[e-luder]

LOL.

I didn't realize you were in that kind of train of thought.
I'm not comparing anyone to anyone.
Comparing dick sizes isn't my thing...

Of course you rack a slide a million times with the frame to wear each other out but that is only if you have a similar brand lower frame and slide. Most slides from other companies outside of the premium grade brands (Surgeon/NOVA/PROG4) like Shooters Design, 5KU, Creation tend to fit loose and rise up. Sometimes the slides don't even fit at all and require some serious modifications.

Disagree completely.

Loose or not, racking the slide a million times is one the only few ways to fuse the slide to the frame properly regardless of their make and model to naturally smoothen the surface area and thereby minimizing the forthcoming wear that occurs from future combat use.

My original point was if someone wanted to slap on an after-market slide from those brands aside from the premium grade brands you are going to run into more problems since they slimmed down the frame on the Gold Match version.

If you start with the 5.1 with the regular made frame, you are more likely able to run into less problems (since most after-market slides are modelled on the original 5.1 design) and at least get some good use out of the original frame before it goes kaput. That being said, I did say that the original frames are no good for building a "race-gun".

I don't completely find this statement to be valid.

Mainly because if you're making this kind of distinction between the two platforms, you can't simply say that putting on a slide tailored for one gun will react the same way in the other gun with different a point-of-interaction.

When building a custom race gun I would say every piece plays an important role, you can't have a loose slide and say just cause the barrel is bone solid your accuracy wouldn't be affected. The inner barrel shifting issue can be addressed easily like you pointed out (you even made that make shift spring and o-ring to guide it), you don't need to buy a gold match just for the sake of a inner barrel support.

While I agree with you that "every piece plays an important role", yes I can say because "...the barrel is bone solid, your [my] accuracy wouldn't be affected."

If we're talking purely and simply about race guns, there's no real point in tuning hop ups because of the engagement distance. And even then, if you need to go further, you'd likely just switch out your BB weights anyways.

So the only thing that can point your BBs in the unintended direction is the actual barrel....

The purpose of that support structure is not to stabilize the inner barrel. It's purpose is to reduce the likelihood of your barrel chewing up the lugs on your slide thereby reducing the chance of your slide and barrel locking up.

Again here's what it does:

What it does is "...push the [outer] barrel back to it's natural state. This ensures the chamber is always lowered and clear of the slide. When the slide returns to battery, it will push the barrel back in to battery. As the slide moves backwards, the barrel will follow the slide back. With this method, even if your lugs are completely smoked, it's still functional ". -iLLusion.

and here's what I said:

I can't see why you discard this gun so easily to work from. You'd actually be downgrading if you use the old 5.1 since it doesn't have that inner barrel system that prevents the inevitable slide self-destruction. THat's a big plus to this gun....

To me the self destruction of a $1500 hardware is just...uncalled for. So why not invest in something that has the potential of minimizing this occurance right from the get go!?

You make a good argument about gas efficiency by asking questions like "blowback unit trip the disconnector too late? does the piston head seal properly? Does the recoil spring have too much tension? Doesn't the floating valve close too late?" surely enough these are all good questions to ask, but the most important thing is keeping the weight of the upper frame light. Meaning using a lightweight BBU, plastic loading nozzle, plastic floating valve etc. Then after you can ask the questions you had mentioned.

Dont dont do that.
Dont piggy back on an idea or a point that i've already made to you.
Stay and defend your original argument. That's what i want to see. Dont just cower behind mine. Dont just expand on my contentional argument to make a point that I've already pointed out to try and sweep your original argument under the rug. You've done it twice now. If that's the way you're going to proceed then you're right to end things right here and now.

Weight can play a role in gas efficiency, but again, I disagree with how important your making it out to be.

Every Glock that I built thus far, is always able to spit out the same amount (and sometimes more) of BBs regardless of slide weight. The Stock PLASTIC Glock slide (w/ stock plastic guts) was always a match with a heavier slide set up similar to the 1911 I built. And even those guns, had stock BBUs. i even put a STEEL Slide and it still matched the amount of BBs to spit out with the Stock. THe guy I was with found it "blasphemic..." (- Jon C.)

My point is this (...and I know I'm going to get a lot of flack for saying this and many, MANY people will disagree with me):

The level of importance of the internal components and understanding how to manipulate them far exceeds the importance of things trivial like weight reduction (as it pertains to gas efficiency and gas consumption).

I'm not going to use the 1911 video again for reference since it doesn't 100% match yours and mine's testing conditions but it's somewhat conducive (...like 5%). lol.

I would say a loose slide/frame is more important than that of a inner barrel guide. A overly lubricated hop-up rubber, regardless of how rock solid your inner barrel will throw your aim off completely. Or minor calibrations on your hop-up, or the dial coming loose upon the initial blowback action.

Again, the purpose of the inner barrel assembly is not for stabilizing the inner barrel as I stated above.

When I say that your inner barrel is rocking inside your outerbarrel, what I mean is that the hop up unit is not being supported properly by the frame and that the outerbarrel can not support the directional shifts it undergoes.

(...or you just forgot to tighten to those screws properly.)

On the point of lubricated hop up rubbers and such, those are all user error. And could be avoided with proper care.

Again, at 50ft engagement, you're unlikely to have any use of a hop up.

If you're talking about a swelled bucking due to the lube, then you're BB wont even fly out of your gun. Thus, the efficacy of the so called accuracy test would be inconclusive because of mechanical failure. And this would be the opposite if you bucking was "freshly" soaked. And whether the whatever component rattles or not (slide or barrel) would effectively be rendered excused as it pertains to accuracy.

In your Marui 1911A1, I wouldn't have gone with Creation. But that's just me. I'm not knocking your work either E. But I like to tend to stay far away from Creation.

TO be honest, I'm in completely agreence. But the inner frame that I wanted doesn't seem to exist anymore. And Brian isn't here to bug answers for regarding availability. I couldn't really find anything else for the 1911 frame. I purely just wanted it because the frame that I got with the gun was damaged (it was used).

This debate is going no-where. I am done replying to this. As, if anyone were to build a custom "race-gun" / Hi-Capa they would already know the key points we have both pointed out. We could talk about this for months back and forth and still have no outcome. You do you, and I'mma do me.

We both don't need each other's validation (or anyone else's).
I wasn't "e-liciting" (...see what I did there?) some sort of outcome from our conversation.

I was merely hoping to illicit some well thought out answers in order to further my knowledge in putting a gun together. you know...Maybe learning something new, for once in my old age??

...And who knows, maybe even change my perspective altogether.

But Agreed.
To each his own, I guess and we'll leave it at that.