1911Forum
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > Hardware & Accessories > Parts and Accessories Bin


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-03-2012, 10:57 AM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
8-round Tripp magazines for a compact 1911




Against better judgment, I use my New Agent for IDPA. I'd like to have some 8-round magazines for CDP so that I don't have to swap mags as often. I know Wilson Combat makes some with modified baseplates to make sure everything locks up right, but Wilsons cause feed problems for me. I'm guessing this is related to how they 'shortcut' the controlled feed mechanism. Anyway...

I'd rather go with Tripp magazines, as I have yet to have a feed problem with them. I just called and asked them, and they're going to call me back and let me know if they can do it with some modified baseplates. I figured this would be of interest to others, so I'll post updates here.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:05 AM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
Quote:
I just called and asked them, and they're going to call me back and let me know if they can do it with some modified baseplates. I figured this would be of interest to others, so I'll post updates here.
That sounds interesting.

Quote:
...Wilsons cause feed problems for me. I'm guessing this is related to how they 'shortcut' the controlled feed mechanism. Anyway...
How do they do that? What is significant about Wilson mags that causes that to happen?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:24 AM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
How do they do that? What is significant about Wilson mags that causes that to happen?
I am basing that assertion on this interesting article.

From what I hear Kimbers like the Wilson mags, Colts like Tripps. That matches with my (limited) experience with my Colt.

EDIT: Here is a description of what I think causes problems in my New Agent. With the Wilson mags, I tend to get 3-point jams and live stovepipes. I guess the rounds are 'hopping' out of the mag as he describes:

Quote:
These photos show the bullet's meplat approaching the barrel ramp edge, but not quite touching it. The reason I don't have any photos of that is because the Wilson's feed lips let go of the rim either at the instant the bullet touches the barrel ramp or less than a hundredth of an inch before. (I couldn't tell for sure.) What I can tell you, though, is that it's definitely not a controlled feed. The rim of the cartridge pops up with great alacrity, and if the slide isn't moving forward fast enough the rear of the case will bypass the extractor entirely and the entire cartridge will zip merrily out the ejection port before a photo can be taken. Above a certain speed this doesn't happen, of course, and the cartridge just hops right into the chamber.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:35 AM
RickB's Avatar
RickB RickB is offline
1911 Aficionado
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Posts: 17,224
I cannot get mags that have "plus" capacities to work in my compact. Short 6-rounders, and full-length 7-rounders work great, but 8s and 10s are a no-go, regardless of make.
I think the springs are weakened just enough, in the interest of squeezing in an extra round, that they can't keep up with the fast-cycling slide.
I've had no issues with feedlip design, having started with parallel style from Metalfom, and now with the hybrid style from Check-Mate, though the latter style does seem much more sensitive to proper dimensions. If the lips splay out at all, rounds are not sufficiently secured in the mag. I suspect weak springs will compromise the hybrid design to a greater extent than parallel, too.
__________________
If you're not shooting you should be moving. If you're not moving you should be reloading. If you're not shooting, moving, or reloading, you should be taping or picking brass. - Z.C.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-03-2012, 11:47 AM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickB View Post
I cannot get mags that have "plus" capacities to work in my compact. Short 6-rounders, and full-length 7-rounders work great, but 8s and 10s are a no-go, regardless of make.
What I am looking for is a government model length magazine with a modified baseplate to keep it from over-inserting. Then this should not be an issue, right? Or maybe because of the shorter cycle time, still an issue? I guess if they can put one together I can try it and see, but I appreciate the warning.

Last edited by brocktice; 10-03-2012 at 11:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:20 PM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
Quote:
brocktice wrote,
What I am looking for is a government model length magazine with a modified baseplate to keep it from over-inserting. Then this should not be an issue, right?
Chip McCormick has a mag such as this.

http://www.cmcmags.com/Powermags.html

Quote:
brocktice wrote,
I am basing that assertion on this interesting article.
I'll admit I was baiting you a bit. I was sure that is the article you got your information from. The question is, what causes the loss of controlled feed? Well, the article, as you excerpted, says...
Quote:
the Wilson's feed lips let go of the rim either at the instant the bullet touches the barrel ramp or less than a hundredth of an inch before. (I couldn't tell for sure.) What I can tell you, though, is that it's definitely not a controlled feed.
The conclusion then of the author, is the reason for loss of controlled feed is the presence of the wadcutter feed lips used by Wilson mags. I do congratulate the author as that is a lot of work that went into that article and his other "How I did it" 1911 magazine article.

However, here are some points to consider.

1. Did the author include McCormick or Tripp magazines in his review?

2. Read this thread in the "stickies" about "best mags", and find out how many recommend McCormick, Tripp or Wilson mags. The only thing all of these magazines have in common is they all use wadcutter feed lips. McCormick and Wilson feed lips have virtually the same release point. Tripp mags, admittedly, do release a little later.

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=344509

3. How many trainers and students use these mags at Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, Shoot Rite, etc., not to mention the military and police, and shoot thousands and thousands of rounds through the 1911 at odd angles on a daily basis. If there was a loss of controlled feed, how would these rounds get into the chamber without causing a malfunction?

Last edited by jtq; 10-03-2012 at 12:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:59 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
Chip McCormick has a mag such as this.

http://www.cmcmags.com/Powermags.html
I've heard good things about CMC mags, I'll check that out. Sounds like just what I'm looking for

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
The conclusion then of the author, is the reason for loss of controlled feed is the presence of the wadcutter feed lips used by Wilson mags.
My read was that it had to do with the point of release, not necessarily that it has wadcutter feed lips, as other magazines had those too

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
1. Did the author include McCormick or Tripp magazines in his review?
No! And I have no idea why! Do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
2. Read this thread in the "stickies" about "best mags", and find out how many recommend McCormick, Tripp or Wilson mags. The only thing all of these magazines have in common is they all use wadcutter feed lips. McCormick and Wilson feed lips have virtually the same release point. Tripp mags, admittedly, do release a little later.

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=344509
Perhaps the later release is important for my gun?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
3. How many trainers and students use these mags at Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, Shoot Rite, etc., not to mention the military and police, and shoot thousands and thousands of rounds through the 1911 at odd angles on a daily basis. If there was a loss of controlled feed, how would these rounds get into the chamber without causing a malfunction?
Well, I bought Wilsons because they have a good reputation, and I know they are used extensively as you mention. I also understand (though I am a newbie in all of this) that most modern guns do NOT use a controlled feed mechanism like the 1911, and clearly they hold up fine also. My understanding was that lack of controlled feed in a gun that was designed for it was a problem. I'll need to research this because now I'm curious, but more input is welcome.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-03-2012, 01:15 PM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
Quote:
My read was that it had to do with the point of release, not necessarily that it has wadcutter feed lips, as other magazines had those too
Feed lips have everything to do with the point of release. As the slide comes forward and begins to strip the round from the mag, it is the feed lip design that governs the release point.

Certainly, there are other things that can affect how well a particular mag works in your pistol, such as the spring, follower, tube strength, etc, but feed lips control when the round is released.

My point is, many people use that article to take shots at Wilson mags, due to their early release point, yet nearly all of the top rated mags use the same style of feed lips and many release the round at the same point. Why don't they find fault with McCormick, Tripp, or any other mag with similar wadcutter feed lips and similar release points?

Hey, you can not like Wilson mags for any number of reasons, but I caution people not to complain about the lack of controlled round feed with Wilson's in one breath, and in the next breath say how much better their McCormick mags are. The release point is the same for both mags. If the Wilson's don't have controlled round feed, then neither do McCormick mags.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-03-2012, 01:19 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
My point is, many people use that article to take shots at Wilson mags, due to their early release point, yet nearly all of the top rated mags use the same style of feed lips and many release the round at the same point. Why don't they find fault with McCormick, Tripp, or any other mag with similar wadcutter feed lips and similar release points?

Hey, you can not like Wilson mags for any number of reasons, but I caution people not to complain about the lack of controlled round feed with Wilson's in one breath, and in the next breath say how much better their McCormick mags are. The release point is the same for both mags. If the Wilson's don't have controlled round feed, then neither do McCormick mags.
I'm just now getting to the part of that sticky thread where you are arguing this with someone. Based on what you're saying maybe the CMCs will have the same problem for me as Wilson's. One way to find out...
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-03-2012, 05:18 PM
AreB AreB is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
I'm just now getting to the part of that sticky thread where you are arguing this with someone. Based on what you're saying maybe the CMCs will have the same problem for me as Wilson's. One way to find out...
Just to add a little more spice to the mix, I have read that CMC mags have stronger springs than the 47 series Wilson Combat mags.

Don't know this for a fact, mostly own Checkmates w/hybrid lips. But I love mag debates.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-03-2012, 06:56 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Could the early release on my Wilsons and those in that article be spreading feed lips? How to check? I have calipers.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-03-2012, 07:21 PM
A X E A X E is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 847
I run Tripp 7, 8, 10 round magazines with butt plates in my Kimber Ultra CDP II and they all work fine at the range. I only carry with the flush mag.

Give em a whirl, they are a great magazine.

Out!

Last edited by A X E; 10-03-2012 at 07:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-04-2012, 07:14 AM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
Could the early release on my Wilsons and those in that article be spreading feed lips? How to check? I have calipers.
It is certainly possible, but you do know early release is a design feature of wadcutter or parallel feed lip magazines, right?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-04-2012, 02:03 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Shari Tripp called me back this morning and confirmed they can do the 8-round full-size mags with baseplates to fit my a compact-length grip. Going to order two as my backup mags. I'll let everyone know how they turn out.

Last edited by brocktice; 10-04-2012 at 04:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-04-2012, 02:53 PM
AreB AreB is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
Shari Tripp called me back this morning and confirmed they can do the 8-round full-size mags with baseplates to fit my a command-length grip. Going to order two as my backup mags. I'll let everyone know how they turn out.
You meant compact-length, right?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-04-2012, 04:04 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by AreB View Post
You meant compact-length, right?
Yes, fixed. Needed moar coffee this morning.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:19 AM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
Feed lips have everything to do with the point of release. As the slide comes forward and begins to strip the round from the mag, it is the feed lip design that governs the release point.
...
My point is, many people use that article to take shots at Wilson mags, due to their early release point, yet nearly all of the top rated mags use the same style of feed lips and many release the round at the same point. Why don't they find fault with McCormick, Tripp, or any other mag with similar wadcutter feed lips and similar release points?
OK, here's a picture I just took. Left to right: Tripp, Colt factory, Wilson Combat. Go ahead, tell me again how the Wilsons don't have an earlier release point.

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:24 AM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Ack, Tripp just emailed me (very nice of them, mind you, great customer service) to tell me they are short on 8-round mags, and will send mine later this month. They said they won't charge me til they ship. I'll let everyone know how they look and work once I do get them.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:34 AM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
OK, here's a picture I just took. Left to right: Tripp, Colt factory, Wilson Combat. Go ahead, tell me again how the Wilsons don't have an earlier release point.

Where's your comparison McCormick PowerMag?
Quote:
JTQ wrote,
Hey, you can not like Wilson mags for any number of reasons, but I caution people not to complain about the lack of controlled round feed with Wilson's in one breath, and in the next breath say how much better their McCormick mags are. The release point is the same for both mags. If the Wilson's don't have controlled round feed, then neither do McCormick mags.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-05-2012, 11:48 AM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
Where's your comparison McCormick PowerMag?
I've never said they were any different. I haven't ordered one yet. If you have some for a side-by-side pic with Wilsons I would be interested to see it. If you are telling me they look the same as the Wilsons then I probably never will order any for use with my New Agent.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-05-2012, 12:29 PM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
The McCormick PowerMag and Wilson 47D I have in my hand right now have feed lips that look practically identical. I'm sorry, but no pictures.

The point I'm trying to make in this discussion, is in the article you referred to in your first post, the author makes the claim that Wilson mags bypass controlled round feed, and I'm not willing to accept that assertion. In spite of the author's claim, he never proves it in any of his detailed pictures and analysis of the feeding cycle with various ammo types. He may have that information, but he doesn't share it with us.

Your Tripp mag, and the CheckMate wadcutter mag in the center of your picture, both have earlier release points than a GI feed lipped mag. The GI feed lipped mag is really the feed lip designed for "controlled round feed".

The question then is, at what point, in an earlier release than a GI mag, does one lose "controlled round feed"? Where the Tripp mags release, where the CheckMate wadcutters release, where CheckMate's hybrid feed lip mags release, where the McCormick/Wilson mags release? I don't know.

What I do know, is of the top rated 1911 mags out there, Wilson's are consistently rated as one of the best. They may not work with your pistol, but lots and lots of people have good success with them. If they had a specific design shortcoming, I'm sure they would be identified by many, many. users. You can search for problems with Wilson mags, and McCormick mags, and other than any comments referenced to the aforementioned article, nobody complains about the release point of these mags. There may be other complaints, but the release point is not one of them.

I would be willing to bet using the correct capacity mag has more to do with reliable feeding than feed lip design. For instance, in your case, with a New Agent, just about any well regarded 6 round mag, regardless of feed lip design, would work better in your pistol than any 8 round (or 10 round, since I know you're headed that way) magazine.

This is always a worthwhile article regarding 1911 magazines from the late Mr. Camp's blog.

http://hipowers-handguns.blogspot.co...11-45-acp.html

Ultimately, you'll need to do what just about all of us end up doing. Buy a mag from a well recommended maker and see if it works in you pistol. If it works, and you like the design, buy more. All mags don't work in all pistols, even really good mags in really good guns. As Mr. Camp mentions, you up your chances of getting a properly working mag by using 6 rounders in compact 1911's and 7 rounders in full size 1911's.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-05-2012, 12:36 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
The McCormick PowerMag and Wilson 47D I have in my hand right now have feed lips that look practically identical. I'm sorry, but no pictures.
That's fine, that's enough for me to avoid ordering them for this gun. Thanks for saving me the money and the trouble.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
The point I'm trying to make in this discussion, is in the article you referred to in your first post, the author makes the claim that Wilson mags bypass controlled round feed, and I'm not willing to accept that assertion. In spite of the author's claim, he never proves it in any of his detailed pictures and analysis of the feeding cycle with various ammo types. He may have that information, but he doesn't share it with us.

Your Tripp mag, and the CheckMate wadcutter mag in the center of your picture, both have earlier release points than a GI feed lipped mag. The GI feed lipped mag is really the feed lip designed for "controlled round feed".
Does anyone still make/sell such mags? Why would people use shorter lips?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
The question then is, at what point, in an earlier release than a GI mag, does one lose "controlled round feed"? Where the Tripp mags release, where the CheckMate wadcutters release, where CheckMate's hybrid feed lip mags release, where the McCormick/Wilson mags release? I don't know.
This should actually be not too difficult to determine, right? You would have loss of controlled feed if the round is released before it's under the extractor, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
What I do know, is of the top rated 1911 mags out there, Wilson's are consistently rated as one of the best. They may not work with your pistol, but lots and lots of people have good success with them. If they had a specific design shortcoming, I'm sure they would be identified by many, many. users. You can search for problems with Wilson mags, and McCormick mags, and other than any comments referenced to the aforementioned article, nobody complains about the release point of these mags. There may be other complaints, but the release point is not one of them.
Perhaps people do not realize this is the problem?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
I would be willing to bet using the correct capacity mag has more to do with reliable feeding than feed lip design. For instance, in your case, with a New Agent, just about any well regarded 6 round mag, regardless of feed lip design, would work better in your pistol than any 8 round (or 10 round, since I know you're headed that way) magazine.

This is always a worthwhile article regarding 1911 magazines from the late Mr. Camp's blog.

http://hipowers-handguns.blogspot.co...11-45-acp.html

Ultimately, you'll need to do what just about all of us end up doing. Buy a mag from a well recommended maker and see if it works in you pistol. If it works, and you like the design, buy more. All mags don't work in all pistols, even really good mags in really good guns. As Mr. Camp mentions, you up your chances of getting a properly working mag by using 6 rounders in compact 1911's and 7 rounders in full size 1911's.
Yep, this is what I'm doing. At this point I'm going to double down on Tripps, because they're the only mags (so far) with which I haven't had a misfeed. The engineer in me would like to understand why.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-05-2012, 12:38 PM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Posts: 5,010
Quote:
brocktice wrote,
Left to right: Tripp, Colt factory, Wilson Combat. Go ahead, tell me again how the Wilsons don't have an earlier release point.
I never said Wilson's don't have an earlier release point than Tripp. In fact I said Tripp mags release later.
Quote:
JTQ wrote,
McCormick and Wilson feed lips have virtually the same release point. Tripp mags, admittedly, do release a little later.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-05-2012, 12:42 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktice View Post
This should actually be not too difficult to determine, right? You would have loss of controlled feed if the round is released before it's under the extractor, right?
OK, I just cycled some dummy rounds and proved to myself that this is in fact what happens with the wilson mag in my gun. It took three rounds, but the third one popped up in front of the extractor instead of under it.

I know this is not exactly the same as what happens when the slide is running freely on its own in terms of speed, but I would say that I found the problem. Loss of controlled feed.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-05-2012, 12:43 PM
brocktice brocktice is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
I never said Wilson's don't have an earlier release point than Tripp. In fact I said Tripp mags release later.
Sure, but they release even earlier than the Colt (checkmate?) mags.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:35 AM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2011 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved