, and I will see if I can find them and compare in case any other small differences.

Anyway, my reason for feeling curious, is that back in the 1980s when I was shooting a lot or in minor competitions, my 1914 Commercial Model, always fed anything I ever tried, while other Shooter's new or newer M1911-a1 or other make variants, would sometimes have troubles feeding various things.

35remington

06-21-2010, 03:03 PM

I would be most interested in seeing them!

Should you be having difficulties, you can always upload your photos to an account on Photobucket.

Oyeboten

06-21-2010, 05:09 PM

Here is an image showing the two Magazines I was able to dig up...I will keep looking for the others.

I can not say if these are Commercial or Military, as both have very very fine 'Brushed' Blue bases...but, if I had to guess, I would guess 'Military', circa early 1914 to very early 1916 was it? for this style? It was a short window anyway, between the Key-Hole type, and, when they discontinued the Lanyard Loop altogether.

Anyway, these were always said to have fed well with no issues, where, the earliest models, then the Key-Hole type, were said to have tempering issues with the upper Lips cracking or being too brittle. So this was where they found their stride, for trouble free magazines anyway, far as I recall hearing.

http://inlinethumb23.webshots.com/7958/2222503660067835264S600x600Q85.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2222503660067835264tsfpHr)

http://inlinethumb25.webshots.com/1048/2400292260067835264S600x600Q85.jpg (http://good-times.webshots.com/photo/2400292260067835264RpgghO)

My trouble was that my accessory Floppy Disc reader had died...but I had a spare, so now I am good to go again. My circa 1999 Sony 'Mavica' Camera uses the 3 inch Discs...so to upload anything, the Disc Reader needs to be working right. Lol, I know, I am probably the last kid on the Block to have retained the Floppy System.

S.R.Custom

06-21-2010, 05:15 PM

...Lol, I know, I am probably the last kid on the Block to have retained the Floppy System..!

They make a pill for that, you know.

35remington

06-21-2010, 08:41 PM

"They make a pill for that, you know."

Ha!

Those magazines you have may have a stamped letter on the toe of the baseplate in the front of the magazine or on the underside of the baseplate. This would give a clue as to the manufacturer.

The righthand one in the picture has been altered like the one I showed in a previous picture with a mandrel to quicken the release timing to make it more suited to shorter rounds. The taper of the rear lips has been retained. Check to see if the two magazines differ by trying to determine where the magazine lets go of the round in relation to the position of the dimple (at the dimple, just in front of it, considerably in front?). Insert the cartridge and slide the rim over the dimple from the rear to find out.

I can see the slide stop shelf on the righthand magazine's follower, and it doesn't look too worn. It may be old but unless the spring's deteriorated for some unknown reason those near 100 year old magazines may have some life left in them yet.

And to the comment that the release timing doesn't matter, well, someone thought altering it to an earlier release was a valid policy many years ago, before Colt started doing so with their "hybrid" magazine sometime in the 70's.

So the timing of the release does very much matter, depending upon the length of the round you shoot in a tapered lip magazine.

Oyeboten

06-21-2010, 11:52 PM

"They make a pill for that, you know."

Ha!

Those magazines you have may have a stamped letter on the toe of the baseplate in the front of the magazine or on the underside of the baseplate. This would give a clue as to the manufacturer.

No Stamping letter or symbol on any Toes.

These would be Colt made. 'Type 3' magazines...1914 through 1915 or very early 1916 maybe. Then they went to the 'Type 4'.

No one else was making them at that time, other than Springfield Armory, and, theirs had folded Bases and are easy to tell apart from the Colt ones.

The righthand one in the picture has been altered like the one I showed in a previous picture with a mandrel to quicken the release timing to make it more suited to shorter rounds. The taper of the rear lips has been retained.

The 'dimple' location is different, also, I realise...between the two Magazines.

Check to see if the two magazines differ by trying to determine where the magazine lets go of the round in relation to the position of the dimple (at the dimple, just in front of it, considerably in front?). Insert the cartridge and slide the rim over the dimple from the rear to find out.

They each let go at just about the same instant or spot...far as I can tell.

The one, lets go j-u-s-t as the Cartridge Rim slides down the side of the 'dimple'.

The other, lets go when the Cartridge Rim is about 1/16th of an inch past the Dimple.

But because the Dimples are not located the same, both let go at about the same time.

Funny...these were actually my 'spare' Magazines, and I had never used them.

One had no hint of scrape mark on the follower, the other had a small slight scrape mark, from cartridge Heads rubbing, when being loaded, probably from me testing it by Charging Rounds when I got it.

Now, for having loaded a single Round in five or six times, the slight mark is much larger, and the previous no mark is getting a mark.

I believe these were both 'NOS' and virtually un-unsed when I got them...and, still essentially are 'as new'.

It does not take much to get those subtle marks on the follower I guess!

I can see the slide stop shelf on the righthand magazine's follower, and it doesn't look too worn. It may be old but unless the spring's deteriorated for some unknown reason those near 100 year old magazines may have some life left in them yet.

I doubt either of these were ever used at all.

Spings are robust....also.

And to the comment that the release timing doesn't matter, well, someone thought altering it to an earlier release was a valid policy many years ago, before Colt started doing so with their "hybrid" magazine sometime in the 70's.

So the timing of the release does very much matter, depending upon the length of the round you shoot in a tapered lip magazine.

Oh yeah...makes sense that it would.

Follower angle would matter also in all this, also, I would think. and follower Angle would conform to how the Cartridge is pressing against the inside of the Lips...so...it all has to matter.

I have a 1920s "STAR" Model "P" Magazine here, also NOS, which I could photograph the Lips of.

The "Model P" was .45 ACP and quite similar to the Colt Model 1911.

I do not have a Star Model P Pistol...but, I would like to have one, in case you know of any out there? Lol...I have been looking for years, and all I have to show for it is one really nice NOS Magazine.

35remington

06-22-2010, 12:31 AM

On taking a closer look at the lefthand magazine, I can see a possibly flared spot on that one as well. Might explain the similar release.

Any chance you'll take them out and shoot them to see how they do? Or are these just keepsakes?

I am interested in when this alteration fad of GI magazines to change the release timing got started. Possibly almost right in the beginning, maybe. A lot of GI's I used to pick up from gunshows had shown evidence of this alteration; some have not.

Certainly some cast bullets of shorter length for the 45 ACP came out long ago, and this might have started the trend.

Oyeboten

06-22-2010, 03:15 AM

I know they had some never seen now-a-days Wadcutter types for early .45 ACP which I have seen pictures of but never had to try. Some looked like a slumped Hershy's Kiss sorta shape.

If I ever find a Mold, I will try them.

I gather the M1911 found an enthusiastic reception right away, and this included both Military and Civillian Marksmanship and Target Shooting contexts, which of course would have soon also involved choices and experiments in Bullet types and kinds, at least for the Civillian situations.

The Hague Convention of course had stipulated that Military Ammunition must be Hardball, or, non-expanding anyway, which possibly limited the Military Marksmanship situations to limit themselves to Hardball even for Peacetime Marksmanship events.

I am sure the Civillian Market would have immediately seen use for Lead Bullets, and of various kinds...some of which one sees in the old Ideal or later Lyman and other Mold and Bullet illustrations.

There are some interesting old Bullets to be seen in those old illustrations.

I will root around some more and see what other early Magazines I can find.

But, in essence, I would kind of expect that the details for feeding of various types of Bullet ( within reason!) had been resolved fairly early, regardless of whether the resolutions were continuously emulated or duplicated since.

If either of my two Magazines had been modified in any way, I would be very surprised, as they appear to be as close to "as new" and never used, as one could hope to see.

Possibly some savvy Military or Civillian Armorers, even in the mid 'teens, elected to slightly massage or subtley form further, the Lips of those Magazines destined to be feeding other than Hardball Cartridges.

I am sure that happened...and maybe had happened to one or more of mine for all I know!

But, I do not see any hints of Pliers or Tools or rubbing or anything else there to show anything had ever been modified or rolled a little more or changed in any way from the Factory.

35remington

06-22-2010, 10:09 PM

I'd vote for the modification idea, as my modified ones don't show tool marks either, but with a mandrel and yoke as similar to the Brownell's, no tool marks are produced despite the fact they were modified. The reforming is done with a hammer or a plastic mallet striking a tool that is shaped to alter the feed lips. The mandrel supports the inside of the magazine, the "yoke" dictates the slight flare location.

I know GI magazines didn't come with the slight flare and slightly earlier release point.

My modified ones came from my dad's infantry unit, so I think there was definitely a military armorer origin somewhere.

Railbuggy

01-11-2011, 02:33 AM

Thanks for the Info.I got a new Taurus SS PT1911 last friday,and I have had a hard time finding mags that will fit at the local shops.My magazine well throat is small by
the plunger tube(.540),and it looks like 1911 mags run .537 to .544.I found one Kimber
8rd today for $20 that I got,and a Wilson for $40 that fit that I passed on.Were having
a Bill Goodman gun show this comeing weekend.I copyed the GI style photos to my hard drive and will look for some at the show saturday.I was a security guard for the navy back in 75/78(USMC L/Cpl) and carried a 1911A1 every duty day.I don't ever remember having a FTF or FTE with any of the 1911s I used.:lovebooli

Combat Diver

01-11-2011, 06:47 AM

Checkmate is a U.S. government contracter for small arms magazines. I've been issued 1911 mags with IM291 on the baseplate, M9 mags and M14 mags all from Checkmate. During the last 10 years however all my issued M1911A1 mags have been Wilson 47D 8 and 10 rd mags. These were unit purchased for our M1911s used in Iraq from 2003-2011 (5th and 10th SFGA). I was with 5th SFGA and took over 250 ea M1911A1s out of depot to the sandbox in Oct 03. My son is still carring today a 1911 with Wilsons in Iraq with 10th SFGA.

my 1911A1 in issued drop rig (firing battlefield pickup MP44), I'm carring 105 rds of .45 ball on my belt! (12x8 rd mags on belt, 1x 8rd mag in gun + rd in chamber) You can fit two 1911 mags in each M9 double stack mag pouch.
http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/9809Blacked_out_George_firing_MP44_2.JPG
My last M1911 that I had in 2008 in Iraq (frame was 1916 dated), magazines are my personnel Shooting Stars 8rders.
http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/P5210025_rz.JPG

unclebill

01-11-2011, 07:20 AM

wow
thanks guys!
i have 5 mags for my s.a.1911a1 and 2 of them release the round way too early
like when i snap the mag in the well
those 2 also wont hold the action open after the last round.
the mags that work best for me have no flare and a pronounced dimple.
p.s.
all i shoot is 230 gr.lrn

35remington

01-11-2011, 10:23 PM

Shooting Stars are to full power load reliability as the Vega was to reliable transportation.

The extremely weak spring of Shooting Stars are a very, very bad idea. Avoid them like the plague for full power ammo.

MtGun44

01-12-2011, 02:46 AM

So, what do you think of the first ever assault rifle, the MP44?

And thank you for your service, sir.

Bill

Checkmate has the GI lips mags on their site. Anybody up for a group buy?

Railbuggy

01-12-2011, 10:30 PM

Depending on the price,I may want 6.
Some one at another site informed me the following.

The Ordnance specs for the magazine well width and magazine width are, respectively, 0.551 + 0.010 and 0.541 +0.008/-0.006 inch.

TAURUS put mine out with a undersized mag well.

Combat Diver

01-13-2011, 01:35 AM

So, what do you think of the first ever assault rifle, the MP44?

And thank you for your service, sir.

Bill

Checkmate has the GI lips mags on their site. Anybody up for a group buy?

In Dec 03, I had my hands on two MP44s with only one mag and 60 rds of East German 7.92Kruz. Nice walk thru history. Cylic rate as a lot slow than I expected and very controllable, around 500 rpm as I'm used to 750 rpm from my M4A1. Handguard does get warm after on magazine as it is steel and just over the barrel.

CD

dualsport

01-13-2011, 02:26 AM

I'm learning a lot here. I have the ugliest rattle trap 1911 there is. I put it together from parts. Accuracy at 25 with Wolf(I built it for a cheap shooting beater) is minute of man, maybe 12". That's fine, for what it is, but it has feeding issues. How does the recoil spring fit into this scheme of things? Does the speed the slide is moving forward affect magazine performance? My LRNs are jamming halfway in pointing up at about a 45 degree angle. Too heavy recoil spring or feed lip problem maybe? I'm using old GI mags.

Naphtali

01-13-2011, 12:50 PM

Many thanks for information pertaining to magazine shaping and configuration. Regarding magazines intended for Colt Series 80 Officers ACP, excepting magazine length (shorter for flush-with-grip fit) does information or magazine manufacturer preference, or anything else change? Do most of the preferred makers manufacture Officers ACP magazines also?

35remington

01-13-2011, 08:48 PM

An Officer's is potentially more unforgiving of weak magazine springs because of the reduced slide travel past the magazine well. There's less time for the round to feed up from the magazine before the breechface goes forward.

No wimpy magazine springs for this design. The shorter you make the 1911, the more likely it is to malfunction, so everything must be up to par.

Specific magazines for the shorter grip frame of the Officer's are available. There is not the selection there is for the full size guns, but they can be had.

For instance:

http://www.checkmateindustries.com/handgun.htm#tbl1

I believe these have the wadcutter feed lips.

The tapered GI feed lips or hybrid feed lips, as near as I can determine, are available in styles for full length grip frames only in seven or eight shot format.

If Checkmate offers extra power springs for these (please inquire as I do not know) be sure to order them. XP springs are available for the larger magazines in lieu of the standard "high performance" springs. They are a very good idea.

DS, "old GI mags" may be suspect in that they may be abused, worn, or release too late. If the round releases too late, it can mimic the problems I think you might be having, but without a picture of just what the jam looks like it's hard to say. Could you show us a picture of what the jam looks like? It sounds like a three point. Do these happen on any particular order like the last shot only or is it any time?

DS, insert a round in the GI magazine from the front. Look at the release point in relation to the dimple on the follower, which on most is in the same location (can you tell us the manufacturer or identifying markings?).

The release should be a little tiny bit in front of the dimple if it's faithful to the original design as a ball magazine. Not a lot. A little. Release when it's touching the dimple with a slight drag as the round is let go is just about ideal.

If you build a 45 from parts, mate the barrel to the frame with the slide removed, with the barrel fully down in the frame bed, and fully to the rear. There should be a bit of a gap between barrel ramp and frame ramp. If the gap is nonexistent, this detracts from reliability.

A powerful recoil spring is capable of outrunning a magazine with a weak spring and producing bolt over base misfeeds. These usually occur on the last shot and the second to the last shot.

If you're feeding your 1911 with rounds that duplicate the nose profile and overall length of standard ball ammo (about 1.265" and 2 radius ogive) with proper, in spec 7 shot GI magazines, it is likely that this is the most reliable function that can possibly be obtained from the 1911.

The reason why is because you're feeding exactly the rounds it was meant to feed with exactly the magazines the pistol was designed to work with. Just as Mr. Browning intended. Claims of other magazine designs to "improve" on this reliability are not credible.

Mostly because they feed the 1911 in a way that was not intended by the designer.

Of course, it is possible for a gun to misfunction even with the right ammo and magazines if something else is wrong, but the right magazines used with compatible ammo give the gun the best chance of functioning correctly.

dla

01-13-2011, 09:41 PM

I've launched a lot of 45acp out of a pair of 1911's using a lot of different styles of magazines. I don't see anything special about GI mags at all. If you want to go backwards in 1911 development and shoot ball ammo with GI mags - go ahead. But I'm not interested in going backwards.

35remington

01-13-2011, 09:55 PM

A deeper look at the issue would make the differences apparent. Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean those differences are not there. If you'd care to read up, you may be enlightened. If you don't, that's your business.

A reminder about how the 1911 was meant to function is very appropriate, and GI magazines are not going "backwards." They feed the gun the way it was meant to be fed.

That's a step back, yes.....to how the gun was designed to work. We've lost that in recent years, and it's worth the reminder.

Adherence to these principles also works for other bullet types. Not just ball.

If it helps, just think of me as a guy that's better informed and able to move forwards......after taking a look back to see what the designer of the gun intended. Those that have done so are better informed than those who have not.

dla

01-13-2011, 11:40 PM

A system either works or it doesn't. 1911 design has gone forward because the new systems work. Going backwards is really more of a lack of understanding of actual failure rates. I.e. sometimes folks go backwards to "fix" something that actually works quite well.

flinchnjerk

01-14-2011, 01:59 AM

So, what do you think of the first ever assault rifle, the MP44?

And thank you for your service, sir.

Bill

Checkmate has the GI lips mags on their site. Anybody up for a group buy?

I'd be in for six.

dualsport

01-14-2011, 02:38 AM

35, ok I checked my mags. They are 1M291 manufactured. I got a bunch cheap at a gun show a long time ago. They look like hell. Most sensible people would chuck them, but I don't carry a .45 for business so can play with junk.(I found two mags I forgot I had! A MecGar 8 rd. and one I think is a Shooting Star, has the shooting star emblem on the unusual looking follower. Neither of those has a dimple, but then I haven't tried them in this gun either). The GIs release just forward of the dimple, so that is a good thing as I understand it. The reloads that are FTFing are Speer swaged 230 gr. RN at 1.25". The FTF is usually the last round. The gap between barrel ramp and frame is there. I recall reading something about that in Kuhnhausen's book which I used to do this build. It's a Sarco parts gun. I know even less about posting pictures than gunsmithing so can't post a picture of the jam but it ends up like the boolit is snagging on something on it's upper surface as the slide is trying to close. It jams it in there pretty good. The round is partway in when it jams but acts like it isn't breaking over soon enough. Of course now I have a new element, the two newish modern mags that have the wadcutter lips. I'll try them tomorrow. Ultimately I would like to shoot something besides the RNs in it. I have no idea what weight my recoil spring is.

KYCaster

01-14-2011, 11:57 AM

unclebill

01-14-2011, 07:38 PM

shoot ball ammo with GI mags - go ahead.

thats exactly what i do.
thanks for the tip![smilie=s:

35remington

01-14-2011, 08:23 PM

The code you have indicates those are Checkmate magazines.

I'd have to agree that replacing the spring is a start. Last round misfeeds are a clue.

Get the Wolff extra power for seven shot magazines (make sure you don't get the eight shot spring....it's an entirely different spring meant for a different follower).

Is the rim anywhere near the extractor when it is jammed, or is it well away from it?

Is the rim forward of the extractor, or is the breechface wedged in the extractor groove?

If the last round is not brought up fast enough to meet the breechface, the returning slide may wedge the round tight and a deep smiley face will appear. It looks like a three point jam (which also may have the smiley face just below the case mouth) but on steroids. The bottom of the breechface strikes the case in the extractor groove rather than on the rim.

If it's a three point jam, cartridge breakover alignment with the chamber is a little too late. Such jams can be cleared by pulling the slide back a little bit and letting it snap forward. Lots of other reasons cause it, including a low barrel ramp strike and magazines that release too late for a short cartridge. If you have the barrel/ramp gap it sounds like that spec is okay.

How much and what type of powder are you using? The heavier the load, the more a weak spring will make itself felt on the last shot (another reason Shooting Stars are a bad idea for standard power loads). Weak springs will also cause the gun to eject the second to last or last shot instead of feeding it, or the gun will have the last round laying loose on top of the magazine with the slide locked back.

A good replacement magazine is Checkmate's seven shot GI with folded dimpled follower and XP springs. These have an almost ideal setup for ball and the longer wadcutters as well as the longer hollowpoints like Golden Saber. They've been tweaked with gunsmith input as to their design so that they do not release too long.

These are well done and what a new GI magazine should be. The XP springs are about two bucks extra on purchase of the magazine and well worth it, as aftermarket Wolffs will cost you three times that.

I haven't shot the Speer bullet myself. Is it a one or two ogive bullet?

35remington

01-14-2011, 08:33 PM

dualsport

01-15-2011, 01:53 AM

Like I said, I'm learning a lot from this thread. Made it to the range today but had to make it quick as I discovered a blown seal on the right rear wheel and needed to get her home before I got stuck out at night. Anyway, I know about 100 times more now about magazines than I did before. A couple things became clear. The jam is contacting at 3 points. On my handloads(mild) the rims are snagging on the protruding tip of the firing pin! They are captured by the extractor by that time so just stop. The slide jams on the cockeyed cartridge. Back to Kuhnhausen for a firing pin protrusion lesson. To give it a fair chance I shot Remington factory hps which worked perfectly in the Mccormick but not the Mecgar or GIs. My course of action is to retire the junk mags, see about the firing pin sticking out thing, and try handloads with a bit more juice. The Speers are very similar to ball ammo in shape. All this isn't actually bad or surprising. I started this build project to learn more about the 1911. Oh, it also jammed with another load, a Lee tumble lube job at moderate power. One of the things I think it's telling me is it likes a full power load.

dla

01-15-2011, 10:58 AM

"A system either works or it doesn't."

Not true. There are a great many instances of the occasional, unpredictable jam when speaking of automatic pistol function. Often times these are due to poor choices in ammunition compatibility and magazine selection.

As has been stated elsewhere, just because a gun feeds does not mean it's feeding correctly. Mr. Murphy may be waiting in the wings to make his presence felt when tolerance stacking and limiting factors coincide. Just when you don't want him there.

No, you are flat wrong. As I said, " a system either works or it doesn't". The words "occasional, unpredictable" are known as FUD. Everything ever made can have "occasional, unpredictable" attached to it. The way we get machines to work is to measure the actual failure rates, root-cause them, and improve. The modern 1911 system is BETTER than the GI 1911, not worse. Today's 1911 is not something that has devolved to a mess of problems.

Everything fails eventually - that's a physical law.

Geraldo

01-15-2011, 11:23 AM

Posted by dla:

The modern 1911 system is BETTER than the GI 1911, not worse. Today's 1911 is not something that has devolved to a mess of problems.

For the record, I use Wilson 47Ds because I've got a boatload of them. When they die, and they will, the may be replaced with something else.

With that out of the way, I guess your statement depends on your definition of evolution. What are the substantial changes that have "evolved" in a 1911? Better sights? OK, that's true. After that it gets sticky. If you talk to top 1911 smiths who build pistols to fight with, they stick to what has always worked, like a standard barrel, recoil spring, and plug. They do not use bull barrels and full length guide rods. They are also picky about frames and slides, as well as internal parts. Many of their pistols look a lot like Combatdiver's 1911. In other words, very GI with a few updates.

The FBI HRT tried "evolution" with their wide mag 1911s, and it died a quiet death as they could not get them to run properly. They were replaced with the same single stack SA 1911 that the field office SWAT units got.

dla

01-15-2011, 03:10 PM

If you talk to top 1911 smiths who build pistols to fight with,

What does that mean? Do manufacturers build different versions of 1911's to love with? :)

There's a reason why the 1911's built in the last 20 years look different than a GI version. People don't buy 1911's because they are unreliable ***. I'm probably out of the loop as I haven't bought any more 1911s for over a decade, but I don't remember seeing many 1911's that were GI-style.

35remington

01-15-2011, 04:36 PM

dla, you're guilty of thread drift. If you want to accuse me of being wrong, then keep focused and limit the discussion to the original topic.

The post is about magazines. Changes to the 1911 pistol itself have not been discussed, nor are they the topic at hand.

Please keep on topic.

There is no question that many "modern" magazine "innovations" have been counterproductive.

Witness:

Weak springs in 8 shot format
Poor followers found in McCormick and other magazines that are prone to nosediving and damaging aluminum frames
Plastic followers and wear in slide stop notches
Smooth followers that allow lost control of the round on the last shot
Steeper feed angles and "kachunky feed" from wadcutter type magazines
Magazines that reduce the chance the rim will find its way under the extractor

Please discuss magazines. Only.

Dualsport, jamming on the firing pin sounds kinda......weird. The firing pin should not be protruding while the gun is functioning.

How is this possible? Either the spring is weak (from a ballpoint pen, maybe?) or there's no spring in the gun.