Does anybody have experience with a 9mm 3 or 4" barrel 9mm Spartan, especially the shorter one? Is it dependable, reliable?

They have a very good reputation. I was considering the 5" one for my 9mm 1911. Will probably go with the RIA tactical because i want the GI look with the better sights.

I have friends that shoot the 5" model Spartan in 9mm and it eats everything. Never saw one of the shorty versions. If the feed ramp is cut the same way, it should swallow everything as well?

Issue with alot of 9mm 1911's would be the mags.

 

Wilson's, Tripp's, all good. Not familiar with others.

 

It is a nice gun.

I have friends that shoot the 5" model Spartan in 9mm and it eats everything. Never saw one of the shorty versions. If the feed ramp is cut the same way, it should swallow everything as well?

 

Should be.

 

Im pretty sure that the Spartan models feed ramps are on the frame, where as the higher end model like the Trojan is intergrated into the barrel.

 

Either which way, It's a great gun. I have a Trojan in 9mm 5". Good shooter, no major problems. Only issue i've ever had was nose diving sometimes if the first round in a 10rd mag is a flat point, round noses always run great. ( Tripp Mags )

I have a Spartan V 9mm and it's been great. The Spartan 3" and 4" shouldn't be any different as they are just shortend slides and barrels. They all use the same non-ramped frame. I load FMJ/CMJ bullets at 1.15" and it's been running like a champ...couldn't ask for more performance-wise even from a gun two or three times the cost. I'm also using The Tripp Cobra 10rd mags, which are great as well. Tried with Wilsons and like the Tripps better.

I think a lot of people here are assuming facts not in evidence. I'll be the first to stipulate that STI builds a great gun and you seldom hear of any malfunctions. IIRC, the 3" version is new as of this year (debuted at SHOT show), so they really haven't been out there long enough to garner a track record. I do know that there are a good number of 1911 pistolsmiths that will not build 3" guns because of reliability issues - and that's in .45 ACP, I don't know whether the variable of it being a 9mm is an asset or a detriment. The gun was designed with a 5" barrel and has been found to work equally well with a 4" (4.25" really), but now you are having to deal with the recoil impulse, eject/chamber cycle with a much smaller, lighter slide. It's in these guns (3-inchers) that you find the multiple recoil spring set-ups to deal with these issues.

 

Maybe they run like a Swiss watch, but, being somewhat of a traditionalist, a 3" 1911, to my way of thinking, is something to avoid - no upside and a possible huge downside. Barrel length is not hard to hide - why sacrifice reliability, velocity and sight radius?

 

JMHO (well, you asked)

 

Adios,

 

Pizza Bob

Agreed Bob - I've never owned a 9mm 1911 but in 45acp the smallest 1911 I'd bet my life on is Commander size.

My 3.5" Colt Officer's .45 is very reliable and will eat anything, including hard-to-swallow SWC bullets that do a jammaramma when they nosedive on some feedramps, even in full-size tubes.

 

Making a 3" .45 to me is sorta like reinventing the wheel....for what purpose? A well-tuned 3.5" Kimber (I said well-tuned, so cut me some slack) or Springfield with 7-round Chip McCormack mags gives you a 8-round gun in Condition #1. And if someone comes out with a light-weight frame, by the time you shoot half a box of defense ammo, you're done for the day, since it's not a pleasure to shoot. My Officer's is full-weight (for what it is) and it's a handful with factory full-house ammo......