Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Internal or External Ejector on 1911?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="druryj" data-source="post: 3034370" data-attributes="member: 10465"><p>An excellent source for historical info on the 1911 can be found at: (<a href="http://www.sightm1911.com/1911-History.htm" target="_blank">http://www.sightm1911.com/1911-History.htm</a>) at this site, there are links to a wide variety of other sites as well as a plethora of historical info.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Its not really a problem. From my casual reading on the 1911, a lot of which is from the above site, but not really what I'd call homework, I learned that JMB designed numerous prototypes prior to the final acceptance of the pistol that was subsequently called the M1911. Some of those prototypes had external extractors and some had internal extractors. One of the early prototypes that he designed didn't even have a thumb safety, and it had an external extractor. Don't hold me to this, but I believe it is referred to as the Model 1905. There are some benefits to an external extractor; one, it isn't susceptible to clocking, as an internal extractor can be. But a pistol with an internal extractor was desired for reasons of logistics; repairs of such would be easier in the field. You don't need a special punch to remove pins on a design with an internal extractor, but you do with an external one. An internal extractor still allows one to tear it down without tools. Regardless, the pistol that was submitted and which passed the final acceptance trials, and which became known as the M1911 had an internal extractor. That pistol is the only one that can truthfully be called "The Design" of the Model 1911. All others are merely prototypes. We may be arguing semantics here, there were as I said above, numerous "designs" of the pistol that would eventually be adopted as the M1911, but <u>nothing can be called the M1911 except the one that was accepted. And that one had an internal extractor.</u></p><p></p><p>As far as magazines go, Wilson magazines, particular those in the 47 series, are also my preferred magazines. My experience has convinced me that they will reliably feed virtually any commercial or factory ammunition of the proper caliber. I completely agree that they are far better than the old GI Magazines...it does make me wonder though, what Browning would have done differently had he had he same type of ammunition we have available today. To argue that is moot; there were no hollow points back in those early days so he designed a magazine to feed ball ammo.</p><p></p><p>Folks, I didn't come here to argue over what was in JMB's mind prior to the final acceptance and naming of the pistol, I only know that he did design pistols with both types of extractors, with and without thumb safeties, and the one that was <u>accepted</u> and subsequently named as <u>the M1911</u> was the one that had an internal extractor and that is the one that counts. I don't know it all, but I do know that.</p><p></p><p>Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="druryj, post: 3034370, member: 10465"] An excellent source for historical info on the 1911 can be found at: ([URL]http://www.sightm1911.com/1911-History.htm[/URL]) at this site, there are links to a wide variety of other sites as well as a plethora of historical info. Its not really a problem. From my casual reading on the 1911, a lot of which is from the above site, but not really what I'd call homework, I learned that JMB designed numerous prototypes prior to the final acceptance of the pistol that was subsequently called the M1911. Some of those prototypes had external extractors and some had internal extractors. One of the early prototypes that he designed didn't even have a thumb safety, and it had an external extractor. Don't hold me to this, but I believe it is referred to as the Model 1905. There are some benefits to an external extractor; one, it isn't susceptible to clocking, as an internal extractor can be. But a pistol with an internal extractor was desired for reasons of logistics; repairs of such would be easier in the field. You don't need a special punch to remove pins on a design with an internal extractor, but you do with an external one. An internal extractor still allows one to tear it down without tools. Regardless, the pistol that was submitted and which passed the final acceptance trials, and which became known as the M1911 had an internal extractor. That pistol is the only one that can truthfully be called "The Design" of the Model 1911. All others are merely prototypes. We may be arguing semantics here, there were as I said above, numerous "designs" of the pistol that would eventually be adopted as the M1911, but [U]nothing can be called the M1911 except the one that was accepted. And that one had an internal extractor.[/U] As far as magazines go, Wilson magazines, particular those in the 47 series, are also my preferred magazines. My experience has convinced me that they will reliably feed virtually any commercial or factory ammunition of the proper caliber. I completely agree that they are far better than the old GI Magazines...it does make me wonder though, what Browning would have done differently had he had he same type of ammunition we have available today. To argue that is moot; there were no hollow points back in those early days so he designed a magazine to feed ball ammo. Folks, I didn't come here to argue over what was in JMB's mind prior to the final acceptance and naming of the pistol, I only know that he did design pistols with both types of extractors, with and without thumb safeties, and the one that was [U]accepted[/U] and subsequently named as [U]the M1911[/U] was the one that had an internal extractor and that is the one that counts. I don't know it all, but I do know that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Internal or External Ejector on 1911?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom