Magnum 1911 reliability

Status
Not open for further replies.

TRX

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
1,321
Location
Central Arkansas
A while ago I found out about the .460 Rowland, which promises .44 Magnum performance in a 1911 package. I was quite interested since I've enjoyed shooting a Desert Eagle in .44 Magnum as well as various .44 revolvers.

The Rowland guys say the conversion increases wear on the frame and slide, which is entirely reasonable. They have a list of various brands of 1911 that they recommend, and others they don't recommend. I went searching to see where 1911s tend to wear, which seems to be mainly where the slide and frame meet, and the locking lugs in the slide and barrel.

Nobody can predict exactly how long a converted gun will last, since there's no way to tell exactly which materials were used, how they were heat treated, etc. Which is also reasonable.

There are other "Super" .45s, at least half a dozen, from one developed for the Thompson SMG through the ,451 Detonics and others.

However, I also found out about some 1911 variants that aren't conversions. They're primarily:

1) The Coonan .357 Magnum, which shoots ordinary rimmed .357 Magnum cartridges. Apparently Colt actually made some .38 Special 1911s years ago. The Coonan's magwell was stretched to allow the longer .357 cartridge. Early ones used a ramp and pin locking system, later ones use the swinging link.

2) The AutoMag IV and V, which are long-slide, swinging-link variants. The IV appears to be stretched at the magwell like the Coonan, and shoots .45 Winchester Magnum. The V shoots .50 Action Express. I haven't found mention of it, but I assume the magwell (or the whole gun) was widened to accept the larger-diameter cartridge. (neither gun has any relationship to the "real" Sanford-designed Auto Mag)

3) the .50 GI, which uses a widened magwell and a proprietary .50 cartridge. The ballistics overlap the various "super" .45s.



I'm thinking of the "Supers" as hot rods. You'd trade power for longevity, and they'd need increased maintenance until it was time to replace major parts. "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch."

The .50 GI and Coonan seem straightforward enough, but I'm curious about the AMTs. The exploded views seem to show ordinary long-slide 1911s. Does anyone here own one of these? Shot it regularly? From the crude pictures, I can't see that there's any more beef where the slide and frame bang together. I'm having trouble believing they'd hold up for the thousands (or tens of thousands) of rounds some people have run through ordinary .45 ACP 1911s.
 
Local shop has an AMT in 45 Win Magnum. It is a long slide - probably 7" or better - and I have to figure that all that slide mass has to be trading off slide velocity for slide momentum. If I had to guess, I'd say that the slide is also likely larger to accomodate a thicker chamber/hood. It's a chunky piece of work.

IIRC, it's also got a pivoting trigger and not the traditional 1911 sliding trigger.
 
The original Auto Mag was a short-recoil setup with a multi-lug rotating bolt. The Desert Eagle is a gas operated rotating bolt. The Wildey was also gas operated. All were well established when the AM-IV and AM-V swinging-link pistols hit the market.

Given the lack of "Super-Duper" swinging-link pistols, I guess I'm wondering if AMT discovered something that wasn't obvious to anyone else, or if they're just trading a bunch of lifetime for power.

I've not had the opportunity to shoot a real Auto Mag. I got to put a couple of magazines through a Wildey once, and wasn't impressed. The barrel is light and the muzzle axis is pretty high in relation to my hand. I've run hundreds of rounds through the Desert Eagle, which shoots fine, except the weight bothers me nowadays. A 1911 is positively petite against the Eagle. Of course, a 1911 is petite compared to some of the modern double-stack 9mms, too...

Over on forgottenweapons.com there's an operator's manual and some photos of a Gabbett-Fairfax "Mars" - http://www.forgottenweapons.com/mars-pistol

The Mars looks like it would bring "hammer bite" to its ultimate extreme... and that's the last of the .44-class autoloaders I know of. Apparently packaging an autoloading mechanism around that much cartridge and keeping the size and cost down to something reasonable is not a simple problem.
 
Don't forget the LAR Grizzly Winchester Magnum. That was a beefed up 1911A1 frame and slide, with some parts interchangeability.

I have fired one of these, and it was very nice. I wish I had one.

I've fired most variations of both IMI and MRI Dessert Eagles, and they are fun, low recoil, and very heavy.

I've fired an older Coonan in the late 80's, and passed up the chance to buy it. Yes, I am still kicking myself. Hard.

The only AMT "AutoMag" offerings that I have fired were the AMT AutoMag II in .22WMR and the AMT AutoMag III in .30 Carbine. Fun, but whatever the label says, they were AMT Automag, not really an Auto Mag by Harry Sanford of Auto Mag Corporation. I would love to own and fire one of his designs.

Any high pressure cartridge is going to cause increased wear and tear in the action, rifling, and all parts of the machine that it is fired from. I haven't looked into the .460 Rowland - I am going to.
 
I'm having trouble believing they'd hold up for the thousands (or tens of thousands) of rounds some people have run through ordinary .45 ACP 1911s.

I am a little confused. You initially made the premis that these are "hotrodded" 1911s. They are and you indicated that pushing the limits shortens the life. That is very true. So why then ask if you have trouble believing something you have already said is not true? BTW I have a Kimber 1911 that I have made a couple of changes to and handload 45 super brass to 1350fps with 185g bullets. It has a healthy recoil but works great. I could care less if it reduces the life of the gun to 5,000 rounds as I will be an old man by then. The pistol still shoots regular 45acp without problem, I have not had too give up anything. Good luck.
 
I'd forgotten the Grizzly.

The Rowland looks very interesting. The only part I don't like is the compensator, but the manufacturer says the gun will beat itself to death without it. And at $300, the price is right... I could afford to replace the frame and slide several times before I worked up to the price of a Desert Eagle, plus I wouldn't need a trailer to lug it around...

The Coonan, though... I always liked the .357 Magnum.
 
There was a Rowland kind of circulating around here. I guess nobody could figure out what it was FOR and shot it some, then traded it. But it performed as advertised. Velocity was as claimed and the compensator kept the recoil down. It was more comfortable to shoot than a revolver of similar power.

Years and years ago, there was a real .44 Automag in use here. I got to shoot it some and recall a good stout kick and a lot of monkey motion as the action cycled. I'd rather the Rowland and a little less power for better manageability. The Automag was accurate with good bullets, though.

I have no experience with a Coonan .357 but a 9x23 Win. in a real Colt is pretty close to magnum performance and is a good shooter.
 
I'm still looking at the Rowland. I was considering doing my own instead of using the Clark kit, starting with a premium barrel and hard-fitting it to get maximum lug engagement, etc.

Stepping back from the problem, I realized all the modifications I was looking at were due to the extra oomph of the Rowland slamming the slide and barrel back into the frame harder than the .45 ACP.

Perhaps a better solution would be to not have the slide move so vigorously to start with.

The motion of the slide is controlled by the link timing. I don't have any problem with moving the slide stop pin or reshaping the lugs, so I started reading up on timing... I'm still digesting what I've read so far.

Something else came to mind, though. Looking at the exploded views, the AMT AutoMag IV and IV handle .45 WinMag and .50AE using the same basic mechanism as an ordinary 1911. And if they're using the same steel as the Hardballer slide laying on my desk, their metal isn't particularly hard.

Is it possible to change the link timing so as not to give so much kick to the slide? And does anyone know if the "AutoMag" pistols did that?
 
Factory .45 ACP loadings aren't considered "high pressure" cartridges. The frame & slide steel of earlier 1911 pistols, while considered state-of-the-art for the 20th Century, really can't compare to the durability & elasticity of modern metallurgy. It's the swing-link design (thanks Moses) that endures. Long Slide AMT's aren't "beefed-up" anywhere to run .45 Super. They don't need to be. I know of a Caspian Long Slide that's happily chewed & spit through cases upon cases of .45 Super. As for "tens of thousands" of rounds of .460 Roland running in a "ordinary" 1911? I can't definitively say. With careful link-timing & recoil spring experimentation, anything's possible. Since your title is "Magnum 1911 Reliability" I can say it wouldn't be reliability that concerned me. Now durability? That's the unknown.
 
That's a point I've already been wondering about. A longer barrel means unlocking begins further before the bullet leaves the barrel, which looks like it would put even more stress on the locking surfaces and impact points.

On the other hand, the Clark kit and the AMT "AutoMags" have long barrels, so I'm probably missing a point somewhere.


Hmm. MV=mv means the barrel/slide assembly will be recoiling faster, proportional to the added bullet velocity. So the slide position as the bullet exits the muzzle should remain the same, assuming the same barrel length...
 
The motion of the slide is controlled by the link timing.

:scrutiny: Ummmm, no. The link times the barrel drop. It has naught to do with the slide.

A longer barrel means unlocking begins further before the bullet leaves the barrel,

Ummm, no. If the breech opens before the bullet leaves the barrel, unpleasant things will happen about 18 inches from the end of your nose.

which looks like it would put even more stress on the locking surfaces and impact points.

The upper barrel lugs and mating slide lugs are stressed by the forces of the bullet holding the barrel forward and the slide being driven rearward and dragging the barrel along with it against those forces...locking horizontally in opposition/shear. Barrel impact surface in the frame and rear face of the lower lug don't suffer all that much as long as they hit at the right point...high on the lug and high on the VIS.

Slide to frame impact abutments are really neither here nor there. They're designed to absorb it, and are actually way over-engineered for standard cartridges.
 
Ummmm, no. The link times the barrel drop. It has naught to do with the slide.

The barrel and slide are keyed together via the locking lugs until the barrel swings down far enough to disengage.


Ummm, no. If the breech opens before the bullet leaves the barrel, unpleasant things will happen about 18 inches from the end of your nose.

So I've heard.
 
The barrel and slide are keyed together via the locking lugs until the barrel swings down far enough to disengage.

The link still doesn't have anything to do with the slide's motion. The slide isn't timed other than at its limits of travel backward and forward...neither of which have anything to do with the link.

So I've heard.

Do you doubt it?

So the slide position as the bullet exits the muzzle should remain the same, assuming the same barrel length.

Pretty much, yes...assuming that the outside forces acting on the slide are also equal.
 
I used to own a Coonan .357. That was more than 20yrs ago. Selling it was a big mistake (though I sold it to buy a Desert Eagle .44mag, shouldn't have sold that one either!).

The gun was absolutely reliable. I shot 158gr SWC cast bullets in it, max loads; never jammed. I don't know if the new Coonan is as good as the old one, but if it is, I wouldn't hesitate buying another one... It was very accurate and kicked very hard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top