[Dane Burns]

Shay brought this up..but I think it deserves a new thead.

I mentioned how well my parts gun shot. Shay thought I was too humble. The connotation was it took a good shooter. Some of that is true..and I am seldom humble :grin:

But most peopel don't realize just how good a quality hand gun can make you look.

A 1911 in particular set up right will make an ametuer look credible. I have seen it over and over in classes. Ask someone to put a mag through the same bullet hole at 7 yards. What they can't come close to with their own guns they easily do with one of mine! It isn't always just the shooter. A better gun will make you a better shooter at any level. That is not a sales pitch or gun writer hype. It is fact.

What many don't realize is that many can out shoot a factory handgun. Not because they aren't accurate but because they are not user friendly enough to achieve the accuracy potential in the handgun. Compare a Glock and a 1911. Which is easier to shoot well? Or a HP for that matter. Try the single action pull on a Smith revolver and then try the same double action.

Just some food for thought :grin:

 

[Eugene D. Goodwin]

Once again, absolute truth...

Everyone I let shoot my Wilson MP shoots better with it than any other, and so do I.

I can only imagine what a full custom will do for me, specially one in 9x23. :grin:

which is one of the reasons, of many, I'm switching from alot of factory guns to nothing but quality, custom/semi-custom jobs. They are most certainly worth it without question.

Anyone want to buy a Para or two? :roll:

 

[RAD]

Well, I know that I shoot 1911s better than anything else, and I believe it is due primarily to the trigger pull (and the ergonomics, which seem to fit me). Not surprisingly, the 1911 I shoot best is also my best 1911.

But at what point to we cross the line between custom work or options that improve the function in some fashion, and custom work or options that are primarily cosmetic?

I like to look at pretty 1911s - engraving, damascus slides and whatnot. And I can even understand that it is OK to have some pretty (albeit surperfluous) things done to a gun just "because." I remember seeing pictures of what I think is one of Clint Smith's guns, engraving and all, and the story said that he used it as a daily carry gun.

But as a consumer, rather than an admirer, I want to know "why" something is done. For example, take work done on the front strap - checkering (at 20 or 30) vs. serrations vs. scallops vs. skateboard tape. The "why" is clear - as an aid to gripping the firearm. How it is accomplished becomes a matter of taste.

But what about some of the other work that 'smiths do and other options. Bushing vs. bushingless barrels. FLGR or not. Triggers with holes vs. solid ones. One type of steel for a part vs. another. Cast v. MIM v. barstock for any particular part. Why do we do the things we do? :smile:

 

[John Lawson]

You hit it on trigger pull and trigger type.
If the barrel re-aligns with the sights consistently...and the slide can clang like a cow bell, provided it does not disturb sight plane vs barrel c/l...it only remains for a light trigger pull without backlash to be fitted. The best trigger for general use in a 1911 is a DLASK. (I have fitted up many, many thousands and have found that the Dlask is the ONLY ONE that works for most of the shooters I have known. Some, however, still benefit from a different style.) If you fit a Dlask up properly, the reasons will be self-evident. When you run into a pistolsmith who does not like the Dlask, you have found a pistolsmith who should have been better trained, has never had to train teh "basket case shooters" and one who probably uses the "Weaver Stance" for most of his shooting. THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF SHOOTING STYLES. Become familiar with them and figure out what kind of fittings would benefit eash shooter.
You need a lightweight trigger to keep from tripping the sear by the trigger's inertia. I use a f9our blade Clark sear spring, properly adjusted for the pistol.
For nearly a century Colt has a superior frame, then for absolutely no valid engineering reason they began cutting a flat on top of the front strap. Witness what this does to the fit of a one piece neoprene grip. How do you like the mushy feel at the frontstrap top? Me neither! And some folks felt that a very high grip safety benefitted them. Well, everything boils down to fitting an individual customer, not pushing one's own prejudices. FIT YOUR SHOOTER and forget the bleating of non-technical types who will tell you all of the answers without knowing the questions.
I once detected a bad habit that Mas Ayoob had developed and built him a pistol that FORCED him to change to a pattern of shooting that allowed him to win many matches (he even used it to place in the top ten internationally. Would have been #3, but his foot slipped on one changeover)and, strangely, everyone he loaned the pistol to did better, and won the match they had borrowed the gun to shoot! iT ISN'T "TALENT" that is behind this, it is empirical reasoning.
The reason that non-technical pistolsmiths do some strange combinations is that the parts are available. Years ago, if we wanted a non factory part, we had to make it. Believe me, that one fact stopped many unworkable combinations from being cobbled together.
If you forget your own prejudices, and FIT YOUR SHOOTER, you will be able to answer your questions yourself.

 

[gyp_c2]

Oh boy...I don't know what I was thinkin...:wink:
...I'm gonna' wait a bit on this one...

 

[Steve Morrison]

John,
With all due respect, I differ in opinion with you regarding the Dlask trigger and the Clark sear spring.

I don't shoot the weaver stance, (but I am familiar with it) and I have trained shooters ranging from beginners to proffesionals. I don't claim to be an expert, I have had and continue to get what I feel is excellent training in shooting and gunsmithing.

The profile of the Dlask finger piece leaves a lot to be desired. Relative to other triggers, the Dlask is often rather troublesome to fit.

With the high quality trigger group components available, the Clark
4 leaf spring is an unneccesary complication on a racegun with a very light pull or hard use working guns.

FWIW, regarding neoprene grips: most of the serious pistol shooters of high level ability in my loop have great disdain for rubber and neoprene grips and especially fromtstraps.

I do agree with you that fitting the shooter is important. If someone knows what works for them, as far as I am concerned, they should go with it.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Steve Morrison on 2001-04-23 15:05 ]</font>

 

[Ken Cook]

In short,
BINGO!
This is why I (without badmouthing Ruger) never enjoy shooting Ruger's semi-autos.
To me, the trigger pull on the Rugers is uniformly AWFUL, and I just can't get used to them.
Six or eight inch groups at 25 yards is about the best I can expect shooting a Ruger.
Needless to say, I do MUCH better with even a "rough" 1911, and a well-tuned one SINGS!

 

[twentyone]

WHAT international match did Mass place 10th at? I'd

bet it wasn't an open, widely attended one. Maybe he was the 10th ranked "cop"?

 

[bountyhunter]

I Know What You Mean.....

But, the most deadly accurate guns are wheel guns. I was just at the range and I generally practice "combat" style shooting with my SW model 66 (6" barrel) at 15 yards (both eyes open and focused on the target, gun sighted through fuzzy sights). The target I shoot at has a 1.2" black center and a couple of rings. Nearly all shots were either completely inside or on the black. About twice I yanked the gun and sent one maybe an inch from the black (and asked the guy in the next lane to smack me for it).

 

[Lane Mullins]

I'll side with Steve on this one. I have also had problems with the Dlask triggers fit. If you want the best, BCP is the way to go. I don't shoot Weaver stance and I never reccomend Weaver to new shooters. I have found most catch on quicker and control recoil better with the modern isocoles.

 

[Gordon Hulme]

I just got my custom Stainless 80 Series Gold Cup back from John Lawson and will post and 'show and tell' later. I sent a Videcki trigger (because I had one) and got a Dlask along with ALL the bells and whistles on this signed piece. I gave John his free reign on many issues such as sight picture ect. I only put 200 rounds thru it in the hours after unpacking BUT no malfs everything is slicker than snot and ticks like a OLD SCHOOL 1911 should. The Dlask trigger IS VERY COMFORTABLE and John's 3.5 trigger pull (as requested) is the most iciclish I've ever experienced. I shot 3" unrested at 25yds adjusting the Wilson sights(his settings were close) with Win white box ball with most of the groups haveing 3-5 touching out of 7 rounds. His ejection pattern of the Wilson Bullet proof extractor is the best I've experienced on a .45! He coverted gun (above his objections) to 70 series tool steel fire control parts and I will go on and on later. I wanted to get this old 1911 master to grind me one good un. I am having him rub the innard of two old 1911's also.

 

[M. Hall]

I also didn't care for the Dlask....I also like the cutout
under the triggergaurd because my knuckle rubs right
there. Give me a Videcki (or a BCP-which I haven't
used yet, my last gun was finished before his were
available) and a Wolff leaf (as well as all the other
springs in the gun).

 

[Guest]

I like to keep it simple at the highest level. BCP trigger and internals, Ed Brown thumb safety, BCP beavertail, Heinie sights, and a well fit barrel. The aesthetics are for me, the controls and accuracy are for somebody else.