robertg5322

Until someone figures out a way to get a Holosun 510c on a slide, Leupold Delta Point Pro wins simply for the biggest window and brightest dot. Got a DPP on a M&P C.O.R.E. and another on a milled G17 slide. Both work great, and the big window is a huge deal.

Metalform work for me. And the top round does not slide forward under recoil, so they drop free with no, or any number of rounds left. Best part is the price. I've read that Brownell's brand mags work well, and they are supposedly Metalforms with a black coating, and Dawson are Metalform with Dawson basepad.

.45 is a less desirable alternative to .40 for SS Major. Obsolete is a bit extreme, it still works as well as .40, just less brass laying around. The price difference on bullets is there, but I doubt it's why anyone switches to .40 for SS. The overriding reason is probably not having to load .45 ammo, with the primer size switch on their reloading machines.

Yeah, I'll be in Arizona in a year and hopefully I can forget how f'd up California laws are.

As hard as it is to get a .40 S&W 1911 here in California, there are more than a few at any match I go to.

You wouldn't know it where I shoot (Richmond CA), .45 brass is as rare as .38 Super. Brass picked up is like 60% 9mm, 39% .40 S&W and 1% split between .45 & .38 Super. Maybe the guy shooting .45 picks up most of his brass and the guy shooting .38 Super picks up most of his, who knows. You don't find it on the ground though.

Does anybody shoot 45 acp for anything? FIFY 

My Springfields all worked. My issue was that they were loose, rattly and just generally poorly fitted with junk internals. Sharp edges everywhere (Loaded models and a couple of Mil-Specs, one stainless one parkerized). If they were $600.00 (the loaded models are more, and the 9mm is about a grand), I wouldn't complain. And that odd .220" radius BTGS is just annoying. I have no experience with the Trojan, but the ones I see at matches generally have happy owners and seem to work.

Just wish the bad ones were easier to recognize BEFORE you pay for them.

I've had two, a Custom Ii from 2001 and a pre-Series II I had for a few months and traded away. Traded a M&P9 for it, a Stainless Target. Neither ever gave me a bit of trouble, 20K in .45 and another 10k in .40 after I converted it for the Custom II and maybe 2k for the other. Also have a couple of friends with Kimbers that they have no issues with. Would I buy another? Probably not unless the price was too good to pass up. Same for Springfield. If I'm buying a 1911 at that price-point, I'd go with Sig. Not crazy about the firing pin safety garbage but Sig gives you front strap checkering, which is a feature I like.

You feel this way about them because all the ones you owned were no good? Or cause you read it on the interwebz? Serious question.

I'm not comparing internet reputations. I'm speaking of the guns I've owned or whose owners i know. Springfield does make a nice $600.00 gun. My issue is they're selling them for a grand. I don't know enough about Dan Wesson to comment on their value relative to their price. The ones i see at matches look nice enough, and work well enough, but that can be said for most guns that make it to a match. We USPSA shooters generally don't like stuff that don't work, and make it work before going to a match. And Colt makes Springfield look like a bargain. Kimber, I've never had an issue with my $650.00 Custom II or a pre-Series II I had and traded away. YMMV.

I'd much rather buy from a company that didn't have such an atrocious QC history. And a standard BTGS radius.

I don't own and haven't shot a Dan Wesson 1911, so I can't comment on them other than to say those that own them seem to like them. I had read about the galling issue. Theres not a company out there that is perfect, and some are less perfect than others. My beef is when the company wont correct the causes of its issues. Springfield's customer service people rave about isn't free. Its factored into their product prices. People like me who will fix all but the most glaring issues get the short end. The guy who sends his gun back because the trigger is at 5 lbs, and the sights aren't aligned gets his work subsidized. At least with Dan Wesson you get quality internals and a standard BTGS radius. And I figure if I haven't broken a gun in five years, when/if it does break, it's not a manufacturer defect. If I was doing it again, I'd go Sig for 1911s. Same price point as Springfield, Kimber or most decent quality guns and you get front strap checkering. Funky slide, but who cares about aesthetics?

Like I wrote, I'm not saying yours are. Mine were/are. And for $1,000.00 (which is what my 9mm Loaded Target cost) it's not too much to expect the gun to be built right.

Not saying "your Springfield gun" isn't perfect but Springfield Armory has a stellar customer service reputation built on a foundation of crap QC. Every one I've owned or felt was loose, rattly and gritty. Internals are junk and the goody .220 BTGS radius makes replacing that part with a better fitted one a major pain.

Before the feed ramp, my issue was the nose slamming into the breech at the 6:00 position. Nose down.. Bullet setback was occurring regularly. After, no issues at all (so far).

Then don't load long. If it will feed an normal OALs, why bother?

So the Colt lowers and adapters being designed for this have addressed the problem. And they work, at least in my experience.

Yes. Colt mag lowers don't have the gap from front of magazine to chamber (I'm told)

You won't regret it.

I had issues with Montana Gold 124g JHP bullets until I installed the Taccom feed ramp. Holy crap, best $29.00 I ever spent. Feeds anything now, and runs the Taccom 57 round extension with zero issues. Now if I could just get firing pin tips to stop breaking off when dry firing... ATI (NFA clone) lower, NGA side charging upper. I should mention my Colt mag l gun feeds better than the ATI did (before the feed ramp upgrade).

That's so true it's scary. And annoying.

I think the trigger reset issues are as much due to the part of the bolt that rides over the trigger as they are the hammer profile. Specifically the ramp length. I had issues with a RRA 2 stage NM trigger resetting with the ATI bolt and the Taccom 3 stage buffer. The last stage was impeding the bolt's full travel. Unless ;the bolt traveled to the end of the buffer tube, spring fully compressed, the trigger would have reset issues. Specifically, it would not reset if the trigger was held back. Changing to the Taccom buffer corrected this issue, it now functions perfectly.

Once they're installed and blended, they can pretty much be fit to your preference. The question is which one will be easier (fit closest to the lines of your gun). I've done them on Kimber, Colt and Springfield Mil-Spec frames. I've yet to find a BTGS that works well enough to use on a Springfield frame with a factory Springfield BTGS. And as much as factory Springfield BTGSs rattle, it'd be nice to find one that could make the gun complete without having to weld. The Ed Brown has the highest cut out of the box, though I made the others as high with judicious use of a dremel and sanding wheel. Springfield has their funky radius, the EGW and Smith & Alexander are about the only ones I've seen that work without having to weld up the tangs. The EGW is more expensive, so the S&A gets the nod (for me on this unstressed part, I see no benefit of a machined tool steel part over the cast S&A unit).