barrel bushing or not

my question is what are the advantages and disadvantages of slide with barrel bushing verses slide without bushing as in the springfield RO verses the TRP model?

I personally wouldn't waste my money on a cone. Quite a few reasons for that opinion. (1) I don't know of any top BE shooter using it, (2) AMU tested it and don't use it (3) Seeing how it's made tells me it will cause vertical stringing do to barrel springing (4) my son Adam won a decked out Infinity with the cone not the bushing, never did shoot great group, had it redone bushing installed and now it shoots great! (5) a taper is a very ridged mount, used on lathes, milling machines and other machinery to accurately locate tools. There is no way it can pivot a requirement needed in 1911 type guns!

Joe Chambers uses them in his  bullseye guns with great success, and they have set records and are in the hands of some great shooters. All his guns shoot sub 1.5 in groups some sub 1'' so its  not in the part but the way its installed I guess. There is a reason why you don't see certain guns in the hands of the best civilian (or retired military) shooters and it has very little to do with the gun, its the money paid to these shooters by big buck companies that control what they shoot.

I know a few of the heavy hitters, most get nothing! Some are given a gun yet they might not shoot the gun! I was at the AMU trailer at Perry. A few were there griping to each other (Not AMU Shooters, it's a kind of gathering place for top shooters) They had team shirts and were on a Gun Company team and given the guns too. I asked why they were complaining? The company wanted them to shoot the company guns in the team match, I said why the problem?? Was told the dam things will not shoot! Talked to another heavy hitter, won quite a bit at Perry. He said I will take a gun from anyone willing to give it to me, will sell them but will not shoot it!
 However I will not use names, simply said do not believe every thing you read! I have seen many claims, know those that purchased the gun that came with test target but could never duplicate the group. As my son Adam said, "Everyone can make a gun that will shoot a great group on a test target one time, making the gun that will do it every time is the hard part" But I can talk about my guns! I have a Fieinwerkbau AW-93 that came with a test target. I can't duplicate it! tried all different brands of top of the line target ammo, shoots good, 1.5" at 50 yards but not great! The top AMU smith thinks the recoil spring is too light! I'm trying to find another! Purchased every spring kit Brownells had but none are what I need! Got one from McMaster Carr, almost is good, I have to test it but it completely compresses and the slide will not go about 1/8" all the way back!

Maybe all don't gest "cash" and maybe no-one will admit getting paid but I personally know there is money paid by sponsors and the guns they provided were used. (on the Nationals level) In nascar you wouldn't expect Jeff Gordon to drive your car for nothing and it doesn't happen here either

Froneck wrote:I personally wouldn't waste my money on a cone. Quite a few reasons for that opinion. (1) I don't know of any top BE shooter using it, (2) AMU tested it and don't use it (3) Seeing how it's made tells me it will cause vertical stringing do to barrel springing (4) my son Adam won a decked out Infinity with the cone not the bushing, never did shoot great group, had it redone bushing installed and now it shoots great! (5) a taper is a very ridged mount, used on lathes, milling machines and other machinery to accurately locate tools. There is no way it can pivot a requirement needed in 1911 type guns!

Frank,
What are you smoking..???
No one has higher regard for the AMU than I...but, just because they aren't shooting cones, does not mean the cone is not a very viable option.. I have been doing this for a looooong time.. I really had the bushing thing figured out.. and was super reluctant to change.. Joe Chambers and Chuck Warner influenced me to use the cone, as one step toward reducing recoil  when my shooter was injured.. I will never install another bushing.. That's how good the cone is.. As with all things.. It has to be done correctly.. It's not basic machine shop 101. The barrel in the picture has bottom lugs you describe as incorrect...  The link is what it is... In the other posts you are juggling link length to adjust groups..??? The groups are from coned barrels.. The Perry target is short line RF, and there are several more cleans from Perry, and Canton.. That gun has been winning a whole lot more that it loses..    
Coned barrel

Coned barrel

Coned barrel

Jerry,

two questions:

1. How does the coned barrel work in reducing recoil?  Is it the added mass, or ?
2. What are you calling "incorrect" (based on Froneck ideology) lugs in your photo...the no contact on them with a sharp radius prior to the slide-stop/lock up area?  If so, doing what you do seems smart as it means wear is confined to the very inexpensive link. ???

-Ron

r_zerr wrote:Jerry,

two questions:

1. How does the coned barrel work in reducing recoil?  Is it the added mass, or ?
2. What are you calling "incorrect" (based on Froneck ideology) lugs in your photo...the no contact on them with a sharp radius prior to the slide-stop/lock up area?  If so, doing what you do seems smart as it means wear is confined to the very inexpensive link. ???

-Ron

Yes, the extra weight/mass slows the barrels reaction.  But, I said one step in that direction.. The cone alone would be barely noticeable. The lower lug has a long contact area..footprint..  A plus when pursuing accuracy..The two pin centerlines...The slide stop pin and the link pin control the link size.. I do not egg out the slide stop holes. In my opinion, the link should be completely free and neutral, when in battery, and exert force only when pulling the barrel out of battery.

I always asked myself why would I want to have the lugs in, or near contacting the slide stop when in the unlocked position, and your explanation of the egged-out hole in the frame is something that I had not considered....just let the link do its job with no other points of contact or friction added, until lock-up, when all pressure is removed from the link.  Makes sense, thanks.

-Ron

+1 on Jerry's response.

I've encountered many pistols with little to no bearing surface on the bottom barrel lugs. They always recoil much more and typically shoot horrible from hand than a pistol with a longer lockup/bearing surface. I think more gunsmiths make an error fitting the link than they realize. Proper link fit is crucial to consistent accuracy.
Jon

thanks for all you thoughts, so from what I hear both will shoot good if done right for me I still on the fence, what or how hard is it or what due you have to have done to a TRP to make it a bullesye gun I am thinking of one with red dot mount on the rail system.

Deerspy,

As far as a BONE STOCK TRP goes, I'm not aware of anyone who has done 50 yard testing of one in a ransom rest.  See the other threads about Springfield Range officers, Loaded Targets, and Trophy matches that we have tested stock under 3" groups.  You would be travelling in unknown territory about where the TRP will deliver without being accurized.

There are scores of Bullseye gunsmiths that I would trust to accurize a Springfield with a bushing type barrel.

There are 2 or 3 that I would trust to accurize a cone barreled gun.  One of them isn't taking new customers, the other has a 2+year waiting list.  The 3rd I haven't asked about the topic.

I'm guessing to get that TRP setup accurized, you are going to be near $3000 invested.

As far as your thoughts of mounting a red dot on the built-in rail in front of the trigger guard, the mounts that do that haven't impressed me.  Since the barrel work is extremely specialized, and the gun would have to be at the gunsmith anyway, you might as well have a proper mount installed by the gunsmith.

So since the TRP is over double the price of other Springfields with bushing-type barrels, and accurizing the gun and installing a proper optic mount would be much more problematic, I would not recommend it for a bullseye gun.  It might be a fun gun for other uses, but have your wallet and patience ready if you want to have it built as a bullseye gun.

Jerry I don't know that lower lug I described as incorrect! The lower lug I see in the photo is exactly like I make mine! Possibly with very close examination of that lower lug it may not be exactly the same but dam near! The lower lug I say that is NO Good is the type that has a large radius. The type I seen on youtube being done on that fixture that guy is selling. Hand feeding in the climb mill direction to boot! To me that was a perfect example of how not to cut the lower lug!!! The lower lug I see in your photo has a small radius and will provide a smooth transition in and out to the lugs! No bump or lug rounding!
 The target shot at Perry is not impressive to me. I aced rapid fire at Perry with my Ball Gun when Jimmy Clark put a roll trigger job on it. I've shot 100-10X a few times. My son Adam has Aced the entire short line in quite a few matches. Plus a few 50 yard targets too! All with a bushing type gun.
 As to the cone or taper, how can you accomplish pivoting the barrel in and out of the locking lugs? Failure to pivot is a problem with the bushing if it's not done right. In some other photos I think were yours I seen you inserted a piece in the end of the slide and bored it to fit, what the difference between that and a bushing? Do you double bore the mating taper or is it somewhat like the typical bushing?
 As far as machine shop 101 I can assure you I'm well beyond that. If I were to bore that slide I would do it on Jig Borer using a Tree taper boring head with the slide mounted on a sine plate! I can repeat the accuracy on every slide done to with in .0001"

Didn't imply that the target was impressive.. I meant that the gun will shoot cleans all day long.. That target and many more like was shot by a girl..who is breaking 2600 on a regular basis.. If you can not see the advantage of a precisely fit cone as an advanced machinist, I can't help you..

Froneck wrote: The target shot at Perry is not impressive to me. I aced rapid fire at Perry with my Ball Gun when Jimmy Clark put a roll trigger job on it. I've shot 100-10X a few times. My son Adam has Aced the entire short line in quite a few matches. Plus a few 50 yard targets too! All with a bushing type gun.
 As to the cone or taper, how can you accomplish pivoting the barrel in and out of the locking lugs? Failure to pivot is a problem with the bushing if it's not done right. In some other photos I think were yours I seen you inserted a piece in the end of the slide and bored it to fit, what the difference between that and a bushing? Do you double bore the mating taper or is it somewhat like the typical bushing?
 As far as machine shop 101 I can assure you I'm well beyond that. If I were to bore that slide I would do it on Jig Borer using a Tree taper boring head with the slide mounted on a sine plate! I can repeat the accuracy on every slide done to with in .0001"

Froneck,
You said in an earlier post that you are planning on getting back to shooting.
Be careful not to hurt your shooting arm by patting yourself on the back so often.

To the other Members,
I wouldn't call Froneck out like that in front of all of you if I hadn't already done it in private.

Froneck,
dial your high-horse down a few notches.  Last warning.

All I can say is the trigger shoe he made for me is fantastic and will be ordering another

Thanks Frank ;

Clarence

I don't doubt your guns are good shooting guns, I'm sure they are! You think the cone is best, I don't!
 I do understand the tapered alignment but don't think the added expense doing it provides a great advantage. As far as I know Cabot guns are bushing too!

 As to padding myself on the back, I don't think so! I have scored and seen quite a few targets at Perry and hundreds of other matches. Aced targets are normal! My point was to be that is wasn't anything outstanding! Anyone can do it including me!

Froneck wrote:I don't doubt your guns are good shooting guns, I'm sure they are! You think the cone is best, I don't!
 I do understand the tapered alignment but don't think the added expense doing it provides a great advantage. As far as I know Cabot guns are bushing too!

 As to padding myself on the back, I don't think so! I have scored and seen quite a few targets at Perry and hundreds of other matches. Aced targets are normal! My point was to be that is wasn't anything outstanding! Anyone can do it including me!

The. Cone does not lock up on the taper. The taper provides the clearance to smoothly cycle. The lock up  is provided by a precise straight section that is machined or ground to the slide ID.

Am I correct in thinking the taper guides the barrel into the straight section that is ground or bored into the slide at the same angle the barrel is when locked up in the lugs ? If so then I understand the concept. Thinking it was taper into a tapered hole, that there would be quite a bit of stress load causing lower lug, slide stop pin and taper wear and eventually bigger groups.
 I want to be clear in that I'm not putting down your friends shooting skills! That is a fine target. I hope she continues and becomes High Master if she hasn't yet. My point was that it did not support the cone method since bushing guns do as well. On the other hand I'm quite impressed with the 50 yard group!
 As far as the lower lug, I spray weld with Carbide and diamond grind the surface to something very similar to what you have in your photo. The flat area is ground with a 1 degree taper. I then I service hard chrome the slide stop pin and grind it too. Diamond lap the two for a perfect fit. Local company that did the hard chrome plating closed so I purchased a kit to do it and the power supply. About all I did was read the book that came with it! Another project on my pile!

All I can say is this is a very interesting topic and I thank all of the knowledge that all the smiths have given, there are many paths to a clean target and many ways to build a accurate 1911. I think at times we all get passionate about what we do and sometimes typing words don't express things as we want them too.

thanks for all the comments on bushing verses cone I think for my next new gun I will stick with the bushing but still want to try the rail on front of frame to mount red dot on, theres something in my head that just won,t let that ideal go away. but my money is tight might have to sell something to fund this project.

This is a good reminder that as gunsmiths we need to be open minded. Perfect example is Bob Marvel's disconnecter rail cut. Definitely thinking outside the box!  I put it up there with sliced bread :p)
Jon

Rail on frame or slide mount, it's like which is better Ford or Chevy! I've tried both and use slide mount. AMU was Frame then went to Slide, back to Frame and currently most AMU shooters have Slide mount new large Aimpoint Red 2moa dot scope.The micros have been replaced. When you think about it the barrel is connected mostly to the slide and loosely attached to the link and pushed up buy the slide stop pin mounted in the frame. Other than being in contact with the slide stop pin pushing the barrel up into the slide the barrel makes no contact with the frame when in the closed position.
 That is why being a slide mount user I test the gun in the ransome rest but adjust every shot so that the sights (red dot) is in the center of the bull. I test it as it is shot rather than allow the fixed frame location.
 Forgive me for using the AMU as the Gold standard to compare, but they are the best shooters in the country at this time, having deep pockets to test just about everything used in competitive shooting.

 To clear up another point, I have never said or implied that group size can be determined by the link. When ever the link in use the bullet is well out of the barrel. The sole purpose of the link in to pull the barrel out of the top lugs.

Frank

Jerry,

I was intrigued with your coned barrel idea so I tried it. 

I am impressed with it on a couple of levels.  I like the way/apparent ease in fitting compared to the gyrations with a bushing, as well as the weighting.  The "clean" front end is kind of unique also. Seems to shoot well, and I think that it will last longer with less wear than the bushing....and I don't need a bushing wrench.

thanks for the idea.

-Ron