Front cocking serrations on the 1911

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Front cocking serrations on the 1911

Posted: 5/24/2002 10:06:46 PM EDT

What do you think of them?
I don’t like them, personally. I think that they detract from the traditional good looks of the 1911, and really serve no justifiable function (This is up to debate however). I don’t need them for a “press check” – my hands are relatively strong. Seems like SIG, HK, Glock, Walther, and other manufacturers of top quality pistols do not see the need for them either.

Am I missing something?

Edited to ADD POLL

Posted: 5/24/2002 10:55:17 PM EDT

[#1]

I don't care for them, either.

Aside from the way they look, I'm not a big fan of any "feature" that places your hand so close to the muzzle.

I know some people that use the front serrations for a "squeeze" check of the chamber, where you wrap your fingers over the top of the slide by the front sight, put your thumb in the triggerguard, and "squeeze" the slide back by sort of making a fist. I get really uneasy about somebody sticking their thumb in the triggerguard to check for a loaded chamber, though.

I personally prefer using a squeeze check where you place your thumb in the crook of the grip safety and wrap your fingers over the slide by the rear sight and squeeze to pull the slide back a little bit. Then you can check the chamber with the pinkie finger of your "squeeze" hand to verify whether you have a round in the chamber. And you don't run the risk of bumping the trigger with your thumb while checking.

The front serrations can also drag somewhat on your holster during a draw. Plus, they're ugly.

Unfortunately, I didn't get the option of NOT having front serrations on my Kimber.

Posted: 5/25/2002 2:14:59 AM EDT

[#2]

I dunno, they don,t bother me. From an aesthetics alone perspective, I kinda like them. From function perspective, they might help if you were wounded or partially incapacitated, maybe. Good point about them tending to put your hand to close to the muzzle though.

Uh, how come I just went from something like 474 posts to one?

Posted: 5/25/2002 2:22:47 AM EDT

[#3]

?????????

Posted: 5/25/2002 2:25:53 AM EDT

[#4]

This is a little wierd.

Derr, I just figured it out. This is the first time I've been to the handgun forums. Doh...

Posted: 5/25/2002 3:26:17 AM EDT

[#5]

I like them aesthetically...I've always thought they looked cool on a 1911.
I also find them useful for unloading the chambered round from a 1911 without having to chase it across the floor.

Posted: 5/25/2002 3:59:11 AM EDT

[#6]

They are nice.....I like them.......(sure would be a help on the 10mm)...........

Posted: 5/25/2002 4:00:46 AM EDT

[#7]

Man......I LOVE that dog........

Posted: 5/25/2002 5:16:43 AM EDT

[#8]

I like them.

Posted: 5/25/2002 7:17:12 AM EDT

[#9]

What dog?

Hell, I raised him to think he's human!

Posted: 5/25/2002 8:38:06 AM EDT

[#10]

I like the way they look, but I don't use them. I've got 2 with and 3 without. Another vote for keeping your hands away from the muzzle.

Posted: 5/25/2002 9:54:09 AM EDT

[#11]

Personally I think they are just another gimick to get your money... If John Browning didn't put them there there's no reason for them to be there

Posted: 5/25/2002 10:27:12 AM EDT

[#12]

I can live without them and personally think a gun without front cocking serrations has much cleaner lines. The use of front cocking serrations is widely debatable and anyone who knows how to properly use the 1911 shouldn't need them to perform a systems check. If they are present I'll use them... if not I’ll survive and rejoice in a more seamless better-looking gun.

Posted: 5/25/2002 11:47:53 AM EDT

[#13]

HATE EM !!!

Posted: 5/25/2002 12:58:01 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
HATE EM !!!

How did I know that you were going to say that?

Posted: 5/25/2002 2:15:08 PM EDT

[#15]

...yuk !

Posted: 5/25/2002 4:07:28 PM EDT

[#16]

1)Ugly.
2)Unneccessary.
3)Tear up holsters if they are not completely rounded.
4)Add to the production cost.
5)REALLY UGLY

Posted: 5/25/2002 4:53:50 PM EDT

[#17]

I bought a Springfield loaded, and then a series 80 Colt, both stainless. The serrations on the Springfield tore up the inside of my new Galco Avenger holster. It shot everything well (SWC's too), but I sold it to my range officer. I just like the sleek lines of the Colt better. Para looks good too, sleek black slide.

Posted: 5/25/2002 6:02:13 PM EDT

[#18]

Reply!

Posted: 5/25/2002 6:41:27 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
2)Unneccessary.

I find them useful.

3)Tear up holsters if they are not completely rounded.

Haven't run into any that did this so far.

4)Add to the production cost.

Haven't noticed that...if they did, it was absorbed along with the other custom parts on the various production guns that feature them.

Posted: 5/25/2002 7:36:58 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
1)Ugly.
2)Unneccessary.
3)Tear up holsters if they are not completely rounded.
4)Add to the production cost.
5)REALLY UGLY

My sentiments exactly.

Posted: 5/25/2002 9:32:04 PM EDT

[#21]

IIRC, they started in the 80's with competitive shooters using optics on their pistols. The optics supposedly blocked or interfered with reaching the rear serrations. Ugly as crap-total poseur look.

Posted: 5/26/2002 9:24:26 AM EDT

[#22]

I like the looks of them and thats about it.

Sgtar15

Posted: 5/26/2002 9:43:29 AM EDT

[#23]

love em.....................

Posted: 5/26/2002 9:44:15 AM EDT

[#24]

... Absolutely, if your going to seriously train to fight with pistols you need to get into the habit of racking a slide from the front with or without front sight serrations.
Obviously you should have them on your personal carry.

... If in doubt, just go through the motions and you'll quickly see how much more ergonomically friendly a front slide really is (weak hand thumb pointing towards hammer).

It requires much less space to do it too.

MAKE CERTAIN YOUR MUZZLE IS MANAGED CORRECTLY AT ALL TIMES WHILE DOING SO.

Posted: 5/26/2002 10:54:23 AM EDT

[#25]

I hate the damn things, along with most of the other gimmicky features popular on .45's and other custom firearms today. People seem to think just because something is expensive and looks different, it must be worthwhile. Or, they dream up a one-in-ten-billion scenario where their favorite gimmick offers some theoretical 1% advantage, and use that as justification for spending $500 on butchering up perfectly good firearms.

Speaking of one-in-ten-billion scenarios, anybody ever heard of something called "notch effect"? This is something engineers, metallurgists, die designers, etc. sometimes have to think about. Basically, if you cut a notch or groove in a piece of metal, that acts as a stress concentrator and increases the likelihood of the metal breaking at that point. Especially if the notch or groove has a sharp "V" shaped bottom.

Looking at a M1911 type slide, if there was any stress from the thing smacking back against the frame, it would already be concentrated right where the "spring housing" section at the front of the slide steps up to the longer main section of the slide. There is already sort of a natural, unavoidable "notch" at that point.

So why the heck would anybody want to go cutting any additional notches up the sides of the slide in this same area?

Posted: 5/26/2002 12:24:19 PM EDT

[#26]

Colt did this in 1902, on the .38ACP "Military Model"..Interesting to see it pop back up again..

Meplat-

Posted: 5/26/2002 12:32:57 PM EDT

[#27]

... I'm serious. Once you've trained to a front sight rack you'll never go back.
There are MANY advantages over the rear serrations cycling.

Posted: 5/26/2002 12:48:30 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
... I'm serious. Once you've trained to a front sight rack you'll never go back.
There are MANY advantages over the rear serrations cycling.

What are the advantages? I responded to your post over on the AR15 board and you haven't answered.

I'm not trying to be a smartass or anything, I'd just like to know why you think that front serrations offer an advantage over the rear serrations.

Posted: 5/26/2002 6:26:49 PM EDT

[#29]

Most Ruger "P" pistols dont have any at all, no one complained. If I had 'em, I wouldn't care, just more grooves to clean crud from. I wont poke fun at anyone who prefers them, its what you like that counts.

Posted: 5/27/2002 10:52:15 AM EDT

[#30]

I guess if you were standing up in a 2x2x6.5 foot box filled chest-high with sand, and your hands were covered with grease, then they might offer some genuine advantages. Especially if you were in a hurry.

Posted: 5/27/2002 4:07:33 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
I like them aesthetically...I've always thought they looked cool on a 1911.
I also find them useful for unloading the chambered round from a 1911 without having to chase it across the floor.

I was taught to not catch the ejected round like that because, when Murphy strikes, the primer will be set off by the extractor. If this happens you get pieces of cartridge case embedded in your hand.

I don't care for them because they are unnecessary, get the weak hand closer to the muzzle, and tempt me to handle the weapon in ways that I have been taught not to do.

Posted: 5/27/2002 6:39:41 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
I was taught to not catch the ejected round like that because, when Murphy strikes, the primer will be set off by the extractor. If this happens you get pieces of cartridge case embedded in your hand.

I've heard people talk about the possibility, but never heard of anyone who even saw it happen. I have been doing it that way for years and don't intend to stop because of unfounded rumors.

Posted: 5/27/2002 8:47:12 PM EDT

[#33]

I don't like the way they look, but they are handy in certain situations.

But, they will rub you raw with some open holsters.

Posted: 5/29/2002 7:19:47 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:I hate the damn things, along with most of the other gimmicky features popular on .45's and other custom firearms today.

I'm curious to see what 1911 features you feel are gimmicky.

Better sights
Beavertail
Extended safety

The above are features I can't live without. The following are features that I feel have limited or questionable functionality:

elongated hammer
full length guide rod
mag well
ambi safety
mag base pad
front slide serrations
shock buffs
light rail
titanium firing pin

Or, they dream up a one-in-ten-billion scenario where their favorite gimmick offers some theoretical 1% advantage, and use that as justification for spending $500 on butchering up perfectly good firearms.

The "tactical standoff muzzle device" that some folks are pushing seems to be the epitome of this.

Posted: 5/29/2002 7:52:19 AM EDT

[#35]

Necessary (for me):
Extended thumb safety
Beavertail grip safety
Skeletonized hammer
High-profile fixed sights
Mag base pad

Useful but not strictly necessary:
Front slide serrations
Full length guide rod
Ambi safety
Light rails

Unnecessary:
Mag well
Shock buffs
Extended slide release

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Front cocking serrations on the 1911

Handguns » Handgun Discussions

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us