Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 2/2/2006 8:05:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/2/2006 8:05:49 PM EDT by mlm1219]
This is a Wilson Combat CQB made in 2004. There is a disinct line on the hammer that starts at the left side of the hammer strut recess and goes up the side of the hammer. Any ideas as to what it is?
Link Posted: 2/2/2006 10:00:45 PM EDT
I can plainly see it. Can't explain it though.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:16:52 AM EDT
FWIW it appears on all Kimbers that I have seen.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 12:44:31 AM EDT
Dunno, but if it worries you maybe spring for an Ed Brown Barstock hammer. You'd think in a pistol as expensive as a Wilson they'd put top quality stuff in it.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:52:26 AM EDT
It's nothing. Don't worry about it at all. It's just a finish flaw. Sad for a Wilson...maybe...but who cares. It shoots sweet i'm sure.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 3:48:55 AM EDT
I am not really worried just wondering what it is.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 6:19:45 AM EDT
post a side view of that hammer if you would. Wilson has about 3 grades of hammers
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 6:40:07 AM EDT
If you take a side view picture of the gun I could tell you for sure but I'm 99% sure that is one of the MIM hammers that Wilson used for a bit.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 7:41:09 AM EDT
That strut looks shitty too.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 9:26:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



I guess they figured the paint would cover it.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 11:04:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



It works though. That's what matters.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:07:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Spartan24:

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



It works though. That's what matters.



I hope it stays working too.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 1:21:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RMPSTRAT:
post a side view of that hammer if you would. Wilson has about 3 grades of hammers



I will try and post a pic sideways later but if you look in the 2005 catalog it looks like value line hammer and the #337 ultralight.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 6:55:58 PM EDT
I'm looking at my '04 made CQB and it doesn't look like that at all. What does your slide stop look like?
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 7:20:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Spartan24:

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



It works though. That's what matters.


Yes but it would have "worked" in a pistol that cost Far Less that what was paid for that 1911. I thought they were supposively a cut above the rest.... Some of the pictures are saying otherwise.

I know they are only cosmetic flaws, but for that much money it is unacceptable.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:02:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:

Originally Posted By Spartan24:

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



It works though. That's what matters.


Yes but it would have "worked" in a pistol that cost Far Less that what was paid for that 1911. I thought they were supposively a cut above the rest.... Some of the pictures are saying otherwise.

I know they are only cosmetic flaws, but for that much money it is unacceptable.

For fuck's sake man, what do you do with your pistols, dinner and dancing? Cosmetics mean NOTHING , no matter what the cost. If the fucker works it works! I'll post pics of my CQB(when I sober up) that cost probably near the same, but does not have Cosmo defects. I pay for peformance, not pretty!
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:06:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 8:11:14 PM EDT by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:

Originally Posted By Spartan24:

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



It works though. That's what matters.


Yes but it would have "worked" in a pistol that cost Far Less that what was paid for that 1911. I thought they were supposively a cut above the rest.... Some of the pictures are saying otherwise.

I know they are only cosmetic flaws, but for that much money it is unacceptable.



Are you joking? Have you ever owned a Wilson CQB or high end 1911? The only difference that really matters is the parts and the hand fitting that goes into assembling a quality 1911. After owning a CQB, I would trust any part that Wilson placed in a CQB without question.

Why in the hell would I worry about a "Cosmetic Flaw" that it takes a damn magnifying glass to see? It just looks like a slight machine mark to me. I'm amazed that guys jump all over any mark and assume its MIM.

Internet 1911 owners never cease to amaze me.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:12:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 8:13:46 PM EDT by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By mlm1219:
Any ideas as to what it is?



How about a miniscule machine or forging mark? Ignore it and shoot the hell out of it.
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:14:19 PM EDT
Well pics definitely have to wait for sober!
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:27:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:

Originally Posted By Spartan24:

Originally Posted By comp1911:
That strut looks shitty too.



It works though. That's what matters.


Yes but it would have "worked" in a pistol that cost Far Less that what was paid for that 1911. I thought they were supposively a cut above the rest.... Some of the pictures are saying otherwise.

I know they are only cosmetic flaws, but for that much money it is unacceptable.



Are you joking? Have you ever owned a Wilson CQB or high end 1911? The only difference that really matters is the parts and the hand fitting that goes into assembling a quality 1911. After owning a CQB, I would trust any part that Wilson placed in a CQB without question.

Why in the hell would I worry about a "Cosmetic Flaw" that it takes a damn magnifying glass to see? It just looks like a slight machine mark to me. I'm amazed that guys jump all over any mark and assume its MIM.

Internet 1911 owners never cease to amaze me.


All I'm saying is with a "custom Hand-fitted" gun that costs in the area of 2K someone would have caught that, btw it doesn't require a magnifying glass to see. As far as it working, it's pretty hard to make a 1911 using CNCs these days in this country that doesn't work. Even the Rock Island Armory 1911s I've shot worked great. The Gun appears overall very nice, but now I'm wondering if it's not MIM myself. Looks like MIM, smells like MIM.....
Yes it is a small minor cosmetic flaw I still think That if it bothers him they should replace it.
That's all I'm saying. Nice to jump all over my case though guys thanks...
Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:41:00 PM EDT


If I was married to Cindy Crawford, I'd be throwing my lower back out, not posting about her beauty mark on arfcom.


Link Posted: 2/3/2006 8:47:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/3/2006 9:04:50 PM EDT by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:
As far as it working, it's pretty hard to make a 1911 using CNCs these days in this country that doesn't work.



No offense (And I really mean that), but this statement clearly illustrates your lack of knowledge in 1911's. What is your definition of a 1911 that "Works"? Is it a thousand rounds a year or a thousand rounds in a day? That’s the difference hand fitting makes, and no CNC machine is going to do it as reliably as a trained and experienced 1911 gunsmith. That’s why 1911's like the CQB cost $1,600 and up.

Skilled hands cost money.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:16:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By modog:
I'm looking at my '04 made CQB and it doesn't look like that at all. What does your slide stop look like?



My slide stop is the Bulletproof slide stop.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:49:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:16:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 6:18:19 AM EDT by JaketheSnake]

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:
As far as it working, it's pretty hard to make a 1911 using CNCs these days in this country that doesn't work.



No offense (And I really mean that), but this statement clearly illustrates your lack of knowledge in 1911's. What is your definition of a 1911 that "Works"? Is it a thousand rounds a year or a thousand rounds in a day? That’s the difference hand fitting makes, and no CNC machine is going to do it as reliably as a trained and experienced 1911 gunsmith. That’s why 1911's like the CQB cost $1,600 and up.

Skilled hands cost money.


Exactly! Now I wonder why those "skilled hands" would use parts of that nature to build a 1911? Pay that much for a 1911, by the acclaimed best custom 1911 smiths in the world and you get a part like that?

My definition of works is it works. The gun reliably fire, reliably ejects, and reliaby feeds rounds. It should reliably feed 10000 rounds no problem wether that be in day, two, three weeks or three years ( with the exception of spring replacements). All of my 1911s will go toe to toe with my G21 no probem. Even my Kimbers with MIM parts, which are a weak point I understand. Even they perform great, the only weak of any of the 1911s I've own thru out the years are the materials used to build the parts in them.

Just like SGB says, it affects the price only I'm sure, for 2K maybe Wilson should make good and give the guy another handfitted steel part.

That's all I'm saying.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:24:56 AM EDT
Wilson builds these with the #337B hammer. If it was the value line hammer, it would be a fluke. If you can detail strip the gun, and if you really want to know, pull the hammer and look for small MIM mold circles on the sides of the hammer. I highly doubt it's MIM. I've seen quite a few CQBs, and they have nothing but quality parts in them. As for the strut, looks don't mean squat. Numerous companies have been making cast struts like that for years, and they are just fine.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 7:13:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 10:46:45 AM EDT by Va_Dinger]

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:
Exactly! Now I wonder why those "skilled hands" would use parts of that nature to build a 1911? Just like SGB says, it affects the price only I'm sure, for 2K maybe Wilson should make good and give the guy another handfitted steel part.

That's all I'm saying.



Absolutely amazing.

What exactly does "Parts of that Nature" mean? So, a reliable hand fitted semi-custom 1911 should be sent back for that miniscule little mark? Are you joking? This reminds me of the dentist on 1911 forum who actually took a relatively high-powered magnifying glass to his just to find something to bitch about. Like I said, Internet 1911 owners never cease to amaze me.


I would listen to hobbs5624 if I was you.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 7:28:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By hobbs5624:
Wilson builds these with the #337B hammer. If it was the value line hammer, it would be a fluke. If you can detail strip the gun, and if you really want to know, pull the hammer and look for small MIM mold circles on the sides of the hammer. I highly doubt it's MIM. I've seen quite a few CQBs, and they have nothing but quality parts in them. As for the strut, looks don't mean squat. Numerous companies have been making cast struts like that for years, and they are just fine.



I just pulled the hammer out and it is definitly MIM. 3 MIM mold circles.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:36:50 AM EDT
Wow.

What I mean by, "looks shitty" is I would have reservations about using a strut that looked that way, not from a cosmetics stand point but a strength one.

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 11:46:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Va_Dinger:

Originally Posted By JaketheSnake:
Exactly! Now I wonder why those "skilled hands" would use parts of that nature to build a 1911? Just like SGB says, it affects the price only I'm sure, for 2K maybe Wilson should make good and give the guy another handfitted steel part.

That's all I'm saying.



Absolutely amazing.

What exactly does "Parts of that Nature" mean? So, a reliable hand fitted semi-custom 1911 should be sent back for that miniscule little mark? Are you joking? This reminds me of the dentist on 1911 forum who actually took a relatively high-powered magnifying glass to his just to find something to bitch about. Like I said, Internet 1911 owners never cease to amaze me.


I would listen to hobbs5624 if I was you.



I read about this denstist. To all who woder why I am complaining about this I am not. I was just wondering if this was a MIM part b/c I thought Wilson's guns were all built using tool steel parts as the catalog says. The gun is fine it shoots great and is very accurate. I may call Wislon to see if indeed they did use MIM hammers in 2004.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 4:14:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mlm1219:

Originally Posted By hobbs5624:
Wilson builds these with the #337B hammer. If it was the value line hammer, it would be a fluke. If you can detail strip the gun, and if you really want to know, pull the hammer and look for small MIM mold circles on the sides of the hammer. I highly doubt it's MIM. I've seen quite a few CQBs, and they have nothing but quality parts in them. As for the strut, looks don't mean squat. Numerous companies have been making cast struts like that for years, and they are just fine.



I just pulled the hammer out and it is definitly MIM. 3 MIM mold circles.



Answers all my questions, I orginally thought All Wilsons were made from steel parts not MIM? Doesn't mean it's a bad thing my kimbers run fine with MIM parts. But of alllll the threads I have read here in the 1911 forum they all end in the same way, MIM parts are inferior to steel parts and are prone to breaking/ causing failures.
That's just something I would never expect to see in a Wilson despite the fact if it's hand fitted or not.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 5:05:39 PM EDT
MIM bothers some and doesn't bother others. I'm not going to get into that one. However, you paid a lot of money for that gun, I presume. If it were me, and it was supposed to come with their ultralite hammer, I would send it back. The ultralite is an excellent quality hammer, and if that's what you paid for, that's what you should have. Just my two cents.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:06:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By hobbs5624:
MIM bothers some and doesn't bother others. I'm not going to get into that one. However, you paid a lot of money for that gun, I presume. If it were me, and it was supposed to come with their ultralite hammer, I would send it back. The ultralite is an excellent quality hammer, and if that's what you paid for, that's what you should have. Just my two cents.



Well according to the 2005 Catalog they are supposed to come with the #337 Ultalight Hammer. Mine was made in 2004. I will call and ask on Monday and see what they say. The gun works and shoots great as it is now.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 6:38:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mlm1219:

Originally Posted By hobbs5624:
MIM bothers some and doesn't bother others. I'm not going to get into that one. However, you paid a lot of money for that gun, I presume. If it were me, and it was supposed to come with their ultralite hammer, I would send it back. The ultralite is an excellent quality hammer, and if that's what you paid for, that's what you should have. Just my two cents.



Well according to the 2005 Catalog they are supposed to come with the #337 Ultalight Hammer. Mine was made in 2004. I will call and ask on Monday and see what they say. The gun works and shoots great as it is now.



Oh well. I'm sure Wilson will send you a new hammer or have you send the gun so they can fit it if needed. Be prepared for excellent customer service. The CQB is a great gun IMHO. Let us know the outcome when you get a chance. Thanks.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 7:15:18 PM EDT
The hammer is one thing.....a quality part whether MIM, cast or bar stock...
On the other hand, that hammer strut is unacceptable.....sorry Bill.

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 7:18:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JCG4:

Originally Posted By mlm1219:

Originally Posted By hobbs5624:
MIM bothers some and doesn't bother others. I'm not going to get into that one. However, you paid a lot of money for that gun, I presume. If it were me, and it was supposed to come with their ultralite hammer, I would send it back. The ultralite is an excellent quality hammer, and if that's what you paid for, that's what you should have. Just my two cents.



Well according to the 2005 Catalog they are supposed to come with the #337 Ultalight Hammer. Mine was made in 2004. I will call and ask on Monday and see what they say. The gun works and shoots great as it is now.



Oh well. I'm sure Wilson will send you a new hammer or have you send the gun so they can fit it if needed. Be prepared for excellent customer service. The CQB is a great gun IMHO. Let us know the outcome when you get a chance. Thanks.



I will definitly post the outcome.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 7:18:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pistolwretch:
The hammer is one thing.....a quality part whether MIM, cast or bar stock...
On the other hand, that hammer strut is unacceptable.....sorry Bill.




What exactly do you see wrong with the strut. It just looks a little rough to me.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 8:16:54 PM EDT
The strut looks to me like a stamping. I don't really think there's anything wrong with that. Others' opinions will, of course, differ.

Cheers,

kk7sm

Link Posted: 2/4/2006 8:33:04 PM EDT
I would be pissed off if my CQB contained any MIM parts. On a Kimber or Springer, fine..but not on an $1800 gun.
Link Posted: 2/4/2006 10:50:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/4/2006 10:50:57 PM EDT by GUNGUY1911]

Originally Posted By modog:
I would be pissed off if my CQB contained any MIM parts. On a Kimber or Springer, fine..but not on an $1800 gun.

+1 I have an '04, and it is all real metal so far as I've seen.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 5:50:30 AM EDT
A MIM Hammer , slide stop and mag catch was standard on the CQB until late '04, IIRC.
Wilson had a price increase and switched to barstock (bulletproof) slide stop and Hammer at that time.

Most earlier CQB's had a MIM hammer/slide stop but they could be upgraded when ordered by the dealer or the customer, and many were, for a nominal increase ($100 or so).

The mag catches are still MIM, FWIW.

The struts are stamped from plate stock (just like Brown & Colts) and although fugly, work really well.
I prefer the C&S or CMC struts as they are purty, but the Wilson struts (and Brown too) work well.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 10:23:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Aplombardo1:
A MIM Hammer , slide stop and mag catch was standard on the CQB until late '04, IIRC.
Wilson had a price increase and switched to barstock (bulletproof) slide stop and Hammer at that time.

Most earlier CQB's had a MIM hammer/slide stop but they could be upgraded when ordered by the dealer or the customer, and many were, for a nominal increase ($100 or so).

The mag catches are still MIM, FWIW.

The struts are stamped from plate stock (just like Brown & Colts) and although fugly, work really well.
I prefer the C&S or CMC struts as they are purty, but the Wilson struts (and Brown too) work well.



Mine did come with the Bullet Proof slide stop.
Link Posted: 2/5/2006 10:33:17 AM EDT
Why would Wilson be automatically obligated to replace the part? Was the CQB advertised in this time frame as using 100% tool steel parts? Remember that for a relatively short time frame MIM was considered acceptable. Virtually every 1911 builder was using it in one way for another. If you purchased one of these pistols after the fact are they really obligated to replace it because the Internet told you it is "Inferior"?
Top Top