I have a SA1911 Loaded in stainless. I noticed the other day that the slide is about a 1/16" of an inch forward of the frame, you can see the frame rails in the gun. I didn't notice this until lately, and have no idea if the gun came like this (I bought it new and I have about 2k rounds through it now). Is this because of normal wear and tear? Do I need a new recoil spring? Would a Wilson Shok Buff fix this? I am contemplating bring the gun in to EGW for some work. But before I spend a lot of money, I want to know if my gun is OK.
Oh yeah, I also on ocassion have a tough time swithcing the safety up. It doesnt happen often, actually rarely, but sometines I have to fiddle with the safety to get it to engage. Are these problems possibly related?
Either the upper lugs in the slide or the upper barrel lugs were cut out of spec... maybe both (tolerance stacking).
Maybe the link is too short (just guessing, maybe its not locking up right)
Or maybe the slide was cut off a tad short. (the extractor is sticking out about that much too)
Take it apart and inspect the lugs in the slide and on the barrel, the link and pin... see if you see anything else that looks "out of place".
When the lugs are cut, it is common to have the slide not match perfectly with the frame. The smith just contours the back of the frame before the gun gets blued or hard chromed. Since your gun is stainless, you could contour the frame yourself and simply polish the end result.
It is a good idea to check the lug engagement, but I seriously doubt if there is a problem.
Please consider all that's been said. What allows the slide to go forward or more correctly what sets the relationship of the slide to frame? Two things, one the barrel lower lug is stopped by the slide stop pin, and since you're not sure, check that the lower lug feet stop is not peened back, if not great. Second the upper lug engagement should not be what stops the slide, it's the hood that should do that, but to be clear if the hood were cut .020" short or more the upper lugs would stop it then as the slide lug recesses are about .020" wider than the barrel lugs. To check if the hood is over cut put shims between the breech face and hood extension until the barrel won't go up into battery and that will give you an idea of how much or if. Normal would be .001"-.005". If all proves out blend the frame and slide with file and sand paper and bead blast. Or send to SA.
The slide does appear to be forward more than it should be and the reason for it should be understood. I'd like to see what the barrel lower lug looks like in a side view. The mark on the top of the barrel is not necessarily a sign of a problem and can be polished off shoe shine method with 320 grit +- until you like it, just don't lower the first lug recess.
Am gettin' the feelin' that the TS is probably okay, but the barrel link may be too long. Let's wait and see what log comes up with. He's been doin' this stuff for a LOT longer than I have.
Quote:
TI'd like to see what the barrel lower lug looks like in a side view.
Here ya go, looks all normal to me, no peening or abnormal wear.
Quote:
...but the barrel link may be too long...
How do you see this as a contributing factor?
Quote:
How do you see this as a contributing factor?
Here was my train of thought.
He suggested four problems: (A) periodic TS resistance, (B) the ejector being so far out the back of the slide, (C) the slide overhanging the frame, and (D) some sort of resistance when he cycles the slide, apparently evidenced by heavy scuffing on the front of the hood.
(A) The periodic TS resistance might have been the result of an internal problem, or a more benign thing such as the slide notch being too far forward or the TS's edge not being mated well with the plunger pin. Through testing, he confirmed that the TS is blocking the sear properly, so although we don't know yet for sure what's causing the interference with the TS, it's likely going to be something benign that can be narrowed down and dealt with later. That got us as far as possible for now with problem (A).
(B) As for the ejector, I just wanted to make sure that the FP stop was still in the gun, in the proper position, and holding the extractor well. Through testing, he verified that the ejector being so far out of the back of the slide is probably just a purely cosmetic issue, and that can also be dealt with later. That got us as far as possible for now with problem (B).
The slide overhanging the frame (C) and the heavy scuffing on the hood (D) may be purely cosmetic issues, or they may indicate that there's a problem inside the gun. The OP just noticed it so we don't know if the gun ran fine with it in that state or not. So, I defaulted to the generality that factory guns are often built with wider tolerances to allow for ease of assembly. That generality is an assumption with regard to this specific pistol, but if correct it could mean that the horizontal face of the lower lugs and the front vertical face of the feet were cut with so much margin that the slide sits too far forward. And with a link long enough for the gun to work, the gun may be taking too long to unlock, which I think would account for the heavy scuffs on the hood.
If that's the case, though, he can't just go to a shorter link because it would break in short order with the feet not being in contact to stop the slide as it returns to battery.
Geez guys, I really am thankful for all the time and thought you put into my problem. So I am relieved that through my checks, the gun seems to function just fine. But like Jon said, the scuffs on the barrel hood may be a sign of something out of spec. So, I am going to call Springfield on Monday and see what they can do. Since I bought this pistol brand new, I think Springfield will make good. BUT, it is also about 6 years old with around 2k rounds through it. So they may say that it is just normal wear and tear. But whatever they say, I will keep you informed so everyone can find out what exactly the issue is!
The lower barrel lug looks normal. Given the fact that the extractor is sticking so far out the back of the slide I'm going to say the rear face of the slide is out of spec. Notice that the amount the extractor is exposed is close to the same amount as the frame rail overhang. Normally this issue is caused by the lower barrel lugs being overcut, but in your case it would've been obvious given how far foward the slide sits. I see the thumb safety notch is also cut a bit far forward as well, but a possible explanation might be that they index off the back of the slide when the notch is cut. That last part is just a guess, however.
Quote:
...is it possible the lower lugs on the barrel were under cut? This is all
just wild speculation.
Hmmm. If the lower lugs are UNDERcut (not cut far enough), wouldn't that leave the slide too far BACK on the frame?
I see the thumb safety notch is also cut a bit far forward as well, but a possible explanation might be that they index off the back of the slide when the notch is cut. That last part is just a guess, however.
Interesting idea! Because the TS notch is forward as much as the rear of the slide, I'd assumed that automatically meant that the whole slide was too far forward. Interesting idea about the possibility of having indexed off the rear of the slide for the TS notch. Seems like the extractor sticking out just that much flies in the face of that though - seems like they'd have to locate the slot for the FP stop after they located and cut the rear of the slide, or the metal in between them would be too thin. (With me?) So, if the FP slot is in the right place relative to the back of the slide, then the extractor wouldn't be sticking out like that. Make sense?
Hi Jon, your thoughts are fine, albeit maybe over thought out, as if all evidence points to the problem. It may, I don't know. I was questioning the long link in regards to the slide position and see you where thinking of the scuff which I consider normal in a gun like this, but you're right IF the link was too long it could contribute to the scuff.
So, why do barrels scuff on top of the chamber area? The barrel un-locked should be parallel to the slide one would think. The cause by far is since the barrel is belled at the muzzle and when the slide comes back the area where the barrel is reduced allows the barrel to drop a little past parallel in the bushing and the consequence is the scuff, the top of the chamber can be finished with a 1 degree slope beginning with the top of the first lug recess corner to the hood. Problem is the marking may be obliterated as the barrel maker rarely does this and is left to the fitter.
I curiously noticed Schuemann barrels didn't seem to scuff as much and realized that since he doesn't reduce the barrel diameter behind the muzzle, (so it could be threaded for a comp), the barrel doesn't drop in front and therefore doesn't drag the chamber in the slide. No matter pretty normal and some worse than others.
The OP's concern over the position of the slide to frame is valid in my opinion and more than cosmetic as the the safety notch indicates, which should be located 2.095" from the apex of the relief cut to the breech face.
Well, after about 3 weeks or so, I got my gun back from Springfield. Turns out that the slide being forward of the frame is only a cosmetic issue. The Springfield tech replaced the sear, ambi-safety, and adjusted the sear spring. That's basically all they did and the gun runs great now. The trigger pull is crisp and breaks at about 4.5lbs, which is perfect for me. The wear marks on the barrel are normal according to Springfield. They offered to blend the rear of the frame and slide at the custom shop for $100, but I declined because if it is only cometic it doesn't bother me that much. I am happy that I got the gun back in spec now, and look forward to sending a lot of lead down range.