Which of these 1911 pistols do you prefer?

RoadDawg · May 29, 2015

Sling Blade said:
I looked at those. They ain't bad at all.

But I gotta have the original style hammer.

Hammers can be switched...

it ain't like it's a gender change. :rofl:

Alea Jacta Est · May 29, 2015

RoadDawg said:
Hammers can be switched... it ain't like it's a gender change.

Perhaps Bruce Jenner changed because of his initials. That's gotta be a tough go in the locker room for all those years...

I like the original hammer too but it (not being present on the gun I'd otherwise want) wouldn't keep me from buying...

Magnumite · May 29, 2015

Get an extra spur hammer and GI A1 grip safety as on the two pistols in question. Shape and blend the grip safety to the original high swept 1911 spur profile, fit and bob the hammer a bit and you'll have a nice high grip and no hammer bite.

Boats · May 29, 2015

Colt because:

100% American made instead of a Brazilian frame

Resale value

"If it aint a Colt, its a copy"

Series 70 firing system

No nanny state ILS system (internal locking system similar to Taurus)

No strange take down procedures (ILS requires a few extra steps to remove mainspring housing)

No loaded chamber indicator, so you can brass check, which is manly.

Never really agreed with Springfield marketing alluding to them being similar to the original gov't armory (which they aren't)

Colt uses less MIM parts. (Springer MIM is generally good tho, but I cant get behind a MIM or even a cast extractor)

I have/had both. Ditched the Springfield a long while ago. They shoot the same. The "match" barrel in the Springer doesn't make much of a difference due to the inherent accuracy of the 1911 platform.

http://www.springfield-armory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/1911Manual.pdf
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=256203

Magnumite · May 29, 2015

Boats said:
Colt because:

100% American made instead of a Brazilian frame"

Springfield Armory guns have been made state side for about two years...no more Brazilian manufacture.

"Resale value

"If it aint a Colt, its a copy""

So was Remington Rand, Singer, Ithaca, etc.
Plus, the copy was out dayed so the other 1911 manufactures made all the modern improvements.

"Series 70 firing system"

SA uses series 70 lock work.

"No nanny state ILS system (internal locking system similar to Taurus).
No strange take down procedures (ILS requires a few extra steps to remove mainspring housing)"

Someone must have snuck in and installed all those series 80 firing pin blocks...oh that was COLT. It is more involved to service than the ILS.

No loaded chamber indicator, so you can brass check, which is manly.

Never really agreed with Springfield marketing alluding to them being similar to the original gov't armory (which they aren't)

"Colt uses less MIM parts. (Springer MIM is generally good tho, but I cant get behind a MIM or even a cast extractor)."

MIM is MIM. There is good and bad, comes down to QC. SA uses barstock extractors.

"I have/had both. Ditched the Springfield a long while ago. They shoot the same. The "match" barrel in the Springer doesn't make much of a difference due to the inherent accuracy of the 1911 platform."

The Colt will have a long linked barrel and a sloppy bushing..the design of the 1911 and A1, which is how the Colt S70 is built. Springer typically closes the tolerances.

http://www.springfield-armory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/1911Manual.pdf
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=256203

Not knocking the Colt...

501st · May 29, 2015

Boats said:
Colt because:

100% American made instead of a Brazilian frame

Resale value

"If it aint a Colt, its a copy"

Series 70 firing system

No nanny state ILS system (internal locking system similar to Taurus)

No strange take down procedures (ILS requires a few extra steps to remove mainspring housing)

No loaded chamber indicator, so you can brass check, which is manly.

Never really agreed with Springfield marketing alluding to them being similar to the original gov't armory (which they aren't)

Colt uses less MIM parts. (Springer MIM is generally good tho, but I cant get behind a MIM or even a cast extractor)

I have/had both. Ditched the Springfield a long while ago. They shoot the same. The "match" barrel in the Springer doesn't make much of a difference due to the inherent accuracy of the 1911 platform.

http://www.springfield-armory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/1911Manual.pdf
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=256203

You do realize the ~$2500 Springfield Professional which is used by the FBI HRT, has MIM parts, right?

Huckleberry · May 29, 2015

Big difference in MIM parts made with good quality steel and those made with low grade steel or pot metal.

Also, many companies like Ruger use investment casting. Ruger's Pine Tree Castings makes part for many other mfg'ers and high end gunsmiths' aftermarket parts.

Most shooters couldn't tell the difference between a high end part that is MIM, Investment Cast or machined part.

Boats · May 30, 2015

501st said:
You do realize the ~$2500 Springfield Professional which is used by the FBI HRT, has MIM parts, right?

Apples and Oranges. We arent talking about a $2500 pistol. We are talking about the Colt MkIV/Ser70 and the Springer Mil-Spec. My $5000 custom Delta Elite (linky: http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=108140) has a Colt MIM sear and disconnector. I have no problems with certain MIM parts. Considering the relative fragility and tuning issues that are inherent to a 1911 internal extractor, I prefer a barstock one. Just like I wouldnt use a MIM barrel link (e.g. Kimber).

Huckleberry said:
Big difference in MIM parts made with good quality steel and those made with low grade steel or pot metal.

Agree. I mentioned that Springer has good MIM parts, as does Colt. Which is why I didnt take issue with any of the MIM they use OTHER than the extractor. BOTH guns have MIM parts. BOTH companies use good quality MIM parts. But using MIM on high stress parts like extractors is asking for trouble, just ask Kimber and their aforementioned MIM barrel links. See above.

Magnumite said:
Not knocking the Colt...

100% American made instead of a Brazilian frame" Nevermind

Springfield Armory guns have been made state side for about two years...no more Brazilian manufacture.
Didn't know that, thanks for clarifying. Did some research and this checks out.

"If it aint a Colt, its a copy""

So was Remington Rand, Singer, Ithaca, etc.
Plus, the copy was out dated so the other 1911 manufactures made all the modern improvements.
I was speaking more to the colloquial than any real advantage. It should be noted that it would appear the OP wants an original as possible 1911 so modern "improvements" are kinda irrelevant.

"Series 70 firing system"

SA uses series 70 lock work.
Never said it did or didnt, only because SA doesn't mention it. I do know the Colt does, but if the Springer does as well, so much the better.

"No nanny state ILS system (internal locking system similar to Taurus).
No strange take down procedures (ILS requires a few extra steps to remove mainspring housing)"

Someone must have snuck in and installed all those series 80 firing pin blocks...oh that was COLT. It is more involved to service than the ILS.
Very true, but irrelevant since (as you pointed out) we are talking about two series 70 lockwork pistols. Wasn't commenting on the company practice or history, just these two pistols. Of the two, the Springer has a locking device in the MSH, the Colt doesn't. Personally, I convert almost all of my firing pin block 1911s to Series 70 but that is personal preference.

"Colt uses less MIM parts. (Springer MIM is generally good tho, but I cant get behind a MIM or even a cast extractor)."

MIM is MIM. There is good and bad, comes down to QC. SA uses barstock extractors.

Agree (see above replies to other posters). That being said: THR, FiringLine, Calguns, and ARFcom all disagree with your statement that the extractors are barstock, along with my personal experience. (The Mil-spec I owned had a MIM extractor). Do you have a reference to prove this? I am not trying to be argumentative, I actually want to know if Springer changed this or not.
https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159303
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-76019.html
https://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=5&f=49&t=31660 (cached version)

"I have/had both. Ditched the Springfield a long while ago. They shoot the same. The "match" barrel in the Springer doesn't make much of a difference due to the inherent accuracy of the 1911 platform."

The Colt will have a long linked barrel and a sloppy bushing..the design of the 1911 and A1, which is how the Colt S70 is built. Springer typically closes the tolerances.

Again, I agree. Whether or not this is functionally necessary is debatable. In bullseye shooting I would say it is, but otherwise I doubt it. My personal experience is that my stock MkIV Colt (without collet bushing) shoots about the same as my Springer Mil-spec did.

http://www.springfield-armory.com/wp...1911Manual.pdf
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=256203

Schipperke · May 30, 2015

The Colt has a standard ejection port, the other looks lowered. For that reason the SA. I looked at 70 series, but preferred the straight back strap and trigger and lowered port of the 80 series Colt.

Boats · May 30, 2015

Schipperke said:
The Colt has a standard ejection port, the other looks lowered. For that reason the SA. I looked at 70 series, but preferred the straight back strap and trigger and lowered port of the 80 series Colt.

Good point that I hadnt noticed. The lowered and flared ejection port is a difference, but that also means the Springer Mil-spec isnt really mil-spec. (along with the sloped cocking serrations and 3-dot combat sights)

Blaster229 · May 30, 2015

Holy crap! I fondled a Ruger CMD lightweight today. I can see me lightening up the stable a bit to make room for this piece of delicious self defense tool. Thinking this for my edc retirement piece

RoadDawg · May 30, 2015

Blaster229 said:
Holy crap! I fondled a Ruger CMD lightweight today. I can see me lightening up the stable a bit to make room for this piece of delicious self defense tool. Thinking this for my edc retirement piece

I have Both and that CMD is a great piece for IWB... You are going to love it

Series 70...
Titanium firing pin and stronger firing pin spring negates the need for the firing pin block and mechanism found in the series 80 pistols.
The 716 Stainless is a proprietary stainless alloy...
Barrel and bushing are match milled from the same bar stock...
The lower is investment cast... Having a cast lower and and an upper milled from billet stops galling in the slide/frame contact area...

Here is a very impartial review of the original SR1911 (from May 1911)... And it is about as comprehensive as it is impartial... And there have been further improvements made in the line since then.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/05/robert-farago/gun-review-ruger-sr1911/

We’re talking about one of the if not the best 1911 for the money.

And a more recent review... 4.9 stars at Cabelas...
http://www.cabelas.com/product/Ruger-reg-Centerfire-Pistols/1226036.uts

photoracer · May 31, 2015

Me I would not pick either one. And understand I have a lot of 2011 type double stack guns but until recently no single stack ones. I wanted something that would be a great shooter right out of the box and would be reliable enough to carry or shoot matches with not something I had to work on. On the otherhand I didn't have a price limit of $1000 or less either. Based on recommendations from a lot of shooting pros on the Brian Enos website I picked up a Dan Wesson Guardian Commander in 9mm. Unlike mag sensitive .45s or .40s it runs 100% on DWs, Colts, Pachmyers, and even 10 rd. Metalform mags. Heck I even shot a Steel Challenge match with it and it cycled cheap Fed 9mm like it was a $3000 STI. All for about $1300. And this one included a barrel, recoil assembly and mags for 9x23mm also. So far the only change I did was add a set of Hogue wrap-around grips.
But hey go with whatever you want. Compared to a Colt this thing is a simple work of art.

RoadDawg · May 31, 2015

9mm 1911??? Blastphemy... That's what that is... Blastphemy... :sad20:

JMB weeps...

Racer Doug14 · May 31, 2015

^^JMB might not..he did design the Hi-power.

Magnumite · May 31, 2015

We all shoot what we like and a 45 ACP in a 1911 is...well, just right.

But, don't knock the 9mm 1911's until you tried them. Fast slide cycle with less recoil (more time to index on the next target with no time lost, typically in less time), comparable ammo savings ( 33% and greater), a couple more rounds in standard length mags.

I had a 9mm 1911 once before but I really like a 45 1911 and... well, I sold it. Then kicked myself. Then during this last ammo and reloading components frenzy, I looked at 150 plus cases from 45 ACP reloads I had just shot. I thought about the steel game I was practicing for. All that cash just to go clang with a minimum 125 power factor. Doing fast math I decided to build a 9mm 1911. I still shoot 45 but my stock steel gun is now a 9mm.

RoadDawg · Jun 1, 2015

Racer Doug14 said:
^^JMB might not..he did design the Hi-power.

Magnumite said:
We all shoot what we like and a 45 ACP in a 1911 is...well, just right.

But, don't knock the 9mm 1911's until you tried them. Fast slide cycle with less recoil (more time to index on the next target with no time lost, typically in less time), comparable ammo savings ( 33% and greater), a couple more rounds in standard length mags.

I had a 9mm 1911 once before but I really like a 45 1911 and... well, I sold it. Then kicked myself. Then during this last ammo and reloading components frenzy, I looked at 150 plus cases from 45 ACP reloads I had just shot. I thought about the steel game I was practicing for. All that cash just to go clang with a minimum 125 power factor. Doing fast math I decided to build a 9mm 1911. I still shoot 45 but my stock steel gun is now a 9mm.

Actually guys ... The comment was TIC. Joke. Ha ha... I know that the original that Colt was working on, in 1904 was supposed to be in .41 cal. There was also a .38... (it was ruled ineffective.) But due to testing, the powers that be wanted .45... So JMB/Colt designed the 11.43 x 23 (.45) in 1905 (Colt model 1905). The U S MIL adopted the Colt version in 1911, naming it the M1911, after testing it and the Savage offering. Therefore the ONLY true "1911" is the one so named by the U S MIL in 1911 and it was in .45 cal ACP. (It seems that the Savage .45 had a lot of failures.)

But over the years... Folks see the pistol that looks like the 1911... and even if it is in .40 cal... they will still call it a 1911... not a Colt model 1905.

To some folks... Every tissue is a "Kleenex".

Magnumite · Jun 1, 2015

Yah, no problemo. And every soft drink is a Coke...

Vile Shadow · Jun 1, 2015

Racer Doug14 said:
^^JMB might not..he did design the Hi-power.

Irrelevant. Matters not. Our soldiers used 'em in .45 in.... How many wars?

So, as a certain deodorant ad mentions, anything else would be uncivilized.

hairba111 · Jun 2, 2015

Magnumite said:
Yah, no problemo. And every soft drink is a Coke...

nu uh, orange coke tastes different.

Which of these 1911 pistols do you prefer?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Nos nostraque Deo

Extinguished member

Ultimate Member

Broken Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

No One of Consequence

Broken Member

Ultimate Member

Broken Member

God loves you, I don't.

Nos nostraque Deo

Competition Shooter

Nos nostraque Deo

Thread killer

Ultimate Member

Nos nostraque Deo

Ultimate Member

...

XGMG2

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics