Author Topic: Any Comments on SA GI .45 Models? (Read 2036 times)

KurtB · « **on:** May 27, 2004, 05:20:10 AM »

I am thinking of picking up one of these to have some fun shooting. Anyone have any experiece with these?

Questor · « **Reply #1 on:** May 27, 2004, 07:30:52 AM »

I'd get one with adjustable sights.

williamlayton · « **Reply #2 on:** May 28, 2004, 01:00:30 AM »

Many/Most folks agree that, as a base, this is a wonderful piece to choose. As a base it is gonna need to be tweeked to perform reliably. Having said that, most folks round here are gonna tweek gold anyway.

:oops:
Blessings

Mikey · « **Reply #3 on:** May 28, 2004, 02:04:41 AM »

KurtB: got one, dressed it, carry it as a primary - won't do without it.

I dressed mine only for the ergonomics - wanted the beavertail grip safety, and the commander style hammer has to go with that, preferred the flat mainspring housing, dropped in an Ed Brown accuracy bbl and look out - she doesn't miss. It can be a plinker or a carry gun. I carry mine. Absolutely reliable. HTH. Mikey.

chuckles · « **Reply #4 on:** May 29, 2004, 06:14:25 AM »

I bought one of the parked versions and loved it so much I bought 2 more, 1 stainless and another parkerized. I think it's the best $400 you can spend on a handgun. Mine has performed flawlessly for 700 rounds, with 3 different brands of magazines and 3 different brands of ammo. The price is going up as is the demand as people hear about the quality of these pistols. Get one, you will not regret it. I am keeping the stainless and 1 of the parked models as unfired "for later on". Unconditional lifetime warranty and forged slides and frames = a great deal. :-D :-D

paladyn · « **Reply #5 on:** June 03, 2004, 09:57:02 AM »

I like my standard Parkerized SA so much I went back to the shop and bought the discontinued Compact version for $417. Both are performing very well so far right out of the box.

paladyn · « **Reply #6 on:** June 10, 2004, 10:54:33 AM »

I have had a couple of jams with the Compact, but I think it's a combo of breaking it in and me limpwristing it.

mr.pants · « **Reply #7 on:** July 19, 2004, 11:00:53 AM »

Just another shout out for this great gun. I own the stainless version and have close to 3000 rounds through it with NO problems. Amazing. Highly recommended for any 1911 enthusiast.

C96 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 22, 2004, 08:22:13 PM »

I have the GI in stainless. I like it a great deal. I do plan on going with
a beaver tail safety and bobbed hammer due to hammer bite.

I will also replace the extractor with a Brown Hardcore. There have been a lot
of SA extractors loosing tension early in life.

I do like the looks of the GI over the Milspec. I like the US grip panels
and the shiny slide. I don't need a parked version, already have a real
one of those.

allan

Charlie · « **Reply #9 on:** July 23, 2004, 02:47:59 PM »

I understand the main spring housing on the Springfield GI can be replaced in order to delete the hex key safety. If so, is this simply a MSH replacement? Thanks for the info.

1911WB · « **Reply #10 on:** July 24, 2004, 03:35:44 AM »

I really like my new GI. I've put 250 rds. of ball thru it with no problems. I have upgraded some parts for personal preference. So far I've spent about $75 upgrading my new GI as follows: Nowlin sear spring & 20# mainspring (lowered trigger pull weight from 5 lbs to 4); Wilson "Bulletproof" extractor; Brown "Hardcore" slidestop & SS firing pin. I could stop now; but I think I'm going to replace the sear with a Nowlin; the disconnector with a Briley; and the hammer strut with a Brown. So, by the time I finish, I'll probably have added $150 to a $400 pistol. But when I had a $1000 Kimber GM I was doing the same things, which really annoyed me! So I put the original Kimber parts back in and sold it for $900- leaving enough for two SA GI's or one really tricked-out pistol!

glock fan · « **Reply #11 on:** July 30, 2004, 06:38:42 AM »

I just got one and took it to the range last week. I put 100 rds. of Win 230 gr. FMJ through it with no FTEs/FTFs. Accuracy was good though not as good as my RIA 1911 mil-spec. The sights on the G.I. 45 were hard to use. I seemed to want to shoot low all the time even when I shot purposely high. Overall I'm impressed with the pistol but the RIA is a much better value, IMHO.

dldyer · « **Reply #12 on:** August 07, 2004, 05:38:56 PM »

Bought the stainless GI. Ran a couple of boxes of UMC through with zero problems, and it seems reliable so far. Seems very, very tight and well built. The trigger is not bad. Was more accurate than I would have expected. The plain military sights don't really bother me as kinda reminded me of my single actions, and even hit point of aim. (I have had a Taurus PT-99 for a lot of years which has the adjustable sights. The Taurus is a good gun except the sights always seemed rather delicate and easy to knock off or at least out of adjustment. Not this) Didn't seem to have the problem with brass hitting me some described, although it must have been coming close to me as I noticed the spouse moved from over my right shoulder to over my left shoulder.

epochelyptikal · « **Reply #13 on:** October 18, 2004, 06:04:06 AM »

I've just purchased a Springfield GI 45, and only have about 50 rounds through it so far... However, some things I've noticed:

1) Fit and finish, IMHO, are fantastic.

2) I love the checkered US grips for both looks and excellent grip function.

3) UMC 230 grain shoots about 2" high at 12-15 paces, a fun plinking distance. Windage is right on.

4) The GI model does ding the brass. Not sure if this will impact reloadability.

5) Was hit about 5 of 50 times by the ejected brass.

6) No FTFs/FTEs.

I intend to run the dinged brass through a resizer and see if that is managable for reloading. I really like the look of the ejector port/slide currently on the pistol and would rather keep it that way vs cutting it down and modifying the ejector to kick brass more cleanly to the right.

I'll be testing a few more ammo types for more reliable ejecting. I don't mind getting hit now and then, but it would be nice to correct it with an ammo change if possible. Another nice side effect might be eliminating the 2" high problem with a bit faster or lighter bullet. That 250 rounds for $48 bulk pack deal on UMC is nice, though!

Anyone have any tips on a factory ammo type that shoots to POA in the GI 45 at about 20 yards?

A great pistol. I'm glad my buddies convinced me I "needed" one!

Chad

twodollarpistol · « **Reply #14 on:** October 18, 2004, 08:18:46 AM »

Quote from: epochelyptikal

I've just purchased a Springfield GI 45, and only have about 50 rounds through it so far... However, some things I've noticed:
5) Was hit about 5 of 50 times by the ejected brass.
Chad

Man I wish I could pronounce your handle :wink:
Anyway, when I first started shooting 1911's I got hit a few times in the head with empties. Those things come out pretty fast too. I came to the conclusion that it only happened when I limp wristed the gun. Some may disagree that this is the cause, but its been quite a while since I've been hit. Having said all that I think you got a great gun. Just experiment with different ammo till you find what yours likes. Thats part of the fun anyway.

greenjeans · « **Reply #15 on:** October 19, 2004, 12:44:59 PM »

Have an Ultra Compact and full size GI model. Get hit by brass every time I go to the range. Came away with a bloody forhead last week. Just got the 4" Champion version over the weekend, but haven't shot it yet. Will be interesting to see if it does the same.

epochelyptikal · « **Reply #16 on:** October 21, 2004, 04:29:02 AM »

:grin:

It's a play on Apocalypse...

Our first assumption was limp wristing too, BTW. But when we held the pistol rigid, with no regard for aim, we still had the same issue.

So, I ordered a slightly reduced power recoil spring (15#) and I'll see if that takes care of the unreliable eject range. Every spent cartridge kicked out, but some seemed to almost dribble over the right side, while some kicked up and over and landed about 3 feet behind me. I'm betting the difference is more the variance in the factory ammo I was shooting, but putting some shok buffers in the pistol along with the reduced recoil spring should allow for the ammo variety and still guarantee a powerful eject. That's the theory anyway.

I'll update with the results, just so future owners might know.

Mikey · « **Reply #17 on:** October 21, 2004, 02:18:15 PM »

twodollarpistol - I have to laugh along with you when you mentioned getting dinged by ejected brass. I have an older Colt Commander that has seen so many different ejectors that haven't changed the ejection pattern, to include at least 1 in every 4 magazines dingin' me dead center in the forehead, that I just wear a baseball cap with the brim forward and all is now fine (lol).......

epochelyptikal: 12-15 paces is about 10-12 yds or halfway to the 25 yd target. Your UMC ammo is shooting pretty close to poa for those regulated sights. You should hit about 1-2" at 25 yds and be dead on at 50 yds, where the sights are regulated. Hitting 1-2" high at 12-15 paces should be expected.

I doubt you will have problems reloading your brass. The dings you mention are probably on the case mouth and they usually come out after you have resized the brass, expanded the case mouth and belled it.

Hits on head by ejected brass - epoch - you're shooting a new pistol and with only 50 round through it she isn't close to being broken in. Give it another couple of hundred rounds of hardball, and there isn't anything wrong withthe UMC hardball for this purpose, and some of your problems may work themselves out. If not, then do something about it.

But, I would do two things - one, replace the factory spring. They are supposed to be 16-18 pounds - you need to break that piece in using what it came with and then if you need to modify either the recoil system or other parts, do it after you have broken it in. The second thing I would do is get tid of those shok buffs. Those things take up the space necessary for the slide to return fully to battery and properly ejcted the spent case. They may be adding to your problems.

Rather than the shok buffs and light weight spring, go back to the factory sping, ditch the shok buffs, pound out another couple of hundred rounds in a 'make it or break it' scenario and then see how she works for you. The variance you mentioned in the UMC ammo may exist, although I think your problem is most probably caused by the changes you made to the recoil system.

Anyhow, HTH. Mikey.

Iowegan · « **Reply #18 on:** October 21, 2004, 02:56:29 PM »

I agree with Mikey, loose the shok buffs and go back to the factory recoil spring. Shok buffs restrict the rearward movement of the slide and can cause feeding or extraction problems.

Most shooters think the extractor is the cause of brass-in-the-face problems. Sometimes it is but usually it's the ejector. That's the little blade gizzie mounted on the frame and held in place by a cross pin. A longer ejector will fix the problem. Ed Brown makes them and Brownell's sells them. (Brownell's P/N 087-041-305, $21.95). This will also fix the dings in the brass by ejecting sooner in the cycle.

twodollarpistol · « **Reply #19 on:** October 22, 2004, 12:01:44 AM »

This is sound wisdom from Mikey and Iowegan. Listen to 'em. These guys know "stuff" about 1911's, as do most of the guys on this forum.

Epochelyptikal....of course it is. I can see it clearly now. :shock: :oops: :grin:

epochelyptikal · « **Reply #20 on:** October 22, 2004, 05:39:17 AM »

I haven't popped any of the shok bufs in my pistol yet (and it's enlightening to read that most people don't care for them). It is a 100% bone stock GI .45 and the "first impressions" are all based on that stock firearm... I ordered a 15# variable recoil spring but it hasn't arrived yet :wink:

I'm going to an indoor range this Sunday where I'll be able to accomplish two things:

1) Hammer out the remaining 200 rounds of UMC in the "make or break" type scenario suggested by Mikey.

2) Test out true POI vs POA at a documented 25 yards.

Once this is complete I'll be able to start comparing stock function vs. function with a slightly reduced weight recoil spring setup (if required). By the time the stock spring cycles 250+ times, I agree it's likely that the ejection could become much more reliable. If it does, great... I have a backup spring! LOL. If not, I'll test the new spring and see what happens there. At the very least, it will give me a great excuse to buy another bulk pack of ammo and spend another day at the range.

If there's one thing I've learned in the last 6 years of technical support work, it's to change ONE thing at a time and to test thoroughly after each change. This should be enjoyable testing.

I was reading another series of posts over on the 1911forum about how the ejector can be shaped to accomplish the type of ejection you want out of your pistol. However, it seems that with the non-lowered ejection port of the GI45, I'd want the ejector to remain as is: A non extended ejector with a face perpendicular to slide travel, and angled backwards slightly to coax the brass up, through the port and over my head vs. over and out through the side of the port where it could potentially just bounce back in and cause further havoc. Does that sound about right?

At any rate, thanks for taking the time to read and respond. I'm looking forward to posting results after a few more hours of break in have been completed.

Iowegan · « **Reply #21 on:** October 22, 2004, 09:08:52 AM »

Lets talk about recoil springs. The perfect recoil spring would be the strongest spring possible that would provide proper function. Lighter springs are used for lighter weight bullets or very light powder charges.

Back in the "old days" of NRA bullseye shooting, I loaded 3 grains of bullseye and a 220 gr LSWC bullet. These chronographed at a whopping 650 fps from a standard Govt Model. You could actually see the bullet going down range. A 12 lb recoil spring worked perfect. By the way, shooting the 10X ring out at 25 yds was common. The guns would last forever!

With a normal factory load (230 gr FMJ at 850 fps), you need at least a 16 lb recoil spring (factory standard). An 18 lb would work even better.

The concept is to prevent frame battering, slide cracking, fast extraction, and muzzle flip that comes from a light recoil spring. Once you get a spring to match your ammo, the brass will extract reliably but doesn't fly to the next county. Your spring guide, frame and slide will last 10's of thousands of rounds. Muzzle flip is less making second shot recovery time better.

Here's what I use for recoil springs in a 45 ACP, 5" 1911: 22 lb for +P, 18 lb for 230 gr FMJ, 16 lb for 220 gr LSWC, 14 lb for 185 gr TMJ, 12 lb for super light loads.

epochelyptikal, So we don't get confused. The extractor is the slide mounted hook shaped device that pulls the brass from the chamber. The ejector is the frame mounted blade shaped device that flings the brass out of the ejection port.

The extractor can be removed from the slide and shaped with a slight arch. When it is shaped right, it will require a little pressure to reinstall. The more the arch, the more tension the extractor puts on the case rim. When tensioned correctly, the gun will feed flawless and extract flawless. Too much extractor tension will result in feeding problems. Too loose will result in extraction problems.

Now the ejector. The face on the ejector contacts the brass case head when the slide moves to the rear, then kicks the brass out of the gun. The length of the ejector determines when, during the cycle, the brass is ejected. If the brass ejects too soon, the gun will get stovepipes. Too late will result in straight back ejection (head bonks), just right ejection will make the brass exit out of the ejector port without hitting and will toss the brass to the right. Shaping the ejector face can help a little too.

With the proper recoil spring, adjusting the extractor tension and ejector length will optimize ejection. No more dinged brass, stovepipes, or head bonks.

epochelyptikal · « **Reply #22 on:** October 25, 2004, 09:41:25 AM »

Another 200 UMC 230gr ball have now been put through the GI45 without a single problem of any sort. Everything was left stock for this range trip.

Using a 6 o'clock site picture, POI was pretty much right on from 7 yards to 25 yards... Or at least, within usable spec for that entire range of use. I hadn't been using the 6 o'clock picture for the first outing reported above. Didn't realize that was what Springfield sets them up for. In hindsight, should have figured it when I was hitting 2" high!

Due to the indoor range, and the mechanism for moving targets around, I still don't have a solid idea of where the brass was ejecting to, but I know I didn't get hit in the face much as the day went on. It seems everything is working down into a well functioning piece of equipment

Although it's getting sent to Springfield tomorrow for some warranty work; the plunger tube wobbles slightly on the frame, making the thumb safety hard to work.

Now I need to find some more inexpensive ammo for the next outdoor shooting I get to do. Probably not until after deer season with fall moving as fast as it is.

1911crazy · « **Reply #23 on:** October 30, 2004, 09:40:23 AM »

I had a new colt series 80 gov. in nickle and after a while hammering it i noticed both sights came loose so i traded it in for a new SA 1911a1 and i haven't had a problem yet with it. I have shot it often in the past without anything going wrong with it. I'm very happy with it. BigBill

I just moly'ed that baby up and let her rip.

ragdude · « **Reply #24 on:** December 29, 2004, 04:50:46 PM »

I just got one today and LOVE the feel & looks of it, but... any info. on a lighter trigger (aside from spending big $ at gunsmith) would be appreciated!