Posted: 1/14/2010 9:02:45 PM EDT
| am thinking of drinking the cool aid and picking up a springfield 1911. Alocal shop has a stainless loaded one for $769 new in box or a mill spec for $649, was wondering what you the experts thought.I dont know much about 1911's, and i will also be selling my wittness-p to put toward purchase. DO not want to go crazy on price, just want a fullsize 1911 that i can go have some fun at rang with. Already have a M&P 40c for carry weapon and a G19 for plincking. Also would like a 1911 so if i run out of bullets i can split there skull open with it lol. your imput will help me deciede thanks. |
|
Quoted:
am thinking of drinking the cool aid and picking up a springfield 1911. Alocal shop has a stainless loaded one for $769 new in box or a mill spec for $649, was wondering what you the experts thought.I dont know much about 1911's, and i will also be selling my wittness-p to put toward purchase. DO not want to go crazy on price, just want a fullsize 1911 that i can go have some fun at rang with. Already have a M&P 40c for carry weapon and a G19 for plincking. Also would like a 1911 so if i run out of bullets i can split there skull open with it lol. your imput will help me deciede thanks. The Mil Spec and the Loaded are dandy pistols. I own two Mil Specs and have owned a Stainless Mil Spec and a Stainless Loaded. Both are fine pistols and the two SS models went to my brother and nephew as presents. While I loved the Loaded, it did not possess any features that were superior to the Mil Spec. If I were in your position, I would not drop the extra coin on a Loaded over a Mil Spec. That is $120 that could go toward mags , holster, belt, etc. That is if you can't make a better deal. |
|
I love the lack of front cocking serrations on the mil-spec but the single piece barrel and novak cuts + night sights on the loaded is a very expensive and worthwhile upgrade with the Loaded.
I would get the Loaded. I bought a mil-spec and regretted not buying a nicer pistol. Now that I have a really nice 1911 I want a mil-spec again, but as more of a play toy than an honest to god pistol. Not saying a mil-spec isn't an honest to god pistol...but it's not the gun I would take with me to a carbine course. |
|
I think those are your answers...I think that price on the Mil Spec is a bit high and the Loaded is not bad...if you need the ambi safety (I'm a Southpaw so I would), would like the sights dovetailed instead of staked (aren't they night sights on some Loadeds?), flat MSH, FLGR, front serrations and beavertail and elongated Commander hammer the $120 step up in price is worth it...if not...look for a better price on that Mil Spec...
Both are fine pieces...just know that with the Mil Spec you get "lesser" sights, no ambi and need to know if your particular hold will give you hammer bite from the GI type grip safety and spur hammer...I prefer the GI guide rod set up to the full length guide rod of the Loaded... Good luck with your choice... Bill |
|
Quoted:
I love the lack of front cocking serrations on the mil-spec but the single piece barrel and novak cuts + night sights on the loaded is a very expensive and worthwhile upgrade with the Loaded. I would get the Loaded. I bought a mil-spec and regretted not buying a nicer pistol. Now that I have a really nice 1911 I want a mil-spec again, but as more of a play toy than an honest to god pistol. Not saying a mil-spec isn't an honest to god pistol...but it's not the gun I would take with me to a carbine course. My "Loaded" had a 2pc bbl. Which ever way you go look it over very close. Their QC leaves a lot to be desired on their lower end pistols IMO. |
| go for the loaded, i have one and she performs like two sexy women dancing on each other rather provocatively. Mines doesnt have the novak sight however it has the stock sa adjustable sights. then again if you have a 'mouthpiece" and can sell pussy to a hooker then id say haggle the price on the milspec and with all that money saved you can use it to personalize the pistola to your tastes. FTW |
|
Quoted:
I have a Mil Spec made in 1988 with a two piece barrel. So far, it has been an outstanding pistol. Why is having a two piece barrel considered undesirable here? There has been failures of the 2 piece barrels in the past. I had fail a long time ago. Something like a barrel, needs to be a one piece part. |
| I have a stainless Mil Spec, and now that I am shooting it more I wish I had the Loaded. I am tired of getting hammer bite on every shot. I really want a beavertail, but to upgrade you need to buy the beavertail and a new hammer, and know how to do the install yourself, or pay more for someone else to do it. I will probably sell the milspec to buy a loaded. |
|
Quoted:
I have a stainless Mil Spec, and now that I am shooting it more I wish I had the Loaded. I am tired of getting hammer bite on every shot. I really want a beavertail, but to upgrade you need to buy the beavertail and a new hammer, and know how to do the install yourself, or pay more for someone else to do it. I will probably sell the milspec to buy a loaded. I am embarrassed to admit that I had forgotten about the lack of a beaver tail. I have upgraded all of my 1911s with beaver tails and Commander style hammers. So, with this reminder, I would recommend getting the loaded, but encourage the OP to negotiate a better price on it. |
|
Personally, I think the "loaded" parts (thumb safety, beavertail) are pretty much crap and that the Mil-spec is a better buy. You do get dovetailed sights on the loaded though.
I guess I'd rather pay less and put on the parts I want, than pay more for "upgrades" I'm going to swap out anyway. |