I have been advised on several forums not to shoot my 1911 very much because of the steel not being strong enough. Why isn't this stated for rifles of the same period - i.e. Springfield and Mauser actions ?
broomhandle
Strong enough for what? I have one made 1918, shot 1000s of times. As a kid in the 1930s it belonged to my cousin - a rancher. It looked wore out event then. One of his ranch hands brought back from National Guard a nail keg almost full of loose .45ACP. We shot up a storm. I got it from his estate and have done a bit restoration on it, engraved, nickeled. It's loose, but with new innards still a good shooter and I still shoot it.
Here we go again...
The original M1911's had no heat treating at all, and were thus more prone to cracking of the frame and slide than a modern A1. Does this mean it will crack... maybe - or maybe not. It could crack on the next shot - or after thousands and thousands of shots. This pistol design is obviously very strong, and not readily prone to damage. But, the chance of damage is still greater than zero.
So, I would put the question back to you. If this pistol is all original, and important to you for any reason other than the monitary value (family history, etc)... will you be upset if you cause any damage to it? If not, then blast away and have fun with it. If you will be upset with any damage, then that is an answer in itself.
Bottom line... it is your gun. Enjoy it the way you want. Collectors take this issue to heart because there are only so many original M1911's left. Once it is damaged or parts exchanged, it will never be original again.
The original M1911's had no heat treating at all, and were thus more prone to cracking of the frame and slide than a modern A1. Does this mean it will crack... maybe - or maybe not. It could crack on the next shot - or after thousands and thousands of shots. This pistol design is obviously very strong, and not readily prone to damage. But, the chance of damage is still greater than zero.
So, I would put the question back to you. If this pistol is all original, and important to you for any reason other than the monitary value (family history, etc)... will you be upset if you cause any damage to it? If not, then blast away and have fun with it. If you will be upset with any damage, then that is an answer in itself.
Bottom line... it is your gun. Enjoy it the way you want. Collectors take this issue to heart because there are only so many original M1911's left. Once it is damaged or parts exchanged, it will never be original again.
Old gun, new gun, soft gun, hard gun..... The longevity by itself isn't really an issue. American soldiers in World War One were hardly concerned that their 1911 slides might crack. Many of them did, but the pistols went back to the depot and had a new slide installed. The pistol wasn't theirs anyway, and the government bought them cheap.
The issue here today is of value. What point is there in taking a $4000 pistol and shooting it until something breaks and it becomes worn out? I always find such a bizarre juxtaposition of concern and opinion among 1911 owners on these Internet forums. On one hand you have the guy who just bought a $600 alloy-framed Kimber and he's afraid he'll wear it out if he shoots it too much. Then you have the guy who just acquired a $4000 vintage Colt who plans to blast way with the thing until it blows up or ends up looking like it went through four wars. About all I can do at this point is stand back and watch.
The issue here today is of value. What point is there in taking a $4000 pistol and shooting it until something breaks and it becomes worn out? I always find such a bizarre juxtaposition of concern and opinion among 1911 owners on these Internet forums. On one hand you have the guy who just bought a $600 alloy-framed Kimber and he's afraid he'll wear it out if he shoots it too much. Then you have the guy who just acquired a $4000 vintage Colt who plans to blast way with the thing until it blows up or ends up looking like it went through four wars. About all I can do at this point is stand back and watch.
Metallurgy on the original 1911s into the 1920s was found to be inadequate in military use. The front ends of the slides were first hardened along with the slide stop notches, later on the slides were through-hardened.
This progression of heat treatment in those pistols was the direct result of inadequacies (wear) found in service use.
Other designs (Luger, Mauser) didn't experience the same wear interactions & stresses in the same locations. While any older pistol or revolver from prior to the 1920s, when heat treating became more widespread in general across the board, has the likelihood of wearing parts quicker than later treated guns & parts, some designs can hold up longer in certain areas even with softer parts just because of how they function.
Early Mausers & Springfields did not have a reciprocating slide that wore at the front & wore the slide stop notch in repeated use, or that battered the frame as it cycled. Their steels were adequate, by & large, to contain pressures & to provide a long service life on those bearing surface interactions that did wear. The steels of the era used were adequate to safely hold up to the ammunition the rifles were designed around.
There was a production run of Springfields that got an improper heat treatment during the process that resulted in brittle receivers. Those are well known, and you can find the serial number range with a little Googling. The rest were perfectly serviceable & many are still being fired today.
Even in the early days when heat treating was being explored, what they did in the 1920s was still not up to modern standards, but better than what was in use before it.
In most cases, the tensile strength & wear characteristics of the steels available were fairly well known & taken into consideration by the men who designed those rifles & pistols.
In the case of the early 1911, even Browning was limited by materials then in use, and even Browning could not forsee everything, such as the weakness of the un-hardened slide areas revealed by field use.
Shooting those older 1911s is controversial, as you've noticed.
I'm in the camp of "I got a nice 1918-made original, and it'll stay that way."
I have modern variants to shoot.
Other opinions differ.
As a short answer (I know- too late ) to your academic question: other firearms from the era don't always include identical concerns about shooting them because there are no identical concerns about their metallurgy.
WITH the caveat that any 100-year-old rifle or handgun really should not be hot-rodded, and there is still always a possibility of breaking a part that's just not made anymore to replace it.
Denis
This progression of heat treatment in those pistols was the direct result of inadequacies (wear) found in service use.
Other designs (Luger, Mauser) didn't experience the same wear interactions & stresses in the same locations. While any older pistol or revolver from prior to the 1920s, when heat treating became more widespread in general across the board, has the likelihood of wearing parts quicker than later treated guns & parts, some designs can hold up longer in certain areas even with softer parts just because of how they function.
Early Mausers & Springfields did not have a reciprocating slide that wore at the front & wore the slide stop notch in repeated use, or that battered the frame as it cycled. Their steels were adequate, by & large, to contain pressures & to provide a long service life on those bearing surface interactions that did wear. The steels of the era used were adequate to safely hold up to the ammunition the rifles were designed around.
There was a production run of Springfields that got an improper heat treatment during the process that resulted in brittle receivers. Those are well known, and you can find the serial number range with a little Googling. The rest were perfectly serviceable & many are still being fired today.
Even in the early days when heat treating was being explored, what they did in the 1920s was still not up to modern standards, but better than what was in use before it.
In most cases, the tensile strength & wear characteristics of the steels available were fairly well known & taken into consideration by the men who designed those rifles & pistols.
In the case of the early 1911, even Browning was limited by materials then in use, and even Browning could not forsee everything, such as the weakness of the un-hardened slide areas revealed by field use.
Shooting those older 1911s is controversial, as you've noticed.
I'm in the camp of "I got a nice 1918-made original, and it'll stay that way."
I have modern variants to shoot.
Other opinions differ.
As a short answer (I know- too late
) to your academic question: other firearms from the era don't always include identical concerns about shooting them because there are no identical concerns about their metallurgy.WITH the caveat that any 100-year-old rifle or handgun really should not be hot-rodded, and there is still always a possibility of breaking a part that's just not made anymore to replace it.
Denis
I gotta agree with bob greer. Get yourself a less valuable/rare 1911 and shoot the snot outta it ! !
I absolutely love old collectible firearms...I look at them and my mind travels with them throughout thier history...the places they've been...it's all quite fasinating. I don't own any of 'em! I have some modern Colt 1911's and various other handguns and rifles and even an 870 shotgun...I often feel like I have too many firearms. I mean hell, you can't take 'em with you and you will never wear 'em out...I shoot my guns...I bring them home and the next trip out, I shoot a different gun but they all get shot eventually. I suspose if I had lot's of expendable cash laying around, I'd collect and hang them in my gallery with pride...but this is not the case...to each thier own.
Understand that properly heat treating a part adds strength and resilience. The early pre-1925 Colt slides were not hardened at all, thus cracking was a known problem. We're not talking about butter-soft parts, but ones that didn't have much tensile strength. Colt tried many methods to heat treat the slides, but only quenching them in oil was practical. Since the slides had to be completely machined first (you can't harden first, then machine unless you want to break your cutters all the time) there was a problem of warping the slides if the entire surface was heat-quenched afterwards. Therefore they could only quench the front part of the slide (which was stiff enough not to warp), and then drill out the breechface around the firing pin hole for a hardened press-fit insert. Later in 1943 the slide stop notch was quickly heat-treated with a hot flame to reduce wear to that area. The critical slide lug area and ejection port opening remained completely unhardened and was still prone to peening and cracking. By the end of WW2 the Austempering method of completely hardening parts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austempering) was developed, and the end-result was the durable components we see in use from the post-war period through today.
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
