After the last update, I decided to detail strip and clean the gun. Lo and behold, the ejector has broken again.
I cannot say exactly when it broke. It could have been immediately after the last shot I’d fired through the gun or it could have happened shortly after I last had the gun apart (a range of more than 3,000 rounds). After cleaning, it was reassembled as-is and successfully fired 700 rounds of 115gr Blazer TMJ without any signs of trouble.
After a quick email to the Springfield Armory Custom Shop I received an overnight shipping label. The pistol is already at SACS and I expect it back in my hands before the week is out.
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
I’m impressed.
Are the empty cases being ejected by the stub of the ejector blade, or the next round coming out of the magazine, or simply the asymmetrical pull of the extractor?
I know nothing about 1911’s, but do you think you might have some clearance issues with all those slide-lock reloads?
Redchrome — My guess is that it’s at least partially each of them, but short of high-speed photography there is probably no way to be certain.
BKS — I’m assuming you mean the mag impacting the ejector? There’s no way for me to tell on the test gun (since the ejector is gone!) but on the backup gun there is a small but significant amount of space between the magazine and ejector even when I insert the magazine as hard & far as I can.
Isn’t the brass landing in a different place than it normally does?
“Are the empty cases being ejected by the stub of the ejector blade…”
The “stub of the ejector blade” is what was called the “ejector” until the 1980s or so.
So what you are saying is, that the gun keeps insisting on returning to the way God & JMB intended it to be. If it works why fight it?
Tam — Can you explain (here or at VFTP) why the extended ejector came into being, then, and why so many high end ‘smiths and semi-custom manufacturers use them? I assume (1) there was a reason for the introduction of the extended part and (2) you probably know more about it than 99% of the 1911 “experts” out there.
Briefly (because iPad; I’ll expand elsewhere) it’s mostly for consistency of ejection. If you look at an O.G. military 1911, the ejection port is mostly in the top of the slide, and that’s where the empties go with the GI ejector. Looking at the slide from the rear, the empties fly up and back anywhere from 11:30-2:00, depending mostly on slide velocity.
There’s more, but that’s the meat of it…
Thanks, Tam. I’ll keep an eye out for the details.
Couple questions – does the asymmetric wear pattern on the hammer indicate an alignment problem, or asymmetrical thrust on slide movement?
And, this might be one for Tam: Until I read her comment I hadn’t thought about it, but my antique IPSC Springers do eject 1130-to-1400, and everything else 1300-to-1500. This is, AFAIK, a function of ejector length (and extractor case retention strength as well as extractor design). Since, obviously, short ejectors work, and long ejectors appear to break more frequently than short ones, is there a “sweet spot” intermediate length ejector that might eject halfway between the extremes and offer longer life?
Wilson Wombat makes ones that aren’t overly long and seem to give good positive ejection. They used to be called “tactical” but don’t seem to be called that anymore.
Bear in mind that, as shipped, an EGW or Brown unit is overlong and squared off so that the gunsmith can shorten and profile it as appropriate. This assumes the gunsmith knows what he’s doing, which is a great big ol’ assumption, as we all know. đŸ˜‰
The hammer wear pattern could also be caused by a not-perfectly-perpendicular hammer pin (unlikely) or the bevel on the bottom of the FP stop isn’t perfectly robot-straight (probable, and no big deal.)