Why build a 1911 when you can make a low cost one better?

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread has brought up a wonderment I've had for quite some time: are modern 'Mil-Spec' pistols actually built to the same prints as the original Military pistols? I carried a 45 as my Duty Weapon and fired a handful of guns in qualifying and none were anywhere near as tight as what Springfield built on my friends pistol. I've been suspecting for many years that all modern 1911's are built considerably tighter just because if you owned a gunstore and had two guns on the counter....one original Mil-Spec and the other a modern tight gun....which would sell first? Most consumers would pick up the original gun...give it a shake (which results in rattles) then put it down and buy the tight gun...wouldn't they?

If you want a super-tight slide/frame fit it would seem easier to buy parts that are oversize then fit them as you desire rather than buying something that's loose and needing to tighten them up. If the slide/frame fit of the RI pistol is OK for you...then replacing internal parts to upgrade would be a relatively easy thing and as mentioned, you have a functional pistol the entire time you're tinkering with things if you limit your mods to one piece at a time. Once you get it working then move on to the next part to improve...sounds like fun!:)
 
RecoilRob said:
This thread has brought up a wonderment I've had for quite some time: are modern 'Mil-Spec' pistols actually built to the same prints as the original Military pistols? I carried a 45 as my Duty Weapon and fired a handful of guns in qualifying and none were anywhere near as tight as what Springfield built on my friends pistol. I've been suspecting for many years that all modern 1911's are built considerably tighter just because if you owned a gunstore and had two guns on the counter....one original Mil-Spec and the other a modern tight gun....which would sell first? Most consumers would pick up the original gun...give it a shake (which results in rattles) then put it down and buy the tight gun...wouldn't they?

If you want a super-tight slide/frame fit it would seem easier to buy parts that are oversize then fit them as you desire rather than buying something that's loose and needing to tighten them up. If the slide/frame fit of the RI pistol is OK for you...then replacing internal parts to upgrade would be a relatively easy thing and as mentioned, you have a functional pistol the entire time you're tinkering with things if you limit your mods to one piece at a time. Once you get it working then move on to the next part to improve...sounds like fun!:)
Click to expand...

This is a reasonable way to approach RIA pistols. I had a used mid-size (think commander) RIA that I did much the same on. Fit a new STI grip safety (old one had been deactivated or possibly botched in a fitting attempt-it did nothing), opened up the ejection port, fit the slide stop for easier insertion, new barrel link, replaced the dead tritium front sight, fit a new thumb safety (actually used a Gunsite low mount for a while but I tended to bump it back on safe so went with a WC bulletproof TS), new recoil spring--sized properly--the stock one was too long and would bind on compression, new sear spring, new mainspring, EGW oversize firing pin stop--flat bottom, had to replace and fit the reverse plug that broke--RIA sent me one free, properly fit the WC magwell it came with, clean up the trigger track and properly adjust the trigger take-up and over travel. The bull barrel was plenty accurate, so I left it alone.

It was a work in progress for a long time. And I'm totally sorry I traded it in a deal for 2 other guns. I should have kept it and just paid cash! I gained a lot of knowledge over time while working on that pistol. It was really a fine shooter! Oh, well.

At least I have been able to put the knowledge to good use on 3 other 1911s. They run like custom shop tuned pistols! (Dan Wesson, Ruger, RIA .22TCM)
 
RecoilRob said:
This thread has brought up a wonderment I've had for quite some time: are modern 'Mil-Spec' pistols actually built to the same prints as the original Military pistols? I carried a 45 as my Duty Weapon and fired a handful of guns in qualifying and none were anywhere near as tight as what Springfield built on my friends pistol. I've been suspecting for many years that all modern 1911's are built considerably tighter just because if you owned a gunstore and had two guns on the counter....one original Mil-Spec and the other a modern tight gun....which would sell first? Most consumers would pick up the original gun...give it a shake (which results in rattles) then put it down and buy the tight gun...wouldn't they?

If you want a super-tight slide/frame fit it would seem easier to buy parts that are oversize then fit them as you desire rather than buying something that's loose and needing to tighten them up. If the slide/frame fit of the RI pistol is OK for you...then replacing internal parts to upgrade would be a relatively easy thing and as mentioned, you have a functional pistol the entire time you're tinkering with things if you limit your mods to one piece at a time. Once you get it working then move on to the next part to improve...sounds like fun!:)
Click to expand...
A common way for tightening slide-frame fit is not by replacing parts and fitting them, but rather by squeezing sides of the original slide tighter or hammering the two sides of the slide more closely together (protected of course).
 
rpenmanparker said:
A common way for tightening slide-frame fit is not by replacing parts and fitting them, but rather by squeezing sides of the original slide tighter or hammering the two sides of the slide more closely together (protected of course).
Click to expand...
I'm not sure tightening the slide will make it any more accurate. If it runs (which you say yours does) I would leave that alone and upgrade all the other stuff.
 
drband said:
I'm not sure tightening the slide will make it any more accurate. If it runs (which you say yours does) I would leave that alone and upgrade all the other stuff.
Click to expand...
Personally I wouldn't know the truth, only what I read and what seems sensible. The published literature on accurizing a 1911 documents the value of tightening the slide to frame and slide to barrel fits. You hold the frame still (hopefully). If the slide can move relative to your grip and point at different angles from the frame from shot to shot, that will increase the size of groups. Likewise you look through the sights which are mounted on the slide. If the barrel can point at different angles relative to the slide/sights from shot to shot, that will also increase the size of groups. So snugger slide to frame fit and barrel to slide fit via a tighter bushing would seem to be good ways to improve shot precision.
 
gbw said:
I’d start with the RIA. The parts you ruin, and you will, are cheaper. RIA is a good choice to begin learning, and in the end if you’re careful, humble, and patient you’ll end up with an excellent gun. Then you can decide if you want to invest in the parts and tools needed to build first class guns. It’s not simple or cheap, but it is addictive. The tool list is fairly long, depending on how tight / accurate / reliable a pistol you are going for.
Click to expand...
Exactly the reasoning I had in my head. I'd like to start tinkering a little but don't want to screw up an expensive frame or slide so figured "why not try it on a cheap RIA" and IF it came out ok, what would a Caspian build have over it. Just the 'smith?

Some snobby posts, 'get a dremel' and 'just cause you picked up a book on amazon' etc, I'm just trying to read up and be informed on building up a gun-or even just properly upgrading parts. I appreciate the helpful posts and the time taken, a lot of well written info here. Thanks!
 
rpenmanparker said:
A common way for tightening slide-frame fit is not by replacing parts and fitting them, but rather by squeezing sides of the original slide tighter or hammering the two sides of the slide more closely together (protected of course).
Click to expand...

peening the slide is not a long term solution.. To do it correctly the frame rails have to be welded up and re-machined.
 
drband said:
I'm not sure tightening the slide will make it any more accurate.
Click to expand...
As is obvious, I'm no expert on 1911's but I've read that slide to frame fit isn't near as important as barrel to bushing to slide fit and aids in accuracy only very slightly. Correct me if im wrong someone.
 
Found it. "Ed Brown done all the math on this once and if memory serves me correctly he figgured that tightening the slide to frame accounted for as little as 5% of the mechanical accurracy in a 1911." Bob Hunter.
 
rpenmanparker said:
The published literature on accurizing a 1911 documents the value of tightening the slide to frame and slide to barrel fits.
Click to expand...
Mn Fats said:
I'm no expert on 1911's but I've read that slide to frame fit isn't near as important as barrel to bushing to slide fit and aids in accuracy only very slightly. Correct me if im wrong someone.
Click to expand...
You are correct. That is what they believed...tighten up the whole gun...and what often caused failures. A correctly tightened gun can be very reliable.

The barrel to slide fit is much more important as consistent lock up is needed to optimize use of the slide mounted sights. How the slide and frame interfaced was much less important, because you don't aim with the frame
 
rpenmanparker said:
A common way for tightening slide-frame fit is not by replacing parts and fitting them, but rather by squeezing sides of the original slide tighter or hammering the two sides of the slide more closely together (protected of course).
Click to expand...
That is pretty old thought and has been superseded by better methods. That was pretty much a "bigger hammer" solution

tarosean said:
To do it correctly the frame rails have to be welded up and re-machined.
Click to expand...
This is how most are done nowadays.

My 1911 has "high points" in the rails that were welded up to lock up the slide when in battery. As soon as the slide came out of battery, the clearance for the rails to move on the frame were much larger. That is part of what allows a "tight" 1911 to remain reliable when dirty. My 1911 isn't a target gun, it was built to be a fighting gun
 
Mn Fats said:
Found it. "Ed Brown done all the math on this once and if memory serves me correctly he figgured that tightening the slide to frame accounted for as little as 5% of the mechanical accurracy in a 1911." Bob Hunter.
Click to expand...

He didn't do the math Jerry Kuhnhausen did. The Ed Brown math is wrong.

Jerry Kuhnhausen (The Colt .45 Automatic; A Shop Manual, VSP Publishers, McCall, Idaho, 1990) says that slide to frame fit accounts for about 10 to 15 percent of accuracy when compared to all the other mechanical variables, such as barrel and bushing fit, headspace, etc. IIRC
 
What would you do to the RIA? If all you’re going to do is fit a new barrel bushing, change out rhe sights and put different grips on it the RIA is probably the place to start.

If you’re going to fit a threaded match barrel, go with a new trigger, sear, hammer, change out the thumb and grip safeties, etc you might as well start off with the blank canvas.

The RIA route will certainly be cheaper and easier, but then that doesn’t really count as building anything.

Can you strip a 1911 down to the individual components?
 
Save up $1500 and buy yourself a Dan Wesson or Springfield TRP or save another couple hundred more and get a Les Baer. Any of those guns will be fit better, tighter, and more accurate than you’re gonna get from upgrading a RIA and the you’ll actually have something of marketable value that will not only shoot better than you can, but will look incredible sharp, and will certainly impress people.

I’m all for learning a new skill, but to me you’re going to spend a lot of money on learning a skill that takes years of experience to perfect. I’m not so easily parted with my money.
 
9mmepiphany said:
The barrel to slide fit is much more important as consistent lock up is needed to optimize use of the slide mounted sights. How the slide and frame interfaced was much less important, because you don't aim with the frame
Click to expand...

There IS one place where you DO 'aim with the frame'....and that's the Ransom Rest which many use for testing purposes. I wholeheartedly agree that the barrel/slide and muzzle bushing fitting are most of what can cause accuracy problems when fired by hand, but if you plan on making bragging groups with the Ransom.....the slide to frame also has to be pretty tight or you'll not see everything it can do.
 
Back in 2007, while recovering from cancer treatments, I was bored out of my mind. I had a Kimber 22 conversion kit for a 1911 and I thought it would fun to build a frame for the kit. Rock Island frames were selling for $75 back then so, I bought one. I bought a GI parts kit and a few other parts and this is what I ended up with.
C5062CC6-349C-4084-9B25-4BA574D0138D.jpeg

Everting went together great. Super easy build with minor fitting to some of the parts.
It may be just a 22 but it’s had thousands of rounds through it. The only trouble I have ever had was with cheap ammo.
 
I don't know about the percentages but the bushing supports the barrel and the slide supports the bushing. I would think the best fit you could get with both and still have reliability would also give you the best accuracy. Looseness in either should detract from the best but then can YOU shoot good enough to tell the difference. I have a couple of 1911s that I am sure are more accurate than I am able to shoot an am compelled to do nothing to. I made custom grips for each and that's it.

I also understand the desire to try to improve a gun or to build one and am usually involved in one or the other although mostly improving these days, just not 1911s. I say if you wish to do either to go for it. There is a lot of info and parts available to indulge yourself with.
 
Why would you not continue to improve the gun just as you continue to improve yourself? Even if it is already better than you, it is likely far from perfect. I never stop trying to make the gun better. Not always actively but certainly in my head. In fact, the better a gun shoots, the more I am encouraged to work on it. The draw of tack driver accuracy is very powerful.
 
Not to rub it in, but boy-o-boy were the heydays of cheap, good quality pistols great. I have two Argentine Navy Sistema 1927's, and in every way they are the equal of any military 1911 produced IMO, and experience. The very first were actual Colt made, then made in Argentina to the same specs. My two are extremely tight, shoot great, and have beautiful markings. Later imports tended to be in a more 'used' condition, until they all dried up. I think these were around $250 ea, back in the 90's.

Shown are my two made in the early 50's, along with my much loved NORINCO 1911A1 bought BNIB for $225 back in the early 90's. I can not make it malfunction, the trigger is very good, and as you will read here and elsewhere the steel is absolutely tops.

DSC-3716.jpg

Just the two 1927's in 11.25 mm caliber ;)

DSC-7584.jpg

Thanks.
 
Mn Fats said:
Good post Drail, cherry picked this qoute above. Have you seen what mil-spec Springfields sell for these days? $700 new.

Even then, the advantage is just forged on forged and truer design?

Overall, I'm understanding the only difference will be the Caspian/Foster Springer etc will be more in spec than a RIA?..

I appreciate the replies :thumbup:
Click to expand...

If you shop a little?

...you can find'em NIB for less than $500.

WP-20180802-15-50-19-Pro-50-crop-inv.jpg



​
GR
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
  • Locked
1911 R1 Build
Replies
9
Views
1K
Harleytoo
H
Hummer70
  • Locked
It don't go bang, fires, misfires, hangfires and short order cooks
Replies
24
Views
3K
hps1
hps1
Back
Top