Re: Any feedback on Sig Sauer 1911s ?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbo54</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim, your post sure sounded intelligent, but it doesn't really explain why those of us with Sigs aren't having reliability issues.</div></div>
I wasn't trying to. It's great when guns do run, and I was only commenting on the external extractor bit.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It also doesn't explain why, out of the 6 or 7 guys with 1911s I shoot with each Sunday, the ONLY 2 that never seem to fuck up are the Sig, and the S&W with external extractors. </div></div>
That's great... what are the other 4 or 5 makes?
The S&W extractors tended to run out of the box, and run strong for about 8k rounds or so. Eventually they wore out, and you had to replace the whole slide. That's why they redesigned it this time around... it wasn't what it needed to be.
Out of the box, S&W's have very few extraction related problems.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I don't mean to say you're full of it or anything, but I don't think you can make the blanket statement that external extractor + 1911 = bad.</div></div>
I didn't say the external extractor was bad, I said no one has figured it out yet. If it does get figured out properly, it could be a huge thorn gone from the side of the 1911.
LAV and Hilton Yam have both spent a lot of time and energy on the concept. Larry has zero interest in them until something comes along worth looking at, but Hilton thinks the latest S&W iteration may have.
http://10-8performance.blogspot.com/2011/04/external-extractors-and-1911s.html
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To say that JMB was brilliant is an understatement, but to say that nothing he ever did can be improved upon is just wrong.
Otto developed the first 4 cycle reciprocating piston engine - thankfully people didn't simply kick back and enjoy its "perfection", and never update/improve it.</div></div>
I'm not all about sitting on your heels, it's just that this is an area where I don't think improvement has been made yet. I may be a purist in the sense that I don't think anything other than a 5" bushing barreled, steel frame gun is worth looking at... but there are certainly improvements like integrated plunger tubes (or Ned Christiansen's 3 legged plunger tube), beavertail grip safeties, ambi safeties for lefty's, magazine wells, front strap texturing, and advances in materials composition and tolerances.
The current offerings of external extractors don't offer an improvement, in my estimation. That's all.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I dont know why Sig/S&W use external extractors, but I thought I read engineers just couldn't bring themselves to including a design feature they fekt was just "wrong". I dunno, I don't really have a dog in the fight because I've seen quality pistols with both types of extractors work well, and both fail.
I don't have a hard-on for XDs, but my old XD45 (internal extractor) was THE MOST reliable gun I've ever experienced. Over 10k rounds and it never, ever, ever quit. Even my Glocks, which I do have a hardon for, screw the pooch now and then.</div></div>
It's easier to supply a working external extractor on a gun than an internal one. If you can slap a gun together with loose parts like you can with a Glock, it's a lot cheaper to build, sell, and warranty them, as opposed to paying skilled craftsmen to hand tune each part to each gun.
If someone figures out how to make one that runs better than an internal, I'll be all for it.