# Guide rod comments...



## WillBrink (Jul 13, 2008)

No, not another "should I have a guide rod in my 1911?" or "what does a guie rod do in a 1911?" thread. After years of owning and shooting 1911s with and without FLGR, I have finally concluded I prefer guns with FLGRs. Hopefully the God of JMB will forgive me. From my experience and readings, FLGRs do NOT improve the accuracy or reliability of the gun, but they don't harm it either in my experience, but your mileage may vary. So why bother? 

I have tried the same gun(s) with and without a FLGR over the years, and I find they clearly smooth out the cycling slightly. Two, they add a bit of weight to the muzzle. Three, some claim the FLGR  *may* increase the life of the recoil spring, but I have never seen anything objective on that. Finally, they look cool. Yes, I said it. I simply prefer the look of a 1911 with an FLGR then without. At least I admit it! 

PS, one often comment to push FLGRs on people is it "makes break down and assembly of the gun easier." I find no difference what to ever and this should not be part of the consideration for or against FLGRs in 1911s.

That's my thoughts on the issue. Add your own if you think I'm off base.


----------



## 8'Duece (Jul 13, 2008)

I have one 1911 with FLGR and I tend to like it also. 

I can't really speak for extending the service life of the recoil spring due to the fact that I do not shoot that particular firearm enough to have an honest answer. 

I do seem to prefer it though. 

I've alway's kinda been a series 70 kinda guy but I don't mind a FLGR as long as my extractor is still internal. Bad experiences with externals and Kimber. For what it's worth.


----------



## AWP (Jul 13, 2008)

I have a Springfield 1911 and I've shot it with and without a FLGR. Other than adding a little weight to the muzzle, I don't notice any difference.

If JMB controls access to heaven then we all know where we're going. :)


----------



## WillBrink (Jul 13, 2008)

Freefalling said:


> I have a Springfield 1911 and I've shot it with and without a FLGR. Other than adding a little weight to the muzzle, I don't notice any difference.
> 
> If JMB controls access to heaven then we all know where we're going. :)



From your mouth to his ears! Lemme' in JMB!


----------



## WillBrink (Jul 13, 2008)

Freefalling said:


> I have a Springfield 1911 and I've shot it with and without a FLGR. Other than adding a little weight to the muzzle, I don't notice any difference.
> 
> If JMB controls access to heaven then we all know where we're going. :)



I added my comments to a forum of respected people and got a response from someone I know is an experienced person in the ways of 1911s, and besides telling me he thought all my comments were totally off base he said:

"The 1911A1 type weapon was not designed to use a full length guide rod and they are a genuine and proven liability to reliability, especially in dirty conditions."

Obviously, I knew the former, but the latter comment is news to me. Everything I have read, talked to others, etc, etc was they had no effects on reliability one way or another. So, I guess you learn something every day. However, I also think the persons particular situation might need to be taken into account. Ergo, it's highly unlikely I will ever have a 1911 in dirty conditions to the point the guide rod would actually effect function. Oh well, I am happy to defer to those with much greater expertise then I in this area. Yes, I know the top names in the smith world etc. are almost universally anti FLGR. For example, Hilton Yam said:

"No full-length guide rods. Period. They add nothing to function, make takedown more difficult, add useless weight, and reduce options for one handed cycling. For stock format guide rods, the stock Colt is the best, with the Ed Brown units being a very good choice for kit guns"

However, he didn't say they reduced reliability either...:uhh:


----------



## HOLLiS (Jul 13, 2008)

If you do it, let us know.  I tend to like to leave things the way the engineers designed it.   (unless perchance I just might know something they don't, which is not often)

Until you posted this, I never thought of it.  I own several 1911, two are 45s and one is a 38 super.  One thought, a chain is as strong as it's weakest link.  So if one add more links, one increases the chance of failure.  

More thinking to do here,  

best.

H.


----------



## WillBrink (Jul 13, 2008)

HOLLiS said:


> If you do it, let us know.  I tend to like to leave things the way the engineers designed it.   (unless perchance I just might know something they don't, which is not often)
> 
> Until you posted this, I never thought of it.  I own several 1911, two are 45s and one is a 38 super.  One thought, a chain is as strong as it's weakest link.  So if one add more links, one increases the chance of failure.
> 
> ...



For additional thought, his less than complimentary comments to me on the issue via the Tactical Forums:

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...bb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=56;t=001438;p=1#000002


----------



## HOLLiS (Jul 13, 2008)

WillBrink said:


> For additional thought, his less than complimentary comments to me on the issue via the Tactical Forums:
> 
> http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-b...bb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=56;t=001438;p=1#000002



I am not a member there.  I am all for giving some thing a good go at it.  One never knows.   Maybe a flop, maybe a improvement.   I like 1911s, I do know they are not the end of all pistols.  I still tend (maybe because of age) prefer wheel guns,   but some of the new designs are really nice.  I was TOed on the 1911 in the Corps.   When we selected the one we would use, we would shake it, and try to get the one that rattle less.  I have a Colt Commander which was re-worked by Kimber (from the person I traded it from)  it is nice.  I still think DA is a great for the first round fired, keeps crud from falling between the hammer and frame.


----------



## WillBrink (Jul 13, 2008)

HOLLiS said:


> I am not a member there.  I am all for giving some thing a good go at it.  One never knows.   Maybe a flop, maybe a improvement.   I like 1911s, I do know they are not the end of all pistols.  I still tend (maybe because of age) prefer wheel guns,



As Bill Jordan said "I'll take a revolver, you take your chances." I love that quote. :)



HOLLiS said:


> but some of the new designs are really nice.  I was TOed on the 1911 in the Corps.   When we selected the one we would use, we would shake it, and try to get the one that rattle less.



LOL, they were well known for that, but they didn't let you down right?



HOLLiS said:


> I have a Colt Commander which was re-worked by Kimber (from the person I traded it from)  it is nice.



1911 purists dislike anything shorter than the government even less than FLGRs! I would be burned at the stake if I mentioned I owned one on that forum...



HOLLiS said:


> I still think DA is a great for the first round fired, keeps crud from falling between the hammer and frame.


----------



## HOLLiS (Jul 13, 2008)

Revolvers have made a come back for personal carry,  easier to use.  Unlike the movies where a person is going to expend a zillion rounds dispatch a army of bad guys, ofter one or two shots works.  Still the odds are, a person will never use a personal carry side arm.


In RVN, where I was, the rifle (M16) was more preferred.  Even the Docs carry one.  My dad who as a China fleet sailor (USN 1937 -1957) was very good with a 1911.  It is still a fine design.  

Difference in a Wheel gun and a semi auto with equal length barrel is range.  A semi will out range the wheel gun, though at that point I would prefer a rifle.  I still prefer a rifle over a pistol.  I like the older rifles because they had a serious club factor (less than lethal factor).   I am not a techie person, because, it is the person not the technology that prevails in most cases.   (obviously except for when situations is way over balanced one way). 

IMHO, a lot of guys will use gizmos to over compensate for the lack of personal skill/experience.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jul 13, 2008)

1911 + FLGR = should have got a Glock


j/k


I like the classic look of no FLGR on some 1911's but I do like a FLGR. I can't tell if they help or not, but they do look cool!!! ;)


----------



## AWP (Jul 13, 2008)

WillBrink said:


> I added my comments to a forum of respected people and got a response from someone I know is an experienced person in the ways of 1911s, and besides telling me he thought all my comments were totally off base he said:
> 
> "The 1911A1 type weapon was not designed to use a full length guide rod and they are a genuine and proven liability to reliability, especially in dirty conditions."



I've shot a little IPSC with mine and my buddy who shoots a ton of IPSC has a Para Ordnance in .40 and an Open Class STI or SVI in .38 Super. Not your normal 1911's I know. He'll go the range and blow 500 rounds easily. The biggest factor that has affected both of us hasn't been the presence or absence of a FLGR but the recoil spring. Changing it around and playing with different hand loads to get the right combination to work consistently and reliably has been where our failures occur, not due to a FLGR.

Maybe I'm functionally reatrded but I don't see how a FLGR would affect reliability. And if you are worried about a dirty 1911: 1) Why is your carry gun dirty? 2) Who is shooting their carry gun 500-1000 times without cleaning it?

Maybe the old guys are onto something but I just don't see it.


----------



## 8'Duece (Jul 13, 2008)

To quote Larry Vickers "Modifications to any handgun should be performance based" 

With that in mind I see no need for a full guide unless there is some *performance* based attribute that it brings to the table. Seems to me it doesn't, at least from my limited experience with one in a Springfield TRP. 

As I said earlier, there is something about it I do like, but I don't see any _performance_ increase in having it. 

I'll let the 1911 guru's have this one.


----------

