Posted: 7/20/2022 10:33:10 AM EDT
|
I am curious why SA does not sell a lot of parts to us there customers. I own a Mil-Spec and after a few years of enjoying it I wanted to upgrade to a beaver tail safety like SA has on a lot of there other 1911's. All they sell for the 1911 line is grips, firing pins and springs. I did not know enough about 1911's and when I purchased an aftermarket beaver tail safety I ended up getting one with the wrong radius cut so it does not fit. It just does not make sense to me that triggers, safeties and such are not sold by SA forcing us to go to the aftermarket. |
|
Originally Posted By GunDisaster: It's ok their parts aren't that great. Mostly MIM parts. Go Wilson Combat or Ed Brown or something better. I got the Ed Brown part and it does not fit, Ed does not use the same radius cut that SA has on there frames. When the part did not fit I started researching and that is when I found there are multiple radius cuts used among the various 1911 manufactures and not many of the after market companies do not cut there grip safety to the SA radius. |
|
Originally Posted By rookie421: I got the Ed Brown part and it does not fit, Ed does not use the same radius cut that SA has on there frames. When the part did not fit I started researching and that is when I found there are multiple radius cuts used among the various 1911 manufactures and not many of the after market companies do not cut there grip safety to the SA radius. With SA Milspec, you still need to cut frame tang to fit SA beavertail grip safety. It is not a drop in part. Wilson Combat or EGW make GS with radius that can be fitted to SAI Milspec frame. |
|
Originally Posted By mlin: With SA Milspec, you still need to cut frame tang to fit SA beavertail grip safety. It is not a drop in part. Wilson Combat or EGW make GS with radius that can be fitted to SAI Milspec frame. Originally Posted By mlin: Originally Posted By rookie421: I got the Ed Brown part and it does not fit, Ed does not use the same radius cut that SA has on there frames. When the part did not fit I started researching and that is when I found there are multiple radius cuts used among the various 1911 manufactures and not many of the after market companies do not cut there grip safety to the SA radius. With SA Milspec, you still need to cut frame tang to fit SA beavertail grip safety. It is not a drop in part. Wilson Combat or EGW make GS with radius that can be fitted to SAI Milspec frame. Thanks for the tip. When I have more time to work on this I'l check those options out. |
What have the Romans ever done for us?
Joined:
Jul 2008
Posts:
37510
EE: 100% (212)
TN, USA
|
Originally Posted By Finslayer83: SACS recommended Wilson parts when I sent my TRP in years ago. Thank you. That helps narrow things down. Well, I guess SA is not going to comment in this thread. I knew there was a large chance they would not, I thought I would try anyway. |
|
Originally Posted By rookie421: If it came from SA I would think it would not need fitting. I would prefer a drop in part but, I am not opposed to have to have it fitted. Originally Posted By rookie421: Originally Posted By Geralt55: Just to clarify, are you kind of asking for a beavertail that's drop-in with no fitting? If it came from SA I would think it would not need fitting. I would prefer a drop in part but, I am not opposed to have to have it fitted. Brother, the 1911 isn't really the drop in platform.  The old 1911 design absolutely isn't a "goes together like legos" design, beavertails are on that list of parts. Even if they sent you a beaver tail they use, I would expect it to need some degree of fitting. That's more or less where we are with the platform, "With modern manufacturing the fitting is minimal" (compared to the old days) ETA: Attached File See on a mil spec frame, there's a good deal of fitting and metal to be removed that would have to take place to put any beavertail on it Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By Geralt55: Brother, the 1911 isn't really the drop in platform. The old 1911 design absolutely isn't a "goes together like legos" design, beavertails are on that list of parts. Even if they sent you a beaver tail they use, I would expect it to need some degree of fitting. That's more or less where we are with the platform, "With modern manufacturing the fitting is minimal" (compared to the old days) ETA: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/144599/Milspec_beavertail_jpg-2473723.JPG See on a mil spec frame, there's a good deal of fitting and metal to be removed that would have to take place to put any beavertail on it https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/144599/images__2__jpeg-2473724.JPG I am learning new stuff about the platform all the time. I now know there would need to be material removed for the beaver tail to fit. I don't know why most parts have to be fit, what about the basic design makes this so? |
|
Originally Posted By rookie421: I am learning new stuff about the platform all the time. I now know there would need to be material removed for the beaver tail to fit. I don't know why most parts have to be fit, what about the basic design makes this so? Originally Posted By rookie421: Originally Posted By Geralt55: Brother, the 1911 isn't really the drop in platform. The old 1911 design absolutely isn't a "goes together like legos" design, beavertails are on that list of parts. Even if they sent you a beaver tail they use, I would expect it to need some degree of fitting. That's more or less where we are with the platform, "With modern manufacturing the fitting is minimal" (compared to the old days) ETA: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/144599/Milspec_beavertail_jpg-2473723.JPG See on a mil spec frame, there's a good deal of fitting and metal to be removed that would have to take place to put any beavertail on it https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/144599/images__2__jpeg-2473724.JPG I am learning new stuff about the platform all the time. I now know there would need to be material removed for the beaver tail to fit. I don't know why most parts have to be fit, what about the basic design makes this so? Shortest answer: It was designed in the early 1900s, when materials were expensive but labor was cheap Today it's the opposite, and we have over 100 years of manufacturing experience, gun designs, new manufacturing machinery, etc. The modern platforms have us spoiled. Glocks go together more like legos, a modern 1911, like a watch. It's not just Q/C and tolerances, is the design itself. A lot of the 1911's parts have to fit together, and there are differences from gun maker to gun maker, and even gun to gun. (And let's be real, a lot of instructors say when they see malfunctioning glocks? They're usually not a stock gun. Once the stock parts are put back in and the add ons taken off, they start running again.) For people who started shooting after the AWB passed, after the AR-15s rise, and rails and accessories along with it? Came an accidentally warped idea of how easy it is to plug and play parts into OTHER platforms. 1911 stuff as a rule (And there are exceptions-ish) aren't a plug and play platform for parts. They're about handfitting, timing, tolerances, all that. 2 Examples: Over-polishing a feed ramp and making it out of spec? Could/would make a jammomatic. And the frame is toast.  Hastily feeding an extractor and/or over-filing it, you could get an extractor that clocks or jiggles in there, and now it jams. Now it's not a nuclear reactor or anything, it's not impossible - BUT it's a platform for the mechanically inclined, and one has to be REALLLLLY careful tinkering with certain things
|