Looking for history on GI 1911 AMU

I’ve recently acquired this 1911 and was told it was built for the Army Marksmanship unit. It is very tight and shoots like a dream. I became interested in its history and can only make a guess about who built it and where. Just for fun I thought I’d ask the more experienced 1911 guys what they think. I’d like to know if anyone recognizes the work done to it. I would be interested to see if my research was going on the right direction. It is equipped with Bo-Mar sights. Please let me know what you think.Attachment 314353Attachment 314354

you can obtain information from FOIA - https://www.amc.army.mil/Media/Freed...formation-Act/
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
The Freedom of Information Act Office is responsible for management oversight of the Army-wide implementation of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) programs in accordance with 5 USC, and Public Law 106-554.


FOIA REQUEST FORM
COVID-19 UPDATE: As a result of increases in the Health Protection Condition (HPCON) level, our offices are limited to mission-essential personnel only and maximizing the use of telework for other personnel. This means that we are unable to handle Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests sent via traditional methods and can only respond to electronic inquiries while under elevated HPCON levels.

To submit a FOIA request to the U.S. Army Materiel Command, use the following contact information:
E-mail: usarmy.redstone.usamc.mbx.foia@army.mil
Phone: 256.450.7061
Fax: 256.450.8812
Address:
HQAMC
ATTN: AMCIO-BM (FOIA)
4400 Martin Road
Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-5000


DEPARTMENT OF ARMY FOIA INFORMATION

forgot to add, in email request offer to pay for search + they will perform it at no charge - received one on my M1 garand a few months ago + got reply in 3 weeks - i used this email to make request -
usarmy.redstone.usamc.mbx.foia@army.mil

Hits me with a slight wave of nostalgia. When I ran one of the local chain gun shops, one of my employees was an old Marine Gunny who was on the pistol team. We got to talking .45's and he said that that armorers set him up with an arched mainspring housing that had been reduced about 50% of the way to being flat - just like yours is.

You've got a commercial Colt slide on a GI frame. This was done because in WWII, one of the methods used to speed production was to mill the slides out of softer stuff that was easier to work, then spot-harden the nose to the stop surface in the rails (1942 on) and the slide stop and disassembly notches (1943 on). You can see the discoloration from this in the Parkerizing if you look closely. For the high round counts of a match team gun, they'd want fully hardened slides.

By the post-war era, there probably weren't many secrets left to making the guns match accurate, and Army vs. Marine guns might (or might not) be hard to distinguish. I requested some info from the Air Force on my granddad's bomber unit, and I got a CD ROM with what was obviously files that were semi-randomly thrown into boxes before being taken out and microfilmed decades later. I got some good stuff out of it, but it was PAINSTAKING work. You might get lucky on an individual serial number, but it may be a long shot.

You've got a commercial Colt slide on a GI frame. This was done because in WWII, one of the methods used to speed production was to mill the slides out of softer stuff that was easier to work, then spot-harden the nose to the stop surface in the rails (1942 on) and the slide stop and disassembly notches (1943 on). You can see the discoloration from this in the Parkerizing if you look closely. For the high round counts of a match team gun, they'd want fully hardened slides.

For that reason, if this is an AMU pistol the slide may be a replacement installed when it was built. Many years ago I spent several months attached to the USAMU at Ft Benning; weapons were 'built' on site, and commercial weapons were also used, so I imagine commercial slides were available as parts. Subject to my dimming memory this pistol looks like a typical AMU weapon. The stippled front grip frame was common practice with AMU armorers. I do not recall ever seeing a beavertail safety on an AMU pistol; when I was shooting competitively I don't think they existed. It could easily be a drop-in part added by a previous owner. During my military service I never saw a set of 'diamond' grips on any GI weapon. As best I recall AMU .45s had plain checkered walnut grips.

I'm skeptical that 'research' will reveal anything beyond the pistol being a M1911A1 delivered to the military. Sixty years ago M1911A1s were $20 from the DCM; many were converted to target guns. Without a government receipt, or similar documentation, I think the best you can verify is the pistol is a GI M1911A1 converted to target use and is typical of a USAMU pistol. Tracking it to the AMU is akin to those optimists who think the government has records matching weapons by serial number to individual WW2 soldiers. Maybe some AMU armorers 'signed' their work; I don't remember any such markings. I would be dumbfounded to learn the AMUs (there were more than the one at Benning) kept records of modifications made. Like any military unit, I'm sure they listed all the weapons on hand by serial number for accountability purposes; I'm also sure those records are long gone. What would have been the point of retaining them?

As a practical shooter, I imagine it is very accurate. I was issued a similar pistol referred to as a 'wad gun' being used for ammunition loaded with 185gr FMCSWC bullets. It was built so tight that to guarantee functioning with the light load, after every string of five rounds, while the slide was locked to the rear, I squirted LSA on the barrel where it interfaced with the bushing when the slide went into battery. Hopefully your pistol isn't quite that tight.

Do you have any trouble finding 38 AMU ammo or brass ?
I have had the chance to shoot one ... very nice shooter .
At our local indoor shooting range we had a NRA Bullseye Match Shooting League (Tuesday nights) a local man was a member of the Louisiana AMU Team and he had one ... He would come and shoot with us for practice when he was in town and help us learn how to shoot ...
I would bug him every time he came ...shooting that 38 AMU was so SWEET !
The ammo looked like a rimless 38 special with a extractor groove ... feeding was flawless.
Gary

The "Low Mount" rear sight indicates to me that the pistol was built in the 80's or later. Are there any markings in and around and on the trigger guard? Have you had the slide off to check for any builders markings on the flat? Is it a .45 or .38 Wadcutter?

My first thought was that it's unlikely a military armorer would individually mark his work. My second thought was, but if there are such markings, they would indicate the weapon was converted by a civilian gunsmith.

As for caliber, I vaguely recall seeing at least one Colt Govt Model at Benning in caliber .38. As best I recall it was a .38 Special, set up for shooting wadcutters. I definitely recall once shooting a S&W Model 52 in .38 Special, but I suspect these were not generally issued to mediocre shots such as myself.

The centerfire national match course could be shot with any centerfire handgun (which thanks to COL Charles Askins's shenanigans with a centerfire .22 had to be at least .30) I can't remember USAMU centerfire match SOP on .45 v .38, but I recall centerfire matches being shot with .45s set up for the 185 grain FMCSWC target load, as I described in my previous post. An advantage was the bigger bullet hole was more likely to score 'scratch' hits, when any portion of the hole touched the next higher scoring ring.

The service pistol match was shot with a separate .45 pistol set up for the 230 grain service cartridge. The original poster didn't indicate what sort of ammunition he is using. Assuming the original poster's pistol is a .45, it would be interesting to know if it feeds SWC bullets reliably, and more important, the weight of the recoil spring.

Thank you for the information and resources provided. This pistol is .45 ACP. I bought it because I thought it was a good looking pistol. I was impressed with the workmanship and performance and became more interested in it. Just for fun I tried to find out more about it. I love to hear what people’s first hand knowledge on the subject. There are markings on the trigger guard area but all seem to be factory marks made by Colt at time of manufacture. The barrel and bushing are made by Wilson so more recent work has been done. The beavertail is different than any I have seen and doesn’t match the rest of the pistol so it was probably a later addition. The slide is a commercial replacement dating later than 1943. Slide replacement seems to have been commonly done. I’ve considered that this pistol has characteristics of a AMU pistol, but could be a personal one done as side work.Attachment 314401Attachment 314402

So far I have only fired 230 grain ball through it to test it. It did very well with that load. I plan on trying some 200 SWC soon.
Attachment 314403Attachment 314404

The rear of your gun has a nice fit. I have several WW11 frames and I keep the charges under 4.7 grains of fast burning powders and usually 4.5 for target use. From what I read around 1947 was a better heat treating set up for 1911's. A 45 set up like yours is my favorite one hand shooter.

My experience is similar to El Bibliotecario. I also spent some time in the AMU in the late 80's. This looks like a "service pistol" with a wooden grips and a beavertail grip safety added on by a previous owner. In those days, a service pistol had to be a .45 ACP 1911 with open sights and a 4# trigger. Beretta 9mm were very new and not well understood for accurizing purposes, so the AMU wasn't using them yet. I remember that we were issued only 2 guns for competition - a S&W 41 .22 (because you had to shoot a .22 in a 2700 match) and a service pistol. For centerfire matches, we shot .45 hardball. For .45 matches, we shot .45 hardball. For service pistol and CMP "leg" matches, we shot .45 hardball. I got hammer bite a few times and I wish I had a beavertail safety then, but that would have disqualified the pistol. Things are much different now.

The AMU smiths were very good at their job. You probably have a gun that will outshoot you any day of the week. 2" groups at 50 yd. were common. By that time, the AMU had long given up on the .38 AMU and .38 Special S&W 52s. The more advanced shooters were using .45 "wad guns" for centerfire & .45 matches since it made a bigger hole and the recoil was almost as low as a 38. S&W 52s are not forgiving, but the 1911 was easier to control. Wadcutter .45s were modified to feed wadcutter ammo reliably and a bit lighter trigger pull. Optical sights were available if you wanted one.
Yours does not appear to be a wad gun as the ejection port has not been lowered.

If your gun does not shoot to your liking, it is a simple matter to put in a new match barrel and bushing which will restore lost accuracy. Kart makes a very good barrel that you can fit yourself if you're handy. I wish you good luck with that gun.

I well recall hammer bite but didn't remember oversize grip safeties on MTU weapons, so am grateful for the above poster reassuring me it's not just my poor memory. I appreciate the perspective on army level competition after my involvement ended. The hardball 45/wad gun 45/22 combination was probably what I was issued; while I recall .38 autos being around, I know I didn't receive one.

The reference to the S&W M41 doesn't surprise me. When I arrived at Benning I had been shooting my personal High Standard Citation. I was issued a Model 41 and told that was the weapon I would use for .22 matches. It didn't fit my hand as well, but still shot more accurately than I could.

I concur the MTU armorers were highly skilled. The night duty man at the Benning MTU was armed with what I assumed was an in-house custom weapon: a 20" barrel Remington 1100 with the vent rib shortened to match the reduced length.