Leaderboard

I will assure you that none of replies I have written have EVER been created by AI. I do not trust the junk that most AI produces. I do not even look for AI material to try to better my knowledge. When I said that several points had been brought up on "other forums" and might be considered for possibly solving the poster's problem, those came from real well known LIVE members of the 1911 Forum. Can you please stop with the attempts at character assassination and insults? And also believing that you can comment on how "everyone else" feels. Get on the topic, please. Thanks, GJ

Now guys, try to get over your egos and stick to the issues. I don't know you, EL Chapo, but I have known G Joe for at least 20 years. He speaks from many years of 1911 knowledge. I don't always agree with his approach to things, but he really knows his stuff. I know my way around a 1911 pretty well also. I was one of the big time dealers in 1911's from 1970 until 2014. I have "fixed' hundreds of them with small issues to big ones. I have probably handled/fixed more 1911s than most active shooters put together will ever see. It wasn't unusual for me to deal with well over a thousand a year in busy times. I always had 500+ in inventory. So just remember that different people may disagree about small issues but don't let this wire get like the SASS wire. We kept it civil for years and I for one would like it to remain so. I feel that the current most knowledgable person in SASS/Wild Bunch about current issues is Boggus Deal. He builds 1911's from a block of steel and knows how to fix anything. I don't blame him for not getting into discussions like this, he is too busy building/fixing guns to bother. Happy Shooting.

One thing that JM Browning noted early in the life of the 1911 was that putting a small dimple in the flat follower of the magazine, dimple round side upwards, was enough of an improvement to retaining the LAST round inside the magazine to prevent it squirting out with recoil. Colt mags ever since have carried that dimple. My Tripp mags also have a small dimple to help retain last round. Maybe it's something worth duplicating? I have at times used other brands of mags than Colt and Tripp. I found myself adding Tripp followers and springs to my Wilson and Chip McCormick mags because they ran better with the non-diving follower and the stronger springs. At this point, Tripps are what I shoot with, and never have had a "loose last round" problem. (Nor any broken base plate welds, either.) good luck, GJ

What I'd really like for you to do is stop posting AI-edited nonsense instead of sharing your actual experience, you know, kinda like everyone else who posted in this thread, including me.

You know guys, I'm not a moderator on this forum anymore but I think this thread has run it's course. 3 pages to answer a simple question is enough. It has turned into an opinion piece. How about tucking your opinions aside and go shoot??

I don't really care for stainless but the mags I'm using now are stainless because that's what was available. It's really just a vanity thing, I don't think either material is superior or works better; stainless is perhaps easier to keep clean because you can see when it's dirty. I don't think you'll see a difference in the feed lips holding up on stainless vs. regular steel, the heat treat probably matters more with regard to that. I have never really had a problem with my 1911 mags holding up, I did wear out a set of 9mm mags over a 10+ year period but I shot many thousands of rounds through them in that time. 45 mags have generally been good for me although after about 2012, I stopped shooting 45 completely except for wild bunch now. I have a set of Wilson Combat mags for WB and a set of Tripps. Both work in my gun, but I like that the Tripps have feed lips that hold the round for longer as the slide cycles, which is why I switched to them. I know some prefer other mags and I hope to try some others eventually. In USPSA, I used Chip McCormick mags from about 2004-2008, then I switched to Tripp Research mags and I have been using those since. When I started WB I bought a set of Wilsons because they were on sale and this year, after comparing them to my USPSA 45 mags that I have had forever, I got a set of GI style Tripps for WB and shot two matches with them over the last two months. My gun feeds with both but I think my gun feeds better with the Tripps because they release further forward. I loaned my gun and mags to another shooter last month and he shot the Wilsons and I shot the Tripps just so we didn't have to trade mags back and forth; neither of us had any gun related issues. I have not had a whole lot of problems with feed lip tuning in 1911s nor having them go out of spec, contrast that with 2011 mags that have a lot of problems feeding and mag tuning is required. Because of that, I don't know the feed lip dimensions that are ideal for 45 Auto, I haven't moved mine. In your case I'd measure all your mags at the front and back of the feed lips and set the dimensions, to start, at the smallest numbers you see among your mags as long as that one fed reliably. I bet you find that a few of your mags are a little wider at the front and release earlier, which in my experience, all my Wilson mags release earlier than I'd like, not because they are bent but because it's part of their design to have shorter feed lips than my other mags. If your tightest mag feeds reliably, just set them all to that number. You'll know right away if they are too tight because the round will hit the feed ramp too low and it may cause feeding issues. That's why I don't recommend going any tighter than that, just set them to exactly 1x your tightest mag and test fire. Tripp calls the situation you're experiencing "mag squirt" and some very minor adjustment to your mags will likely restore normal functioning for a long time. Write down the numbers that work and check them once a year and you'll be good.

Procedural for firing more rounds than required by the stage instructions.