1911 FLGR

[hps]

Okay,, I gotta know why such the hate for the Full Length Guide Rod (FLGR) in a 1911? Can honestly say they don't bother me in the least. Is it just because JMB didnt design them this way?

 

[churchmouse]

I run them in everything.
Some say it slows the cycling down just a bit. I have zero issues with them.

 

[Peacekeeper3073]

They make disassembly and press checks tough. I put them in the same category with Shock Buffers, don't need them.

 

[churchmouse]

They make disassembly and press checks tough. I put them in the same category with Shock Buffers, don't need them.

I get the press check issue but I get around that easy enough.
1 piece rods come down really easily just pulling the slide.
All in what you like.

 

[halfmileharry]

I'm used to the full length guide rods.
I get the "keeps the spring in place" thing.
I'm neither here or there on them but I do think it's a fix to a non existing problem.

 

[churchmouse]

I'm used to the full length guide rods.
I get the "keeps the spring in place" thing.
I'm neither here or there on them but I do think it's a fix to a non existing problem.

Never seen any info on side by side tests on spring life with and with out the rod. That would be interesting but I doubt any one would make the effort.

 

[halfmileharry]

Never seen any info on side by side tests on spring life with and with out the rod. That would be interesting but I doubt any one would make the effort.

I read years ago the FLGR kept the spring from binding. I don't remember where.
I do have a tendency to buy 1911s with the full length rod. Unless it's a collectors piece I usually add one.

 

[churchmouse]

I read years ago the FLGR kept the spring from binding. I don't remember where.
I do have a tendency to buy 1911s with the full length rod. Unless it's a collectors piece I usually add one.

In more than a few discussions with folks I deem knowledgeable 1 being the SA custom shop many see the FLGR as a guide for the spring. It keeps it lined up and delivers a more linear result. It keeps the spring in check. Is this true, I think there is merit to this. JMHO of course. My degree in the school of hard knocks engineering agrees.

 

[88E30M50]

I've only put them in two 1911s I built. The first was a Springfield that I was just trying to do everything right, regardless of whether or not I understood what right was. It certainly didn't hurt anything by being in there though. The second was my Kimber compact. The FLGR and modified spring plug let's me run a flat wire spring that greatly extends spring life. I don't love them or hate them. The original design was probably good enough for most purposes, but there's nothing wrong with the FLGR if that's what you like. Like CM says above, there are advantages to the geometry of the spring when using a FLGR but as to whether or not it's needed is above my pay grade.

 

[churchmouse]

I've only put them in two 1911s I built. The first was a Springfield that I was just trying to do everything right, regardless of whether or not I understood what right was. It certainly didn't hurt anything by being in there though. The second was my Kimber compact. The FLGR and modified spring plug let's me run a flat wire spring that greatly extends spring life. I don't love them or hate them. The original design was probably good enough for most purposes, but there's nothing wrong with the FLGR if that's what you like. Like CM says above, there are advantages to the geometry of the spring when using a FLGR but as to whether or not it's needed is above my pay grade.

Over the original design we are now pushing these guns a lot harder then when JMB penned this design.
Metallurgy and tighter tolerances leave us free to load them up for bear. Any and every thing I can do to keep things happy is OK by me.

 

[88E30M50]

Over the original design we are now pushing these guns a lot harder then when JMB penned this design.
Metallurgy and tighter tolerances leave us free to load them up for bear. Any and every thing I can do to keep things happy is OK by me.

Makes sense to me.

 

[halfmileharry]

Over the original design we are now pushing these guns a lot harder then when JMB penned this design.
Metallurgy and tighter tolerances leave us free to load them up for bear. Any and every thing I can do to keep things happy is OK by me.

Sure as heck sounds good in theory.

 

[churchmouse]

Makes sense to me.

You being an aircraft mechanic in a previous life and my racing experience has this making some sense to me. A battle accurate 1942 Colt (I have one) running military ball of the day I doubt you could even tell the difference. Not that I could tell in any of my customs but as we are discussing this I see an experiment in my near future. Can I tell the difference in the same gun running the the FLGR for a few mags and then putting a standard 1911 recoil system in it and repeating.
Need to set a base line somehow.

 

[88E30M50]

There's a huge difference in feel in my Kimber with the FLGR and flat wire spring, but I think the difference is in the spring feel. Actually, IIRC, the original recoil setup in the Kimber was a captured FLGR and spring, so forget what I just said. I like the idea of testing, but am not too sure of how to go about it with this one since it would be very subjective. With the problem child CZ, it is easy to test. Does it work now? Must be better then. Since all of the 1911s are reliable already, the testing at my end would be strictly in feel. But, I'm always up for an excuse to shoot more .45, so I'm all for trying to test a FLGR.

 

[churchmouse]

There's a huge difference in feel in my Kimber with the FLGR and flat wire spring, but I think the difference is in the spring feel. Actually, IIRC, the original recoil setup in the Kimber was a captured FLGR and spring, so forget what I just said. I like the idea of testing, but am not too sure of how to go about it with this one since it would be very subjective. With the problem child CZ, it is easy to test. Does it work now? Must be better then. Since all of the 1911s are reliable already, the testing at my end would be strictly in feel. But, I'm always up for an excuse to shoot more .45, so I'm all for trying to test a FLGR.

Having 2 individuals shoot the same gun with the parts listed would be even more subjective I believe.
Hhhhhmmmmm.....sounds like a good excuse for an early morning MCFG meet up to me.
I love doing a non-scientific churchmouse experiment.

 

[88E30M50]

Sounds like a plan. I'll start looking for parts to swap into one of the 1911 for the experiment. Right now, I'm thinking that from my side, the CZ 1911A1 would be a good test subject. It's been perfectly reliable in close to 2000 rounds, and the gun has a distinct feel to it. I should be able to feel a difference if there is one. Are we going to just test FLGRs or can we add in flat wire springs too?

 

[churchmouse]

Sounds like a plan. I'll start looking for parts to swap into one of the 1911 for the experiment. Right now, I'm thinking that from my side, the CZ 1911A1 would be a good test subject. It's been perfectly reliable in close to 2000 rounds, and the gun has a distinct feel to it. I should be able to feel a difference if there is one. Are we going to just test FLGRs or can we add in flat wire springs too?

Anything you want to try.
I have 2 loadeds that are pretty close in feel. I will put the standard lug/spring combo in one (I have 20 or more in the parts bins) and leave the FLGR in the other. Base line both guns and then swap the parts between the 2 and run them again. We both shoot all of them and list our findings.

 

[churchmouse]

Another point....we need to base line ammo. Same same through out.

 

[88E30M50]

That would work

 

[88E30M50]

I'll bring along both the CZ 1911A1 and the DW Heritage. We could swap parts out midway through the test to see if there's any differences to be felt.