Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/26/2004 10:49:36 AM EST
what do you think of the SA milspec as a carry gun? price is why i ask. i just can't afford a high end 1911.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 11:27:01 AM EST
Needs alot of work to be reliable.

Dont get me wrong, I am a huge 1911 fan, but the SA mil Spec is just not a quality pistol from the factory. Get a Glock for CHL.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 11:40:13 AM EST
i have a sig 226, but since i'm a skinny guy, i'm looking at 1911s. plus they are .45s. i don't shoot glocks well.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 11:53:57 AM EST
It will do fine, just make sure your carry ammo runs OK, a min of 200 rds to be sure. People on the Net tend to be trendy buying the "high line" models but more money does not mean reliability. Infact the opposite tends to be true. The only thing I would do is replace the recoil spring with a Wolff 18.5 pound and maybe get some quality mags. Sights and trigger are up to you but not a "need" for the younger folk. It will last a lifetime, something NO plastic frame will ever do.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 11:57:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By Timanator:
Needs alot of work to be reliable.

Dont get me wrong, I am a huge 1911 fan, but the SA mil Spec is just not a quality pistol from the factory. Get a Glock for CHL.




[cough] BULLSHIT!! [/cough]


I HAVE one. It is fine for CCW. However, just like any gun, you need to make sure it functions with your chosen ammo. Shoot a couple hundred rounds through it to get used to it's POI and so on...
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 1:08:11 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 1:41:11 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 1:45:17 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 2:10:24 PM EST
I don't see a problem with it as long as it feeds the ammo you carry in it. Personally, I like a basic 1911a1 for a carry gun. When I rebuilt my Essex Arms 1911a1 I put a Mil-Spec Sarco Kit on it and it runs fine with ball ammo. I've still got to test it with some hollow points, probably Remington because their ammo has more of a "ball" profile to it. K.I.S.S. has always been the buzz word in defensive firearms, hasn't it? That's why a basic, mil-spec 45 has been and will always be a good choice, after all, G.I's have been using them that way for over 90 years without a problem.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 2:52:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:



A properly tuned Wilson or Brown extractor and some quality magazines, he'd be in business.




And that would be why I stated it is not going to be a good choice out of the box. SA's QC is not good IMO. I have had 2 Mil spec models. Neither one was reliable out of the box.(Got them around the same time so I believe they are made pretty closely within the sme time frame)

One of them FTE 1 out every mag atleast. Turns out the extractor did not even touch the rim of the casing if you put a shell in the breach.

Second one started shooting low and to the right after 200 rounds. It does the stove piping jam every 50 rds or so. Dust cover wore in to the finish of the slide right out of the box and had to e refinished. And the Extractor had to be replaced for FTE. Now it has about 500 rds through it, the plunger tude is loose and had to be re staked.



SA is a good platform to build a 1911 on. But I do not believe it is a reliable gun out of the box for CHL.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 5:30:12 PM EST

Originally Posted By topgunpilot20:
what do you think of the SA milspec as a carry gun? price is why i ask. i just can't afford a high end 1911.



I have a mil-spec that needed nothing out of the box to be reliable and I carry it often. Very accurate...

Guess I'm just lucky that way The WWII mil-spec is another story.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 5:33:44 PM EST

Originally Posted By Timanator:
Needs alot of work to be reliable.

Dont get me wrong, I am a huge 1911 fan, but the SA mil Spec is just not a quality pistol from the factory. Get a Glock for CHL.




I would love to see you back up the "Not a quality pistol from the factory" statement. I would have zero problems carrying a Mil-Spec.
Link Posted: 9/26/2004 8:23:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/27/2004 5:06:53 AM EST by p99guy]
I carry a 2002 vintage Mil-spec on duty...and the things I done to it was the same mods I put on the last 6 1911's I have owned in my life for the most part. Had Novak type night sights put on by MMC, Match barrel bushing fitted,Wilson match trigger, and a wide grip safety/ slight reshape of the hammer spur underside and simply as a tip of the hat to history...real G.I. grips. I use mec-gar 8 rounders and it feeds everything I have tried in it, and is very accurate. This is one 1911 I wouldnt have a second thought having in my hand when it all goes to hell'n a handbag.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 5:43:05 AM EST
My WWII milspec has gone about 2500+ rounds now without failure

There only thing I've added is a extended slide stop because I have a gimp thumb.


Link Posted: 9/27/2004 1:26:03 PM EST
My Mil-Spec ran just fine out of the box. I ran about 2000 rounds (break in and familiarizing) through it before I did some light modifications to make the pistol what I wanted (trigger job, King's grip safety, new sights, S&A flat checkered MSH). Hell, I still have the o.e.m. extractor! Aside from my brass flying anywhere from 3-4:30 (NEVER in my face/forehead area), no problems (even with Wolf ammo). HTH
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 4:03:43 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 4:44:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lumpy196:
I never said a Springfield Mil-spec wouldnt run with the out of the box extractor. I generally use the Wilson part as a reliability hedge in ANY 1911 I own.



See, what Lumpy is getting at here, is that the extractor is the weakest link in the 1911 platform.

Doesn't matter if you gots a $2,000 Wilson Combat... when the extractor goes, jamomatic city!

This is a well know fact among us 1911 aficianado's
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 6:12:07 PM EST
It doesn't matter who made the extractor as long as the tension is set properly. It doesn't make a shit if its Wilson, Ed Brown, STI, Colt, Kiber or Springfield.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 6:13:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/27/2004 6:13:58 PM EST by Lumpy196]
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 7:00:47 PM EST
I don't know how the 1911 made the 71 years before Wilson and their superior steel. You have been a victim of modern marketing. As PT Barnum put it there is one born ever minute.
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 8:12:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/27/2004 9:02:49 PM EST by Lumpy196]
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 8:19:16 PM EST
Well the examples I have used seemed to be excellent performers. Hell even the G.I. didn't hiccup! (but it did bite my highride hide)




This one is brentwal's ^.

MT
Link Posted: 9/27/2004 9:33:22 PM EST
Hey Lumpy, know you didn't say that, I was just listing one of the parts I haven't changed. The Springer extractor could've been fitted alot better (thus the wacky ejection pattern), but it doesn't bother me enough to change it outright. Upgradeing parts for peace of mind, especially from a reputable source, is a good thing. No attack on my part to your previous post intended, more of a testimonial as to how reliable they can be out of the box.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 3:11:24 AM EST
Mine could have been fitted alot better also.

The guy asked for opinion, and I gave it based on what I have gone through. Nor eason to "lie" about my own gun, I still have one of them and it is reliable now after some work though.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 3:26:22 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 3:38:45 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 6:06:16 AM EST
I recently replaced the factory extractor in my loaded Springfield with a Wilson extractor. After doing a few double feed clearance drills (which is rough on 1911 extractors) at a pistol course I attended, I had 2 failures to extract. This was after literally 2-3 thousand rounds fired with no issues. Checking the extractor tension revealed the problem.

The Wilson part has a noticeably larger hook to engage the rim than the factory SA part does. Adjusting proper tension isn't that difficult, and is nicely explained in directions included with the Wilson part.

I also replaced the extractor in my Series 1 Kimber compact with the Wilson part; totally cured the reliability issues I had with the gun. Well, that and dumping the POS mags that came with the pistol.

My friends largely shoot Springfields. They have been excellent shooters, mostly loaded models with 2 TRPs tossed in. I have a TRP on the way...
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 9:52:42 AM EST

Originally Posted By M199:
It will last a lifetime, something NO plastic frame will ever do.

Ignorance is bliss


Springfield tests

More

continued
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 1:40:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/28/2004 7:10:43 PM EST by Timanator]

Originally Posted By bigkracka:

Originally Posted By M199:
It will last a lifetime, something NO plastic frame will ever do.

Ignorance is bliss


Springfield tests

More

continued




Damn these guys are anal when it coems to their 1911's...


Good info, but not too many shooters hae the expertise to strip and gauge every aspect of their new pistol like that guy.
Link Posted: 9/28/2004 2:44:19 PM EST
Great gun to get, although I would do some modifications just for my personal taste.
Top Top