Posted: 12/12/2012 11:09:09 AM EDT
|
Ive never owened a 1911, but have been interested in buying one. I want a full size 5". I want reliability with no frills. i would prefer to spend under 1000, cheaper even better.
Interested in your suggestions. I was interested in a Springfield Milspec. I want something that can cycle hollow points and anything i feed it without failures or having to tkae it to a gunsmith. |
|
I have not had a new 1911 in the last 15 years that would not feed anything I placed in the magazine, even my 200 gr lead reloads.
What do you want carry/range gun stainless or blue fixed or adjustable sights cast forged or barstock frame Lifetime warrenty or 1 year. Colt, SA, Sig, etc etc all make something that may just be what your looking for. |
|
Quoted:
Rock Island Armory. They're some of the more inexpensive 1911's and tend to be reliable. He gave 1000 as his ceiling, why would he spend 400?? OP all my 1911s are 100% reliable, I have a Kimber custom (carry gun) and 2 Springfields, a mil spec and loaded. You are on the right track with getting a 5" gun, you will experience less issues than you would with an officer or commander size out of the box, IMO |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rock Island Armory. They're some of the more inexpensive 1911's and tend to be reliable. He gave 1000 as his ceiling, why would he spend 400?? OP all my 1911s are 100% reliable, I have a Kimber custom (carry gun) and 2 Springfields, a mil spec and loaded. You are on the right track with getting a 5" gun, you will experience less issues than you would with an officer or commander size out of the box, IMO He also said that cheaper was better. So, I agree with the RIA recommendation. Mine feeds anything I feed it. So does my brother's. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks for yhe feedback. My brother bought a RIA a year or two ago and it wont cycle hollowpoints. S ok far im looking at SA milspec. Who do u guys recommend in colt? I want the closest to AK Reliability!!!! If you want AK-like pistol, I think you need to look at a Glock. |
|
If I were buying a brand new 1911 right now it would probably another Colt M1991A1, heck if I was buying used I'd find another ORM 1991. The M1991A1 is comparable to the Springfield Milspec in features, but is made in the US. I suspect the Milspec would cost close to the same price if it were made here.
I have an "old roll mark" M1991A1 that was given to me by my father 6 or 7 years ago and it was almost brand new in the box. It now has somewhere in the neighborhood of 12k rounds through it(I know, I know, I don't shoot enough) and the only part I had to replace was the plunger tube as it had gotten loose. It didn't fail, it was just loose and discovered it during a tear down of the weapon. Replaced it with a much stronger looking Ed Brown part and off I went. I plan to shoot it a lot more this year, especially since with the MR07 and X300 Ultra it is now more useful than ever. Almost new 6 or 7 years ago she looked like this: 
Changed the grips out and added a solid aluminum trigger. The 3 hole triggers were just too over done for me then as they are now. Wasn't hard to fit it either, about 10 minutes with a file. I also changed out the nylon mainspring housing for an S&A checkered MSH. The trigger and the MSH are both plastic. I also fit an Ed Brown thumb safety. 
Then about 5 years ago I fit a new hammer and sear to it, but being the extreme conservative I am(you can always take more off but you can't add more to it..) I was having trouble getting the grip safety to fit. So since I needed it refinished anyways I sent it to EGW and they fit the grip safety and their barrel bushing for me and refinished it. I also added CMC thin grips too it and began carrying it regularly. For being my first hammer/sear job, the trigger turned out a darn near perfectly smooth 5lbs. The 'smith at EGW(back when they had one in shop) inspected it at my request and saw no issues. 
In the last few weeks I've added the Surefire MR07 and X300 Ultra along with replacing the loose plunger tube. 
Overall, I'm very pleased with my Colt. Had I done it again.... I would've kept the stock spur hammer(which is machined from bar stock by the way), replaced the sear(MIM), and then shortened the hammer spur and broke the edges on the grip safety to make it less sharp followed by adding Novak sights. The beavertail is nice, but something about the look and feel of the old spur hammer can't be replaced. You still see ORM 1991's show up for around $500 and they are an excellent 1911. Mine has had NO "reliability work" and it will feed anything I can fit in the magazine. I've carried it on hikes, gotten it full of snow and mud and it just plain works. It's not super tight, but it's more accurate than the GI standard. I am neutral on the presence of the "Series 80" parts that so many here love to hate. Mine still has it as I don't really see a need to remove the parts. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rock Island Armory. They're some of the more inexpensive 1911's and tend to be reliable. He gave 1000 as his ceiling, why would he spend 400?? OP all my 1911s are 100% reliable, I have a Kimber custom (carry gun) and 2 Springfields, a mil spec and loaded. You are on the right track with getting a 5" gun, you will experience less issues than you would with an officer or commander size out of the box, IMO Curious why you would say this about an officer or commander size. Not trying to be smart, just would like to hear your opinion if you don't mind. I'm thinking of buying an officers in 45 cal. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rock Island Armory. They're some of the more inexpensive 1911's and tend to be reliable. He gave 1000 as his ceiling, why would he spend 400?? OP all my 1911s are 100% reliable, I have a Kimber custom (carry gun) and 2 Springfields, a mil spec and loaded. You are on the right track with getting a 5" gun, you will experience less issues than you would with an officer or commander size out of the box, IMO Curious why you would say this about an officer or commander size. Not trying to be smart, just would like to hear your opinion if you don't mind. I'm thinking of buying an officers in 45 cal. I honestly have no personal officer or commander guns, and am saving for one now. Im not saying they have issues, but a lot of people that say "1911s are crap" later come out and say they were shooting a 3". For example, take Kimbers. I have never ever seen or personally known anyone to have a failure in a 5" Kimber, not saying it doesn't happen though. I personally have almost 8k through with 0 failures of any kind(I know thats not astronomical but for a college student with no ammo money thats a hell of a lot). Every dude I have heard in the gunshop saying kimbers suck talks of his ultra II and how it jammed once in the first hundred rounds(still not a big deal but whatever). So my mistake on misleading about the smaller guns, it is all observation. I am saving for either a Kimber Ultra carry or a Colt CCO if I can find one. Which weapons are you looking at? |
|
Quoted:
If I were buying a brand new 1911 right now it would probably another Colt M1991A1, heck if I was buying used I'd find another ORM 1991. The M1991A1 is comparable to the Springfield Milspec in features, but is made in the US. I suspect the Milspec would cost close to the same price if it were made here. I have an "old roll mark" M1991A1 that was given to me by my father 6 or 7 years ago and it was almost brand new in the box. It now has somewhere in the neighborhood of 12k rounds through it(I know, I know, I don't shoot enough) and the only part I had to replace was the plunger tube as it had gotten loose. It didn't fail, it was just loose and discovered it during a tear down of the weapon. Replaced it with a much stronger looking Ed Brown part and off I went. I plan to shoot it a lot more this year, especially since with the MR07 and X300 Ultra it is now more useful than ever. Almost new 6 or 7 years ago she looked like this: http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/pix886690954.jpg http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/pix886690719.jpg Changed the grips out and added a solid aluminum trigger. The 3 hole triggers were just too over done for me then as they are now. Wasn't hard to fit it either, about 10 minutes with a file. I also changed out the nylon mainspring housing for an S&A checkered MSH. The trigger and the MSH are both plastic. I also fit an Ed Brown thumb safety. http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/199145002.jpg http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/Colt-Forty-Five018.jpg Then about 5 years ago I fit a new hammer and sear to it, but being the extreme conservative I am(you can always take more off but you can't add more to it..) I was having trouble getting the grip safety to fit. So since I needed it refinished anyways I sent it to EGW and they fit the grip safety and their barrel bushing for me and refinished it. I also added CMC thin grips too it and began carrying it regularly. For being my first hammer/sear job, the trigger turned out a darn near perfectly smooth 5lbs. The 'smith at EGW(back when they had one in shop) inspected it at my request and saw no issues. http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/ColtM1991EGW003.jpg In the last few weeks I've added the Surefire MR07 and X300 Ultra along with replacing the loose plunger tube. http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/P1000868-1.jpg http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu321/Pentagon556/guns/1911/P1000866-1.jpg Overall, I'm very pleased with my Colt. Had I done it again.... I would've kept the stock spur hammer(which is machined from bar stock by the way), replaced the sear(MIM), and then shortened the hammer spur and broke the edges on the grip safety to make it less sharp followed by adding Novak sights. The beavertail is nice, but something about the look and feel of the old spur hammer can't be replaced. You still see ORM 1991's show up for around $500 and they are an excellent 1911. Mine has had NO "reliability work" and it will feed anything I can fit in the magazine. I've carried it on hikes, gotten it full of snow and mud and it just plain works. It's not super tight, but it's more accurate than the GI standard. I am neutral on the presence of the "Series 80" parts that so many here love to hate. Mine still has it as I don't really see a need to remove the parts. You've done some good work on that pistol. How do you like the rail? is it a tight fit? Does your gun shoot different/POI shift? |
|
Quoted:
I honestly have no personal officer or commander guns, and am saving for one now. Im not saying they have issues, but a lot of people that say "1911s are crap" later come out and say they were shooting a 3". For example, take Kimbers. I have never ever seen or personally known anyone to have a failure in a 5" Kimber, not saying it doesn't happen though. I personally have almost 8k through with 0 failures of any kind(I know thats not astronomical but for a college student with no ammo money thats a hell of a lot). Every dude I have heard in the gunshop saying kimbers suck talks of his ultra II and how it jammed once in the first hundred rounds(still not a big deal but whatever). So my mistake on misleading about the smaller guns, it is all observation. I am saving for either a Kimber Ultra carry or a Colt CCO if I can find one. Which weapons are you looking at? 5" guns including Kimber fail. Your 5" guns tend to be less problematic though. A Commander is pretty reliable as with an officer frame with a commander length slide. Problems real start adding up when you drop to 3" 1911s. Never would I own any of those. Some are better than others, but the potential is high for failure.. The problem 1911s have is tolerance stacking. It is a manufacturing term.I doubt many guns and there parts are out of spec, but the individual parts, while in spec don't always work in complete harmony with the other parts of a given assembly. A 1911 is a gun that doesn't lend itself to mass production as well as say a Glock. It needs a expert craftsman to individually go through it and fit it so it functions it's best in all conditions. While it is not uncommon to have a good 1911 the same is true having one with problems. Luck of the draw. The higher end you go the less potential problems exist However the old world 1911s were works of art then to. There production was a lot of hand fitting and care. What you are paying for is the hard work and time it takes to build a very nice 1911. By the naked eye your entry level 1911 can look very nice and be very functional, but they mgiht not simply because the time was not spent really working with them. Carry wise I like the commander length. My hand is sort of big for a officer frame, but if I were really concerned, there is always a bobtail option. Doing that can print a little less when you a concealed with a bigger frame. |
|
I would not expect "AK reliability" out of a 1911, but from numerous postings on this and other forums, and what my friend who owns a large LGS says, the least problematic 1911's (that aren't $2500 customs) are the RIA. He also says he has the most problems with Kimbers.
That said, I have a Ruger SR1911 and have only had an issue with one type HP ammo, and that was at the first range trip. It is well-built and very accurate. No matter what some people say, I believe racking the slide on a new 1911 a few hundred times causes the pistol to wear a little at friction points and loosen the new recoil spring. I also dry fired my SR1911, and it seemed to make the trigger a bit smoother. Shooting it should do the rest unless their is a real problem. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for yhe feedback. My brother bought a RIA a year or two ago and it wont cycle hollowpoints. S ok far im looking at SA milspec. Who do u guys recommend in colt? I want the closest to AK Reliability!!!! If you want AK-like pistol, I think you need to look at a Glock. I have a glock I just wanted something super reliable in a 1911 platform. They are sweet guns |
|
Quoted:
With a $1K budget, I would either buy a Springfield Loaded PX9109LP or a Colt XSE. Either one will exceed all of your needs. good advice....here ya go.....Colt XSE |
|
I have had Colt's, Para's, Springfields, Taurus's, and Rock Island Armory. They are all dependable, all are available under $1,000.00, and all are available in .45 or 9mm.
I think out of all of them I like my stainless Springfield the best. No reason other then I just like em. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I honestly have no personal officer or commander guns, and am saving for one now. Im not saying they have issues, but a lot of people that say "1911s are crap" later come out and say they were shooting a 3". For example, take Kimbers. I have never ever seen or personally known anyone to have a failure in a 5" Kimber, not saying it doesn't happen though. I personally have almost 8k through with 0 failures of any kind(I know thats not astronomical but for a college student with no ammo money thats a hell of a lot). Every dude I have heard in the gunshop saying kimbers suck talks of his ultra II and how it jammed once in the first hundred rounds(still not a big deal but whatever). So my mistake on misleading about the smaller guns, it is all observation. I am saving for either a Kimber Ultra carry or a Colt CCO if I can find one. Which weapons are you looking at? 5" guns including Kimber fail. Your 5" guns tend to be less problematic though. A Commander is pretty reliable as with an officer frame with a commander length slide. Problems real start adding up when you drop to 3" 1911s. Never would I own any of those. Some are better than others, but the potential is high for failure.. The problem 1911s have is tolerance stacking. It is a manufacturing term.I doubt many guns and there parts are out of spec, but the individual parts, while in spec don't always work in complete harmony with the other parts of a given assembly. A 1911 is a gun that doesn't lend itself to mass production as well as say a Glock. It needs a expert craftsman to individually go through it and fit it so it functions it's best in all conditions. While it is not uncommon to have a good 1911 the same is true having one with problems. Luck of the draw. The higher end you go the less potential problems exist However the old world 1911s were works of art then to. There production was a lot of hand fitting and care. What you are paying for is the hard work and time it takes to build a very nice 1911. By the naked eye your entry level 1911 can look very nice and be very functional, but they mgiht not simply because the time was not spent really working with them. Carry wise I like the commander length. My hand is sort of big for a officer frame, but if I were really concerned, there is always a bobtail option. Doing that can print a little less when you a concealed with a bigger frame. I dont necessarily agree with this. Its been stated hundreds of times by the smiths in this forum (who haven't even wasted their time coming in to this thread) that any 1911 can be made to work like a swiss watch unless it is seriously screwed up from the factory. Parts in 1911s have to be fitted 95% of the time, but you don't know much about the weapon if you think it takes an expert craftsman to do so. I did research, watched a 1911 smith and taught myself the rest. Am I a pro? not at all, but I can make just about any 1911 run without a single issue related to the gun. Not arguing with you, just the whole expert craftsman thing is a myth. 1911s are a more refined machine than a glock or xd, and it shows. I would much rather work on my carry gun to make sure it runs 100% than to think my gun is unstoppable because it is plastic  fwiw though, I only have the loaded so that I could learn to work on a modern 1911. My kimber and mil spec carry guns never had an issue, and I believe in "isn't broke, don't fix it".
OP, what I wrote should give you some good advice. If you get a 1911 that doesn't "run like an ak" out of the box, don't chuck the gun and say its crap and 1911s suck etc etc. Take the time to look at whats join on and how the weapon operates, then fix it. Its really not hard. If you don't want to do that then the weapon may not be for you |
|
Curious why you would say this about an officer or commander size. Not trying to be smart, just would like to hear your opinion if you don't mind. I'm thinking of buying an officers in 45 cal.
I honestly have no personal officer or commander guns, and am saving for one now. Im not saying they have issues, but a lot of people that say "1911s are crap" later come out and say they were shooting a 3". For example, take Kimbers. I have never ever seen or personally known anyone to have a failure in a 5" Kimber, not saying it doesn't happen though. I personally have almost 8k through with 0 failures of any kind(I know thats not astronomical but for a college student with no ammo money thats a hell of a lot). Every dude I have heard in the gunshop saying kimbers suck talks of his ultra II and how it jammed once in the first hundred rounds(still not a big deal but whatever). So my mistake on misleading about the smaller guns, it is all observation. I am saving for either a Kimber Ultra carry or a Colt CCO if I can find one. Which weapons are you looking at?[/quote] Not trying to derail the OP's thread, but I have a Springfield Mil-Spec with 5" barrel I bought several years ago and it has never failed in any way out of the box. I've been looking at the Colt New Agent in 9mm and finally found one locally that I put my hands on, but it was 45 cal. So I've been doing some research and reading all the treads I can find to see anyone's opinion on how a 3" barrel shoots. I have just about talked myself into finding a cheaper gun in 45 cal with a 3" barrel just to test myself. That's my plan now. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Thanks for yhe feedback. My brother bought a RIA a year or two ago and it wont cycle hollowpoints. S ok far im looking at SA milspec. Who do u guys recommend in colt? I want the closest to AK Reliability!!!! If you want AK-like pistol, I think you need to look at a Glock. +1 for GLOCK..... |