I am shopping for a new M1911A1 and I am having a hard time deciding which one I want.

Candidates: Auto-Ordinance WW2 Parkerized M1911A1, and Colt M1911A1 (the new one).

Requirements: the closest WW2 reproduction.

Now I've checked Colt's website and the picture is not very good on their M1911A1. (http://www.colt.com/colt/html/a1a_m1911a1.html)

And here is auto-ordinance's 1911: http://www.tommygun.com/ao_1911pkz_f.html

Well, now I ask.. which one is the closest WW2 reproduction? I know the specs and both are close, but what is definatly throwing me off is the "color" of the finish on the Colt model.

Thanks, man... decisions decisions.

The most accurate 1911A1 would be the Colt. Notice that the serrations on the slide of the Auto Ordinance are not vertical but slanted unlike ANY contract 1911A1. If you want other alternatives that are less expensive look into a 1927 Argentine Colt (Sistema). These were made using Colt tooling, and apart from the location of production are 1911A1's. My next suggestion would be a Norinco 1911. These are milspec GI except for grip screws. Both of these are about $600 less than the Colt, and although the finish might not be typical GI parkerizing, that can easily be accomplished with all of the money you'll save. BTW, my Argentine Sistema shoots as well as my new Springfield.

How much does the Colt run? I see no prices on the website.

Also, the Finish on the Colt won't be as dark as lets say.. one of the older Springfield Armory M1911A1s, right?

The last one of those Colt's I saw was around a grand.  Which is just plain nuts.

Had an Auto Ordnance.  Decent gun as long as you shot hardball in it with plain jane gi mags.  Anything other combination was hit or miss.  Got rid of if because the GI sights were just about invisible with my eyes.  Good part os the AO's can be found used for around 300.  

Springfield makes a "mil-spec" 1911.  Has better sights than the original.  Don't own one but Springfield is generally decent stuff.

Probably others out there.  

I am going with the AO, that price on the Colt is ridiculous.

Only if AO made a slide with the vertical serrations, oh well.. guess I can always get a parts kit later down the road eh?

The Kahr/AO is a POS...go with a Charles Daly for a better built/assembled pistol.
Do you want a WW2 look alike or something to build upon later ?
For a straight WW2 Springfield Armory is the best quality for the $$$

American Handgunner (Or Rifleman) gave it a good review, how is it a POS?

Dont buy an Auto Ord. There was one in a gun test rag last summer and I was actually at the match the writer used it in. It was junk. It finally locked up for good but the "Gun writer" still gave the gun an overall good review. Said he was going to keep it and shoot it. Saw him at a match later in the year and guess what he wasnt shooting? (That experiance makes me leery of ANY gun pimp writing reviews, remember they get paid to do it). Depending if your on a budget buy a used Kimber or a new Colt. Springers are vastly over rated and feel like crap when you rack the slide and check the trigger on new ones. IMO. If you got the bucks go Wilson or Baer.
I almost forgot, dont overlook the Para's.
Go to www.1911.com and do your homework. A good used (Kimber) gun is always far better than a new POS (Springer).

Colt 1991A1.

I love mine. THey can still be had for around $500.

 Go with the 1991A1...basic GI with better sights....I seriously miss mine.  Sometimes...at night...I cry into my pillow I miss it so much.  And my evil Springfield taunts me and says bad things....and...uh......uh-oh...time for my meds.....

Just curious why you're not considering the Springfield Mil-spec.

I have a Thompson-Auto Ord in ten mil,it's searations on slide look just like the colt picture posted!    Mine is old(1988) but a good reliable shooter,only had one stove-pipe and that was from the first(limp-wristed)shot.

  Don't know about Khar,probably the same gun!

Mine is a five inch bulldog,combat hammer with factory wrap around rubber grips,a hoot to shoot!

 Bob  

Quoted: Just curious why you're not considering the Springfield Mil-spec.

Prolly cause of that sissy stainless barrel!
Charlie (or the krauts...or the japs) would see you from miles!



lol...jk...