Has anyone ever seen the inside of a Combat Commander milled away as to expose the extractor? I have never seen this as was curious as why someone would do this.

http://s785.photobucket.com/albums/...nt=DSC00222.jpg

http://i785.photobucket.com/albums/...ra/DSC00224.jpg

http://i785.photobucket.com/albums/...ra/DSC00222.jpg

This was done to some early Gold Cup National Match (GCNM) pistols to lighten the slide.

I am not aware of it having been done by the factory on any Combat Commanders or why it was deemed necessary to lighten the slide on the GCNM other than that it was felt that they would be used with lighter target loads.

Perhaps someone was trying to create a Combat Commander National Match.

__________________

Robert.
NRA Endowment Life Member.
The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedients, and by parts. - Edmund Burke 1777

I have also wondered about the reasoning behind the NM slide design. Possibly since Colt was producing them in 38 Spec mfg expediency caused the use of a lightend slide in both cals? I have one (45) built as a BE wadcutter. Very nice feel for an old guy but mostly sits in the safe due to slow recovery time.

I have considered using the lightest springs in combimation w/ a very light pdr charge behind a 160 grain bullet in the gun hoping to extending shooting well into my dotery!

Ron

__________________
Distinguished Service Pistol, Bullseye Master

It was once SOP with LW Commanders. Since there was/is no dimensional difference between the LW and Combat Commander slides, and because Colt...never being a company to waste resources...probably had a few of the older slides in inventory in mid 1972 when they began production on the early Combat Commanders, and used them. Slides are normally produced and maintained in inventory in greater numbers than frames, being that's where all the action is. More slides are replaced under warranty than frames...so it's likely just a matter of logistics.

__________________
Help save a collie http://www.collierescue.net/available/index.html

This is just a thought, and I can't prove it but the extractor tunnel does collect a lot of "stuff". I have taken apart a lot of 1911s that had a lot of "glop" in there. If you cut the slide away like this it might open that area up to removal of stuff during normal cleaning plus lubricants could get in there more easily also. Of course the added machining would also add a to the cost of the gun. I never bought that Colt did this just to save weight.

__________________
NRA Life Member

I don't think it's done to save weight in general, it's recipricating weight in particular. Less weight = less inertia, so a lighter recoil spring may be used, at least in theory!

I'd like to hear 1911Tuner's opinion on this and other, more recent (and much uglier) ways to reduce the weight of slides on competitive 1911s!

Why else would they do it?



Less reciprocating weight/mass would call for a heavier spring. Remember that the primary function of the "recoil" spring is to feed, chamber, and return the slide to battery.

__________________
Help save a collie http://www.collierescue.net/available/index.html

"Less reciprocating weight/mass would call for a heavier spring. Remember that the primary function of the "recoil" spring is to feed, chamber, and return the slide to battery."

Sorry but the laws of physics seem to be against you on that one, less weight requires less spring to do the same job. Lt. wt. comp. guns almost universaly have much lighter springs than their big heavy G.I. cousins.

Very interesting find though, love seeing factory odballs like that.

__________________
Foxhole religion,...so easy an athiest can do it.

Sorry, but you've got it backward. The laws of physics states that momentum is mass times velocity. Less mass means that the object needs more speed to create the same momentum. A lighter spring won't provide the same acceleration for the slide as a heavier spring. The spring's primary function is to return the slide to battery. Momentum is important here.

Examples abound.

A lighter bullet needs more speed to penetrate to the same depth in a given medium as a heavier bullet. Momentum.

A bobbed hammer sometimes causes misfires until a heavier mainspring is added. A lightened spring can cause misfires with a standard hammer. Momentum again.

A less massive slide leads to return to battery failures unless a heavier spring is used. Momentum.

Regardless of how fast the slide moves backward, at some point it has to come to a dead stop, and the spring has to accelerate it back to battery. On the way, it encounters resistance from the cartridge in the magazine, and having to force that cartridge across other resistive influences in order to chamber it. If the slide lacks momentum with spring X, then spring Y must be installed to provide the required velocity to reach the required momentum.

Because...the less momentum the object has, the easier it is to stop.

Because...momentum is mass times velocity. The less massive it is, the less momentum it has at a given speed. Conversely, the more massive it is, the more momentum it has at a given speed.

Comp guns have light springs because the comp adds mass to the barrel, and the barrel is part of the reciprocating mass for a short time. The slide takes the barrel with it on its trip rearward and drops it at 1/4th inch of travel. The gun has to work in both directions. The more massive the slide/barrel assembly, the greater the inertial resistance to acceleration it offers, and the more power it requires to drive it rearward. Too much spring, and it will short-cycle.

Clear now?

__________________
Help save a collie http://www.collierescue.net/available/index.html

Sorry for the double post, John. Just wanted to get this down so there won't be a question about what was said later on.

__________________
Help save a collie http://www.collierescue.net/available/index.html