Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MadMax
Actually he got to check out a sample we ordered to see if it was something worth carrying.
The slide lock does not reliably function. You can cock it one handed by making a sharp punching motion holding the grip. And there's a funny malfunction where the gun does not fire if the hammer starts decocked and you cock the hammer after replacing the mag. If you rack the slide that bit works ok.
The fill valve is of the single port style popular with KJW which does not assure consistent fill.
With so many niggling issues seen in only one sample it doesn't look like a great GBB to carry. The slide catch might be a random defect, but the hammer issue is a design problem. The mag fire valve has a smaller diameter than the TM design. Because of this, the firing pin does not reset properly (the problem goes away with TM mags). The fill valve is a design problem. Try filling a hot mag with a cold tank. The very heavy slide and impotent recoil spring is a design issue.
If you pull the slide back and ease it forward with the gun pointed upwards, the slide cannot fully return to battery as the slide is nearly as heavy as the preload in the recoil spring. Sliding friction eats up the rest of the force.
While the TM build is faithfully copied, the spirit of the design is not appreciated. There's a lot of subtlety that can be missed with a pair of vernier calipers and a willingness to cut corners.
|
As per a real 1911, you'll always "start" off with hammer down. You need to actually put one in the tube, simply cocking the hammer will not function on a real-steel 1911 either. So, in that respect, yes, it actually is closer to a real 1911ish design. My 5.1 was a very nicely built piece, in respect to the price it fetched.
Only true problem I saw was the ambi-safe is pretty loose (so loc-tite, but never open again), and the grip safety had an abnormally high rate of not functioning off the production line.