Quote:
You are aware that pretty much everyone today machines 1911 frames, slides, and many small parts on CNC machines, and uses MIM for other small parts. The original 1911 was designed at a time when every part had to be machined by a person standing there and operating the machine. Most of the parts had a tolerance of .005", which by today's CNC standards is ridiculously loose. Consider slide-to-frame fit, for example. The frame spec was nominal - (minus) .005". The slide spec was nominal + (plus) .005". That means if you got a slide and a frame that were both machined exactly to the nominal dimension, the clearance would be .001". But if you got a slide and a frame that were both at the extreme of the tolerance, you would have a clearance of .011" and still be in spec.
Even the entry level makers beat that with every pistol they produce.
|
Yes I am aware of the tolerances that CNC equipment is capable of, however that is not the point I am trying to make. If it were simply a matter of machining parts within spec than every single 1911 pistol would run right out of the box no matter what the price point was but the facts are that they don't. The real issue is not how close to the spec is this part or that part a lot has to do with what is the spec they are using.
Again not arguing against shooting carrying or owning a 1911 but am simply trying to drive home to concept that all 1911s are not created equal and there are lots of guns being called 1911s where the manufacturers have for whatever reason deviated from what was know and proven to be reliable and this clouds the issue.