updated 06/02 - SHOT MY COLT ACE CONVERSION TODAY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 15 YEARS

[chief38]

SEE UPDATE BELOW:

When my Dad passed 15 years ago one of the guns I inherited was his Colt USGI 1911A1 that was made in 1944 (verified by serial number). It does shoot pretty well for a GI service pistol.

I also inherited his Colt ACE 22 conversion (made slightly earlier I believe) which I mounted on it today for the first time in 15 years. The front sight's finish was bare and I had a heck of a time seeing it! As I am typing this, the first coat of Testor's paint is drying and I will add two more after that. Next week when I bring it back to the Range I hope I can see it much better and be able to score a bit higher. All in all it performed flawlessly and I had a thrill shooting it. I was shooting CCI 40 grain standard velocity ammo at 50 feet. While by no means a M41 (especially the service grade trigger) it did shoot better than I had anticipated for a 80 year old set up.

UPDATED 06/02 Below:

I painted the front sight orangish/red this past week and truly thought that since now that I can see the front sight so much better I would shoot it better. I went through 100 rounds today and the pistol shot about the same as it did last week. I guess that is about the best the conversion unit will do at 50 feet. New picture with today's date (06/02) was shot with the now high visibility front sight paint.

That said, after reading all the comments here about lack of accuracy of these units, I shouldn't complain. While no tack driver - still respectable at 50 ft. The great news is another 100 flawless CCI Std. Vel. rounds shot with no issues. These units truly clean up much better with some good old Hoppes instead of the usual CLP as the floating chamber does build up with carbon.

 

[petepeterson]

Great shooting.
I have a Ceiner kit on a 1911. Very accurate, but it seems to need the hot stuff to run well.
Lots of fun though. I keep it holstered on my hip on weekends around the property for plinking and critters, dog-walking, etc.
If I venture out into civilization, I just swap it for a "proper" 1911- same holster.

 

[Murdock]

Standard velocity lead (not plated/jacketed) bullets will foul the floating chamber piston quickly and so should be avoided. Use the hottest jacketed ammo you can find. I can get through several hundred rounds with mine before functional issues arise if I shoot CCI Velocitors.

Back in the 1970's I was an officer at the Navy's Recruit Training Center in Orlando, Florida when that was still a thing. The recruits were "familiarized" with the 1911A1 service pistol by firing the Colt Ace pistols we hand in inventory. Winchester T22 ammo was used, and it was awful. The guns leaded the floating chambers quickly. (Fouled the rifling in my K-22 also, causing keyholing a 25 yards on one box of ammo).

The remedy employed to correct that was to have a number of recruits scrub the pistols until they could work again. The cleaning done by those young recruits probably aged those guns a good deal.

 

[chief38]

Standard velocity lead (not plated/jacketed) bullets will foul the floating chamber piston quickly and so should be avoided. Use the hottest jacketed ammo you can find. I can get through several hundred rounds with mine before functional issues arise if I shoot CCI Velocitors.

Back in the 1970's I was an officer at the Navy's Recruit Training Center in Orlando, Florida when that was still a thing. The recruits were "familiarized" with the 1911A1 service pistol by firing the Colt Ace pistols we hand in inventory. Winchester T22 ammo was used, and it was awful. The guns leaded the floating chambers quickly. (Fouled the rifling in my K-22 also, causing keyholing a 25 yards on one box of ammo).

The remedy employed to correct that was to have a number of recruits scrub the pistols until they could work again. The cleaning done by those young recruits probably aged those guns a good deal.

I had heard pretty much what you posted above over the years, however I have never experienced any issues with standard velocity ammo. Yesterday, my friends and I fired 150 rounds of the standard velocity ammo with not one single failure. I always clean every gun I shoot after a range session so there is never any built up carbon, debris or powder residue build up in any gun I shoot. Normally I use G96 synthetic CLP for cleaning but yesterday I did use an old bottle of Hoppes 9 as it did have more carbon build up than a normal auto loader does.

I am not doubting what you say at all, however I do really believe that how clean a gun is at the beginning of a shooting session has a lot to do with how and when it will get to dirty to fire reliably. Because of the nature of the Ace's floating chamber I can understand why this situation might occur and with high velocity ammo the situation might be put off for one or two more boxes due to the more powerful action of the moving parts being able to overcome the dirt and debris's resistance. On the other hand, if the gun is "forced" to work, more scoring and wear would also be occurring if my thought pattern is correct. Since I almost never fire more than 100 rounds out of any given pistol without a cleaning, this sort of becomes a non issue for me. Like I said, yesterday was a rare day and I shot 150 rounds because I first had to sight the pistol in after many years of not being used and I had two other friends with me who were enjoying shooting it.

I have a habit of trying to make pretty much any gun I am shooting into as accurate a gun as I can and have found that the CCI standard velocity ammo usually shoots better than high velocity stuff. Quite honestly, I was actually surprised that the standard velocity cycled the action perfectly without one single hitch! BTW, I did bring 150 rounds of CCI Mini-Mags with me to the range but I never needed them.

 

[rockquarry]

I've had two of the Colt Conversion units. Neither was very accurate and I sold them, but CCI SV outshot just about everything else so that's what I generally used. The CCI SV caused fouling no worse than any other ammo and functioning was always fine.

 

[Andyd]

I inherited a Colt conversion and had been told the history behind it many times. As a result I shot RWS HV ammo through it and the results were not impressive. SV ammo did better but the floating chamber protested after less than a box full.

 

[chief38]

I inherited a Colt conversion and had been told the history behind it many times. As a result I shot RWS HV ammo through it and the results were not impressive. SV ammo did better but the floating chamber protested after less than a box full.

Well, I will consider myself very lucky with mine then! So far 150 rounds of SV CCI and not a single jam or FTF. Doubt I'll ever fire more than 100 rounds at one time going forward anyway.

The floating chamber did have carbon on it (used Hoppes 9 for cleaning) but still operated smoothly when I took it apart. Mine is at least 80+ years old & been around the block a few times so maybe it just smoothed out.

Right now I'm in the process of coloring the front sight orangish - red. Had much difficulty seeing the sights yesterday! 3 thin coats should do it.

 

[Walter Rego]

I had heard the cautions regarding firing lead bullet ammo in a Colt .22 Conversion Kit before buying mine so I have never fired anything other than good old CCI Mini Mags and Remington Golden Bullets, both of which work just fine. I keep the kit clean enough to eat off of and well lubed, especially on the floating chamber area.

Chief38, that is very good accuracy for 50 feet. My kit was made circa 1948 and was never particularly accurate but that was when I was using the factory barrel bushing from the base gun. I bought one of the EGW barrel bushings which can be ordered to fit the ID of the Conversion Unit slide and the OD of the .22 barrel and that did tighten up the groups. Not like my Colt Match Target Woodsman but certainly better than before and worth the < $30 it cost for the custom bushing.

Yes, they aren't target grade pistols but they sure are fun. And that counts for a lot these days.

 

[tmd17]

I just sold one of my conversion sets to my shooting buddy. After a few years of listening to him beg for it, I finally caved. I still have four. One for me, and one for each of the grandsons.

The heft and feel in the hand of a steel 1911 frame hosting one of these is nothing like the new crop of alloy "1911-22" guns on the market. If you have never had the pleasure of shooting one, you are missing out!





The kit pictured below uses a set of steel inserts shaped like 45 acp rounds that accept a 22 lr round. These are then loaded into a standard 1911 magazine. The barrel that goes with the kit has a 45 acp sized chamber but a 22 lr sized bore! It will cycle the gun, sending the blue steel inserts with the empty 22 brass in random directions! Not very practical, but I suppose they were relatively inexpensive to make.

 

[Murdock]

If you are indeed doing a through cleaning after each 100 rounds you are far more disciplined than I.

I have always used my conversion unit as an understudy for shooting centerfire. In that role I tend to shoot at least 100 rounds per session, and load 7 magazines at a time. Rather than bullseye targets for precision, I shoot IDPA-type steel and paper silhouettes on my backyard range for speed. I then put the gun away dirty until next session. When it begins to balk, I clean it. The hotter the ammo, the longer time between cleaning sessions.

Lead fouling, not powder residue, is what ties up the floating chamber. If you are shooting SV ammo that that doesn't lead, why change? Personally I like the recoil the Colt units provide as it better simulates centerfire shooting. and HV ammo helps with that, as well as shooting cleaner.

 

[824tsv]

Chief,
Your "Colt .22 Conversion Unit" (It's not an ACE) is from the early 50's. The Coltmaster rear sight is the "tell" identifying the era.
As previously stated, plated ammunition is generally the best option for these (I use Remington Golden Bullets). I've haven't expereanced accuracy like your's so it looks like you have a winner there. Are you are using the OEM Colt magazine(s) from that era which have the pot metal follower?

 

[chief38]

Chief,
Your "Colt .22 Conversion Unit" (It's not an ACE) is from the early 50's. The Coltmaster rear sight is the "tell" identifying the era.
As previously stated, plated ammunition is generally the best option for these (I use Remington Golden Bullets). I've haven't expereanced accuracy like your's so it looks like you have a winner there. Are you are using the OEM Colt magazine(s) from that era which have the pot metal follower?

Sir, you are exactly correct about the "conversion unit" not being an Ace - I was a bit sloppy when posting. I have two original magazines and one that was still made by Colt but from a slightly later era. All three work well and I do believe the followers on two of them are some sort of pot metal.

As far as accuracy is concerned, I was actually quite surprised myself - I was not expecting that! I participate in all phases of shooting, PPC, Cowboy Action Shooting, Trap, Sporting Clays, Skeet, etc. but bullseye shooting is what I am pretty good at. The M41 I own (my .22 bullseye competition gun) will blow the Colt away however I get a big kick out of shooting a gun that is older than I am - especially because it was my Dad's. Now that I have put 3 coats of Testor's paint on the front sight (still drying and I will clean up the excess paint when dry), I can't wait to see what I can do with it this Friday. Maybe some improvement.

Here are a few pic's, maybe you can enlighten me a bit as I am no expert on Conversion kits or Ace's.

 

[chief38]

This is how my Colt Conversion Unit looks after painting the front sight with three coats of Testor's #1127 Orange Gloss paint after cleaning up excess on sides. Of course the front sight looks a bit out of proportion because my camera focused on the rear sight, but this is basically for color and contrast. It will take a few more days to cure (still soft), but I should be able to be shot Friday. Before painting the sight, it was just a worn off bare metal finish and next to impossible to really see correctly at the indoor Range.

Sorry for the crummy pic's but photography has NEVER been one of my strong points - lol The gun oil I just put on the slide makes for bad pic's as well.

 

[824tsv]

Chief,
Too much to type. It's better to check out the links.
Briefly:
Initially Colt used the "ACE" name to identify a particular pistol. They then used the "ACE" name included in another model (Service Model Ace) They also used the "ACE" name in their pre-war .22-.45 Service Model Conversion Units. Colt re-issued the Service Model Ace pistol in 1978 and used the "ACE" name again as more of a decoration on the right side of the slide. The original Colt ACE and the Colt Service Model Ace are 2 completely different pistols.
In the post war period Colt did not use the "ACE" name on their .22 Conversion Units.
These links are to Sam Lisker's excellent coltautos.com website.
Colt Ace .22 LR Pistol Photos and Information - Coltautos.com
Colt Pistols and Revolvers for Firearms Collectors - Service Model Ace .22 LR Collector's Information
Colt Pistols and Revolvers for Firearms Collectors - .22-.45 Conversion Unit - Collector's Information

Your pictured magazine is from a wartime era Colt Service Model Ace pistol or .22-.45 Conversion Unit.

 

[SS336]

Good shooting and a very cool Colt conversion. Would like to have one. Yours seems to fire lead bullets just fine.
I have a Kimber conversion made by Ceiner I think. It shoots just about anything without a problem. Probably not as accurate as you Colt but lots of fun at the range for not much money. Just banging away at 15yds it can eat a lot of ammo.

 

[824tsv]

Colt .22 Conversion Unit

Chief,
I have (3). All from different eras. None of mine shoot like your's. I started a thread on the Colt Forum for fellows with the Colt .22 Conversion Unit to post their targets. Again, none shot as accurately as yours.
Here's my (3):
From left to right, early post war (1947) with the modified Stevens (no binding screws) rear sight, mid 50's (like yours but with different roll stampings) with the Coltmaster rear sight, mid 70's with the Colt-Accro rear sight.

 

[824tsv]

Continued from above

I also have a post war re-issue Colt Service Model Ace (1978). It also doesn't shoot as accurately as your .22 Conversion Unit.
The first pic is of the right side of my mid 70's .22 Conversion Unit that I couldn't add to the above post

 

[chief38]

I also have a post war re-issue Colt Service Model Ace (1978). It also doesn't shoot as accurately as your .22 Conversion Unit.
The first pic is of the right side of my mid 70's .22 Conversion Unit that I couldn't add to the above post

824tsv thank you for posting the information and all the links. I will read them all. Even though I've owned this 1911 and conversion unit since my Dad died, I never really paid much attention to it. I feel like I just got a new pistol - lol. Now I am anxious to find out how well I can shoot it with the newly painted sights. I'll find out Friday.

BTW, when converted back to it's original form, (45acp) it shoots even better. I no longer believe the rumors that military 1911's were not accurate - it shoots damned near as good as my Gold Cup (minus the Gold Cup trigger of course). The service sights makes it harder to get a good sight picture, but the gun itself is super accurate.

 

[Muley Gil]

I had a Colt conversion kit back in the '70s. It shot OK on an Essex frame, but was definitely NOT target grade. I sold it not long afterwards.

My dad inherited a number of guns from a friend. Some he kept, some he sold. About a year before my dad passed, he gave me the 1939 Service Ace that he got when his friend Jim died. It shoots a lot better than the conversion unit I had.