Almost all manufacturers of entry level to top level production 1911s use some MIM. Before you open that can-o-worms you might want to use the search feature to read all of the previous threads on MIM. The bottom line is that, while you might not like MIM in your gun, quality MIM is not a bad thing. It must be made by a manufacturer who knows what they are doing using good material and process controls. It is not appropriate for all parts, but some are just fine and will last as long as a part made by any other standard process.

 

https://www.auto-ordnance.com/Firearms/Auto-Ordnance-1911BKOW.asp

If it sells for $689, as above, it will have MIM parts. It is a near certainty that most, likely all, parts commonly described as "1911 small parts" will be of MIM fabrication in this price range. A manufacturer can't build a 1911 at such a low price point without using the cost-savings offered by MIM fabrication.

To get all machined from barstock parts, you're looking in the $3,000 and higher price range.

Discussion of merits and/or satisfactory service of MIM parts is an entirely different discussion ... I'm merely and only responding to your question.

 

My first question is: why is this a concern to you?

Bruce

 

It's a fair question for someone new to 1911s and unfamiliar with cost/pricing of differing build specs IMHO....

... but, as Bruce suggests, it does beg another question in return.

 

All the small parts will be MIM. They will be on most production guns. You would find less on a Colt. You'd find none on a Dan Wesson, and if you could find one. You'd find none of the Dan Wesson built CZ1911.

Your imports, Kimbers, Springfields, ect... They'll all be full of them.

 

The concern is that while I have both WW2 and WW1 issue the thought of buying a newer one is on the budget for this year.
Being a former metallurgist and tool maker, I like the idea of forged parts, machined parts, cast parts and mim at the bottom of the list. The cost is not in question, reliability is foremost.
Albeit that any part can fail due to stress, bad heat treating or other issues, I believe that I want to try to work towards a mim free gun, I can do most fitting or alterations. Therefore it would be nice to be able to identify which parts are mim beforehand and work towards eliminating these one by one.
Yes, cost is the driving factor but Quality and Reliability are higher on my list.

Thanks, any lists of mim parts on Auto Ordinance or other "Made in USA" and California legal 1911a1s would be appreciated

 

... The cost is not in question, reliability is foremost. ...

Which begs the question, then why are you asking about the lowest cost 1911 manufacturer?

 

Kahr are masters at MIM. I would say that their MIM is stronger than some forged parts.

 

Parts Listings

I'm curious if any manufacturer using MIM parts (which includes a huge majority) provides a public listing of such parts, specifically identifying them, part by part, as MIM.

I would think that manufacturers would consider this confidential.

Just curious.

Of course, anyone could look at parts in a 1911 for tell-tale signs of fabrication technique, but the accuracy of such opinion-based data would be entirely dependent on the person's skill... If someone has a background in metallurgy, he/she could probably make better guesses than someone who does not. But it's still no more than an opinion-based best guess.

If someone is specifically seeking machined-from-barstock small parts (on a part by part basis), he probably needs to look at parts made in-house by Ed Brown, Wilson Combat, or similar. I doubt that someone could reach, or even come remotely close, to that end objective by looking at current production a1 versions of the 1911. The latter approach is likely a dead-end street.

 

I, too, prefer machined from bar stock and forgings, but my preference is more due to a strong sense of tradition and a deep appreciation for the skills of the machinists who make the parts.

MIM is in no way inferior when used in the correct application. Some parts commonly made by the MIM process are the magazine release, sear, disconnector, and thumb safety. MIM and similar related processes are used to make the turbines blades for jet engines.

 

Being a former metallurgist and tool maker, I like the idea of forged parts, machined parts, cast parts and mim at the bottom of the list. The cost is not in question, reliability is foremost.

I take it that these two careers were in a former life. Therefore, I ask this question. When was the last time you or one of your personal acquaintances had a MIM firearms part fail?

I find that all of this MIM vs forged/barstock controversy revolves around a single question. When is strong enough strong enough? Consider:

The Soviet Union has enough nukes to destroy the world 6 times and the US has enough to get the job done 9 times. Which country is more powerful?

When somebody comes up with quantitative data showing that high quality MIM parts are more likely to fail in actual use and have significantly lower design life in actual use than forgings and bar stock parts, I'd be extremely interested in seeing this. In view of the fact that high quality MIM parts are used in critical applications where a failure poses a life & death possible outcome, this maximum reliability rationalization justifying a preference for forged handgun parts is just that-a rationalization.

I see that the OP doesn't have a lot of use for cast components either. The fact that Ruger has proven over the decades that this old prejudice to be just that much apple sauce is telling.

In firearms regarding MIM vs forged/bar stock, it's highly debatable whether something can be too strong but there is definitely a point where something is strong enough. Bigger isn't automatically better, just bigger. Further, there definitely is something called the law of diminishing returns and modern high quality MIM is way beyond the point where there is a return.

Bruce

 

why the double talk?



So the original question was NOT clear enough?

I don't care about others opinions on this.
I don't care if you are gay or if you voted for Hillary. I don't care if you were in prison or if you like Trump. That's not the question.
All I want to know is what parts are MIM. Yes, I am opinionated and prefer forged over machined, machined over cast and MIM the least, Why bother me with the dissertation on the mim process? I simply want to build using non mim parts. Thanks for all of the help so far

 

MIM is cheaper
Forged is stronger
Cost is usually the deciding factor, as long as its " strong enough "


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

not so. MIM is just as strong properly done, forged is strong in certain directions depending on the die set. Nothing wrong with MIM, nothing wrong with forged. most of the discussion is urban legend and has nothing to do with engineering. it is getting old though

 

I see nothing wrong, nothing deserving of criticism, with someone preferring machined-from-barstock.

Nor do I see anything wrong, anything deserving of criticism, with someone preferring MIM.

False assertions are to be criticised, but I'm not sure sure that someone's preference for one fabrication technique should be criticised. Sometimes people take their preference to a level that criticizes other's preferences ... I wonder if this is going too far?

Not refering to any posts in this thread, but merely to a general idea of a firearms owner having a right to a preference without being told in return that he's wrong. Oftentimes, MIM related discussions do descend to a level of rebuking another person's preferences...which is different from discussion of satisfactory performance of MIM. Let's not do that here.

 

FWIW, most of my 1911s have all machined-from-barstock small parts.

But two have plenty of MIM... as do my non-1911s. Another has a number of cast parts. And I've never experienced a problem with them. Thousands of rounds on the range. No concerns about using any of these firearms for critical SD purposes.

Thus, I have sentiments on both sides of "this fence" ... and respect for both.

 

Virtually everyone uses MIM parts now, even non-1911s like Glocks, Walthers, and SIGs. Virtually nobody uses a bulk of forged and machined parts unless you're talking a $3000 custom. Colt comes the closest in sub-$1000 manufacturers, as only their sear, disconnector, and magazine catch are MIM in their Series 70 and 1991. Their higher-end models often have MIM ambi safeties.

BTW modern MIM parts are stronger and more durable than WW2-era forged parts due to the improved metallurgy and heat treating. Anyone who's ever done a trigger job on a vintage 1911 and found out how soft the hammer and sear is underneath its hardened surface can attest.

 

I dont know why MIM is such a controversial method. There are many MIM firearms, engines, appliances etc. parts, that have been ran hard, and still work. Higher priced guns use machined parts to help justify their high price, and to help prove, they do "build them like they used to". If MIM was as fragile as people accuse it of being, manufacturers would not use it!

 

All you seem to be getting here is speculation. Why don't you call Auto Ordnance?

 

Take the gun apart, and look at the small pieces. If you see lines on top of, of see a relieved areas in the metal,(like small circles.) It is more than likely MIM. A machined part will typically be straight and uniform throughout, and will not have those features.

 

I am opinionated and prefer forged over machined, machined over cast and MIM the least, Why bother me with the dissertation on the mim process? I simply want to build using non mim parts.

My emphasis added.

The above statement is telling.



Bruce

 

By the way, Auto Ordnance pistols use machined barstock slides but the frames are investment cast. I think the cheapest route is to get a Colt or Springfield (both used forged slides and frames) and replace all small parts, both internal and external. You may have trouble finding machined parts however as most aftermarket parts are MIM as well these days. I think you'd have to buy them from places like Cylinder & Slide if you want machined components.

 

not so. MIM is just as strong properly done, forged is strong in certain directions depending on the die set. Nothing wrong with MIM, nothing wrong with forged. most of the discussion is urban legend and has nothing to do with engineering.

For quality MIM in the correct applications, absolutely. Then again, I'd not want to let facts get in the way of opinion.

Bruce

 

Unaware that forging (separate from MIM, cast, or machined-from-barstock) was a common method of fabricating small parts in a 1911.

One can learn much on the internet.

 

I would expect you will get lottsa help in the future.
None of it will be from the crew here that knows what they are speaking of.