Wolff has recoil and mag springs for the Detonics Combat Master:

https://www.gunsprings.com/index.cfm...s&cID=1&mID=17

I did the extractor tension test and at first it held the case beautifully. But that was with the rear of extractor flush with the slide, which it turns out is only one of its many positions.

The range is slightly proud of the slide to inset substantially, as shown in the photos below. The firing pin retainer is very loose, so I think that's where most of the problem lies. I will end up replacing both of them.

EDIT to add: After church I pulled the extractor and firing pin retainer out of my Springfield 1991 Defender (70s series) and tried them in the Combat Master. The fit was much better with the Springfield parts and the extractor had no detectable movement.

Adding a couple pics too. The Detonics parts (top) next to the Springfield parts. The Detonics firing pin springs is toast, and it's an integral part of the operation due to the short slide. The extractor has a wider groove at the rear, and the claw isn't as beefy.

Attached Images

	TS1.jpg (61.9 KB, 34 views)
	TS2.jpg (80.5 KB, 34 views)
	TS3.jpg (71.7 KB, 36 views)
	TS5.jpg (172.5 KB, 33 views)
	TS4.jpg (74.7 KB, 26 views)

UPDATE:

I contacted Mark over at Thunder Mountain for some parts. They shipped super fast but the USPS took the small package on a nationwide tour that took almost two weeks longer than it should have.

The firing pin retainer was going to be the biggest problem because it's one of the Detonics unique parts. They sell one that's shorter, for use with a slide cut for Bomar sights and as you can see the fit is pretty close. I had planned to dress off the extra but after I installed it I think I'll leave it as is; there's no way I'm going to get that nice of an edge with a hand file, sander, or grinder.

The extractor was a tight fit, but it's in and all the slop is gone. The issue now is the length (?) of the extractor. Sliding a case under the hook, the rear of the case is not against the breech face, there seems to be a lot of space between. I don't know enough about 1911s to say for sure. Thoughts?

I also bought two new firing pin springs from Thunder Mountain. Both are Wolff springs; the extra power and the extra-extra power. The extra-extra is in now but the other is in the box with the tools to do a field change if I think it needs it.

I put the new recoil spring set in and swapped out the magazine spring with a new one from Wolff.

Hope to get out next weekend to give it a try. The 17th is the last day of work for me until the second week of 2021 as I need to burn off some use-or-lose leave, so I should have plenty of time to shoot the thing.

EDIT to add: if I'm still having problems it might be time to call in a Pro. I've reached the edge of my 1911 tuning/reliability knowledge.

Attached Images

	Detonics15.jpg (103.4 KB, 42 views)
	Detonics16.jpg (68.4 KB, 38 views)

Not to rain on anyone's parade, but why anyone would want one of those constant jamming turds is beyond me. A guy next to me in my concealed weapons class had one of those jam-masters, and it did not fail him in that area! The range master finally made him use HIS 9mm Beretta to finish the shooting phase, otherwise we would have been there all afternoon. The guy shot a 175 score, the lowest you could shoot at that time on the Texas test to still pass and get your CWL. They might be collectors items, but I sure don't want one to depend on to protect my life.

Many years back I attended a full auto shoot in Connecticut and while we were loading guns into a pick up truck we heard a loud bang. We all looked around and noticed one guy had a hole through the back of his shirt. While he was loading a 30 cal it apparently caught on the hammer of his Detonics Master that was in a horizontal shoulder rig. Luckily it went off while he was bent down and the round hit the ceiling.

__________________
Thirty characters. Exactly...

No rain on my parade.

"Constant jamming" and "Combat Master" were phrases that never went together. That's what made the Detonics the best and only reliable subcompact 1911 in its day.

If you knew someone that had a problematic one, it was likely unique. Everything I have read (a lot so far) says they were one of the best concealed carry guns of the day.

And to be honest, wouldn't you be able to say that about any 1911? People have spent 2X the going rate for a 1911 to get the Kimber name on it, and the forums are full of people that say their would never run. Colt had a very long period where buying one was just a start, you were going to do a lot of work to make it run 100%, and they never did out of the box.

I will get this to run right and it will be a carry gun.

Good luck, my friend. I've never read anything good about em, and I'm 75 years old.

got mine in 1981 great gun

Perfectly normal and necessary. The extractor's job is not to hold the shell tight to the breech face, it's job is to pull on the case and hold it well enough that it does not come loose before the case head impacts the ejector. There needs to be clearance between the case head and the breech face while held by the extractor for smooth function.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

I had one of these back in the '90s. VERY well made and and reliable. However, I could never understand why a compact pistol such as this was designed with a sight radius an inch shorter than it could have been. Brainless!

Not brainless; purpose designed to carry the gun in "condition 2" The rear of the slide was designed so the thumb was in position to cock the hammer as the pistol was drawn from holster. BTW, it works very well, and I wonder why other manufactures of SA pistols haven't copied the design; apparently, folks no longer want a gun designed for "condition 2" carry. And in a self defense, adrenalin overload, situation, what does sight radius at 10 feet really matter ( sort of like trigger pull).

__________________
John

One thing I've noticed in the limited time I've owned it; these guns are sprung tightly. The firing pin spring needs to be stiff, the recoil springS need to be stiff, and the hammer spring is stiff to counter the firing pin spring.

All to say, it's really hard to thumb that trigger back when drawing, which isn't helped at all by the short grip.

I'll be carrying C&L when I get it running.

The hammer spring has to be very heavy, powering the firing pin is not its only job. A heavy hammer spring provides a lot of resistance to the slide as it attempts to move rearward during recoil. A light mainspring will result in the slide having little resistance during recoil, allowing the breech to unlock too soon and the slide will batter the recoil spring guide rod head and impart a far greater shock to the receiver.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

In some custom 1911s they'll install a lighter hammer spring, but they'll balance it with a heavier recoil spring.

I have been there and done that, but doing that is counter the way J.M. Browning designed the 1911. A heavier recoil spring does less to control the unlocking of the breech, but will propel the slide forward with far more force which can batter the feet on the bottom lug of the barrel, the slide stop pin, and the pin holes in the receiver.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Agreed. I prefer to stick with the standard spring weights.

Now I'm no expert on the Detonics CM's nor have I seen all models that were made but there is something on yours that caught my eye while reading this Thread. I only have one; a Combat Master MKVI with the CR prefix and Seattle made but it shoots and handles flawlessly.

It's my knowledge that older Detonics Combat Masters were basically all the same design and the model designations (MK Roman Numerals) were mostly for the different finishes offered over time.

Yours for whatever reason has a cutout on top of the slide above the extractor that I've never seen before. Your extractor base is open and exposed in the extractor channel. Makes me believe you're going to have excessive extractor and firing pin stop movement. Again no expert here but I wonder if it's been modified after factory for some reason. Anyway here's pics from mine (top) and the one you have (bottom). Good luck.

Attached Images

	IMG_3571.jpg (51.8 KB, 158 views)
	IMG_3570.JPG (81.3 KB, 157 views)

WOW! The bottom photo looks like Bubba tried to modify the gun for some reason. My CM is a late 1979 model and looks just like the top photo ( as it should). Good luck on your "project". Please post some photos when ya get her up and running.

__________________
John

Wow! I hadn't noticed that before.

Anyone know why this would be done?

I just scrolled through ALL the Combat Master pics on Bing and think the mystery may be solved. Very few pictures show this area.

Given this bit of metal is thinner due to the slide scallop, I'm thinking they were prone to failure in that spot.

I found a sale ad on Guns International and that gun had a piece broken out in that spot. No, they're not the same gun but the serial numbers are only about 2K units apart.

Attached Images

OtherCM.jpg (26.0 KB, 152 views)

Good find. Maybe the one you have broke in that area and someone cleaned it up to look better?

Why aren't they still making this "combat wonder pistol?", anyone know? If they were all that good, seems to me they would still be in production. Just wondering...........

Detonics had two or three iterations. Like AMT, Dornaus & Dixon, and a few others, the small production gun companies seem to have a hard time staying afloat.

I imagine someone still owns the patents to the Combat Master design, even though it isn't too terribly unique. This was the gun that got Colt to make an Officer's Model.

The gun is a piece of history, because small big-bore autos were not readily available in the 70s and 80s.

Probably because Colt introduced their Officer's ACP, then nearly every other 1911 clone maker started offering cut-down 1911's with much lower price tags.



Seems to me Jerry Ahern bought the rights to the Detonics line and had them in production briefly somewhere in the late 1990's or early 2000's. I do not know who currently owns the rights, but there is a Detonics, but they do not make anything that looks like a 1911 clone.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Because? The small versions of John Browning's crowning pistol achievement just DO NOT WORK WELL! I've owned some of the cut down 1911's, and they are just not up to snuff. Like I said earlier, I shot next to guy in CCL class, and he had a Detonics. It jammed, or otherwise malfuntioned at least once every magazine. The instructor finally made him use HIS 9mm Beretta to finish the course. This does't sound like a gun I would want to carry to protect my life, but some out there have drunk the kool-aid, so carry one if you must.

Really ?? LOL. You need to do some more research.

__________________
John

Ok, what wonder cut-down 1911 do YOU carry or prefer, OLDSTER? And I am on oldster, too! LOL

I think I would find an expert gunsmith to weld some metal back into that area, just to be safe. I can't understand why that area would be prone to breakage. For me, I would want the extra metal to make sure the extractor is held as properly as possible.

I have always liked these guns, but never bought one when they were new. I ended up going with a Colt Officer's Model instead back then.

I'll ask again since you ignored the question the last time I asked:
And to be honest, wouldn't you be able to say that about any 1911?

Or, wouldn't you be able to say that about any Ford motor vehicle?

Or, wouldn't you be able to say that about any Chevrolet motor vehicle?

To what firearm do you trust your life? If I find a single empirical example of that gun failing, will you abandon it as quickly?

With barrel lengths less than 4 1/4 inches, they are more difficult to make reliable, but certainly not impossible. Cheap ones with out of spec receivers can be impossible to make reliable, but that also applies to Commander and Government Model size 1911's.


I cannot be 100% certain, but I think that at least some of the Detonics slides are cast steel, which would explain fractures in thin areas.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Mainsail, I trust my life to my Ruger SR-40. although I do own a couple of 1911's. I do have a factory small 1911, but I quit carrying it after it let me down. Not in a self-defense situation, but it stove-piped in a situation where I felt that shouldn't have happened. If that had happened in a situation where I had needed it to run perfect, I might not be here now.

Any firearm can suffer a failure, it's not limited to the 1911 platform.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

I had a few Detonics back in the day. Pretty sure they came that way.....

I had one of these pistols, a stainless with the J-hammer, many years ago. I don't have it today in spite of its collector value.

Two things turned me off. Ergonomically, it was a fumble multiplier. Also, it was NOT 100% reliable, which was something I had to have in a defense gun.

Nice concept, but brought to much better fruition in later years with more practical solutions. This Springfield Armory V10 Ultra Compact fills that niche admirably, and it goes bang every time I want it to.

John

Attached Images

1911 V10 SPRINGFIELD.jpg (104.7 KB, 8 views)

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

That is correct. It is designed that way to assist when carrying it in Condition 2 (loaded chamber, hammer down) since these have no Grip Safety feature. Whereas you can effectively and quickly cock the hammer without snagging or ripping up your thumb on the rear sight.

Got back out to shoot the gun with all new springs, extractor, and firing pin retainer.

First mag ejected like a 1911 is supposed to.... sorta. The last round in the mag wants to stay inside. Added a little more tension to the extractor and that seemed to help some.

Firing without the mag in the gun told me things are still not right. It isn't ejecting without a round in the mag to assist. If the mag is out of the gun the empties fall out the mag well.

Might be time to call an expert.

Are you running an extended ejector in it? That might be what's called for and is an easy fix. Something like this, but it doesn't have to be Wilson's although those work for me in my guns.

Poor man's guide to extractor tension:
With the slide off of the receiver and barrel out of the slide, place a round loaded with a 230 grain bullet under the extractor, turn the slide horizontal, like it would be when firing, then give the slide a shake. If the round falls out, then you have too little extractor tension.

The extractor needs sufficient tension to hold the round, but not so much so as to prevent rounds from feeding smoothly from the magazine.

Ejectors: I agree, a slightly extended ejector is a benefit with slides shorter than Government Model length. An ejector of proper length will not touch the case head until the tip of a 230 grain FMJ bullet has cleared the mouth of the chamber and does not cause the tip of the bullet to hit the barrel chamber hood as the round pivots during extraction.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA