User Panel
Posted: 3/6/2014 8:54:37 PM EDT
Say it ain't true!
"The longer I was involved in this effort, the more failures I saw in the concept of the 1911 in a role as service pistol over more modern designs. One agency with whom I had a close relationship required some assistance getting their fleet of Kimber 1911srunning correctly. Fast forward 4 years and a lot of visits and phone calls to help troubleshoot broken down guns, and I was eventually able to convince this agency to discontinue the use of their team 1911s and have the team use the M&P issued to the rest of the agency. The phone has been very quiet since they went to the M&P. " Did a search but didn't find anything...
|
|
This is a pretty common thing.
Most agencies gave up Model Ts also. |
|
|
|
Quoted: The ones with the 80% failure rate? Yeah. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: This is a pretty common thing. Most agencies gave up Model Ts also. The ones with the 80% failure rate? Yeah. Well they were Colts...
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is a pretty common thing. Most agencies gave up Model Ts also. The ones with the 80% failure rate? Yeah. Well they were Colts... And nothing is Marine nor roughneck proof. |
|
I'm also a member at 1911forum.com and there's a thread running over there discussing this. When I read Hiltons comments and his reasoning, I was just as amazed as everyone else over there. I wonder how that will impact his business, if at all?
|
|
|
I have a S&W 1911 and I know it will never see the use that the Marines, LEO, etc... will put theirs in, but I like mine and will continue to use it as a ccw
|
|
Quoted: MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Thanks, will do.
|
|
Quoted:
MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars |
|
Quoted:
I have a S&W 1911 and I know it will never see the use that the Marines, LEO, etc... will put theirs in, but I like mine and will continue to use it as a ccw View Quote I sold the Sig scorpion from my avatar because it was a peice of shit that could not make it through two mags. Same with my Kimber Custom II. Glocks are ugly, but the damn things work. |
|
Quoted:
Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. |
|
Quoted:
I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. |
|
Quoted:
[div style='text-align: center;'] The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
[div style='text-align: center;'] Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. Yup. Never understood the high end guns being so tight they need 500 rounds to "break in" or "loosen up". |
|
I paid $750 new out the door for my S&W and have shot 2 gun comps with Ranger T's and the only failure was with a Kimber brand aftermarket mag. It has over 6k (500+ of carry ammo) rounds through her and I should probably replace the springs, but it runs so well I don't want to jinx myself.
Here it is next to my wife's Ladysmith 3913 |
|
Well no shit. Kimber is named in the article as the example of failures of the 1911....
|
|
Quoted:
[div style='text-align: center;'] The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
[div style='text-align: center;'] Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. Because people who REALLY should know better cant get it through their heads that what might work for a Bullseye gun WILL NOT work for a Service or action match weapon. Also "Loose" is a relative term..my 1911's are "Loose"...but when they are locked up in battery they are LOCKED up.. |
|
Quoted:
MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yes, and if you continue googling, you'll find that the frames were a rush job, and that they had milled out a lightening cut in the frame, under where the rail was. The recoil spring and guide rod were bowing and entering that lightening cut, and on recoil were effectively being folded in half and bypassed, which led to the failures. They no longer make that lightening cut, and the failures went away. |
|
Quoted:
Say it ain't true! http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=6631&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=my-personal-path-away-from-the-1911 "The longer I was involved in this effort, the more failures I saw in the concept of the 1911 in a role as service pistol over more modern designs. One agency with whom I had a close relationship required some assistance getting their fleet of Kimber 1911srunning correctly. Fast forward 4 years and a lot of visits and phone calls to help troubleshoot broken down guns, and I was eventually able to convince this agency to discontinue the use of their team 1911s and have the team use the M&P issued to the rest of the agency. The phone has been very quiet since they went to the M&P. " Did a search but didn't find anything... View Quote Based on my experience, the problem is KIMBER, not the 1911 as a design. |
|
Quoted:
Yes, and if you continue googling, you'll find that the frames were a rush job, and that they had milled out a lightening cut in the frame, under where the rail was. The recoil spring and guide rod were bowing and entering that lightening cut, and on recoil were effectively being folded in half and bypassed, which led to the failures. They no longer make that lightening cut, and the failures went away. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yes, and if you continue googling, you'll find that the frames were a rush job, and that they had milled out a lightening cut in the frame, under where the rail was. The recoil spring and guide rod were bowing and entering that lightening cut, and on recoil were effectively being folded in half and bypassed, which led to the failures. They no longer make that lightening cut, and the failures went away. Did they redo the tests? |
|
I'm going to ignore the 1911 hardware issues to highlight what I thought was absolutely the most interesting part of the article:
After only a short retraining cycle, I quickly learned that I was able to match my performance standards using the M&P. This first rather serendipitous step made me realize that I did not need the 1911 trigger or ergonomics as a performance crutch. View Quote I think it points out a good thing for all of us to do: Get out of our pistol comfort zones. I hear and see people who say "I only shoot X brand because Y or Z have bad triggers/bad ergonomics/don't point right/have weird recoil/are outdated old designs/were built not facing the moon on a tuesday/whatever." The fundamentals are the same. If you're not pushing yourself by learning how to shoot outside your comfort zone (be that da/sa, with a tupperware gun, or an old heavy low cap design), you're not improving as a shooter nearly as much as you could be. I've been a 1911 and Glock shooter for the large majority of my time shooting pistols. I've been trying to work hard over the last year to master da/sa style guns. It's been a fun challenge, and has helped reinforce good fundamentals to help overcome my terrible initial transitions between the first and second shots. If you haven't stepped outside your comfort zone and gotten to know a different pistol than your carry gun, you should try it out. I'm not talking 50 rounds one time before declaring it total crap on the internet, but a bare minimum of 2,000 rounds over several trips. Might even change some of your preconceived notions about other designs. |
|
Do you want a gun that works or a gun that is pretty and has the right "feel" for you?
I like guns that work. |
|
Quoted: Yes, and if you continue googling, you'll find that the frames were a rush job, and that they had milled out a lightening cut in the frame, under where the rail was. The recoil spring and guide rod were bowing and entering that lightening cut, and on recoil were effectively being folded in half and bypassed, which led to the failures. They no longer make that lightening cut, and the failures went away. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yes, and if you continue googling, you'll find that the frames were a rush job, and that they had milled out a lightening cut in the frame, under where the rail was. The recoil spring and guide rod were bowing and entering that lightening cut, and on recoil were effectively being folded in half and bypassed, which led to the failures. They no longer make that lightening cut, and the failures went away. That's about what I saw. Just failures of the first batch. I'm sure they figured out the problem and it's all fixed now. I still love the 1911 platform and will stick with it. I've been around mechanical things my entire life, sometimes you get a fluke...
|
|
Quoted:
Yeah, you are right. They were dumb enough to spend 2000+ bucks on it and wont admit it sucks. That sucks about your Scorpion I love mine, it has proven to but completely reliable no matter what I put through it. It seems the majority of problems that happen with Sig 1911's are extractor related, being to tight. And of course the shit mags that come with them. I use Chip McCormick mags in all my 1911's anyway. <a href="http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/bamarebel45/media/IMAG1063.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa441/bamarebel45/IMAG1063.jpg</a> View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. Yeah, you are right. They were dumb enough to spend 2000+ bucks on it and wont admit it sucks. That sucks about your Scorpion I love mine, it has proven to but completely reliable no matter what I put through it. It seems the majority of problems that happen with Sig 1911's are extractor related, being to tight. And of course the shit mags that come with them. I use Chip McCormick mags in all my 1911's anyway. <a href="http://s1198.photobucket.com/user/bamarebel45/media/IMAG1063.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1198.photobucket.com/albums/aa441/bamarebel45/IMAG1063.jpg</a> The mags are a HUGE hangup with sigs. I switched to wilson combat mags and had a little better luck. I loved the gun when it worked, that was the worst part. Felt good, accurate, and damn sexy. Just could not trust it. |
|
Quoted: I'm going to ignore the 1911 hardware issues to highlight what I thought was absolutely the most interesting part of the article: I think it points out a good thing for all of us to do: Get out of our pistol comfort zones. I hear and see people who say "I only shoot X brand because Y or Z have bad triggers/bad ergonomics/don't point right/have weird recoil/are outdated old designs/were built not facing the moon on a tuesday/whatever." The fundamentals are the same. If you're not pushing yourself by learning how to shoot outside your comfort zone (be that da/sa, with a tupperware gun, or an old heavy low cap design), you're not improving as a shooter nearly as much as you could be. I've been a 1911 and Glock shooter for the large majority of my time shooting pistols. I've been trying to work hard over the last year to master da/sa style guns. It's been a fun challenge, and has helped reinforce good fundamentals to help overcome my terrible initial transitions between the first and second shots. If you haven't stepped outside your comfort zone and gotten to know a different pistol than your carry gun, you should try it out. I'm not talking 50 rounds one time before declaring it total crap on the internet, but a bare minimum of 2,000 rounds over several trips. Might even change some of your preconceived notions about other designs. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: I'm going to ignore the 1911 hardware issues to highlight what I thought was absolutely the most interesting part of the article: After only a short retraining cycle, I quickly learned that I was able to match my performance standards using the M&P. This first rather serendipitous step made me realize that I did not need the 1911 trigger or ergonomics as a performance crutch. I think it points out a good thing for all of us to do: Get out of our pistol comfort zones. I hear and see people who say "I only shoot X brand because Y or Z have bad triggers/bad ergonomics/don't point right/have weird recoil/are outdated old designs/were built not facing the moon on a tuesday/whatever." The fundamentals are the same. If you're not pushing yourself by learning how to shoot outside your comfort zone (be that da/sa, with a tupperware gun, or an old heavy low cap design), you're not improving as a shooter nearly as much as you could be. I've been a 1911 and Glock shooter for the large majority of my time shooting pistols. I've been trying to work hard over the last year to master da/sa style guns. It's been a fun challenge, and has helped reinforce good fundamentals to help overcome my terrible initial transitions between the first and second shots. If you haven't stepped outside your comfort zone and gotten to know a different pistol than your carry gun, you should try it out. I'm not talking 50 rounds one time before declaring it total crap on the internet, but a bare minimum of 2,000 rounds over several trips. Might even change some of your preconceived notions about other designs. Very true
|
|
Quoted:
[div style='text-align: center;'] The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
[div style='text-align: center;'] Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I had not seen the 80% fail rate. MARSOC tested 5 guns. 4 failed before reaching the requirments. MARSOC then changed the requirements. Google MARSOC 1911 failures Frames were cracking worse than Whitney Houston on a Saturday night. Yup, the Marines have been having constant problems with them. But the ones going to civilian gunshops have been a bit more reliable. Still aint worth freaking 2000+ dollars I doubt they have been more reliable. People that buy a $2000 gun usualy try to cover up its deficiencies by saying it needs to break it, or they need to clean it. I paid ~$1100 for a shit gun. I will admit that. The best 1911s I have seen were Springfield Mil-Specs and RIAs. The best performing 1911's I've used and owned have been super loose. I don't understand the insane obsession with SUPER TIGHT TOLERANCES. +1 I have a coupe Norinco 1911's that rattle like hell and the machining is... rough, to be nice. But shit, they run like a raped ape no matter what I put through them. One has been rebuilt by a gunsmith with mostly Wilson parts and the other is completely stock. The stock one is ugly as fuck but shoots great |
|
Quoted:
Did they redo the tests? View Quote IIRC, they did redo most of them under modified criteria, modified to save time as the failures were being caused by a pretty blatantly obvious problem that was rectified... It still came out on top *shrug* And to get back to the original point. Mr. Yam is right. As much as a die-hard 1911 guy as I am, they are enthusiast's guns, and require more maintenance and tuning than tupperwear. For a duty gun, Glocks, M&Ps and similar make a huge amount of sense when it's a large department with a lot of guns to maintain. Hemis and 440s require more tuning and maintenance than a 1.8 liter Honda with VTEC. It's just the way things are. That said, I'm not gonna drop a 1.8 liter Honda plant into my muscle car, now am I? |
|
I would take a Hilton 1911 over an M&P, but would take a M&P over any factory 1911 without even thinking twice. This is coming from a guy that carried 1911 for many years. I'm sold on the M&P. Glocks are a very good choice as well.
|
|
My Dad said he never saw a Colt .45 Auto jam in WWII. He had a poor opinion of the civilian versions because they did. |
|
|
Quoted:
You may not know this but you can have both. With a little effort you don't have to be stuck with ugly ill fitting guns. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you want a gun that works or a gun that is pretty and has the right "feel" for you? I like guns that work. Ok But I want capacity too Now what ? |
|
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you want a gun that works or a gun that is pretty and has the right "feel" for you? I like guns that work. Ok But I want capacity too Now what ? http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/C3V6V0ugYFk/hqdefault.jpg I bet that functions flawlessly. |
|
Quoted:
I sold the Sig scorpion from my avatar because it was a peice of shit that could not make it through two mags. Same with my Kimber Custom II. Glocks are ugly, but the damn things work. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I have a S&W 1911 and I know it will never see the use that the Marines, LEO, etc... will put theirs in, but I like mine and will continue to use it as a ccw I sold the Sig scorpion from my avatar because it was a peice of shit that could not make it through two mags. Same with my Kimber Custom II. Glocks are ugly, but the damn things work. I think there was an exec who screwed up Sig and then got hired on by Kimber. Or vice versa. Here in the St. Louis area, there is an outfit called Megamet. They make a bunch of MIM parts for gun manufacturers: http://www.megamet.com/ |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you want a gun that works or a gun that is pretty and has the right "feel" for you? I like guns that work. Ok But I want capacity too Now what ? Buy one of these. |
|
I'm a Glock and 1911 guy.
But for work, rough use, skipped maintance, issuing to guys that aren't "gun guys" etc.... The Glock (or other M&P, Sig, HK) is a better choice. IMHO Most of my 1911s are Colt or Springer base guns that have been built up by a custom gunsmith and run 100% I've owned Kimbers.... No thanks..... The only box stock 1911 I have experience with that has run 100% without any tweaking is my TRP All this said..... G21 w/ X300 goes back on the belt in the morning. |
|
Quoted:
I think there was an exec who screwed up Sig and then got hired on by Kimber. Or vice versa. Here in the St. Louis area, there is an outfit called Megamet. They make a bunch of MIM parts for gun manufacturers: http://www.megamet.com/ View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have a S&W 1911 and I know it will never see the use that the Marines, LEO, etc... will put theirs in, but I like mine and will continue to use it as a ccw I sold the Sig scorpion from my avatar because it was a peice of shit that could not make it through two mags. Same with my Kimber Custom II. Glocks are ugly, but the damn things work. I think there was an exec who screwed up Sig and then got hired on by Kimber. Or vice versa. Here in the St. Louis area, there is an outfit called Megamet. They make a bunch of MIM parts for gun manufacturers: http://www.megamet.com/ Yeah, the CEO for Kimber became the CEO for Sig. |
|
Quoted:
And to get back to the original point. Mr. Yam is right. As much as a die-hard 1911 guy as I am, they are enthusiast's guns, and require more maintenance and tuning than tupperwear. For a duty gun, Glocks, M&Ps and similar make a huge amount of sense when it's a large department with a lot of guns to maintain. View Quote And let's face it. You are correct that 1911s are enthusiasts huns and many if not most cops are simply not enthusiasts. They do not shoot as often as enthusiasts often do, and do not personally care for their weapons like enthusiasts do. I wouldn't choose a 1911 for a department either, I'd choose the easist weapon to adopt and maintain, knowing that while some of my folks are hard core shooters, most are not, will only shoot when they have to qualify or whatever, and view their weapon as any other tool on their belt and not be overly concerned with maintaining it. Tupperware is great for such applications, but that doesn't mean a 1911 can't be an equally great duty firearm. It's just not as idiot proof as the others, and when outfitting a large number of people, many of whom are ambivalent, you need a least-common-denominator gun. |
|
Quoted:
My Dad said he never saw a Colt .45 Auto jam in WWII. He had a poor opinion of the civilian versions because they did. View Quote This. There is nothing wrong with the 1911A1. Too bad nobody still makes them with updated sights. It's assumed that all that work JMB did was pointless, and the things need to be fucked with, until they only resemble a 1911A1...sort of. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Do you want a gun that works or a gun that is pretty and has the right "feel" for you? I like guns that work. Ok But I want capacity too Now what ? Buy one of these. |
|
Quoted:
That was gonna be my answer as well. I want one of those in 9mm really bad. I'm thinking Tactical 5.0. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do you want a gun that works or a gun that is pretty and has the right "feel" for you? I like guns that work. Ok But I want capacity too Now what ? Buy one of these. I have always been impressed with STI. |
|
Quoted: I'm a Glock and 1911 guy. But for work, rough use, skipped maintance, issuing to guys that aren't "gun guys" etc.... The Glock (or other M&P, Sig, HK) is a better choice. IMHO Most of my 1911s are Colt or Springer base guns that have been built up by a custom gunsmith and run 100% I've owned Kimbers.... No thanks..... The only box stock 1911 I have experience with that has run 100% without any tweaking is my TRP All this said..... G21 w/ X300 goes back on the belt in the morning. View Quote Mongo just pawn in game of life. All my 1911s were 100% out of the box with the exception of the TRP. The TRP needed a minor trigger tweak and sear spring tweak out of the box. I've had great luck with my 1911s, even the used and abused second hand 1911s have been good. The 68 National Match has been flawless and never had a part other than springs changed. Ever think that maybe God just don't like you? |
|
I saw 1911s crap out frequently back when I was going to classes all the time. But people are emotional about guns and gear and there are always excuses "those were cheap guns" "those were modified guns" "those were poorly maintained guns"
|
|
Most of the problems associated with 1911 can be summed up as such.
1.Kimber 2. Owner is a tool who does not maintain his weapon, i.e. clean, oil, or change springs. 3. guy packing $2k custom gun matched graded out the ass in a high round count class 4. WECSOG kitchen table gunsmith with a Dremel, a Brownells catalog, and a dream. I have a Glock that died on me during (slide release spring broke turning it into a single shot) a Carbine Class, a SIG that for some reason refused to actuate the hammer when the trigger was pulled (some sort of crap got caught inside had to be stripped, cleaned, and relubed before it would work again). A Remington that tried to shit out it's trigger group during a shotgun class. An AR15 that was supposed to be a 5.56 gun that was assembled with a .223 match chambered barrel, that was an awesome first range trip when all the ammo was 5.56 ammo surplus ammo. Shit breaks, gun companies employ retards, and some CEOs just shouldn't be allowed near firearms manufacturers. |
|
That didn't take long
What do Hilton Yam and Larry Vickers know?
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.