Colt..... or the other guys?

[SamColtFan]

This is my opinion from my own experience and observations during the past 18 years and owning numerous 1911s.

If I had only one choice for a 1911 for under $1,000.00 I would go with a Colt new rollmark 1991A-1. It's a wonderful pistol, built to 1911 specs and it works. They have beautiful cosmetics, and Colt goes the extra mile to ensure great customer satisfaction if their lifetime warranty ever needs to be used. Very few MIM parts are used in the Colt 1991, less than many of the the other name brands. It may not be a big deal to others but what would you rather have, an MIM slide release or a forged steel slide release holding your 1911 together? For less than $700, the Colt NRM 1991, is one of the best values on the market. If you can find an old rollmark 1991-A1, still NIB, they often can be had for less than $500. The 1991, is a great platform to build on to create your own personal 1911 dream.

I recently had the opporunity to check out a recent production S&W M1911 with adjustable sights. The first thing that I noticed was the S&W pistol didn't have the same quality look to it that the original pistols had. The finish looked different. The poorly checkered wood grips looked like they came from a third world country. The large, "45 AUTO" on the barrel hood looked tacky compared to the original Nowlin barrels. For $750, I wasn't impressed with the cosmetics, but the fit was excellent. My original 800 serial numbered S&W M1911 was perfection, cosmetic and otherwise. Still not impressed with external extractors on a 1911. S&W does offer excellent customer service if you ever need their assistance (my experience).

Dan Wessons......If you get a good one, enjoy it. Over the years I've seen many broken parts and anomolies with DWs, NIB. Fragile blue finishes, one pistol that came with a proof target but no front sight, extractors that contacted and over-rode barrels, rotating extractors with undersized FP stops, many DWs that wouldn't eject live rounds and would jam the gun, broken ejectors, bent ejector,loose ejectors, galled frame, a blocked firing pin tunnel, grips that were installed loose and could not be tightened, grips that lost their medallions, grips that lost their dye, hammers that would drop when the safety was deactivated, hammers that wouldn't drop when the saftey was thumbed down and the trigger pulled, sights that wouldn't stay in place, broken MIM sight pins, slides that wouldn't lock back, front sights that couldn't be seen (too thin), hammer struts that were cut too short causing the hammer to flop, misfires due to weak mainsprings, broken mag releases, guns that wouldn't feed ball ammo, guns that wouldn't eject spent rounds, and spotty customer service (my experience) to name just a few of the things that I 've seen or experienced. DW's in my opinion are excellent project guns for the hobbiest who likes challenges and likes to tinker and "fix" things or likes to make contributions to "Fed-Ex" or "UPS". Be a wise consumer, and check before you buy, or have someone who knows 1911s, check for you.

For those who know nothing about 1911s or handguns, Colt still offers the newbee the best 1911 product for the money, IMHO.

Regards,
Sam

[azroadrunner]

^6
I agree completely! Colts are <i>by far the best</i> 1911s made. I have had several non-Colts, and they were nothing but trouble. My first Colt (a 1991A1 in SS) was/is a great gun and is my hiking companion. My newest 1911 is a Colt XSE -- and works right out of the box, just like the 1991A1. Accurate, <u>very</u> high quality, durable, and <u>extremely</u> reliable. It doesn't get any better than that! ^c

Colt is the only 1911 for me! ;?

[tackdriver]

I respectfully disagree. I have/currently own a Colt, Springfield, and an STI.

I sold my colt. Every other Colt I have shot or held/actioned has not felt the quality of Sprinfield or STI. I know that STI production pistols are of a different category. The Springfield felt better when shooting and the trigger was much better. The Colt pistols I have tried seem to be lacking with their triggers or in the way they feel during the action cycle. I would like to be a Colt fan, my first 1911 was a Colt. While beautiful, the pistol action and trigger feel just don't stack up.

Just my opinion.

[Rob96]

I have experience with Colt, Kimber and Springfield. The two kimbers I have shot were crap. I never experienced so many failures with an autoloader. The Springfield shot fairly well. The two piece guide rail was a problem, as was the rear sight coming loose. Accuracy was ok. The two Colts I have are spectacular. First, they feel different, especially when compared to the Springfield. They have been totally reliable. The accuracy is great. The slide to frame fit may be a little loose, but barrel to slide fit is spot on. I do have one problem with my blued Colt. The staked in front sight came loose. Doesn't matter, because it was going to be making a trip to the pistolsmith anyway.

[adamsbomb]

Pondered the choices all heavily on my last purchase, Kimber, colt and SA. Kimber and Colt had the best fit, kimber had a slightly better trigger than both (but not as nice as my Dan Wesson, Sry Sam lol) but when all was said and done I bought the colt, took it out saturday, not a single issue, great gun.

[SeanK]

Since I don't have $700-1000, and anyone who buys a 1911 pistol for $5000 and doesn’t put it in a museum is just plain stupid, the Springfield GI is good for me.

My Springfield GI came tight but not too tight, it had nice roll marks, and it shot very nice and was 100% reliable. Best of all I spent $400 for it, Browning is probably rolling over in his grave when he sees what people have done to his perfectly designed pistol, and what they are charging for it.

The 1911 was a working man's gun, it protected a lot of the gangsters in the 20-30' till today, and you would be surprised how many wise guys still carry a .45. Any police officer who could afford one and the chief was smart and allowed them, got them. They totally outgunned every officer on the beat with a .38. It's been principle in half the wars we have fought, many of the 1911's used by Vietnam veterans were used by their fathers in WWII and Korea. Every soldier wanted one and it saved countless lives, and served our forces faithfully.

This gun was never meant to be what it has become, a monstrosity. Nothing makes a 1911 look worse than amba safeties, checkering here there, stainless finish, beavertail grip safety, speed triggers that relay on this tiny little screw to work, stainless parts, ugly finishes, grips, some would call fancy, guns built so tight they are unreliable and need excessive break in periods.

You want a 1911, get one that doesn’t have all this s**t on it that some people call improvements. None of this junk is needed when I can take a GI $400 gun and have it run 100%, I haven’t ran any hollow points through it, but i'm not going to be surprised if it doesn't chock. Besides this type of ammo was not around when browning designed his masterpiece.

Isn’t it funny how the 1911 was fine the way it came from the factory during the day, had an excellent rep for stopping power, reliability, ruggedness, ergonomics, and looks. Now all the sudden we have all these “improvements” and the gun’s unreliable, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist people…

The most that's going to be done to my GI is a Blue finish and those ugly as hell yuppie Cocobolo grips replaced with walnut, and I will shoot the hell out of it, without jewelers gloves on, ;)

[Wyeth]

i actually think the colt 1911's are seriously over rated compared to springfield. granted, i own a custom SA chamipon, a trp, and a loaded operator (among other great 1911's...)

the springfields are the true "working man's" gun when it comes to 1911. they have been above par as far as quality, customer service, and just general reliability. colt does these things, but with the newer a1 guns, i just get the feeling of buying a "kia" when the toyota was the same price. colt won't give you a gnats butt hare more than you pay for. thats why i've always recommended springfield loaded guns, even to beginners. god oly knows, if i was new to the 1911 scene, and bought a mil-spec, i'd spend a week behind that lousey sight set up. (new sights... dovetailing the slide, ejection port work, trigger job... etc.)

kimbers are nice- the are accurate, and sometimes reliable, but they are a complete rebuild job waiting to happen. the chip sights suck, the trigger group (sear disconnector and hammer, slide stop, thumb safety are all MIM.) lots of bucks to shell out when you could do it right the first time...

no offence, but it's always been my practice to but a gun that you can grow into- not a money pit that will make your local smith rich. if you can't find a loaded springfield locally with ambi's for under $650, let me know. i'll help ya out.

[commander]

Over the years I've owned or carried seven 1911's. One was a Delta Elite 10mm. The rest were .45's ranging from a Commander, LW Commander, Series 70 Gold Cup to several Government Models. All but one (an Auto Ordinance) were Colts. All except the AO functioned flawlessly and were accurate enough to qualify with. The 1st couple, 25-30 years ago, had to have their feed ramps polished and barrels throated to ensure they would feed modern hollowpoint ammo. The trick to dependability is normal maintenance and to regularly replace worn or damaged magazines.
My most recent Colt, a 1993 Series 80 Enhanced Commander, has been just as dependable, right out of the box as my G30, and way more accurate. My friends who own newer models say they are even better.
I don't see any reason to look at anything other than Colt for a combat-ready 1911 pistol. Like they say "Anything else is just a copy".;)

[rubijeep]

colts are great pistol i have one and carry it everyday, but when it comes to extras, (dehorning, better trigger, sights) to get them you have to spend 1200 dollars on a hard to find gunsite, or 900 on an xse or gold cup. i love my colt, but my loaded springfield costed 630 bucks, very tight slide fit, extended safety, nice wood grips, excellent trigger and outstanding reliability and 2" offhand 25 yard groups from and average shooter. my colt that sort of fits loosly, creepy, heavy trigger, plastic grips, no dehorning and hits around 2" groups at 15 yds offhand costed 700 bucks used. i love my colt and it is the original, but bang for the buck goes to springfield, or even rock island armory that ive had good experience with. the only thing about the ria is that cast frame. so it sort of boils down to this. plain jane mil spec ria cast frame-300 bucks, springfield gi .45-400 bucks, plain jane "mil spec" 80 series colt-600 bucks. but the name justified the cost, sort of.

[adamsbomb]

I only paid 729.00 for my stainless xse

[Jeeps]

The only Colt I ever enjoyed was, and is, the Detective Special.

I have a Colt 1911 that was just bad from the get-go, and if you had read in a another thread in this forum, that the magazine on my Colt would fall out after only one round being shot.

Long story shorter - It got traded.

Then, I happened to see a 1991...nice gun. But too mucb plastic. Now, at that point, I might have picked it up and tinkered with it - but this was back in 97 and I felt as though a 550 dollar gun ought to have some metal parts!

I went Kimber then. Two POSs. Hated them, dumped them and went to Springfield.

Alas...nirvana. I've been toting Springies now for almost 8 years. Great gun, great price and never let me down once.

That's my two cents. You can keep the change!

[auto45]

Colt produces a very good 1911, it may be the best all around one out there right now. That is always up for debate however...:)

But, for many people like myself, a mil-spec configuration is not doable for the way I shoot. To properly outfit a Colt, like a Springfield Loaded or Kimber, you will need to spend at least $200, probably more like $300+ to have it set up. That's fine if you are particular about the beavertail style, thumb safety, etc, but for most people they just buy the Kimber or Springfield.

Colt custom shop is one option, but at that point you are probably better off with STI for example, unless you want a firing pin safety or just want a Colt.

[Tennessee Slim]

I have a very long memory. I can't (more like won't) forget that Colt got into bed with the Antis. I'll never put another red cent into their pocket.

Out of the box, the Springfield is a fine weapon. If I wanted another 10mm (yeah, I'm one of those), it'd likely be a DW.

[Rob96]

To properly outfit a Colt, like a Springfield Loaded or Kimber, you will need to spend at least $200, probably more like $300+ to have it set up.

Same could be said if you would have all of the MIM parts in your SA or Kimber replaced. With Colt you are getting the the regular hammer and grip safety, but you are getting better quality small parts.

[Kruzr]

I can't speak about Colts over the past 30 years but I have seen a few new Colts come over the counter in the past 3 years(I work for a range/ffl). From what I've seen and based on the 2 Colt NRM range rentals we've had over the past 2 years, the "return to quality" that I keep reading about is pure Oscar Meyer bologna. I've never seen so much inconsistency between guns. I've seen NRM Colts out of the box where the slide doesn't fit the frame properly. On brand new guns, I've seen sharp edges, machine chatter marks, loose front sights, stripped grip screws, and poor finishes. Sure, Colt will eventually fix whats wrong (just as any manufacturer I've dealt with except SA) but they aren't always too quick about it. A minimum time trip to Colt in my experience has been 5 weeks.
One of our rental NRM's cracked the slide after 15K rounds. This was after it broke the ejector and the thumb safety. Compare that to a rental Kimber that now has over 90K rounds and needed 2 MIM thumb safeties over its life and finally had the sear and hammer replaced at about 80K. Oh, and Kimber turned the gun around in a week.

No thanks, if I wanted another production 1911, I'd find something other than a Colt until they finally return to "the good old days." Just MHO based on MH experience.

[auto45]

" One of our rental NRM's cracked the slide after 15K rounds. This was after it broke the ejector and the thumb safety "

Sounds like someone was sneaking in 45ACP+++ loads to test. ;)

That's unusual to hear and read about those problems with the new Colt's.
I have experienced the loose ejector, misfit slide/frame issue, plunger tube etc, but never anything as bad as that.

I'll bet the 90,000 round Kimber is an early series I. What's going on with thumb safeties breaking? It's not a impact part so to speak.

[FATSEXY]

Originally posted by SeanK
Since I don't have $700-1000, and anyone who buys a 1911 pistol for $5000 and doesn’t put it in a museum is just plain stupid, the Springfield GI is good for me.

My Springfield GI came tight but not too tight, it had nice roll marks, and it shot very nice and was 100% reliable. Best of all I spent $400 for it, Browning is probably rolling over in his grave when he sees what people have done to his perfectly designed pistol, and what they are charging for it.

The 1911 was a working man's gun, it protected a lot of the gangsters in the 20-30' till today, and you would be surprised how many wise guys still carry a .45. Any police officer who could afford one and the chief was smart and allowed them, got them. They totally outgunned every officer on the beat with a .38. It's been principle in half the wars we have fought, many of the 1911's used by Vietnam veterans were used by their fathers in WWII and Korea. Every soldier wanted one and it saved countless lives, and served our forces faithfully.

This gun was never meant to be what it has become, a monstrosity. Nothing makes a 1911 look worse than amba safeties, checkering here there, stainless finish, beavertail grip safety, speed triggers that relay on this tiny little screw to work, stainless parts, ugly finishes, grips, some would call fancy, guns built so tight they are unreliable and need excessive break in periods.

You want a 1911, get one that doesn’t have all this s**t on it that some people call improvements. None of this junk is needed when I can take a GI $400 gun and have it run 100%, I haven’t ran any hollow points through it, but i'm not going to be surprised if it doesn't chock. Besides this type of ammo was not around when browning designed his masterpiece.

Isn’t it funny how the 1911 was fine the way it came from the factory during the day, had an excellent rep for stopping power, reliability, ruggedness, ergonomics, and looks. Now all the sudden we have all these “improvements” and the gun’s unreliable, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist people…

The most that's going to be done to my GI is a Blue finish and those ugly as hell yuppie Cocobolo grips replaced with walnut, and I will shoot the hell out of it, without jewelers gloves on, ;)

Outstanding. You make me want to buy a GI and trade off with my Custom Loaded Springfield. Seriously.

[Kruzr]

I'll bet the 90,000 round Kimber is an early series I. What's going on with thumb safeties breaking? It's not a impact part so to speak.

Nope, a Custom II. The thumb safeties broke at the paddle both times......bad MIM I assume but the Colt's thumb safety also broke at the post. Rental guns get abused......the worst guns we've had as rentals due to breakage were HK's.......go figure. It doesn't matter if its MIM or machined steel....if it isn't manufactured and heat treated or sintered (in the case of MIM) properly, it will break. I've broken more machined steel parts on guns than MIM over the years.

The ammo is all house ammo with the rental guns......downloaded about 10%.

FWIW, I have a Gov't Series 2 Kimber with over 23K rounds and no problems of any kind in the 2 1/2 years I've owned it.

[auto45]

It would be interesting to know how you rate the rentals by brand in so far as breakage, relative to the number of shots fired of course.

I wouldn't have guessed H&K to be a problem.

Glock, Ruger, etc. Notice any differencs in breakdowns between 9mm and 45 ACP in the same make?

How do revolvers really hold up to a lot of shooting, etc?

That's a lot of questions, so if you don't have time...no foul. ;)

[Kruzr]

Based on the rentals, the Glocks hold up the best (I just hate their triggers).......there isn't much to break but springs. We had a KB once on a .40 Glock .....nobody was hurt but the gun. Our Glock 21 won't feed wadcutters but other than that, it hasn't had any problems through 50K or so. The 9mm Glocks have had no problems if we keep them clean.
The S&W revolvers we have had had their share of problems also. We have a S&W 66, 65, and 60. Both the 65 and 66 have "shot their barrels off". They had somewhere in the vicinity of 30K rounds through them. The barrels broke at the threads. The 66 also broke the FP spring that is behind a sweated fit....it had to go back to S&W.

Of the 1911's we've had, the Kimber has held up the best. We normally wouldn't keep a gun to 90K but it still shoots fine and the barrel isn't smooth yet :). Our first Colt got to about 60K before it was sold. We replaced the extractor and hammer/sear on that one. The last one we had....had many breakages and it was sold before it had 30K after the slide was replaced by Colt at about 15K. We've never had an SA rental but lots of folks ask for an XD. The Ruger 44 mag we have is like most Rugers....a tank. We used to have a couple of GP100's that also held up very well. The Ruger Mark 2's get loose after a while and we turn those around about every 30K. The Sigs (220 and 239) we have hold up very well. Their slides get a bit loose on the frames after 20K or so but they still shoot fine.

The Berettas 92 and 96 hold up fairly well......we did have one of the famous locking block breakages but it was fixed and its held up since. We usually turn the Berettas around at 60K or so.

I've seen some beautiful older Series 70 Colts that I'd love to have and someday I probably will get a Colt 1911.......but not one of the new ones until I see the quality that everyone talks about.

[auto45]

Interesting. Thanks for the info.