Springfield XD Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,913 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Thought some would want to know there are sights out there for the S&W 1911s (well I asked them specifically about the E series) I'm buying one when I get home now blacked out, bobbed commander, and putting TFOs and G10 grips on it, unless someone can tell me a better deal out there (and don't even think of saying kimber)

While I'm thinking on this, does S&W offer any deal for military? Figured I'd ask.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,222 Posts
Thought some would want to know there are sights out there for the S&W 1911s (well I asked them specifically about the E series) I'm buying one when I get home now blacked out, bobbed commander, and putting TFOs and G10 grips on it, unless someone can tell me a better deal out there (and don't even think of saying kimber)

While I'm thinking on this, does S&W offer any deal for military? Figured I'd ask.
Bud's Guns has a website set up for LE/Military/First responders where they give you good prices. Not trying to advertise for them, just passing along information.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,409 Posts
Yeah I get great deals at Buds for LE. Kind of hard to beat a Springfield. Maybe try CDNN
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,913 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
ok for under a grand find me a springfield that beats it out?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
ok for under a grand find me a springfield that beats it out?
A Springfield loaded model can be had for under a grand. It beats out the S&W for a number of reasons IMO, the first of which is that it is more a true (JMB) 1911 design.

I love S&W products, but for this reason, I will not buy their "1911".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,913 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
A Springfield loaded model can be had for under a grand. It beats out the S&W for a number of reasons IMO, the first of which is that it is more a true (JMB) 1911 design.

I love S&W products, but for this reason, I will not buy their "1911".
whats not a jmb design? he intended the extractor to be external just couldn't get the metallurgy right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
whats not a jmb design? he intended the extractor to be external just couldn't get the metallurgy right.
JMB never had an external extractor on a 1911. Obviously the Hi Power did. Kimber tried it on their "1911" and theirs sucked. Not to say that there is anything wrong with Smith's design. Quite the contrary, they seem to work well, with some even saying it is an "improvement". The extractor and the Swartz-type firing pin safety are the main differences. I do realize that most manufacturers have screwed with the firing pin mechanism in some way, including Kimber and Colt's series 80. Not knocking the S&W...just think they are less than pure, expecially cosmetically. I just prefer the internal extractor. An external extractor on a 1911 is a solution to a nonexistent problem, but they aren't all bad. I still prefer JMB's original. If you asked a S&W engineer in the know, he would tell you that the external extractor was chosen due to production costs given the high level of machining required to produce the internal extractor.

Only my opinion. Not necessarily the right opinion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,913 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
JMB never had an external extractor on a 1911. Obviously the Hi Power did. Kimber tried it on their "1911" and theirs sucked. Not to say that there is anything wrong with Smith's design. Quite the contrary, they seem to work well, with some even saying it is an "improvement". The extractor and the Swartz-type firing pin safety are the main differences. I do realize that most manufacturers have screwed with the firing pin mechanism in some way, including Kimber and Colt's series 80. Not knocking the S&W...just think they are less than pure, expecially cosmetically. I just prefer the internal extractor. An external extractor on a 1911 is a solution to a nonexistent problem, but they aren't all bad. I still prefer JMB's original. If you asked a S&W engineer in the know, he would tell you that the external extractor was chosen due to production costs given the high level of machining required to produce the internal extractor.

Only my opinion. Not necessarily the right opinion.
I might just be ornery cause an ANA convoy destroyed my gate today and Ill spend this whole evening fixing it. but.

where do you get this from? Seriously? The E series doesn't have a schwartz safety, it has titanium firing pins exclusively.

JMB before releasing originally intended an external extractor and and only one safety. The extractors breaking forced his hand on the iternal and the army forced his hand on two safeties.

Now does the interna look better and have the ability to be user adjusted yup, I'll agree there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
I might just be ornery cause an ANA convoy destroyed my gate today and Ill spend this whole evening fixing it. but.

where do you get this from? Seriously? The E series doesn't have a schwartz safety, it has titanium firing pins exclusively.

JMB before releasing originally intended an external extractor and and only one safety. The extractors breaking forced his hand on the iternal and the army forced his hand on two safeties.

Now does the interna look better and have the ability to be user adjusted yup, I'll agree there.
Sorry about your gate. That sucks. They in a hurry or somehing? Need more training?

Where I get this from...

S&W incorporated the use of a firing pin blocking automatic safety similar to the Colt series 80 style (and Kimber Series II). Smith gets around the adverse trigger pull created by the system by linking the firing pin safety to the grip safety like Kimber (unlike trigger-activated series 80). Better trigger than the stock series 80, but still safe in the event that the pistol is dropped on its muzzle. This is different than the series 70 design used by many, including SA. Maybe it isn't as similar to the Swartz system as I recall it. The early S&W 1911s even had a safety recall where the firing pin safety plunger of the pistol became disabled, creating a situation where the slide could jam and render the firearm inoperable. Their current 1911s do not have this problem.

JMB used the extractor and design he did for a number of reasons as I understand it. The major one is that controlled-round feed was required. The pistol needed to feed from any angle, even upside down. The internal extractor and magazine design worked together to acheive this and was paramont to controlled round feeding as well as the most reliable design for repeatability and long-term reliability. This is one reason the external design was ruled out.
Another reason was that the Army said no to the external extractor due to the fact that they wanted a gun that could be field stripped and parts replaced without the use of tools. A breaking external extractor had nothing to do with it as far as my knowledge (which isn't absolute). You may be able to educate me here.

This is the history of the 1911 extractor design as I understand it. Of course, the 1911 began when JMB worked for Colt and the Army wanted a replacement for the 38 revolver. He already had an initial design that was, oddly enough, designed to fire a round very similar to the 38 Super. He re-designed this original to use a .45 caliber. Also oddly enough, Smith and Wesson submitted a design along with Luger, Colt (JMB), Savage and some others in 1906. The Savage design and JMB's (Colt) were chosen as the best and then torture tested. JMB's design waas the most reliable and was chosen in 1911. You may have already known all this, since you seem very knowledgable. I don't mean to soud insulting.

I welcome more discussion on this, since I learn new stuff about guns every day and do not consider myself any expert, just very opinionated and possibly biased occasionally due to my "gun raising" by a WWII arms specialist who was an Army team shooter, and is a WWII arms collector, and armorer. My grandfather is also a living survivor of WWII, so I am very fascinated by weapons from this era and I am fortunate enough to shoot everything from Browning M2s (Ma Duece:cool:) to Thompsons on a regular basis. I'm learning how to work on 1911s and have access to my friends machine shop, so I am able to do some custom work with a little help and guidance. The 1911 bug has bit me recently. I've been a long-distance rifle loony prior to this new "hobby" (you gessed it-- Mauser actions). It's all fun.:)

Don't get me wrong. The S&W is a great pistol. I just like the internal "true 1911" design that (to me and my bias) is superior to the external design. Being honest, neither of us is likely to shoot a pistol enough to see a properly executed external extractor design fail before the internal design on any "1911".

Kinda long-winded there, but that's why I think the way I do. You probably got that gate fixed by now...
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top