M1911s... Maintenance nightmares?

[jr24]

I have a RIA Tactical in 10mm that is solid. There are some rough edges and machine marks but in my limited use (probably 350ish rounds) it has been dependable and accurate with a surprisingly nice trigger. I use it as a woods walking gun when im not feeling revolver..y

[vba]

I have owned many many 1911's over the years and still do. The issues you brought up are NOT what I've experienced. All of them have functioned properly and have not needed any more maintenance than my Glocks, Sigs, Kahr's and S&W's.

These guns were all stock Colts, Les Baer and Rock Rivers. I have replaced some parts in my Colts (triggers, mainspring housings, grips) only because of preference.

[Tactical Jackalope]

All of them have functioned properly and have not needed any more maintenance than my Glocks, Sigs, Kahr's and S&W's.

Whoa, whoa, whoa... I hate to say this but there's a chance that you're practicing improper maintenance on your 1911's then.

1911s, like SIGs and any 3rd generation semi-automatic Smith and & Wesson have full length frame rails and require more lubrication right off the bat. So that's already one point where the 1911 and co need a little more maintenance.

Back to m original response to this thread though, I don't feel they're nightmarish in any way. Just that they need a little more attention. Even the top 1911 pistoleros will say so.

Ken Hackathorn, Larry Vickers, and even then owner of Wilson Combat if I'm not mistaken.

[tirod]

And nobody linked to this: https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_5_4/16...ervations.html

In general, 1911's require more maintenance. Compared to Glocks, they are maintenance intensive. It's why some military units don't prefer them even if they could.

When discussing one fleet of guns vs another, the 1911 has shortcomings. One is that when they were designed it was done literally by hand and intuition - not computer aides stress analysis. Please note that when they were fielded and used for quite a while, John Browning moved on to the HiPower to address the issues.

When Gaston Glock had the 17 designed he had a staff of engineers skilled in mainframe CAD analysis and engineering a high cycle count product that would last decades. Their main line of product? Cabinet hinges. They don't accept or make junk in Europe the way we do here. They demand professional grade for the most part, something only approached at the institutional/commercial level here.

If the 1911 was given the benefit of modern design and workup, a lot of it's intrinsic issues might not be there at all - but it would look slightly different. It wouldn't be the 1911 we know, any more than the Cobra Daytona Coupe looks like a GT40. They are a different generation apart, the first drawn on a restaurant nakpkin with hand formed aluminum body on a 1950s tubular space frame, the second computer aided with aerodynamic emphasis, dyno tested to destruction motor, and riveted aluminum panel chassis.

1911's are the epitome of gun making at the start of auto pistols - they are state of the art for 1911. Glocks, sorry, they are 1984, but it doesn't mean that something else couldn't come along even better. It's been over 30 years on the market and they are starting to get long in the tooth, too. They are, however, more maintenance free and easier to use on a fleet basis.

I wouldn't say the 1911 is a nightmare of maintenance issues. What has happened is more modern guns have come along which had issues discovered in the use of 1911's prevented. Newer gun designs sidestep what Browning didn't know about or accepted in that days state of the art. Now we demand more, and those issues aren't acceptable. We kept the 1911 for a long time, rebuilding the twice over the years, but it doesn't mean they didn't have problems. It was simply accepted then. Now, not so much.

If anything the quality of the gun maker and what ammo can have just as much affect with the anecdotal stories posted above. 1911's were never intended to fire HP ammo and the nose design of ball ammo dominated the feed ramp angles. It still does - but newer designs accommodating modern ammo as standard do better overall. For the most part the average shooter won't suffer from the 1911's less accepting design faults but across the board it's been put to pasture for most large units. Some may point to a few users who do but it's notable for the Marines that they don't issue it for combat - LTC and below get a M4 heading to the field. Pistols are largely ceremonial in the services, badges of rank. A Glock doesn't do that as well in our social appreciation.

[RickB]

Thanks guys. As some of you may know I am looking at a RIA tactical model, single stack .45. Anybody know if the Rock Island guns have some shady parts that I'll need to switch out or have the gun worked over?

I wouldn't make any but DIY mods to a RIA, and then, only when something is demonstrably not working like it's supposed to.

[P71pilot]

Tirod,

I believe some of the most reliable pistols in the world are GI issue 1911s. If the gun is made to spec with strong parts, it will require less maintenance than any other semi auto design.

[44 AMP]

Please note that when they were fielded and used for quite a while, John Browning moved on to the HiPower to address the issues.

Browning was constantly moving on, looking for different, and hopefully better things. Note that his designs went from dual links to a single link, and the last to a cam system for pivoting the barrel. (and it was his last, I think, only because he died. AND, he died quite a few YEARS before the HiPower design was finished. The finished HiPower pistol looks very little like his prototypes, and while I have no proof, I've always felt naming it the Browning HiPower was both a tribute and a marketing ploy, to capitalize on the fame of Browning's name, for a gun that was mostly designed and finished by others.

If the 1911 was given the benefit of modern design and workup, a lot of it's intrinsic issues might not be there at all - but it would look slightly different.

Oh, exactly...

This is a further testament to the true genius of JM Browning. He didn't have a design team of engineers able to spend thousands of man hours doing computer design before actually creating a product. He also didn't have over half a century of seeing what worked, what didn't, and how well in combat.

Over 20 different firearms designs that became tremendous commercial and military success, WITHOUT an engineering staff, without computer support, without the benefit of a modern education, modern metallurgy, without the benefit of decades of use history of firearms of similar designs ... impressive doesn't even begin to describe it.

Browning seldom did much "paper" design work, most of what he did is simple rough sketches. Browning often carved his designs as wood models, turned them into steel prototypes when he was comfortable with the concepts, then refined those, and then using what he had tested and actually worked, put the designs on paper in the usual way.

All the failings and shortcomings of the 1911 design we see today were state of the art in 1911. They aren't any more maint. intensive than any other gun of the era (or for many decades afterwards) and less needful of care than many guns of the era, or even later.

Don't,however, fall into the trap of thinking the 1911 needs no care. The legend of the 1911 always working is just that, legend, NOT fact. But where the legend came from was the fact that the 1911 most often worked better than its contemporaries when it didn't get the "proper" care.

Someone once described the US GI 1911A1 as "the best combination of size, weight, ergonomics, and power ever produced in one package". Certainly true a half century ago, and some of us still think its true today.

[P71pilot]

It is a machine. It requires lubrication to function, and also requires that all moving and mating surfaces be clean ENOUGH to do their job. It will always be my favorite semi automatic pistol.

My 1911 has only had malfunctions due to bad crappy reloaded ammo. Twice in its short life of 1500 or so rds. I have seen my dad's kimber malfunction a whole lot more, but only being due to being dry. My Springfield will run dry. It probably just isn't as tight as his kimber. There are alot of variances between yours and mine and this model and even the same model of the same maker.

[noonesshowmonkey]

tirod has been doing the good work on this issue.

Originally Posted by P71pilot

I believe some of the most reliable pistols in the world are GI issue 1911s. If the gun is made to spec with strong parts, it will require less maintenance than any other semi auto design.

Then you either a) don't understand statistics and/or b) have a statistical outlier of a handgun from which you base your thoughts on the entire design.

Or, rather, 'belief' is exactly what is going on here, not actual, raw facts.

The cult of personality that the 1911 commands is absurd. If you want to know what tools work the best, find people that use those things for a living, and you'll start seeing an absolutely crap load of Glocks (especially Glock 19s), and an ever thinning crowd of 1911s, run by guys that understand that their lil baby needs to be rubbed with a diaper now and again.

Hell, even just a survey of this forum and it's topics is all that it takes. Just take a quick look at the first 100 threads here and find how many of them are questions about 1911s and how to address various problems with them. Then, do the same thing with other, more modern designs. It's a crude method, but an enlightening one.

[KyJim]

Tirod --

Read the entire 17-page thread you linked to started by the owner/operator of a commercial firearms rental range. On page 17, he says:

As long as the Springfield, Sig's and Armscor/Citadel models keep working, we won't be adding any other 1911's. Though we do have issues with them and have to send some of them in for repair somewhat more often than others, the warranty repair is easy and we get our money's worth. I don'w want to add additional brands for the armorers to deal with, especially when those boutique brand 1911's may be more expensive.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_5_4/16...s.html&page=16 (italics in original)

And, if you read the thread, there's a several cracked slides in the Glocks they use. I'm not saying 1911s are more problem-free. That would be inaccurate. But it is also inaccurate to say that 1911s are substantially more problematic than other guns or need a lot more maintenance.

[44 AMP]

The cult of personality that the 1911 commands is absurd.

I agree.

So is "GLock Perfection". And both sides are completely convinced of their stands.

To a degree, both are correct.

One feels like misguided over enthusiasm, the other the marketing scheme of an arrogant Austrian, to me.

If you want to know what tools work the best, find people that use those things for a living,

While this is logical, and probably correct for a number of things, when it comes to people who use "guns for a living", I don't think its correct to take at face value.

By the numbers, people who use guns for a living do NOT get to choose WHAT guns they use. The best organizations take their input, and use it, but it isn't the "shooters" that get to choose what they want, individually, by and large.

You may survey artists to see what is the "best" paintbrush, get one answer, and then check with house painters and get a different one. Ask a cabinetmaker and a lumberjack what are the best saws, and I expect different answers. And these are examples where the users get their personal choices.

Work for a police dept, or the military (the largest numbers of people who use guns for a living) and you see the users do NOT have a choice. (or much of one, in the best cases)

So, in that regard, the argument fails.

Another facet of the choice is not what works best, or better, but how much of what the individual wants beyond "works good enough".

And, a superior feature in one area does not cancel out a negative feature in many people's opinions. Which is why we argue back and forth a lot.

[noonesshowmonkey]

Originally Posted by KyJim

And, if you read the thread, there's a several cracked slides in the Glocks they use. I'm not saying 1911s are more problem-free. That would be inaccurate. But it is also inaccurate to say that 1911s are substantially more problematic than other guns or need a lot more maintenance.

I did read the whole thread. The thread also starts out by saying that, hands down, the most fired and most trouble-free of the handguns is the Glock. Further, the cracked slides show up after some absurd round counts. Due to the cache in pop culture and gaming, Glocks get shot a crapload at a place like that. Due, if only, to the magazine capacity (!!!!!), their round counts get extremely high.

At no point am I going to call a 1911 a garbage pistol or claim that it is made of glass and likely to break if handled roughly. It IS, however, an older, more complicated design, that is generally hand-fitted rather than precision machined by robots.

Also, if Glock got it wrong with their slides, then they got it wrong. My guess is that the slide in question was something of a lemon. Either way, there is an absolute preponderance of evidence available showing MRFBs that are pretty intense.

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

While this is logical, and probably correct for a number of things, when it comes to people who use "guns for a living", I don't think its correct to take at face value.

You're right in so far as those who use them for a living are often issued firearms, and have little say in the matter. I carry a glock for work, because I have to. I carry a glock 19 in my off time, because I want to. When it comes to those who do have the capacity to exercise choice, such as the vast majority of SOCOM, or security contractors, etc. the Glock comes up a lot. There's a reason for that, even if there's a chicken/egg argument to be made about issue weapons vs personal weapons.

Finally, since I have pointed this out in this particular thread: I don't have a horse in this race. I could give a straight crap about Glocks. I admire their engineering, and have first hand experience with just how well they work, how easy they are to work on/maintain. I also have an absolute love affair with Sig P228s, and think that a P35 may in fact be the sexiest handgun ever (just to put all you JMB-is-a-Saint crowd at ease). But, I don't carry, nor would I ever consider carrying, a 1911 unless it was issued to me.

[Spats McGee]

IMHO, and purely IMHO, . . . two points:

First, the 1911 was born of a different age. At the beginning of the 20th century, every man (and every soldier) could reasonably be expected to possess at least some basic mechanical knowledge. There were no smartphones, no internet, no satellite uplink TV. Even if you worked in a fairly urban environment, things like cash registers would have been mechanical in nature. Today, I suspect that there are many young shooters who have simply never had much reason to deal in purely mechanical things. I don't even change my own oil any more, because I don't understand how that interacts with my car's computer (and I don't have time to learn that).

Second, comparing a 1911 to a Glock (for example) is a little unfair because "1911" has come to mean this basic style of handgun, built by (at least) a dozen manufacturers, with at least 3 different levels of fitting. (Custom, semi-custom, and production.) A Glock is built by one manufacturer, in one of 2 (?) factories. (If there are more, someone correct me.) A fairer comparison would be "1911 vs. polymer striker-fired pistol."

[P71pilot]

I am going to attempt to post a link of an interesting Video on yewtube. I have never done this before so hopefully it works. There is a channel that abused the crud out of a rock island tactical 1911 and the series of c
Videos is a hoot to watch.


http://youtu.be/NRf7MbF9suk

[Tucker 1371]

Spats, there's at least one, maybe two, companies that now make a 100% Non-Glock Glock. Lonewolf is one.

To reiterate my point, I don't believe 1911s are a maintenance "nightmare". But I don't believe they are the kind of pistol that a first time gun buyer with no knowledge or aptitude for troubleshooting mechanical problems should go pick up for they're bet-my-life-on-it gun (Carry, HD, etc).

Don't get me wrong, I did exactly THAT. I absolutely LOVE the 1911, it's in a dead heat with the CZ75 for my favorite handgun. But I invested the time to learn the 1911, its drawbacks, weak points, and how to troubleshoot it.

The two worst things the 1911 has going against it are its magazines and its extractor. Both are prone to losing tension and crapping out on you. And good 1911 mags aren't cheap. If someone could make a 1911 magazine that would last as many cycles as a Glock magazine then nearly all of this crap about the 1911s reliability would cease to be. The extractor hasn't been a problem so much for me, the channel just has to be cleaned from time to time. That's something your average new 1911 buyer just isn't going to do or think about. I didn't until I had a problem.

All of y'all claiming to have a million bajillion round through multiple 1911s and have never ever ever experienced even one malfunction either are the luckiest 1911 owners on the planet or you aren't being entirely truthful. I flat out don't believe it. Everyone, somewhere along the line of owning a 1911, will have one malfunction. At least. Now maybe you've developed a maintenance program for your guns that prevents malfunctions before they happen, like buying new mags after you pass a certain round count. But somewhere along the way of learning that routine you have had ONE malfunction. Don't blame it on a bad magazine, because that is part of the system. I've had a Colt cycle wolf and Tula and floorboard PMC so don't blame it on ammo either.

Some handguns will feed everything and can reach an absurdly high round count on the original factory magazines. The majority of 1911s do not fit that description. They are a gun with a personality. You have to figure your 1911 out and develop habits for keeping it running before you bet your life on it.

[buckhorn_cortez]

One of the problems with the 1911 is variability in performance due to things like magazines and even recoil springs.

As an example, Todd Green tested a 9mm 1911 in 2012 - 2013. Todd was famous for his performance tests where he just took a pistol and used it for his every day shooter for a year. He would log the number of rounds shot, broken parts, stoppages, and malfunctions.

With the 1911, at about the halfway point through the test (30k rounds), the mean rounds between stoppages (MRBS) was 3,571. Not as good as the Glock 19 Gen4, or HK P30 that he tested - but, far better than the gun industry standard of 2,000 rounds.

Now to the really interesting part. Jason Burton (Heirloom Precision) suggested that he change to Wilson magazines (from Metalform), and also change the recoil spring to a 14lb progressive spring.

When he made those changes, the MRBS went up to 6,211 for the remainder of the test which surpassed the performance of both the Glock and the P30.

At the end of the test, the final statistics were: 64,579 rounds, 15 stoppages, 0 malfunctions, 5 parts breakages.

None of the parts breakages stopped the gun from functioning. In fact, the part that broke the most was the ejector which he would find broken when he cleaned the pistol.

Todd was notorious for not cleaning his test guns. He cleaned the 1911 at odd intervals that approximated 4,000 - 6,000 rounds. Between the infrequent cleanings, he'd just add some lubrication and would continue to shoot the pistol.

I've used 1911's upwards of 2k rounds without cleaning and adding only a bit of lubrication between range trips - and the guns have worked 100%.

The 1911 is still able to compete with modern pistols for functionality and reliability. The problem is the trial-and-error process of finding the "right" combination of parts that will give you the same level of functionality that you get with a modern pistol right from the factory.

[Tucker 1371]

The 1911 is still able to compete with modern pistols for functionality and reliability. The problem is the trial-and-error process of finding the "right" combination of parts that will give you the same level of functionality that you get with a modern pistol right from the factory.

Nailed it! +1

[KyJim]

But I don't believe they are the kind of pistol that a first time gun buyer with no knowledge or aptitude for troubleshooting mechanical problems should go pick up for they're bet-my-life-on-it gun (Carry, HD, etc).

I agree with this 100%. If you're not willing to do some initial experimenting, today's 1911 is not the right platform for you. I just think, though, that once the experimentation/familiarity phase is over, the 1911 does fine in the maintenance category.

[mr bolo]

Ive experienced WWII and Vietnam era magazines cracking or developing stress cracks on the back of the feed lips

since the slide slams that area it takes a lot of abuse and impact causing eventual stress cracks