1911 Firearm Addicts banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
You Don’t Know Me!
Joined
·
1,852 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We talk a lot about both the reliability of certain guns we have and the potential finicky nature that can exist as well.

I feel like, with my 1911’s, I have been pretty luck. I have really not experienced a lot of FTF’s or other failures. But they do happen. I was shooting my VBob against my P220 Elite Carry and P227 yesterday. I had a few FTF’s where the round hung up in feed and got slightly stuck taking a bit of work to clear.

This was far less a firearm failure than a Reloading issue. I was getting to the bottom of an older set of reloads that I had this issue with due to a bit of bulging in the case. So I did not mark it against the VBob.

However, the interesting thing is that the rounds that would not feed in the VBob fed without issue in both of the SIG’s. That is not to say that I have not had the P220 have a similar feeding issue with these older reloads. The P227 however has never once hiccuped on me. No matter what I fed it. Something about the design of the double stack 45 mag makes it just run flawlessly.

On both the 1911’s and the P220 the feed ramp on these particular rounds can cause the bullet to get “stuck” feeding from a single stack mag.

I have remedied my reloading process and newer rounds feed without issue in all of my 45’s. Also I should note thes are SWC and not ball rounds. Which can be an issue at times as well.

This got me to thinking though about meantime between failures of guns I carry. Truthfully, since getting the P227 both its accuracy, reliability and additional 2 round capacity - it tends to now be my go to carry 45. Still love my 1911’s but ... extra rounds....

Anyhow, I know there has been mountains written about reliability of 1911’s and their potential finicky nature. That you need to pour at least a good $1000 into even a basic 1911 to make it fully reliable (not my words, but many others) and most of us would prefer a tuned 1911 to a bone stock one before putting it on the hip.

So, what is your expected meantime between failure if you are fully honest and think about how your 1911’s have functioned?
 

·
CEO of DILLIGAF industries
Joined
·
8,561 Posts
I don't expect failures . The few times in the past that they have happened were traced back to reloading issue . My 9mm 1911s have had nothing but factory ammo , and have zero fails of any kind . My 45 acp 1911s get almost exclusively reloads run thru them . The only fails were from a light load or bullet OAL . That was a long time ago , problem solved . My Sig P220 does not like light loads so I don't use them in it . By light , I mean below 4.5 grns of Tight Group with a 200 grn bullet .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,567 Posts
Like Mike I don’t expect failures. In my 1911’s I shoot exclusively reloads, SWC in my .45’s & round nose in my 9mm’s.

To be fair I have zero bone stock guns & I’m fortunate that at this point all my guns are either Jardine or Rogers but one so they are all properly built.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
  • Like
Reactions: boatdoc

·
Known Agitator
Joined
·
3,697 Posts
My only issues have been with my reloads. I still have a few .38Superb reloads that are a little too long. I went through them and plunk tested them and separated the ones that did not pass.

Usually with my 1911's, if shooting more than a couple hundred rounds, I do put a bit of oil on the gun, If I don't I have had a few feeding issues, but oil solves them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,847 Posts
Which SWC? The Universal Internet Standard for the usual machine cast H&G No 68 copy is 1.250000". My brand of bullet and my guns do better at 1.24-1.242". I do have non-SWC guns and I am changing over to roundnose throughout; consuming the SWCs on hand in a couple of guns I know to handle them reliably.

But there are non-68 SWCs on the market and the plated ones can get really weird. I never did get Rainier plated SWCs to feed in any gun any OAL.

You can go by the "thumbnail of shoulder" standard or the target shooter's 0.936" from head to SHOULDER length.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,838 Posts
I'm using a Berrys plated 200 grain SWC @ 1.225 , which was the recommended length . I also have a small shoulder above the case ( approx. .030 ). I have FTF'S with all my .45's . I just didn't know whether to go longer or shorter .
 

·
CEO of DILLIGAF industries
Joined
·
8,561 Posts
I'm using a Berrys plated 200 grain SWC @ 1.225 , which was the recommended length . I also have a small shoulder above the case ( approx. .030 ). I have FTF'S with all my .45's . I just didn't know whether to go longer or shorter .
Can you describe your FTF ? I have just enough lead shoulder showing to facilitate a crimp . I pay no attention to OAL length on SWC . But , if too much shoulder is showing it effectively makes the case length too long and may hit the ridge in chamber , too short and brass hits barrel hood . I seem to have it worked out . I also run them all through a Lee factory crimp sizing die at the end . FWIW , RNFP's are a little less finicky and available in 200 grn . I also use these because they easily chamber in my 625 Miculek revolver .
 

·
Every day is Saturday and every night's a party!
Joined
·
7,829 Posts
I don't reload so I like to keep it simple. I have almost no ammo/feeding issues with my 1911s - built, stock, "semi custom" - they all run good. However I only run 230gr ball or one of two JHPs, Federal Hi-Shok 230gr or Ranger T +P 230gr. Both have long records of feed reliability and accuracy regardless of the gun. Same with my 9mms, it's either 115gr ball or Federal 9BPLE 115gr JHP +P+, another JHP that has an excellent reputation for function and accuracy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,687 Posts
In 3, 9mm 1911’s I’ve had 4 FTF this year (8K+ rds).
3 were backwards primers.
1 was a bulged case that wouldn’t go into battery.
Yes, my reloads.

My experience is; if your pistols are set up properly, and maintained- they run.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
Responding to Rod's OP, the round affects feedability, but my personal belief (anecdotal and so possibly mistaken) is that a given single stack mag gun, 9 or 45 or whatever, may have any issue with a given round that a double stack gun would not. That is one of the reasons I initially was attracted to the EDC X9 because it adapted a typical double stack 9 mag (Walther?) to a SAO with 1911 controls. I eventually sold my X9 because I did not like the grip but did not have feeding issues with it.

As indicated, this is colored by my personal experience when I was in the Marines near the end of the 1911 era and we were struggling to adapt 1911s from a military sidearm afterthought to a special operations-usable, primary, 100 percent reliable weapon. I also recall the relief when the Berettas arrived and they actually fed and shot 100 percent. I also recall in that era after I had transitioned to the reserves and was a cop, the problems some agencies had with semi autos until, again, Beretta came to the rescue.

Pointing out a hole in my theory, I do not understand problematic 2011 mags. I am late to those guns and had some initial mag issues but it appears STI has resolved those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
I only run reloads (9 & 45) and the only times I had problems that were not due to an ammo fault were 1) when I hadn't cleaned a gun after > 800 rounds; and 2) trying to run SWC's in my 45. I could never get a reliable SWC load.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,521 Posts
I have owned 14 or so 1911s. 12 colts, 2 GIs, and an EVO. The colts have ranged from 1991s to SCGs either 45s, 38 supers, 10mm, or 50GI. The only failures I have experienced have been to worn or damaged mags or reloading mistakes. I reload lead round nose. Factory ammo runs through no issues. When I first started reloading 38 super I had oal issues.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top