I've heard the caution that 1911s shorter than 4.25" are not reliable, but it's not quite that simple.
The earliest compact 1911s in .45 ACP were not generally well regarded for reliability and that negative reputation has stuck. More recent compact 1911s are better engineered, and when made by a reputable company they can be every bit as reliable as a full sized 1911
A short officer model framed 1911 requires some engineering changes to ensure reliability. However, if properly designed, any reliability problems are more often than not due to the actions and modifications of the end user.
For example, these smaller frame, shorter slide 1911s have reduced slide over run available and that shorter over run distance means reduced over run time. If the end user decides he or she knows more than the design engineer and adds a shock buffer, he or she is going to be reducing the slide over run distance. Shock buffers do this just by nature of limiting rearward slide travel, and with the already short over run of a compact 1911, there isn't a travel that can be given up. or the over run time as changing springs changes slide velocity and rebound characteristics. Similarly, if the shooter changes the recoil spring weight, he will be changing the slide velocity and rebound characteristics, reducing the over run time. Both these changes will have a negative impact on feeding and reliability.
Kimber's Ultra Carry is often cited as an example of an "unreliable" compact 1911, but many of those same people end up swapping springs, magazines, etc before the pistol has been properly broken in, and then they blame the pistol.
I carried the Ultra Carry below for nearly 10 years and after a couple hundred rounds to break it in, it has been relentlessly reliable with a wide range of ammunition types. It surprised me from the start by being as accurate or more accurate than most 5" 1911s. The recoil is also very manageable, far better than you'd think when you lift it up and feel what it weighs, and I shoot it just as well as a LW Commander in .45 ACP.
---
I've recently started carrying a Commander sized 1911 in 9mm, mostly because I like the reduced recoil and consequently faster follow up shots that 9mm offers compared to a .45 ACP as well as the 10+1 capacity.
The counter argument to a 3" or 3.5" 1911 is that a 4" or 4.25" isn't significantly harder to carry. The extra slide length just isn't a factor in carry comfort when you are using an IWB holster on your hip.
The earliest compact 1911s in .45 ACP were not generally well regarded for reliability and that negative reputation has stuck. More recent compact 1911s are better engineered, and when made by a reputable company they can be every bit as reliable as a full sized 1911
A short officer model framed 1911 requires some engineering changes to ensure reliability. However, if properly designed, any reliability problems are more often than not due to the actions and modifications of the end user.
For example, these smaller frame, shorter slide 1911s have reduced slide over run available and that shorter over run distance means reduced over run time. If the end user decides he or she knows more than the design engineer and adds a shock buffer, he or she is going to be reducing the slide over run distance. Shock buffers do this just by nature of limiting rearward slide travel, and with the already short over run of a compact 1911, there isn't a travel that can be given up. or the over run time as changing springs changes slide velocity and rebound characteristics. Similarly, if the shooter changes the recoil spring weight, he will be changing the slide velocity and rebound characteristics, reducing the over run time. Both these changes will have a negative impact on feeding and reliability.
Kimber's Ultra Carry is often cited as an example of an "unreliable" compact 1911, but many of those same people end up swapping springs, magazines, etc before the pistol has been properly broken in, and then they blame the pistol.
I carried the Ultra Carry below for nearly 10 years and after a couple hundred rounds to break it in, it has been relentlessly reliable with a wide range of ammunition types. It surprised me from the start by being as accurate or more accurate than most 5" 1911s. The recoil is also very manageable, far better than you'd think when you lift it up and feel what it weighs, and I shoot it just as well as a LW Commander in .45 ACP.
---
I've recently started carrying a Commander sized 1911 in 9mm, mostly because I like the reduced recoil and consequently faster follow up shots that 9mm offers compared to a .45 ACP as well as the 10+1 capacity.
The counter argument to a 3" or 3.5" 1911 is that a 4" or 4.25" isn't significantly harder to carry. The extra slide length just isn't a factor in carry comfort when you are using an IWB holster on your hip.
Last edited:
