dave williams springfield armory

Rosco Benson · 11-29-2001, 08:35 PM

A pal of mine recently bought a Springfield Armory stainless/alloy "Compact" (PX9162L).

The pistol is very nice. Unlike the earlier "loaded" models, it features a cross-dovetailed front sight and is pretty well dehorned. Removing the ugly rubber stock and screwing on a couple nice wood panels resulted in a pretty little blaster. It functioned perfectly and even had a nice trigger. Springfield was even on the ball enough to use the thicker/higher version of the Novak rear sight, so the pistol will hit POA/POI and still have a decently high front sight. All in all, a very nice pistol and a real value.

So why BOO?

My pal disliked the integral mainspring housing lock...on principle. I agree. He purchased a Wilson 30-LPI checkered housing and an Officers ACP-sized mainspring, mainspring cap & pin, and mainspring housing pin retainer (the Springfield uses the same diameter components as a full-size 1911. Colt and the aftermarket housings use a larger diameter spring & parts).

However, upon trying to install the new mainspring housing, it became apparent that Springfield Armory wasn't content just to put a lock on their mainspring housing. THEY MOVED THE $%?#*&% PIN HOLE! That's right. The mainspring housing pin hole is drilled a tiny bit farther toward the rear of the frame than Colt-spec and the holes won't line up to permit the pin to be pressed home.

Thinking that we had an out-of-spec frame or mainspring housing, my pal called Springfield today and they 'fessed up to changing the position on the holes.

WEAK, Springfield Armory, WEAK.

I originally thought that Springfield's Integral Locking System was pretty clever. It originally appeared that it was there if one wanted it, but easily replaced if one didn't want it. Things are not always as they appear.

Rosco

[ This Message was edited by: Rosco Benson on 2001-11-29 21:39 ]

youngun · 11-30-2001, 01:46 AM

Well, we can sure as hell fix that.
Let's see what the loaded 2003 models look like.

Here's their email for anyone interested in sharing your feelings about this.
sales@springfield-armory.com

This is really just biz as usual though.
You don't want to spend R&D and ad hype making something the customer will just swap out at first chance.

We just need to 'splain to them just how important it is for us to play Mr Potato Head with our toys.

[maybe move to political forum?]

Hilton Yam · 11-30-2001, 05:17 AM

Rosco:
Does this mean that ALL SA pistols will have mislocated MSH holes, including the Milspec? That would put SA right in there with Kimber and Colt as far as "almost got it right" 1911's. They were the only ones left...

buzz_knox · 11-30-2001, 08:15 AM

So much for Springfield 1911s for me. Ah, well. I prefer Kimbers and Colts, myself.

Paten · 11-30-2001, 08:58 AM

This has to be a recent change or only on their compact frames. I had a 9mm Loaded model with the MSH lock on it earlier this year. I was able to put a Colt polymer MSH in the pistol as a replacement, then change it back when I sold it. I've also noticed that, sometimes, aftermarket MSH's are not all up to spec. My father has a Para-Ordnance P12 with the factory MSH in it. He had purchased a S&A replacement MSH that the holes wouldn't line up on. These are even labeled specifically for the P10/P12. So I think there is some play in some manufacturers tolerances. Have you tried any other MSH's or just the one?

Stephen A. Camp · 11-30-2001, 09:04 AM

Hello, Roscoe, and thanks for the informative post. I'd assumed, like many, that one could just swap out the mainspring housings.

I'll put the word out in my neck of the woods.

Thanks again.

Best.

Rosco Benson · 11-30-2001, 09:41 AM

I can't say whether or not this folly is limited to the Compact frames. I also can't speculate on whether whether earlier iterations of the Integral Locking System had the pin-holes properly located. I can only address the one example that my friend and I encountered.

I will note that, in addition to the Wilson housing, we tried a Colt housing in the SA frame and it wouldn't work. We tried the Wilson housing in a Colt Officers ACP frame and it worked fine. We tried the SA "ILS" housing in the Colt frame and the holes were off.

Unlike the various key-locked Taurus' and other junk on the market, this is a sad situation, because the SA "loaded" pistols are very nice otherwise. The blockier frontstrap profile and thicker dust cover were items that I was willing to live with (or have corrected). This bastard hole location thing is "strike three" as far as I'm concerned.

Rosco

Paten · 11-30-2001, 10:56 AM

I just don't understand what the reasoning would be for not allowing the user to swap out the MSH. What if I wanted checkering or scallops or the wave on my MSH? One of the draws for the 1911 style pistol is how many customizing options are available. Why would they want to limit my options as a customer? That just drives me away from their product.

I'm sure it will just be a matter of time before one or more aftermarket company comes out with the "New and Improved" Springfield pinhole cut MSH, so what exactly is the point of changing the pin location? Have you talked to Dave Williams about this? I would like to hear what he has to say about it.

One things for sure though. I won't be buying another new Springfield pistol until I know I can swap out the mainspring housing.

[ This Message was edited by: Paten on 2001-11-30 12:05 ]

Mute · 11-30-2001, 03:48 PM

It must be on Compact models only because I was able to swap my old Milspec arched MSH with the ILS one that came with my Loaded Champion. Besides, I thought they had made the ILS system to be readily added to any current 1911. If what you're saying is true than there's either 2 lines of ILS (one for SA guns, one for all others) or there's one set of ILS for the Compact size frames and another for the full size frames.

Maybe I'll send of an email to Springfield to get the lowdown.

Shay · 11-30-2001, 06:35 PM

At least the pro model doesnt have this dumb ILS system.

Vladimir Josip Rumac · 11-30-2001, 07:37 PM

Referring to recent SA 2001 product literature, I've observed the MSH pin hole on certain models located closer back to the edge of the backstrap. As Mute implies above, this seems to be on the compacts only. -- The Compact Lightweight, Ultra-Compact and High Capacity Ultra-Compact.
All other models seem to have their pin hole at a consistantly same distance further away from the backstrap edge.
I believe they must have had a good reason for this. If someone here will communicate with Dave Williams, I too would be interested to hear the outcome. Please post it.

Vladimir Josip Rumac · 11-30-2001, 07:51 PM

Quote:

On 2001-11-30 19:35, Shay wrote:
At least the pro model doesnt have this dumb ILS system.

What about the Operator?

_________________
Proud to Be Canadian Eh!

[ This Message was edited by: Vladimir on 2001-11-30 20:53 ]

Rosco Benson · 12-06-2001, 09:08 AM

Springfield's custom shop director, Dave Williams, has responded to this issue over on http://www.1911forum.com (in the Springfield Armory forum). His position is that the location of the holes hasn't changed and that the ILS housings will retrofit to any 1911. This is contrary to what Springfield's service rep told my friend when he called the factory, but I'll put more weight on Dave Williams' opinion than that of a service rep.

I posed the question "Will a Colt-spec mainspring housing retrofit to an ILS-equipped Springfield?" and await his response. I hope that the pistol that gave my friend and I problems is simply out-of-spec on the hole location. I'll report Dave's response here.

Rosco

ragls · 12-06-2001, 09:44 AM

I have a new SA that had the ILS MSH and I swapped it out for a S&A integral magwell MSH. I had some fitting to do as the S&A housing is deigned to be a tight flush fit but the hole lined up fine once the housing was fitted.

I don't see this as being such a problem to say BOO to SA. I personally believe that they are the best deal going for a 1911! I have owned Kimbers until I saw the light that they are fantasy created by advertising dollars!
I also like Colt series 70 1911's and have 2 of them that are set up for Bullseye but have been extensively modified.
Playing Mr. Potato head with are 1911's sometimes takes a little patience to fit some of the pieces after all that is the fun of it to me.

Rosco Benson · 12-08-2001, 09:28 AM

As "Paten" (over on 1911forum) pointed out, Smith & Alexander lists different part numbers for Officers ACP and Springfield Compact mainspring housings. Wilson Combat's website carries the caveat that minor fitting may be required to fit their Officers ACP-sized mainspring housings to the Springfield Compact. Although I can't imagine why, it looks as if the Springfield Compact differs from the Colt Officers ACP in terms of mainspring housing specs. Springfield's Dave Williams' contention that they have not changed the location of the frame's holes is apparently true. The holes have apparently been slightly off Colt-spec since the inception of the product and long before the ILS system was introduced.

I apologize for my error. I was mistaken. What I perceived as a design change to prevent the swapping out of the ILS system appears to simply be a non-Colt-spec aspect of the Springfield product.

My "BOO" is hereby withdrawn.

Rosco

ragls · 12-09-2001, 08:27 AM

Roscoe, if there is something about SA 1911's that I have found to be a pisser is that the "loaded" fullsize has very loose tolerances in the hammer sear slot which allows more than my liking of hammer and sear side play.

I plan on ordering a new hammer and sear along with the oversized pins to correct this.

More of tweaking which is Okay by me as I will in the end have one sweet Mr. Potato Head SA 1911!

11-29-2001, 08:35 PM	#1
Rosco Benson Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 515	A pal of mine recently bought a Springfield Armory stainless/alloy "Compact" (PX9162L). The pistol is very nice. Unlike the earlier "loaded" models, it features a cross-dovetailed front sight and is pretty well dehorned. Removing the ugly rubber stock and screwing on a couple nice wood panels resulted in a pretty little blaster. It functioned perfectly and even had a nice trigger. Springfield was even on the ball enough to use the thicker/higher version of the Novak rear sight, so the pistol will hit POA/POI and still have a decently high front sight. All in all, a very nice pistol and a real value. So why BOO? My pal disliked the integral mainspring housing lock...on principle. I agree. He purchased a Wilson 30-LPI checkered housing and an Officers ACP-sized mainspring, mainspring cap & pin, and mainspring housing pin retainer (the Springfield uses the same diameter components as a full-size 1911. Colt and the aftermarket housings use a larger diameter spring & parts). However, upon trying to install the new mainspring housing, it became apparent that Springfield Armory wasn't content just to put a lock on their mainspring housing. THEY MOVED THE $%?#*&% PIN HOLE! That's right. The mainspring housing pin hole is drilled a tiny bit farther toward the rear of the frame than Colt-spec and the holes won't line up to permit the pin to be pressed home. Thinking that we had an out-of-spec frame or mainspring housing, my pal called Springfield today and they 'fessed up to changing the position on the holes. WEAK, Springfield Armory, WEAK. I originally thought that Springfield's Integral Locking System was pretty clever. It originally appeared that it was there if one wanted it, but easily replaced if one didn't want it. Things are not always as they appear. Rosco <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Rosco Benson on 2001-11-29 21:39 ]</font>

11-30-2001, 10:56 AM	#8
Paten Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 87	I just don't understand what the reasoning would be for not allowing the user to swap out the MSH. What if I wanted checkering or scallops or the wave on my MSH? One of the draws for the 1911 style pistol is how many customizing options are available. Why would they want to limit my options as a customer? That just drives me away from their product. I'm sure it will just be a matter of time before one or more aftermarket company comes out with the "New and Improved" Springfield pinhole cut MSH, so what exactly is the point of changing the pin location? Have you talked to Dave Williams about this? I would like to hear what he has to say about it. One things for sure though. I won't be buying another new Springfield pistol until I know I can swap out the mainspring housing. <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Paten on 2001-11-30 12:05 ]</font>

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Springfield Armory	Rem700	M1911 Pistols	0	10-04-2007 05:36 AM
Springfield Armory XD-9	MichaelOrick	Gun Tests	8	05-07-2003 06:16 AM
Springfield Armory TRP	Rabid Maddog	M1911 Pistols	6	03-24-2002 02:47 PM
Springfield Armory	meanoldman	M1911 Pistols	4	02-13-2002 06:47 PM
Gun oil for Springfield Armory SS	Zayomabi	M1911 Pistols	9	05-28-2001 09:10 PM

dave williams email adress springfield armory

dave williams springfield armory

dave williams springfield armory best

sa ultra compact mainspring housing pin sizes

springfield armory custom shop dave williams

springfield armory scallop

springfield compact mainspring housing

springfield custom scallops

springfield mainspring cap

11-30-2001, 01:46 AM	#2
youngun Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 93	Well, we can sure as hell fix that. Let's see what the loaded 2003 models look like. Here's their email for anyone interested in sharing your feelings about this. sales@springfield-armory.com This is really just biz as usual though. You don't want to spend R&D and ad hype making something the customer will just swap out at first chance. We just need to 'splain to them just how important it is for us to play Mr Potato Head with our toys. [maybe move to political forum?]

11-30-2001, 05:17 AM	#3
Hilton Yam Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 239	Rosco: Does this mean that ALL SA pistols will have mislocated MSH holes, including the Milspec? That would put SA right in there with Kimber and Colt as far as "almost got it right" 1911's. They were the only ones left...

11-30-2001, 08:15 AM	#4
buzz_knox Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 418	So much for Springfield 1911s for me. Ah, well. I prefer Kimbers and Colts, myself.

11-30-2001, 08:58 AM	#5
Paten Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 87	This has to be a recent change or only on their compact frames. I had a 9mm Loaded model with the MSH lock on it earlier this year. I was able to put a Colt polymer MSH in the pistol as a replacement, then change it back when I sold it. I've also noticed that, sometimes, aftermarket MSH's are not all up to spec. My father has a Para-Ordnance P12 with the factory MSH in it. He had purchased a S&A replacement MSH that the holes wouldn't line up on. These are even labeled specifically for the P10/P12. So I think there is some play in some manufacturers tolerances. Have you tried any other MSH's or just the one?

11-30-2001, 09:04 AM	#6
Stephen A. Camp Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Southwest Posts: 2,371	Hello, Roscoe, and thanks for the informative post. I'd assumed, like many, that one could just swap out the mainspring housings. I'll put the word out in my neck of the woods. Thanks again. Best.

11-30-2001, 09:41 AM	#7
Rosco Benson Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 515	I can't say whether or not this folly is limited to the Compact frames. I also can't speculate on whether whether earlier iterations of the Integral Locking System had the pin-holes properly located. I can only address the one example that my friend and I encountered. I will note that, in addition to the Wilson housing, we tried a Colt housing in the SA frame and it wouldn't work. We tried the Wilson housing in a Colt Officers ACP frame and it worked fine. We tried the SA "ILS" housing in the Colt frame and the holes were off. Unlike the various key-locked Taurus' and other junk on the market, this is a sad situation, because the SA "loaded" pistols are very nice otherwise. The blockier frontstrap profile and thicker dust cover were items that I was willing to live with (or have corrected). This bastard hole location thing is "strike three" as far as I'm concerned. Rosco

11-30-2001, 03:48 PM	#9
Mute Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: People's Republik, Komrade Posts: 934	It must be on Compact models only because I was able to swap my old Milspec arched MSH with the ILS one that came with my Loaded Champion. Besides, I thought they had made the ILS system to be readily added to any current 1911. If what you're saying is true than there's either 2 lines of ILS (one for SA guns, one for all others) or there's one set of ILS for the Compact size frames and another for the full size frames. Maybe I'll send of an email to Springfield to get the lowdown.

11-30-2001, 06:35 PM	#10
Shay Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 407	At least the pro model doesnt have this dumb ILS system.

11-30-2001, 07:37 PM	#11
Vladimir Josip Rumac Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 120	Referring to recent SA 2001 product literature, I've observed the MSH pin hole on certain models located closer back to the edge of the backstrap. As Mute implies above, this seems to be on the compacts only. -- The Compact Lightweight, Ultra-Compact and High Capacity Ultra-Compact. All other models seem to have their pin hole at a consistantly same distance further away from the backstrap edge. I believe they must have had a good reason for this. If someone here will communicate with Dave Williams, I too would be interested to hear the outcome. Please post it.

12-06-2001, 09:08 AM	#13
Rosco Benson Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 515	Springfield's custom shop director, Dave Williams, has responded to this issue over on http://www.1911forum.com (in the Springfield Armory forum). His position is that the location of the holes hasn't changed and that the ILS housings will retrofit to any 1911. This is contrary to what Springfield's service rep told my friend when he called the factory, but I'll put more weight on Dave Williams' opinion than that of a service rep. I posed the question "Will a Colt-spec mainspring housing retrofit to an ILS-equipped Springfield?" and await his response. I hope that the pistol that gave my friend and I problems is simply out-of-spec on the hole location. I'll report Dave's response here. Rosco

12-06-2001, 09:44 AM	#14
ragls Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Maryland Posts: 72	I have a new SA that had the ILS MSH and I swapped it out for a S&A integral magwell MSH. I had some fitting to do as the S&A housing is deigned to be a tight flush fit but the hole lined up fine once the housing was fitted. I don't see this as being such a problem to say BOO to SA. I personally believe that they are the best deal going for a 1911! I have owned Kimbers until I saw the light that they are fantasy created by advertising dollars! I also like Colt series 70 1911's and have 2 of them that are set up for Bullseye but have been extensively modified. Playing Mr. Potato head with are 1911's sometimes takes a little patience to fit some of the pieces after all that is the fun of it to me.

12-08-2001, 09:28 AM	#15
Rosco Benson Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 515	As "Paten" (over on 1911forum) pointed out, Smith & Alexander lists different part numbers for Officers ACP and Springfield Compact mainspring housings. Wilson Combat's website carries the caveat that minor fitting may be required to fit their Officers ACP-sized mainspring housings to the Springfield Compact. Although I can't imagine why, it looks as if the Springfield Compact differs from the Colt Officers ACP in terms of mainspring housing specs. Springfield's Dave Williams' contention that they have not changed the location of the frame's holes is apparently true. The holes have apparently been slightly off Colt-spec since the inception of the product and long before the ILS system was introduced. I apologize for my error. I was mistaken. What I perceived as a design change to prevent the swapping out of the ILS system appears to simply be a non-Colt-spec aspect of the Springfield product. My "BOO" is hereby withdrawn. Rosco

12-09-2001, 08:27 AM	#16
ragls Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Maryland Posts: 72	Roscoe, if there is something about SA 1911's that I have found to be a pisser is that the "loaded" fullsize has very loose tolerances in the hammer sear slot which allows more than my liking of hammer and sear side play. I plan on ordering a new hammer and sear along with the oversized pins to correct this. More of tweaking which is Okay by me as I will in the end have one sweet Mr. Potato Head SA 1911!