Group grippers work for 10 minutes before that tiny spring weakens. Don’t be a sucker.

 

Perhaps you should ask yourself what the actual tangible benefit would be of the full length guide rod vs the original standard, worked fine for the past 109 years guide rod...

 

Yup, 1911s should only be built to the original specs, with the original materials. No stupid frame/slide tightening, no gunsmith fit barrels or bushings, etc., etc., ad nauseum. I for one am very glad that we now make better guns, cars, etc. than we made back then. But hey, horses were so good why would anyone want to own a car? /s

 

Hi,
FLGR's are for making other people money!

 

I will offer the opposing opinion. Bought my first 1911 style gun in 1972 or 73. I was not yet 21 years old. After many years experience with several 1911s, I prefer a full length rod. I have both the one piece and the 2 piece rods. With a full length rod I should never again have a recoil spring kink on me in the middle of a string of fire. I also believe the spring on a full length rod has to run smoother because the rod keeps the spring centered in the tunnel. The downside is they are sometimes not as easy to field strip and reassemble, depending on how tight your gun is. They can be a real chore. Pick your priorities.

 

Beginning to wonder how much practical difference there is between the two. Of the guns I own Baer and ACW use the short rods while Cabot and STI (Staccato) use full length. Breakdown with the full is only very slightly more involved. From a practical shooting standpoint they function the same to me.

 

Just slide the top end off, it's what us old timers do.

 

Hi,
LOL!

You can lead them to water, but...

 

Hi,
LOL!

You can lead them to water, but...
View attachment 539137

Personal preference isn't it? I tried one in one of my comp guns and liked it.

BTW John Browning while brilliant, didn't think of all the improvements to the 1911 that exist these days. So no, the design wasn't perfect and the original 1911s didn't have the greatest life span.

 

I only want a full length guide rod in a bull barrel gun. In a bushing gun I much prefer a short guide rod. I really don’t see any benefits to a full length other than ease of reassembly in a bull barrel gun.

Just personal preference on what you like the best.

 

Group grippers don't work. Several folks tried them in the SWPL. There was no noticeable effect in accuracy. To this day I'm surprised Wilson picked up the product. If you want a hassle free FLGR, get the Dawson.

 

Thanks for the info on group grippers
Sounds unanimous - I won't shop for that in the future

 

Group grippers do work.
They do improve accuracy with loose fit, stock barrels.
The spring does not wear out.
They benefit from competent tuning.

Full length guide rods add static, non-reciprocating weight to the front end of a 1911.
Aside from slightly complicating dis-assembly/re-assembly, there are no downsides.

 

I've had 1911's with both. I noticed no appreciable difference. The FLGR did not shoot smoother, did not tame recoil to any noticeable degree. It did make the gun a tad bit (couple of ounces) heavier, a consideration if you're gonna carry it.
Take down-schmakedown, use the base plate on a magazine to depress the plug and you're golden.
It really comes down to preference. Some think it has a benefit, some don't.
They ain't real expensive, neither are the spring plugs, buy one of each and try it out. See what you like, or don't.

 

I've gone back and forth over the years. My first 1911 came with standard GI guide rod which I ran until I read Bill Wilson's book and he recommended full length so I switched. I never really noticed a difference and over time migrated all my guide rods back to GI. Over the last few years the 2 most knowledgeable gunsmiths I shoot with each independently told me I should be running a full length guide rod because it would cycle smoother, etc. So I tried it again and still couldn't tell much difference, if any. My current thinking is:
1. If I competed with my 1911 (which I don't) I might consider that full length for a little additional weight in the muzzle to potentially help getting back on the target
2. If I used my 1911 for concealed carry (which I don't) I would definitely go with GI for weight reduction
3. Since I'm just a guy shooting my 1911s for fun at the range I go with the GI so I can swap recoil springs when testing reloads and for ease of cleaning when I get home.

 

I have had all pretty much, Recoilmaster, Standard GI. Personally prefer full length. I have one STI I converted to the Dawson. To me it’s a personal preference...

 

Thanks for the info on group grippers
Sounds unanimous - I won't shop for that in the future

Better things to spend the money on.

 

Hi,
You are correct!

Surprisingly, the US ARMY asked for a lot of things we now have on the 1911A1.

I think JMB's original plan was no grip safety or thumb safety, using the half cock notch as the safety on the single action pistol.

Of course the originals were not made with 2.5# trigger pulls either.

Admittedly, I'm having a little fun, but still think, less is more, in a combat pistol sometimes!

I've carried a Series 80 on duty. Even though they were issue, I don't know of any of those Colts that weren't improved. And NO, light triggers weren't allowed, clean search breaks were.

BTW JMB also never figured on a beaver tail. And no, we didn't use hardball. Issue 1911 and 1911A1s are hardball pistols

 

It’s a solution to an unrealized problem.

It’s only benefit is the ability to remove the slide without removing the barrel!

 

It’s only benefit is the ability to remove the slide without removing the barrel!

Perhaps I am missing something here but I take down all of my 1911's by removing the slide while still under spring tension??? I only have 1 that has a flgr. My 2 4" guns I have no choice in the matter as they both have closed ended reverse plugs and GI style guide rods.

My only real issue with using FLGRs is not being able to keep track of the paperclips.

 

Group grippers do work.
They do improve accuracy with loose fit, stock barrels.
The spring does not wear out.
They benefit from competent tuning.

Full length guide rods add static, non-reciprocating weight to the front end of a 1911.
Aside from slightly complicating dis-assembly/re-assembly, there are no downsides.

Just take out the slide stop and slide the top end off. It's easier that way. Or get a Dawson

 

Would you be able to properly fit it? That's the real question.

Just some insight from a guy that can shoot better than me.

 

Am I the only person who has had a recoil spring kink while shooting with a GI style guide rod?

 

I haven’t had an RC kink while I was shooting in 30 years.
How do you know it kinked when you were shooting?
.

 

Hi,
I've never seen it?
There really is no room for the spring to kink, between the GM spring guide and the spring tunnel on the slide?????
Just sayin, does not really compute?
How many kinked recoil springs in a GM 1911 in 100 years?
That's a hard one?
Just sayin, YMMV!

 

You know, your "Just sayin" and Just playin" are amazingly unhelpful.

Yes we get it, you love original 1911s and 1911A1s, but they're seriously flawed in several ways by today's standard. If they weren't, why was the last 1911 manufactured for the military (USMC) the M45A1 and not a standard 191A1 or Series 70 or 80? Simple issue, a lot of Marines were aware of what it takes to make a 1911 more reliable when their lives are on the line.

Can they kink? YES. does it happen a lot, no. But if it does happen and jams the pistol, someone may well die.

You overlook that 1911A1s being rebuilt towards the end of Vietnam were using substandard parts or just plain out of spec parts because spare parts were running short. You overlook that for combat, the sights on the 1911s and 1911A1s aren't great, even if the staked front sight doesn't fall off when you need it.If you go back, to the early competition shooters with 1911A1 for bullseye, they changed the sights to higher viability sights and that includes replacing the staked on front sights (see below, that's my 1911A1NM)

IPSC? Lower the ejection port, do the ramp, because the 1911/1911A1 design is for hardball, doesn't often do well with other and more accurate ammo like using a 200 grain SWC. We could look at the issues with various hollow points that wouldn't feed well. Obvious High Vis sights or adjustable sights (not including the Ellison sights on a gold Cup that would drop off because of the way they were pinned on).

Obviously a trigger job, Bullseye started with stippling, IPSC started Checkering. You do realize that when you're sweaty, etc etc, 1911s tend to move around in your hands. Collet bushings had to go, they break and jam the pistol. Early on it was Micro bushings or whomever else made them. Most of all better bushing and barrel fit in the slide.

The list can go on for awhile... but you're so out in left field, I'm having a hard time trying to fathom the way you think.

Try getting shot it.... you'll learn to love High Vis sights and a 1911 style pistol that's one h*ll of a lot more reliable than either an original 1911 or 1911A1.

I have a lot of time at a colt repair center. Yes I saw some, especially in 1911A1s. I was one of the SWPL guys that was at a meeting with Colt in 80 or 81 when we had a huge argument with them trying to get things built into a commercial pistol that you find on a lot of commercial 1911 pistols these days.

Remember one thing, if you ever have to use a pistol regardless of the circumstances, you're libel for where those rounds end up... so you want good sights, and 1911/1911A1 original sights aren't great.

Please do us a favor, give it a rest.

Sorry guys... this was just nonsense

 

I kinked one myself by accident while cleaning. I put it back in the gun cause I didn't have a spare. The gun still ran fine .

 

Hi,
Well, looks like I pushed a button, but...

It's not my fault that the US Government didn't spend the money to maintain our Soldiers side arms, seems we have plenty to give away to our Enemies these days???

Not my fault, the US Government, does not want to take the time, money, and trouble to show our troops how to use a side arm!

My problem with people on these Forums is, they push a lot of crap that's suppose to make the 1911, sooooo much better and compete with a Glock, of all things?

If someone thinks a Glock is the greatest then go buy one, see ya, wouldn't want to be ya?

If my posts upset you put me on ignore, I give my opinion to maybe get others to see more than one view and I'm welcome to that, I guess, until the Mods show up anyway!

 

Everyone is entitled to espouse an opinion. And pretty much all here do. But when someone starts in with the 'well I'VE never seen that so it must be BS' nonsense they can leave that at the front door. But that's just my opinion.

 

Hi,
Well you are welcome to that.
But, did the Owner look at the OEM spring guide and check it???
I made my living for 40 years working with machinery and there is always a reason something happens?
Just sayin, the GM 1911 has been around for over 100 years and through 2 World Wars and a few "Police Actions"...
I think if there was a problem with the recoil system we might just have seen it by now???
That's all I'm sayin.

 

I have a one piece rod in mine, along with shok buffs. Never had a problem with either one and I think everyone should put what they want in their weapon and leave it at that. Same thing goes for all the un-needed things like ball cuts, naked slides etc.. If that is what you want, have at it, just don't say everyone else is wrong for not doing it.

 

I thought that the idea of a forum was to share
Information, tips, ideas and yes even informed
opinions. Don’t like my opinion, then cast it aside
and move in whatever direction you see fit.
But making personal attacks on anyone due a difference of opinion seems uncalled for. IMHO!