Author Topic: 1911 series 80 or 1991 A1 (Read 1483 times)

SteveAZ · « **on:** December 14, 2004, 01:03:55 AM »

I remember that there are some differences between the 1911 ser 80 and the 1991 A1, one of them being that the 1991 was parkerized. I'd be interested in one that was stainless so that difference goes away. What other differences are there? I'm looking at the Commander sized version of each. I vagely recall the hammer and lowered ejection port and maybe throating but my memory fails at the point.

I've also seen "XSE". What is that?

A series 70 would be ok too. If I recall the major difference there is the disconnector.

Since my 9 mm conversion idea was more involved than I wanted I'll stick with a single caliber per gun. I have a series 80 1911 Lightweight Commander with stainless slide and satin nickel frame in 45. I think of it as more of a carry gun than a bang and clang, couple of thousand rounds a year gun so I'm thinking of getting a shooter.

The 1991 A1's I've seen are a bit more reasonably priced, that ususally means there is a perception of lesser desireability.

Thanks for taking the time to read and reply.

SteveAZ

Mikey · « **Reply #1 on:** December 14, 2004, 02:41:54 AM »

Steve - the new 1991 A1s are supposed to be pretty darned good handguns and all the gun reports I have read about them indicate that Colt has put some quality back into its handguns, even thought this particular model is a plain jane government issue. The series 80s guns are also very good. I guess it depends on what you find and what you see that you like best. Either one would be a good choice.

The 1991 A1s are more reasonably priced because they are a government model without all the bells and whistles. It is only the politics of the Colt company that might make it less desireable to some. But, there are other 1911 makers as well that produced excellent quality and very reliable autos - Springfield, Rock Island, Kimber, and a whole bunch of others. You may want to look there for prices too. HTH. Mikey.

Iowegan · « **Reply #2 on:** December 14, 2004, 09:42:04 AM »

The good news is: there are more companies making 1911 clones than any other gun on the market. All have their advantages and disadvantages. Most of the expense comes from precision tolerances and enhancements. Built-in enhancements include flat top slides, adjustable sights, reshaped extractor ports, spring loaded extractors, relieved mag wells and a host of other "machined" features. The add-on enhancements include extended slide locks, triggers, and thumb safeties; skeleton hammers, beavertail grip safeties, grips, and more.

Once you have a decent "platform" most of the enhancements can be added later. Of course some things get pricy because machining may be required such as a ramped barrel or custom sights. A match grade barrel and bushing and some trigger work will make most guns into tack drivers.

I have owned just about every brand of 1911. With exception of my Les Baer Custom, I keep going back to Colt. Yes, Kimbers, S&W, and others are quite nice but the good old Colts are real hard to beat.

I would highly recommend a Colt 1911 or a 1991. From there, you can build -up to a combat, bullseye gun, or a carry piece.

Jim n Iowa · « **Reply #3 on:** December 14, 2004, 01:39:38 PM »

Ok I have a series 70 colt 1911, that I have had some tricks applied. I had not realized that I have had this gun so long. ( has't occured to me how old I am getting either). So do I need any up dating if possible. This is a smi carry, and when possible bowlingpin gun.
Jim

Iowegan · « **Reply #4 on:** December 14, 2004, 06:55:33 PM »

Jim, There's a ton of aftermarket parts available for your Series 70. The "real" series 70's had a collet type barrel bushing and a unique barrel. They also had the 1/2 dime front sight.

I have one of these also. Great gun, very accurate, and functions perfect. My Series 70 is on its second barrel and has fired a ton of ammo. I installed a nice set of 3-dot sights. The rear sight fits the normal Colt dovetail and is called a Novak low profile carry sight. I used an Ed Brown modified ramp front sight (narrow tenon). Great combination for just about any type of shooting and great for a carry gun.

I also installed a Chip McCormick light weight extended trigger, a Nowlin skeleton hammer, a Wilson Beavertail grip safety, and a set of Wilson matched extended thumb safety and slide lock.

The nice thing about Colts...most aftermarket parts are "drop in". Except for the Gold Cups, all parts are pretty generic, unlike some other brands that claim to be 1911 clones.

Jim n Iowa · « **Reply #5 on:** December 15, 2004, 07:19:33 AM »

GLB
Many yro when I bought series 70 on the advice of a fellow shooter I sent the gun off to a Smith in ND, who was familiar with 1911's. He in stalled the three dot sights he referred to as combat sights, new trigger, lighter pull, cut out the port. After some time I experienced feeding problems with hps and flat points. Rick down in Oceola polished it up and corrected the feed problems. And installed a commander type hammer. All that is stock is the barrel and bushing. So some day I may need to do that.
Jim

IntrepidWizard · « **Reply #6 on:** December 15, 2004, 07:26:20 AM »

Three years ago I bought the Colt Gunsight Pistol and it is all a man could ever want or need in a 45acp auto,prior to that I had a Chromed Bob Chowed A1,and I do have two other issued 1911's.The GSP is just worth every cent and the warranties which I have not used or needed.

STW · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2005, 06:17:01 PM »

I agree, that GSP is pretty close to perfection, just don't have the $.

I do have a series 80 lightweight flat-top commander and a early 90s 1991 commander. Used to have a full size gov. but can't find a single drawback to the commander length.

Surprisingly the 1991 has become my favorite, and all I've done is put on a nice trigger for more reach and some checkered walnut grips. I like the the mil-spec sights, nice trigger pull, the flat blue (apparantly not parkerized but sort of looks it), and especially the round commander hammer. I've not had any jams to my amazement after something over a 1000 rnds (unlike with the lightweight), and it's plenty accurate for me.

Wouldn't mind having an engraved pony on the 1991 rather than the huge "1991" marking, but there is something modestly classy about this plain jane Colt that makes it a great shooter.

Iowegan · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2005, 07:09:57 AM »

It makes me sick when guns are judged solely on trigger pull and slide-to-frame tightness. Unfortunately, thats all most 1911 buyers know what to do. Most out-of-the-box Colts have pretty crappy trigger pulls and the slides are not usually very tight. So an otherwise great Colt gets passed up for some clone that won't come close to Colt standards.

The slide-to-frame tightness has very little to do with accuracy but being a little loose does help feeding and function. Trigger pull is pretty bad in most non-custom guns. This is 30 minutes of work to make a 1911 have a crisp 3.5~4 lb pull. The other tolerances in Colts are quite good. No doubt one sneaks out of the factory now and then with a problem but their overall quality is excellent.

Next time you want a 1911, get the real McCoy with the little horse on it.

SteveAZ · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2005, 07:52:01 AM »

The jury is in!!!

Do in part to helpful information I received here, thanks to all who responded, and in part to circumstances, I now have a 1993 vintage, 1991 A1.

As it turned out a friend of mine had a 1991 A1 with some modifications that he no longer had an interest in but he did have a considerable interest in a Thompson Contender I had. After some conversation, test firing of each gun and a little more conversation a mutually agreeable trade was arranged.

It has a nice trigger, a high ride beavertail and crappy sights. It is presently in the hands of my favorite pistolsmith and after being given a clean bill of health it is being cut for Novak low mount's, dehorned and re-blued.

I don't plan to do a whole lot more to it other than shoot it a bunch.

Thanks again for your input.

Steve(AZ)

jakes10mm · « **Reply #10 on:** January 24, 2005, 05:16:30 AM »

You made a wise choice. Like others that posted, I've found myself gravitating back to Colt in my 1911's. I passed up on a 1991A1 Commander recently and after considering my error, returned to the shop and found it sold. Oh well.

Don't spend too much of your hard earned cash trying to make your Colt "better". I started that way with 1911's and have found myself going the opposite direction lately. My "new" USPSA Limited 10 competition pistol is a Colt 1991 NRM Government model. Modifications: S&A Arched mag Guide, Ed Brown Extended Tactical Mag Release, CMC Power10 mags, and a little hand filing on the hammer & grip safety to lessen its infrequent bite. No trigger work, no sight changes, no guide rod, etc. Its a veteran of three matches so far and by far the most accurate 1911 I've owned.

Spend your money on reloading equipment and try to wear it out!

Bigdog57 · « **Reply #11 on:** January 25, 2005, 06:42:18 AM »

Good choice! I've had my 1991A1 since about 1995, and it has never let me down. I've shot more accurate pistols, but I'm a die-hard Colt guy.
I looked at some clones back in '95, but for the money, I decided to stick with the original. I have been well pleased. :-)