Just picked-up a NIB Springfield MilSpec... 100-rnds thru, shoots great!
Was told at the Range that changing the stock Guide-Rod to a longer, full- size version helps accuracy/performance.
Is this 'fact?'... And if so, which size makes sense for the MS.
Ummmm...no it does not improve the performance and accuracy.
At least not EVER in any kind of measured scientific test I have seen referenced. There is lots of anecdotal chatter about how much better they are but proof?
Nonexistent.
Just wondering why it's done?...
My first thought was, these manufacturers would surely be using a longer-rod if it would markedly increase accuracy/performance...
And considering the long history of the 1911, most 'bugs' (if any) would have been worked out by now...
My basic is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"... So I guess I'll just let mine be!
The argument has gone on for almost 100 years. It's almost in a class with revolver vs. auto, 9mm vs .45, .223 vs 308 and all the other great firearm debates. I have shot with short and full length on the same gun.
Frankly, I think it gives some shooters a mental boost. They think it makes the gun more accurate so it gives them more confidence in their shooting.
If there is a real benefit it is that the gun may cycle more smoothly and therefore get you back on target for a second shot more quickly. This is especially true with the tungsten full length guide rods. They are heavier than a standard GI guide rod and therefore not only make the gun heavier but put more weight out at the muzzle which reduces muzzle flip. Within the limits of the shooter's strength, a heavier gun will be easier to hold a sight picture with, absorb more recoil reducing perceived recoil and have less muzzle flip.
For defensive use, I have the most confidence in the standard length GI guide rod.
Full length guide rods come in two varieties. Two-piece and one-piece. A one- piece FLGR is probably ok for self defence as well. However, do not use a two piece guide rod for self defense. They will unscrew and you will shoot the front half quite a ways. This is not good in a defensive situation. I would expect that most competition shooters have seen a guide rod go flying at a match once or twice.
They function in exactly the same way. The only difference is that the two piece FLGR is easier for some people to disassemble. Really, once you get used to it, either one is not a problem
I believe that the main function of a FLGR is to remove money from your pocket and put it in the pocket of the FLGR manufacturer.
I had pistols with them in the past; and couldn't tell any difference in their performance compared to other pistols without the FLGR.
Currently, three of my 1911's don't have one. The other two are smaller than standard length and have "recoil systems" in them which are telescoping and have multiple springs (including a captive inner one) involved.
I don't particularly care for those either; but don't know of any way to replace them.
Yeah. What Rick said. I never thought of it that way before, but it sounds right.
Quote:
Was told at the Range that changing the stock Guide-Rod to a longer, full-
size version helps accuracy/performance.
Sorry, they told you wrong. They do nothing for accuracy. However, they improve extraction and feeding, as it has already been said. They extract money from your pocket and feed it to the manufacturer's pocket. As simple as that. Not even the people who make these things don't ever say that they improve accuracy. All they say is that they prevent the recoil spring from kinking, but if you study the internals of the pistol, you will find out that there is no room for it to kink.
Quote:
About 12 years ago I installed one of the Hart's Recoil Reducers in my Gold
Cup Trophy along with having the frame/slide and barrel bushing fitted,
beavertail, extended thumb safety. It was as you described, the reduction in
recoil and muzzle flip was quite noticeable for me which allowed a fast follow
up shot and the gun would cycle and extract empty cases all day when cycled by
hand.
That's interesting because several years ago, I tried the Harts recoil reducer too. I was shooting two identical 1911s side by side, one with the reducer and another one without it, same springs, same ammo, etc. Never saw any difference in perceived recoil. At that time, I also tried Sprinco reducer. Same thing.
The only thing I used, with which the perceived recoil was immediately noticeable, was the flat-bottom firing pin stop.
Back to what I said, "Frankly, I think it gives some shooters a mental boost. They think it makes the gun more accurate so it gives them more confidence in their shooting."
I have found with some shooters that convincing them that they shoot better than they think they do can be a difficult job. When they have the confidence to hold sight alignment and press the trigger instead of trying to get a shot snapped off before the gun moves, their scores go up. So if the FLGR gives the shooter confidence, it's probably worth it.
As for me, I don't need all that foolishness. I just wear my lucky underwear and have my wife kiss my bullets. Note, that's why I don't play golf any more.
Same experience here... out of all the years of experimenting with all kinds of things, a simple flat bottom FPS was much more noticable than anything else I have messed with that affected felt recoil or the feel when it went off.
The only advantage I have found to a FLGR is that it allows you to remove the entire slide assemble by removing only the firing pin slide stop like most modern pistols like this Sig P226 shown with the slide removed next to my TRP. Both with FLGRs.