IdahoMike

I like Turtles.
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 30, 2009
269
0
39
12TUN8307946609
Does anyone have any experience with these pistols? I had my mitts on one last night it seemed pretty nice. Side by side the fit and finish seemed to be just as good as or better than the Springfield TRP and about 200$ cheaper.
 

Smith44699

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 11, 2011
231
0
47
Southeastern Ohio
Re: S&W 1911?

I have one in matte stainless. I got about 700 rounds through with no problems. Great trigger and feels great. I don't know which model you are looking at. But I think you will be happy with it.
 

IdahoMike

I like Turtles.
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 30, 2009
269
0
39
12TUN8307946609
Re: S&W 1911?

According to S&W's info on their site, the model is SW1911, its basically the SW1911PD but a stainless frame instead of scandium. I also looked at one of the 'E' series which I thought was sweet although I can't get past the fish scale cocking serrations (takes the aesthetics right out of it).
 

smokshwn

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Dec 7, 2004
746
0
Salt Lake UT
Re: S&W 1911?

Great guns for $$$. Some people poopoo the external extractor but so what. I have one with a couple thousand trouble free rounds through it. My only complaint is that S&W had to cut proprietary sight cuts into the slide which limits your aftermarket sight choices. Small problem for sure but a nitpick anyways.
 

IdahoMike

I like Turtles.
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 30, 2009
269
0
39
12TUN8307946609
Re: S&W 1911?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Great guns for $$$. Some people poopoo the <span style="color: #CC0000">external extractor </span>but so what. I have one with a couple thousand trouble free rounds through it. My only complaint is that S&W had to cut proprietary sight cuts into the slide which limits your aftermarket sight choices. Small problem for sure but a nitpick anyways.
</div></div>

Problem being??? That it't not part of the original JMB design? Or that something is wrong with it?
 

shoot4fun

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    3500+ rounds thru my SW1911 DK from the Pro Series and no malfunctions of any kind.
    smokshwn is not saying anything is wrong and even that what he mentions is "a problem". The rear sight cut is wider and more shallow than the norm. No worry for me, as I have found the ones on my gun to be up to the task.
     

    smokshwn

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Dec 7, 2004
    746
    0
    Salt Lake UT
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: IdahoMike</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Great guns for $$$. Some people poopoo the <span style="color: #CC0000">external extractor </span>but so what. I have one with a couple thousand trouble free rounds through it. My only complaint is that S&W had to cut proprietary sight cuts into the slide which limits your aftermarket sight choices. Small problem for sure but a nitpick anyways.
    </div></div>

    Problem being??? That it't not part of the original JMB design? Or that something is wrong with it? </div></div>

    Yes, the purists who always claim that JMB's original design was not followed. Nothing functionally wrong with the S&W external extractor.
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    At the risk of getting cursed long and loud, the JMB version of the extractor may have been the only weakness of the pistol.
    It is the only thing that has ever given me issue in my 40 years of owning and really shooting the 1911. The AFTEC extractor came very close to curing the problem.
    BTW, the external extractor on the SW1911 came from the technology developed many, many years ago on the Model 39 S&W. It simply works.
     

    scsbronco

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2010
    367
    1
    38
    Michigan
    Re: S&W 1911?

    Great guns I had two. One with a rail and one stainless. They were both tack drivers and functioned flawlessly. However, I have switched to DAN Wesson 1911's
     

    EddieNFL

    SMSgt
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 11, 2006
    8,016
    9,770
    Florida
    Re: S&W 1911?

    I shot an E-series last week. Functioned fine (only fired about 50 rounds) and accuracy was acceptable, but it had a high priced lawyer trigger.
     

    coues103

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Sep 20, 2010
    197
    0
    39
    Glendale, AZ
    Re: S&W 1911?

    i love mine still had to have a ramp job and still tuned the extractor but now it will feed anything. great gun and frame to slide fit is just as good as some of my custom buit guns
     

    mnhntr

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 14, 2011
    253
    0
    51
    Re: S&W 1911?

    Its a good pistol but I prefer the series 70 version 1911s and I am not a fan of the external extractors, unless of course it is on a High Power. That's the way JMB meant for it to be.
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnhntr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its a good pistol but I prefer the series 70 version 1911s and I am not a fan of the external extractors, unless of course it is on a High Power. That's the way JMB meant for it to be. </div></div>

    Let's see. The 1911 came out, oh, around 1911 (as it is pretty much now) and the High Power quite a few years later. Internal extractor on 1911; external extractor on High Power.
    Maybe, just maybe, JMB learned a thing or two about extractors in the twenty odd years between the two.
    Besides, even though we all know JMB began the design of the HP, it was not finalized or manufactured until nine years after his death.
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nw1911guy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would rather have an external extractor (provided it's not Kimber's) than a firing pin safety. Just sayin. </div></div>

    Now the S&W E Series has the old style FP w/o safety.
     

    mnhntr

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 14, 2011
    253
    0
    51
    Re: S&W 1911?

    I was speaking of the 1911<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">JMB died before there ever was a hipower.</div></div>
     

    mnhntr

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 14, 2011
    253
    0
    51
    Re: S&W 1911?

    I am not saying one is better than the other. I just personally prefer the internal extractor because I find it easier to tune.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnhntr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its a good pistol but I prefer the series 70 version 1911s and I am not a fan of the external extractors, unless of course it is on a High Power. That's the way JMB meant for it to be. </div></div>

    Let's see. The 1911 came out, oh, around 1911 (as it is pretty much now) and the High Power quite a few years later. Internal extractor on 1911; external extractor on High Power.
    Maybe, just maybe, JMB learned a thing or two about extractors in the twenty odd years between the two.
    Besides, even though we all know JMB began the design of the HP, it was not finalized or manufactured until nine years after his death.</div></div>
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnhntr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am not saying one is better than the other. I just personally prefer the internal extractor because I find it easier to tune.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnhntr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its a good pistol but I prefer the series 70 version 1911s and I am not a fan of the external extractors, unless of course it is on a High Power. That's the way JMB meant for it to be. </div></div>

    Let's see. The 1911 came out, oh, around 1911 (as it is pretty much now) and the High Power quite a few years later. Internal extractor on 1911; external extractor on High Power.
    Maybe, just maybe, JMB learned a thing or two about extractors in the twenty odd years between the two.
    Besides, even though we all know JMB began the design of the HP, it was not finalized or manufactured until nine years after his death.</div></div> </div></div>

    You're missing the point. The external extractor DOES NOT need to be constantly "tuned" (fucked with) to keep the gun running properly***UNLESS it is a Kimber****. Try it and I think you will change your mind too.
     

    mnhntr

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 14, 2011
    253
    0
    51
    Re: S&W 1911?

    I have been running the series 70 in USPSA for 3 yrs now and I like to F with my guns thanks.
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    I been shooting USPSA since 1988 with a 1911 and can tell you flat out that extractor problems have cost me a match win. My S&W 1911 DK model has around 8K rounds thru it in four years without a jam of any kind.
     

    Downzero

    -
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 15, 2006
    2,515
    200
    NM
    Re: S&W 1911?

    A successful external extractor design would be great for high round count users. For most people, though, it's a liability rather than an asset.
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A successful external extractor design would be great for high round count users. For most people, though, it's a liability rather than an asset. </div></div>


    ????
     

    Downzero

    -
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 15, 2006
    2,515
    200
    NM
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A successful external extractor design would be great for high round count users. For most people, though, it's a liability rather than an asset. </div></div>


    ???? </div></div>

    The internal extractor is a proven design, it just wears out faster than many other components in the pistol (besides the coil main and recoil springs).

    For low round count users, an internal extractor will probably last the life of the pistol.

    For higher round count users, an internal extractor will eventually wear out.

    That said, I've not worn one yet in any of my guns. My 9mm 1911's extractor was too lose from the factory and I had to file on it to make it tighter. But in general, none of my guns have needed a new one.

    Basically what it comes down to is that an external extractor can use a coil spring, whereas an external extractor is an odd shape, but must be made from spring steel, and operate as a spring for its life.

    An extractor with replaceable springs, if it were reliable and did not interfere with the 1911 feeding process, would be great.

    But the reality is that the internal extractor is part of the 1911's feeding process so it's unlikely that an effective external extractor design that doesn't create more problems than it solves will be invented anytime soon. An extractor that has to "snap" over the rim rather than feed the cartridge under it is bound to create feeding problems or require more force than the internal extractor.

    It's interesting that nobody thinks that the early P226s are unreliable, but they, too, had internal extractors.

    People should just stop messing with the 1911 extractor design until they honestly believe that they've created something better than JMB himself did. Admittedly that'd be a pompous thing to think, so my suggestion is that they make sure they get it right before asserting an "improvement" on the JMB design.
     

    mnhntr

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 14, 2011
    253
    0
    51
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A successful external extractor design would be great for high round count users. For most people, though, it's a liability rather than an asset. </div></div>


    ???? </div></div>

    The internal extractor is a proven design, it just wears out faster than many other components in the pistol (besides the coil main and recoil springs).

    For low round count users, an internal extractor will probably last the life of the pistol.

    For higher round count users, an internal extractor will eventually wear out.

    That said, I've not worn one yet in any of my guns. My 9mm 1911's extractor was too lose from the factory and I had to file on it to make it tighter. But in general, none of my guns have needed a new one.

    Basically what it comes down to is that an external extractor can use a coil spring, whereas an external extractor is an odd shape, but must be made from spring steel, and operate as a spring for its life.

    An extractor with replaceable springs, if it were reliable and did not interfere with the 1911 feeding process, would be great.

    But the reality is that the internal extractor is part of the 1911's feeding process so it's unlikely that an effective external extractor design that doesn't create more problems than it solves will be invented anytime soon. An extractor that has to "snap" over the rim rather than feed the cartridge under it is bound to create feeding problems or require more force than the internal extractor.

    It's interesting that nobody thinks that the early P226s are unreliable, but they, too, had internal extractors.

    People should just stop messing with the 1911 extractor design until they honestly believe that they've created something better than JMB himself did. Admittedly that'd be a pompous thing to think, so my suggestion is that they make sure they get it right before asserting an "improvement" on the JMB design.</div></div>
    Exactly
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    I'm afraid that if both of you guys had been in charge there would be no Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Night Hawk, etc. and none of the innovation that has indeed made the 1911 so widely popular. Face it, until gunsmiths started tinkering with the 1911 to improve on it and get it where it is today, no one really liked it. It had a horrible reputation as sloppy, inaccurate and unreliable with the masses because the only one most guys ever fired was an old worn out GI gun while in the service.
    True to what you are saying, 1911 should not have adjustable sights, beavertails, checkering, beveled mag wells, etc because that isn't how JMB designed it.
     

    Wolf22

    Full Member
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 13, 2006
    951
    0
    Midwestern USA
    Re: S&W 1911?

    Dave Lauck uses internal.......Paul Liebenberg uses external and internal.... Pick a top 1911 smith and you'll get diff. ideas/beliefs. Who's right, who's wrong....who cares. If they mastered their craft, it should work just fine for most people.
     

    smokshwn

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Dec 7, 2004
    746
    0
    Salt Lake UT
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A successful external extractor design would be great for high round count users. For most people, though, it's a liability rather than an asset. </div></div>


    ???? </div></div>


    <span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="color: #FF0000">An extractor with replaceable springs, if it were reliable and did not interfere with the 1911 feeding process, would be great.</span>
    </span>
    </div></div>

    So you often point out to people how much experience you have yet you are unaware of AFTEC Extractors with you guessed it, replaceable coil springs .......you never cease to one up yourself.

    Which btw is a much better design than the original JMB part.

    It never ceases to amaze me that those who so loudly profess the sanctity of the original 1911 design so conveniently forget all of the parts (beaver tails, hammers, sights, triggers, magazines, magwells etc) that are not only superior to the original design, but have almost wholesale replaced the original parts in 1911 production.
     

    nw911guy

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 29, 2010
    208
    0
    44
    Puyallup, Washington
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nw1911guy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would rather have an external extractor (provided it's not Kimber's) than a firing pin safety. Just sayin. </div></div>

    Now the S&W E Series has the old style FP w/o safety.
    </div></div>

    Wow, that had flown under my radar. Interesting. Might have to see if I can find one to fondle.
     

    mnhntr

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Oct 14, 2011
    253
    0
    51
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm afraid that if both of you guys had been in charge there would be no Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Night Hawk, etc. and none of the innovation that has indeed made the 1911 so widely popular. Face it, until gunsmiths started tinkering with the 1911 to improve on it and get it where it is today, no one really liked it. It had a horrible reputation as sloppy, inaccurate and unreliable with the masses because the only one most guys ever fired was an old worn out GI gun while in the service.
    True to what you are saying, 1911 should not have adjustable sights, beavertails, checkering, beveled mag wells, etc because that isn't how JMB designed it.
    </div></div>
    And quite a few of those old, sloppy, worn out, GI model 1911s that apparently no one liked, turned out to be used in bullseye matches all over the country.
     

    shoot4fun

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 27, 2003
    4,416
    757
    Riverside, Alabama, USA, etc
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnhntr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm afraid that if both of you guys had been in charge there would be no Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Night Hawk, etc. and none of the innovation that has indeed made the 1911 so widely popular. Face it, until gunsmiths started tinkering with the 1911 to improve on it and get it where it is today, no one really liked it. It had a horrible reputation as sloppy, inaccurate and unreliable with the masses because the only one most guys ever fired was an old worn out GI gun while in the service.
    True to what you are saying, 1911 should not have adjustable sights, beavertails, checkering, beveled mag wells, etc because that isn't how JMB designed it.
    </div></div>
    And quite a few of those old, sloppy, worn out, GI model 1911s that apparently no one liked, turned out to be used in bullseye matches all over the country. </div></div>

    Those old, sloppies didn't do it without a lot of love from the old master gunsmiths that specialized in bullseye guns.
     

    Downzero

    -
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Oct 15, 2006
    2,515
    200
    NM
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mnhntr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm afraid that if both of you guys had been in charge there would be no Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Night Hawk, etc. and none of the innovation that has indeed made the 1911 so widely popular. Face it, until gunsmiths started tinkering with the 1911 to improve on it and get it where it is today, no one really liked it. It had a horrible reputation as sloppy, inaccurate and unreliable with the masses because the only one most guys ever fired was an old worn out GI gun while in the service.
    True to what you are saying, 1911 should not have adjustable sights, beavertails, checkering, beveled mag wells, etc because that isn't how JMB designed it.
    </div></div>
    And quite a few of those old, sloppy, worn out, GI model 1911s that apparently no one liked, turned out to be used in bullseye matches all over the country. </div></div>

    Maybe at the bottom of the match results. A combat pistol made to kill Japs at 5 feet isn't exactly a bullseye gun.
    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: smokshwn</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A successful external extractor design would be great for high round count users. For most people, though, it's a liability rather than an asset. </div></div>


    ???? </div></div>


    <span style="font-size: 11pt"><span style="color: #FF0000">An extractor with replaceable springs, if it were reliable and did not interfere with the 1911 feeding process, would be great.</span>
    </span>
    </div></div>

    So you often point out to people how much experience you have yet you are unaware of AFTEC Extractors with you guessed it, replaceable coil springs .......you never cease to one up yourself.

    Which btw is a much better design than the original JMB part.

    It never ceases to amaze me that those who so loudly profess the sanctity of the original 1911 design so conveniently forget all of the parts (beaver tails, hammers, sights, triggers, magazines, magwells etc) that are not only superior to the original design, but have almost wholesale replaced the original parts in 1911 production. </div></div>

    An Aftec is not an external extractor. Perhaps you should consider the discussion in context, or read the title of this post before shooting off at the mouth.

    You would be hard pressed to show that I "profess the sanctity of the original design." In fact, I have stated repeatedly that I wouldn't own a 1911 without dovetail sights and a beavertail.

    In fact, I don't own any 1911s that even remotely resemble the original design, and I probably wouldn't ever.

    The Aftec does in fact satisfy the short quote you've pulled from my post. But it is not an external extractor, and it is part of the feeding process just like any other internal extractor.

    In other words, the Aftec shares more in common with the normal spring steel 1911 extractor than an M16 or Glock style external extractor, which is what the subject of this post is--spring loaded external extractors that snap over the rim of every cartridge rather than feeding the rim up under them in a controlled manner like the 1911 does.
     

    RADcustom

    Registered Coonass
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 1, 2008
    1,881
    4
    Louisiana
    Re: S&W 1911?

    <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
    In other words, the Aftec shares more in common with the normal spring steel 1911 extractor than an M16 or Glock style external extractor, which is what the subject of this post is--spring loaded external extractors that snap over the rim of every cartridge rather than feeding the rim up under them in a controlled manner like the 1911 does. </div></div>

    Twice you have mentioned that the external extractor "snaps" over the cartridge. Perhaps in a M16 but, in the 1911 platform, the round feeds under the hook of the external extractor the same as it does under the internal type. You need to spend a little more time learning and less time on the internet giving advise.