recoil spring replacement?

[DennisH87]

WARNING: This is a newbie question! lol

I fired 4 mags through my gun and i was having problems with it going to full battery. It wasn't on all mags. There was one in particular where it was every other shot, but it did do it once with one other mag. all it needed was a little push forward and it snapped into place. Would this mean that i need a new recoil spring? I bought my gun used so i have no clue how many rounds has been through it. I think that's what i need but I'm not sure. What weight to do i need to buy? I'm going to be carrying this gun if that matters.

[wichaka]

First off it sounds more of a magazine problem than anything.

What make and model do you have? That will tell us what spring to put in it.

The problem may be an extractor problem. Take out the extractor, and see if the gun still has the same problems.

[DennisH87]

oh, sorry i forgot to mention what caliber and gun. Its a Rock Island Armory 1911 GI in .45 ACP. The ammo is handloads with a COL of 1.230. Bullets are i think hornady JHP, 5.5 gr. universal clays, remington primers, mixed cases.

I'm not sure what kind of mags they are. The only one i do know is a Colt 8 round that functions flawlessly. the others have no markings.

well, i thought it would be the spring because on my 1911 it does seem a little lighter than other 1911's I've handled. Not considerably, but i can tell a difference.

It has a two piece full length guide rod.

[wichaka]

There never was given lb rating for the recoil spring in the original design, just a spring wire diameter and number of coils...which if I remember right, equals to a bit over 14lbs.

I run 14lb recoil springs in all my full size 5" guns....but the standard of the industry now is 16lbs.

Your hand loads may be the culprit. I would run some factory loaded stuff thru it to see if it acts the same.

[DennisH87]

no, its not my handloads. I've allready shot 200 + factory loads through it and it was even worse with those.

[DennisH87]

well, i figured out what was part of the problem. The extractor had too much tension on it which allowed the case rim to hesitate because it was getting stuck on the bottom of the extractor and therefore not letting it go into "full battery" or all the way forward. (am i using the right term?) I first saw this problem while i was shooting i figured the spring wasn't strong enough to force the slide forward and the rim up into the extractor.

I haven't shot it after adjusting the extractor tension but i still plan on replacing the recoil spring.

This is the one I'm thinking about buying.

http://www.midwayusa.com/eproductpag...eitemid=185341

Is 18.5 Lbs. too strong to shoot loads with a velocity of ~700-750 FPS?

[wichaka]

18.5lbs is too strong of spring for any load......just my opinion.

[Stone Cold]

18.5lbs is too strong of spring for any load......just my opinion.

Proper recoil spring weight is dependent on more than just the load. Other factors, such as mainspring weight, also play a role. That is why gun makers of the stature of Ed Brown specify 18 lb. springs. There is also the whole CCW phenomenon that plays a role. Many people carrying 1911s are not handloaders, and they want the hottest ammo possible. +p ammo requires a heavier spring to avoid damage. My next door neighbor buys nothing but the hottest ammo he can find, even for range use. I put an 18 lb. spring in his gun because it was bottoming out with the 16 lb. spring, flipping brass at 6 o'clock.

I won't say Mr. Wichaka's opinion is flawed, just specific to his circumstances and hardware. All my builds have light triggers and 19 lb. mainsprings, tuned extractors. I consider 18 lbs. to be standard for a carry piece.

[wichaka]

The person who invented the gun specified a lighter recoil spring......who knows more about the gun....Ed Brown or John Browning?

"I put an 18 lb. spring in his gun because it was bottoming out with the 16 lb. spring, flipping brass at 6 o'clock."

Please explain what "bottoming out" means, as it pertains to cycling and recoil of the 1911.

[Stone Cold]

I tell you what. Put a worn out or light spring in your pistol and stuff 'er full of +P ammo. You'll get the idea what I mean by "bottoming-out." Better yet, look at your storm door. See those pnuematic shock absorber things? Ever adjust one? You don't want the door slamming, but you also want it to close reliably on it's own. Just a little turn of the vent screw will cause it to close with more or less resistance. Similarly, the recoil spring should be strong enough to keep the slide from hammering the frame and force all ammo into battery, yet soft enough for reliable ejection. Finally, you seriously believe that Browning's 1911 and the ammo of that time was comparable to what we have now? Come on, you're sharper than that.

[wichaka]

Let's also be realistic...how much +P ammo does anyone put thru their 1911 in any given year?

Carrying +P ammo is one thing, shooting it is another. Who can afford to shoot +P ammo every time they go to the range, and shoot enough of it to cause any damage?

And why would someone want to subject their gun to that on a continual basis? Check out any gun, semi-auto or revolver that has had hot ammo put thru it on a continual basis for years, and you'll find that they tend to get loose and out of time.

I have been carrying +P ammo in my duty guns for many years. I shoot 50+ rounds of +P ammo every year, when it's time to rotate to fresh stuff. I also shoot +P ammo when making sure my carry gun is reliable with the chosen ammo I use.

Use a square bottom firing pin stop, with a 23lb main spring, and a 16lb recoil spring...and if one is still nervous, add a shok-buff, and the gun will last your life time without any damage.

The bottom of the firing pin stop and the main spring take the initial recoil of the round being fired, with the recoil spring taking up the slack after the hammer is cocked. Also, the recoil spring does not reach it's full advertised weight until it's reached a certain point...which is very close to full rearward movement of the slide.

If you're using a square bottom firing pin stop, as JMB designed the gun to have, you don't need the 18+lb spring. It was switched to the round bottom on the request of the Military.

I run 14-15lb recoil springs, 23lb main springs, square bottom firing pin stop, and a shok-buff....have yet to have any problems with the 7K+ rounds a year I put thru them. I also run 16-17lb springs in my Commanders, and a 20lb in my Officers.
People who have shot my 1911's have commented on how much smoother the control is with my gun, compared to theirs.

I don't believe JMB thought of everything when he designed the 1911, as he had his marching orders with the parameters given by the Military, but he did know about function and design, and how things worked together.

Springs work both ways...the 18.5lb spring will recoil back slower, but slam forward harder...and where does all that energy go? On the slide stop pin, and the hole in the frame.
Which is a tougher area to take impact...the slide stop pin and the hole in the frame, or the base of the guide rod & the VIS?

I consistently hear people putting heavier recoil springs in their guns because they don't function reliably. A 1911 will reliably cycle with a 10lb spring, if it's in spec.

If you want to run 18+lb recoil springs in your 1911's, please do so.

[egumpher]

Finally, you seriously believe that Browning's 1911 and the ammo of that time was comparable to what we have now? Come on, you're sharper than that.

Hello,

The 1911 was designed to accelerate a 230gr bullet to 830-850fps. This is exactly how .45 ammo is still being made. The +P and +P+ ammo is intended to be used with short barrel 1911's. Like 3, 4, and 4.25-inch barrels. I use +P ammo (pnly occasional use of +p) with my 3-inch New Agent because it achieves the 850-fps the 5-inch barrel does. All my 5-inchers use standard pressure loads.

So yes, seriously, the .45 ammo is the same as Browning specified.

All with standard pressure recoil springs......IMHO more isn't better...

Rgds
Eric

[Rick McC.]

As Wichaka said; go with a 16 pound recoil spring for standard (and occasional use of +p) loads. Springs work both ways, and continued use of too heavy recoil springs places undue stress on parts that weren't designed to take that stress.

I think you nailed it with the extractor tension. I've found it to be the most likely cause of FTRB issues.

Take care,

Rick

[Tom]

The +P and +P+ ammo is intended to be used with short barrel 1911's. Like 3, 4, and 4.25-inch barrels. I use +P ammo with my 3-inch New Agent because it achieves the 850-fps the 5-inch barrel does. All my 5-inchers use standard pressure loads.
But not every gun maker recommends +P ammo in pistols with less than a 5-inch barrel, so unless the maker of your gun clearly says "Yes, you can use +P ammo in our Model X pistol with less than a 5-inch barrel" I would not recommend doing so.

[DennisH87]

"I think you nailed it with the extractor tension. I've found it to be the most likely cause of FTRB issues."

What does FTRB stand for?

I think i solved it by tuning my extractor but I'm not sure yet, I still haven't shot it. The extractor seemed to be way too tight (too much tension) so i bent it a little to relieve some of the tension.

[jimster]

"If you're using a square bottom firing pin stop, as JMB designed the gun to have, you don't need the 18+lb spring. It was switched to the round bottom on the request of the Military." I AGREE!

Plus one on the square bottom firing pin stop, I finally got around to trying this out after a very long time of reading about it....it is amazing how this changes things.
It even solved a problem in one 1911 that I had where the spent primers seems elongated sometimes, now all the primer hits look nice and round in that one.
No need to try to slow down the slide with heavy recoil springs with one of these, the firing pin stop helps do this now.

[DennisH87]

I dont understand what you mean by a square firing pin stop. Is that the peice of metal on the very end of your slide that holds the firing pin and extractor in? and if so which part is square and why does it help? I'm confused lol

[toolman]

The oversize firing pin stops available from EGW come without a radius on the bottom corner, the corner that rubs against the hammer when the slide moves. During the installation process you stone a very small radius on this bottom corner. This small radius (as offosed to the larger radius on most FPS's) makes it much harder for the slide to cock the hammer when the slide begins moving to the rear.

[Tom]

What does FTRB stand for?
Failure To Return to Battery. Often confused with FTF (Failure To Feed) but there is a significant difference. A FTF means the round is still in the magazine, whereas a FTRB means the round has been stripped from the magazine but cannot return to battery.

[wichaka]

For a good reading on the square bottom firing pin stop, check this very long thread;

http://forum.m1911.org/showthread.php?t=13060&highlight=amazing+recoil+reduction

[egumpher]

But not every gun maker recommends +P ammo in pistols with less than a 5-inch barrel, so unless the maker of your gun clearly says "Yes, you can use +P ammo in our Model X pistol with less than a 5-inch barrel" I would not recommend doing so.

Thank you for the information. Yes, I realize the consequences of +P and rarely shoot them though my New Agent but I feel that getting 5-inch performance from a 3-inch gun is worth it if I ever need it.

Rgds
Eric

[DennisH87]

problem fixed. I re-tensioned the extractor, bought a wilson combat complete spring kit (included 18.5lbs recoil spring and reduced mainspring), and a Wilson Combat ETM mag. It functioned flawlessly for 200 + rounds even with my other decent mags. thanks for your guys help.

[WyoBob]

Here's a picture of my D.W. CBOB's factory FPS on the left and an EGW oversize, square bottom stop I fit to one of my Springfield's on the right.

WyoBob

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v620/WyoBob/Guns/DSCN1911.jpg

[Stone Cold]

I haven't yet tried one of those. What impact does it have on the hammer? Browning also didn't design the 1911 to have skeleton commander hammers. JMB was a genius, no doubt, but the 1911s of today are superior weapons than those of his day, not only from metallergy and manufacturing technology standpoints, but also from a design one. Romanticism and hero worship don't change the facts.

Glad the OP got his gun running well. The specs he described are certainly good ones. One small investment I wouldn't be without is a Weigand Extractor Tension Tool. It takes the guesswork out of adjusting an extractor. I was surprised at how very small changes in tension can affect function. I'd put this little tool in the "Don't go to the range without one" category.

[egumpher]

I haven't yet tried one of those. What impact does it have on the hammer?

I read that the original 1911 design used a squared off FPS like the EGW shown in the picture. It was the government that wanted the rounded off corner to help the GIs rack the slide.

Maybe someone else can confirm.

Rgds
Eric

[niemi24s]

Hi Stone Cold: Romanticism and hero worship don't change the facts.And precisely what are those facts?

Regards

[egumpher]

And precisely what are those facts?

Regards

Please read this thread and decide for yourself......just the messenger...

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=164678&highlight=egw+firing+pin+stop

Rgds
Eric

[wichaka]

There's no more impact on a Skeleton hammer, than a GI standard hammer.

Today's 1911's could be superior in many ways, if the makers would take the time to make them in spec, and quit slapping them together.

In other words, pay attention to QC!

I don't think there's much change to the original design....just some subtle parts upgrade designing. It still operates/functions the same as it did in 1911.

[westval]

Hey guys,

My Charles Daly 1911 is having the same problems as Dennis', yet mine does it while the slide is being released by hand on an empty and unloaded weapon. It was returned by the seller to "the factory" twice, and it still has the same FTRB problem. I do notice that the barrel side of the barrel link had been ground off durring one of the returns to the maker. It locks up right as the link should be pivoting over to lock the breach.

I'm happy to provide as much info as needed. Please let me know what you think is happening.

Thanks,
Clay

[niemi24s]

It locks up right as the link should be pivoting over to lock the breach.If the empty gun does an FTRB when the link is vertical it's a sign the link is too long or there's some foreign object stuck in the slide or barrel locking lugs preventing full vertical engagement.

Confirm this by removing the link and seeing if the (unloaded, of course) gun will go to battery.

FYI, the link in an M1911 is vertical when the slide is about 0.041" out of battery, and the recoil spring's not needed for the test in the paragraph above.

[westval]

niemi,

That seemed to do it. Or at least I couldn't get it to stick with out the link installed. I read somewhere on here, maybe the 3-point jam article, that the link can be opened up on the top side of the bottom hole by .002. Think it's worth a try? At this rate it sticks every other round and is worthless as a sidearm.

I wanted to post a pic of what they did to the link, but battery is dead on camera. It is pretty well butchered. Might have to get a new one and check it out then file as needed.

Thanks,

Clay

[niemi24s]

Hi Westval:

Now that we know, I guess, that it has something to do with the link let's make sure it's not something besides its length:

1. The top & bottom outside curves of the link should be arcs of a circle, with no protruding burs or lumps. OK?

2. Before re-installing the link in the barrel, examine the slot where the link goes into and see if you see any evidence of rubbing. See any?

3. Then pin the bottom of the link (no barrel) back in with the slide stop and see if it's free to swing back & forth. OK?

4. Then, remove the link from the frame, pin it to the barrel and see if it's free to swing back & forth there. OK?

5. Lastly, install the barrel & bushing in the slide and see if the barrel is free to go all the up into the slide. Do this with the slide upside down, and if it's OK the barrel should go all the way in just under the influence of gravity. OK?

6. If these checks are OK, it points to the link being too long. If it is, you may be able to see evidence of the binding on the top, center of the slide stop cross pin. But, maybe not. See any?

Reassemble the gun without the recoil spring and see if it still fails to go to battery. Cycle the slide by hand slowly and real fast with the gun in the normal position and upside down.

7. If you can't get it to fail, there's a possibility some piece of foreign matter fell out that was causing the problem

8. If you can get it to fail, the link's probably too long. If so....

.... remove the link from the barrel and make a careful measurement of the width of the web between the holes - the dimension labeled 0.097 here:http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/scan0003atxtc.jpg

9. This measurement will tell you the effective length of that link when it's in compression. What's it measure?

You stated the link had been tinkered with at the factory, so I'd recommend not tinkering with it any more. Making the holes too big can affect linkdown timing and cause damage to the gun.

Do the checks, above, and get back with us.

[westval]

niemi,

Thanks for the time you put into that post. Very appreciated! I will check the list you gave and come up with some answers. Thank you, again.

Clay

[westval]

niemi,

Filed off and polished the radius curves on top and bottom. Assembled the link and could feel a drag on the barrel side. I then removed the link and saw a very small spot on bottom side of barrel where link has rubbed. I filed the link some more, and used a very small point rat-tail file to clean up barrel. Polished both surfaces again, and she now operates smooth as can be! Doesn't catch at all when cycling by hand, with or without recoil spring installed. Can't wait to try it at the range now! Thank you very much. I never would have seen that small wear point on the barrel...

Clay

[niemi24s]

Hi Westval:

I wouldn't trust that link. If it breaks, bad things can happen.

It's been filed on at the factory and now you've filed it some more.

It's time your gun got a new link of the proper size (length).

Regards

[westval]

niemi,

I had thought of that too. I suppose the local gun smith could order one that is under or over sized to fit correctly. I suppose I better do that. Thanks, again.

Clay

[niemi24s]

Just read your Post #29 again, and I'm getting an uneasy feeling there might be something wrong besides the link.

You'd said the barrel side of the link had been ground off at the factory. If you meant the outside curve, it's an indication there wasn't enough room for that part of the link to fit between the link pin and the clearance cut in the barrel.

This, in turn, could mean 3 things:

• That part of the link was too wide
• The link pin hole in the barrel feet is too far up, or
• The clearance cut in the barrel is not deep enough

Hopefully, the new link will fit in and not bind. However, if the the new link does bind I'd have your 'smith check the barrel's link pin hole location and clearance cut depth.

If the barrel's out of spec, CD owes you a new barrel (IMHO)!

Regards

[dogngun]

The first 1911 I bought was a WWII issue Remington Rand that was missing some of its parked finish and sported a beautiful pari of plastic pearloid grips as its only "improvements". I bought the pistol and a box of ammo for about $165. I cleaned loaded and took it to a range and fired the entire 50 rounds of ammo with no problems at all. I have no doubt the recoil spring as wellas every other part of the gun but the grips had survived WWII service and the 30 years till I bought it, and no matter what their round count, still were within working parameters - the pistol fired standard issue velocity ball ammo every time I intended it to for the years I had it. I never bothered to change or "improve" that old pistol other than to find a pair of wood grips to replace the "pearl" beauties on it. Yes, I did from time to time carry that pistol as it was the only one I had till I was dumb enough to sell it. I could not forsee the cult of the 1911 growing to its present status, not the huge number of companies trying to sell replacement parts for these guns, or I certainly would have kept it.
I now have 3 1911 type pistols, 2 of them have factory standard recoil and main springs, and the 3rd has parts ordered to restore it to factory spec after a previous owner "improved" it.
Everyone is free to do as he - or she - wishes, I just wanted to add my small comments to this opinion fest.

Thanks.

Mark

[westval]

Just read your Post #29 again, and I'm getting an uneasy feeling there might be something wrong besides the link.

You'd said the barrel side of the link had been ground off at the factory. If you meant the outside curve, it's an indication there wasn't enough room for that part of the link to fit between the link pin and the clearance cut in the barrel.

This, in turn, could mean 3 things:

• That part of the link was too wide
• The link pin hole in the barrel feet is too far up, or
• The clearance cut in the barrel is not deep enough

Hopefully, the new link will fit in and not bind. However, if the the new link does bind I'd have your 'smith check the barrel's link pin hole location and clearance cut depth.

If the barrel's out of spec, CD owes you a new barrel (IMHO)!

Regards



niemi,

That is what I meant. The outside curve was rubbing against the bottom of the barrel. I'll sure keep you posted when I get a new link and try it. I hope the link is the flaw and not the barrel as it is way out of warranty. Life has been so busy the last few years that I put it back in the box when it failed last time and used the other 1911 instead.

Thanks,

Clay

[niemi24s]

This drawing that might help you figure out if the problem's with the barrel or the link:http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p232/niemi24s/P093060001b.jpg The dimensions are mid-spec Ordnance Dept. values.

Regards

[10851Man]

"Use a square bottom firing pin stop, with a 23lb main spring, and a 16lb recoil spring...and if one is still nervous, add a shok-buff, and the gun will last your life time without any damage..."

When I look at 1911's and see a ragged slide stop notch, I can usually tell they have been using Shok-Buffs in the gun...Robert

[log man]

When I look at 1911's and see a ragged slide stop notch, I can usually tell they have been using Shok-Buffs in the gun...Robert

Good! Now please explain how the shock buff will cause the slide stop notch to become ragged. I run them in 12-1911's and one 2011 and don't/haven't had that problem. From a Detonics on up to the STI full rail. A good indicator of the load your shooting.

LOG

[10851Man]

LogMan,

We do not authorize Shok-Buffs in any on or off-duty pistol. I think the Shok-Buff is quite good in theory, but not very well executed.

In many pistols, I have seen significant (measurable) differences in the thickness of the recoil spring guides, as much as .070" on some variations. The Wilson Shok-Buff is roughly .090" thick, which limits, to some extent, the rearward movement of the slide.

If you cycle a pistol by hand, absent a Shok-Buff, you will notice the slide stop notch completely passes the slide stop as the slide moves aft. If you conduct the same experiment with a Shok-Buff installed (and depending on the thickness of the recoil spring guide) you will notice the slide stop has much less room to effectively engage the slide.

I routinely see a slide stop that just barely engages the notch enough to hold the slide open, which often begins to deform the profile of the notch. I have seen many pistols that will not reliably lock open on the last round and in most cases, removal of the Shok-Buff corrects the problem.

Any good machinist would tell you it is beneficial to maintain the original operating parameters when modifying any machine. The correct solution would be a Titanium recoil spring guide that is the same thickness as the stock piece when fitted with a Shok-Buff...Robert

[log man]

Any gun that will not operate dependably with a shock buff, and will without is in need of tuning.

Shock buffs should be inspected and replaced when/if damaged.

There is no evidence that it causes the slide stop notch damage. A slide stop that doesn't fully engage and a mag follower that doesn't fully cause the slide stop to engage is a threat.

The buff does reduce the slides rearward travel by .100" and in 50% will limit the travel so a sling shot release will not work.

The closer to the point that the slide stops and the slide stop engages the better for the slide stop and notch as it slips up at a point where there isn't any/little forward velocity. Doesn't have to do much stopping.

When the notch is further back from the slide stop, the slide must travel further forward before the notch will line up, will give greater impact to both the notch and stop lug.

Buffs not allowed in duty guns is understandable as it relies on the human machine to keep track.

Bill Wilson does put buffs in his new guns. They can be taken out and will function fine.

LOG

[10851Man]

Log,

This is my professional observation and it was discussed in the 1911 armorer's course. More than a few police department's reported similar failures to lock open that persisted, even with a magazine or slide stop swap, until the Shok-Buff was removed.

As with anything, if you like them, then use them...Robert

Terms of interest: personal taste

[wichaka]

I run buff in all my guns, duty as well....and yet to have a problem with a ragged slide top notch, or anything else for that matter.

I even use them in my Commanders without any problems.

Just like anything else in the gun that needs to be looked after, buffs need to be checked and replaced as needed. If this is not done, then expect problem with them coming apart.

Can you post some photos of the slide stop notches in question?

I agree, they are a personal choice. But add one to a gun with the original JMB set up, that being a small radius firing pin stop and a 14lb recoil, and a 23lb main spring.

[log man]

Log,

This is my professional observation and it was discussed in the 1911 armorer's course. More than a few police department's reported similar failures to lock open that persisted, even with a magazine or slide stop swap, until the Shok-Buff was removed.

As with anything, if you like them, then use them...Robert

Terms of interest: personal taste

Bill Wilson isn't a professional. Okay that's kinda what I thought, you meant. I presented an observations of the action of the slide locking back and what was relative to the question at hand. Not exposing my credentials of lesser or greater merit as part of a discussion. :)

Using or not using a shock buff is a personal choice in the private sector at least, and guns that choke have something else wrong. Find out what it is. There are a lot of threads of guns failing to lock back and do not have a buff.

Squad cars don't run hub caps for instance, makes sense in that area. But running hub caps does not cause the lug nuts to come loose.

Buffs do not cause slide stop notch deformation.

LOG

[kenhwind]

OK, I'm hip with the EGW FP Stop.

Recoils springs;
If an extra power recoil spring is so evil please explain to me the Delta Elite. Standard power 23 lbs. OK we also have a hi-intensity cartridge. Theoretically the gun is bounding itself apart because the 1911 is designed for a 14 - 16 lb recoil spring.

My .45 has a Wolff 18 lb spring in it, and I just checked it against some other recoils springs, one of which is factory and could not feel any appreciable difference. Another spring was a little stiffer:( factory?) One spring was longer and lighter.

Now the three recoil springs in question are the same length. An 18 lb recoil spring that is the specified OAL probably is not an issue, but a heavier longer spring would be..
The recoil spring in my Super, an 18 lb Wolff, was shortened to factory length for that caliber.

Its to late to worry bout Shok Buffs in my babies, thousands and thousands of rounds X ten.

[10851Man]

Loggy,

Never said anything about Bill Wilson not being a professional. We exchanged a number of emails over a Wilson magazine issue and he was very helpful and professional.

The issue of slide stop and notch wear with Shok-Buffs is a noted topic of discussion in the Colt 1911 Armorer's Course and supports what I have seen personally. I was in a gun shop in Fresno Thursday and was talking to the gunsmith about 1911's in general and he brought this point up before I even had a chance to speak.

Nothing in my post whould hinder you from what you are doing. However, in pistols that are carried everyday, for on-duty use, we don't support the use of Shok-Buffs, nor do we allow the use of one-piece guide rods...Robert

[log man]

Loggy,

Should I say, Funny Number Manny, or Robby my boy? Using disrespect in a discussion is counter productive.

Never said anything about Bill Wilson not being a professional. We exchanged a number of emails over a Wilson magazine issue and he was very helpful and professional.
So, are you a more or less professional than Bill Wilson? As you use the term "professional" to bolster your claim without any explanation of the mechanics of how the damage is participated by a buff. Now you suggest Bill Wilson is a professional, but is totally wrong about buffs in his guns, shouldn't you be emailing him and alert him. Or is he the real professional?

The issue of slide stop and notch wear with Shok-Buffs is a noted topic of discussion in the Colt 1911 Armorer's Course and supports what I have seen personally. I was in a gun shop in Fresno Thursday and was talking to the gunsmith about 1911's in general and he brought this point up before I even had a chance to speak.
Baseless argumentative claim, no substance as to why this may or may not be true.
Nothing in my post whould hinder you from what you are doing. However, in pistols that are carried everyday, for on-duty use, we don't support the use of Shok-Buffs, nor do we allow the use of one-piece guide rods...Robert
Oh, well thank you for that, and now in addition to an opinion about buffs, which is all you've shared, now one piece guide rods are on the block. So, what should a follower of this statement do with the one piece guide rod system in his Beretta, or his Sig, or his H&K, or his Glock, or......

What's used/allowed in a department is very much understood, and not the topic or point of interest. Uniformity is the mandate in a dept. for life saving reasons and are not based on performance, but the ability for anyone in the dept to operate effectively with anyone's gear.

Please before you begin pounding the rod, explain the mechanics of the buff causing damage to the slide stop and the slide stop notch. This is the right forum for that.

LOG

[10851Man]

Log,

With all due respect, I think I will take the opinions expressed by the instructors during my Colt armorer's course, including the Shok-Buff and the one piece guide rod to heart. You should feel free to use whatever you like.

You obviously are not reading my posts, as you continue to imply that I said Bill Wilson is not a professional.

Enjoy your holiday...Robert

[log man]

Log,

With all due respect, I think I will take the opinions expressed by the instructors during my Colt armorer's course, including the Shok-Buff and the one piece guide rod to heart. You should feel free to use whatever you like.

You obviously are not reading my posts, as you continue to imply that I said Bill Wilson is not a professional.

Enjoy your holiday...Robert
Opinions are fine, when it's either or, but when a mechanical action is claimed it should be explained past because someone or thing so stated without explanation.
I've read your posts how could I comment if not. Bill Wilson is a professional gun builder, he includes a shock-buff in the pistols he builds and stands behind it. He also states his pistols will operate fine without. That's a professional opinion. So he makes no claims either way.

You have made a claim and in an earlier post I gave reasons, mechanical reasons, that I believe support the opposite. Please if you can, give substantive mechanical evidence of the change in operation that causes damage to the slide stop and slide stop notch that you claim in an unsubstantiated way.

LOG

[10851Man]

"What's used/allowed in a department is very much understood, and not the topic or point of interest. Uniformity is the mandate in a dept. for life saving reasons and are not based on performance, but the ability for anyone in the dept to operate effectively with anyone's gear...."LOG

Log,

Our department is, in my opinion, fairly progressive in many respects. In the 10 years that I have worked for this agency, we have issued the Colt 1911 Government Model, the H&K USP and the Glock 22, although the individual officer can carry any .40 or .45 caliber semi-automatic handgun of reputable, commercial manufacture, with the armorer's/rangemaster's blessings.

Our agency’s first issued duty pistol was the Colt Commando 4” Barrel .38 Revolver that the department bought from Surplus City in Visalia, CA., in 1951 for $8.95/each.

Recent problems with our 1 year old fleet of Glocks, to include breech block failures, jammed firing pin stops from chipping/flaking and cracked polymer frames to name a few, prompted my chief to ask me to research a new duty pistol. After quite a bit of testing (and an incredible trade-in offer from Sig) we have adopted the Sig P226 Elite as our issued duty pistol. I was able to trade in our Glock 22's and our entire stock of old, unissued department pistols and shotguns to accommodate the swap with no money out of the taxpayer's pocket.

Having said that, I still have more than a few Colt 1911's (a few genuine Colts, a couple of Kimbers, and a Para) to keep running, including two of my own. While uniformity is great, my chief feels that allowing officers to carry their preference of duty weapon improves efficiency and our overall range scores have supported this notion. I served in the military and I am familiar with a variety of weapons, so my ability to fire weapons with a different manual of arms is above average.

I do, however, only carry one style of holster in both my leather (daily) and nylon (tactical) duty gear and have carried this holster exclusive since I was in the academy in 1991. That holster is the Safariland ‘070’ Triple Retention model. I have two gun belts (one leather and one nylon) that I have setup in exactly the same way.

I’m very hesitant to change away from something that is proven, which is probably why I carried a stock 1917 production 1911 (unmodified other than new springs/extractor) for 9 years on and off duty with 7 round magazines.

I don’t think we jump to conclusions here too often and we don’t mandate uniformity as a matter of course either, but I do give some credence to what I have learned from others with far more experience than me…Robert

[wichaka]

I went thru the Colt Armorer course recently to get an update, and was surprised at the lack of knowledge the instructor had...as well as being very disorganized.

Not sure who you had as an instructor, but the armorer courses from Colt leave something to be desired at best.

I don't see the problem with using a 1 piece guide rod, what did the instructor specifically say about them?

[10851Man]

Wichaka,

I agree with you that sometimes, instructor knowledge can be luck of the draw. The instructor at my Glock armorer's course fumbled with the pistol like he had never had one apart before.

My instrcutor was Dean Caputo and he was very skilled and informative. I have met a number of contacts at Colt to include Seth Bielucki, Thomas Herlihy and Michael Guerra. All of them have been very helpful and a wealth of information.

Our instructor mentioned two things about the 1 piece guide rods. First, was the difference in the thickness of the spring guide head, which will often cause failures to lock open, especially with Shok-Buffs. He also mentioned that the 'bunching up' of the recoil spring in the gun wasn't an indication that Browning wasn't smart enough to make a guide rod, but the bunching-up of the recoil spring is designed to permit the barrel unrestricted downward movement during the unlocking period.

I also mentioned in a prevoius post that I had measured some great variations in the thickness of the recoil spring head in some pistols and replacement parts. I was able to cure an intermittant failure to lock open malfunction on a Springfield .45 by installing a thinner recoil spring guide.

I would like to see a recoil spring guide made that is the same overall thickness with the 'buff' installed as it is without it, or perhaps a polymer spring guide would be a good idea???

The instructor also pointed out how many pistols exhibited increased slide lock wear with shock buffs since it reduces the rearward travel of the slide. He showed several examples during his presentation and this mirrored my own personal observations...Robert

[1911Tuner]

the bunching-up of the recoil spring is designed to permit the barrel unrestricted downward movement during the unlocking period.

I'd like to hear his reasoning on that one...

:rolleyes:

[10851Man]

This is how I looked at the issue:

The weapon worked for almost 100 years without it and I saw no appreciable benefit to installing it...Robert

[1911Tuner]

The weapon worked for almost 100 years without it and I saw no appreciable benefit to installing it

The armorer in question apparently hasn't studied the standard recoil system and how it works. Short version...As the spring compresses, the standard guide rod and the spring plug essentially encapsulate it. It can't flex much.

And as for bunching up to allow the barrel to drop...

When the barrel is fully linked down, the slide has only moved a quarter-inch. Not a whole lotta bunchin' at that point.

The guy needs schoolin'...

[wichaka]

The 1911 was designed without a lot of things that are used today, which doesn't mean they can't be used.

'buffs are one of those things where some guns run just fine with them, and others do not.

That must have been one thick guide rod head to give the gun problems. What was the measurement?

[wichaka]

The guy needs schoolin'...

I'll have to look up to see who taught our class, as he really needed schoolin'.

He was pathetic......

I think it was Caputo, but am not sure. With this spring bunching thing, it sure reminds me of the same guy, and the same type of stuff he would bring up.

[log man]

The whole statement is hilarious as how does bunching (if it where possible to bunch) help give unrestricted room for the barrel at link-down. Wouldn't, not bunching up, be the preferred action. The spring tunnel and end of guide rod is so close at battery that the chance to bunch is minimal at best and at link down, it just doesn't happen except during installation when loaded from the rear, preferred by me, LOL.

The head flange thickness is surprising as I have a good cross section of both and the average difference is only .0965" versus .090" with the greatest spread of .016" and the least being -.002" which comes from a plug head being thicker than the thinnest rod head. So not much evidence in that area either.

I declare, my eyes are burning!

LOG

[10851Man]

Well, I'm not the smartest fellow around that's for sure, but I have carried one of the earliest forms of the 1911 (circa 1917) in completely stock condition for around 9 years, stopped counting at 8,000 rounds of 230 grain Hydra-Shok and still carry it to this day. I guess I am not smart enough to realize this gun just can't shoot without all the modern upgrades that are available these days.

Yeah, I suppose there are a lot of cool, fancy doo-dads out there like Ambi safeties and mag releases that you can use if you like, but I never found any real benefit from adding any of that stuff to a duty weapon.

And cops are the worst of all for tinkering with things. I see guys with speed-feed stocks, side-saddles, ammo-bearing slings, laser guide rods, ambi safeties that 'roll-off' in some holsters and the list goes on and on and on.

I have one officer here who likes to carry his $1,000+ dollar TRP and it shoots and groups no better than my 1917. To each thier own, so long as it is within policy I say.

Funny thing though, the fancy guns and gear won't make you a better shooter.

One thing I have seen with the smaller agencies is a reduction in the number of shots fired for training, probably due to the high cost of ammunition. My desire was to find a way to increase our quarterly qualifications to monthly events and fire more ammo during both events.

When we started breaking breechblocks in our year old fleet of issued Glock 22's, I was asked to find a replacement pistol. After some shopping around, I found that the majority of our staff (who don't carry their own weapon as our policy allows) liked the Sig P226 Elite. When making the purchase, I bought (6) of Sig's .22 caliber conversion kits for the P226 and a large quantity of .22 ammunition.

With .40 caliber target ammo costing us $230.00/1000 rounds and .22 ammo costing around $70.00/1000 rounds, I think we can put a lot more 'trigger time' on our shooters and improve their marksmanship skills too...Robert

[10851Man]

Log,

Man, you need to relax more often...

I have seen quite a variation in guide rod head thickness since I started looking for it. I have one guide rod in my collection that came out of a Springfield that is at least .045" thicker than any of the other guides I have in stock. Now .045" may not seem like much to you, but when you couple that with a Shok-Buff thats almost .150" of travel reduction.

Log, you remind me of the armorer at the local sheriff's department that told me that you simply cannot break a breechblock on a Glock pistol, just because he never saw one personally; and we broke two of them with factory, standard pressure .40 loads.

Please, put whatever you want on/in your gun. I'm not here to influence you either way, just sharing what I have been told...

I appreciate the post and the photos on hammer/sear engagement by the way...Thanks!!!!....Robert

[log man]

LOL, This is major relaxed 94 over 65, it's a holiday. Of course .045" is significant to me, but I haven't seen any head approaching .145" in thickness so I can't say. If so then that is a part for the trash can and I wouldn't accept it either, but it certainly isn't the norm.The Colt, Para, and Springfield rod heads where all between .084" and .094", and the FLGR heads, Springfield, Sig, Ed Brown, Wilson, STI, where all in between .090" and .100". I measured a total of 16 random heads.
Comparing me to someone you disrespect due to what he may or may not have seen or understood is a mistake on your part.

LOG

[egumpher]

liked the Sig P226 Elite. I bought (6) of Sig's .22 caliber conversion kits for the P226 and a large quantity of .22 ammunition.


My P226 sits in my nightstand every night while my .45s are in the safe. I find the P226 quicker on target and easier followup shots.

Rgds
Eric

[wichaka]

When Glock was smart to put a higher pressure 40 cal round in a 9mm engineered gun, something is going to give at some point. :scared:


10851Man, you're conversing with a group of people (logman - 1911Tuner - neimi24s) who have studied the original blueprints of the 1911, and are far from putting any type of gadget on their guns.

If you've ever seen a cut-away 1911 go thru the cycle process, the spring does not bunch up.

I will admit that a full length guide rod makes my 1977 Commander cycle smoother, and sounds less clunky as it does. But I still choose to leave the original recoil set up.

The Model O Colt class really has something to be desired for anyone that has knowledge of our beloved platform. Over the years, I find the info. more shallow, maybe for liability reasons...who knows.

[10851Man]

Wichaka,

It's not just limited to the .40 caliber varients...

Yes, part of the Glock armorer's course trains you on how to find hidden cracks in the Polymer frame (by bending it by hand) and how to check for the commonly broken rear slide rails. Not very confidence inspiring.

I have noticed a very interesting trend with Glock pistols recently. One of my colleagues sent a Glock 9mm (17) back to Glock with a broken Polymer frame. The frame split through the breech block pin. Some time passes and he receives a new pistol from Glock. The work order states something to this effect: "Received Glock Pistol Serial # XXXX from customer. Examined pistol and found no defects in workmanship. Courtesy law enforcement replacement."

My colleage calls Glock and asks how they couldn't see a huge crack through the breech block holes. The contact at Glock tells him that there were no defects in the frame. He simply exceeded the service life of the frame and it failed, hence no 'defect' in a normal wear and tear item, like a recoil spring.

When speaking with Glock directly, I have been told more then once the frame is designed to have a service life of 5,000 rounds, even though many of them shoot far more rounds than that, this was one of the minimum specifications for the original Austrian military contract.

I don't dispute these gentlemen's credentials. I was only passing along what had been passed along to me. What you/they say (collectively) about the recoil spring not 'bunching up' makes sense, but quite honestly, I never used anything but Browning's original style guide rod in any of my pistols (or department guns) for that matter...Robert

[wichaka]

When talking with Dennis Tueller and other Glock reps, they all say they are pretty much throw away guns. And change all the pins and small parts about every other year or so.

Doesn't say much for them.....

[kenhwind]

A Glock only has a service life of 5,000 rounds. Overrated junk IMO.
A Colt 1911 ain't even broke in at 5,000 rounds. My gun is 37 years old I would have needed between 10 or 15 Glocks to compete. I'm sure I've shot at least 50,000 rounds through my gun and probably more, a lot more.

Tupperware isn't disposable, but those Glad and Ziploc plastic bowls are.

[1911Tuner]

Ain't gonna say that they're not out there, 'cause anything is subject to show up on a 1911 variant or clone these days...but in 45 years of shootin' and wrenchin' on the gun...I've never come across a guide rod flange thicker than .095 inch or so. Most run in the .085-.090 range.

But...

A .145 thick flange shouldn't present a problem in a 5-inch gun unless used in conjunction with a shock buff...which can bring on problems all by itself sometimes, even with a .085 thick flange. I've seen dead-nuts reliable pistols turn into pukin' buzzards, (with apologies and all due respect to the101st) and then return to reliability as soon as the buffs were removed. Most 5-inch guns don't know the difference, though a few exhibit a change in ejection patterns.

A little modification that I've done a few times to address the issues caused by short runup in individual pistols is to reduce the thickness of the flange to gain a little slide travel. .050 inch is perfectly workable as long as a like amount is faced off the butt-end of the rod itself. This is a neat way to increase slide travel and runup in pistols with chopped slides...Commander-length included. As with any change to the recoil system, a test for spring stacking...aka "Coil Bind" is strongly advised.

As for the Glock being a throw-away gun, or worthless junk...it would be well to remember that everything but the frame on the 1911 was designed to be thrown away.
That's why the government ordered a dozen sets of parts for every complete gun delivered...and that includes slides and barrels. It was especially important on the early pistols, before full hardening of the slides was incorporated in mid-1946.

You might want to closely examine the slide lugs in that 8,000-round 1917. If the rear faces of the lugs have a stair-stepped appearance...the headspace is approaching the point of no return, if it hasn't already gone past it...and the increase is in the kaboom direction. Be advised. 8-10 thousand rounds was about the life of a slide and barrel on those old guns, and some failed well before that point.

The barrel lugs may also be stepped. If you've had to use a file to dress any flanging from the tops of the lugs, they've most certainly been deformed and set back...also in the kaboom direction.

The breerchface itself can get pretty beaten up under recoil forces. A hardened steel insert in the breechface was incorporated in 1936 to prevent that peening and deformation...and continued until the end of production. There are a few post-war replacement slides made after Colt started fully hardening them...but I've encountered only a handful. If you look closely at a WW2-era GI pistol, you can see the insert. Many mistake it for a machining mark.

Be well.

[kenhwind]

it would be well to remember that everything but the frame on the 1911 was designed to be thrown away.
Didn't think about that. The 1911 truly is a modular design.
But their is one difference though, on a 1911 frame a cracked dust cover does not render the frame unservicable, but a crack any where in a polymer frame seems like a problem to me.

[1911Tuner]

But their is one difference though, on a 1911 frame a cracked dust cover does not render the frame unservicable,

There are places that they can crack that does render them unserviceable, though.
Frame rails...at the rear. Adjacent to the disconnect hole...most often toward the starboard side. Adjacent to the slidestop crosspin hole at the bottom. (Still believe letting the slide slam home on an empty gun can't do any harm?)

[kenhwind]

There are places that they can crack that does render them unserviceable, though.
Frame rails...at the rear. Adjacent to the disconnect hole...most often toward the starboard side. Adjacent to the slidestop crosspin hole at the bottom. (Still believe letting the slide slam home on an empty gun can't do any harm?)
This is also true, I know these things happen, especially on older guns and guns that are abused.
My GI maintenance manual does point out the dust cover crack.
My guns has been shot a lot, but after I grew up and stop trying to destroy it, they've held up quite well.
Except for the dust covers. The .45 was well, "Buffalo Loads" I think they used to call them. On the .38 Super I inadvertantly installed a target recoil spring. Left side crack, both guns. But the dust covers on my Series 70s seem a little thin IMO, but I never really changed recoil springs like I should have. Maybe I had a reload setback that cracked the .45 I don't rightly know.
They work and shoot good, and they 're mine.

[10851Man]

1911 Tuner,

Thank you for the informative posting! I did a little research last night and the 'thick' guide rod out of the Springfield was a little over .100" thick and I have one from SARCO that is closer to 1/8" in thickness!

Again, let me say that until this was mentioned to me during my Armorer’s training, I have never looked that closely at a guide rod head. Now I am in the habit of scrutinizing them very closely and I do see some variations.

On my 1917, I stopped counting at 8,000 failure-free rounds. There is no way to tell exactly how many rounds that old gun has fired. My Dad and I reload as a hobby and we shoot constantly, so I guess with my duty qualifications and target shooting combined, it is possible that we have fired 15,000 to 20,000 rounds through this gun in 17 years. Before I started using it as my primary duty pistol in 1992, I installed a new barrel, bushing, extractor and replaced all the springs. I use a 16 lb Wolff recoil spring and 23 pound main spring.

Interesting thing about the breechface insert. I did not know that and this was never mentioned in the Armorer’s course.

The breechface on both my 1917 and 1927 production Colt pistols show a wear pattern from the cartridge case that is visible only when looking across the breechface at an angle. Not a deep recession, but it is visible. One of the things I do with these old pistols is to cut a light, 45° chamfer around the firing pin hole to eliminate any rough edge. I would have to say this cut is roughly .008" to .010" in width. I have had the slides and frames on all my old pistols Magnafluxed prior to placing them into service.

On my 1927 Colt Argentine, I have conducted an very complete restoration on it and I am ready to parkerize it. I started with a new barrel and bushing, new wide spur hammer, new sear, new oversize hammer and sear pins, all new springs, new extractor and hand-fitted firing pin stop with a new firing pin. All I need to do is fix this trigger creep and I am ready to refinish it.

The old 1917 has quite a story behind it. My grandfather was in the USAAF in WWII and was stationed at an army airfield in Texas where he was a firearms instructor. After the war, he bought the 1917 from a pawn shop in San Antonio Texas for $10.00. He gave it to my Dad in the 1950's and I learned to shoot with this weapon.

When I went to the police academy in 1992, as an unaffiliated cadet, I needed a gun and didn't have any money. My Dad gave me the 1917 and 6 old military magazines and this is what I used in the academy. Over the 12 week course, we fired about 2,500 rounds and I never had any problems with the gun. We were allowed to shoot FMJ for target, but we had to shoot JHP's for the 'duty qualification' portion of the course. The old 1917 digested 'Black Talon' and Federal Hydra-Shok without any ramping or throating.

When I was hired by the Woodlake Police Department in 1993, I was allowed to carry this pistol on duty and it has been my primary duty weapon ever since.

Twice tried to 'upgrade' to a newer pistol and both times I was faced with problems.

In 1998, I bought a beautiful Series 80 Colt Government Model. This gun never would feed reliably. We changed magazines, extractors, ejectors and everything else, but the feed problems persisted. One day a friend of my Dad's who had worked for the Firearms Unit in Quantico stopped by and we discussed the pistol. He took the weapon apart and started pointing out major problems.

The extractor tunnel was bored off-center as was the ejector and it wasn't just a little, the difference was big enough you could see once he pointed it out. Even reducing the pad on the end of the extractor couldn't move it close enough to the firing pin hole centerline to correct the problem.

I went back to the dealer and explained this. The dealer told me that just wasn't possible, but if I wasn't happy with the gun, he would sell me a new Springfield pistol. This wasn't a bad gun, but I didn't like the short trigger and curved mainspring housing. I quickly changed both parts and restored some of the original feel and pointability that I was used to with the old 1917 model. I carried the Springfield for about a year and that is when it started giving me trouble.

Problems started at about 3,000 rounds with random ejection patterns and ultimately a failure to extract. I had always replaced the recoil springs at 2,000 round intervals, so I inspected the gun and found the extractor tension was gone. Fitting a new Wilson extractor corrected the problem, but the gun just wasn't reliable enough to depend on. So, I went back to the old Colt which had always proven itself to be reliable.

There are guys here with high-dollar Kimbers and Wilsons that have had to send them back at least once for adjustments under warranty before they would function reliably. To me, that is simply unacceptable.

When I picked up this old 1927 Colt Argentine, it had been hanging on a nail in an attic for probably 50 years. The gun was given to me. I cleaned it, replaced the barrel, bushing and recoil spring, and then immediately fired 300 rounds of Federal 230 grain Hydra Shok through it (with a 7 round GI magazine) without a single malfunction. The old gun kind of impressed me in comparison to the Kimbers and Wilsons I have encountered, so I will be replacing my 1917 museum piece with this 1927 Argentine Colt as soon as I correct this trigger creep issue and re-parkerize it.

Thanks very much to all of you for your input and expertise...Robert

[1911Tuner]

I did a little research last night and the 'thick' guide rod out of the Springfield was a little over .100" thick

Interesting. Was it a full-length rod or a standard "stub" type? I know that the FLGRs tend to run thicker than standard ones...as many aftermarket parts manufacturers sometimes seem to make up specs as they go...but I haven't seen one yet that was that thick.


I have one from SARCO that is closer to 1/8" in thickness!

No surprises there. You're apt to get anything from Sarco...which is why I've made it standard practice to stay as far from'em as I can get.

[10851Man]

The 'thick' guide in the Springfield was of the standard variety. I agree with you on the SARCO stuff....looks like 'offshore' items for the most part...Robert

[niemi24s]

Somebody had posted a pic within the past few months of a very crudely done guide rod. Looked like it had been fashioned from a big blob of JB-Weld and the head/flange looked like it might have been close to 1/8" thick.

It was simply awful!

Maybe that's the kind 10851Man was referring to.

Regards

[10851Man]

Nope...this was very well machined, just super thick....

Has anyone made a polymer guide rod????

[texagun]

Has anyone made a polymer guide rod????

At the Ft. Worth Gun Show about 3 months ago I ran across a guy who had a large bag of polymer G.I. guide rods....must have had 1000 or more of them for $1 each. I asked him how they held up, and he said you had to change them about every 1000 rounds. I didn't buy any....didn't seem like a very good idea to me.

[niemi24s]

Is the idea behind an all-polymer guide rod that the flange/head becomes a sort of built in recoil buffer?

[kenhwind]

Has anyone made a polymer guide rod????
Colt Delta Elite uses a polymer GI type recoil spring guide.

[niemi24s]

Hi Ken:Colt Delta Elite uses a polymer GI type recoil spring guide.If you've got one, how thick is the flange/head?

[kenhwind]

If you've got one, how thick is the flange/head?
No I don't but these had a SS plate on each side.

[1911Tuner]

The 'thick' guide in the Springfield was of the standard variety.

Gotta love outsourced parts...

:rolleyes:

The polymer guide rod in the Delta was a shock buffer. It actuallyworked pretty well.
Colt should have included a couple extras with each gun, but I guess they figured that most people wouldn't shoot a thousand rounds of full-on 10mm ammo.

[10851Man]

Would this work in a regular 1911????

[1911Tuner]

Would this work in a regular 1911????

Don't see why not. Note that any soft buffer negates the rebound effect of the slide smackin' the steel guide rod flange. Sometimes that causes problems...sometimes not.
Usually not, but these old pistols are like wimmin. Mystifyin'.

[10851Man]

Here is a photo of the .127"+ thick guide rod...

http://i575.photobucket.com/albums/ss196/10851Man/ThickGuideRod.jpg

[1911Tuner]

A photo of the .127"+ thick guide rod...


Well, don't that take the paint off'n the outhouse...

Definitely aftermarket. Looks like a Brown, except Brown's run from .092-.096 inch...or at least all that I've seen do. Could be one that slipped through the QC cracks.

[niemi24s]

Well, don't that take the paint off'n the outhouse...Outhouse? PAINT??

That's gettin' pretty swanky, isn't it? :D

Cheers

[egumpher]

My Lightweight Commander has some guide rod hits on the frame.

Where can I buy a polymer guide rod to try?

Rgds
Eric

[1911Tuner]

Outhouse? PAINT??

That's gettin' pretty swanky, isn't it?

Oh, yeah. As a proud son of the Appalachian coal fields, I not only know what an outhouse is...I've used'em. Cooked on a wood stove...hauled coal into the house in a scuttle...and woke up to snow inside the house after an overnight...uh...flurry, and have seen water freeze inside the house overnight.