Besides added weight and bulk, is there any reason NOT to use fit and blended S&A magwell?
There is no reason not to use one. I have a few. On the other hand, I am no longer sure there is a reason to use one.
Well the question is why do you need/want one?
I dont think they are beneficial in a carry gun.
But on a range/competition gun they make sense for faster easier reloads.
If its a safe queen, I do think they looks nice if fully blended and fitted well
They can make it difficult to seat a mag-by that I mean making it click into place.
I liked the one I had on my first 1911. My Tripp Research Mags stick out the bottom a bit anyway, so it didn’t make the grip stick out any further than the mag already way, and I never had any problems with the mag not seating when using Tripp Research 8 rounders or other mags that had base pads.
I see no reason to not run a magwell on a 1911. Including concealability. Most modern mags run a baseplate of some sort so the added length of a magwell is a wash in terms of added length.
I run a magwell on every single 1911 I carry, with the exception being my SA mil-spec and a Colt Series 70 repro, and that is only because I want them to look “authenticious”.
I want every advantage I can get and if the addition of a magwell increases my mag changes by a fraction, the added weight and length are worth it.
Nope… They make nice kit!
I like them on all my 1911’s. Besides the easier reloads the extra quarter inch of checkered mainspring feels like it gives a little more control but I have fairly large hands.
Because you have way too much money and want to waste some of it on one of the Nighthawk ones?
There are arguments to be made in both directions, I suppose, but in general, I don’t find magazine chutes or funnels to be all-that-necessary or even particularly useful. Have certainly had guns in both configurations (still do), but am probably more likely to remove them these days than to retain or install new one.
With proper indexing and regular practice, a 1911 presents no special reloading difficulties. Of course, the gamer/competition side of the house looking for that extra thousandth in a split will tell you otherwise, but now we’re talking about an entirely different application for the gun.
Where carry and defensive roles are concerned, what you’re talking about is more stuff on the gun, and in this case, that added length can preclude the use of low-profile basepads. I’d rather keep things as compact as possible than to add an extra quarter-inch onto the butt of the gun that serves no practical purpose.
Not saying there is no reason to consider them, but as is so often the case when we’re talking 1911s, you probably stand to gain something by asking “why” before just checking another box on the options sheet, or having a smith add a feature that serves primarily to separate you from some more of your money.
AC
AC, would you quit trying to brainwash us with your logic and common sense?
so a “speedswap” is not exactly in the cards. IWB, the spare is almost as much hassle and discomfort as is the gun, and you are most unlikely to need it swiftly (and live to tell of it) so I just blew off the idea.
I hate magwells.
I used one for two days on a borrowed Pro and thought it was the most useless, ridiculous thing I’d ever seen on a 1911.
But everyone else seems to like 'em…
I’ve found the Magholder horizontal mag carrier makes it painless for me to carry a spare mag in an accessible way. www.magholder.com
I don’t like 'em. I think that you’re probably better off just having the frame itself beveled. However, and EGW weld on mag chute, probably isn’t a terrible option.
My preference, since I know that everyone and their brother is extremely interested in this information, is for a Round Butt conversion and nice simple bevel in the tunnel (60-degrees is fine, thanks).
Bolt-/weld-on chutes and funnels meet the needs of competitor and game guys, as I indicated earlier, and I’m glad that they have this option. I just have never figured out how it meets any pressing need for me, despite having a gun or two so-equipped over the years.
Kind of like lipstick on a first cousin, I guess. Nice, but not super-relevant in my world.
AC
Magwells where the frame is shortened to accommodate the added length are pretty dang cool. Add in a custom contoured rounded butt well to the aforementioned scenario and on the right gun it both accelerates reloads and looks badass.
unless you’re from Alabama:haha:
I’m a proponent of magwells on 1911’s. I believe Ken Hackathorn is as well. I’ve used several, from Ed Brown, S&A, EGW, etc. The best standard profile magwell is the Wilson Bulletproof.
Take a look at the difference:
S&A
Wilson
See the difference in the size and angle of the well? Obviously to maximize the effectiveness of the well, it needs to be blended to the frame (as the Wilson is).
If your gun is for carry, one other option I’d strongly consider is the Chen Magwell Suite. It’s pricey as hell, but it offers all the benefits of a magwell with no downside for a carry gun.
I have 1911’s with magwells and without - to me it depends on the intended use of the pistol in terms of installing one or going without - as well as the design intent ( carry vs duty vs retro vs classic )
I will say this ; after using and installing the S&A magwell for years the Wilson Bulletproof one is hands down the finest of the magwell/mainspring housing type I have ever used - my current Supergrade training 1911 has one and it is superb
If you decide a magwell is a good option for you then do yourself a favor and check out Wilson’s version - you will be glad you did