A serious question for 1911 lovers...

[Walt Sherrill]

This was first posted in another topic here on the forum, but it was suggested it ought to be a separate topic. I think that's right.

About those 1911s.

I've read rave reviews of 1911s, but most of the compliments focus on the trigger. The 1911s I've seen, shot, or owned that WERE very accurate had been tweaked by very competent 1911 gunsmiths -- triggers improved, barrels barrel bushings upgraded, barrels sometime replaced, new hammers or sears, or triggers improved, etc., etc.

Are 1911s innately more accurate, or do they simply, because of the great triggers, just lure people into tweaking them more.

Most of the out-of-the-box 1911s I've been around were reasonably accurate, but that was also true of most of the other guns that sell in the same general price range. The 1911 triggers will generally seem better, but the guns don't seem to be more accurate than other guns.

I've had a CZ-97B (a bit bigger in my hand than I was comfortable with), a Witness Sport Long Slide (in .45), a number of SIG P-220s, a SIG P-220 Match, and (now) a SIG P-220 Super Match. I've also had a couple of nicely tuned 1911 .45s, including a Norinco that George Stringer built for me. (George Stringer used to participate here, years ago, until a health problem knocked him out of business). I've also had a SIG GSR that was quite good, and spent some time with a friend's 1911 (built by Wilson Combat) -- that gun was beautifully made, reliable, and accurate, too.

All of these .45s -- 1911 or otherwise -- shot very well, and while the 1911s had nicer triggers, I wouldn't say they were any more accurate than the other guns.

That said, I've got a BHP, a Sphinx SDP (on loan), and a semi-custom AT-84s that are all very accurate. Their triggers are nothing to complain about, either -- not as crisp as a 1911 trigger, but the triggers do their job and don't get in the way. The only real difference I can see between these guns and the various .45s is that the holes these guns make just aren't as big as the holes made by .45s. That and the fact that the best .45s cost a lot more than these other guns.

Are 1911s really more accurate, or have they just been around so long that most gunsmiths know all of the "secrets" to improving their performance when they come from the factory? Do 1911s have to be "tuned" to live up to their reputation? And when improved, are that THAT MUCH better than other tuned guns?

 

[lamarw]

I think the question is too broad sweeping to receive a stab at a realistic answer.

The 1911 platform covers a vast horizon of looks, reliability, durability, accuracy and etc.

I would wager every aspect has been covered at one time or another on this and just about any other pistol forum.

This is not intended to slam your generic question since 1911s are always a popular topic.

 

[DAVID NANCARROW]

A lot of it depends on what you are looking for in a pistol in the first place. For some folks, the basic 1911 is all that they want. That would be me for sure. I don't care for all of the front serrations, funny looking grip safeties, ambi thumb safeties, etc.

I don't buy or sell weapons on a regular basis so I may not be the person to best address your question, but on my birthday this year, my lady bought me a blued Colt government model. It has the firing pin safety system which doesn't bother me at all. The sights are 3 dot drift adjustable, wood grips, some would say nothing fancy.

While taking the pistol apart, I noticed a few things.
1. The slide to frame fit was pretty close but smooth.
2. The barrel bushing was .003" smaller than the slide.
3. The barrel to bushing fit had about .002" wiggle, for a total of .005" clearance or "slop". Not bad for a production pistol.

The trigger pull had a slight creep to it but nothing truly offensive. I could have let it alone and use would have worn the parts in but instead got an extra fine ceramic stone for a few dollars and cleaned up the sear/hammer surfaces myself.

I have shot a mix of target loads and full house JHPs out of it, totaling slightly over 1000 rounds without a burp or hiccup. It groups at 2 inches or so at 25 yards depending on the load and I am quite pleased with it. I am sure that one of those fancy race guns or gun smith hand fitted jobs would probably do better, at least in someone elses hands, but not much more in mine.

I did compete for a time in IDPA and one thing I did learn was that money cannot necessarily buy accuracy UNLESS the shooter can take advantage of it. My "competition" pistol was a series 80 Colt government model that I bought used for $400, don't know how much it had been fired, but put well over 100,000 through it myself, and now my eldest son has it. IIRC, I did replace the barrel bushing, springs on a regular basis, and replaced the wood panels with wrap around rubber grips. The trigger pull was good, but the secret I think was owning it and shooting it a lot and getting used to the weapon.

Nothing beats experience in my view.

 

[skizzums]

a 1911 will be exactly as accurate as any other pistol with the exact same tolerances/chamber/barrel. the triggers and ergos may make the gun easier to shoot accurately, but doesn't make the gun accurate

 

[1stmar]

I don't think there is anything inherently more accurate in a 1911. I think there are countless more gunsmiths who have identified ways to improve accuracy and some of these have been moved into production. As a result we are seeing very accurate inexpensive guns.

 

[saleen322]

I have three 1911s in 45. They are stock except that two have simple trigger jobs to get them to 3.5 lbs. With the right load, they all shoot exceptionally well. Accuracy for me as been more developing a good load than modifying the pistol. With quality Win in the Super X box, I am lucky to shoot 4-5 inch groups at 25 yards. However, get the right load and they tear the center out of the target at 25. I have S&W 625 revolver that shoots as well but no better. I am expecting my Sig 220 Match Elite to be here this week and I will see how it compares. In any case, dollar for dollar, a good 1911 is hard to beat.

 

[WVsig]

There are many factors which make the 1911 an accurate gun. It is not just mechanical accuracy that has been wrung out of by modification of the stock platform as it was designed it was pretty accurate. There are many factors which contribute to its overall accuracy but I believe that JMB 1911 lockup design and the trigger are #1 and #2.

Most of the accuracy comes from the way the barrel locks up. It is that consistent reliable and repeatable lockup that makes the design accurate. The way the gun locks up and and unlocks again is a tribute to JMB. It is all about the repeatable lock-up from a mechanical standpoint. That is why if you want to make a 1911 you focus on those things which help the lock up be more consistent. People focus way too much on slide to frame fit IMHO. Also the term "match grade" for barrels has been bastardized to the point where I think it matters less than it used to because so few "match" barrels these days are truly "match barrels."

This list assigns a % to each tune-able feature of the 1911 and I believe it to be a nice road map to an accurate pistol but also very telling of why it is an accurate pistol.

Mechanical Accuracy Features: (repeatable lock-up):
20% eliminate rear barrel play.
20% consistent vertical lug lock-up.
20% barrel / slide bushing fit.
15% frame / slide play.
10% match grade barrel.
10% headspace.
5% unreachable.

-This is according to Kuhnhausen 1911 shop manuals.

The #2 is the trigger along with the grip design and the grip safety which allows for a high grip close to the bore axis of the gun. So the trigger plus the grip allows a lot of different shooters with a lot of different hands to shoot the gun well.

The trigger design helps a lot because of its straight asymmetrical straight back trigger pull. Is is simply clean and smooth. It does not have the camming action of a CZ or the mushiness of a striker. It is just crisp and clean. The design results in a short reset as well. JMB got this one right.

This IMHO this contributes to the why so many people claim they shoot the 1911 better than any other gun they own. It is beautifully designed trigger that works. Kuhnhausen seems to agree that it is the major factor related to the Indian not the arrow creating accuracy from the 1911.

Shooter Assisting Features:
50% good trigger.
25% good sights.
25% Misc., like good ammo, grips, etc.

-Again taken from the Kuhnhausen 1911 shop manuals.

I also think that there are very few other guns are as tunable for accuracy because of design constraints which were not present in the development of the 1911. In the modern world of guns more and more guns are produced to a price point. They are made to satisfy lawyers and hold up against lawsuits. They are a product of the limitations that people/companies put on them before they are even designed. This was not as much the case with the 1911 even though it was a contract gun built to a spec not entirely the whim of JMB.

YMMV

 

[RickB]

I'd say they are not innately more accurate, as the interaction of all the parts - barrel, link, link pin, bushing, slide - is very complicated when compared to newer designs.
At the same time, a lot of effort has been put into optimizing the fit of those parts, so companies with a lot of experience building 1911-style guns have figured it out.
I do think that the modular nature of the 1911 design, with the ability to fit the gun to the shooter, makes it easy to shoot well.
Other designs are starting to catch up, with interchangeable backstraps and what-not, so the gun can fit the hand, rather than the hand have to fit the gun, but the 1911, is still way ahead in that department.
A 1911 with arched mainspring housing, long trigger, and standard thickness grip panels could not fit my hand better. It's a perfect extension of my hand and arm, and I doubt that I could shoot any gun better that did not have better mechanical accuracy.

 

[DAVID NANCARROW]

One thing I have noticed is that in the number of new shooters I have introduced to casual pistol shooting, both men and women, they have done better shooting the 1911 that I had on hand at the time. Probably 20 shooters which is no scientific study but more of a random sample.

I had them try a beretta 92, Ruger GP100 loaded with 38 Special, Colt government model, Colt officers model, and a S&W Chiefs special. The hardest one for them was the Chiefs special and the officers model in that order. One fella out of the group did best with the Ruger which surprised him. He really liked the beretta but did many times better with the revolver. Some folks are just built that way I guess.

 

[kutz]

Go to 1 bullseye match & see what they are shooting @ 25 & 50 yards, yes 50yards.

 

[polyphemus]

OP asks:

Are 1911s innately more accurate, or do they simply, because of the great triggers, just lure people into tweaking them more.

Innately more accurate than what?
M1911's are military sidearms designed as weapons of war for close combat.
The trigger group is elegant yet simple and reliable,a pistol built to specs should
need no tweaking to properly function.
Accuracy as such is in the eye of the beholder and in my case anything beyond 50' is for the birds.There's something to be said for simplicity and those super modified competition pistols bear little resemblance to a true M1911.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Go to 1 bullseye match & see what they are shooting @ 25 & 50 yards, yes 50yards.

I'm always impressed by that sort of accuracy at that distance -- but have never really understood why it's all that important. At that distance, if our lives were at risk, most of us would fare better with a good rifle -- if only because of a more potent round would be going down range.

That said, the bullseye example is a good one, and I'm sure you'll see a lot of 1911s in bullseye competitions. But you can bet they aren't run-of-the-mill 1911s. I'd be willing to bet that those 1911s are guns that folks have spent a lot of time and many, many hundreds of dollars -- or more -- getting the gun to a high level of performance.

Go to other venues where accuracy is needed and you'll see a lot of 1911s -- made into race guns, with higher capacities and interesting sight systems. You'll also see a surprising number of guns based on the CZ Pattern. Still other venues have SIG X-5s and X-6s (in calibers ranging from 9mm to .45); those SIGs are pretty highly regarded in some parts of the IPSC world. Even the Beretta M9 can be tuned to a very high level of performance: the US Army's Marksmenship Training Unit demonstrates that with some regularity.

And then there's the SIG P-210 -- it also started as a service pistol, and those "service pistols" probably performed as well as most of the tuned bullseye guns straight out of the factory. Picking up a surplus M-49, which was still possible when I started shooting, would make that case. I once had a P-210-6 that came from the factory with a test target that showed 1.75" group at 50 meters, roughly 55 yards. Some 210s could smaller groups than that. (I could never shoot it that well, but I knew it was up to the task in the right hands.)

I've also had a P-226 X-Five in .40 that was capable of very small groups at long distances. I have no doubts that a great deal of time and effort went into making that gun run as it does; it sure cost me a lot. Unhappily, that gun and me just weren't a good fit and I later traded it for two guns I shoot more effectively.

All of these guns are based on basic service pistols, but they've all been refined and tweaked at great expense.

Does a high level of performance in these different forms of competition tell us much about the basic gun, or does it tell us about the skills of the people who tweak them to make them so effective, or about the skills of the people that shoot them.

I suspect it's all three.

 

[tipoc]

If we look at the basic question...

Most of the out-of-the-box 1911s I've been around were reasonably accurate, but that was also true of most of the other guns that sell in the same general price range. The 1911 triggers will generally seem better, but the guns don't seem to be more accurate than other guns.

That's true in my experience also. It's true for today.

Are 1911s innately more accurate, or do they simply, because of the great triggers, just lure people into tweaking them more.

I find this bit an odd way of presenting it. Maybe it's just the word "lure".

In the initial military trials for the 1911 it went up against Smith and Wesson and Colt revolvers in 45 Colt and 45 acp in reliability and accuracy testing. The guns had to be at least as accurate as the service revolvers they were replacing. That proved to be the case. They also did well in accuracy up against the 9mm Luger, the Colt M1900 in 38acp, and a few other guns and rounds that were a part of the trials. Looked at another way those guns were at least as accurate as the 1911. So from the beginning there were guns around that were as accurate even with the handicap of not having the 1911s trigger.

But there was something about the 1911 that was not intended in a military pistol but a fortunate offshoot of it's design. It had, for decades, no rival for it's adaptability to individual shooters or for enhancing it's mechanical accuracy. So it developed a reputation. It still has one.

Most production 1911s are capable of good accuracy. So are most other production guns. The CZ97 and Sig P220 are extremely accurate for production guns. Plenty of 9mms as well. For many the trigger is not the same as a tuned 1911 trigger but they are much better than they used to be and often because of the high standard set by the 1911. They aslo don't need to be as good as a 1911 trigger. Often a 1911 trigger is not as good as a "1911 trigger" that many folks have in mind.

tipoc

 

[saleen322]

... But you can bet they aren't run-of-the-mill 1911s. I'd be willing to bet that those 1911s are guns that folks have spent a lot of time and many, many hundreds of dollars -- or more -- getting the gun to a high level of performance....

While some folks have custom pistols, as stated before, I shoot stock 1911s except the triggers are worked to 3.5 lbs and one has a dot sight mount. Everything else is the same, stock Springfields I bought new for $700 give or take about 15 years ago. I also bought a Dan Wesson for about $900 about 4 years ago that I did nothing with as the trigger was perfect out of the box. I just worked up a load for it and went shooting matches. Here are two test targets shot at 50 yards, both are under 2". The other thing you need to remember is the 45 Auto round is very accurate. It has a lot to do with the accuracy reputation of the 1911.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The other thing you need to remember is the 45 Auto round is very accurate. It has a lot to do with the accuracy reputation of the 1911.

That may explain why some of the other .45s I've owned shot very well, too. (Not to mention a big S&W model 25, that was a true tack-driver.)

As for the accuracy at a greater distances -- I can see a target at 50 yards but unless I've got some special optics on the gun, trying for small groups is a joke that only I find somewhat funny...

 

[jimbob86]

a 1911 will be exactly as accurate as any other pistol with the exact same tolerances/chamber/barrel. the triggers and ergos may make the gun easier to shoot accurately, but doesn't make the gun accurate

IMO, it is easier to master the trigger pull on a 1911 than any other handgun design, all else being equal ....... short, crisp, and straight back make the gun sights easier to keep on target than a heavier, mushier, swinging through an arc trigger .....

The mild recoil of .45ACP target loads coupled with the 40 oz. weight (empty) of a Government Model don't hurt in the shootability department, either.

 

[tipoc]

50 yards has been a standard distance at NRA Camp Perry matches for many decades with 22 caliber and centerfire handguns for about 106 years now. The last few decades have allowed optics.

http://www.nrablog.com/post/2013/07...tches-kick-off-with-Pistol-Championships.aspx

This involved shooting 22 revolvers and pistols in the early years and service handguns. Initially both 38Spl. revolvers and 45 acp (once the 1911 was adopted).

tipoc

 

[WVsig]

50 yards has been a standard distance at NRA Camp Perry matches for many decades with 22 caliber and centerfire handguns for about 106 years now. The last few decades have allowed optics.

http://www.nrablog.com/post/2013/07/...pionships.aspx

This involved shooting 22 revolvers and pistols in the early years and service handguns. Initially both 38Spl. revolvers and 45 acp (once the 1911 was adopted).

Which is why 50 yards is often sighted as the true test of a hand guns accuracy.

 

[NGIB]

Personal opinion but I think it's just easier to shoot the 1911 well than other platforms. I'll never forget the first time I shot one - cored the center of the target without really trying hard. I don't know the reason, partly the trigger, maybe the weight and balance - I don't know why. This target is 25 rounds at 25 feet in less than 45 seconds with 2 mag changes - I can't do this with any other platform. This is also a gun I picked up used for less than $500...

 

[tipoc]

Another thought, or the same one expressed a better way, maybe...

Are 1911s innately more accurate, or do they simply, because of the great triggers, just lure people into tweaking them more.

The 1911 was designed as a service sidearm, as we all know, and it's basic accuracy was and still is on a par with many other guns out there built for the same role. Today your basic Colt, Springfield, even Rock Island Arsenal (the inexpensive Philippine builds) produce acceptable combat accuracy on a par, occasionally worse, than many other of it's competitors.

But for less than $200. you can take that basic gun and improve it's handling characteristics and make it a more accurate and precise shooter.

This was an unintended consequence of it's design. It's not just the trigger. It's the ability to change easily, from a short to long trigger, from a flat to arched mainspring housing, from smooth to checkered grips, thick to thin grips, rounder to flatter stocks, to tighten the slide to frame fit, to install a fit bushing and much more. You can do some of this for less than $100. bucks and more, of course if you want. It used to be for decades that no other guns matched it's versatility. Now there are a few that can aspire to it. You can fit the gun to the shooter easily rather than the shooter to the gun. This is what attracts many people to the 1911. You can easily alter the ergonomics of the gun to fit the individual shooter. That is an aid to more accurate and precise shooting.

This is why it has been the semi-auto of choice for developing new rounds and experimenting for decades.

Hilton Yam, the pistolsmith, developed arthritis and moved to guns other than the 1911. He discovered that he could shoot other guns as well and as accurately as his 1911s (why he didn't know this before hand I don't know, I know it and I don't have arthritis). As a result of this startling, for him, revelation he described the 1911's trigger as a "crutch". He meant that he shot 1911s so well so easily that he never took the time to learn other platforms till he had to. Which is an odd round about kinda praise. The 1911s adaptable trigger helps many folk shoot better. That's a good thing.

tipoc