Posted: 12/25/2011 8:29:46 PM EDT
|
I have an Auto Ordnance 1911a1 that I am upgrading..(Sights, mainspring, hand safety, trigger) and am wondering if the WILSON COMBAT FLGR with buffers for 38 bucks from brownells.....would be worth adding to the order....Reduced recoil would be great if it works...and does a FLGR actually make the gun cycle smoother??? cant really find anything on here...even with the search function...
thanks in advance. |
|
The majority of folks who take time to comment on guide rods, choose the g.i. short guide rod over any flgr, whether single piece or two-piece. The occasional user will claim that a flgr smooths out the cycling, but most by a large margin cannot tell any difference between a flgr and a short guide rod.
Some who favor the long guide rod state that the added weight of the longer guide rod suits their needs. Whatever. Personally, I can't tell the difference. It's worth noting that Springfield equips their flagship 1911 (the Pro) with a g.i. guide rod system at the request of their primary customer (the USG). |
|
Quoted:
The majority of folks who take time to comment on guide rods, choose the g.i. short guide rod over any flgr, whether single piece or two-piece. The occasional user will claim that a flgr smooths out the cycling, but most by a large margin cannot tell any difference between a flgr and a short guide rod. I've probably shot half a million rounds of .45ACP ball through several 1911s in the past decade, and I really can't tell the difference - I prefer a GI Guide Rod. It's cheaper, you can better cycle the pistol with one hand, and (I'll admit that it's a cop out reason) John Browning designed it that way and it's worked for our military for almost a century. Some who favor the long guide rod state that the added weight of the longer guide rod suits their needs. Whatever. Personally, I can't tell the difference. It's worth noting that Springfield equips their flagship 1911 (the Pro) with a g.i. guide rod system at the request of their primary customer (the USG).
Like many things, I think the brief affections a lot of shooters felt for the FLGR came from the competition world. I think top competitors had heavy FLGRs because they reduced muzzle flip, even if only marginally. Most of us wouldn't notice, but in World Class competitions even a fraction of a second in getting back on target can make a difference. |
| It can give the perception of smoother function.But there is no factual evidence showing that it really does improve reliability or the overall function of the gun. My Kimber came with a one-piece full length guide rod and I never changed it out. The gun works great. My custom Springfield Armory G.I. came with the traditional guide rod and it functions great. I put the full length guide rod in the G.I. and hand cycled it a few times. It does feel a little smoother. |
|
Quoted:
It can give the perception of smoother function. My Kimber is the Commander size, and I've never messed with the guide rod and spring. I have limited knowledge of all the platforms and intricacies of how the components interact. I do know that going from the standard guide rod to the full length on my Springfield seems to have made it tighter. I also went from a lighter recoil to a heavier one, which could be influencing the "feel" Thinking about it, though, the piece that goes on the end of the spring and holds it in the end of the slide... Plunger I think? It slides along the guide rod... and it's tight. There's no play in it, and to me that's adding another continuous surface giving the slide stability. The issue with this, and where someone more knowledgeable will hopefully chime in, is the rear of the guide rod isn't fixed. It's basically just held in place by the spring pressure, right? I dunno. If I'm out $30, so be it. I like the way it looks from the front.  lol
|
|
This has been a highly debated issue over the years and I really do not know why. The same gun magazines that would review a gun with a FLGR and note it as an attribute or at minimum not say anything negative about them, now will write articles stating that they serve no purpose. I really do not get all of the hate on the FLGR. I don't completely agree with the miracle claims either. And if the FLFR is truly a useless item, then why do almost every other type of handgun come with a FLGR, i.e. Glock, Sig, H&K, etc? These guns are very reliable and more than proven themselves in combat and duty use.
So here is my take on it. If a gun has a great slide to frame fit with minimal play then the perceived benefit is probably none to minimal at best. But, if a gun has a loose slide to frame fit then having a FLGR will allow the slide to be better supported. The looseness doesn't go away. The gun has not been made tighter. The FLGR promotes more consistent travel of straight back and forward and this is due to the added weight and, the addition of a pseudo-third rail. So in that sense it may reduce the wear and tare and smooth out the cycling process (Read as Smoother, i.e. not better or improved, just smoother). Installed on an already perfectly fit gun in theory may preserve this fit for a longer period of time. I know that my G.I. with the standard setup shows signs of wear on the inside of the dust cover where the spring has slinked up and worn some of the bluing. I can also hear it too when hand cycling. The gun is loose, but functions fine and is very reliable and accurate. But, if I place a FLGR in this same gun; the cycling feels smoother. I can still shake the gun and the slide will rattle, but I do need to do this more forcefully to get it to rattle. Yet, it does feel tighter and smoother???? I'll go shooting later this week and see if I notice anything else. This debate will never go away. If you want to try it, cool, go ahead. Yes, you will spend about 24-36 dollars and you may like it or you may not. Either way, it is not going to ruin your gun. And if it truly does preserve the slide to frame fit most of us will never see that high of a round count to definitively say that, "yes" it worked or "no" it did not. |
| This is the truth. When I first got my Commander it shot 6" at 25 yrds. I changed the guide rod to a Wilson one piece with a buffer and the groups went to 2". I know this wasn't me. After all that (15years later). I own a different 1911 and only use the short guide rod. Hmm.... It's your choice, It may help or not. It may not hurt for $35.00. Good luck, stay with what was designed. |
|
Quoted:
I have an Auto Ordnance 1911a1 that I am upgrading..(Sights, mainspring, hand safety, trigger) and am wondering if the WILSON COMBAT FLGR with buffers for 38 bucks from brownells.....would be worth adding to the order....Reduced recoil would be great if it works...and does a FLGR actually make the gun cycle smoother??? cant really find anything on here...even with the search function... thanks in advance. Well, I did not get to the range to test and see if there was any felt difference. However, I looked through my spare parts and found that I did have a stainless, Wilson Combat Full Length Guide Rod. So I switched out the G.I. plug and rod with the Wilson FLGR. Yes, the gun feels and hand cycles smoother. I placed the G.I. setup in my Kimber, which does have an excellent slide to frame fit. The Kimber was now looser and will rattle. When hand cycling, I hear and feel the recoil spring making contact with the dust cover. On my Springfield Armory G.I. now with the Wilson FLGR installed, the gun feels more solid. But, here's the real interesting thing, I can usually see some light coming through in the area of the slide and dust cover of the frame. With the FLGR installed this is all but gone. I had to use my Surefire and really position the gun at weird angles to get any light to show, and when it did it was very slight. So, then I switched back to the G.I. plug and rod and placed it back in my Springfield Armory, and sure enough, there was a significant amount of light showing and the gun felt looser. I now have FLGR in both guns. |