On steel at 5 yards?
Who does that? Was this at SIG Academy?
Steel gives insufficient shot accountability.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On steel at 5 yards?
Who does that? Was this at SIG Academy?
Steel gives insufficient shot accountability.
While we are on the subject of 1911 magazines, I'm curious what the current flavor is...
For real shooting steel at 5 yards indoors sounds like clown academy.Who does that? Was this at SIG Academy?
Steel gives insufficient shot accountability.
For real shooting steel at 5 yards indoors sounds like clown academy.
This is why you only take training from those who don't wear red noses.
Benefit of the doubt since I wasn't thereSometimes it ain't about pure accuracy it's more about speed or transitioning and the sound of "clang" is just as satisfying as one perfectly in the T
Of all the mag brands, the 1911 world seems to be in unanimous agreement that there are only three deemed trustworthy: Chip McCormick, Tripp, and Wilson Combat. McCormick and Tripp were the go to before 10 years ago. In the last 10 years, Wilson mags have proven every bit as reliable, and seem a little higher quality, not to mention having a lot more options. I've had feeding problems with McCormick 7 rounders. My Wilsons are flawless. I have no experience with Tripp mags.This is really good info, as I've used Chip McCormick and Wilson mags in the past, but always heard that Tripp Research had a great product too.
Maybe I just got a few lemons, but the Chip McCormick Power Mag 10 rounders never seemed to feed right for me (probably due to magazine spring tension), and I've been looking for an alternative for 8 and 10 round mags.
This is really good info, as I've used Chip McCormick and Wilson mags in the past, but always heard that Tripp Research had a great product too.
Maybe I just got a few lemons, but the Chip McCormick Power Mag 10 rounders never seemed to feed right for me (probably due to magazine spring tension), and I've been looking for an alternative for 8 and 10 round mags.
It sounds like you took training from one of the many "trainers" who dont know their ass from a hole in the ground.And explain how so?
Just an interesting aside. . . the original GI 1911 steel 7 round magazines are reported to function flawlessly as well. Of course, you wouldn't pay the ridiculous price for an antique just to run it in competition or for duty.
Just an interesting aside. . . the original GI 1911 steel 7 round magazines are reported to function flawlessly as well. Of course, you wouldn't pay the ridiculous price for an antique just to run it in competition or for duty.
It sounds like you took training from one of the many "trainers" who dont know their ass from a hole in the ground.
Now this is just as assumtion based on the info provided.
For reference i have taken classes from vickers, hackthorn, rodgers (before he died) , hackathorn, letham, barnhardt, haley and pat mac.......and never once did we bang steel from 5 yards for the obvious abserdity. From a strickly legal liability standpoint, even using frangable at that distance is not something insurance would cover. Which leads me to beleive they did not carry the $1m bond that every reputable facility requires for trainers.
Making everyone buy stupid expensive frangible ammo when its not a speciity class like air ops is another hint. Sounds like a racket to seperate the ignorant from their money.
All of those top trainers primarily use paper, with very little steel work. Its hard to diagnose problems with combat accuracy on steel. Many drills require certain grouping in x time.
Its sounds like a clown shoe trainer with the blind leading the blind. Thats why peolple are asking about it. It would make someone who plays in this sandbox stop and say what the fuck. Sounds like a waste of time and money.
And sorry it took me a whole hour to respond to you. Some of us have jobs.
You are right. Taking training from an entity who specializes is removing money from less than knowledgeable people is a recipe for success.Yeah, your right Sig Sauer is kind of a rinky dink, cheesy entity, probably dont carry adequate insurance and really doesnt have the firearms background to be doing this stuff.............
The circus will not miss you at your job by the way.....whether its 11 of you getting out of the Mini or 10 the crowd still finds it funny.
@pmclaine Can we see a pic of the gun you ran for the class?
You are right. Taking training from an entity who specializes is removing money from less than knowledgeable people is a recipe for success.
From the makers of we can't get a gun right before production, Our gun can't survive a drop test to we outsourced all of our small parts manufacturing to India to we need you to send back every Sig Cross because they tend to shoot on their own.
There is a reason you take training from people who are actual experts in their field. Not some rando cop or strap hanger to a SF ODA who got a participation trophy (BSM is a meritorious award given to anyone in E6 or above in a combat zone who manages not to shoot themselves, unless its a V device.). They also have nothing to do with combat marksmanship. Guys who spent 20 years doing high level DA or FID generally are who you want to learn from. They got the best training, have to teach that training as part of their job and can take the best parts from each to tailor a program.
It actually makes perfect sense. Glad you had a good time. The whole steel at 5 yards thing just threw up a red flag.
The only real issue I learned about was at this class - COAL of dummy rounds is longer than loaded rounds and if you are loading the dummies in a mag for drill purposes you will get a hangup in the ejection port and your immediate action is almost always likely to require ripping out the mag to clear the fouled dummy.
From the "Guns and Coffee" thread....
View attachment 7516208
This was going to be my backup if there were issues....
View attachment 7516209
This (the constant fuckery with ejectors, magazines, and other small parts) and a manual safety are the two reasons why I haven't owned a 1911 and never willOut of curiosity, take a look at your ejector in your particular 1911 frame. If it is an extended one, it may me pivoting the dummy rounds toward the ejection port too early in the slide cycle causing the interference. On top of that, I would certainly hope that the dummy rounds weren't longer than SAAMI spec.
This (the constant fuckery with ejectors, magazines, and other small parts) and a manual safety are the two reasons why I haven't owned a 1911 and never will
Aint nobody got time for that
My polymer CZs (both striker fired and DA/SA) are truly as trouble free and reliable as Glocks.
Any 7 round magazine should seat easily in any 1911 with the slide forward, as there is some room left in the bottom of the mag tube to avoid being at spring bind without the 8th round taking up space in there.
Original GI magazine tapered feed lip geometry makes for a smooth feeding transition for the magazine to the chamber, but extended use tends to wear/spread the feed lip gap open. When you handle a loaded GI mag or drop one on a hard surface with some rounds left in it, the top round has a tendency to jump out. Most of the Chip McCormick mags I've seen have parallel lips, but they are short in order to get semi wadcutters to feed easier by letting go of the back of the round sooner in the feed cycle. The Tripp Cobra mags have longer parallel feed lips, but the top round height seems to be higher than a lot of other mags in order to keep the height transition during feeding to a minimum.
The best way to tell what magazines your particular 1911 likes is to take your recoil spring out and hand cycle some rounds from your magazine of choice. For some reason in any of my 1911s, Chip mags always have the nose of the top round hitting the feed ramp rather abruptly before turning up into the chamber. GI and Trip mags have been noticeably smoother hand feeders for me in my guns. Since Tripp mags retain the top round during handling and have room in the bottom of the tube for easy slide forward seating with 8 rounds, they are my ultimate go to magazine.
It's not constant fuckery. You set your gun up right on the front end and never have to worry about it again.
It's not constant fuckery. You set your gun up right on the front end and never have to worry about it again.
It's extractor tension that needs to be set. Not ejector. With the better steels that have been around for a few decades, it isn't a big deal anymore, but in cheaper 1911s it can be. The only three things that really need to be fit on a 1911 are a thumb safety, grip safety and extractor. None of it is rocket science. I don't think they are the best platform in the world at this point, but they are not difficult to keep running. Some older forgings have crappy dimensions, but that isn't much of a deal anymore.Seems constant from many of the threads here, pistol-forum, and benos about 1911s. And even if you're right, I prefer pistols that I don't have to set up right on the front end. I prefer those that come that way from the box.
I can probably dig up a dozen threads in pistol-forum about extractor tension alone.......
Plus the manual safety. That's a deal killer.
It sounds like you took training from one of the many "trainers" who dont know their ass from a hole in the ground.
Now this is just as assumtion based on the info provided.
For reference i have taken classes from vickers, hackthorn, rodgers (before he died) , hackathorn, letham, barnhardt, haley and pat mac.......and never once did we bang steel from 5 yards for the obvious abserdity. From a strickly legal liability standpoint, even using frangable at that distance is not something insurance would cover. Which leads me to beleive they did not carry the $1m bond that every reputable facility requires for trainers.
Making everyone buy stupid expensive frangible ammo when its not a speciity class like air ops is another hint. Sounds like a racket to seperate the ignorant from their money.
All of those top trainers primarily use paper, with very little steel work. Its hard to diagnose problems with combat accuracy on steel. Many drills require certain grouping in x time.
Its sounds like a clown shoe trainer with the blind leading the blind. Thats why peolple are asking about it. It would make someone who plays in this sandbox stop and say what the fuck. Sounds like a waste of time and money.
And sorry it took me a whole hour to respond to you. Some of us have jobs.
Seems constant from many of the threads here, pistol-forum, and benos about 1911s. And even if you're right, I prefer pistols that I don't have to set up right on the front end. I prefer those that come that way from the box.
I can probably dig up a dozen threads in pistol-forum about extractor tension alone.......
Plus the manual safety. That's a deal killer.
Yes, I caught myself and fixed thatIt's extractor tension that needs to be set. Not ejector.
With the better steels that have been around for a few decades, it isn't a big deal anymore, but in cheaper 1911s it can be. The only three things that really need to be fit on a 1911 are a thumb safety, grip safety and extractor. None of it is rocket science. I don't think they are the best platform in the world at this point, but they are not difficult to keep running. Some older forgings have crappy dimensions, but that isn't much of a deal anymore.
I totally get all that.
A RWD Porsche 911 RSR without any traction or stability controls is WRONG car for most people, but in the right hands, nothing can touch its performance.
![]()
I really think it's the same with [a properly set up] 1911. It's the wrong gun for most people, but for those willing to learn the platform, get it set up correctly, do the higher level of maintenance, and train with it, nothing else comes close. That's why all the die-hard fandom. . it's performance, not nostalgia.
What are you shooting? Unlike the extractor, which is always a bit of a fit up, ejectors are really easy in 45 and can be a pain in the ass otherwise. In general, you want to have as little extension to your ejector as you can get away with. It makes life easier when dealing with ejecting live rounds, and gives you a lot more room. What kind of ejector are you using?So, on the topic of ejectors... maybe I have experienced a lemon a couple times, or maybe it's just because I'm shooting a non-standard round out of a 1911, but I peen the living crap out of my ejectors after around 500 rounds to the point where I am wondering if it's a metallurgy issue. This issue has appeared a number of times on a custom 1911 from a very reputable company. It appears to still be an issue, albeit the case that I am referencing may be out of the ordinary as it isn't a .45... Never had this issue on a contemporary 1911 (production or otherwise) chambered in .45
So, on the topic of ejectors... maybe I have experienced a lemon a couple times, or maybe it's just because I'm shooting a non-standard round out of a 1911, but I peen the living crap out of my ejectors after around 500 rounds to the point where I am wondering if it's a metallurgy issue. This issue has appeared a number of times on a custom 1911 from a very reputable company. It appears to still be an issue, albeit the case that I am referencing may be out of the ordinary as it isn't a .45... Never had this issue on a contemporary 1911 (production or otherwise) chambered in .45
So I know you have me on ignore, but serious question. Do you really think that at this day and age? I have been shooting 1911s since I was a kid, rebuilding them since my teens, taken classes and worked with really good smiths to learn more about the guts etc. Even with that, I find that over the last few years I rarely shoot a 1911 at all, and when I do, even though I know the system back and front, I am better with a plastic 9mm at everything other than group accuracy out past 25 yards. Sure I love the way the look and feel, I just do question whether they actually provide anything today you can't get elsewhere with less hassle.I totally get all that.
A RWD Porsche 911 RSR without any traction or stability controls is the WRONG car for most people, but in the right hands, nothing else comes close.
View attachment 7516290
I really think it's the same with [a properly set up] 1911. It's the wrong gun for most people, but for those willing to learn the platform, get it set up correctly, do the higher level of maintenance, and train with it, nothing else comes close. That's why all the die-hard fandom. . it's performance, not nostalgia.
So I know you have me on ignore, but serious question. Do you really think that at this day and age? I have been shooting 1911s since I was a kid, rebuilding them since my teens, taken classes and worked with really good smiths to learn more about the guts etc. Even with that, I find that over the last few years I rarely shoot a 1911 at all, and when I do, even though I know the system back and front, I am better with a plastic 9mm at everything other than group accuracy out past 25 yards. Sure I love the way the look and feel, I just do question whether they actually provide anything today you can't get elsewhere with less hassle.
Interesting. I agree with you 100% on all of the ergonomic issues, and especially the trigger, and cartridge for cartridge I am probably no slower with a 1911 than a Glock, but my 1911s are basically in 45, with a couple of outliers, and I do think I am faster with a 9mm Glock than a 45 1911. Maybe it just feels that way, though. Perhaps more importantly, I am now mainly set up to load 9, though I could switch that around in a couple of hours. Not an issue if ammo was easy to just run down to the store for, but in this day and age... Another one of those things I should probably do that I don't get to.Yes, I actually do. I believe ergonomics is the biggest factor. I've put thousands of rounds through mine in practice, which is far more than I've put through any other gun. But I am considerably faster from holstered to first round hit with a 1911 than a glock, S&W M&P, Sig, and anything else I've played with. My split times are faster and my groups smaller.
Could it be purely a familiarity thing? I suppose so. I mean Jerry Miculek used a revolver to put 6 rounds on target, reloaded and put 6 more on target in like 1.8 seconds or something. But I really think it's more than familiarity. It feels more "pointable", natural, comfortable, intuitive. The trigger is a bazillion times better, which definitely aids both grouping and speed. The recoil feels more managed.
It probably boils down to a person's hand size, shape, etc. and personal ergonomic compatibility with the gun. For me, I do the best with a 1911.
Thanks for such a thorough reply - great advice and really cool knowledge on the Tripp and Chip McCormick mags. Assuming that this test works with ramped and unramped barrels, as well as calibers that do not end in .45?
Out of curiosity, take a look at your ejector in your particular 1911 frame. If it is an extended one, it may me pivoting the dummy rounds toward the ejection port too early in the slide cycle causing the interference. On top of that, I would certainly hope that the dummy rounds weren't longer than SAAMI spec.
You ran a 1911 with the original GI style grip safety instead of the 1911 with the beavertail??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
So confused I would have typed more question marks, but my thumb tired.
Beautiful guns btw
This (the constant fuckery with ejectors, magazines, and other small parts) and a manual safety are the two reasons why I haven't owned a 1911 and never will
Aint nobody got time for that
My polymer CZs (both striker fired and DA/SA) are truly as trouble free and reliable as Glocks.
It's not constant fuckery. You set your gun up right on the front end and never have to worry about it again.
I've put about 5600 rounds through my Wilson, and it has had ZERO malfs. I only clean it after every 500 rounds or so, but I've gone to 1000.
Seems constant from many of the threads here, pistol-forum, and benos about 1911s. And even if you're right, I prefer pistols that I don't have to set up right on the front end. I prefer those that come that way from the box.
I can probably dig up a dozen threads in pistol-forum about extractor tension alone.......
Plus the manual safety. That's a deal killer.
I love 1911s, always have, and always will. THAT BEING SAID, in 2020, there are other options that require much less love and care for the same end-result. I personally view the 1911-style manual thumb safety (the ambidextrous versions) as a feature, not a drawback... especially when carried.
Getting things right on a 1911 on the front-end requires someone who knows what they are doing, and the bankroll to do it... 1911s aren't for everyone...
I've taken some of those same classes you have and I would probably have agreed with you ten or twenty years ago, which is when I took those classes. However, frangible ammunition has become quite common and much cheaper than those days. It's use in training is extremely common today. Thunder Ranch, which didn't require it fifteen years ago, does today. The Sig Academy is considered a top rated school, which I believe even those trainers you mention would likely agree.