My Sig RCS is having a variety of feeding issues. Most recently it has been returned from Sig with a new barrel and bushing, so perhaps the problems have been resolved. But I'm curious to know a few things about the cycling of a 1911. The RCS has a 4 1/4 inch barrel atop a shortened Officer size frame. The recoil spring assembly consists of a conventional short guide rod, not a full length guide rod, and a single spring.
1) When the slide is in full recoil, what surfaces impact what other surfaces?
2) What arrests the slide's rearward motion?
3) In my pistol, it seems the rear face of the bushing is impacting the barrel forward of the locking lugs, damaging both the bushing and barrel. This apparently is a known defect in Sig's barrel geometry. Should the bushing be impacting the barrel?
4) The recoil spring guide rod is battering the barrel feet. The barrel link is also being damaged as it passes by the damaged area of the feet.
Quote:
1)When the slide is in full recoil, what surfaces impact what other
surfaces?
The rear edge of the recoil spring tunnel of the slide hits the flange of the guide rod, which rests against the frame's abutment area.
Quote:
2)What arrests the slide's rearward motion?
What I said above.
Quote:
3) In my pistol, it seems the rear face of the bushing is impacting the
barrel forward of the locking lugs, damaging both the bushing and barrel. This
apparently is a known defect in Sig's barrel geometry. Should the bushing be
impacting the barrel?
Well, if this is a Commander-length pistol as you say, I can see several issues here. First, the front area of the barrel's legs, in a Commander, are cut vertical to the barrel's axis, that's the reason you can see those marks on your first picture. When the pistol was returned to you, has it still the angled barrel legs or were they now machined perpendicular to the barrel's axis?
I believe that when your pistol was assembled in the factory, someone installed the wrong barrel in it.
Me thinks when the barrel is in battery (forward), the lugs may be touching the guide rod flange.
Need a pic of the flange please.
Steve, you are of course right. The barrel has the angled feet, so it should contact the flange. And I think it is clear that it is touching the flange both at its top, but also at the button, where the guide rod is screwed, that's what caused the marks in the middle of the feet.
The question is what causes the marks on the bushing rear face. I guess that the barrel's chamber is also wrong on the outside.
Wichaka and John correctly pointed to the angle at the front of the lower lug and guide rod flange beating one another to death.
Sig... the manufacturer that was purportedly going to "correct" all the flaws in the design... has made the common mistake of not having a look at a Colt Commander before proceeding. Don't know if that was due to oversight or the attitude that they know more about Colt's designs than Colt does. I mean...they did notice that the frame's impact abutment and rails are .100 inch further rearward than on a 5-inch gun. How could they have missed the more obvious difference in the barrels?
By the way... the guide rod is making contact at the flange and the end of the rod... hence the two separate impact areas.
*sigh*
The peening on the barrel bushing are caused by the extension at the front of the forwardmost upper lug. On a Colt, that's machined away, leaving the front of the lug vertical instead of a step.
Colt has been building Commanders since 1949. It's been successful, which is a strong indication that they have a handle on it. You'd think that the engineers who aspire to clone the design would have the logical good sense to at least take a look at one of Colt's pistols before proceeding... but I guess that's too much to expect. Other hopefuls have made the same mistakes with the Commander clones and copies... with the same results. At least Dan Wesson noticed the interference points, and shortened the bushings.
The good news is that this is a relatively simple fix. The bad news is that... because the bushing smacks the lug extension in recoil... it's probably cracked and will very likely fail pretty soon.
I'd be interested in what Sig will have to say about this...
I don't suppose the OP has any images of the original 4 1/4"barrel?
Quote:
I'd be interested in what Sig will have to say about this...
They'll say:
"It's normal wear."
"All guns need to be broken in with X number of rounds."
"You must be limp-wristing it."
"You must have installed an unauthorized recoil spring."
"You fired overloaded ammunition in the gun."
"You fired reloaded ammunition in the gun."
Pick one.
Anything but admitting that they made a mistake.
PS: I've seen this before... and fixed it.
I think you need to contact SIG again; and advise them of the corrections they need to make (the points identified in Tuner's post).
I took a peek at the replacement barrel this morning before work. It appears to have correct geometry, at least to my untrained eye. The upper portion of the lower lugs (is "barrel feet" incorrect terminology?) is perpendicular to the barrel, not slanted as in the photograph of the original barrel. And I think the step has been removed from in front of the upper recoil lugs. I'll snap some pictures of the new barrel tonight.
I misunderstood your original post, I thought this was the replacement barrel there.
Quote:
I took a peek at the replacement barrel this morning before work. It
appears to have correct geometry
Well! I guess Sig's had a few others come back... and the lads figured out where the bug had nested. Excellent!
Now if they can just get their extractor figgered out...
John Browning already did that about a hunnert years ago... but for some mysterious reason, folks just keep thinkin' they can outsmart him.
Here are pictures of the replacement barrel and bushing. It does appear to have correct Commander-style geometry, as far as I can tell. The forward ends of the lower lugs are perpendicular to the barrel, and it does not have a chamber extension forward of the front locking lug.
And here is a different view of the original barrel, showing the chamber extension.
That's how a 4.25" barrel should look like.
What do you know, it looks like they had a look at a Colt Commander in the end.
It's good to see they replaced your bushing too!