testtest

Springfield Prodigy Torture Test: Did It Survive 10K Rounds?

Yes Sir, that is correct. But if I know this going into it, I personally would go to a different gun. I had and loved a Sig 1911 but after less than 2000 rds the recoil spring started to fail. In my profession. I would not take/carry a pistol that I had to keep records of how many rounds I fired though it just to make sure I replaced the spring before it failed. I could consider replacing after 10,000 rds but not much less than that.
Well, you're going to need to keep track to know when you've arrived at 10k rounds, just like you would to know when you've reach 5k, no? Pro-actively changing out a recoil spring every 5k is hardly an indication of anything being inferior - it's just basic and common good gun maintenance. What does a recoil spring cost?
 
Yes Sir, that is correct. But if I know this going into it, I personally would go to a different gun. I had and loved a Sig 1911 but after less than 2000 rds the recoil spring started to fail. In my profession. I would not take/carry a pistol that I had to keep records of how many rounds I fired though it just to make sure I replaced the spring before it failed. I could consider replacing after 10,000 rds but not much less than that.
I think you may be confusing recommended maintenance with actual failure.
It didn’t fail at 5K. It was replaced just as a precaution.
Nothing saying it won’t make it to 10K.

We’re talking about a simple spring…easily replaced during a field strip and clean.
How many, how much…subjective. Anything mechanical can fail.
The fact 10K rounds were put through the weapon with basic maintenance and one stove pipe, most likely due to admitted user error/use, I’m good with that.

Run it to 10K. See what happens. I don’t plan on replacing mine until it actually fails…and I have a feeling it’ll be a long, long time before that starts to happen.
There is nothing even in the manual suggesting a maintenance window.
Could be 2, could be 20. When it’s half inch shorter than new, replace.

Frankly, I’d be more concerned with magazine springs losing their tension than the recoil from a maintenance perspective.
 
I love the idea of the Prodigy and I was thinking that it would be my first 1911 in 9mm. However, nearly every gun store I visit has stated that the Prodigys have been problematic and that I should wait for the next "batch". That does not seem to be the case with the tested gun. Thoughts? I'm really itching to buy one and this testing makes me want to pull the trigger (pun intended). Thanks!
I love the idea of the Prodigy and I was thinking that it would be my first 1911 in 9mm. However, nearly every gun store I visit has stated that the Prodigys have been problematic and that I should wait for the next "batch". That does not seem to be the case with the tested gun. Thoughts? I'm really itching to buy one and this testing makes me want to pull the trigger (pun intended). Thanks!
Yes Sir, that is correct. But if I know this going into it, I personally would go to a different gun. I had and loved a Sig 1911 but after less than 2000 rds the recoil spring started to fail. In my profession. I would not take/carry a pistol that I had to keep records of how many rounds I fired though it just to make sure I replaced the spring before it failed. I could consider replacing after 10,000 rds but not much less than that.
I tend to agree with 1911Fan, I would just move on to another platform that I understood had a better track record. That’s just me. For instance, I now carry Beretta’s PX4 Storms in one configuration/caliber or another and have for a while but years ago, when they were young to the market I wouldn’t give you 2 cents for one. As a matter of fact, I was offered a PX4 Compact 9mm by a friend at a deeply discounted price but declined because I could not get past the “ugly duckling” appearance and the fact that it was a DA/SA. Fast forward many years and I start following Earnest Langdon on YouTube as he puts a full size and a compact carry through the paces. He ran unmodified models of each through a 100,000 round torture tests, lubricating them only at 25,000 round intervals, without a single malfunction! He discovered after the test, a crack in the block of the Compact Carry, but the gun had continued to run without a hitch… I was impressed! I now own 4 of them… And yes, I’ve had to learn how to manage a DA/SA, which I believe honestly has made me a better Pistoleer all round. We are fortunate to live, at present anyway, in a country where we can run any gear we want, AND share our insight from these experiences so that, hopefully, others can learn from them without the grief we might have encountered along the way. However, an opinion is just that, an opinion, not a put down, and should be taken as such even when we disagree.
 
Well said Kat
We can discuss, agree to disagree based on our own beliefs and experiences.
And they’ll usually different from one shooter to the next.
In the end, it’s my money, my experience and my thought process that wins out for me… :)
 
This gun is going to revolutionize the 2011 market . Plus it's a Gun , not an Eco-auto with computers and such . If the thing fell completely apart . You could replace all the eternals for under $400. People seem to be afraid of this gun because of the Internet Hype . Or that 1911 parts aren't drop in . Aaah yeah they are . It's just a light filing here and there on parts that don't go in perfect . It's even easier with the Videos Atlas puts out .
It's using MIM parts : Take it apart -find the tiny burrs and polish them off . I don't see what a 2nd generation is going to cure . There's nothing to fix . It's a steel framed heavy 2011 that when it cycles shoots lights out . For 1300.00 It's possible that the next batch they will have moved to a tool-less guide rod . Which you can do yourself . If SA does it the prices go up. .
 
Last edited:
I love the idea of the Prodigy and I was thinking that it would be my first 1911 in 9mm. However, nearly every gun store I visit has stated that the Prodigys have been problematic and that I should wait for the next "batch". That does not seem to be the case with the tested gun. Thoughts? I'm really itching to buy one and this testing makes me want to pull the trigger (pun intended). Thanks!
Test and Influencer firearms are “Cherry-Picked,” test fired, tuned, polished, inspected, tested again, adjusted, tested again, cleaned up and then sent out on either loan or “gifted” to the influencers or testers. Prodigy issues were known from the get go.
 
Test and Influencer firearms are “Cherry-Picked,” test fired, tuned, polished, inspected, tested again, adjusted, tested again, cleaned up and then sent out on either loan or “gifted” to the influencers or testers. Prodigy issues were known from the get go.
I guess I got an influencer gun then. Other than a handful of FTFs on my first range session mine has run like a freight train from the get go. No trips to SA, no polishing of parts, it runs SA mags without complaint and the only mod was to get rid of the two piece recoil rod. I do think a lot of the problems were inexperience with a 1911 based platform. I read comments from a lot of noobs on many forums who were just unfamiliar with the peculiarities of the 1911. Not saying experienced people didn’t have issues. And of course everyone was crowing that they would never buy a brand new production gun, they’d let others work the bugs out and then when people had bugs people were shocked. And of course most of the people we heard from were the ones having problems, not the tens of thousand who just got on with it. I personally don’t think the Prodigy was the debacle it was made out to be.
 
Test and Influencer firearms are “Cherry-Picked,” test fired, tuned, polished, inspected, tested again, adjusted, tested again, cleaned up and then sent out on either loan or “gifted” to the influencers or testers. Prodigy issues were known from the get go.
You know, I hear that a lot, but the evidence doesn't really support that theory. There were a number of reviewers/influencers who reported "issues" with the Prodigy. If the guns that were sent out to reviewers were supposedly "cherry picked" in order to be running perfectly before they were sent out, then how do you explain that?

Honest Outlaw posted both an initial review on his channel, and a 1,000 round follow-up. He states clearly at the beginning that the pistol was sent to him for review from a local gun shop, not from Springfield. By going this route, he maintains that he is not beholden to any company. His two videos on the Prodigy have over 300,000 views combined. I would also place him in the category of people who know how to properly run and maintain a 1911/2011, and so his reported experience is legit and fair, imo. And he did have some issues with his Prodigy, though nothing major. Which leads to the second point...

I've watched a number of other reviewers, and it's clear to me that some of them don't know what they are doing and/or believe that you should be able to treat a 2011 just like a Glock. It usually starts with, "I haven't done anything to this pistol yet - I'm just taking it straight out of the box, and let's see how it runs..." :rolleyes:
These people are clueless and should stick to reviewing cheap Tupperware, to be perfectly honest.

This has already been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere on this forum. But suffice to say that many of the so-called "issues" can be attributed to, 1) magazine/feeding issues, which were/are a legit problem with the mags that should be addressed, 2) a recoil spring on the 5" model that probably should have been a little heavier, 3) people not bothering to properly clean/lube the gun before shooting it, nor realizing that tight tolerance guns generally have a bit of a break-in period.

Mine runs just fine, btw.
 
Last edited:
"This has already been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere on this forum. But suffice to say that many of the so-called "issues" can be attributed to, 1) magazine/feeding issues, which were/are a legit problem with the mags that should be addressed, 2) a recoil spring on the 5" model that probably should have been a little heavier, 3) people not bothering to properly clean/lube the gun before shooting it, nor realizing that tight tolerance guns generally have a bit of a break-in period."

I think #3 in your list is especially important. I noticed with my Prodigy that it had a very light coating of oil on it's internal parts at best. From my experience 1911s need a lot of lube, and the Prodigy seems to be no different.

I think that a liberal amount of lube should be applied (not to where it's dripping wet), but perhaps what some might consider as excessive, at least until the pistol has been shot enough to break in. After a sufficient break in period the amount of lube can be dialed back a bit.

I know many might disagree, but I like to run a bit of grease on the slide rails and even the disconnector tip and the flat that it rides on. Regular oil just seems to evaporate and 1911s require a bit more lube than the regular plastic Glock style firearms. My preference is to use grease on anything that slides and oil on everything else.
 
It's great to read about a 10k round torture test. I would've rather seen the gun run 10k rounds with Zero parts replaced. A torture rest, in my mind, I'd shoot a gun until it won't shoot anymore or its reached the rounds fired goal established beforevthe test begins. Replacing the recoil spring at 5k rounds makes this a 5k round torture test BECAUSE you started to preemptively avoid failures by replacing parts. Its unclear whether the spring "FAILED" or it was simply replaced because you what?
1. Were going by the SA Progidy owner/operators manual suggesting a spring replacement at 5k rounds
Or...
2. The spring no longer provided reliable return to battery
Or...
3. You replaced the recoil spring simply to preemptively avoid a recoil spring failure.

If you replaced the recoil spring for reason #3, then IMO the gun ran a 5k torture test and probably did or could've continued without that replacement spring, however, we won't know for sure. Call it a 5k torture test which it passed with flying colors with one particular brand and type of ammo. That doesn't mean it will stand up to 5k rounds of Black Hills honey badger rounds, or other self defense oriented ammo. It means it will shoot PMC Bronze 9mm 115grain FMJ. Not really a torture test in my mind if mixed ammo and/or nato stamped ammo 124 grain ammo, or +p or +p+ ammo werent mixed into the test protocol.
Thanks for running this test but realize the parameters it was tested under would exclude a torture test as done by the great Chuck Taylor. 👍
 
Last edited:
....If you replaced the recoil spring for reason #3, then IMO the gun ran a 5k torture test and probably did or could've continued without that replacement spring, however, we won't know for sure.
And had the reviewer kept the original recoil spring in the gun after 5k, and the spring had failed at some point between 5k and 10k, would that have demonstrated anything, other than that a recoil spring had failed? Would a recoil spring breaking after 5k have been an indication that something more serious was wrong with the design or manufacturing of the gun itself?

I'm honestly curious what you think would have been learned by a recoil spring failure between 5k and 10k, assuming the gun had no other issues?
 
Last edited:
"This has already been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere on this forum. But suffice to say that many of the so-called "issues" can be attributed to, 1) magazine/feeding issues, which were/are a legit problem with the mags that should be addressed, 2) a recoil spring on the 5" model that probably should have been a little heavier, 3) people not bothering to properly clean/lube the gun before shooting it, nor realizing that tight tolerance guns generally have a bit of a break-in period."

I think #3 in your list is especially important. I noticed with my Prodigy that it had a very light coating of oil on it's internal parts at best. From my experience 1911s need a lot of lube, and the Prodigy seems to be no different.

I think that a liberal amount of lube should be applied (not to where it's dripping wet), but perhaps what some might consider as excessive, at least until the pistol has been shot enough to break in. After a sufficient break in period the amount of lube can be dialed back a bit.

I know many might disagree, but I like to run a bit of grease on the slide rails and even the disconnector tip and the flat that it rides on. Regular oil just seems to evaporate and 1911s require a bit more lube than the regular plastic Glock style firearms. My preference is to use grease on anything that slides and oil on everything else.
Definitely agree on the running it straight from the box issues. I saw a boatload of comments from people who had done exactly that.

I always run grease on my 1911 rails (and my 226) and I reapply it regularly. I find my Prodigy really sings when it is well lubed.
 
It's great to read about a 10k round torture test. I would've rather seen the gun run 10k rounds with Zero parts replaced. A torture rest, in my mind, I'd shoot a gun until it won't shoot anymore or its reached the rounds fired goal established beforevthe test begins. Replacing the recoil spring at 5k rounds makes this a 5k round torture test BECAUSE you started to preemptively avoid failures by replacing parts. Its unclear whether the spring "FAILED" or it was simply replaced because you what?
1. Were going by the SA Progidy owner/operators manual suggesting a spring replacement at 5k rounds
Or...
2. The spring no longer provided reliable return to battery
Or...
3. You replaced the recoil spring simply to preemptively avoid a recoil spring failure.

If you replaced the recoil spring for reason #3, then IMO the gun ran a 5k torture test and probably did or could've continued without that replacement spring, however, we won't know for sure. Call it a 5k torture test which it passed with flying colors with one particular brand and type of ammo. That doesn't mean it will stand up to 5k rounds of Black Hills honey badger rounds, or other self defense oriented ammo. It means it will shoot PMC Bronze 9mm 115grain FMJ. Not really a torture test in my mind if mixed ammo and/or nato stamped ammo 124 grain ammo, or +p or +p+ ammo werent mixed into the test protocol.
Thanks for running this test but realize the parameters it was tested under would exclude a torture test as done by the great Chuck Taylor. 👍
In the realm of running torture tests, I agree with Eagle - set the bar and run the gun until you either clear the bar or it doesn't run. If the point of the exercise is to show how a pistol can stand up to frequent, regular high(ish) round counts, then have at it! Running 250 rounds every few weeks really isn't a torture test in my mind. That's just normal range use. At best, perhaps you could call it a MTBF (mean time between failures) test.

Just my thoughts from the peanut gallery 🥜
 
In the realm of running torture tests, I agree with Eagle - set the bar and run the gun until you either clear the bar or it doesn't run. If the point of the exercise is to show how a pistol can stand up to frequent, regular high(ish) round counts, then have at it! Running 250 rounds every few weeks really isn't a torture test in my mind. That's just normal range use. At best, perhaps you could call it a MTBF (mean time between failures) test.

Just my thoughts from the peanut gallery 🥜

I agree that calling it a "torture test" is an exaggeration. I'd also agree with the point above that over the course of 10k rounds, some variation in ammo would have been good.

But pro-actively swapping the recoil spring at 5k is a complete non-issue for me.
 
"This has already been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere on this forum. But suffice to say that many of the so-called "issues" can be attributed to, 1) magazine/feeding issues, which were/are a legit problem with the mags that should be addressed, 2) a recoil spring on the 5" model that probably should have been a little heavier, 3) people not bothering to properly clean/lube the gun before shooting it, nor realizing that tight tolerance guns generally have a bit of a break-in period."

I think #3 in your list is especially important. I noticed with my Prodigy that it had a very light coating of oil on it's internal parts at best. From my experience 1911s need a lot of lube, and the Prodigy seems to be no different.

I think that a liberal amount of lube should be applied (not to where it's dripping wet), but perhaps what some might consider as excessive, at least until the pistol has been shot enough to break in. After a sufficient break in period the amount of lube can be dialed back a bit.

I know many might disagree, but I like to run a bit of grease on the slide rails and even the disconnector tip and the flat that it rides on. Regular oil just seems to evaporate and 1911s require a bit more lube than the regular plastic Glock style firearms. My preference is to use grease on anything that slides and oil on everything else.
Why should any 1911 need a tone of oil ? Makes no sense :
 
I really like this pistol, but unfortunately mine wouldn't run after the first three magazines. I tried 5 different types of ammo and it just wouldn't run. I sent it back to Springfield and haven't gotten it back yet. I hope they send it back soon.
 
Why should any 1911 need a tone of oil ? Makes no sense :
I'm not saying it needs a ton of oil, but it does run better if it is well lubed. It's just the nature of the beast. Compare a 1911 style pistol to the more modern Glock style that we see today.

The Glock has generally a lighter slide compared to the 1911 style, while the Glock style frame has these tiny stamped steel rails while a 1911 has much more substantial rails. That translates into more contact surface which means more friction, and more mass to move. 1911s also have tighter tolerances than Glock style pistols, which are fit much more loosely.

Maybe it's just me, but in my experience, a 1911 style pistol just needs more lube to run like it should. I'm not saying that you need to flood it with oil, but I sure have noticed that my Prodigy runs much better if it's well oiled.
 
Back
Top