1911s like JMB intended

[American1776]

I like 1911s. I like high quality stuff. I’ve got a plain Jane Colt 1911, blued. Its in great condition, and when new, it rattled in the slide to frame fit. It rattles loud: ‘smack-smack-smack’ sound when lightly shaken. The barrel locks up tight. It’s accurate and reliable.

I recently bought a Dan Wesson Heritage. This screams quality. Slide to frame clearance is tight. It’s so tight that the manual specified a 500 round break in, with a special oil provided, with cleaning every 50 rounds. On the forums one will find all sorts of problems with galling.

Why have the top makers of JMB’s design decided to no longer make the rattle inducing clearance designed into the pistol? My Colt will work in a trench, in a desert, and in a rice paddy. My DW? I don’t know. Same goes for all the top end stuff.

Anyone else prefer the Colt specs to the super tight stuff today?

 

[bigggbbruce]

For military, clearance offered cycling reliability.

I don't need or want a gun so tight you have to "break it in"

I like 'em to work straight out of the box with no concern of reliability.

 

[Chino74]

My fairly new Colt GOV. is pretty rattle free, slide to frame fit is good, snug but not tight....older Colts I'm sure were a little looser. Mine needed no break in. Now Wesson's and a lot of the top end guns are pretty tight, not something I need or want.

 

[Ivan the Butcher]

Back in the 80's I built a bunch of "Parts" 1911's. A few rattled (my personal gun does not!) but most didn't. On a canoe trip my Mini-14 and self built 1911 got full of sand, so when it was safe I shot a mag through each to see if the would function. Both functioned fine! My mine never would hit anything so accuracy didn't change. When I built 1911's, I guaranteed them to feed Ball ammo, and I tested every one of them for accuracy: 7 shots on a paper plate at 25 yards! My personal 1911 did about 4" at 25 yards, after the trip and a detailed cleaning, it still shot the same. That UGLY 45 is still my personal full sized 1911, and it still will shoot, but now I can't get the groups out of it! I never did the slimy mud bath test, but I'm confident all the 1911's I built would pass.

Ivan

 

[Echo40]

A wise YouTuber by the name of Batjac J.W. once said that it was the loose fit of the original 1911s which kept them in Military service for the better part of a decade.

A common misconception is that a tight fit is conducive towards the reliability of a firearm, but that's a half-truth. Tight tolerances are beneficial towards reliability, but tight clearances are more often than not detrimental towards reliability, hence why some of the most reliable firearms out there have a very loose fit to them.

The root of the misconception is the theory that a tight fit keeps dirt/debris out of the action, and while it is true that a tighter fit does help keep debris out, the issue is that once debris inevitably finds it's way inside, it often gets trapped in there then packed into place when the slide cycles causing malfunctions to occur.
However, a firearm with a looser fit often allows for debris to be expelled out of the firearm when fired.

In addition, folks don't seem to understand that while a well lubricated firearm with a tight fit is beneficial, firearms with a looser fit are better off lightly lubed so that dirt/debris won't stick. So sometimes you'll get someone who's used to tightly fit firearms needing generous lubrication for reliable function will buy a firearm with a looser fit then hose the internals down, then experience a lot of malfunctions at the range because it gets all fouled up inside from debris sticking to the wet surfaces, leading them to believe that the firearm is unreliable due to the loose fit.

TL;DR: Gaps between the slide and frame may allow dirt/debris in, but it also provides a passage for it to be blown out when fired.

 

[Marshal Tom]

There is no reason for a well built ie. fairly tight fitting 1911 not to function properly. Due to CNC machining of today, most factory built 1911's are pretty tight fitting out of the box compared to those of old. I have had 4 total customs built for me over the years. All have functioned flawlessly. If properly lubricated and with changing out the springs as required, they should run just fine.

 

[lrrifleman]

@OP,

When my permits come in, I will have 4 1911s. My Colt government model was combat ready from day 1. My Springfield Trophy Match I wouldn't consider to be a combat gun. Hopefully, my Ruger commander and my ATI commander will be combat reliable with little break-in.

In my opinion, a combat oriented 1911 should require minimal break-in.

 

[Fishslayer]

I guess my tight Dan Wesson & SIG 1911s have never looked at the internet forums...

 

[H Richard]

There is a difference between self defense accuracy, (4-6" at 10 yards or less), and Precision shooting, such as Bullseye where you need 1.5 - 2" at 25 yards to be competitive.

 

[ProCarryNAustin]

Sloppy fit does not equal reliable any more than it means poor accuracy. You can have fit, finish, accuracy and reliability. It usually costs more but for me it has been very worth it. As far as what JMB would want, I feel like he was a man constantly improving his designs. Hard to think he would ever stop tinkering.

 

[Kanewpadle]

Dan Wesson is without a doubt the best production 1911 made today. Others may have the prestige of their name stamped on the gun, but DW quietly produces an entire line 1911’s that can only be surpassed by true custom guns.

 

[Protected One]

There is a difference between self defense accuracy, (4-6" at 10 yards or less), and Precision shooting, such as Bullseye where you need 1.5 - 2" at 25 yards to be competitive.

Thanks for saving me all the typing!

 

[Marshal Tom]

I posted above but I can't believe the stuff that I see about 1911's and the loose fit vs. tight fit ****. If the gun is well built with dependability as a deciding factor then there should be no issue, Period. A gook custom builder like I mentioned will not let the gun out of his shop if it is not totally reliable.

 

[Bullet Bob]

Two Wilson Combat's; no rattles, no failures. Build them right and they will work.

Also have two Colt's, one rattles, one doesn't. Both work well, but the quieter one is more accurate.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I’ve shot WWII era 1911’s when qualifying in the military. They were sloppy loose. At 10 yards, accuracy wasn’t a problem. Nobody knew any different.

Full length guide rods were “invented” to make them more accurate. So far nobody has convinced me that they are.

People have tried for decades to make the 1911 more reliable and more accurate. Most of them failed or were simply done to convince buyers to buy one. They failed to realize that the 1911 was designed to be accurate and reliable if and only if quality components are used. The rest is up to the shooter.

 

[bushmaster1313]

Does this qualify?

(1943 Ithaca M1911A1, 5 rounds at 5 yards)

 

[Rick_A]

My Colt 1991A1 of 90's vintage was a rattle trap and not particularly reliable out of the box (extractor clocking issue). Once fitted with a match barrel/bushing on an oversized frame it has no discernible movement between the barrel, bushing, slide, and frame. The only thing that rattles is the grip safety. It is perfectly reliable and gives my 22-4 a run for its money accuracy wise.

Would it still function after being dumped in the mud or sand? I don't know, but I wouldn't want to find out on purpose, either.

 

[stansdds]

The generous tolerances between slide and receiver in the original 1911 design were there for a couple of reasons. It was believed that loose tolerances would allow the weapon to continue to function even with powder residue, dirt, and even mud in the action. The second reason was the limitations of machinery used to mass produce items. The loose tolerances allowed for a fair degree of variation from one machine to another and from one factory to another.


The concept of the tightly fitted 1911 came from target competition shooting, specifically, bullseye shooting. Shooters wanting the highest degree of accuracy wanted pistols with superb triggers, very tight lockup of the barrel and a slide and frame that were matched and had just enough clearances to cycle.


Modern consumers still equate super tight tolerances with quality and accuracy, but a wartime 1911 that rattles, but has a good trigger and barrel lockup can produce impressive accuracy and still be utterly reliable under all sorts of conditions.

 

[johnbeaver]

I believe Mr. Brown said that they don't have to be tight, just right.

 

[Farmer17]

I had a 1982 Colt Combat Government Model, a Kimber, an American Classic, and currently a Rock Island. None of them rattled and all were quite accurate and perfectly reliable clean or dirty, the latter two guns were also fairly inexpensive. I never tried dipping them in mud but I believe they would still be as reliable as about any gun out there.