PT1911 9mm

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Had a chance to test a couple of inexpensive 1911's I got for curiosity. A MetroArms American Classic II .45 and a Taurus PT1911 9mm. Never had any 1911's before.

Both pistols are set up very similar. The PT1911 has bomar sights and the ACII has bomar look-alikes. Weight is similar, as are the controls and trigger.

Both fed fine. The out of the box off hand accuracy of the ACII is about as good or better as other pistols I shoot.

My situation with shooting is that the odds of missing an 8" target at 10 or 15 yards are rather low. If I shoot 10 rounds the odds are very high there will be 10 holes somewhere on the paper. But the odds are not high that they will be grouped real tight on the paper. A 5 or 6 inch circle will usually hold the majority of hits.

Shot about 100 rounds in the PT1911 9mm, and the interesting thing about the PT1911 9mm is that it definitely shoots smaller groups than I'm used to. It seemed to be very reliably putting most of the rounds into a 3 or 4 inch circle.

The factory point of impact is a little low and to the right. That may be my shooting, but may be the pistol. Other pistols I shoot have other natural points of impact. If there was some systematic error in my technique then one might suspect that several pistols would tend to have the same kind of error. On the other hand, perhaps it just means I have different kinds of consistent technique errors on different pistols.

Will break the gun in real good before adjusting the sights. Maybe the point of impact will change with break-in and practice.

Sometimes am tempted to buy or build a pistol shooting vise so a gun can be locked down and the actual accuracy determined. Variables in accuracy in my hand could include the fit in the hand, trigger, visibility of the sights.

Maybe the PT1911 9mm is shooting better groups just because the grip, trigger, and sights are easier for me to work. On the other hand, that American Classic II .45 works close to identical and makes decent groups, but not as tight as the PT1911 9mm. All of which may evolve with break-in and practice.

But it is possible that this PT1911 9mm is just naturally a little more accurate than average. Dunno.

Other things I noticed. Not necessarily complaints, just observations--

1. The PT1911 9mm has one of those stupid hammer locks. Eventually will probably remove the lock mechanism from the gun just in case it could ever accidentally lock itself.

2. The PT1911 9mm grip safety spring is stiffer than on the ACII. Have not handled enough 1911's to know the average 1911 grip safety stiffness. Both grip safeties have near-identical shape, but the ACII grip safety goes off if you just have the gun in hand. You have to intentionally squeeze the PT1911 grip safety to toggle it off.

Out of 100 rounds had a couple of fail-to-fire because wasn't squeezing the grip safety enough. That issue may go away with practice and break-in. Never had a gun with grip safety before. Maybe the Taurus lawyers, same guys who suggested the hammer lock, suggested a stiff grip safety?

3. Wally-world Federal 115gr FMJ feeds reliable in the Taurus 9mm mags. However, the slide has not yet locked back on empty. It will lock back fine if you pull the slide back on an empty mag. Perhaps the recoil spring is a little stiff. If it continues to fail lock-back after break-in, maybe it will need a slightly weaker recoil spring.

4. No 9mm I've shot has bad recoil, but the PT1911 seems to have a little more muzzle flip than others. It isn't a big deal, but interesting that it has a little more muzzle flip than a Beretta 92 or CZ 85 or Kahr P9.

The PT1911 seems to have a little more muzzle flip than the ACII shooting .45. Strange, since the height of barrel on the PT1911 appears near-identical to the ACII, and the grip is identical, etc. Wonder if this could also be a consequence of a slightly-stiff recoil spring?

Am thinking that the PT1911 will become a favorite.

[Chucktshoes]

The grip safety on (used to be) my pt 1911 was stiffer than other 1911's I have handled. I believe that is intentional on the part of Taurus. You will likely end up adjusting the sights, mine also shot a bit low OTB. The Taurus factory mags I had also had issues with locking back. I would recommend doing as I did and buying some CMC or Wilson mags and letting the factory ones for the range.

I sold it yesterday and already miss it.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Chucktshoes

[Jonnin]

.45 recoil is funny, folks describe it as a push rather than a jerk, while 9mm is a single instant jerk of significant force.

The magazine can be related to the ability to stay open on the last round. It may not properly hit the tab to raise the slide stop. Check that out before swapping springs or whatnot, maybe try another mag if you have a spare.

Most 1911 grip safetys seem to take almost no force. A few models take more than others but most, simply holding the gun is sufficient, no squeeze. Perhaps this can be fixed on the 9mm by a smith, you should not have to squeeze it proactively and that action (squeeze the grip) can mess up accuracy.

The beretta 92 has some of the least recoil in 9mm that I have ever shot. Its the same old story, the heavy, big guns have less recoil. A rough 9mm is a plastic subcompact, those jump around bad in my hands esp. if 1h shooting. I really enjoy my old beretta 92, forget when I got it but it predates the clinton ban by a number of years.

Definately some interesting comments. I am going to seek out a 9mm 1911 this year, as 45 is a bit pricy to shoot day in and day out. I sort of expect to see a number of not-45 1911 styles this year, with the 100 year circus, so if one comes out that I like, I will be all over it. I plan to look at that PT1911 later, when I have some cash, and appreciate the comments on it.

[hipower]

Yes, Thanks very much for the review. I've been interested in the idea of a PT1911 in 9mm or possibly even 38super. So this was a definite help.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Thanks for the good advice. Two mags came with the PT1911 9mm. Was wondering if just any 9mm 1911 mag would work. Web searched about a week ago and couldn't find any references to good third-party mags for the gun. Hopefully Wilson's will work fine.

Actually, I had been reading good things about PT1911's for awhile, and had read a long time ago about the 9mm version announced by Taurus.

I got the facts confused in memory. When I saw one in the store, I assumed that PT1911 9mm's had been out for awhile. When actually the 9mm PT1911 only recently started shipping.

So it was a little more of a gamble than I expected to make that it would run ok, being a fairly recent shipping model. Considering that some 9mm 1911's have earned a reputation for being finicky. Luckily it seems to run solid so far.

If the point of impact continues to be a little low and to the right after a good break-in-- Drifting the Bomar rear sight ought not to be much trouble.

For raising the point of impact, would there be a solution more elegant than simply filing the front sight? That wouldn't hurt my feelings. Just wouldn't want to bubba the front sight if there is some more elegant recommended fix.

The Bomars seem easy to use. The front blade is thin enough that you can see light on each side of the front blade, in the rear notch. That seems to make it easier to get everything lined up.

A lot of pistol sights have a fatter front sight that tends to fill the rear notch, which might make it harder to see enough contrast in some lighting conditions. I've had that problem shooting at dark targets from under shade with some sights.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Still haven't got around to ordering some Wilson mags for the PT1911 9mm. Just the two Taurus manufactured mags that came with the pistol.

Adjusted the horizontal point of aim by drifting the rear sight, and the vertical point of aim seems to be getting closer all by itself. Placing the front dot on the bullseye seems the way it is intended to aim at relatively short range.

The groups still seem tighter than most of my pistols, whether it is a better fit for the hand or just slightly more accurate than the typical pistol.

Feeding has been 100 percent with Wallyworld FMJ Federal 9mm from the beginning. Being currently a range toy, haven't had a pressing need to try self-defense JHP ammo yet.

I stored the PT1911 in the gun safe all last week with the slide locked back to see if that might loosen the recoil spring. That may have actually had an effect, because today the slide locked back on empty every time. The pistol had never locked back on empty with previous range visits. Or maybe the PT1911 9mm has finally broken in enough to lock back.

It would seem a strange coincidence if it just suddenly started locking back at the beginning of today's session compared to never locking back at the end of last week's session, solely from break-in. It seems a likely explanation that a week of storing the pistol locked-back may have loosened the spring enough to make a difference.