Page 2 of 3
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 1:37 pm
by DoubleJ
so, the Series II Kimbers are susceptible to this. they don't have a newer series, and you can't necesarily get a series I brand new, so whaddya'll recommend?
I am in desperate
need of a 1911. and I was thinking Kimber, cause, that's what all the cool kids have. price, extras, all that leaned that direction.
now ya'll got me questionin' mahself! GAR!!!
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 3:17 pm
by KBCraig
To my simple mind, the chance of inertia fire is best reduced by reducing inertia. A lightweight firing pin, such as titanium, won't have enough inertia to ignite a primer no matter how hard the gun is hit.
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:40 pm
by jhutto
A lightweight firing pin, such as titanium, won't have enough inertia to ignite a primer no matter how hard the gun is hit.
inertia = mass * velocity... I am guessing you were speaking practicly.
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 5:48 pm
by The Annoyed Man
jhutto wrote:A lightweight firing pin, such as titanium, won't have enough inertia to ignite a primer no matter how hard the gun is hit.
inertia = mass * velocity... I am guessing you were speaking practicly.
There's always a physicist in the crowd...
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:09 pm
by NcongruNt
I agree that a simpler mechanical design means that there are fewer points of failure. The lightweight firing pin/heavy spring design seems to be a much better solution in this case.
It is my understanding that the RIA 1911s do not have firing block mechanisms, but I have not found whether or not they employ the light firing pin/heavy spring solution. Anyone know the details here?
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:13 pm
by dihappy
KBCraig wrote:I believe the purists' argument goes like this: "If the trigger has to do anything other than trip the sear, the secondary function(s) introduce travel and slop."
On a practical level for most shooters, we're still talking about a single action 1911 trigger. Compared to DA or partially pre-cocked systems, it's practically an instantaneous "bang" switch.
Bullseye shooters, I'm sure, can tell the difference. They're an odd subculture of the shooting sports, so attuned to every nuance that they probably pay attention to latitude so they can adjust for the earth's rotation.
Haha, thanks KB, that was great!
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:21 pm
by dihappy
frankie_the_yankee wrote:KBCraig wrote:I believe the purists' argument goes like this: "If the trigger has to do anything other than trip the sear, the secondary function(s) introduce travel and slop."
On a practical level for most shooters, we're still talking about a single action 1911 trigger. Compared to DA or partially pre-cocked systems, it's practically an instantaneous "bang" switch.
Bullseye shooters, I'm sure, can tell the difference. They're an odd subculture of the shooting sports, so attuned to every nuance that they probably pay attention to latitude so they can adjust for the earth's rotation.
FWIW, I'm a long time bullseye shooter (around 20 years) and I can't detect any "feel" from the Series 80 hardware in my Commander.
I'm not saying that nobody can. Just that I can't.
I think that the reason Colt adopted the Series 80 setup is because with the original design it is possible for the firing pin to fire the chambered round through inertia, without anyone having pulled the trigger, if the gun is impacted from certain angles.
Another way for an impact fire to occur is for the sear to bounce off the hammer hooks on impact. If the hammer isn't caught on its half-cock step, the gun fires. A weak (or incorrectly adjusted) sear spring, a worn sear or hammer, or a crudely done "trigger job" can allow this to happen. (Also, if the sear spring simply breaks.)
Note that I'm saying merely that it is possible. By "possible" I mean that I can construct a dynamic free body diagram that will evaluate out to the firing pin having enough impetus to overcome the force of the firing pin spring and hit the primer hard enough to make it go off without anyone pulling the trigger.
In other words, it's "physically possible."
I am not familiar with the case history of the 1911 and do not know (for sure) if such a thing has ever happened but I suspect that it has.
With the introduction of the Series 80 plunger design, the firing pin is mechanically locked. If the trigger isn't pulled all the way back, it can't move forward even if the sear or spring fails, the hammer falls, etc.
My own feeling is that approx. 50% of the griping about Series 80 guns derives from the fact that it is a little bit of a pain in the butt to completely detail strip a Series 80 compared to an original design.
I like the Series 80 design myself.
Thanks frankie, very informative.
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 6:26 pm
by dihappy
DoubleJ wrote:so, the Series II Kimbers are susceptible to this. they don't have a newer series, and you can't necesarily get a series I brand new, so whaddya'll recommend?
I am in desperate
need of a 1911. and I was thinking Kimber, cause, that's what all the cool kids have. price, extras, all that leaned that direction.
now ya'll got me questionin' mahself! GAR!!!
And i HAVE a Kimber :(
So from what im reading, I could possibly get knocked to the ground in such a way that my Kimber wont fire due to the flawed design of my gun? :(
Re: Whats Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 7:32 pm
by Mike1951
I had heard that the Kimber Warrior class 1911's came with the series 70 setup.
While trying to verify that, I found the following statement from defensereview.com 's announement after Shot Show 2005:
New Kimber Warrior 1911 Pistol: Digital Pics from SHOT Show 2005
Posted on Friday, February 04 @ 17:13:23 PST by davidc
by David Crane
david@defensereview.com
DefenseReview got to handle the new Kimber Warrior 1911 pistol (.45 ACP) at its debut at SHOT Show 2005. Basically, it's the civilian-release version of the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) ICQB/MCSOCOM Det 1 pistol, although there are some differences. For instance, the Kimber Warrior utilizes an integral M1913 tactical light rail, instead of the Dawson screw-on rail that the ICQB/MCSOCOM Det 1 pistol uses. Also, the ICQB pistol features Simonich/Strider Gunner Grips, while the Kimber Warrior pistol utilizes grips with a different cut pattern. It would appear that the Kimber Warrior also does ulitize an Ed Brown grip safety. However, both pistols utilize a Kimber Series I safety system (Series 70 safety system), which DefRev prefers to the Kimber Series II safety system, utilized on the Kimber Custom TLE/RLII 1911 pistol.
When viewing Kimber models on their website, the Warrior and Desert Warrior are the only models not followed by the ubiquitous II after their names.
So it appears possible to buy a new Kimber with the series 70 system.
Re: What Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:13 am
by KBCraig
frankie_the_yankee wrote:KBCraig wrote:Bullseye shooters ... an odd subculture ...
FWIW, I'm a long time bullseye shooter
Point. Game. Set. Match.
Re: Whats Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:44 am
by gregthehand
For the record the pistol I was carrying when my accident happened was a Para Warthog.
Re: Whats Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:52 am
by frankie_the_yankee
gregthehand wrote:For the record the pistol I was carrying when my accident happened was a Para Warthog.
I have a Para Carry 6.45 LDA and now you have me wondering if the plunger hole goes all the way through the slide or not. The rear sight is a Novak type low profile sight held in a dovetail with the help of a setscrew.
The gun shoots a couple of inches to the right of point of aim at around 10 yds. or so, so I'll probably get to adjusting it someday. When I do, my curiosity will probably drive me to check out the plunger setup.
Re: Whats Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 7:41 pm
by DoubleJ
Re: Whats Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:21 pm
by rm9792
Hate to jump in late but Kimbers have the Swartz safety system, isnt that different than a Series 80? I took that out of my Kimbers, I had one lock it up already. I doubt very seriously it will affect a good shoot in court, I think thats all paranoia and urban legend unless Chas wants to set me straight. I did put a stronger fire pin spring though, just in case it really will fire if dropped.
Re: Whats Wrong With Series 80 Pistols?
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:31 am
by 73Driver
When John Moses Browning (Jan/1855 to Nov/1926) designed the Colt semi-automatic firearm for the US Army there were multiple requirements. One of the design specifications was that the weapon had to withstand a drop from a mounted (horseback) officer landing barrel first on a hard surface without an accidental discharge (English version of the government jibberish). That is a fall of roughly six to eight feet, some inertia but not alot. That original design adopted on March 29, 1911 and updated to the M1911A1 in 1924 is basically what is now refered to as the "series 70." Now, I can't find the where I read it, but I vaguely remember the series 80 FPS is in response to a lawsuit and a weapon drop from something like twelve feet. So the moral of the story....if you are going to use a 1911 to hammer shingles on your roof, don't drop the thing!!!!
My "series 70" (more correctly pre-80) Colt Gunsite CCO by the way.
