S&W True to History?

[flyfish]

With the external extractor, are the current Smith & Wesson 1911s truely 1911s? I am fairly new to these wonderful handguns and enjoy learning all I can including the history. Today must truely be the "Golden Age" of the 1911.

[Hawkmoon]

Depends on how strictly you want to define "true," I suppose.

John Browning did not design the M1911 with an external extractor. In the strictest sense, then, no 1911 that uses such (S&W, Kimber, SIG, ...) is a "true" 1911. Most people accept the external extractor as a variation within the 1911 platform, however.

Other manufacturers have made other departures. Both S&W and Kimber use different variations of the Colt Schwarz firing pin safety. Para-Ordnance developed the double stack receiver. And, more recently, Para-Ordnance developed the LDA trigger. Most purists probably draw the line there and say that a 1911 is a single action pistol. And yet, some years ago a creative gunsmith in Connecticut was offering single action conversions of 1911 pistols and they were still 1911s, albeit modified.

[KY NIMROD]

With the external extractor, are the current Smith & Wesson 1911s truely 1911s? I am fairly new to these wonderful handguns and enjoy learning all I can including the history. Today must truely be the "Golden Age" of the 1911.
I also hear that S&W uses a non-mil spec beavertail grip safety and of course they have the front serrations on some models that give most purists a major GAS attack.
I have one and it is top notch with only three minor exceptions.
1. The Firing pin safety block system Hawk mentioned.
2. The grip safety already shows signes of finish rub off from drag when it is depressed.
3. The use of MIM parts.
With only those three complaints I do highly reccomend the Smith 1911.
Jim

[garrettwc]

To expand on Hawkmoon's comments, even the current Colt is not a "true" 1911.

With the exception of the WWI replica. Most of the current crop of guns are some variant of the M1911A1.

[Hunter]

No Government Model made after May 20 1924 (I believe that is correct but OD knows dates better than I do) can be considered a true 1911. After that it became the 1911A1.
The pistols made today called 1911s are truly a Government Model.

[flyfish]

Live and learn. Sounds like being a purist could be a tough job. Thanks for all the views. Does anyone have a reading recomendation on the history of th 1910 through today? Thanks again.

[garrettwc]

You will find a pretty complete list of 1911 books on our home page:
http://www.m1911.org/full_books.htm

The standard that most people mention first is "Colt 45 Service Pistols" by Charles Clawson.

[Lazarus]

Flyfish...this is a provocative question indeed, somewhat similar to asking if a true drop-in part exists. Depends upon how you define the word true. I'm going to take a slightly different approach to defining "true 1911", so see if it makes any sense to you.

I'm not going to disqualify a gun simply for cosmetic frills. Obviously, front cocking serrations do not affect the fit or function of the firearm. Nor does an upswept beavertail grip safety or snakeskin front strap.

Nope, what I want to focus on is "correct design". And, I define that term to mean that the design principles of the gun are known and understood by the manufacturer. Furthermore, the manufacturer must be able to produce a product that is consistent with those known principles. I'll even accept a departure from the original Browning design if it can be shown to be superior in some way to the original. Now that's being fair, isn't it?

Having said that, let's just take all fakes off the table right now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I know of absolutely no instance where an original design 1911 has fired accidentally when dropped. However, there are countless articles available that document experiments wherein someone has tried his best to cause this A.D. to happen. Throwing a gun from a speeding car, dropping it onto concrete from 15 or 20 feet...the list goes on and on. Just hasn't happened to my knowledge. Therefore, the design has never been shown to be lacking or dangerous or unpredictable. Yet how many major names employ a form of firing pin blocking safety? Not to mention a nifty lock-and-key mechanism and a way to see if a round is in the chamber. As for the latter indignity, I simply refer you to rule number 1. There is "always" a round in the chamber!

Well, to be fair, Colt produced the Series 80 with a f.p. block, and yes, the High Power was designed with one. But, the 1911 was not designed with a f.p. safety or a lock-and-key. So I am compelled to reject firearms with these added-on, politically correct excuses for common sense. And to make matters worse, the f.p. safety takes some real talent to adjust correctly so that the gun WILL actually fire when you want it to. A gun that won't fire at all is really safe, according to some folks.

But the foregoing is just a minor inconvenience. It seems to me that a much better way to separate a 'real' 1911 from the pretenders is to look at how the finished product functions. Going a step further, we can also get an idea whether correct design is fully understood by looking at how the manufacturer's service facility addresses functional problems....should any arise of course.

-Can't rack the slide with anything less than a pair of vice grips? Hmmm, needs a lot of breaking in!!
-Can't shoot a full magazine without jamming several times? Hmmm, probably needs a ramp and throat job!
-Extractor flies 30 feet down the firing line along with a few other parts? Well, this happens when you don't use sufficient amounts of lube.
-Tries to feed 2 rounds at the same time? Probably needs a heavier recoil spring.
-Bulges in the spent brass cases? Heavier recoil spring!

A brief glance at the gunsmithing rants will reveal that only the folks at Colt seem to know what they are doing. If Springfield once knew how the 1911 worked, they have certainly forgotten everything. So I am proposing that we call a true 1911 one that functions correctly (i.e. feeds, fires and ejects) as received by the customer....Let me add I expect it to do all 3 with near 100% reliability. And without being sent back to the factory several times, without getting a ramp and throat job, or an extra-power recoil spring. Kind of thins down the herd, doesn't it? In any case that's how I go about determining if it is a real 1911 or just a toy. (A big tip of the hat to 1911Tuner for setting my head on straight.)

Ok then. Now is the time for all the "works flawlessly" guys to come out of the closet and make their claims. I'm ready for it, even though we know that any gun can work flawlessly if it never comes out of the sock drawer.

One more thing. In my view, I do not give a manufacturer extra points each time I send the gun back to his service shop....even if I get to talk with the nice lady on the phone.

-Lazarus

[flyfish]

Interesting point of view. If I understand what you are trying to say at least part of a "true" 1911 is reliability, quality and safety. Since my original post I have learned much most of which was learned on this site. I am honored to learn in such a open and supportive atmosphere. :)

[John]

Hey Lazarus, guess what? I agree with you!

:lm:

[Hawkmoon]

One more thing. In my view, I do not give a manufacturer extra points each time I send the gun back to his service shop....even if I get to talk with the nice lady on the phone.
AGREED!

Every company should have good customer service, of course. But, like the old ads featuring the Maytag man, the goal should be to leave the support personal playing pinochle in the break room.

Extra points for providing what any paying customer has a right to expect? Nope, again I agree. Your statement reminds me of some years ago when I was managing a department and one of the (more highly paid and under-motivated) lads came into my office after work one day and lit into me for not being "appreciative enough" of him. This was a guy who had previously worked for a government contractor, as a union member. He arrived at work 32 seconds before start time, and was out the door at the stroke of 5:00. He did what he was told to do, nothing more, and sometimes even did it right the first time.

For this I was supposed to lavish him with praise, apparently.

Doesn't make any more sense than lavishing praise on a gun maker for fixing my defective pistol the second time I have to send it back to the factory. Sure, I'm happy to finally have it working, but the fact is I paid for a working gun the day I bought it, and that's what I should have received. Firearms being complex tools, I understand that some will inevitably have some problems, but those should be a very small percentage of any company's output, and it's just plain silly to think that the company (whichever company it is) should somehow be praised to the skies for fixing what should not have been broken.

The only reason we have devolved to the point of praising acceptable customer support in 1911-land is that so many companies seem to offer less than acceptable customer support. Thus, too many people are pleasantly surprised if their broken gun gets fixed on the first trip back to the factory.

[/rant mode]

[flyfish]

Good point Hawkmoon. Why do the various manufacturers seem to think quality and consistency are extra. Does it really cost more to produce a functioning pistol in the age of CNC machining and automation? Are labor costs in Brazil for instance so high that a quality control inspector can't insure 100%? Look how complex the average automobile is and yet a very high percentage operate for thousands of hours without failure.