I've never owned a S&W 1911. I own a number of 1911s:
- Kimber full size
- Kimber compact steel frame
- Kimber compact aluminum frame
- Kimber CDP (compact steel frame, now sold)
- ParaOrdnance P14
- Colt Delta Elite (10mm)
- Springfield Armory
- Wilson Combat
I've had some work done on all of them, except for the Wilson. Some of them Kimbers initially had failures to feed, and may have one occasionally even now. The Springfield Armory had serious accuracy issues and has since had the barrel replaced. The ParaOrdnance is a double stack, which is a different breed (and not a healthy one at that). The Wilson has been excellent, right up until the adjustable rear sight broke (since replaced).
Standard 1911s have an internal extractor, which must be tuned by bending it just the right amount. It needs to exert just the right amount of tension on the cartridge rim. If it is too tight, you will get failures to feed. Once it is adjusted, it should run a long time without needing an extractor replacement. One of my Kimbers had an overly tight extractor.
S&W uses an external extractor, which should eliminate that type of failure to feed, since it uses a coil spring to produce extractor tension. But you can still get failures to feed due to other causes (rough breech face, rough feed ramp, incorrect angle on the feed ramp, etc.).
S&W have a pretty good reputation. A while back, a fellow at my club showed me his brand new S&W 1911. The barrel fit was very good -- no play when I pushed down on the barrel hood. The rear slide to frame fit looked good, and the trigger seemed very good right out of the box, with no need for a trigger job. But I'm sure that S&W has built some duds as well.
Last edited:
![[puke]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/023.gif "Puke [puke]")
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
