Magazine Observations

[1911Tuner]

This should be of particular interest to Fuff, Jim Keenan, who know and understand...and to Jungle...who doesn't believe.

Recently I had occasion to address a return to battery problem on two pistols, owned by two different guys. One Loaded Springfield and one Colt Gunsite model. Both very nice guns, in fit and finish.

Both guns had slight spec issues, and I didn't want to get too invasive, since both were under warranty. One, I was able to get to run perfectly, with a slight hitch during a slidelock reload on the top round, and only if the slidestop was used to send the gun to battery. Slingshot provided reliable function.

The Springfield gave a hard "Ca-Chunk" on the go-to-battery until the third round was gone from the magazine.

Both owners were using the "best" 8-round magazines. One was made a little better by substituting proprietary 7-round followers and Wolff 8-round extra-power springs...but the top round still shoved the bullet back into the case...and sometimes would fail to go to battery on the top round. Other problems with the frame that aren't related to the functional problem kept me in the "Hands-Off" position until it was resolved by Springfield.

Interestingly, I produced a couple of the old, tapered-lip, late/gradual release USGI magazines...circa about 1940 or so...and tried them in the guns.

What a shock to hear the light "ka-chunk" in the Colt turn into a smooth
"Schlap!" as it went to battery on all rounds...and the Springfield's hard KA-CHUNK!" turned into a light one...with no more bullet setback and no failures to go to battery. And they worked the same way with hollowpoints and lead SWC ammo...

Both guys asked if they could buy the magazines. I declined. The really good ones are gettin' scarce.

Goodness gracious...What are we to make of this?

 

[farscott]

One was made a little better by substituting proprietary 7-round followers and Wolff 8-round extra-power springs...

Tuner,

May I ask if this the proprietary follower was a Tripp Super 7 follower? I have had lots of luck with taking Colt magazine bodies with the Metalform "M" stamping on the floor plate and using a Tripp Super 7 spring and follower conversion kit. I was able to get a friend's new SA GI running just by swapping the stock magazine for one of my Colt/Tripp magazines.

I am asking because I have no real USGI magazines and my prospects for getting some are slim. I do have dozens of the Metalform-made Colt magazines to which I can add the Tripp Super 7 kit.

 

[1911Tuner]

re:

Farscott...nope. By a happy coincidence, Metalform and Checkmate's 7-round mags made to Colt's specs actually provide the best of both worlds. Tapered lips that effect a more gradual release, and a timed release point that is more abrupt than the GI mag design, but still less so than the typical aftermarket wadcutter lips. Interestingly, some of the OEM magazines that come with Norinco pistols share that feature.

I'm hesitant to reveal the magazine brand in question for fear that yet another flame war will start over it, along with the usual: "Harrumph! My
XYZ magazines have been flawless!"

I don't doubt that many have had good service from XYZ and ABC magazines. I just thought that this might be of interest.

 

[45auto]

Just so I understand this , the current style of wadcutter mag simply allows an "earlier" release so that shorter length ammo doesn't dive into the ramp too steep...downward. It does this by being picked up earlier by the extractor.

If the wadcutter is long enough, i.e. 1.250-1.26, it would not need an earlier "release" or early pickup from the extractor. I "assume" when they designed the new mags they were trying to feed, perhaps 185's...short ones?

Ball ammo works in the wadcutter since it's long enough not to dive too steeply and it's picked up by the extractor anyway. Not ideal is the point you are making given the original specs.

The 1911 design is flexable enough to work with a variety of mag lips, ramps, ammo, etc, just not with the "reliability" that it once was know for with the original specs.

 

[1911Tuner]

re:

45AUto...Not exactly. The magazines fed short-coupled 200-grain SWCs...1.230 OAL...as slick as a button in pistols that wouldn't feed either SWC or hardball very well from the XYZ magazines...and several were tried.
Not even my favorite Metalforms did as well as the GI mags...though they did a little better than the XYZs.

The clew:

The old mags start the release a little earlier...release gradually as the round moves...and finish later. The new-style mags hold the round until the last second, and release early and abruptly.

Visualize! Visualize!

 

[45auto]

Okay.

So, the transition from captured ammo to extractor is longer and "smoother", i.e. not abrupt, like the early released wadcutter mag.

Meaning the "jump" from mag controlled casing to extractor is more gentle, controlled...less violent. That's the "key" to working better...yes?

When hand cycling my SWC loads at 1.26 with a wad mag, I can't see the bullet dip at all. The release from the mag to the extractor is quite vigorous. It "appears" the release doesn't happen until the bullet nose is contacting the upper part of the chamber?

One of the problems of visualizing from "books and drawings" is they are often not drawn to scale for clarity I assume. Doing it with the gun gives you a different perspective. Not a lot of "room" in there.

 

[Old Fuff]

Ah yes...

Should I deside to buy a Glock, SIG, Ruger or Beretta I will get a pistol made by.... would you believe... Glock, SIG, Ruger or Beretta. On the other hand if I should opt for something on a 1911 platform it may come from a flock of clone makers who buy the parts from other suppliers, and none in the whole bunch seem to have a set of blueprints (or if they do they can't read them).

So Tuner ends up with two very expensive examples that are "loaded" with gadgets and cosmetics - but won't run. He finds that they have some minor "dimensional issues," and of course tricked-out magazines. So he tinkers a bit and switches to some magazine that were made 60 years ago - give or take - and presto!! the guns start to run.

It will come as no shock to Tuner, but my pistols for the most part have magazines similar to the ones he has, and for the last 55 years or so they have been feeding just fine.

Now some of this has to do with the magazines themselves, and some of it has to do with things like run-up, slide velocity, and where the magazine has positioned the top remaining round when the breechface hits the base of the cartridge. This is why things like spring rates and follower shapes can make a difference. Also I hope someone noticed that Tuner didn't solve the problem of getting the slide into battery by using a recoil spring he made out of something removed from pick-up truck parked out in the back yard.

Browning's pistol used to work just fine - until the "new school" crowd went and made it over...

 

[ugaarguy]

Metalform and Checkmate's 7-round mags made to Colt's specs actually provide the best of both worlds. Tapered lips that effect a more gradual release, and a timed release point that is more abrupt than the GI mag design, but still less so than the typical aftermarket wadcutter lips.

Tuner, good sir, should we take that to mean that the Colt factory 7 round mags from Metalform and Checkmate are the best option for those of us without access to GI mags like yours?

 

[1911Tuner]

re:

ugaarguy...I'd say that they're the best compromise. The one thing lacking is that they don't usually have the best springs, and often the follower angles are out of spec...but that's pretty easy to correct with bent sheet-metal followers.

If the gun is within spec...and the magazine spring is up to the task...and the follower angle is correct...the round doesn't dive steeply into the ramp before making the upward turn toward the chamber. It should dip, strike the ramp high, glance off and glide over the corner of the barrel ramp rather than hitting it and again glancing up. The over-the-corner glide is important to smooth feeding because it holds the barrel down in the bed instead of pushing it forward. When the barrel moves forward, it also moves up...increasing the angle that the round has to overcome during the horizontal breakover.

The tapered lip magazine promotes that occurrence because...as the round strikes the frame ramp and starts to angle up, it's moved forward far enough for the butt-end to start to move up, so that by the time the nose of the bullet starts to glide over the corner of the barrel ramp, the rim has also moved higher onto the breechface. The angle is shallower, so the breakover to horizontal is easier and smoother.

By the time the bullet ogive is on top of the barrel ramp, the barrel is trapped in the bed...the extractor has picked up the rim...and the case is nearly centered on the breechface. All that's left is for the round to finish straightening up in the chamber...and for the slide to strike the barrel hood, and move the barrel forward and up into battery.

The parallel lip, early/abrupt release holds the rim down until the last instant, and releases it during the angled transition. Works well for very short OAL SWC ammo...below 1.190 inch...but not at all for longer rounds from 1.200-1.260 inch, even though they work reasonably well with longer ammo in many guns...but not all the time in all the guns. Again...it does require that the springs are strong enough, and the followers are set at the correct angle to prevent nose-diving deep into the ramp.

In short...The tapered design works for the same reasons that the new "High Cartridge Presentation" magazines work. They lower the angle of entry into the chamber after striking the feed ramp. They just do it by a different method. Nothing new under the sun, it seems. Oftentimes, these wonderous, new inventions were already in place many years before the modern inventor was born. The problem lies in the fact that many have either forgotten...or they've been innundated for so long with the modern that they've neglected to consider why the old was done like it was. Simply not enough faith in the genius who gave us the gun. Think. If the early, abrupt release magazines had enhanced feed reliability...don't you think that he would implemented it long ago? I have no doubt that it didn't escape his attention, and was likely tried during the development process..."Just to see what would happen."

I not only heard and felt the dramatic difference in two different pistols...I now have witnesses to it who are also internet forum members. You can contact Rob1035 and browningwgm over at 1911.org to get their testimonies. The latter one is coming back tomorrow to let me finish up his tweak, even though the original problem of intermittent RTB is solved. Rob's is a machining problem within the frame, and I want Springfield to correct that before we go further.

 

[grendelbane]

Unfortunately, there are no GI mags for my 10mm or .38 Super. So far, I have had a problem child in each flavor. Finally got both working acceptably, and in the case of the 10mm, I discarded 1 Colt mag, but kept the other 3, while replacing the springs with Wolff.

Fortunately, both of my .45s run well with all of my .45 mags. I even have 2 9mm mags for the rare times when I slip the 9mm barrel in the .38 Super, and they both work well.

Then, there are the 3 mags I have for .40 S&W and 357 SIG. Guess I am lucky, because they seem to be working.

Everything is working now, guess I need a new hobby.

 

[1911Tuner]

Problem Chiles

grendelbane wrote:

>Unfortunately, there are no GI mags for my 10mm or .38 Super. So far, I have had a problem child in each flavor.<
****************

Specifically...what are they doin' wrong? Reason I'm askin' is that I've taken the plunge on a couple of magazines...stepped a little ways outside of the envelope...and I may have the cure, depending on exactly what the glitch is.

Oh...and tapered lip mags are around for the Super. Problem is that they're old, scarce, and expensive. You might try one of Colt's and see what happens.

 

[Old Fuff]

Think. If the early, abrupt release magazines had enhanced feed reliability...don't you think that he would implemented it long ago? I have no doubt that it didn't escape his attention, and was likely tried during the development process..."Just to see what would happen."

Sure he did. If anyone has doubts look at Browning/Colt's earlier 1903 Pocket Pistol and 1908 Vest Pocket pistol. But in these pistols he wasn't interested in having a controled feed, and in what became the model 1911 he was. The tapered magazine lips are an important part of that feature.

Anything and everything Browning did always had a reason, although today those reasons are often overlooked or ignored.

 

[1911Tuner]

re:

Old Fuff wrote:

>Sure he did. If anyone has doubts look at Browning/Colt's earlier 1903 Pocket Pistol and 1908 Vest Pocket pistol. But in these pistols he wasn't interested in having a controled feed, and in what became the model 1911 he was. The tapered magazine lips are an important part of that feature.

Anything and everything Browning did always had a reason, although today those reasons are often overlooked or ignored.<
**************

Yep, and yep. Just like the slightly less than 90 degree breechface on the 1911. It's part of the whole controlled feed concept...and part of why some guns just don't run right, no matter what. All those angles are there for a reason...breechface, feed ramp, barrel ramp, magazine lip taper and release point...and none of'em allow for much variation.

 

[grendelbane]

Old Fuff, I think that I now have both problem children under control. The Delta Elite would fail to feed about 95% of the time. Occasionally, it would also fail to extract, so I replaced the extractor. The former owner had a passion for extremely heavy springs, so I tried a #20 spring, and then, after following tuner's suggestions about the small radius firng pin stop, I went to a #18 1/2 spring. Finally, I installed a higher fitting magazine catch, and the combination of all of these things seems to have cured the problem, with the exception of the original magazine that came with the gun. New Wolff springs went into all of the mags, also. The problem magazine was removed from active service, and all seems well with this one.

The .38 Super was always picky about its food. Ball and Remington hollow points were about all I could trust. This was a Series '70 and when I obtained a pre series '70 .38 Super slide and barrel in a box of miscellaneous gun parts, I tried the old barrel and bushing. Now it gobbles up most anything! Both barrels are the old style, but both shoot quite well if you seat the right bullets to the max OAL.

My .38S Commander has never offered any problems. It feeds everything I have ever tried. Its probably 4 or 5 years older than I am, but has held up a lot better over the years. Maybe there is a pattern here?:banghead:

 

[1911Tuner]

Maybe

Grendelbane wrote:

>My .38S Commander has never offered any problems. It feeds everything I have ever tried. Its probably 4 or 5 years older than I am, but has held up a lot better over the years. Maybe there is a pattern here?<
*********

mmmmm...Could beeeee!

 

[Peter M. Eick]

I would add that I think a lot of the "logic" and "testing" that Browning et al. used in designing the 1911 was not so much ignored as just plain forgotten.

My impression of the situation is very much like my company. I work for a huge oil company. I am still getting asked about projects I did and my predecessors did decades ago. Lots of information was passed via the lunchroom discussions or out in the field over a beer. What it taught me is documentation is everything, but in the short term right now I am the "corporate memory" for certain aspects of domestic operations. Just recently I was asked about a an area for a survey I acquired and the guys looking for it did not even realize we not only owned it, I designed it, acquired it and got it processed. They were thinking about acquiring it.

I am sure Browning and his team would think the same thing. They would look at some of problems we routinely have and go "Well of course that failed you changed this that and the other thing which we tested in 1909 and modified in 1910. Why do you think we bent that piece that way?"

Then they would walk off muttering things about amateurs playing in a professional business. Just like I did. It taught me a valuable lesson. Ask professionals, don't assume you understand and document everything!

 

[Old Fuff]

You have a good point. There is a lot more interest in the mechanical side of the picture then the history involved.

That said, much of the development work on the 1911 design was well documented. You find it in the trial reports and letters between Colt and the Army officers at Springfield Armory. Also in Browning's patent applications. More information can be found by looking at the progression of prototypes and how they changed.

In my view the current manufacturers of 1911 platform pistols - as well as parts and accessories - aren't interested in past history, just current and future sales. They push features they think potential buyers will find "cool" and attractive without worrying about possible consequences. If this wasn't true you'd not find certain makers using MIM extractors. The fact that they do makes it obvious that they either don't understand how the extractor is supposed to work - or they don't care.

Most buyers on the other hand don't understand what makes the machine tick, and presume the gun they just bought is exactly like Browning and Colt designed it - and then are disappointed when the gun don't run. They also seem to think that you can put 8 rounds into a magazine designed to hold 7, and not have any unforeseen consequences. The fact of the matter is that sometimes they work (at least until the spring takes a set) and sometimes they don't.

All of this keeps Tuner busy, tweeking this or that, or writing long posts on various forums trying to explain what’s going on and why. Meanwhile nobody ever asks, “why didn’t it work right in the first place?” The 1911 pistol business is the only one I know of where the makers can turn out an inordinate number of lemons, and still have customers coming back and begging for more. :banghead:

 

[XavierBreath]

This is interesting. I would like to know the brand of these "best" magazines, as I have seen feeding problems dissolve after magazine swaps as well.

Anyone care to name names?

 

[45auto]

Good points.

In regards to the magazines the other "reason" is the books that people like me "read", , they often state the newly designed mags are "better" and that's pretty much what is for sale anyway. I've been shooting 1911s for a long time now, but I'm not sure I've ever had a "GI" type mag or knew the difference to be honest...until I "read" about them and they were pretty well dismissed.

I'll have to try one of those metalform mags as Tuner detailed.

Perhaps Metalform should consider the original GI type mag. I'd bet there is more people now than ever shooting hardball type bullets, due to the economy brands.

Too many choices in mags IMHO.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Old Fuff makes a very good point about us accepting lemons in the form of 1911's.

The 1911 format has been so "sold" to the shooting fraternity that we just accept failure as part of the game. The game is marketing as we all can now get a 1911 in virtually every major manufacturer.

Lets step back and analyze the situation for just a sec. Go to any magazine rack and look at the pictures. Most will be of some form of custom or stock 1911. Now read the articles and note that very rarely do they talk about significant shooting with the gun. Mostly 50 maybe 100 rnds fired and then any problems or bulkiness is attributed to being new.

I admit it. I succumbed to the 1911 game and have Baer's and a single Razorback. Of my 4 1911's only the Razorback has been back to the shop thus I have had good luck with my Baer's but I bought them only for the range and I paid a lot of money for each one to work and be accurate. They only have Baer magazines and they work.

BUT!

I go to the range, I watch folks have problems routinely with their Springer/Smith/SIG/Colt/ETC/ETC. They have jams, failures to eject, can't hit the broadside of a barn etc yet they extol the virtues of the 1911 because that is what is supposed to happen. This is even with factory ammo and not reloads.


So where does that leave us?

Basically I see it that the common manufacturers have realized they can just let the 1911's go out the door with no QC/QA because the public will do that for them and also that the average shooter does not put enough rounds down the gun to ever even tell if there is a problem. Thus we have poorly designed magazines, MIM extractors, 8 rnd mags when properly made 7 rounder would last a lifetime.

Sorry to Rant a bit, but it seemed like the thing to do.

 

[Old Fuff]

Welcome to the club...

 

[1911Tuner]

Rantin' and Ravin'

Fuff...I do believe that Peter understands.

The "Inherently Finicky" 1911 has been known for that for so long, that it's simply accepted as fact...but there was a time that this wasn't the case.
Problem is, that many don't remember it as it was in its heyday. Like a world champion prizefighter well past his prime. When he comes out of retirement to take on the young squirt who THINKS he's a tough guy...and gets his clock cleaned...everybody thinks that the old champ never really was any good and that he couldn't have beaten the new kid on his best day...when in reality, the kid wouldn't have lasted three rounds when the older fighter was 25 years old.

Now, whenever somebody buys a new Colt/Springer/Kimber/Whatever..they rave about 200 rounds or 300 rounds without a malfunction...as long as it's clean and well-oiled, of course...and gripped just so...and fired with Brand X ammunition...and...ad nauseum. I know that there are a good many good ones around that just run like a sewin' machine...but there are too many that don't...and the factory-supplied magazine is often at the root of it.

 

[sm]

Good thread, I fully understand all this about the 1911, the mags and load the gun was designed to run.

I still say in less than 3 years Marketing will re-invent Rocks and screw them up...

 

[1911Tuner]

Design

Steve posted:

>Good thread, I fully understand all this about the 1911, the mags and load the gun was designed to run.<
*********************

Which reminds me of another widely accepted bit of lore...That the 1911 was designed to function with hardball, and is only reliable with hardball unless extensively modified. I've disproven that one with several unaltered USGI and old commercial Colt pistols...demonstrating that they'll not only feed and function with modern hollowpoints and semi-wadcutters...but they'll do it from
the old "Hardball Only" magazines...the ones with the tapered lips and late release. Many people have been shocked to see the guns eat'em up...and anyone who wants to see it need only come visit. My pistols aren't rare exceptions, but pretty much the norm for original, matched assemblies. Mixed part guns may or may not do it...and given the military's practice of
disassembling 2 or 3 dozen at a time...tossing the parts into a chemical bath...and reassembling with no regard as to what slide, barrel, bushing, etc. went with what frame...Well...sometimes it gets lost in the translation.
Non-mixed guns will do it at a rate of about 95% or better.

 

[sm]

Well sir,
I admit I am not as learned and experienced as you and others. I just have what itty bit of experiences , observations or what I learned about what.

CCI "Flying Ashtrays" and a old Gov't Model worked - as is, from the get-go.
I buy a Steel Combat Commander, HS grad gift to self, and Mentors said " yeah, get one, be a neat deal from the Gov't model, but set up and Spec'd the same, even if it is steel and not blue".

Get it, take apart, all parts are there, clean factory stuff out, re-lube, and time to shoot it.

Just the factory 7 rd mags, Ran hardball, the 'flying ashtrays' , 200 gr SWC (#68) - darn thing just run. Heck Mentors mixed up loadings in mag, and it run.

Dang thing even cases only...I just got ribbed for buying a steel gun and not blue, all in good fun. Then 3 Mentors ran out and got one like mine, and another dozen of the plain vanilla Colt 7 rd mags.

Life was simpler before folks had to make it complicated.

We didn't know no better than to understand the design best could, and learn to shoot.

Gee, if we'd had a time machine, we could have gone into the future and bought all this skill and target stuff. *snicker*

Year go by...

Stupid me ( mentors too) we see these mags with a hole in the bottom, and we took 'em apart like we'd always done.
Whaddya mean you poke in that hole and the bottom of the mag slides off? Whut for you wanna do that fer?

*grin*