New to the SR1911

[Beruisis]

My son just bought one & loves it.
I want to give him some extra mags. Does it take regular Colt 1911 mags?
wilson 47Ds?
Thanks.
Beruisis

 

[wapiti22]

Wilsons should fit. They are the best!!!!!

 

[dlidster]

I have seven (7) Wilson 47Ds. Never a problem in more than 7000 rounds of 200gr LSWC handloads. The Ruger issue magazines (made by Check Mate) have "hybrid lips." They gave me double-feed problems with 230gr RN handloads. I've quit using them altogether.

 

[VTXS]

Chip McCormick magazines are another option to consider if your unable to get a Ruger factory. I have 2 and have never had an issue with them.

 

[Beruisis]

OK good.
I've got some McCormicks he can have.
Thanks guys.

 

[revhigh]

Wilsons should fit. They are the best!!!!!

ANY 1911 mag will work.

I've never seen one mag that's proveably any better than any other. If it's a functioning 1911 mag, it works in all my Colts .... no reason for it to NOT work in the Ruger.

All expensive boutique mags do better is empty your wallet quicker.

REV

 

[cfolsom]

Simple answer to the question - yes.

I have 5 colt mags that I use along with the 2 rugers.

 

[jimk60]

Well I have had a different experience with non-Ruger mags. I have not tried Chip McCormicks (sp?) or Wilson. I tried Triple K and Pro-mag and had exactly the same experience with both.

They didn't have the little lip indentation on the right front as the Ruger mags do. They were difficult to insert because of the extra resistance from the mag lock.

They were also very tight in the top of the magwell, had to use more force to fully insert than the Ruger mags. They also would not eject when the mag release was pushed, empty or full. They had to be manually extracted.

Anyone else with this experience from non-Ruger mags.

I was lucky enough to find a supply of Ruger SR1911 mags at Bud's Guns and ordered 3 8 rounders for $24.95 each.
I will probably be ordering some 10 rounders when they become available.

 

[dlidster]

They didn't have the little lip indentation on the right front as the Ruger mags do. They were difficult to insert because of the extra resistance from the mag lock...

Check Mate, who makes the magazines for Ruger, is one of the few who provide this indentation. To make all magazines (I prefer Wilson 47Ds) slip in as smoothly as the Ruger/Check Mate magazines,I chamfered and polished the edges of the magazine release. You have to remove the mag release to do this, but that takes just a second.

 

[dakota1911]

Mine is fine with every mag I have tried, and I have about everything.

 

[revhigh]

Well I have had a different experience with non-Ruger mags. I tried Triple K and Pro-mag and had exactly the same experience with both.

Not surprising ... I should have said 'decent' 1911 mags ... those 2 companies are known to produce garbage mags for most guns. Stick with factory ... Colt .... Mec-Gar ... or the CDNN mags that sell for $5.99 on sale .... they work PERFECTLY ... or old 1911 junker mags at gun shows ... I've bought dozens of junker 1911 mags that looked like they'd been run over by tanks. If it's that beat up ... you can pretty much bet that it works perfectly.


REV

 

[jimk60]

Well I have had a different experience with non-Ruger mags. I tried Triple K and Pro-mag and had exactly the same experience with both.

Not surprising ... I should have said 'decent' 1911 mags ... those 2 companies are known to produce garbage mags for most guns. Stick with factory ... Colt .... Mec-Gar ... or the CDNN mags that sell for $5.99 on sale .... they work PERFECTLY ... or old 1911 junker mags at gun shows ... I've bought dozens of junker 1911 mags that looked like they'd been run over by tanks. If it's that beat up ... you can pretty much bet that it works perfectly.


REV

Get that!

Should have specified that these were the only ones Cabela's had in stock. Needless to say, they are back in stock and I am running factory Ruger mags with no issues.

 

[jimk60]

They didn't have the little lip indentation on the right front as the Ruger mags do. They were difficult to insert because of the extra resistance from the mag lock...

Check Mate, who makes the magazines for Ruger, is one of the few who provide this indentation. To make all magazines (I prefer Wilson 47Ds) slip in as smoothly as the Ruger/Check Mate magazines,I chamfered and polished the edges of the magazine release. You have to remove the mag release to do this, but that takes just a second.

Modifying the mag release is certainly worth consideration. When I get around to buying any of the mags recommended, I will give this a try.

 

[eveled]

I have a couple of rusty GI mags that I cleaned up and they run great in my Ruger and Remington. Ed

 

[Richbaker]

I have seven (7) Wilson 47Ds. Never a problem in more than 7000 rounds of 200gr LSWC handloads. The Ruger issue magazines (made by Check Mate) have "hybrid lips." They gave me double-feed problems with 230gr RN handloads. I've quit using them altogether.

I have 10 Checkmates w/hybrid lips, bought in a group buy off another forum. They work great in both my 1911s... No issues with factory hardball or the several variants of HP I've tried, and hundreds of rounds thru them. I don't yet handload, so no way to know. What OAL do you load your .45ACP to?

 

[dlidster]

I have seven (7) Wilson 47Ds. Never a problem in more than 7000 rounds of 200gr LSWC handloads. The Ruger issue magazines (made by Check Mate) have "hybrid lips." They gave me double-feed problems with 230gr RN handloads. I've quit using them altogether.

I have 10 Checkmates w/hybrid lips, bought in a group buy off another forum. They work great in both my 1911s... No issues with factory hardball or the several variants of HP I've tried, and hundreds of rounds thru them. I don't yet handload, so no way to know. What OAL do you load your .45ACP to?

I hesitate to drag out this discussion because it went on forever on one of the 1911 forums a year and a half ago. In a nutshell, here's what didn't work and what went wrong.

Using LRN 230gr hard-cast bullets from Suter or Penn Bullets (they appear to use the same molds), the maximum COAL was 1.22". Anything longer, like the accepted optimum of 1.25", resulted in the bullet being jammed into the rifling.

When using these loads in Check Mate/Ruger hybrid-lip magazines, I would get a double-feed 8% of the time -- about every 12th round. By double-feed I mean a cartridge would voluntarily jump into the breech as the the fired case was being ejected, then the slide would try to pick up the next cartridge in the magazine on returning to battery. Two cartridges in the breech at the same time creates a cumbersome jam.

Also, as I stated previously, if I dropped the magazine, two or three cartridges would "squirt" out. I shoot in USPSA matches. I drop partially-loaded magazines 20 to 25 times per match as a matter of running the course. Squirting cartridges onto the ground is not acceptable.

Both Ruger and Check Mate worked closely and courteously on this situation with me. Both gave me additional magazines. And both admitted they had no idea what was going on. I really appreciated their perseverance and honesty.

Switching the 200gr LSWCs allowed me to load to a COAL of 1.25". This allows the cartridge to snuggle nicely between the front and rear of the inside of the magazines. Double-feeds became less common in the Check Mate/Ruger magazines and squirting cartridges from dropped magazines became less of a problem.

However, switching to Wilson 47Ds completely eliminated both problems with cartridges loaded with LSWC 200gr bullets seated to a COAL of 1.25". (In fact, this load is listed as optimum in the pamphlet that comes with a 47D.) Additionally, LRN 230 gr bullets seated to COAL of 1.22" also work perfectly in the Wilsons, but I've standardized on the 200s.

I have more than 8,000 rounds through this gun now. I find it absolutely reliable with the Wilson 47Ds. I'm happy.

P.S. When first encountering problems with the Check Mate/Ruger magazines I ran a full box (100) of Winchester White Box 230gr through it. I had no problems. But, repeating, I don't shoot factory ammo. Considering how much I shoot, there's no way I could afford it. So how the SR1911 and Ruger factory magazines perform with factory ammo is not relevant to me.

 

[jimk60]

Well I have had a different experience with non-Ruger mags. I tried Triple K and Pro-mag and had exactly the same experience with both.

Not surprising ... I should have said 'decent' 1911 mags ... those 2 companies are known to produce garbage mags for most guns. Stick with factory ... Colt .... Mec-Gar ... or the CDNN mags that sell for $5.99 on sale .... they work PERFECTLY ... or old 1911 junker mags at gun shows ... I've bought dozens of junker 1911 mags that looked like they'd been run over by tanks. If it's that beat up ... you can pretty much bet that it works perfectly.


REV

Just wanted to report back in on the mags. I purchased 3 used, Colt .45 7 round mags at a gun show Saturday.
Tried them Saturday afternoon. All 3 ran flawlessly, not FTL's or FTE's. Inserted with ease, ejected when empty. Great deal @ 3 for $25.
BTW, that is what I paid for EACH Ruger mag.
I guess 4 8 rounders and 4 7 rounders will do for now.

 

[revhigh]

Well I have had a different experience with non-Ruger mags. I tried Triple K and Pro-mag and had exactly the same experience with both.

Picked up 3 Colt mags ....

Tried them Saturday afternoon. All 3 ran flawlessly, not FTL's or FTE's. Inserted with ease, ejected when empty. Great deal @ 3 for $25

I can't tell you how many 1911 mags I've picked up over the years just like that.

The more beat up they are .... the more you can be sure they work perfectly.

I have a box with about 100 of them in it. I just grab a bunch at random when I go shooting .... never had an issue with ANY of them. I used to get surplus 12 packs in brown paper still covered in cosmolene for $25.

REV