10-8 Performance Function Test: Springfield Armory Range Officer 9mm 1911

Last night at Badlands Gun Range I ran the Springfield Armory Range Officer through the 10-8 Performance Function Test. The gun had a total of 3 failures to complete its cycle of operations during the test, meaning that it did fail. I shot an additional 200 rounds through the gun with no issues of any type. What does this mean? Not much, the gun clearly wants to have a magazine in it to function, other than that? No issues. We’ll see over the next 1750 rounds!


  1. Wow, seriously, firearms are not designed to be fired with the magazine out of the gun. So it appears the malfunction is not the firearm. So you teach people to violate manufacturer and safety precautions when firing a gun so you can rank them as better or worse than something else. I wouldn’t exactly call that teaching firearm responsibility.

    1. The point of firing the gun with the magazine out is to isolate the extractor and make sure it’s functioning to the best of its ability. It is entirely possible to set up a 1911 so that it extracts 100% of the time without a magazine it in, I know because I’ve done it.

    2. What safety precautions? How is it not safe? And the testing comes from some of the biggest 1911 SMEs out there.

    3. You get guys like this on one side clutching their pearls over shooting without a magazine. Then you get guys on the other side derping out over the fact that Ruger SR9cs have magazine disconnects and therefore are a liability in a dynamic tactical encounter. I would hate to be a firearm designer.

  2. FWIW, I have a Les Baer that fails that part of the 10-8 test. Point being that I would rather have a gun pass it than not, but I’m not going to ditch a gun for competition/carry if it fails.

    It also might mean that I need to tune the extractor on my Baer, idk.

    1. I actually feel the same way; if I a gun only fails the “no magazine” portion of the test, I won’t automatically downcheck it. However, if it fails to function reliably with a magazine inserted? That’s probably going to be a punt.

  3. FWIW I’m really digging the 1911 function tests, especially since they are in 9mm. Not only looking forward to seeing how the rest of the RO test goes, but was pleased to hear you plan to do the new Colt as well.

  4. I’m happy to hear you’re going to try and test one of the Colts. Not that I have anything against Springfield, in fact, I really want to purchase one of the Warren Tactical 9mm 1911s they offer as it checks a LOT of boxes for me.

  5. Hilton Yam may have other explanations, but here’s my take on the 10-8 extractor function test.

    The magazine provides upward pressure on the round being extracted. When that’s happening, the upward pressure keeps the rim of the case being extracted more or less in position under the extractor claw. This allows the empty case to hit the ejector, which flips the spent case out of the ejection port.

    Taking the magazine out of the gun will let you know if the extractor has insufficient tension…because insufficent tension can ruin your day. If the magazine follower gets stuck, doesn’t have appropriate spring strength or whatever…you can end up with the extractor having just enough of a grip on the case to pull it backwards, but not enough to pull it into the ejector. This can result in the extractor dragging the spent case right through the feed lips of your magazine wrecking them and turning your gun to butt when you need it most…and also destroying a magazine.

    It’s always smart to have an extractor with appropriate tension and geometry to hold a spent case in position by its own tension so it can drag the case back into the ejector, which will then flip the case out consistently.

    Question for you Caleb. Do you use a tension gauge like the one sold by Weigand to measure tension? I use them to set a benchmark for tension and now that I’ve got a number nailed down I don’t need to worry about the whole “hold a loaded case until you can’t shake it out” or whatever the anecdotal standard is…

    1. That’s about how he explains it, tbh.

      Also, I haven’t used a tension gauge before, I use old school witchcraft with mine. I should get a gauge though.

    2. Thanks for your response, it actually helps to qualify the reason for my initial comment . . . .

  6. From what I understand, the reason in favor of the external extractor on 1911s, is that it is a heartier, more robust and reliable extraction system compared to the original JMB designed internal extractor. Then came the Para big claw extractor. I understand the external extractor on Production 1911s as this doesnt require the hand fitting/tension work. But no excuse for a hand fitted custom LB 1911 to fail on extraction during the 10-8 function test. A LB out the box should be 100%. Send it back otherwise and they will fix it.

    1. I will say that the best 1911 I ever had in terms of extraction was a Sig TacOps with an external extractor. That mofo tossed brass into the next area code.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: