45 vs 9MM 1911 reliability question

[JJ45]

Some say the 1911 platform is most dependable/reliable, all other things being equal, when fed .45 ACP. The cartridge that it was designed for.

Can anyone support or dispute this assertion? Not the effectiveness of the rounds but functional reliability. Hypothetically, two identical 1911s, chambered for the .45 and 9mm

[RickB]

I've never owned a 1911 chambered in .40 or 9 (well, I did own a 9, but sold it before shooting it).

But, I have been shooting USPSA and IDPA competition since the mid-'90s, sometimes two or three times a week, for twenty years.
I've watched thousands of shooters at hundreds of matches.

The 1911 already has a reputation of being somewhat fiddly, requiring more care and attention than some modern plastic fantastics, and my observations support the belief that 1911s chambered in the shorter cartridges are more fiddly about magazines, cartridge OAL, extractor tension, etc.
The "problems" aren't different, the newer cartridges just don't have the decades of development that .45 and Super have.

I think the 1911 - 5", Government length - is most reliable in .38 Super, as it is the same length as the round the gun was designed around, and, the cartridge, as it rests in position to feed into the chamber, is closer to the chamber - cartridge centerline and chamber centerline - than larger diameter cartridges, so it doesn't have to zig or zag as much to get into the chamber.

Virtually everyone I knew who was shooting .40 every weekend was long-loading to improve feed reliability - long enough that the rounds wouldn't fit in the mag of a short-stroke gun like a Glock, M&P, etc. - and every year or two a new 9mm magazine comes out, which is supposed to be like a magic wand; if the guns still didn't have chronic problems, why do the mags have to be constantly redesigned?

Completely anecdotal, but I was listening to a professional shooter describe the custom gun she was shooting, and though the company sponsoring her didn't make a gun chambered in .38 Super at the time, her gun had been converted from 9 to Super. She didn't say, "Because the 9 never ran right", but that's what I read into it.

Longer is better.

[T. O'Heir]

Colt, et al have been making and selling hundreds(if not thousands) 9mm Commanders since the mid 50's that work just fine.
The chambering has nothing to do with reliability though. Far too many other variables that affect reliability than the cartridge. Lots and lots of .45 cal. Government Models have reliability issues too.
"...long enough that the rounds wouldn't fit in the mag..." Makes the thing useless.

[KyJim]

Colt, et al have been making and selling hundreds(if not thousands) 9mm Commanders since the mid 50's that work just fine.

Actually, the Colt 9mm Combat Commanders were notoriously finicky, not all of them of course, but enough. I have one and a couple of other 9mm 1911s.

A 9mm 1911 can be made reliable and the use of ramped barrels helps, but, due to cartridge length and design, they are more difficult to make reliable than the same gun in .45 acp. That's the whole reason Springfield Armory re-designed the 1911 into the EMP --- to better feed 9mm and .40 SW ammo.

If there were good factory defensive loads available, I might very well carry a 1911 in .38 Super.

[1911_Hardball]

I've never noticed a difference in ramped vs non-ramped in 45s but ramped barrels seem to be less fussy in 9mm 1911s.

[railroader]

I have owned 3 1911s in 9mm. One was a sig fullsize 5", one was a Bul commander and one was a RIA officer size. All three ran fine. I still have the sig and I was shooting it this morning.

[Jim Watson]

I have come to agree.
My Colt plain barrel 9mm started out great and I wondered what people were talking about. But when my source of bullets failed, it turned out to not be very flexible. I have had it "throated" and found suitable bullets, but my SA with integral ramp still feeds more different styles.

[curiousg]

My Combat Commander in 9mm is the most reliable 1911 I've ever owned. 30 years without a malfunction. Lots of hollow points with no problem and it is bone stock.

[saleen322]

I have Springfields in 9mm and 45 ACP. I have had both for 10 years or more. They are all reliable with the ammo I have shot in them. The 9mm is a factory ramp barrel where the 45 is a conventional barrel. The 9mm is also able to handle long handloads that will not fit into the Glock 17 or XD9 Tactical. YMMV

[BigJimP]

I have two virtually identical guns ( Wilson Combat, 5" CQB in .45 acp and a 5" Protector in 9mm ( Protector is an upgraded CQB ) ...

CQB is 15 yrs old with about 50,000 rds thru it / ...Protector is 11 yrs old...about 180,000 rds thru it ..../ both ran 100% right out of the box.

Both continue to run very well today. CQB used to be my carry gun ...about a year ago, I switched to the Protector in 9mm as my primary range and carry gun. If the 9mm 1911 is properly made...good mags, etc....it should run every bit as reliably as the same gun made in .45acp. I use Wilson ETM mags in both of my Wilsons.
------
I have owned other 1911's in .45 acp...and some in 9mm ( Les Baer Monolith model 5", 9mm, ran well after it was broken in --- but that is a Les Baer problem not a 9mm problem )...and a Kimber Tactical Pro II model, 4", alloy receiver in 9mm and its run very well although it is finnicky on mags - so I stay with the Kimber mag in that gun.
--------------
Good internal parts, properly tuned ( extractor, ejector, slide lock, sear, disconnector, etc ), good springs ---then a 1911 is a very reliable weapon in any caliber.

Does it require some maintenance - yes !
Will parts break...sure -- but parts will break on any gun ever made.. !
I see no downside to a 1911 in 9mm.

[JJ45]

Thanks for the replies....Does the newer Colt Combat Commander have a ramped barrel? ... is the Combat Commander, all steel, 4.25" as reliable as any 1911 9mm?

[RickB]

Colt has never made guns with ramped barrels.

[rock185]

JJ45, Over the last 40 years or so, I've owned multiple Colts, Dan Wessons, Kimbers, Springfield 9MM 1911s, along with one STI in 9MM. Within my humble experience, the 9MMs using the ramped barrels tend to be much more functionally reliable with all types of 9MM ammo, without tuning, tweaking, adjusting, polishing and part changing, than the guns with traditional Colt type unramped barrels. Reference functional reliability between .45 and 9MM, I can say that 3 Kimbers, 2 Dan Wessons, an STI and a custom Springfield, all with ramped barrels, were/are as functionally reliable as any of my 1911s in the "proper" .45 ACP caliber. The only factory ramped barrel 9MM gun I've had that was not reliable from day one was a Springfield Loaded that must have been built late on a Friday afternoon. The springfield and the Colts required some work to achieve functional reliability. I currently have a Dan Wesson PM9, 9MM. It just works, as do my STI and Kimber 38 Supers with ramped barrels. I have one Colt 38 Super with unramped barrel. Due to past experience with this and other 9MMs and 38 Supers with unramped barrels, I never assume it will function with most any ammo that will fit in the chamber, as the ramped barrel guns will. I mention the Supers because my 9MMs with unramped barrels were the same in this respect, i.e., I couldn't assume they would work reliably without some tuning.....ymmv

[tallball]

I have a 1911 in 45, one in 40, and one in 9mm. They all work just fine.

[JWT]

I have not noticed any difference between in reliability between my 9mm and .45 1911s.

[jackstrawIII]

I've owned 3 1911s... and only have 1 left: Colt Combat Commander in 9mm.

It has proved more reliable than the Springfield and Kimber I had in 45 ACP.

[BigJimP]

In general, the shorter you go on the barrel...the less reliable most 1911's become.

But 4.25" guns are very common these days...and they run very well.

The new Colt's seem to be pretty good guns based on what I hear at my local range....its considered a pretty good entry level priced 1911 these days - over the last few years Colt has improved a lot.

[rt11002003]

I've owned at least 10 1911s; both in .45ACP and 9mm, from Springfield, SIG and STI. Have never had an issue with any of them.

[UncleEd]

Bill Wilson's new book "Gun Guy" covers this subject.

As Wilson is a builder of 1911s, I'll takes his words on the subject.

[Badgerstate]

I dont think it really makes a difference either way. IMO, reliability of 1911s started to go out the window when modern gunmakers decided to try to tighten the tolorances in the pursuit of so-called, higher quality.

[ShootistPRS]

I can't see where there would be any reliability issues based on the caliber. The 1911 is a darn reliable gun that has been around for a very long time. I would think there are many more reliability problems that arise from owner customization than from the ammunition used.

[KyJim]

Bill Wilson's new book "Gun Guy" covers this subject.

As Wilson is a builder of 1911s, I'll takes his words on the subject.

And what does Bill Wilson say?

[WC145]

Buy a quality 1911 pistol, clean and lube it properly, use quality magazines and chances are you'll never have an issue with it. I've been shooting the 1911 over 45 years and have carried them on and off duty for over 30 years and I have seen at least as many Glocks and Berettas fail on the range as I have 1911s, almost all of the failures due to poor maintenance or handling.

I've had or still have 1911s in .45, 9mm, .38 Super, and 9x23, some stock, some custom, some steel, some alloy, ramped and unramped, 5"/4.25"/4"/3.5", and the only ones I ever had a feeding issue with was an alloy framed 9mm Fusion CCO with an unramped barrel. Fusion solved the problem by fitting a ramped barrel to it and it ran fine after that. That was apparently an issue with their frames because I've had unramped alloy frame Colts that have never had a feeding issue regardless of ammunition or caliber.

Yes, every company puts out the occasional lemon, some more than others, but interweb talk has a tendency to blow things out of proportion and keep old issues at the front of conversations long after they've ceased to be a problem, if they ever truly were to begin with, as well as dredging up old unsubstantiated BS and rumors that people accept as fact. This "9mm 1911s are unreliable" discussion is a perfect example, they've been around for almost 70 years, the bugs were worked out decades ago. The same goes for the "1911s under 5 inches are unreliable" BS. And one that really gets me is "1911s are finicky, they're an experts gun", what a load of crap - literally millions of men and women, a large number of whom had never fired a handgun before have been taught to shoot and maintain the 1911 pistol effectively over the last 100+ years. And, damn few of them could be considered experts.