Difference in mechanical aspects of Commander's

[WyoBob]

If this belongs in the "1911 Manufacturers-more than one of the above" forum, perhaps the mods can move it. I figured this was best to place this post where the people who work on 1911's every day seem to spend most of their time :)

I have two Springfield's, a 5" SS Loaded and a LW Champion. I prefer shooting the LW Champion except for the slightly more recoil. The 5" seems muzzle heavy to me and, although the 5" has been a great pistol, I find myself wanting a Commander size pistol using a bushing and single spring set up. I'll be mainly shooting steel plates with this gun but may carry it as well. I'd like the single spring setup to make it easier to "tune" the pistol with lighter loads using cast bullets for steel and switching back to a "factory" spring for S.D. loads.

My question involves the "safety" devices incorporated in various makes of 4 1/4" barreled 1911's. As near as I can figure, there's "Swartz" type, "Series 80" type and "nothing". The Champion uses a lightweight firing pin and heavier firing pin spring, I believe, but uses the duel, captured recoil spring and has no bushing. Is any one "design" more desirable than the other when it comes to reliability, function, tuning, dis-assembly, etc?

I shot a friends Dan Wesson bobtail 10mm awhile back and liked the way the grip felt (not necessarily the way it looked) so have an interest in this make, i.e. a Dan Wesson CBOB. I don't know for sure what kind of "safety" provisions this pistol has but it seems very well made.

I went to a seminar given by Ned Christiansen and got to see a lot of different 1911's and remember seeing some "Series 80" pistols and Kimbers and they had more "parts" which complicated dis-assembley a bit compared to my Springfield and I've always felt "simpler is better".

So, to sum up, just looking for your thoughts on the various safety systems involved in "Commander" style 1911's.

Thanks, WyoBob

[wichaka]

For what you're wanting, I would sugest a pre-80 series Combat Commander.

1) It's the real and only true Commander,

2) It comes apart like your 5" gun,

3) ...and has everything you're wanting.

[1911Tuner]

First...Only Colt builds Commanders. It's a trademark. Springfields and others aren't Commanders, even if they're exact carbon copies.

The Commander was Colt's attempt to win another lucrative military contract, and the pistol was to be delivered with an aluminum alloy frame in caliber 9mm Parabellum.

The original recoil system was identical to the 5-inch guns, but shortened to allow for the 3/4-inch shorter slide and barrel. The spring tunnel and frame rails are .100 inch shorter...and the recoil spring plug, guide rod, and barrel bushing are shortened. The recoil spring is likewise shortened, but is essentially identical to the standard, or Government Model spring...other than the number of coils.

The lower lug is of different geometry, removing the angled ramp at the front, and making it vertical for clearance with the end of the guide rod. The short extension...actually a half-slot...in front of the forwardmost locking lug is also missing, to provide extra clearance for the bushing.

There are no Series 70 Commanders or Combat Commanders. All Series 70 pistols were 5-inch pistols. Government Model and Gold Cup.

Up until the introduction of the Series 80 pistols, the guns were identical in function to everything that came before them...all the way to Serial #1 that was delivered in 1912...and they accept the same magazines.

Series 80 ushered in the era of litigation-resistant 1911-pattern pistols, and the guns have extra parts that passively block the firing pin until the trigger is pulled. In addition to the 4 extra parts in the system, there are subtle differences in a few other parts. These parts are fully interchangeable with all pre-Series 80 Colt pistols...USGI...and most commercial clones...but not vice-versa. The grip safety. The firing pin. The firing pin stop. The extractor. The hammer lost the captive half-cock notch, and used a flat quarter-cock shelf. The Series 80 hammer will interchange with original spec pistols, and the old hammers will work in Series 80 pistols.

Series 80 pistols in their original cinfiguration are no harder to field-strip and reassemble than the others. You only have to be careful that the plunger lever isn't standing up in the way of the slide before replacing it. Neither are they harder to detail strip than the orginals, and they fall apart just as quickly. They are a bit more tedious to reassemble, though....but with a little practice and a slave pin, it's not a major operation.

The Commander utilized an extended ejector that was offset...or "doglegged" toward the right, with a modified shape at the tip, and a lowered ejection port.

The recent trend of altering the recoil systems and muzzle containment by using tapered cone and bull barrels...with or without the bushing...and reversed spring plugs, with full-length guide rods has been a study unto itself that's tough to keep track of. Seems that every month, there's a "New and Improved" setup...and I can't understand exactly what the real benefits are over a well-fitted standard system...other than because it looks trick and wows the guys who come to watch football on Sunday.

Other modificatons and spin-offs include integral feed ramps on the barrels and upswept grip safeties that look like a hemrhoid on a duck...to me at least...but some find them attractive, so who am I to make the call. They do make the gun more user-firendly, but require an extremely high, rock-solid grip in order to obtain a proper spot-weld with the hand. Like with all other accoutrements, to each his own. That's part of the fun, I suppose. You can tailor it to suit your particular tastes or requirements.

Neither the Commander nor all its clones are true 1911s. They're 1911A1 variants. They share the design and most of the parts...and the basic function is identical...but they're variations of the orginal theme.

[Hill]

And so it was, the 1911 ruled the roost, the Commander it's sidekick. Until 1986.

In 1986, borrowing on the recoil operated refinement of the 1911 and redesigning the ignition system Gaston Glock introduced a far superior pistol. With further refinement of the feed system Herr Glock had a winner - finally unseating the 1911 as the best most reliable design in the world.

Today Glocks are made for use in calibers the 1911 struggles to feed; the Glock pistols work successfully whether full sized, compact size, and even in subcompact sizes which the 1911 simply has never done with reliability. Glocks work well in every adverse condition - conditions under which the 1911 must have such open tolerances that accuracy is lost. Yet Glocks lose nothing in the worst scenario presented to them, maintaining both accuracy and reliability through hundreds of thousands of rounds fired, even underwater.

Further, Glocks hold and feed numbers of cartridges impossible to load into 1911's even in their heavily modified and bloated configurations.

And each year more pistols emerge onto the market using the same basic firing mechanism that Herr Glock brought out more than twenty years ago. Each of the new arrivals enjoys success. Big ones, small ones, every size imaginable and most less expensive than the original Glocks while during the same periods of success there comes a continuing string af failing new models of the same old 1911, not one an advancement, not one working better much less as well as did the original design put into the market in 1912 and each costing more than it's predessessor.




:D

[1911Tuner]

I'm speechless...and you can quote me.

[Hawkmoon]

I'm going to ignore Hill's comments as the ravings of a man obviously off his meds.

Back to the original post -- the Springfield Champion is not a Commander-size pistol. The Champion has a 4" barrel. Mostly for reasons of geometry related to the tilting barrel, 4-1/4" seems to be the minimum barrel length that can be made to work with the "standard" barrel bushing setup. (Albeit the Commander bushing is shorter than a Government model bushing, and if you look inside some of them the width of the actual shoulder that supports the muzzle in battery is also thinner.) The Colt Officers ACP and Para-Ordnance P12.45 have 3-1/2" barrels and use bushings, but the bushing is different and the barrels are cone-shaped to assist the down-linking geometry.

Once you start shopping for a true Commander or true clone, you find that there aren't as many choices on the market as it initially appears. A lot of the mid-size 1911 pistols are built around a 4" barrel and don't use a barrel bushing.

Colt offers 4-1/4" Commanders in both the 1991 series and the XSE series. Para-Ordnance offers the LTC models, and the Tac-Four in a double stack LDA model. Other than that, you pretty much have to look to the semi-custom and custom makers for a true 4-1/4" Commander-size pistol.

[1911Tuner]

Other than that, you pretty much have to look to the semi-custom and custom makers for a true 4-1/4" Commander-size pistol

And not all of those are true Commander-spec. The two Les Baer Stingers that I was recently involved with were basically no more than standard frame rails and spring tunnels with shortened dust covers...which was causing some of the problems in one of the pistols due to the reduced slide travel, and resulting fast return to battery... and .100-inch shorter runup than Colt decided on for the Commander back in '49. Coupled with the far too-heavy 20-pound recoil spring...it was surprising that the magazine could keep up even when it was full. A combined reduction of 2/10ths inch in time and distance doesn't give it a lot of wiggle room. I can't figure it...

[WyoBob]

And so it was, the 1911 ruled the roost, the Commander it's sidekick. Until 1986.

In 1986, borrowing on the recoil operated refinement of the 1911 and redesigning the ignition system Gaston Glock introduced a far superior pistol. With further refinement of the feed system Herr Glock had a winner - finally unseating the 1911 as the best most reliable design in the world.

(rest of trip to la-la land, snipped :) )

:D

So, I suppose the Glocks use the "Swartz" safety :rolleyes:

WyoBob

[Hill]

No, they use the safety of a shooter with sense enough to keep his/her finger out of the loop until meaning to fire the gun. The best safety of all, and all the safety a person should need.

But nevermind that, I was just funnin' with Johnnie, whom I've learned enough about to know when he's given over his senses to his apparently innate bombastia. An illness from which I've never seen a person cured. Don't let that "speechless" comment fool you; instead expect a steady progression as the years mount up upon him. LOL!


Meds? Where ARE my meds??!!

[wichaka]

After teaching firearms at our state police academy for the last year, I have seen more broken Glocks then I care to remember.

Me buy a Glock????? and death before disco too!

[Frank]

...In 1986, borrowing on the recoil operated refinement of the 1911 and redesigning the ignition system Gaston Glock introduced a far superior pistol. With further refinement of the feed system Herr Glock had a winner - finally unseating the 1911 as the best most reliable design in the world....
Well, I suppose everyone is entitled to his opinion, no matter how misguided or perverse it may be. :D And granted that the Glock my be a useful appliance for some applications, this is a 1911 site, so we can reasonably be expected not to be particularly receptive to cheerleading for Glocks. :D :D

DVC

[1911Tuner]

Frank...I think Hill's pokin' us with a stick just to see if he can get us to snarl. :D
At least, that's the way I took it...

So...Let's talk about that "Glock Perfection" and feed reliability for a minute.

Know how ol' Gas got'em to feed so well? I do. He undercut the head support area in the barrel ramp...the way that Dremel Jockies do when they jump into a ramp and throat job on a 1911. Bad form!

As long as the gun:

A...Has good headspace, and:

B...is fired ammunition with amply strong/thick brass cases, and:

C...the shooter doesn't reload the brass fired from that gun...there's rarely a problem.

Remove any one of those criteria, and there could be a nasty surprise in store. Remove two of the three, and the surprise is almost a certainty. Maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow...but one day for sure.

Cheers!

[ElrodCod]

First...Only Colt builds Commanders. It's a trademark. Springfields and others aren't Commanders, even if they're exact carbon copies.

Springfield did market a gun as a Commander for a brief time before changing the name to Champion. I see them at gun shows from time to time & judging by the prices asked, they don't seem to have any appeal as collectors items.

[1911Tuner]

Springfield did market a gun as a Commander for a brief time before changing the name to Champion.

Yep. I remember those. They didn't last long. Colt fired a shot across their bow and they backed off. Now, if ya get any closer than "Commando" they load the 16-inch guns and stand by.

[Hill]

Frank...I think Hill's pokin' us with a stick just to see if he can get us to snarl. :D
At least, that's the way I took it...Cheers!

That's right, Johnnie, I was playin' around - and seeing you struck speechless, even for a minute, was the payoff. :)

I do like the comparison of Glocks and their offspring to a double action revolver in terms of safe operation. They are in essense cocked by the pull on the trigger and don't rely on the correct operation and good condition of mechanical blocks to the sear or hammer to keep them from firing unintentionally.

I read somewhere the other day that Gabe Suarez and many of the other trainer/school operators recommend Glocklikes to their students for the point and shoot simplicity of the things.

Enough of this thread diversion....I had my little chuckle.

[WyoBob]

Well, this has been an interesting thread and I learned something. I've also learned I need to be much more "precise" when communicating with you guys :)

Yes, I know from reading this and the "other" 1911 forum that the "Comander" is/was made only by Colt. That's why I said "Commander size". Should have used a small "c" to denote the "generic" commander term that lots of folks use to describe a 4 1/4" barreled "version" (aka 1911A1 variants) of a 1911 that comes with a bushing and a single spring guide rod.

Yes, I know the Champion (4") is not a "commander size" pistol, doesn't have a bushing and doesn't have a single spring guide rod set up. I own one :o

The response "So, I suppose the Glocks use the "Swartz" safety" was my feeble attempt at humor. "Swartz = German". Missed the mark :(

"No, they use the safety of a shooter with sense enough to keep his/her finger out of the loop until meaning to fire the gun. The best safety of all, and all the safety a person should need." I couldn't agree more. I was mainly interested in how the "added" safety mechanisms used by various manufacturers affected the "mechanics" of the pistol and whether they would be disqualifying when considering purchase of a 4 1/4", bushing type of a 1911 pattern/version/variation pistol. IOW, as I've learned here, when companies go tampering or "improving" a design, sometimes "bad" things happen.

Anyway, I appreciate the time you all took to write your posts in this thread. I always learn something in the "Gunsmithing" section and it's the first place I go when I log on. Awhile back, the tips given to me here helped me get my 1911's up and running 100%.

Thanks, WyoBob

[Frank]

Frank...I think Hill's pokin' us with a stick just to see if he can get us to snarl. :D...
That's right, Johnnie, I was playin' around - and seeing you struck speechless, even for a minute, was the payoff. :)...
Not to worry, that's the way I took it too.

What's not generally know is that good old Gaston hit upon the particular polymer used for the Glock frame while trying to develop a better container for his wife to store leftover pigs' knuckles with sauerkraut. Thus referring to Glocks as "Tupperware" is really especially appropriate.

DVC

[1911Tuner]

Bob...We could sub-name the forum "Anal Retentives 'R' Us"

:lh:

[WyoBob]

Bob...We could sub-name the forum "Anal Retentives 'R' Us"
:lh:

Uh, no, I think I like it's present name better :)

Being A.R. isn't all bad. I was that way when I overhauled a 150 hp Lycoming, built a "sport plane", strapped my butt in and blasted through the air at 180 mph. It took me 5 1/2 years to build and I flew it for 470 hours and all I had to do is change oil/filters and tires. Otherwise, no "fixes" repairs or mods. Sometimes, being A.R. is GOOD (especially if you're over 10 feet above the ground.)

WyoBob

[Hill]

Not to worry, that's the way I took it too.

What's not generally know is that good old Gaston hit upon the particular polymer used for the Glock frame while trying to develop a better container for his wife to store leftover pigs' knuckles with sauerkraut. Thus referring to Glocks as "Tupperware" is really especially appropriate.

DVC

This, folks, is completely true. Glock Austria was formed in 1963 as a maker of metal and plastic products, including kitchenware, knives, an entrenching tool, machinegun links and grenades.

Austria began searching for a new handgun in 1980, Gaston asked for the requirements, designed a pistol to meet them and was awarded a contract for 4000 units in 1982. In 1983 they submitted samples of the gun for the US DoD evaluations, in 1985 Norway and Sweden and then NATO selected the G17 (full sized 9mm), the pistol was submitted to BATF for importation and was accepted in 1986. In 2003 they were importing and assembling 270,000 pistols per year in the US alone.

How can it be anything but revolutionary?

Johnnie, have you visited their factory in Smyrna, Georgia? :)


(I'm teasing the old coot, in case anyone can't figure that out)

[1911Tuner]

Johnnie, have you visited their factory in Smyrna, Georgia?

Nope. These days, it's hard enough to get me off the property to go to the grocery store...much less Georgia. :D