Solid Concepts Manufactures First 3D-Printed Metal Pistol 333
Zothecula writes "In a prime example of past meets future, a Texas-based company has used a century-old classic firearm as the blueprint for the world's first 3D-printed metal gun. Solid Concepts' use of a laser sintering method to create a fully functional Model 1911 automatic pistol is the latest demonstration of the potential of 3D printing techniques in industrial processing. The company's 'The gun proves laser sintering can meet tight tolerances. 3D Metal Printing has less porosity issues than an investment cast part and better complexities than a machined part. The barrel sees chamber pressure above 20,000 psi every time the gun is fired.'"
New possibilities (Score:5, Interesting)
As for making guns, well, its a good way to get attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'd say modularity is fantastic for maintainability, and an absolute necessity for anything with moving parts. One solid piece isn't always what you want.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure how that criticism could possibly apply in a conversation about open source designs and 3d printing.
Re: (Score:2)
As for making guns, well, its a good way to get attention.
It is, but not just for the sensationalism aspects. It's a good, dramatic demonstration of manufacturing tolerances and material strength. Personally, if I were Solid Concepts, I would have waited to make the announcement until I could show video of the CEO hitting print, all pieces being printed in a single run, open the machine, clean the result, slap it together, and fire off a few rounds at the range all in one continuous shot to demonstrate the speed, reliability, and confidence in the process. As i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The CEO putting his butt on the line to fire the thing would have been a much more convincing testimonial.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:New possibilities (Score:5, Informative)
What is more, because the process is akin to SLS, what you end up with is a box - the build envelope - completely filled with powder, inside of which is the part you've made. You can ordinarily reclaim most of the powder and use it again. If you were to change materials mid-stream, you would have to junk most if not all of the leftover powder, because you wouldn't have a good way to separate the powders.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't try it with dissimilar metals, but it might work with different alloys. The addition of an annealing step might allow some off the sharp boundaries to diffuse away. I can't speak to the waste aspect.
Re: New possibilities (Score:2)
If someone can think of a good application for it, such as tuning thermal expansion through the structure, I could see the capability being developed.
Re: (Score:3)
I work with a lot of different rapid prototyping processes - including DLMS - on a weekly basis. In their current form you cannot change materials mid-part on a DLMS machine. Even if the machine itself could handle it (i.e., had multiple material-handling streams), you would have a tough time getting the dissimilar metals to properly fuse. As a welder how good the results of welding aluminum and steel are, or titanium and steel. Mixing these metals tends to result in brittle intermetallic phases, which are perfect places for fracture. Even worse is that, because the machine works layer-by-layer, the boundary between the two metals would be planar, making fracture all that more likely.
Actually, if you could deliver multiple types of powder into the print area with reasonable precision (normal office laser printers can print on paper with 1200dpi precision, though using electrostatically charged roller like in a normal laser printer may not be applicable for 3D printing), you could solve the problem of (not) fusing the metals together by printing a complicated interlocking 3D pattern around the boundary. While the metals may not fuse anyway, it won't matter because the brittle boundary wi
Re: (Score:2)
Instead of changing materials once, abruptly, creating a brittle failure plane, couldn't you change materials a whole bunch of times little-by-little (changing the alloy mixture) so that you get a gradient of material properties?
Re: (Score:3)
Instead of changing materials once, abruptly, creating a brittle failure plane, couldn't you change materials a whole bunch of times little-by-little (changing the alloy mixture) so that you get a gradient of material properties?
That depends a lot on the materials in question. If the materials don't mix well, the best you'll get by mixing the powders in a progressive fashion would be very close to one metal with lots of impurities. It would be a little stronger than straight boundary but any impurity is still a perfect starting point for fractures.
Re:New possibilities (Score:4, Informative)
Erm, no. First of all, the Kalashnikovs were based off of the StG 44. As in the russians 'granted asylum' to the maker of the 44 and then Mr Kalashnikov miraculously created the 47 with 'no' input from Hugo Schmeisser. At least until 2009 when Kalashnikov admitted that he 'helped' create the 47.
Because plastic is for pansies (Score:3, Funny)
This is excellent news! I know I wouldn't use some questionable hunk of plastic. I'd much rather have metal arms and high capacity magazines for ensuring the cessation of threats to myself, my family, and my property.
Re: (Score:2)
High-capacity magazines? Maybe you should learn better marksmanship. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That's because the average cop is completely incompetent to carry a gun.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So... this becomes a Glock vs. 1911 debate
I appreciate both, both were tremendous changes in design and process for their times.
However, I sold my Glock and bought a 1911.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your choice of posting name is appropriate.
Re:Because plastic is for pansies (Score:5, Informative)
Well, not exactly. It protects against many more threats than just criminals with firearms. It protects against anyone that seeks to do substantial physical harm to you or your family regardless of their means (aka baseball bats, lead pipe, brass knuckles, etc.)
As for the last assumption, you are most likely referring to the Kellermann report which stated that a firearm in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a family member, friend or acquaintance. That report has been debunked many times as it specifically excluded most accounts of self defense and included suicides and even police actions against criminals in the statistics. And of course these are all statistics 30 years out of date, where the murder rate of US citizens has steadily declined to less than half of what it was in 1986. (despite what the media portrays)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The issue though with saying that is that you make the assumption that not having access to a firearm would change the ultimate outcome. In Japan nearly all suicides occur by hanging and they have double the normal suicide rate of the US. Does that mean they should implement rope control?
Expanding on that, when someone tries to hang themselves and fails, is it considered a 'rope-related injury?' No.
So why does it count if someone does the same thing with a gun?
Re: (Score:2)
And of course these are all statistics 30 years out of date, where the murder rate of US citizens has steadily declined to less than half of what it was in 1986. (despite what the media portrays)
As it has in countries with strict gun laws, so there's your correlation. I guess America is just so much more full of crazy people than UK or Japan that we all need guns for protection. Wait, who are those crazy people? Can they buy guns?
Re:Because plastic is for pansies (Score:5, Interesting)
Well actually home invasions have been on the rise in upper class suburban areas for the last decade. Apparently robbing the poor isn't very profitable, so the criminals go where the money is. The fact is that a pretty upper class town in my local area has had 5 home invasions since September and several victims have been killed.
Sadly my neighbor a few years ago was nearly killed in a similar incident. He was stabbed numerous times even after he was tied up, blindfolded, gagged, and beaten numerous times for "not telling them where the valuables were." You are free to keep living in your fairy tale land where bad things don't happen, but please don't remove my means of defense simply because nothing bad has ever happened to you.
http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/story/8d55e96aa3124d178ecefc2f33637580/IN--Home-Invasion-Fears/#.Un0aUPnkvsg
http://www.indianasnewscenter.com/news/local/Double-Shooting-One-Person-Dead-Another-Injured-230483191.html
http://www.wthr.com/story/21649826/police-investigate-homicide-on-indys-northwest-side
http://www.wthr.com/story/18309693/fishers-police-seek-suspect-in-home-invasion-burglary
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB119508694182293480
Re:What would you recommend? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What would you recommend? (Score:5, Funny)
What would you recommend someone use to protect their family from guns?
Stand very still. Most guns have very limited sensory capability and cannot accurately locate something that isn't moving. If you don't startle them, or try to corner them, they are usually quite passive. Some will even allow you to pet them if you make soothing vocal noises as you slowly approach.
But don't ever get between a gun and its cub. A mother gun is very very aggressive.
And don't open the car window to feed them. That just encourages them to break into cars.
I almost had my first real auto accident the other day. I was driving while listening to NPR. They had a story about the increase in bears breaking into cars at national parks. The bears knew there was food inside, and they had learned how to open the doors by watching people do it. Very smart. They'd go in, the door would close behind them, and they'd be trapped. (They don't see how people open them from inside, I guess.) They tear the inside up trying to get out. The warning was, if you approach your car and it is rocking back and forth, it may have a bear trapped inside. They interviewed the expert -- how do you get the bear out of your car? Well, she said, you walk over to the car and ... open the door.
Thank god we have experts in these things to tell us what to do.
Re: (Score:2)
68% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Re: (Score:2)
That report has been thoroughly debunked. It contained statistics which were wrong, made up, and even statistics that were right! Also, the statistic was calculated 30 years ago, and the number of people who understand statistics have halved since then!
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the majority of Firearm related fatalities are suicides. More than 60% in fact, but that isnt what is being debunked.
First of all your assumption that the outcome of those suicides would be different if there were not firearms is spurious at best. But the the report that is typically referenced is the Kellermann report. In the report kellermann only accepted cases of self defense where there was more than 1 aggressor. That means only a few percent of reports were considered matters of self defense. H
This is why we can't have nice things... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is why we can't have nice things....
Couldn't 3D printers make the news the first few years of going mainstream by producing hospital equipment or something?
Re:This is why we can't have nice things... (Score:4, Interesting)
Although if memory serves the South African kid who's father 3D printed his prosthetic hand did actually make the FP in here.
Re: (Score:3)
They do that too. Here you go:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/06/18/191279201/3-d-printer-brings-dexterity-to-children-with-no-fingers [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is why we can't have nice things... (Score:4, Insightful)
The FDA is a lot more strict about the manufacturing of hospital equipment than the BATFE is about guns.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
83 Year-old Woman Gets Replacement 3D Printed Titanium Jaw [engadget.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, they do?
One of the main areas of 3D printed parts right now are medical, especially implants and prosthesis.
It just doesn't make headline news as much as an "omg! guns!" blurb.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...and therein is the rub.
If you're the tinfoil hat type, you can already hear the bootsteps of The Man coming to take our 3D printers away because we printed guns instead of water pots to tend our victory gardens.
Re:This is why we can't have nice things... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not suggesting for a second that it's not an awesome demonstration...
Re: (Score:2)
True, but the comments and articles about the prosthetic limb get buried under an avalanche of articles and comments about "GUNS!!!!".
Military already does this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't milling a gun on CNC machine from a solid block of metal make much more sense?
From a reliability standpoint I'd say yes; however, if your purpose was proving that 3D laser sintering is a high enough quality process that you can make a working firearm, going CNC kind of defeats the purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it requires your design to be something that can be milled externally and there's nothing simple about multi-axis CNC machine or the tooling required to mill the parts which is why a number of gun manufacturers make parts via metal injection molding versus machining.
Plus, a 3D printer can make a range of objects from a variety of alloys, including objects that would be impossible or difficult to make via milling or require mechanical assembly of pieces machined individually to get a part that could
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The cutting part makes less sense, since if you're building the parts up from the ground up you just wouldn't print where you needed it cut. Using multiple materials sounds interesting, though, and while there will always probably be a need to hone surface finishes I would imagine part of the engineering goal is making the sintering process produce as close as possible to a finished surface to minimize secondary finishing steps.
Automatic? (Score:3)
The 1911 is semi-automatic.
Automatic pistols are idiotic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That's a fairly modern distiction. For decades the progression was Single Action - Double Action - Automatic. I still refer to "revolver vs automatic"
edit (Score:2)
3D Metal Printing has less porosity issues than an investment cast part
fewer
Re: (Score:2)
Fewer pores, less porosity.
Materials science/testing (Score:3)
Parts machined from steel stock are fairly well known characteristics, re: machined steel characteristics, tolerances, and variability of a foundries output, are very well known in manufacturing. but then steel manufacturing has been around a long time. i dont know as much about the proprties of sintereed metal, and therefore the parts made of it. so I'd want to see some extensive testng done of the sintered metal, or the results anyway, so that I could have the same confidence and knowledge of the material.
Rifled and tapped? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You can cast a tapped hole, it's just much harder to do with the appropriate tolerances. Drilling a hole and running a tap through it is pretty bolt simple. Casting a hole with fine threads is anything but simple. Simple usually wins.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Scale: the resolution of the printer isn't that much finer than the pitch of the threads. So, yes, you could model the threads in, but they would come out terribly, and you would have to chase it with a tap anyway. Much better to just model/print a smooth hole/cylinder and then cut the threads from solid material.
2) Helix Angle: unlike plastic SLS, which is light enough to be self-supporting, the metal powders need
3D printing doesn't kill people... (Score:3, Informative)
... Cops kill people
Re: (Score:2)
Oblig. quote from the TV series Tatort:
Luck is like a police bullet. It always hits the wrong one.
Guns are good (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been trying to sort out the "guns" issue from a scientific point of view. After some extended searching, I believe the answer is "more guns is better".
This is made enormously difficult by the vast ocean of misinformation put forth by advocates on both sides of the issue. It's an interesting exercise in clear thinking just to sort through the claims to come up with an opinion unfettered by bad logic. I've included some examples below.
In summary, the best measurable statistic appears to be "chance of death from all causes" at the national level. This statistic avoids most of the bad math and bad thinking, and it's easy to measure and verify. The US does not have good health care, and this [national] attribute has a large effect on the mortality rate unrelated to gun-related deaths, so you can't use the US for comparison purposes at the national level. A better comparison is made between two countries with similar national health care and different gun policies. England and Switzerland, for example.
Comparing England and Switzerland indicates that "more guns" is associated with "less mortality". This echoes comparisons made within the US at the local level, where areas with public access to guns have less crime and mortality.
It's pointless to debate the issues in this forum due to the enormous and convoluted "poor statistics" cited by people on both sides of the issue, and virtually everyone is cognitively dissonant and emotionally invested in the answer.
A good analysis of the issues can be found here [americanthinker.com].
Below are just a few examples of popular claims, and how they mislead the reader into one side or the other. There are misleading claims on both sides, so don't read too much into the choice of examples.
Example 1: "Guns do not make a nation safer, say US doctors who have compared the rate of firearms-related deaths in countries where many people own guns with the death rate in countries where gun ownership is rare." (source [theguardian.com]) (False comparison: when gun ownership goes down, deaths due to other causes rises.)
Example 2: England has fewer gun-related murders, but a much higher rate of beating murders. (Undecidable: In the US, a non-suicide gunshot victim is automatically a murder, in England it's not a murder unless there's a trial and conviction.)
Example 3: If you have a gun in the house, you're more likely to accidentally shoot a family member than a burglar. (Wrong statistic: Having a gun depresses the chance of crime for your neighbors, the overall gain in safety for the community may be more than the loss of safety for the individual. See Polio vaccine [wikipedia.org].)
Re:Guns are good (Score:4, Insightful)
In summary, the best measurable statistic appears to be "chance of death from all causes" at the national level.
Is this a parody of clear thinking? Obviously such a broad statistic is going to be most heavily influenced by factors totally unrelated to crime and guns, since the vast majority of people are not murdered.
Comparing England and Switzerland indicates that "more guns" is associated with "less mortality".
Doubtful. More like national service, an effective police force, high standards of living and high wages all combine to make people less inclined to murder each other, with guns or otherwise. Most violent crime is due to anger or poverty, not a careful calculation that the other person is unlikely to have the means to defend themselves with deadly force.
Undecidable: In the US, a non-suicide gunshot victim is automatically a murder
If a modern country like the United States can't even differentiate between murder and accidental shootings it really suggests that there is some deliberate attempt to make those stats unavailable, which in turn suggests they are not favourable.
Wrong statistic: Having a gun depresses the chance of crime for your neighbors
No, it increases the chances that the robber will be armed and willing to shoot first. In the UK armed robbery, especially of residences, is extremely rare and burglars almost always run when confronted.
Guns actually have little to do with the crime rate in the US. Poverty and gang culture is what drives it, as well as some exceptionally stupid drug laws.
Any other arguments out there? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm happy (indeed - eager!) to examine a better analysis. If I can't find flaws, it'll inform my opinions and I'll include it in future postings on the issue.
Please include references of statistics so that I can fully analyze the arguments of both sides. There is just so much disinformation out there that the first step can only be tossing out all anecdotes and un-cited facts.
Here's an example (posted above) of what doesn't serve to inform the debate (it's ad-hominem, anecdotal, and un-falsifiable):
The American Thinker article is worthless. It just gives more of the false comparisons that you're complaining about. (Yeah, if you remove a whole bunch of poor people from the crime stats for any nation, their murder rate will look way better.) The author also attempts to profit from the audience's ignorance by comparing with nations like Jamaica and Brazil and hoping the reader doesn't know that those are some of the most crime-ridden, gang-infested countries on earth, where gangs rule neighborhoods and police fight pitched battles with criminals.
50 rounds is impressive (Score:2)
Sintered metal often has a lot of microscopic voids in the resulting grain structure so I'm kind of surprised it withstood 50 rounds. The slamming of the action exacerbates the fracture tendency as well. It's basically proof-of-concept, but I'm curious how many rounds this thing would take before failing. I like their clever choice of Inconel even if used only for the barrel (not sure where they used it though).
Space/Propulsion applications (Score:3)
TFA isn't exactly clear, but they seem to be saying that parts made this way are stronger then castings.
I wonder if this would have applications in any of the new launch vehicle engines. For simple parts, SLS might be cost prohibitive, but for complex parts, it may provide superior strength and more complex, one piece parts.
If material strength isn't an issue, then he sky's the limit.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
TFA isn't exactly clear, but they seem to be saying that parts made this way are stronger then castings.
I wonder if this would have applications in any of the new launch vehicle engines.
Other people are way ahead of you [slashdot.org].
Re:Space/Propulsion applications (Score:5, Funny)
You talk about designing new launch vehicle engines and then you say the sky's the limit.
Your rockets are in a lot of trouble, sir.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't which planet's sky. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
exactly, it's not new in any way the impressive part is their ability to print a gun barrel that will take the pressure and printed in the rifling.
Re:CNC machines can do that already (Score:5, Informative)
better complexities than a machined part.
But weaker parts.
When making metal parts the the metallurgical properties are more important than the shape. The direction of the molecules in the metal make the difference between something that's hard and brittle vs. something that's soft and elastic.
Re: (Score:3)
Some geometries are impossible to make with CNC and machined parts always weigh more... if a part meets it's specification who cares how it was done?
Re:CNC machines can do that already (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing is, people make their own guns all the time in gun fans' equivalent to makers meets. They use a combination of tecniques. You really want the barrel and receiver to be forged, not cast. But you can take roughed-out forged parts and them CnC mill them to perfection, and get the strength easily enough.
There's little point in trying to CnC mill the entire gun, but a combination of forged blanks, a rolled tube for a barrel, some milling, and simply buying all the other pieces mail order (they sell kits for this), and you have a perfectly serviceable AR15 with no serial number. In most places that's perfectly legal, as long as you've avoided any legal landmines along the way and especially that you never sell it.
That's the thing, legally. In most places in the US you can legally make your own gun, but making a gun for someone else makes you a firearms dealer. People are arguing over where selling the code to allow someone to make a gun automatically lands, legally (if you follow kit cars at all, you'll find this all familiar).
Outside the US, in places where you can't legally make your own gun, this is a much bugger deal.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if the brown shirts come for your family, exactly 1 gun is worlds better than exactly 0 guns. But, hey, maybe that sort of thing could never happen where you are, and that's really the only scenario where I see an illegal firearm being a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
But weaker parts.
When making metal parts the the metallurgical properties are more important than the shape. The direction of the molecules in the metal make the difference between something that's hard and brittle vs. something that's soft and elastic.
You can harden and temper the printed metal part just like any other.
Re: (Score:2)
The direction of the molecules in the metal make the difference between something that's hard and brittle vs. something that's soft and elastic.
Great. Now I have a Salvador Dali vision of a nice, gooey 45 caliber pistol kind of dripping and drooping...
Re: (Score:3)
So cryo treat the metal before it is printed..just like you cryo treat tool steel (REAL tool steel..for punch/dies) before it's put into a mill..
Or how you cryo treat spot welder tips before they are put into a lathe...
Ditto with the heat treat oven..
Re: (Score:3)
Is that you, Tipper Gore?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Guns don't kill people, physics kills people." -- Dick Solomon
Ban physics!
Re: (Score:2)
Arrrrgh! We're all going to die!
Ban Metal!!!
Music snob!
Strat
Re:Automatic pistol? (Score:5, Insightful)
For the same reason that they refer to intermediate cartridges as "high power": journalists are morons.
Re:Automatic pistol? (Score:4, Insightful)
"journalists are morons."
And they have agendas.
Re:Automatic pistol? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are semi-automatic weapons so often referred to as automatic? It seems to be a common misnomer in the US but I'm curious why.
Sensationalism; the same reason putting a synthetic stock with a Weaver rail on it magically turns an ordinary deer rifle into a "military grade assault weapon."
Re:Good enough for rocket engines (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is anyone surprised laser sintering is more than capable of this? This is nothing more than tech demo clickbait; anyone following the capabilities of SLS already knew this was well within the realm of possibility. Just nowhere close to the realm of practicality from a fiscal perspective.
Also, it's a waste of weight and money to do it this way. SLS should be used for key parts, but the rest should be normal 3D printed plastic (like a Glock).
And as we all know, 100% of Slashdot readers are well versed in laser sintering techniques and capabilities.
The article explains why - as a demonstration of some of the ways this process is superior to machining. I'm a nerd, it's news to me, and it matters in the context of the potential for 3d printing to change significant aspects of society, and yes, firearm availability is significant.
Re: (Score:2)
This is nothing more than tech demo clickbait; anyone following the capabilities of SLS already knew this was well within the realm of possibility.
Believe it or not, even on Slashdot not everyone has been following the progress of SLS. As for clickbait, sure it's for PR. Nothing wrong with that to get some publicity for a company's capabilities.
Also, it's a waste of weight and money to do it this way. SLS should be used for key parts, but the rest should be normal 3D printed plastic (like a Glock).
FTA: "Solid Concept says that the point of the exercise wasn't to create a cheaper pistol". In real production the metal parts could probably be made less expensively by traditional metal fab techniques. Plastic can be injection molded.
Re:Good enough for rocket engines (Score:5, Funny)
Do you have any IDEA how many people would just shit themselves at your suggestion that a Sacred and Precious, Immaculately Concieved 1911 (insert heavenly choir ahhh-ahhhhhh) contain <bleeech> plastic parts?????
I want you to go to your room and THINK about what you have done.
Re: (Score:3)
You know, repeating a lie doesn't make it true.
FWIW, the NRA is mainly funded by member dues and donations, not gun manufacturers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Prediction: There will be heavier restrictions. (Score:4, Insightful)
Example: most NRA members (75%) support sensible gun control
And how many people agree on a single definition of sensible?
Re:"Sensible" (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Define "sensible."
Where I come from, you see a lot of posters and bumper stickers that say something to the effect of, "gun control is using both hands/knowing your target." Something tells me our idea of 'sensible' is going to be a bit different than, say, someone living in NYC.
Side note: I see from your link that they're basing this claim on a poll, but do not actually have a link anywhere on the page for readers to review the poll for themselves (at least, not that I found).
This being Slashdot, with a cr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Percentage of people eventually dying:
With guns: 100%
Without guns: 100%
7% of all people who have ever lived are alive today, meaning human mortality is currently somewhere around 93%.
http://what-if.xkcd.com/27/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Wow the first truly "unexpected" comment I've read on slashdot in a long time.
Nice.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In semi-automatic pistols, the slide (that upper part you talk about) does not return when the magazine is empty. That is, the reason it's stuck open is because it out of bullets. For a three-shot test they, very sensibly, only loaded three cartridges into the magazine.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course between the more precise tolerances and the shitty MIM parts you get all the rumors of 1911s being unreliable. Whereas in an original design 1911 the only parts that needed replacing with anything approaching regularity were the extractor and spring.