Same old debate. 1911 in 9mm or 45

[Shoegazer]

If you want a 9mm 1911 it is not my choice, 9mm Glock 19, or 17 I’d great platform for 9mm ammo.

If you’re wanting 1911 in non .45 ACP, think about .38 Super. Bullet is same length as .45 ACP, so 1911’s in .38 Super work & run well.

The issue with 38 super is the semi-rim. I understand (and can easily visualize) what's described as "rim lock".

I've evolved to having a preference for 357 Mag revolvers. The simplicity, reliability, choice of load, and raw POWER is hard to top in one package. And I'm gradually getting rid of my small number of gun. The last one I'll keep is a 357.

Just my two cents, not really answering the question, am I?

Gulp...

 

[Shoegazer]

I am left handed, this make a M-1911problematic for me as most AMIB Safety seem to come apart if you not watchful while shooting. Has two 1911's both Colt's, both customized, both shot great out to 20-25 yards.

As I age, get old, weak, and loose strength in hands, I love 9mm. Love the Glock platform, it work, it is easy to clean, and last it is combat accurate.

The finest target pistol in hands of person with no shooting skill, is just not very accurate, because of skills of shooter, not firearm.

"As I age, get old, weak, and loose strength in hands,"

Wow! Ain't it the truth!

Long ago I built up a Tanfolgio Witness to be able to shoot .45 Super. I can no longer reliably rack the slide.

Yes, revolvers for me, looks like...

 

[Shoegazer]

First Vetts were 1953 with Straight 6, if you have one you hate, I will take off hands.

Old 235 cu in?

I never knew that...

Something new every day...

 

[Shoegazer]

FWIW, I used to have a lot more faith in semi-autos than I do now.

Like many of you, I've had the odd failure to feed from most of my semis, even using reliable FMJ like Sellier & Bellot, or other standard brands.

But I've had two that have NEVER failed or come even close to failing: a CZ 75 9mm parabellum, and a CZ 83 9mm kurtz.

...and I took both of these to an outdoor range with my visiting brother and his two kids, one a son who was about 30, and his daughter about 25, both of whom shoot occasionally. And it shocked me to see the CZ 83 fail repeatedly (failure to load--locked up REALLY tight) with my brother and his daughter firing.

I thought about it long and hard. He has no semis, only revolvers, and I'll bet he held the gun much less firmly than I do (or his son did), so he had the "limp wrist" syndrome, where the loose grip absorbed sufficient recoil energy to make the ejection/reload much more marginal, right up to outright failure. And it was the same for his daughter.

So it demonstrated to me just how marginal the cycle process might be in some situations, and then I started drifting toward revolvers.

I never really had all that many guns, and I'm getting rid of most of them, but that incident really changed my default position. If it's important for me to have a gun around the house that is much more reliable--at least an order of magnitude, I suspect., I want a revolver. Revolvers can still screw up, but we're looking at mechanical failure (ejector rod unscrewed enough to prevent the cylinder from advancing), but in my mind it's FAR more reliable.

 

[GeronimoWSB]

So I noticed a comment on Tisas on Reddit and looked it up. Tisas besides being seemingly well made and a great value. Besides a forged frame and slide, they also now have only one mim part, starting 11/22 The U.S. Army a1 I have was only 369 and I looked and it's made this year. I do love my Cz's but the 1911 is damn comfortable.

 

[Doc Dan]

Is it military spec or has it been ramped and ported?

 

[jar_]

Is it military spec or has it been ramped and ported?

Depends on the model.

The basic "Army" has the lowered port, the wide spur hammer of the oldest 1911A1s, a polished feed ramp, and a few other upgrades. There is a new one just starting to reach the supply line that's closer to the original 1911. Tisas offers a very broad range of models at very reasonable cost and with pretty high levels of reliability. Of the four I own not a single one really needed and tinkering although my Mk 1 Torch eyes did and I upgraded the slide on one of my Commander size to get better sights than the post WWI era A1 sights.

All of mine are in 45acp.

My 2022 made basic "Army", a 5" as it came from the factory.

My "Duty" as it came from the factory. Another 5" but Novak style sights and Beavertail and long trigger and other civilizing features.

My "Tanker", a Commander size with hammer, A1 style grip safety, and the Post WWI era sights. I upgraded to a "Carry" slide I found on sale.

And the "Carry". Like the "Duty" this has the better sights and Beavertail and other creature comforts.

I probably have over a thousand rounds or more through each of them now with really no pistol related issues. I did have some magazine related reliability issues with a pair of Wilson Combat 920s but changing out the follower to a CheckMate one solved those issues. I've used Mec-Gar, Wilson, CheckMate, ACT as lots of big name but CheckMate made ones and in both seven rounders and eight rounders.

Mine are all the older Cerakote over Parkerizing but newer pistols are simply Parkerized.

 

[dojpros]

SG
Re racking the slide

You might try:
1. Hold the slide top in the non dominant hand
2. Strike the upper Tang/grip with the web of your thumb and forefinger as you pivot at the waist at the same time. Put your hips into it so to speak.
3. Practice this dry and with dummy rounds to see if it will work for you.

 

[Shoegazer]

SG
Re racking the slide

You might try:
1. Hold the slide top in the non dominant hand
2. Strike the upper Tang/grip with the web of your thumb and forefinger as you pivot at the waist at the same time. Put your hips into it so to speak.
3. Practice this dry and with dummy rounds to see if it will work for you.

Thanks! I will experiment with this a bit.

Part of it is that I seldom shoot the gun. The older metal Witnesses .45s had a factory conversion kit available for them to swap out for 10mm. I bought this. I eventually got around to comparing energy attributes for 45 Super and 10mm and found that I'd require more recoil spring potential to get to within what I would be willing to risk. So I got Wolfe springs strongest available spring and installed that. It's just very difficult to use.

 

[Mhinagoya]

The issue with 38 super is the semi-rim. I understand (and can easily visualize) what's described as "rim lock".

I've evolved to having a preference for 357 Mag revolvers. The simplicity, reliability, choice of load, and raw POWER is hard to top in one package. And I'm gradually getting rid of my small number of gun. The last one I'll keep is a 357.

Just my two cents, not really answering the question, am I?

Gulp...

I have completely done away with the semi rimmed 38 Super brass I had. I now load nothing but Super Comp brass. Someone, maybe Lee Jurras (my forgetter works better than my rememberer), realized that the rim had to come off for reliable functioning in double stack 1911s that were being used in competition. Hence, the SuperComp was born. It is a rimless 38 Super, or a lengthened 9mm if you like. The 9X23 and SuperComp are so close that most guns will fire them interchangeably. Losing the protruding rim solved the problem with double stack magazines.
I have two Supers. One double stack and one single stack. I feed them nothing but SuperComp. Both run flawlessly.

Super comp uses the same shell holder and dies as the semi rimmed case. Starline makes the brass. Loading data is the same as well.

Bill.

 

[Shoegazer]

I have completely done away with the semi rimmed 38 Super brass I had. I now load nothing but Super Comp brass. Someone, maybe Lee Jurras (my forgetter works better than my rememberer), realized that the rim had to come off for reliable functioning in double stack 1911s that were being used in competition. Hence, the SuperComp was born. It is a rimless 38 Super, or a lengthened 9mm if you like. The 9X23 and SuperComp are so close that most guns will fire them interchangeably. Losing the protruding rim solved the problem with double stack magazines.
I have two Supers. One double stack and one single stack. I feed them nothing but SuperComp. Both run flawlessly.

Super comp uses the same shell holder and dies as the semi rimmed case. Starline makes the brass. Loading data is the same as well.

Bill.

Is the supercomp the same dimensions as a 9mm Largo? I remember I once looked at an old pistol (Star?) that shot Largo, and I was interested in it just for a while. You've got to limit your personal indulgences so I passed.

I'm trying to remember: the pistol I can sorta see in my mind's eye. It may not have been a Browning-type action.

Wait, wait. Astra. This is it:

https://images.gunsinternational.com/listings_sub/acc_103480/gi_101421799/Astra-Model-400-9mm-Largo_101421799_103480_45DB561911B5C8F5.JPG

I wonder what the original purpose for the semi-rim on the 38 Super was? For a while I was interested in it because it seemed like a pretty robust round, but the rim scared me off. If I'm reading you correctly, a standard 38 Super pistol will feed and fire a supercomp, which implies that the 38 Super semi-rim had no function.

Just to be clear: I am at the limit of my knowledge right here. I do not load, and almost never shoot any more. But when I hear something interesting I like to hear more...

 

[Shoegazer]

I have completely done away with the semi rimmed 38 Super brass I had. I now load nothing but Super Comp brass. Someone, maybe Lee Jurras (my forgetter works better than my rememberer), realized that the rim had to come off for reliable functioning in double stack 1911s that were being used in competition. Hence, the SuperComp was born. It is a rimless 38 Super, or a lengthened 9mm if you like. The 9X23 and SuperComp are so close that most guns will fire them interchangeably. Losing the protruding rim solved the problem with double stack magazines.
I have two Supers. One double stack and one single stack. I feed them nothing but SuperComp. Both run flawlessly.

Super comp uses the same shell holder and dies as the semi rimmed case. Starline makes the brass. Loading data is the same as well.

Bill.

Is the supercomp the same dimensions as a 9mm Largo? I remember I once looked at an old pistol (Star?) that shot Largo, and I was interested in it just for a while. You've got to limit your personal indulgences so I passed.

I'm trying to remember: the pistol I can sorta see in my mind's eye. It may not have been a Browning-type action.

Wait, wait. Astra. This is it:

https://images.gunsinternational.com/listings_sub/acc_103480/gi_101421799/Astra-Model-400-9mm-Largo_101421799_103480_45DB561911B5C8F5.JPG

I wonder what the original purpose for the semi-rim on the 38 Super was? For a while I was interested in it because it seemed like a pretty robust round, but the rim scared me off. If I'm reading you correctly, a standard 38 Super pistol will feed and fire a supercomp, which implies that the 38 Super semi-rim had no function.

Just to be clear: I am at the limit of my knowledge right here. I do not load, and almost never shoot any more. But when I hear something interesting I like to hear more...

 

[Shoegazer]

Is the supercomp the same dimensions as a 9mm Largo? I remember I once looked at an old pistol (Star?) that shot Largo, and I was interested in it just for a while. You've got to limit your personal indulgences so I passed.

I'm trying to remember: the pistol I can sorta see in my mind's eye. It may not have been a Browning-type action.

Wait, wait. Astra. This is it:

https://images.gunsinternational.com/listings_sub/acc_103480/gi_101421799/Astra-Model-400-9mm-Largo_101421799_103480_45DB561911B5C8F5.JPG

I wonder what the original purpose for the semi-rim on the 38 Super was? For a while I was interested in it because it seemed like a pretty robust round, but the rim scared me off. If I'm reading you correctly, a standard 38 Super pistol will feed and fire a supercomp, which implies that the 38 Super semi-rim had no function.

Just to be clear: I am at the limit of my knowledge right here. I do not load, and almost never shoot any more. But when I hear something interesting I like to hear more...

Oh, I begin to get it, maybe: did the 38 Super headspace on the rim, not the case mouth? Is that why they had it?

 

[Shoegazer]

Oh, I begin to get it, maybe: did the 38 Super headspace on the rim, not the case mouth? Is that why they had it?

No, duh. Then the supercomp could not be used in an uinmod'ed 38 super pistol.

I'm lost... :^(

 

[Mhinagoya]

No, duh. Then the supercomp could not be used in an uinmod'ed 38 super pistol.

I'm lost... :^(

I'm working from memory here, so please be tolerant. I'm old.

The original cartridge was actually the old 38 ACP that had been chambered in the Colt M1900. When Colt chambered it in the 1911 (I think in 1929), the newer pistol was capable of handling much higher pressures, so the 'new' cartridge was named the Super 38 +P. It was dimensionally identical to the 38 ACP. The old version was pressure and velocity limited due to the design of the M1900. The semi rim was, as you have surmised, used to headspace the cartridge and Colt carried this in to the 1911 which proved to be source of poor accuracy for years to come.
Finally, one of the guys at BarSto barrels re-designed the chamber to headspace the cartridge on the case mouth and the accuracy problem was solved. Much later, Lee Jurras shaved most of the rim off, allowing the Super to load well in a double stack magazine.
I just put a micrometer on a piece of Starline super comp brass and it measured .3995. The old case has a nominal dimension of .4059 (the Federal case I just measured came out at .4016). That's a difference of .064. The 9mm case head has a nominal dimension of .392 which is only .008 smaller than the Super Comp.
Manufacturing tolerances are such that functionally, one should just consider the case heads of the 9 and the Super Comp to be the same size and in my switch barrel guns, the breech face and extractor work flawlessly for both with no adjustment.

I apologize, but I do not recall when the headspacing was changed from rim to case mouth. I seem to remember that happening in the late 1960s or early 1970s. Hence, your comment about not using an unmodified super barrel may or may not be accurate, depending on how deep the chamber was cut. If it isn't cut too deep, it would be a snap to drop a modern Super reamer in there and correct it, as the modern reamer cuts clearance for the rim so the case is forced to headspace on the case mouth.

One of my Supers has a conventional 1911 barrel setup and the other has a ramped barrel with a fully supported chamber. On the conventionally barreled gun, I stay within SAAMI spec on loads, as some of the case is un supported (just like a 45 ACP). On the other pistol I can run it pretty hot, although I see no legitimate reason to do so. I have tried hot loads without encountering any ill effects, but I don't want to beat the gun up just for imaginary bragging rights.

I just looked at the 9mm Largo and it seems to be quite similar to the Super Comp. If I owned an Astra and needed ammo, I would do a final check on Super Comp dimensions in the Largo chamber and if it would fit or could be made to fit, load to Largo data. I would NOT go the other way, as the Largo is an OLD round and I wouldn't trust the Largo case to be beefy enough in the web area to contain Super pressures. I would not try to fire Super Comp ammo in an Astra under any circumstances.

I have seen super comp ammo for sale, but it's pretty spendy. Usually runs between $30 and $40 for a box of 50.

Trivia: It is believed that Colt re barreled the 1911 to the souped up 38 Colt (38 Super) so the guns could be sold in countries like Mexico where possession of a firearm chambered in a military caliber was forbidden.

Bill.

 

[nortac]

Mexican Eagle grips for the 1911, especially for .38 Supers, used to be quite the thing.

 

[DrStrange]

If you want 9 mm, there's a zillion different guns that are good for that.

But, if you want 1911,
it was made for the .45.
There's different bullets that are better in different situations,
but a lead ball, the size of a marble, going 800 fps out of an automatic,
is special.

 

[Shoegazer]

I'm working from memory here, so please be tolerant. I'm old.

The original cartridge was actually the old 38 ACP that had been chambered in the Colt M1900. When Colt chambered it in the 1911 (I think in 1929), the newer pistol was capable of handling much higher pressures, so the 'new' cartridge was named the Super 38 +P. It was dimensionally identical to the 38 ACP. The old version was pressure and velocity limited due to the design of the M1900. The semi rim was, as you have surmised, used to headspace the cartridge and Colt carried this in to the 1911 which proved to be source of poor accuracy for years to come.
Finally, one of the guys at BarSto barrels re-designed the chamber to headspace the cartridge on the case mouth and the accuracy problem was solved. Much later, Lee Jurras shaved most of the rim off, allowing the Super to load well in a double stack magazine.
I just put a micrometer on a piece of Starline super comp brass and it measured .3995. The old case has a nominal dimension of .4059 (the Federal case I just measured came out at .4016). That's a difference of .064. The 9mm case head has a nominal dimension of .392 which is only .008 smaller than the Super Comp.
Manufacturing tolerances are such that functionally, one should just consider the case heads of the 9 and the Super Comp to be the same size and in my switch barrel guns, the breech face and extractor work flawlessly for both with no adjustment.

I apologize, but I do not recall when the headspacing was changed from rim to case mouth. I seem to remember that happening in the late 1960s or early 1970s. Hence, your comment about not using an unmodified super barrel may or may not be accurate, depending on how deep the chamber was cut. If it isn't cut too deep, it would be a snap to drop a modern Super reamer in there and correct it, as the modern reamer cuts clearance for the rim so the case is forced to headspace on the case mouth.

One of my Supers has a conventional 1911 barrel setup and the other has a ramped barrel with a fully supported chamber. On the conventionally barreled gun, I stay within SAAMI spec on loads, as some of the case is un supported (just like a 45 ACP). On the other pistol I can run it pretty hot, although I see no legitimate reason to do so. I have tried hot loads without encountering any ill effects, but I don't want to beat the gun up just for imaginary bragging rights.

I just looked at the 9mm Largo and it seems to be quite similar to the Super Comp. If I owned an Astra and needed ammo, I would do a final check on Super Comp dimensions in the Largo chamber and if it would fit or could be made to fit, load to Largo data. I would NOT go the other way, as the Largo is an OLD round and I wouldn't trust the Largo case to be beefy enough in the web area to contain Super pressures. I would not try to fire Super Comp ammo in an Astra under any circumstances.

I have seen super comp ammo for sale, but it's pretty spendy. Usually runs between $30 and $40 for a box of 50.

Trivia: It is believed that Colt re barreled the 1911 to the souped up 38 Colt (38 Super) so the guns could be sold in countries like Mexico where possession of a firearm chambered in a military caliber was forbidden.

Bill.

Bill, this is great. No kidding.

I'm far from an expert; I just like the stuff that I like.

I would like to write a reply re 45 Super. I have questions/opinion/stories and these might be in your strike zone. Is this OK by you?

So far as old, you can't be too much older than me and still be above ground. In fact you might be younger., but I don't want to go there...:^)

 

[Mhinagoya]

Bill, this is great. No kidding.

I'm far from an expert; I just like the stuff that I like.

I would like to write a reply re 45 Super. I have questions/opinion/stories and these might be in your strike zone. Is this OK by you?

So far as old, you can't be too much older than me and still be above ground. In fact you might be younger., but I don't want to go there...:^)

I would love to read your reply.

Bill.

 

[Doc Dan]

I'm working from memory here, so please be tolerant. I'm old.

The original cartridge was actually the old 38 ACP that had been chambered in the Colt M1900. When Colt chambered it in the 1911 (I think in 1929), the newer pistol was capable of handling much higher pressures, so the 'new' cartridge was named the Super 38 +P. It was dimensionally identical to the 38 ACP. The old version was pressure and velocity limited due to the design of the M1900. The semi rim was, as you have surmised, used to headspace the cartridge and Colt carried this in to the 1911 which proved to be source of poor accuracy for years to come.
Finally, one of the guys at BarSto barrels re-designed the chamber to headspace the cartridge on the case mouth and the accuracy problem was solved. Much later, Lee Jurras shaved most of the rim off, allowing the Super to load well in a double stack magazine.
I just put a micrometer on a piece of Starline super comp brass and it measured .3995. The old case has a nominal dimension of .4059 (the Federal case I just measured came out at .4016). That's a difference of .064. The 9mm case head has a nominal dimension of .392 which is only .008 smaller than the Super Comp.
Manufacturing tolerances are such that functionally, one should just consider the case heads of the 9 and the Super Comp to be the same size and in my switch barrel guns, the breech face and extractor work flawlessly for both with no adjustment.

I apologize, but I do not recall when the headspacing was changed from rim to case mouth. I seem to remember that happening in the late 1960s or early 1970s. Hence, your comment about not using an unmodified super barrel may or may not be accurate, depending on how deep the chamber was cut. If it isn't cut too deep, it would be a snap to drop a modern Super reamer in there and correct it, as the modern reamer cuts clearance for the rim so the case is forced to headspace on the case mouth.

One of my Supers has a conventional 1911 barrel setup and the other has a ramped barrel with a fully supported chamber. On the conventionally barreled gun, I stay within SAAMI spec on loads, as some of the case is un supported (just like a 45 ACP). On the other pistol I can run it pretty hot, although I see no legitimate reason to do so. I have tried hot loads without encountering any ill effects, but I don't want to beat the gun up just for imaginary bragging rights.

I just looked at the 9mm Largo and it seems to be quite similar to the Super Comp. If I owned an Astra and needed ammo, I would do a final check on Super Comp dimensions in the Largo chamber and if it would fit or could be made to fit, load to Largo data. I would NOT go the other way, as the Largo is an OLD round and I wouldn't trust the Largo case to be beefy enough in the web area to contain Super pressures. I would not try to fire Super Comp ammo in an Astra under any circumstances.

I have seen super comp ammo for sale, but it's pretty spendy. Usually runs between $30 and $40 for a box of 50.

Trivia: It is believed that Colt re barreled the 1911 to the souped up 38 Colt (38 Super) so the guns could be sold in countries like Mexico where possession of a firearm chambered in a military caliber was forbidden.

Bill.

I am no expert. I have worked in the industry. This tracks with what I remember. I appreciate your response.