1911Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I made a range trip this evening to break in/function test a new 1991 I bought, but also thought I'd test a couple new carry mags for my Talo New Agent.

First off, these are sold as 6 round magazines, and 7 rounds easily fit in these mags with no problem or forcing whatsoever.

I loaded up both mags with a 230 grain gold dot on the top and bottom and 230 ball in between. Both of them had multiple FTF on the last round and once on the second round. I then loaded only 6 rounds with the same result (also mixed). Then loaded mags of all gold dot and all hard ball with no issues.

My questions are, 1) why do these mags load 7 so easily, and 2) is there a technical explanation as to why I might experience failures with the 'mixed' load and not with either 'uniform' load?

I'd like these to be my carry mags, but not sure about the seeming inability to shoot the mixed load. Note, my Tripp Cobra 7 round mags do this dance no problem.

As an aside, I put around 150 rounds through the 1991 with no issues in the factory 7 round Colt mags (Chip M.), 8 round Nighthawk mags, Wilson 8 round ETM HDs, 8 round Tripp Cobra, 8 round Kimber flush fits, and 10 round CM Power mags.

I also discovered that the spur hammer on the 1991 and my large-ish hand are not completely compatible. I'm thinking either I get a Commander hammer or send it to Colt for the Tactical Package as I didn't care for (or could not shoot as accurately with) the three dot set up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,805 Posts
I'm curious, did you try the mixed loading after the 100% runs? The reason I ask is I never take a new mag to the range. I always load The mag to capacity then insert it into the gun allowing the disconnect rail to compress the spring further. It sits overnight before the first range trip. This allows for a set to take place in the spring.

You may have broken in the spring in the first few mags, then it started running 100%.

Other than that there are numerous variables with ammo and nuances in your shooting fundamentals to diagnose without photos or video. Try it again and let us know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
Without photos/video its hard to make an accurate diagnosis of the problem...

However, a six round 1911 magazine will be overall more reliable than a 7 round magazine. I dont know why WC decided to market those as 6 round mags though.

Are you attempting to make the mag fail by running a mixed load through it? Or are you going to carry a mixed load?:scratch:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,457 Posts
Same thoughts as Highgear's.

Most people, self included, have highly reliable experience with Wilson magazines and consider them absolutely top tier and well-matched with most 1911 builds.

A couple added thoughts:

(1) Most regulars on the Wilson subsection here (self included) are not going to be owners of a Talo New Agent (We mostly have Wilsons). If this (Talo New Agent) is what I think it is, doesn't it have a 3" barrel? If it is a subcompact 3" 1911, everything will have to be virtually perfect for the gun to run reliably (the gun, the ammo, and the mags will have to be a perfect marriage). Colt does a great job with compact guns, so I'm not in any way suggesting issues with the gun; only that a 3" barrel is going to create a really fast slide speed/cycling which leaves little margin for any ammo, mag, mag break-in, etc., characteristics that the gun "doesn't like". 230 grain ammo (as compared to 185 or even 160), especially if these are loads designed for a 5" 1911, may also be at the outer limits of what will run for the application.

(2) A mixed load containing different bullet nose profiles, different taper crimps, different OALs, etc., might well be more likely to have issues as compared to a load of uniform cartridges. Even so, if the different cartridges are each satisfactorily suited for the 1911 in question, a person normally wouldn't expect feeding issues solely due to the different cartridges, at least not in a 5" barrel 1911. But a mixed load in a 3" barrel 1911 (if this is what occurred) is a pretty extreme test. Not wrong, just extremely demanding.

As Highgear said, it's difficult to say anything definitive without "hands-on" work with the specific firearm and ammo. If I personally chose to carry a 3" 1911 (I don't), once I found ammo and mags that ran well in the 3", I'd stay with them and never change.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,971 Posts
I ran a Kimber UltraCarry II for a few years, using the Kimber and a few Wilson magazines. It fed almost anything with the exception of the plated SWC's - I could never seem to find the right seating depth (OAL) to make it work with those. Everything else worked fine, but one of my Colt magazines made it choke no matter what I fed it. Every gun is its own personality, and yours may just like a non-mixed stack; usually the gun will tell you what it doesn't like when quality mags and ammo are used.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top