What makes a 1911 suitable for Bullseye Shooting

First topic message reminder :

I think it would be helpful if some of the more experienced shooters here were to write up a list of suggestions for someone who wants to buy a 1911 gun for Bullseye Shooting.  This could describe the most important features, and maybe include examples of suitable guns (assuming there still are guns like this being made for sale in 2017).   It might also include recommendations of which guns might be better, if they needed to be sent off to a gunsmith for more work.

mikemyers wrote:'rich.tullo', regarding a trigger job, I need to ask somewhere what a "rolling trigger" is, which is what I think people talked about earlier.  

I'm lost about that last paragraph - why would more expensive bullets have anything to do with the cost of a barrel?  

Regarding stainless vs black, is the preference because the machining, or is there some other reason?

(As for me, this sounds like an enjoyable project, and when I get back home from my upcoming trip, if I still feel then like I do now, I'll get one.  If so, I'll certainly use it as-is for a while, just to see what it's like.  If I did decide to get it modified, I would ask if Jon had time some time in the next decade to do it.)

Roll trigger refers to the shape of the sear cut in a radius versus flat. I shoot rolls because I started with a gun that had creep. Most trigger jobs are accomplished by cutting a relief angle on the sear to eliminate the creep created by the sear and hammer. Browning designed the 1911 to have #5 trigger for combat so creep was not a consideration but people discovered early on they could reduce the resistance by cutting a relief angle.  

The simplest way to explain the difference is a roll feels like a very light DA S&W revolver trigger while crisp feels like a SA revolver trigger. For a Newbie I would get a Crisp trigger job because the roll trigger job won't last if you have little habits. 

So why a roll (its a Chevy Ford Thing) I like it because I can cancel shots in slow fire. Some people like crisp because a roll feels like it takes longer for the shot to break. 


Others may have a better explanation but that is how I think about it.

Rich, hopefully I don't come off as an ass, but stick to describing what a "roll" is vs. gunsmithing. Too many assumptions on your part. I can make radiused sear roll and I can make a traditional primary\secondary angled sear roll. Safest trigger on screwed up frame pin dimensions is traditional sear because it will seat deeper into the hammer hooks and have to practically snap out of engagement. Most radiused sears require deeper hammer hooks and more sear spring pressure. Hammer follow is almost never due to pin holes being off. So don't believe everything that's told about trigger failures or how they're built. Love ya!
Jon

Jon Eulette wrote:Rich, hopefully I don't come off as an ass, but stick to describing what a "roll" is vs. gunsmithing. Too many assumptions on your part. I can make radiused sear roll and I can make a traditional primary\secondary angled sear roll. Safest trigger on screwed up frame pin dimensions is traditional sear because it will seat deeper into the hammer hooks and have to practically snap out of engagement. Most radiused sears require deeper hammer hooks and more sear spring pressure. Hammer follow is almost never due to pin holes being off. So don't believe everything that's told about trigger failures or how they're built. Love ya!
Jon

No worries , question, how do you create a roll with angles? Change the Primary?

Two things...

First, is there a video that shows what you guys are talking about regarding the trigger?  I guess I really need to get a 1911 to disassemble, and learn about all these hidden parts.

Second, regarding the Range Officer isn't the fiber optics in the front sight something that would be annoying?  For quick acquisition I'm sure it's great, but doesn't it annoy people trying to sight the gun normally?  Do people remove the fiber optics, and just fill the hole?


This video explains how the parts work, but it's hard to follow what you do to modify things...  especially for someone who's never actually seen these parts.

mikemyers wrote:I had some more free time this morning, and read everything I could find on the RO.  There is even one shop in Miami that has one (but it is sold).  They said I could come to check it out before the new owner comes to get it.

It's available in black or stainless - do people here have a preference for one over the other?

Also, the front sight is fiber optic.  How much of an annoyance is that for Bullseye shooting?  I think it's great for picking up a target quickly, but detracts from the ability to align the sights?

It's a very nice looking gun, and amazingly I haven't found anything negative written about it in all the internet discussion areas.  

I think you can just get a plain old RO. The fiber optic is geared toward action shooters.
http://www.springfield-armory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/PI9128LP1.pdf

I just went back to their website - they show the Stainless one with fiber optic, but the black one like you showed up above.  I didn't notice that they had different front sights.

mikemyers wrote:Two things...

First, is there a video that shows what you guys are talking about regarding the trigger?  I guess I really need to get a 1911 to disassemble, and learn about all these hidden parts.

http://tonybrong.blogspot.com/2014/02/tear-down-frame.html -- Upper and lower disassembly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHviEIkZWhA -- Okay (but not great) animation of the fire control components in action.

I would not mess with it until you shoot a couple of hundred rounds through it to break in. 

Then send it Bunker, KC Crawford, Jon, or David Sams for a trigger job and new bushing. I can almost guarantee the gun will shoot 3 inches or better at 50 yards. That will take you to expert level averaging 90% scores.

Get the black front sight , fiber not EIC legal....yet....

I started this sport with a S&W Model 41 (22) iron sight no dot. I only shot the 22 agg of two or three local 2700's just to try the sport. I already had the M41 so I wasn't dumping money into a new sport just yet. I was shooting fairly well and loved the game and decided if I was gonna continue and get classified then I'd want to do it based on an average with the 45. 

I asked around "what's the best way to get into a "starter" 45?" Everyone seemed to agree that the Springfield Armory Range Officer was the ticket. Some said a Les Baer but that was out of my budgets reach. And at around $800 for a Range Officer there's room to modify later when you feel something better is needed. 

So Range Officer I bought and shot. And not long after I decided I wanted to shoot red dots and I wanted a professionally worked on 45. But again my budget is not what I'd like it to be. My Range Officer was turned into a dedicated lower for a Nelson I bought, and I needed a new 45. 

I bought a Springfield Armory Mil Spec and sent it to Jon having never shot it. Along with the gun I sent a Marvel Scope Mount or scope base. I removed the sights and barrel and did my own rookie trigger job and sent it off to be reborn. 

A new barrel, barrel Bushing, slide atop pin, barrel link, and barrel link pin were all fitted and installed. The gun was adjusted for reliability and function. Also the frame rails were welded up and recut and the slide was re fitted. 

The gun and everything I had done to it cost me not quite $2000. Jon said it was one of the tightest Mil specs he's done. Capable of shooting winning scores with the right shooter. I was pleased. And I was where I needed to be on spending. 

What's critical in the 45, what's needed for and demanded of these pistols at 50 yards is hard to buy factory unless it's an expensive gun from Accuracy X or Cabot. The better buy is a used wad gun, or having a base gun accurized. And a range officer is a terrific starting place for any shooter.

rich.tullo wrote:Get the black front sight , fiber not EIC legal....yet....

they are legal check the 2017 CMP rule book

Tim, I wanted to see the scope base - found it here:
http://www.marvelcustomguns.com/1911_slide_mount_scope_bases.htm

What effect does it have on the functioning of the gun, when you add the weight of the scope base and a red dot sight up on top?

Mike, depending on the dot weight you need to install a lighter recoil spring, usually 10-11 pounds then reload for proper function. My 45's with full rails and heavy Aimpoint 9000SC's use 10 pound springs. My RRA can cycle with lighter loads than the custom pistol Jon built.

mikemyers wrote:Tim, I wanted to see the scope base - found it here:
http://www.marvelcustomguns.com/1911_slide_mount_scope_bases.htm

What effect does it have on the functioning of the gun, when you add the weight of the scope base and a red dot sight up on top?

I've never liked the idea of the sights being separate from the slide. I know it's been proven they work fine but it's unsettling to me. There is (I'm told) a difference in felt recoil frame mount vs slide mount. My choice is based on how I wanted the gun to function and feel. A heavier, slower moving slide can dampen the recoil from what I understand. If I'm wrong someone please speak up. And I'm a small guy and don't care for recoil so a soft shooting gun is what I wanted most of all and buddy this gun is a soft shooter for sure with light loads. Even with 4.0 it's a baby. You do have to run lighter recoil springs but the spring has still got to be enough to reliably chamber the next round.

Tim:H11 wrote:A heavier, slower moving slide can dampen the recoil from what I understand. If I'm wrong someone please speak up. And I'm a small guy and don't care for recoil so a soft shooting gun is what I wanted most of all and buddy this gun is a soft shooter for sure with light loads. 

Tim I don't think there is an easy answer in the slide verses frame mount and the soft recoil debate.  Jerry Keefer is spending quite a bit of time developing an extremely soft shooting frame mount gun for a lady shooter that has an injury.  He is doing it with fast twist barrels capable of shooting very accurate light loads and lightened slides that reduce reciprocating mass while maintaining slide speed needed to function.
- Dave

If you want to use really soft shooting loads, frame mount is the way to go.  Just review some of Keefer's recent posts on the subject.  A frame mount will generally give you the wider range of otions for loads and recoil spring set ups.  

CR

dronning wrote:

Tim:H11 wrote:A heavier, slower moving slide can dampen the recoil from what I understand. If I'm wrong someone please speak up. And I'm a small guy and don't care for recoil so a soft shooting gun is what I wanted most of all and buddy this gun is a soft shooter for sure with light loads. 

Tim I don't think there is an easy answer in the slide verses frame mount and the soft recoil debate.  Jerry Keefer is spending quite a bit of time developing an extremely soft shooting frame mount gun for a lady shooter that has an injury.  He is doing it with fast twist barrels capable of shooting very accurate light loads and lightened slides that reduce reciprocating mass while maintaining slide speed needed to function.
- Dave

I did hear about that. That's some interesting work he's doing. The way one shooter mentioned it to me was that there's not necessarily a whole lot deifference in felt recoil between one or the other but it's a preference in how they feel. And in the end I prefer the idea that the sights are mounted to the slide. Keeps it convertible if I want too. I like the feel of it. The way it functions. Just works for me. But I think the cookie cutter reason is people will say it helps slow the slide down. With the way Jon fit the barrel the extra weight isn't really necessary but I like it.

I think the Ford/Chevy debate is doing a disservice to a new shooter (Slide/Frame mount, Crisp/Roll trigger) There are advantages and disadvantages to both types. I personally like Slide/Roll but that is after trying both and selecting what I thought was best for me. And Yes I've owned both Ford and Chevy too. I understand the OP asked to be informed but I suggest trying both. I'm sure there are members of his club that would be willing to let a new shooter try their gun. The Trigger is not as expensive to change so selecting Frame/slide mount by trying a few 1911's that friends at the club are willing to allow him to test fire is his best option and least expensive. Of the two mounts a solid frame mount is more expensive to add to the gun than the slide mount but if one of the older grip mounts can be found on something like ebay or in the for sale section of the forum it will be a good inexpensive way to test it. Keeping in mind the one I tried came loose after a short time. However the shooter should keep in mind that the finial selection will depend on personal preference and that our suggestions are simply nothing more that what each of us selected and what the advantages and disadvantages of each type are.

Just an update on what makes a 1911 suitable. I decided to shoot my "stock" Range Officer in last weeks 2700. It has never been to a gunsmith. I gave it a trigger job with my Power jig and mounted a dot on it. So not really 100% stock, but except for the dot and rail no new parts. I had shot it in practice a lot but never in a match. I shot it because I wanted to try reduced loads and my GC was way to tight for the load (3.8gr BE and 185gr LSWC). I had a less then wonderful SF but figured out I needed to grip harder and shot a 281 NMC. Not Master scores but not too shabby either coming off heart surgery. TF was just ok but RF was fun. Shot a 197-4. 
 I guess my point is that it really doesn't take much to be suitable for Bullseye. Not if your shooting to have fun. A trigger you don't need to fight, sights that you can focus on (steel or dot) and a bullet that mostly goes where you call it. When you get great then get a great pistol. YMMV

Len

Tim: wrote:

I did hear about that. That's some interesting work he's doing. The way one shooter mentioned it to me was that there's not necessarily a whole lot deifference in felt recoil between one or the other but it's a preference in how they feel. And in the end I prefer the idea that the sights are mounted to the slide. Keeps it convertible if I want too. I like the feel of it. The way it functions. Just works for me. But I think the cookie cutter reason is people will say it helps slow the slide down. With the way Jon fit the barrel the extra weight isn't really necessary but I like it.

With loads of 2.9 BE for a 180, the recoil will be less even with lightened slide and frame mount. It takes more energy to start the heavier slide into motion and the heavier slide will want to continue in motion until the energy is used and the spring moves it back into battery. What Jerry seems to be doing is applying the recoil control techniques of PPC to 25 yard bullseye while still having accurate long line loads.

We've talked on here about the fact that an Aluminum mount like the Marvel and an ultradot are about the same weight as a steel rib on a gun from the 60s. Look at the popular loads of the time. I have not shot Jerry's lightened gun, though I have dry fired it  at a practice session. I have shot Jon's longslide with shortline loads of 3.5 I think and it is smooth and basically stays in the black in recoil. I have tried to get to 3.5 with the 200 in my Curtis, but to do so would take a 10 lb or lighter spring. I have a 3.9 load that shoots with 185s and 11 lbs and 200's with 3.7 and 11 lbs. It's out of the black into the 8/7 ring at 11 in recoil, but if I keep the trigger moving and control my brain, the shots break in the 10 and x rings.

The best options for a BE gun is a 1911 because you can shoot the same lower for 22lr, cf and 45acp. 

If you are shooting regularly with BE competitors keep an ear put for a good used gun a master is selling. Shoot it to try it and make sure it's reliable and still accurate.  If you shoot it and think its accurate that is one thing but if a Master shoots it and cleans a target chances are its ok. 

Many guns are good to start. Some people like Kimbers but I had one and it loosened up very fast. My first BE gun was a Citadel and it was pretty good tested 3 inches at 50 yards with an EGW bushing. However, the first gun may be the only gun you need or your backup so it makes sense to get a decent base gun. 

Generally, you will want a series 70 trigger gun because people say the trigger job comes out better.  The Springfield Range Officer is generally the best one out of the box. 

I would consider a series 70 Colt Competition, some of the first ones were series 80, The Colt I handled had an inferior slide to frame fit and barrel fit as compared to the Kimber or Range Officer. 

I have never handled one but Joe Chambers wrote a review on the Ruger 1911 and it was good. Ruger makes a Ruger Target Model and I would likely buy that over a COLT. 

If you can find one CZ made a 1911 A1 which has been discontinued and would probably make an excellent base gun. Trigger job and Red Dot and GTG they are built tight and smooth. 

STI Trojan is a very good gun out of the box but you need a Golf CUP slide mount scope or a frame mount as it has a flat top. 

A friend of mine got one of these and he says it was great out of the box. He is a master and he has good guns. I am sure Bob can accommodate you. 

 https://www.fusionfirearms.com/review/product/list/id/3686/category/251/

Buy an older Colt National Match. I bought one from 1967 and it is a great wadcutter pistol.