Posted: 9/30/2007 5:19:47 PM EDT
|
I'm looking at original colt series 70s for target shooting/plinking/eventually a carry gun. How do these pistols run? I'm looking a strictly, bone stock, original Gov't Models. |
|
If you are going to get a new S70, you need to understand as a minor point, it is not a true series 70 (uses the better solid bushing, but Colt slaps some series 80 parts in it). The major point is that Colt has some considerable QC problems with their 1911s. Since they have built them to combat specs you don't have so many that fail to run (unlike Kimber, which makes a tight gun with little margin of error), but you should expect any and all kinds of crap on the gun. If you cannot find one in your dealer's counter or a gun show table, then forget the whole thing. Colt cannot be trusted (any longer) to deliver a pistol of consistent quality. I have owned 2 custom shop pistols and my friend owns one. Both of mine had to be completely replaced due to the unacceptable slop work (Colt refused to make it right w my S70 repro and refunded my purchase price instead), and my friend's S70 had to be returned for an out of spec firing pin stop plate and a loose plunger tube. Weeks after my last Colt nightmare, I went to the dealer's counter (the overpriced guy who has a lot of everything). He had a WWI and a S70 in blued. The WWI had "true geometry", good balance, and was free of blemishes as far as the eye could see without stripping. The S70 was a complete piece of shit. The grips were misshapen (a new expectation of Colt's) the geometry was off in places (bevels and depressions where sharp lines should have been). Most notably, the trigger was so horrendous that it felt as if it could be wiggled out of the triggerguard. Pure slop with what felt like .25" North-South wiggle room. When they make them, they make them nice (with a few minor issues here or there). When they drop the ball, they do it with excellence. They will make you scratch your head and wonder if there is a mandatory drinking policy for those on duty. Today is NOT the time to buy a new Colt 1911, IMO. If you can't wait, then be SURE you are able to closely inspect it before taking possession. Otherwise, I suggest everybody wait for this notion of Colt moving operations to the mid west (new workforce/new tools) to materialize. |
The new Series 70 reissue is on average a much better 1911 than the average Original Series 70. Colts QC on the Original Series 70 was far worse than it is on the current reissue. Many of pulpsmacks grievances with Colt are from what I can tell due to Cosmetic standards. This may or may not be as important to you. |
|
What SGB said is pretty much correct. "Combat specs" was my shorthand for "clearances similar to the original 1911A1". The disadvantage (if that bothers you) is that the pistol is built loosely and may have a little wobble or rattle. The advantage is that the looser construction (like the AK-47) makes for a more reliable platform, allowing for interchangable parts, debris, and common to all production pistols, crap/ill-fitted parts that don't conform to spec. In a tight Kimber the weapon is prone to reliability issues if the parts are not fitted just right. If you don't care what it looks/feels like and it will not burn your ass if 1-3 minor/moderate issues crop up on the gun, which will require a trip back to Colt then you should be fine buying a Colt sight unseen. Their reputation for reliability is among the best for production pistols. If, OTOH you expect everything to be in order (barring something reasonably unforseeable), then you MUST be able to lay your hands on the Colt and inspect it carefully. I do hope that this proposed move to the midwest does give them the tooling and the fresh labor necessary to make a "good" Colt something you should expect rather than hope for. |
Cosmetics aren't a huge concern, however, I'm curious as to what problems the original Colt series 70's had? Are they issues that require gun smithing, or is it a matter of part replacement? |
|
Leading edge on left hand frame rail would brake on some if fired enouph. You'll be able to see which ones will do it over time. Your looking for the slide being biased to the right side by the frame dust cover. Not all the 70's with the biased slide to one side, but I've seen some broken railed frames on them.  Left and right side is determined as pistol is pointed away from you. |
| See pistolwretch's comment. I would also add (my limited knowledge) that you have the breakage prone finger collet bushing on the MK IVs, and often some ugly rollmarks. Also I have heard about some hit or miss issues with quality (sights, grip tang slop), etc. It will also depend on when the pistol was made, the early 1980s models being among the worst, generally speaking. |
|
I think another one of Pulpy's problems stems from what I call "The Big Three Disease". Something I have noticed with automobiles is this: for some people, if you have good luck with one brand of car, say Ford; it is IMPERATIVE that you stick with that brand. for some wierd reason there are many folks who make the mistake of switching from Ford to Dodge and they have a HELL of a time of it. Nothing works, the dealer screws them and the car fall apart....yet when they go back to Ford and stay with Ford they have almost no issues. For instance, I am a Mopar guy, I specifically drive Jeeps. For some reason, I cannot own a Chevy to save my life...I end up spending every waking hour under the hood. With Jeeps....I just do my PMs and I am good to go. Unless I do something stupid to them...but that is not Jeep's fault. As Pulpy can't seem to own a Colt...I dare NOT buy anything from Springfield. Out of the 5 Springfield Armory guns I have owned, only ONE has not needed fixing of one sort or another. I kept thinking ( since I am heavily into manufacturing ) "Oh, the next one won't have X or Y problem...I just got in a buying slump". I learned my lessson...."I cannot own or buy anything made by Springfield Armory anymore". I do have my M1As and the one never needed a thing....it was the ONLY ( and the first ) Springie I bought that never needed any work. from there on out it was some type of hell or another. So, the moral of the story is....if you nevr have problems with Springfield...stay with them. If you never have problems with Colt...stay with them. Same goes for cars, GM, Ford or Chrysler. Stick with what works for YOU. |
I agree. Brand loyalty often stems from more than liking a certain style or "going along with the crowd. " It sometimes comes from simple good fortune with a certain company whether it be automobiles or 1911s. Some self-appointed pundits and wags on this site like to poo-poo brand loyalty as nothing but "drinking the koolaid" when it is often more than that. And I can't forget those that wish the rest of us to wallow in their misery and condemn the 1911 brand that has brought them unhappiness even though you have not suffered the same misfortune. 
|
I like your theory, and it seems sound enough, but I suffer from "Epicureitis", better known as "forced snob syndrome". Maybe it is my luck, or maybe it's the odds out there, but ALL commercial production pistol brands I have owned have ended up disappointing by delivering something unacceptable (in form or function with the company finally failing to make it right). For me the cure was to take two thousand and call Wilson Combat in the morning. It is extremely sad that this has turned out to be a necessity instead of a luxury, but I guess that is the way things go for some. You definitely have a point about the brand loyalty/brand hostility though. I don't recommend SA from experience at all. I would wager that if I bought a SA it would magically be a piece of shit, (that they made right), which would inspire confidence to buy another, which became a worse piece of shit that they would NOT make right causing me to sever ties with them. This has been the way it has been with me. I give the production pistol company enough rope to hang themselves with and given their cost cutting measures (or failure to upgrade tools/employees) they invariably do. It truly is a sad state of affairs, because I believe collectively that all these companies have done a great disservice to us and the tradition of our beloved 1911. Thanks to gross neglect on one side (Colt) and dollar-chasing cost-cutting measures (practically all other production outfits) the M1911/M1911A1 design has gone from the cheap, reliable, rugged assembly line pistol to the "pick two out of those three" pistol. |
|
So the consensus appears to be.... If I want a pretty Colt series 70, get the original. If I want one that I can put thousands of rounds through without a hitch, get the new repro. If I want one with both, I'm SOL  Guess it's time to start hitting up the shops and looking for a decent repro 
|
Pics of a gun I don't own yet?  Well, since you insist, here's a nice one on google Colt Series 70 pic (original) |
That's really a nice pistol that you don't own ! 
|
I owned one in the late 70's and it ran like a top. Most of my 1911A1 experience at the time was with the Remington-Rand's I owned or carried in the Navy so the Colt was a much, much nicer pistol cosmetically. I don't remember any reliability issues with it, but I've always disassembled any new auto loader and went to work polishing parts, usually before I even put the first rounds through it. |
|
I've been shooting 1911's for a long time now. I started on a US GI 1911 via 1918. The org. 70's really didn't have anything wrong with them. The barrel bushing was designed to have fingers so that when the pistol went into battery, the last bit of the barrel was a larger diameter, pushing the bushing fingers out against the walls of the slide giving a tighter fit, but gave it the slop needed to aid in field stripping and opperationg in less than ideal conditions. The problem was the flexing could stress the fingers and cause them to crack and break off. Also if the ridge just ahead of the chamber on the barrel would strike the fingers, that could cause one to break off. Other than that, the 70's might have the same problems any 1911 might have, extractor out of tune, not feeding hollow points. One thing to mention, in the day of the 70's, the hp round really had not taken on yet. Most people back then were shooting ball out of 1911's and the 70's were not really tuned from the factory to feed hp's. Now with all due respect to Pulp, I am not so negative on Colt. I have seen lemons from every manufacture of firearms. I have personally had a problem with S&W, Colt, Glock, Kimber (multiple serious), SA (multiple serious), Browning, Ruger, Ford, GM, BMW, Maytag, Westinghouse, Dell, Apple, Compaq. Get the point. I still say Colt makes a better pistol today than they have since the 50's or 60 or maybe even ever. And I think there is the idea that the new ser 70 and the 1911 repo are hand built custom shop pistols and they are not. They are not regular production line items, and so are "Colt Custom shop" but they are still mass produced in batches or runs. That is why these guns are 800 or 900 bucks and not $1500. Now if you look at say the Special Combat or the El series high polish 38 super, you will see where your $1000 goes. So why do you want a ser 70 over say a 1991 for a carry gun. Other than a roll mark (and the new 1991 roll mark is nice in my book) and the ser 80 parts, you really don't get much more with the ser 70. The 1991 have special throating to feed HP ammo, the least MIM this side of a Wilson, forged frame and slide, not Novaks but good 3 dot sights and better than the ser 70 sights. And no matter what anyone tells you the ser 80 parts have very little to do with a good combat trigger. |
I shot mostly ball at the time. Semiwadcutter was a crapshoot. |
No, your not SOL! I got one, online and nearly perfect. It shot perfect and the very minor cosmetic blemish went away with my first mod. Get the Repro S70 and don't look back. |
|
I have a repro Series 70 and it is a beaut! The fit and finish is great. Out of about 200 rounds through it, I had only one malfunction...a FTF on the first shot. After that, it ran great. You will have to upgrade the sights, and I recommend a beavertail safety. |