The Guns We Own

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Hello XBe02Drvr,
I don't think there are any wear issues at this point other than some marking on the cylinder from rotating against the bolt.
There were no marks on the cylinder when I cut the zip tie and I did the timing check before I had cycled through all chambers of the cylinder 3 times. I have now done 3 timing checks and the results vary but I still don't believe I have rotated the cylinder more than 20 times in all.
The hand simply isn't turning the cylinder far enough for the bolt to reach its locking notch. It never has skipped past a notch thus far.
There may be other reasons why the revolver is "failing to carry up", but when this is happening on all chambers, most likely culprit is a hand that is too short or otherwise not working properly.
This is not the first time I have come across a timing problem. Diagnosing a single action revolver is a whole lot easier than doing a double action one. There are a whole lot fewer parts that need to interact properly.

Slamming the bolt into its locking notch and wearing it out in that manner is why "Fanning" a revolver is so bad for it. Considering how thin some of the pieces are, I don't imagine the Starr would hold up well to that treatment but that is not how I treat these guns.
If a prior owner had done this a lot, then there might be enough wear for the bolt to miss its locking notch.

- Ivan.
 

Here are a couple close up photographs of a nearly new .357 Magnum forcing cone and one that has had about 8000 full power rounds through it. Part of the colour is due to the more worn gun being blued rather than stainless but it is pretty obvious that the flat area at the end of the barrel is now much narrower because of metal that is burned away and there is no longer visible machining marks in the actual forcing cone. The gun is still quite reliable and accurate and should hold up for many more thousands of rounds despite the obvious wear.

- Ivan.



 
This is probably my favourite Rifle. I have mentioned it on this thread a few times before.
I have probably spent more time messing with it, tuning it, and doing load development for it than for any other gun.

A few years back after a bit of load development, I started noticing that it was shooting a lot of very small groups. Some of them were one hole groups at 100 yards which surprised me. I decided to measure the group sizes to see what the average size was.... 5/8 inch for 5 shots which was a bit bigger than I was expecting. When two 5 shot targets were overlayed, the average was 3/4 inch which is pretty respectable but probably no better than a typical service rifle entered at Camp Perry.
Maybe it would do better with a better driver because when I am shooting it, I can see my heartbeat through the scope because of the need for very heavy sling tension.
Scope is a 6.5-20 x Leupold Vari-X III EFR Target model on a B-Square mount.
As you can see from the Op Rod track, this gun has seen a lot of use. It probably has at least 1500 rounds through it since I rebarreled it. I still think it is pretty though.

- Ivan.

 
I have one myself Ivan mine is a standard though when new could pull down 1 1/5" groups @100yds open sights now it's more like 2" groups could be the shooter getting older or the 4K+ rds she has seen.I have been thinking of getting it re-barreled just no real gunsmiths in the area to do the re-barrel.
 
Hello Javlin,
I believe you have posted photographs of your gun before. If it is doing so well without any accuracy work, then that is a pretty good sign that there isn't anything significant that is out of place. If you believe it is a vision issue that is a limitation, then hang a high power telescope on it. Just watch out if you use one with target knobs that you protect the Windage knob from ejected shell casings. There are several layers of bicycle inner tube on the Windage cap on mine.
If I remember right, you had a bipod on your about where the front sling swivel was. That is generally a bad idea with these guns unless you have the stock entirely free floated which causes another set of problems. What the upward pressure at that point does is affect the consistency of the stock tension on the front band which dampens the vibrations at the gas cylinder.

As for rebarreling, that CAN be done at home with the proper tools (not cheap) and some careful work. I installed and finish reamed the chamber on this gun. It started life as a "National Match" gun, but the only things of that original gun that I haven't reworked are the unitized front band to gas cylinder, reamed flash suppressor, 1/2 MOA hooded rear sight and tuned trigger. Everything else has been reworked by me. Guide is AMTU and USMC manuals.

EDIT:
I really need to qualify that statement about rebarreling at home being not that difficult.
IFF your receiver and barrel have thread timing and dimensions identical to the GI specifications, then this is a pretty easy job. If the receiver or barrel thread timing are different in some way, you will need the use of a lathe AND it MAY cause other parts not to fit properly. Note that everything at the gas cylinder and back must be a certain spacing or you may need custom sized parts for the system to operate properly. If this is the case, you have about the biggest can of worms imaginable.

- Ivan.
 
Last edited:

Hello Shortround6,
I was doing a bit of reading to figure out whether or not my .45 Colt revolver was properly dimensioned and came across an interesting article about SAAMI specifications. SAAMI originated in 1913. SAAMI changed the specification for .45 Colt to .451 / .452 in 1951. Before that, .45 Colt typically used .454 inch bullets.
So I wasn't imagining things.
Now I just have to figure a good way to measure the cylinder throats on this gun because the reputation is that the majority of them need reamed to a larger size.
Been doing a LOT of work on revolvers lately.

- Ivan.
 
Ivan1GFP said:
If I remember right, you had a bipod on your about where the front sling swivel was. That is generally a bad idea with these guns unless you have the stock entirely free floated which causes another set of problems.
Click to expand...

I did but the front band was lets say a floater the rifle shoots better in the orginal stock as opposed to the Boyd's stock front band was just to tight I even hacked at it I did get it to shoot better but not like the original stock.You interested in a Boyd's stock
Ivan1GFP said:
If you believe it is a vision issue that is a limitation, then hang a high power telescope on it.
Click to expand...

The simplest solution is usually the correct! Right? what's that Ocmans Razor?I do have the Springfield Mount and a decent scope if I can punch the paper good with that then it's my skills have wavered some my eyesight is still pretty good at 60 I still do not need glasses except for reading.I may try that this W/E if the weather holds out
 
I remember ( I think ) reading that Elmer Keith changed from the .45 Colt to the .44 special because there was less variation in the throats of the revolvers chambered in .44 special which helped eliminate one variable when developing heavy handloads (.44 magnum).
 
I wasn't looking for it specifically. I was just curious if others were having the same kinds of problems I have encountered with certain guns and came across a forum discussion.
It seems that one method of manufacturing the cylinder is to drill and ream three chambers all at once, rotate the cylinder blank one space and ream the other three. With the difference in wear condition of reamers being used, there is a pretty good possibility that there are three pairs of diameters for the chamber throats. With the cost of reamers and their very short life span, they may get used to the point where the holes are a bit undersized.
This undersized throat (full chamber in BP Revolvers) is the situation I was describing earlier.
Reloading gets really inreresting if the chamber throats in a cylinder don't match!

- Ivan.
 
Hello Javlin,
Sorry for not responding sooner, but I didn't see your post until this morning.
I had not been viewing this forum much in the last few days because I have been reworking the two guns whose forcing cones were photographed. I am now at the stage at which I have done as much as I can with the parts on order that have arrived.

I actually already have a Boyds stock for another gun. The problem with their stock is more on the back end than the front: The Buttplate doesn't fit particularly well.
The typical solution for the lack of tension on the Stock Ferrule to Front Band is to Glass Bed the Receiver with a fair amount of space AWAY from the Stock (held by a fixture). The US Army Marksmanship Training Unit manual is not that hard to find and the illustrations are a lot better than my written description. Just make sure it is centered when the epoxy is setting.
Before you do the Glass Bedding if that is your choice, you might want to Glass Bed the Stock Ferrule to the Stock so it does not shift. Make sure it is straight.
After the Glass Bedding, the Ferrule and Stock can be hollowed out quite a bit so nothing contacts the Front Band except at the bottom. That area also needs to be lubricated slightly for best results.
Permanently fixing the Front Band to the Gas Cylinder is what the AMTU accuracy specs calls for but I am not convinced that required unless you are going for a full accuracy build. It is not an easy job unless you can do some tack welding, brazing or are willing to anneal the Gas Cylinder so you can tap it.
Keep in mind that a lot of the materials for Glass Bedding are a LOT better than when the AMTU manual was written.


The issue that I have with some of the scope mounts is that they require that the Clip Guide be removed and replaced with a part that has a tapped hole for a second screw. I like my gun looking original when the scope and mount are not installed.
S&K made a mount that I used for many years that used the little slots around the tapped hole in the left side of the receiver for locating the mount. The whole mount was aluminum and the tabs that fit into the slots in the receiver looked quite abused after a bit of use. The mount looked pretty similar in construction to the military ART mount but without the ranging cam.
This mount was the reason I got rid of a rifle. Its receiver had the slots mis-located and would not accept that mount.
This isn't a problem for a service rifle shooter using only iron sights but I need a good scope to be able to see the accuracy of the rifle.
I switched to the B-Square mount when it became available because it allowed me to set elevation in the mount. I put in enough elevation so that there is about 60 MOA of internal adjustment for increasing elevation left in the scope when it is sighted in at 100 yards. I have actually tested whether this works by hanging an extra high target and shooting a round, increasing elevation 10 MOA and doing this until the scope stopped responding. This scope would actually do about 65 MOA. It is stable enough that I was able to shoot a 5 shot group well under 1 MOA while removing the mount from the rifle between each shot.
There is a lot more I can tell you from messing with this gun over about 20 years.

- Ivan.
 
I have seen quite a few 1911 type pistols here over the years.
Recently I have been doing a little troubleshooting and reading through 1911 forums on various subjects.
It seems like many people have problems with these pistols long after the break-in period of several hundred rounds.
This seems to match up with my own experience and what I have seen at various ranges with shooters who have had gun malfunctions.

Do we have a significant number of 1911 fans here?
If so, I would like to take an informal survey:
How many production 1911 pistols here have worked properly as they came from the factory without needing some kind of tuning?
Please do not include guns from the custom shops such as Wilson, Nighthawk, and others where guns may be hand fitted.
Malfunctions for the first 50-200 rounds are expected as part of the break-in process as the parts of the pistol "wear in", but what about after that?

How many pistols have needed some additional tuning?
How many factory magazines were simply unreliable? Please ignore those $5 POS Gun Show specials.
How many folks here have chosen to make additional "cosmetic" or ease of handling fixes?
How about accuracy tuning?
Everyone is building their own version today and it seems that a large percentage seem to have some kind of issue as they come from the factory.

I am curious because the reputation of the M1911 / M1911A1 is that of a very reliable combat handgun and obviously the US Government never bothered to tune individual magazines before issuing them in quantity during wartime.

- Ivan.
 
Springfield 1945 WWII configuration 5th round with mags does not always eject gets stuck in the ejection chute.I have used a mag from a relatives gun do not know the manufacture but does not jam on that one.The gun otherwise works great but I bought the gun with supposedly about 100rds run through it some years back from the LGS at a discount now maybe 500rds.
 
Hello Javlin,
This is a copy of a WW2 configuration US military 1911A1 by Springfield Armory Inc., right?
Whose magazine are you using with the gun? It sounds like the markings on the magazine may not be obvious and since it also sounds like the gun was used (minimally) when you bought it, it very well may not be the factory Springfield Inc. magazine.

At only 100 rounds through the gun, I would not be terribly surprised if there were intermittent jams of various kinds.
Most folks suggest 500 rounds for break in though I believe if you already have reliable function at 200, that is plenty.
The last gun I bought was sold to be as used but was malfunctioning pretty regularly for about the first 75 rounds or so.
After that, it hasn't burped since which suggests to me that it was never fired by the prior owner(s).
Accuracy was lousy, but reliability was excellent.
At 500 rounds, your gun should be done with break in issues. if it is still malfunctioning, there is something not right about the combination of gun and magazine.

The most reliable magazines I have used are the ones by Metalform and the US Government Issue ones.
The USGI magazines aren't as pretty as commercial: They are welded at the front of the tube and the discolouration from heat is very visible but they are not expensive when you can find them.
Metalform magazines also are not expensive: I just bought a pair of stainless ones about two weeks ago from CDNN off eBay for less than $13 each and that included tax and shipping.

- Ivan.
 
I had a 1919 vintage 1911 that was a "hand me down" complete with some fairly old magazines.
Over time, the magazines' springs had become "soft" and weren't pushing the last few cartridges far enough into the receiver, so they'd hang up.
The fix was revealed to me by my step-dad (Korea vet, USMC) by sliding the magazine's baseplate open and removing the spring. Then grasping both ends, pull it apart gently several inches beyond it's relaxed state and then reinstall it.
The spring now has more tension against the ammunition and should solve the poor feed problem with the last few rounds.
He also mentioned that the springs tend to get "soft" when the magaizines are kept loaded for extended periods of time, he encountered this in Korea when they were given bandoliers of loaded .45 magazines that were WWII vintage.
 
Hello GrauGeist,
I hope you hung on to that old M1911 (not M1911A1 which didn't exist yet). Today it would be worth some serious money though I don't expect something like that would ever get sold.
Just be careful with that old gun. They were not nearly as durable as later M1911A1. As I understand it, the M1911 guns were not even heat treated which was a feature added in production changes for M1911A1. Remember Browning's amazement when the test gun survived the 6000 round test without a breakage. At the time, no other competitor's gun would survive that long.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the problem, but what you are describing is a Failure to Feed as opposed to what I thought Javlin was describing which was a Failure to Eject a spent case clear of the Ejection Port.....
I saw a couple YouTube videos where the narrator was describing one thing when the video showed the basic problem to be clearly another.

- Ivan.
 
I still have it, but I haven't fired it in over 30 years. It was worn out from a long military career and no longer safe to shoot - case in point, the last time I had it at the range, it started cycling rounds as long as the trigger was held. The Slide also had an enormous amount of play, both front to back and side to side.

I think I may have misunderstood Kevin's post. My original impression was the last few rounds in the magazine weren't loading properly, my bad.
 
Hello GrauGeist,
It could be me that misinterpreted the issue Javlin was having. Without a visual, we really don't know for sure.
I sent him a PM with an easy check for Extractor Tension if it really is a "Stovepipe" jam or a failure to toss the spent case out the ejection port.
Between the two of us, we have the magazine issue pretty well covered, so until we know more that is about as far as it goes.

As for the old veteran M1911, It has been through several wars and is over a Century old. Not bad!
As for firing repeatedly without interruption, I can't say I have ever encountered that one before but if I had to look for a problem, I would first look for Hammer to Sear engagement. I am guessing that when the Slide goes into battery, it is knocking a worn Hammer / Sear out of engagement and firing the gun. There are a few other checks to see what is actually not working.
Maybe it is best to leave the old veteran in peace. I like seeing guns functional, but there isn't a point in running it hard until something fails catastrophically.
Seems like you have already decided to retire it. If so, one way to make it inert without permanently damaging anything is to buy an extra firing pin (fairy cheap) and cut off the tip so it can't fire a live round and install it in place of the original. You then know it can't accidentally be fired but the original firing pin can be put back in within a couple minutes if that is your intention.

- Ivan.
 
GrauGeist said:
I think I may have misunderstood Kevin's post. My original impression was the last few rounds in the magazine weren't loading properly, my bad.
Click to expand...
Just Rd5 stove pipes once clear 6/7 load but with a higher quality mag(brother-in-laws) no issues then at other times though few all seven roll out just fine.I am not a big hand gun shooter bought just to have and it fit the the WWII theme of the collection even though not original.
 

Hello Javlin,
If the round has chambered and fired, then the magazine has basically done the job it was intended to do.
If the spent case doesn't clear the gun and results in a stovepipe, it basically means that the Extractor lost control of the case before it could be ejected out of the gun. There are a number of potential causes but the most likely is a lack of Extractor Tension.
The easiest way to check is as I described via PM which is to take a loaded round (you need the weight of the bullet) and slide it under the Extractor and against the Breech Face on the Slide after you have removed the Frame and Barrel. It should be held so it does not fall out no matter which direction you rotate or tilt the slide. If the round tilts and wobbles a bit, that is fine but it should not fall out.

The problem with a lot of guns is that the tuning of the Extractor is often not done correctly and the bending to fit and create proper tension is done AFTER the part has been heat treated. As such, sometimes the tension isn't retained over time and may need bent again. Personally, I have not run into this situation of needing to adjust the Extractor multiple times. The Extractor should be tempered as a spring and I personally don't like the idea of Metal Injection Moulded parts in this application because of the very high stress.

Now the Magazine CAN have an effect by having the follower ride a bit high or presenting the next round so that it collides with the spent case as it is being extracted from the chamber and before it has hit the Ejector and causes the case to come loose from Extractor.
It still boils down to an Extractor problem in that case.
In fact, if your magazine is presenting rounds a touch high, It probably feeds more reliably than one that does not. Have you ever had an actual Failure to Feed with this particular magazine? I suspect not.

The Extractor / Ejector is one of the weak points in the M1911 type guns. (They have a bunch weak points.)
A slightly lengthened Ejector might also help a bit but just hides the basic problem. Usually that is a pretty good solution if the gun is kicking spent cases straight up and back so they hit the shooter in the face. Beware of Ejectors that are too long because then they make it very difficult to clear a loaded round. Some folks machine away part of the right side of the slide to create clearance but I don't like that idea because it isn't necessary to have a super long Ejector for good reliable functioning.
It is all a balancing act....

I originally started this discussion because I believe I have finally come across a 1911 that is distinctly unreliable and needing constant work and was wondering if others here had encountered the same thing.

- Ivan.
 
In regards to current 1911s, I have a Rock Island 1911A-1 FS .45, and it's a beaut (seen on post #1,388, upthread).
Same heft as a Colt, with a factory "smithed" trigger and a nice beavertail that prevents "snakebite" that a traditional Colt can inflict.
It generally comes with an 8 round mag. but will accept a standard Colt (or clone) mag.
I've had it since new (about 6 years) and have yet to experience feed issues, jams or ejection problems - this being with a wide range of ammunition: military ball, hollowpoints, sport/target, etc.
All new ammo, though, no reloads.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Tis The Season
Replies
3
Views
267
fannum
The 1934 precursor to the Osprey
Replies
3
Views
700
ThomasP
T
The Next Time That You Find Yourself In Stockholm....
Replies
1
Views
213
Gnomey
The god awful thing you wont build. Because reasons
Replies
0
Views
187
Snautzer01
When was the first attempt to fly the Atlantic?
Replies
4
Views
636
Lucky13
Menu
Log in
Register