There seems to be a lot of conflicting information about the 1911s currently in service with the United States Marine Corps, commonly referred to by enthusiasts as "MEU(SOC) 1911's."  These pistols have always interested me, and they represent for many the paradigm of a no-bullshit combat pistol for use in real world gunfights.  Many, including myself, have been influenced and inspired by them to either build replicas and/or integrate ideas from them into their own pistols (or in my case, both! ).  Yet a lot of the information and speculation that floats around the internets is conflicting, confusing, or simply erroneous.  I have been interested in the modern combat 1911 for quite some time now, and I've tried to research these pistols and de-conflict some of rumors about these pistols that have reached an almost semi-cult status amongst enthusiasts.  

Before I begin, a couple of caveats:  

a) I make no claim to "know it all" about these pistols, what follows is my interpretation based on my own limited research, most of which has been conducted on the internet, trying to get to the bottom of the "MEU(SOC) 1911."  I can be wrong, I can freely admit to it, and do not mind it being pointed out, however, I have in the past had a bit of an academic streak, so conflicting opinions should be presented in an academic manner, preferably with evidence to back it up that is more substantial than "my cousin's brother's wife's mother's brother in law was a Force Recon Marine, and he said..."  First hand knowledge is, of course, always appreciated, if it is provided by a reliable and knowledgeable source, but with the caution that the study of history is riddled with completely specious "eyewitness accounts."    

b) I am not a Marine, I have never been a Marine, and most likely never will be a Marine, I have a little bit of professional exposure to them, but I am not a subject matter expert on the Marine Corps, and as such, my understanding of some of the inner workings of the Marine Corps with regards to their units and organization may be a little fuzzy or slightly inaccurate, especially considering the difficult to pin down (often even for active duty Marines themselves) Marine special operations components.  Any errors or omissions I make in my descriptions, I encourage those who know better and who can offer clarification to do so.  Again, not being a Marine, my interest is in the continued use of the 1911 nearly a century after its adoption as a front line combat pistol and the pistol itself, and therefore more equipment based, so I may be unclear on many of the details surrounding the units that use them.  

c) This is about 1911 style pistols used by specialty combat units of the Marine Corps after the adoption of the M9 as the standard service pistol of the military, it is not about historical use of the M1911A1, pistols used in competitions, pistols used by Army Special Forces or other military units, personally built or preferred configurations of various operators from the Special Operations community, it is about issued pistols used by a very small fraction of Marine combat units.

d) This is a rough draft of what I hope will be a much better reference on these pistols, and it is being posted as much as a back-check to see if any more information might surface in an open forum, but most of what is posted comes from documented information that I'd like to eventually provide references for and that will have a good selection of photo references as well.  Most of the information and references come from open sources.  I do not personally have any "inside track" information or "know somebody that knows somebody."

Text UNDER photographs in italics are captions.    

The MEU(SOC) .45

The MEU(SOC) .45 is probably the most commonly heard about and probably the most confusing of the 1911 style pistols used since the official adoption of the M9.  It is commonly known by names such as "MEU(SOC) 1911, MEU(SOC) Pistol" as well, and these titles are also the name which is commonly affixed to all "modern-era" Marine Corps 1911s, whether it is appropriate or not.  The question of nomenclature is a difficult one when applied to these weapons.  Unlike other military-issue weapons, as far as I can tell, modern Marine Corps 1911s have not been given an official designation.  I have not seen any official documentation that they have ever been issued either an "M" series number, or an MK or Mk. number.  Nevertheless, they need to be called something, but what is the proper term?  Originally when the Force Reconnaissance companies elected to keep the 1911 rather than transition to the M9, the pistols they were using were old USGI M1911-A1s, however, the pistols that the armorers at PWS would go on to build would be significantly different than the original M1911-A1, and needed to be differentiated.  

By at least 1994, it seems that the Marines had settled on "Pistol, Caliber .45, MEU(SOC)" or "MEU(SOC) .45 Caliber Pistol" as their official unofficial name for the pistol, at least that is the name given in, and the way the pistol is referred to in TM 00526A-24&P/2, dated August 1994: ORGANIZATIONAL AND INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE MANUAL INCLUDING REPAIR PARTS LIST Pistol, Caliber .45, MEU(SOC).  Thus, despite the debate over whether or not using "MEU(SOC)" or "MEU" to describe the pistol when the majority of the MEU(SOC) Marines *did not* carry a 1911 variant, to me the "MEU(SOC) .45" nomenclature seems to be most appropriate given that it is the name the Marines used themselves to describe the pistol in their own maintenance manual, and it is what I will use.  

The MEU(SOC) .45s were originally USGI M1911-A1s rebuilt by the armorers at Precision Weapons Systems, PWS in Quantico, basically the Marine Corps' version of NSWC Crane and the AMU.  When the military as a whole decided to transition to the M9 from the M1911-A1, the Force Reconnaissance companies that were attached to the Marine Expeditionary Units (Special Operations Capable) or MEU(SOC)s elected and fought to keep their 1911s rather than use the newfangled M9s.  How long and how extensively PWS had been modifying the standard M1911-A1s for these units prior to this time, I am unsure of, though I'm certain they probably received some work and modifications.    

It is important to note at this time too, what the MEU(SOC) .45 is.  It is a sidearm designed to be a secondary weapon to a Force Recon Marine's M4A1 Carbine, the long gun being the real workhorse of the warfighter, whether issued an M9 or 1911 or none at all.  Most of the questions I see asked are about the configuration of the MEU(SOC) .45, whether by the curious or by those wanting to build replicas, or just trying to get an idea of what a professional fighting pistol is.  Unfortunately, for many people this becomes an extremely confusing question.  The reason for this is that the MEU(SOC) .45 specs were evolutionary, and spanned over a period of roughly twenty years, and some of the specifications were gradually changed, based sometimes on the availability of parts and better parts being introduced to the market.  The specs for the MEU(SOC) .45 drew largely on the availability of COTS (Commercial Off the Shelf) parts as well, and the pistols were built individually by the armorers at PWS.  Some people, however, tend to see these evolving specs and the availability of COTS parts a license for an "anything goes" attitude about what constitutes a MEU(SOC) .45 replica, having a free-for-all with parts and trying to call just about anything that wears a set of Pachmayr grips a "MEU(SOC)."  Unfortunately, there actually seems to be a great deal of consistency in the way MEU(SOC) .45s were built if you realize that the pistols are the product of many many overhauls at different times while the specs were continuing to evolve.  And while it is possible, probable even, that occaisionally, "non standard" parts were substituted off the shelf based on availability, the contention that no clear specifications existed for how the pistols should be configured and built is preposterous, particularly considering that several parts lists of varying dates have been published.  

The only other concession to the point of view that any COTS part is acceptable is that due to the fact that the MEU(SOC) .45s were built by PWS, they were officially required to return to PWS for anything above operator level maintenance, however, for a deployed unit, shipping a pistol back to Quantico for repairs was not a very pleasing option, and there are reports that they have often bought bench stock and repair parts and conducted repairs out of the Brownell's catalog while downrange.  

Nevertheless, for the "typical" MEU(SOC) .45, if there's not one single spec, there's a clear set of parameters for what is and what is not when talking about MEU(SOC) replicas, MEU(SOC)-ish, and MEU(SOC) inspired pistols, with the latter two being far more liberal descriptions.  

I suspect, with little foundation, that the original MEU(SOC) .45s were little more than modified M1911-A1s rebuilt using some COTS parts and existing bench stock, and probably NM slides and barrels were used as well, and while there were still many pistols still floating around in inventories and ample bench stock available this probably sufficed.  One way or another, some of the earliest seem to have been built using USGI slides with vertical cocking serrations.  The pistols with vertical cocking serrations are probably among the earliest built and most rarely seen.  Despite the popularity in replicas, even ones very very close to MEU(SOC) .45 specs, I have never seen any evidence to suggest vertical front cocking serrations on any of these pistols, and believe that if such animals exist they are extremely small in numbers and quite exceptional.    

By the 1990's a consistent standard applies itself.  For convenience, I will refer to them as "Variant 1."  As a disclaimer, these variant designations are entirely my own, and are somewhat flexible, as features often cross between variants, but always consistently, i.e. a Variant 2 pistol could have been repaired at PWS long after it was built, and therefore exhibit some Variant 4 features.  The Variant 1 pistols used then current Springfield Armory GI Milspec-style slides with slanted rear cocking serrations only and the crossed cannon logo behind the ejection port.  Also, these earliest variants had ejection ports that were slightly lowered and not flared.  Variant 1 seems to have been built using slides manufactured at least prior to 1987, I have not yet tried to determine the exact date that Springfield Armory moved the crossed cannon motif from behind the ejection port to forward of it, however a 1987 dated article on the Gunsite Service Pistol shows that Springfield Armory was already producing their slides with the forward crossed cannon logo and "modern" lowered and flared ejection port.  This is no guarantee, however of the date the pistols themselves were built, only of when the slides were produced. The grip safety was the Clark grip safety, while the hammer was a Commander style ring hammer, with a circular hole in the center.  I have heard second hand from different sources, some claiming that they were Colt Commander hammers, some that they were MGW hammers.  Barrels were BarSto.  

The sights on the early MEU(SOC) .45s were distinctive as well.  The front sight being used at the time was a Millett stake on front with a custom rear sight to fit the standard dovetail designed by PWS, with a flat angled rear plane and a wide notch.  Dave Berryhill has stated that the front sights used were the .224 height, making them fairly tall, high profile sights that could also be used for a secondary function of charging the pistol one handed.  The thumb safety of choice was the King's 201A ambidextrous thumb safety, currently out of production, but still highly sought after as it did not use the more common Swenson style "tang" that needed to be captured under recessed grip panels, but an oversized hammer pin that fit into a dovetail on the right side safety.  

The grips were the common and probably the most recognized feature of the MEU(SOC) .45, Pachmayr G45 rubber wraparound combat grips, and even the earliest ones appear to have used the medallion.  The mainspring housing was a standard GI arched mainspring housing with the lanyard loop ground flat and serrated, while the trigger was a long, three hole aluminum match trigger.  The Variant 1 was also the "type specimen" illustrated in the general arrangement drawings of the MEU(SOC) .45 TM.  The Variant 1 set many of the basic specifications, and even in the 1994 dated TM, they list Brownell's as well as a "Wilson Gun Shop" of Berryville, AR as parts suppliers.  Variant 1 also established the use of 18.5" recoil springs and Shok-Bufs.  Most MEU(SOC) .45s seem to have checkered magazine release buttons as well, most likely original parts and/or available bench stock, and also very commonly display (when such details are visible) checkered slide stops, though serrated ones are not unusual.  



Notice the taped down grip safety.

     





Variants 2 and 3 appear commonly seen and documented in photographs of MEU(SOC) .45s, and are similar to the Variant 1, however, they introduced the newer production Springfield Armory slide with the crossed cannon insignia forward on the slide above the dustcover and the modern lowered and flared ejection port style.  The Variant 2 had rear cocking serrations only while the Variant 3 introduced the front cocking serrations in the matching narrow angled style of the rear serrations used today on the Springfield Armory Milspec pistols.  Based on conversations with Dave Berryhill, he indicates that the MEU(SOC) .45s had standard GI ejectors and beveled magwells.  Other than the slides, the Variant 2 and Variant 3 seem to have retained the features of the Variant 1.  



A good photograph of "typical" examples of both Variants 2 and 3.  



Variant 3's in service in a 2006 dated photograph.  

The first really significant changes to the MEU(SOC) .45 specs come with the Variant 4 which introduces several departures from earlier variants.  Most significantly, it introduces the Novak ultra low mount dovetail front and rear sights, replacing the staked on Millett front and PWS rear sight.  It does not appear that Variant 4 had night sights installed as standard and used a .180 height front sight, part numbers LMC01 and DFS02-3.180 from Novak.  The new slides with Novak cuts are again provided primarily from Springfield Armory, however, these slides now have the wide angled front and rear cocking serrations used on the Springfield Loaded.  Variant 4 also introduces the Ed Brown Memory Groove grip safety to replace the Clark grip safety with the pronounced bump that has become common to ensure positive disengagement of the safety.  







During the production of Variant 4, it also appears that the hammer was changed from the Colt Commander style ring hammer, to a Cylinder and Slide hammer with an elongated hole.



Here a photograph of a MEU(SOC) .45 shows the blackened barrel and Shok-Buf installed.  

Variant 4 production also seems to be when PWS began sourcing slides and possibly a limited number of frames from Caspian, and Variant 4 is by far one of the most well documented variants, as several full parts lists exist listing specific vendors and part numbers.  



In this photo you can see what may be a Caspian slide being used on a Variant 4 pistol, notice the different profile of the front cocking serrations, distinctive to the ones usually seen on both Variant 3 and Springfield slide Variant 4 pistols.  The cocking serrations also do not appear to be the wider ones used on Springfield Armory slides, though one cannot dismiss the possibility that it may have been an updated Variant 1 or 2 slide with front cocking serrations milled in later.  It can also be seen in service side by side with an earlier Variant 1 or 2 pistol.

According to Pat Rogers, the decision to switch to the Novak sights was as simple as the operators preferring them to other options available, including, it seems, the PWS sight.  The tail end of Variant 4 production also coincides with the creation of MCSOCOM, and greater variation and demand for the MEU(SOC) .45 as the Marine Corps was reorganizing their force structure and creating the MSOBs.  Furthermore, during Variant 4 production, King's Gunworks also ceased production of the 201A ambidextrous thumb safety.  

A statement of work for COTS parts for MEU(SOC) .45 production dated at least after 27 SEP 2007 (the text references a document published that date) lists the components of the Variant 4 as:

Part Nomenclature                                        Part Number                      Manufacturer
Grips                                                                692-545-145                      Pachmayer
Grip Safety                                                      087-867-000                      Ed Brown
Trigger                                                              CS181                              Cylinder & Slide
Service Pack w/18.5 lbs recoil (spring set)     69141                              Wolff
Front Sight Pin                                                  080-519-025                      Brownells
Shok Buff                                                         965-002-004                      Wilson Combat
Hammer, sear & disconnector                          CS271                              Cylinder & Slide
Thumb Safety                                                   201-A                              Kings
Slide                                                                  PX4546                             Springfield
Rear Sight                                                         PI5127M                            Springfield
Front Sight                                                        PI5017                               Springfield
Rear Sight Set Screw                                      05535000                          MSC
Mainspring Housing                                          MSH LOOP                        Caspian
Extractor                                                           EXT 45                              Caspian
Magazine Catch                                                R91B                                 Caspian
Grip Screw                                                       080-569-004                     Brownells
Grip Screw Bushing                                         080-568-004                     Brownells
Hammer Strut                                                    087-823-000                     Ed Brown
Magazine Catch Lock                                       CS130B                             Cylinder & Slide
Pin Kit Complete                                                CS014                               Cylinder & Slide

Interesting to see in this listing is the fact that sights are now Springfield Armory manufacture, what some have called "faux-vaks," rather than actual Novak sights (listed by part number on older spec sheets).  I have not yet been able to verify whether those parts numbers correspond to black sights (like the Novaks specified), three dot sights, or night sights.  Also, this list does not seem to specify the manufacture of the slide stop, nor the barrel, as well as some other small parts (Other documents show those parts to be Caspian and BarSto respectively).  

The final and most current variant of the MEU(SOC) .45 appears to be the Variant 5, which seems to be almost identical to the Variant 4, however it now uses the Ed Brown Wide ambidextrous thumb safety as a replacement for the out of production King's 201A unit.  The Ed Brown safety, however, is a Swenson style safety with the tang riding under the right grip panel, newer production examples of the Pachmayr wraparound grips now have the recess to allow for the use of the Swenson style safety from the factory and do not require modification of the stock grips, though older examples were not recessed for the Swenson style safety.  Below is a 25 JUN 2009 dated parts list for the MEU(SOC) .45:                  

Part Nomenclature                                               Manufacturer                                  Part Number
Barrel W/link, pin & Bushing                                    BAR-STO                                         DBBL&P45
Front Sight Pin                                                         Brownells                                        080-519-025
Grip Screw Bushing                                               Brownells                                         080-568-004
Grip Screw                                                             Brownells                                         080-569-004
Firing Pin Stop                                                         Caspian                                            S2045B
Slide Stop Pin                                                          Caspian                                            R111B
Manspring Housing                                                 Caspian                                            R42FBL
Plunger Tube                                                           Caspian                                            R121B
Magazine Catch                                                       Caspian                                           R91B
Extractor                                                                  Caspian                                           S18457B
Pin Kit Complete                                                       Cylinder & Slide                               CS014
Magazine Catch Lock                                              Cylinder & Slide                               CS130B
Ejector                                                                      Cylinder & Slide                               CS136B
Trigger                                                                      Cylinder & Slide                               CS181
Hammer, sear & disconnector                                  Cylinder & Slide                               CS271B
Hammer Strut                                                            Ed Brown                                        R823
Firing Pin                                                                    Ed Brown                                        R824
Grip Safety                                                                Ed Brown                                        R867
Recoil Spring Plug                                                      Ed Brown                                        R881-STD
Recoil Spring Guide                                                   Ed Brown                                        R882-STD
Safety, Ambidextrous,Wide                                       Ed Brown                                       R892
Rear Sight Set Screw                                               MSC                                                 05535000
Front Sight                                                                  Novak                                             DFS02-3-180
Rear Sight                                                                   Novak                                             LMC01
Grips                                                                          Pachmayer                                      692-545-145
Slide                                                                           Springfield                                       PX4546
Shok Buffer                                                               Wilson Combat                                 965-002-004
Magazine                                                                   Wilson Combat                                 965-047-470
Service Pack (full spring set)w/18.5LBS                  Wolff                                                69141

Note that this Variant 5 parts list returns to and lists Novak part numbers for the front and rear sights.  Also note that this parts list was attached to a RFI for "COTS receiver for use in building USMC MEU(SOC) .45 caliber pistols" dated 06 JUL 2009 with a suspense date of NLT 27 JUL, making this probably the most current parts list currently available for public consumption.  It also came with a detailed PDF file including this image:



Which clearly describes an M1911-A1 frame without provisions for an integral rail and with a beveled magwell.  Listed as an "interested vendor" is Caspian Arms of Wolcott, VT (surprise, surprise).  It would see, at least as of this July, that the MEU(SOC) .45 was still a live project.  The language of the RFI,seems to imply that MARSYSCOM (Marine Corps Systems Command) is considering the possibility of widespread use of commercially produced frames in the MEU(SOC) .45 program.  

"This Request for Information (RFI) is the initiation of market research under Part 10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and is not a request for Proposals (RFP). The Government does not intend to pay for any information furnished pursuant to this RFI.

The Program Manager for Infantry Weapons (PM IW), Marine Corps Systems Command is conducting a market survey to determine industry's capability to provide a COTS receiver for use in building USMC MEU(SOC) .45 caliber pistols. The proposed solution should possess the attributes listed in the attachments. This RFI is issued to allow industry the opportunity to review the narrative and provide any comments, questions, or feedback to Marine Corps Systems Command. Comments/Questions/Responses are due not later than 1400 EST on Monday, 27 July 2009. Electronic submissions are required. Interested sources should send all correspondence via email to xxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. THE SUBMISSION OF THIS INFORMATION IS FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A COMMITMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT TO PROCURE ANY ITEMS OR SERVICES. NO SOLICITATION DOCUMENT EXISTS FOR THIS EFFORT."          
(emphasis in bold is mine)

However, it also seems to imply that this has not yet been done on a large scale and they have not even decided whether or not to do so, which would seem to make rumors of Caspian produced frames and integral rail dustcover frames that have been floating around dubious.  That is not to say that such things have not been done or tried on a small, prototype basis, it does not seem to imply that MARSYSCOM has purchased any significant quantity of commercial frames before, nor that they are particularly interested in a railed frame version of the MEU(SOC) .45 (Springfield MC Operator, anyone?).  Needless to say, it would seem that the incidence of commercially produced or railed frame pistols in combat service, if any, would be an extremely small percentage compared to the number currently in service utilizing USGI frames.

It would also seem that this request was very shortly thereafter followed by a request for 1,800 1911-style pistol slides, as well, however, that requested was not made for the MEU(SOC) .45, it was made for what may or may not be a different weapon system known as the "M45 Close Quarters Combat Pistol."  I will go into more detail on this request on the section on the M45 CQC.  The MEU(SOC) .45 is a very very interesting weapon in my opinion.  While the Springfield Professional may be the most officially and scientifically tested modern service 1911-style pistol in existence, I would argue that the MEU(SOC) .45 is probably the most vetted service 1911 there is, given the high OPTEMPO of the units issued the pistol, and of the military in general these last few years, coupled with the fact that the vast majority of these pistols are built on frames manufactured in 1945 *at the latest* leads me to believe no part in the MEU(SOC) .45 is an accident, and while a person might not agree for personal reason about small details in their construction, and understanding that they are built as *general (to the units issued them) issue sidearms* and not as highly customized guns intended for a single user, I have no reason to believe that they have not been built to withstand the utmost of what a combat pistol should be expected to face in terms of durability, reliability, and longevity under harsh conditions and high round counts.      

Ironically enough, and a good way to bookend the story of the MEU(SOC) .45, is this attachment to the same RFI, dated 16 JAN 2004 which, unlike the diagrams included in the RFI, seem to imply interest in an integral railed frame, but it also gives a good idea of what the Marines were looking for in the MEU(SOC) .45.

1.  Must be able to adapt to current and future optical/elector-optical technologies via the Mil Standard 1913 rail.

2.  Must be capable of eight (seven in magazine, one in chamber) well-aimed shots before magazine reload.

3.  Must be capable of firing military system procured DODIC A475, 230 grain .45 caliber Service Ball ammunition.

4.  Must be one-man portable for deployment and employment.

5.  Must be easily adaptable for both daytime and nighttime operations.

6.  Must allow for rapid removal and installation of optical/electro-optical sighting devices.

7.  Must have a non-reflective finish on both the weapon and sighting device.

8.  Must be capable of airborne insertion with parachutists and waterborne insertion, after waterproofing, with divers and small boat.

9.  Must be impervious to 48 hours exposure to high salt content sea water and resistant to abrasion caused by normal use.

10.  Must have an external magazine capacity of seven rounds.

11.  Must incorporate a manual safety.

12.  Must incorporate failure resistant hardened parts where possible throughout.

13.  Must be capable of repair at organizational maintenance with few exceptions.

14.  The weapon shall demonstrate the ability to meet or exceed mean rounds between stoppages of 300 rounds threshold , 900 rounds objective.

Service Use and Accessories

The Springfield Armory Professional

The Kimber Interim Close Quarters Battle pistol (ICQB)

The M45 Close Quarters Combat pistol

Clone Builder's Guide


more to come!

A couple of teasers:







~Augee

I think the old MEU pistols are great lookin pistols but ya'll sure go to great lengths to build a sloppy gun.

I'd rather have a clone of a Springfield built one that they bought off the shelf.

Can you expand on your opinion?

An U.S. Marine assigned to the Force Reconnaissance Platoon (FRP), 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (31st MEU), fires an M-1911 pistol during a live-fire exercise aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) Aug 21, 2013, in the Coral Sea. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Edward Guttierrez III/Released)

Here some more up close pics of an authentic M45 CQBP.  The latest variant that was made .  She is "Ready For Issue"  Enjoy !  :)

I do believe I just found my new wallpaper sir!

Same here!!!

Talked with Rob at Alchemy today.  They are working on cutting down my .312 front sight and stamping the serial number on my parts this week then the pistol will be ready to refinish.

I understand stamping the serial number on the undersides of the thumb safety and grip safety may be the "correct" way, but we decided to have it show.  Its more fun that way.  

Also, reshaping my front sight to .225 from .312 may or may not have it shoot POA/POI with the new PWS rear sight.  We may have to go lower on the front sight.  Not a deal breaker for me either way, I want it to shoot like a match gun but have the old school parts.  It'll be home soon enough and Im itchin to hit the range!

Someone say Clark Grip Safety and Kings 201a???

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=392950940

The height of the front sight determines your POA/POI.  When we build a match gun or a combat gun we collimate the sights to give a solid zero for the shooter to start with.  The height for the front sight should be 010"-.020" lower than the rear sight.  Whether you start at 225, 312, or 500 the height is cut down to the appropriate point relative to the rear sight.  .225 front sights are actually a bit too short to make this requirement, which is why i like to start with a 312 and cut it down.  Im not sure why your smith is telling you that a 312 may not shoot POA/POI, the start height doesnt matter.  Just something to chew on.  Hopefully I didnt pee in your cheerios.

What finish is used on the barrel?

That's a question better directed towards PWS2112.  Maybe he will chime in here and describe the process PWS uses.

No worries at all... I have faith that Rob will make it shoot straight. He just informed me that to make it shoot properly, id have to be open to the height being a different height than the "standard" .225 height. I told him to do what he must.  I appreciate your feedback however... Keep it coming!

I made a post on page 51 about 1/4 of the way down talking about our different bluing processes.  For barrels we use the stainless blackening proccess.  The post gives more detail.

Ben

Thanks buddy. Very interesting and I may have to read this thread all the way from the beginning instead of just popping in to look at pics

Something I did not see anywhere in the thread was a discussion of lanyard options for a correct build. Anyone have info on those? Thanks for some great info.

They use old surplus G.I. A1 mainspring housing that they mill down to flat and serrate.  Huge PITA.

They later use Capsian serrated mainspring housing with lanyard loop for M45 build. Call Caspian see if they still have some of those for sale. I bought 2 couple of years ago. It's not listed on their web store. Need to call and specify serrated MSH with landyard loop.

Does the Caspian have the relief cut under the lanyard loop?

Mine does not.

no mine ,but right now on ebay if you type in the words beavertail safety/ there are 2 clark beavertail safetys, also 1 millett serrated singlestake front sight and on the ee someone is selling a kings 201a ambi thumb safety in ss   hope this helps someone with their meusoc build

No relieve cut on Caspian MSH. FYI, my MEUSOC build use Colt MSH and Springfield added the lanyard loop with relieve cut on the bottom.

WOW! Over $200 for 201a.

More progress!!!

DGI, nice pics!  It's coming along nicely. Your beavertail fit is top notch.  Are you doing that yourself?

Here are some progress pics of mine.  Last I posted I mentioned that it was damn near impossible for me to stamp the left side thumb safety.  It's considerably harder than the right side lever, or any of the other parts to include the slide.  The only thing I could think was that it's heat treated, and I took a gamble on that.  I have an old frame I use strictly for grip making, is it came in handy to place the safety on for stamping.  It makes for a nice, hard platform to transfer energy from the stamp strike into the safety.  Though I did this for the initial attempt, I realized I was going to have to try something different.

I originally decided I would anneal the metal with heat, but that would mean I was destroying any heat treat that would have been there to keep the sear block hard.  I can't confirm for sure that King's heat treated the left side safety body, but if they didn't, mine is a fluke.  Anyway, knowing heat treat doesn't go that deep into the metal, and also needing to get rid of my previous stamping effort, I decided to simply file and sand off the original stamps, and hopefully get through the heat treat in the process.  It worked.  First, filing with a new and sharp file confirmed how hard the surface was.  Once I got down a thousandth or so, the metal softened up a bit and my file ran a lot easier.  My second stamping attempt went much  deeper into the metal.  

Here it is the first time around:



Here it is now, but without being bead blasted:



I also wanted to redo my mainspring housing.  My first attempt was a WWII MSH, and one thing I forgot is that no two metal checkering files are a exactly alike.  I discovered this years ago touching up factory 20 line per inch checkering on a mainspring housing.  My first attempt resulted in non even spacing and crooked lines.  I ordered a WWII MSH off of GunBroker for $23.  It had some damage to the serrations near the bottom, but who cares.  I was going to grind them off anyway.  A couple pages back I described a method for serrating on after grinding it.  I didn't follow my own description exactly, as it was easier just to go at it.  

So here's what I did.  I placed it in my beater frame.  I ground it flat on a belt sander.  I did this at 90 degrees, and only went deep enough to get rid of almost all the serrations:





I then started rounding the edges on the belt sander.  It's just a matter of standing over your work and following the original contours of the bottom of the MSH:




After that I inked it up (Sharpie, as it's cleaner than lay out fluid), and started my serrations.  The biggest thing to be aware of for those who haven't done this is to note that the file is wider than the are that needs to be serrated, usually by one row.  If you're not careful to start at the edges you'll run over and serrate one too many lines.  Serrated GI MSHs have the last row on both sides uncut.  The other thing is to start your file at an angle instead of laying it flat so that you can start serrating in your old grooves.  Not doing so will result in the file wanting to walk easily.  Start your filing at about a 30 degree angle and start to lower it until it's flat.  If you do this from both top and bottom, you'll eventually meet in the middle and complete your first row or two of serrations, and hopefully be running straight.





Eventually the whole thing was done and I installed an old beat up lanyard loop:





Like a lot of in progress pics, some of these parts look pretty rough.  I haven't gotten around to blasting the parts, so the mainspring housing and the thumb safety don't have a finished look.  Also, I still need to go back and clean up the bottom radius or bevel of the MSH.  Next on my list of things to do is bevel the magwell and install the BarSto barrel.  I had already gotten around to fitting a BarSto to this gun, except for the final fitting of the knee area of the barrel feet and the link.  A buddy of mone just had to have that barrel for his gun since he blew his up, so I ordered another for mine and that BarSto is gone.  

In the meantime, I finished stamping things today, including the inside of the beavertail and the mainspring housing. Stamping the beavertail was interesting.  I placed it in my bench vise supported on the underside by a large block of cocobolo.  Worked like a charm:






Well, there you have it.  My project is inching along.  I would have had it done had I kept that barrel, except for refinishing.  Now I have to wait 16 weeks for a barrel.  

Lookin' good!

Not sure if you ordered from Bar-Sto yet, but Midway has them in stock. You'd have it within a week rather than 16.
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/168798/bar-sto-match-target-barrel-1911-government-45-acp-1-in-16-twist-5-stainless-steel?cm_vc=ProductFinding

Figures.  I ordered a few days ago.  That blows.  Thanks though.

I have one that I won't be fitting for at least 17 weeks (got it in last Monday from Midway, hasn't been altered at all). If you pay for shipping, I'd send it to you, and you can send me yours when it comes in (or call Bar-sto, and just have Bar-sto ship straight to me.)

Eventually there will be a MEU(SOC) clone get together, and we will reenact this picture




Here's some more I've come across on the internet

Interesting pics...



ICQB?  With Pachmayrs instead of Gunner Grips?

I found that to be very interesting.  All the ICQBs I saw at Pendleton had the Gunners, as well as Ed Brown grip safeties.  Looks like this one has the Kimber grip safety.  I wonder if that's one that made it back to the MEUs.  Any ideas Ben?

This is beyond my scope.  I fall back on my standard answer:  when the money is tight or gone, you use whatever you can to get the gun operational.  That is the best I can do with this one.

Ben

Hell yes! I'd be in on that.



m

PWS2112, do you ever do any side work, or just for your buddies?

The last 2 pieces of the puzzle finally arrived.  ;)

A brand new, never used, Springfield slide that was not a takeoff.....

And yes, I bought an entire pistol to get a Kings 201a.  Thanks Hobbs for the tip on this one....!

Let the building begin.....

Holy Shit Hobbs! That build is rockin!!! Looking good brother!

Im having Rob at Alchemy Custom perform my assembly. The pistol should be home by mid March sometime (maybe sooner)

Very cool!  Let me know how the chemical strip works.  Even though it's hard chrome, I've had good luck with Brownells room temp nickel stripper after leaving it overnight.  Stuff is expensive though, so the other methods I e-mailed you about should be a better solution.  I didn't have any chromed safeties, but I do have some stock stainless Colts if you need it.  By the way, did you get that slide on eBay?  If so, sorry but it was me that bid against you.  I didn't know.  I owe you a beer or three.

I look forward to your build.  Ben, if you do the build, and you're not too busy, share some progress pics.

Cool.  So are those progress pics from Rob?  If so, that's what I call customer service, sharing progress pics.  A lot of smiths are hesitant to do that because of how bad the gun can look before final cleanup and refinishing.  Did you go with a stainless grip safety?  

On a side note, I hope someone here won the two grip safeties on eBay.  I was so close to making an obscene bid on those, but I have some already.  Hope they go to a MEU(SOC) build.

do they use paint marker or what ? on marking rack number on grips ?

Awesome Jeff!

I'm sure your MEUSOC build will be perfect like your M45!

There has been talk here about the Ed Brown grip safety, it was used on the MUE(SOC) pistol from late 2003 until they changed the name to the M45.  At the same time the slide was changed, front and rear sights, and the hammer, sear and disconnector.

Shoe is an excellent source for Meusoc information.  He teaches the new 2112's at PWS and has been there a long time :)    

I hope nobody minds me posting too many pictures on this thread.  I forgot I had this Surefire 610R in my MEU(SOC) box that stays in my safe.  I bought it new a couple years ago.  I can only imagine how old it is.  I never opened it until tonight.  I expected to find the sliding switch on the body, which I believe was an update over the rocker switch.  I discovered it had the rocker switch, and I also made a few other interesting observations.  First, there was plastic wrap on the outside when I got it, and not a mark on the box.  I expected a pristine light, and was surprised to find lots of marks on the body of the light.  Of course, every one I owned back in the day was scuffed, in contrast to the perfection that comes out of Surefire boxes nowadays.  I also noticed that the battery had not leaked.  I have to think this light is 15 to 20 years old.  Finally, it came with two entirely different grip screws, along with an extra set screw for tensioning the body of the light to the trigger guard.  Just odd observations.







I was curious if the light was going to work with the ancient batteries.  The light mounted up nice.  The switch that wraps around the grips is nothing like the modern X200/X300 switches.  It's thin and not nearly as durable.  I can also tell that the grip screws, whether I use the originals or the Surefire grip screws, will back out without some thread locker.  You can't fully tighten the screws without squishing the rubber grips and bending the body of the "tape switch".  The light mounted up without any issues other than the loose grip screws (which I'll remedy with some blue Loctite), and sure enough, the light came on.  It was actually pretty bright all things considered.






Here's a size comparison between the MEU(SOC) clone and the ICQB with a Surefire IMPL light.  The IMPL is just plain huge.





Well, there you have it.  No more pictures of the MEU(SOC) clone until I get the BarSto in for fitting, and get the gun refinished.  Range report to follow a few months down the road.

now that is a dream collection!!!!!!!!  will one of  the new colts be joining the family down the road?

Hard to say.  Initially I wanted to build a "Variant 1", a "Variant 3", a "Variant 4", and have a Colt M45A1.  I thought that would be a very nice collection, and I wasn't too interested in a "Variant 2" as there is next to no difference between it and the "Variant 1".  Unfortunately, the price of building authentic clones is high.  The cost of an M45A1 is currently far too high for what you get.  I've completely lost the desire to put together the collection I initially intended to do.  As a matter of fact, I have a good feeling I'll probably sell both my Variant 1 and my ICQB one of these days.  I wanted to keep them for my young sons, and will probably wait until they are in their late teens, but if they don't join the Corps, I'll ditch the pistols.

Pachmayr American Legend Grips
http://www.marsoc.marines.mil/Photos.aspx?igphoto=28834

Parabellum,

nice find... I wonder if shoe or PWS2112 can shed some light on that... my experience, at least in big army, they frown when you mod your gat. My M9 went back to reset in AFG with some aftermarket alumagrips on it, came back with the grips rubber banded in a baggy on the gun with a new set of army plastic ones on it with the serviceable tag on it and a note stating "unauthorized grips"

I didn't see what the big deal was, but maybe the MEU and MARSOC guys can do what they want, a la American legend grips and Surefire MR07 Rails... and take them off when the gun goes to reset or inspection

I'm going to guess t that Ben or Shoe won't know anything about those grips other than they didn't leave PWS like that.  What happens at the user end lever is out of their control.  Although, they might be able to tell some stories of pistols that come back with weird parts on them.

That would be fantastic!

I was wondering if anybody knows where to find a pdf or hard copy of the Weapon Record Book that apparently was issued with these pistols along with the 7 magazines and shok buffs. The Technical manual for the MEU(SOC) references it, but I haven't been able to find one. Any help would be much appreciated!

Tom

not mine but on ebay there is another clark beavertail safety listed ebay# 380844792391

That beavertail looks pretty beat.  Im sure a 'Smith can make use of it though.

Hobbs: Yes, Rob at Alchemy is supplying the pics.  He is top notch.  His facebook page has logs of most of the pistols he works on (at least the neat ones).  

Great looking 610R!!! i was looking for a 310R for the longest time.  Stopped looking after I bought one for my Beretta and realized it was for a 92F not FS.  Wasnt too crazy about the size of the light after playing with one.  What kind of Kimber is that? Does it use a Dawson Rail?  I was always a fan of the way they did their weak side ambi safeties on some of their models (that one included).  Originally wanted a TLE RL but bought a TRP instead and have been on a Springfield kick ever since.  Might have to try to get my hands on one to see how they compare.

Next project in the works.



Finding a smith who's willing to tackle to project hasn't been easy thus far. Patience is king.

I also have been unable to locate a copy of TM 00526A-10/1, or the Weapon Record Book.

Any other MEUSOC clone junkies find them?