I agree 100%. In my opinion, the cost of ammunition adequate to verify reliability is an integral part of the cost of owning a 1911 (or any other gun). Too many people only consider the purchase price of the gun and not all of the other required parts like good magazines, ammo, holsters, belt, etc. It's like a kid who buys a car, but doesn't include the cost of insurance in his calculations.
I'm in the process of deciding to go back to 1911s full time and the specter of ammo costs is looming in my mind. My guns used to be very reliable under tough conditions over tens of thousands of rounds, but they haven't been shot in a while. I'll need to vet all of them with both FMJ and carry ammo before returning them to self-defense role and it's going to be a more intensive evaluation that is required for a Glock or a Sig!
We had a classic example of that in one of our early rifle classes. Two guys brought 9mm ARs that would not function properly. They both claimed that they have never had a problem with them before, but during our class one of them was unable to fire more than 2-3 rounds without a malfunction and the other did not complete a full magazine without a malfunction over the course of the day.
What's your reasoning to go back to 1911? I thought you said before you moved to Glock for the capacity?