'The 1911- Myths, Lies And Fallacies' - Patrick Sweeney

[deadman]

I like this thread.

I'm not personally a big fan of Sweeney, but some of his data seems to be in line with others. Light Infantry's comment about him being an "arrogant hack" kinda struck true given what I have read from the guy. He is good at putting together a beautiful coffee table book on the 1911, he has good photographers on staff. And he writes as if he is the ultimate authority on the subject. I have a few of his works, and my sons and I flip through them when we want to look at pictures of 1911's that are prettier than the ones we own.

That being said, I'm open to him endorsing info that he quotes from other users but I will use my free will to sort through his chaff to compare to my own experience and then draw my own conclusions about the 1911.

I want to see the next installment of your posts. You aren't wrong imo, but I don't agree that Sweeney is the be-all and end-all of 1911 knowledge. Not that I am of course....

 

[marshall]

Lots of them, I have had colt, Kimber ,norinco, custom built ones, the norinco's had controls on both sides as did the Kimber, I think a ruger did , can't remember , I am RH, so not a issue
I forgot SAM, hell of a pistol for the money, ED Brown is on the list, but that may be in the future.
Ont., a bit far to drive, but you would be welcome to shot. Mag release, is a different issue, never had one , but should be doable.
I have seen set back with reloads, if the crimp is to light.
Hot revolver loads, that will happen as well, but the bullet will jam up the cylinder at it moves ahead.
I would start with a moderate crimp and work up if needed, that was with quite light bulls eye loads with semi wad cutters.
Factory or warm loads, round nose bullets as a rule.

 

[4n2t0]

A friend shooting a Colt 9mm Comander blew the grip panels and the bottom off a magazine. He was adamant that he had blocked checked before seating bullets and he did not own a progressive reloader. The post mortem concluded that he might have suffered bullet set back, causing a drastic increase in pressure.

The "post mortem" concluded the incorrect cause.

Want some evidence? Most of us have some time on our hands of late, so why not conduct a LIMITED test yourself?

Load some dummies to correct OAL and repeatedly chamber them. Then measure the OAL. If you can do it safely, do the same with some factory loads. Get back to us with the results.

Just because it hasn't happened to you yet doesn't mean it can't or won't happen. I'm going to see if I can find the article about bullet set back on the net.

Bingo! I googled "bullet set back" and got several hits.

Yes, it can and does happen with factory ammo as well as reloads. It requires a lack of adequate crimp in reloads (due to mixed brass and a change of bullet type) and multiple rechambering of both factory and reloads for it to manifest itself.

It causes a spike in chamber pressure but is generally NOT thought to cause a safety concern in pistols with supported chambers.

I'm your Huckleberry...

hxxps://forums.brianenos.com/topic/283954-bullet-set-back-is-no-joke/?tab=comments#comment-3163146 (replace xx with tt)

P.S. Unless it's a revolver round setback has nothing to do with crimp, it's sizing that prevents setback in pistol rounds.

 

[Sharps '74]

Since this is your idea and your claims, perhaps you should be the one conducting this “experiment”. Same gun, two recoil springs of different weight, 10,000 rounds. Cycle 5,000 rounds with each of the springs, use a micrometer to measure the amount of setback, and report on the differences. Until then, stop spreading nonsense and fake news.

Ah, the usual CGN default of personal attack (on both me and Sweeney) when you disagree and don't have the smarts, experience or vocabulary to intelligently refute in an adult manner. It was too be expected.

I'm not advancing any "ideas" or "claims", merely relaying information from Sweeney's article. Feel free to disagree with it or at least disprove it authentically.

 

[Sharps '74]

Moving ahead, the next 1911 "myth" from the article:

"The internal extractor of the 1911 is fragile, needs 'tuning' and MUST be replaced regularly"

"Oh, is this one wrong. If we look at the designs of John Moses Browning, he started with external extractor designs and then went with internal ones. Sometime between 1900 and 1910 he changed his mind. In my first 'Gun Digest Book Of The 1911', I tested the extractor tension of more than two dozen pistols. I came up with readings from zero (no measurable tension) to 44 ounces - almost four pounds. ***Edit*** (On this he was wrong. Four pounds is 64 oz.s, not 44. Typo?)

All those pistols worked just fine. Ned Christiansen, a good friend of mine who is also a custom 1911 'smith of national repute, built an extractor-testing fixture. He split an old slide and used the extractor half to hold extractors. First he measured the force needed to deflect an extractor for a measured amount. Then he made a special tool for his mill. This tool duplicated the movement and stress an extractor would undergo during a 'Bubba load' - you know, where you drop a round in the chamber and then drop the slide home. (Ouch!")

His tool flexed and snapped the extractor the same way. He then used the gizmo to flex an extractor 10,000 times. He measured again. No change in deflection.

I couldn't believe it, so I sent him the extractor from my Wilson Combat CQB - the one with 30,000 rounds through it. Ned set the extractor in his fixture, set his mill for 1,000 rpm and left it on for an hour. Sixty thousand flexions later, care to guess what the change was in extractor strength? If you guessed "none", you win the prize.

So the next time someone tells you that you have to measure and fuss over your extractor after every practice session, ignore him. Unless your ejection pattern has changed, don't sweat it. You should avoid dropping the slide on a chambered round for other reasons, not because it is "so hard" on the extractor".

I've broken exactly one 1911 extractor, that in my Gold Cup during an IPSC World Championship match at Newport News, Virginia. There were several 'smiths with booths at the event, so replacement was not an issue. They were all offering "tuned" extractors and all claimed to have the superior product. I bought one and a spare and have never had to replace an extractor on any 1911 since.

Some of the "tuned" extractors had a curve or warp to them, the better to grasp the case rim, or so it was said. I bought straight extractors like the factory original.

In a 1985 copy of "Beginner's Guide To Combat Shooting", Ross Seyfried, reigning IPSC Champ at the time, discusses at length the mods on his 1911s. On the topic of extractors, all he had to say was: "If the pistol fails to eject the empty cases, the extractor will usually need a bit of adjustment."

So there you have the "myth" of the day. Let the flaming begin .....

 

[Sharps '74]

I like this thread.

I'm not personally a big fan of Sweeney, but some of his data seems to be in line with others. Light Infantry's comment about him being an "arrogant hack" kinda struck true given what I have read from the guy. He is good at putting together a beautiful coffee table book on the 1911, he has good photographers on staff. And he writes as if he is the ultimate authority on the subject. I have a few of his works, and my sons and I flip through them when we want to look at pictures of 1911's that are prettier than the ones we own.

That being said, I'm open to him endorsing info that he quotes from other users but I will use my free will to sort through his chaff to compare to my own experience and then draw my own conclusions about the 1911.

I want to see the next installment of your posts. You aren't wrong imo, but I don't agree that Sweeney is the be-all and end-all of 1911 knowledge. Not that I am of course....

All good points. On occasion I take umbrage with comments made by gun writers that conflict with my personal experience. It has to be remembered that these guys are writing to (a) please their editors, and (b) to generate reaction from their readership. If that means some people will get their backs up, so much the better.

 

[Dietz]

 

[old303]

The extractor doesn't have to work that hard or flex much, since under normal conditions the base of the round slides up the slide face and the rim slips under the extractor hook, later to be hauled back out of the chamber for the ejector to hit. It does have to be able to flex and go around the rim in the event Bubba drops the slide on a chambered round, but that shouldn't be a frequent event.

A key thing is to round over the bottom edges of the extractor hook so that rounds do slide up inside it without getting caught and preventing the pistol from going into battery.

 

[Sharps '74]

"The 1911 was conceived as a military arm for use by soldiers in close combat, and it remains the best thing of it's kind. People who rely on sidearms for self-protection may be divided into two categories: those who have a 1911 and those who wish they did. It is certainly no manner of a target pistol, though it can be put to surprisingly good use on the target range. It's station in life is "up close and personal", where it shines."

From "The Yankee Fist" by Jeff Cooper, Lt. Col. USMCR

"Traigo mi Cuarenta y Cinco!"

 

[Sharps '74]

The extractor doesn't have to work that hard or flex much, since under normal conditions the base of the round slides up the slide face and the rim slips under the extractor hook, later to be hauled back out of the chamber for the ejector to hit. It does have to be able to flex and go around the rim in the event Bubba drops the slide on a chambered round, but that shouldn't be a frequent event.

A key thing is to round over the bottom edges of the extractor hook so that rounds do slide up inside it without getting caught and preventing the pistol from going into battery.

Para-Ordnance used to offer an extractor with a 50% larger claw than a conventional extractor. I don't know if it is still available or compatible with other 1911 platforms.

 

[4n2t0]

Ah, the usual CGN default of personal attack (on both me and Sweeney) when you disagree and don't have the smarts, experience or vocabulary to intelligently refute in an adult manner. It was too be expected.

I'm not advancing any "ideas" or "claims", merely relaying information from Sweeney's article. Feel free to disagree with it or at least disprove it authentically.

Thanks pot!

When standing on a soapbox you should expect the occasional incoming vegetable.

P.S. Was my English not good enough when I told you that setback wasn't a function of crimp in non-revolver pistol rounds? Or don't you have the smarts, experience or vocabulary to intelligently refute my opinion?

 

[jw8]

I have never had to touch my 1911, other than reblueing the slide. it eats everything, just like my glock21. I guess there may be some funky ones out there, I just haven't seen one.
it is hard to beat the basics of a heavy slow round.

as far as the platform itself, its numbers speak loudly.

 

[Ganderite]

Some factories use these modifications.

 

[Sharps '74]

Thanks pot!

When standing on a soapbox you should expect the occasional incoming vegetable.

P.S. Was my English not good enough when I told you that setback wasn't a function of crimp in non-revolver pistol rounds? Or don't you have the smarts, experience or vocabulary to intelligently refute my opinion?

Again with the personal attack .... I didn't comment on your post as I didn't think it warranted comment.

If that is your opinion based on "science based evidence" (which you have not produced), then fine.

How about confining your comments to Sweeney's article. Better yet, he's easy to contact via the net so you can tell him what you think of his "myth busting".

 

[deadman]

All good points. On occasion I take umbrage with comments made by gun writers that conflict with my personal experience. It has to be remembered that these guys are writing to (a) please their editors, and (b) to generate reaction from their readership. If that means some people will get their backs up, so much the better.

I would like to add that there is credit due to Sweeney, he's probably got a lot more trigger time behind a 1911 than me!

 

[Scarheart]

I used to work at a larger gunshop. We had cases of bad ammo that had to go back for various reasons. So my experience in regards to factory ammo being so reliable may vary with yours.
Set back of pistol caliber rounds from factory was a common problem and though it caused a lot of feeding problems it seems nobody had a gun blow up on them. Fortunately when we saw a run like that we could just issue the customer with a new case of ammo and the factory would take the ammo back and replace it.

 

[capp325]

Ah, the usual CGN default of personal attack (on both me and Sweeney) when you disagree and don't have the smarts, experience or vocabulary to intelligently refute in an adult manner. It was too be expected.

I'm not advancing any "ideas" or "claims", merely relaying information from Sweeney's article. Feel free to disagree with it or at least disprove it authentically.

Since nothing has been proven, there is likewise nothing to disprove. Come back with some actual data, and then we can have an intelligent conversation. Merely saying that something is true based on "limited testing", without specifying the testing parameters and methodology, is completely useless.

 

[Sharps '74]

Please pass that on to Patrick Sweeney. I'm the messenger, remember .... ?

Thank you for your contribution to the thread.

 

[Mr Freeze]

I for one love the 1911. I have put 20,000 plus handloads through my 2011 shooting IPSC. And the only real jam can be blamed on kleenex. Long story short... put kleenex in pants pocket. Pants went through the wash. Kleenex disintegrated into a thousand pieces. Put an oiled mag into my pocket at the range between stages. Mag went into my gun. The kleenex bits baked into the chanmber. Good times. Ended my run on that stage after only two shots.

But as always... YMMV

 

[fdc]

I for one love the 1911. I have put 20,000 plus handloads through my 2011 shooting IPSC. And the only real jam can be blamed on kleenex. Long story short... put kleenex in pants pocket. Pants went through the wash. Kleenex disintegrated into a thousand pieces. Put an oiled mag into my pocket at the range between stages. Mag went into my gun. The kleenex bits baked into the chanmber. Good times. Ended my run on that stage after only two shots.

But as always... YMMV

That is a very "funny" story! By funny I mean interesting. It never ceases to amaze me how we can't predict or foresee every scenario. I now have to add the Kleenex in the pocket that got washed before I put my well maintained charged magazine in said pocket failure. We'll never get it right every time ever.