Mark, mass produced 1911's can have fitting problems a plenty, regardless of how many are being made and how many are buying them up. Clocking extractors, poor chamber/frame ramp gap (if any), etc. I doesn't take long in a 1911 forum, or looking at guns in a LGS to find this out. That's not to say that most aren't just fine, but people who have problems scream loud. I am not suggesting that everyone who buys a mass produced 1911 is a novice, but it's not hard to gather evidence that there are indeed novices with respect to 1911 and what on a 1911 has to be fitted just so to have a reliable pistol. I would suggest non-novices are aware, and have a different set of expectations as well as know what to look for.
That could be said for any firearm made in general including ARs.
I'd have to say that untuned extractor issues are not uncommon but then again, almost anything on a 1911 can be fixed or tweaked or upgraded with after market parts. Then there is the full length guide rod crowd verus the standard GI guide rod crowd, external vs internal extractors, the purity of the Series 70 without the firing pin lock and the list goes on and on.
I remember reading on one forum where a gunsmith took apart a Ruger SR1911 and measured every part and then proceeded to explain how the parts were out of spec. He then proceeded to take the pistol to the range and it functioned flawlessly and displayed acceptable combat accuracty, about 3 inches at 25 yards. This is not a race gun, or an Ed Brown or a Les Baer or a RockRiver, but there is a certain degree of what I would call 1911 snobbery within the ranks. Maybe because the father of the 1911 Renaissance, so to speak, Jeff Cooper was an elitist himself, and Chuck Taylor who was another early disciple sort of had that attitude too. The thing of it is, the basic GI 1911A1 was loose fitting, capable of maybe three to four inch groups at 25 yards and was designed to be reliable under severe combat conditions. There is among the 1911 cognoscenti a group that would look upon with disdain anyone who ever carried a Remington Rand, US Switch and Signal or even Colt GI 1911A1 because it wouldn't make the cut. I think part of this disdain is more cultural, simply because the 1911 has been for many years now, a gun for the classes and is now once again being touted as a gun for the masses. It was readily adopted by the IPSC people and suffice to say there is within that particular community a group of what I will charitably call elitists. The agency that I work for went to the SWM&P .45, a good choice IMO, but the STOP Team (you can probably guess the agency because of that acronym) wanted 1911's, why? I'm guessing more of an elite status symbol, so they spent three days shooting S&W 1911's at the range with a S&W armorer who swapped out parts so that each gun was "perfect" at the end. Now I really don't know what this means. I also know the more you tweak and refine any handgun, you may impinge upon reliability under adverse conditions which was the great virtue of the original 1911, loose fit and generous tolerances. I'd like to see how well a race gun would do in Afghanistan.
There are a couple of ways to accomplish getting a high end 1911:
1. Spend a couple of thousand dollars and get a high end pistol
2. Purchase a stock factory produced 1911 and take to a reputable gunsmith and get is customized, like people have done for years
3. Purchase aftermarket parts and replace the stock parts with after market parts
4. Build your own if so inclined, and if you have the right equipment and aptitude
5. If it works fine leave it alone, if it is not broken and you are looking for a general purpose 1911 why change anything even if say the sear is .005 inches out of spec, if it works...why mess with it
There are lots of people who will never put 5000 rounds thru their 1911s, there are thousands who need to practice draw and presentation from the holster to master Condition 1, I will grant you that, but I can say that about owners of any handgun with regard to round usage and draw and presentation. There are those who purchase 1911s who want them because of the mystique that has grown up around the pistol. The gun press contantly hypes all the flavors of 1911s.
The truth of the matter is that millions of GI's never really liked the gun that much because of the technique that was taught one handed target style shooting for decades. In the days before eye and ear protection, shooting a 1911 offhand could be a daunting and even unpleasant experience, I'll wager and a lot of training was nothing more than familiarization. The DOD wanted to replace the pistol in the late 40's {hence the development of the Colt Commander originally in 9mm and the S&W M39} but decided against it because who needed a pistol in the age of Atomic Warfare and Strategic Airpower which was going to be the new face of all future conflicts? The 1911 was "good enough."
I agree totally that the development of the micro 1911's does affect reliability, maybe not for the casual user, but start going thru thousands of rounds and reliability is affected. Browning never conceived the pistol to be a compact gun and some would argue that even the Commander style pistol is not as reliable as the 5 inch model. I'd say that after 64 years of producing that kind of pistol, most of the kinks have been worked out.
ChrisATX I appreciate your reply to my post and your reasoning. I understand, I think your position. It is a worldview that many hold, but I think one can look at this from several different angles.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
Just kidding! or am I?
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
