Author Topic: all these high dollar guys better take a heads up on 1911s (Read 13446 times)

jcn59 · « **Reply #90 on:** September 07, 2011, 07:12:13 AM »

I borrowed my son's Les Baer pistol for awhile. It's very nice with all the bells & tweets. I shoot it a little better than my cheapies, mostly because it has a great trigger. Off bags it shoots with my 20 year old (USA) Auto-Ordnance, still, it's easy to look at. Reminds me of a late seventies Corvette; easy to look at but not very fast.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #91 on:** September 07, 2011, 11:19:25 AM »

you must have a humdinger of a Auto Ord most I saw 20 years ago would feed much less shoot with a Les Baer.

jcn59 · « **Reply #92 on:** September 07, 2011, 12:02:57 PM »

Bought it used, installed a new extractor and a longer link & it has never failed to feed, fire and eject any jacketed bullet. Same for lead SWC 200 gr. as long as velocity is over 750 FPS. Never polished anything. Trigger is stout. Might need to work on that some day.

Have two RIA .38 Supers that run with everything I put in them also.

All the above are handloads.

jimster · « **Reply #93 on:** September 07, 2011, 04:51:04 PM »

The highest dollar gun I ever bought was a Colt combat/target model, at the time sure seemed high dollar to me. All adjustable steel sights, one of those enhanced models. It was a reliable and accurate pistol, probably the best I've had. A few other plain Colts, a series 70 and an all steel combat commander, no problems with those, they worked. Shot some real high dollar ones that belonged to other people, a kimber Target with a trigger that was so light and crisp you could not miss with it, that was an impressively accurate 1911, although the trigger was too light for carry for me. The Ed Browns and Wilsons all impressed me. Right now my all around 1911 is a Springfield Armory Mil-spec with the guts in it that I wanted, and the type of mainspring housing I wanted, I guess if I add the cost of some parts it's still not getting into the high dollar level, but I don't need a whole lot out of a 1911 these days, I like forged frames and slides to work with and sights I can see and I don't need much else except that it runs and is not too tight. If I had my choice (and the money) of a high dollar 1911 I think I might pick Ed Brown, I like the way they look, and my Mil-Spec has Ed Brown parts in it. All that being said, a 1911 that has problems is a royal pain and if you either find one, or make one that runs reliable you best keep it or invest in it till it does, or get rid of it, cause they are worthless to me if they hang up even once in awhile no matter who makes them. It's a pity that 1911's are sold that do not run well, but I guess that's the way it is, and it makes it scary to even buy a brand new one these days.

Swampman · « **Reply #94 on:** September 07, 2011, 04:54:04 PM »

If I wanted a 1911, I'd buy a Remington. If I wanted a combat handgun, I'd buy a Glock.

jcn59 · « **Reply #95 on:** September 07, 2011, 05:32:43 PM »

If I wanted a pistol to be proud of, that looked like a pistol should, I'd get a 1911. Glocks are great guns, I'm told, but why the squared-off slide?? Then so many other manufacturers copied it and squared off the top of their slides too (like Hi-Point). I know that they needed the mass to compensate for not being locked breach, but no one else did.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #96 on:** September 12, 2011, 02:42:55 AM »

sq slide = cheapest way to machine and retain weight needed .

1911crazy · « **Reply #97 on:** September 28, 2011, 03:40:54 PM »

Some of the older auto ordnance 1911's were good pistols. Some guys swear by them. My new '05 AO($389) is awesome right out of the box for 500rds+ now with no ftf or jams or stove pipes. She passed the 500rd test so i can carry it with confidence.(CCW) My '05 springfield armory GI Mil Spec($424) is in the 500rd test right now. I test fired it with only a few mags and she's been flawless right out of the box. My 1990 springfield armory NM ($350)that stove piped 1rd per mag now has gone thru a few mags without stove piping too. (tuned the extractor). My bad luck has finally changed. The 1911 is a sweet pistol when they function correctly.

Bad trigger put some moly on it. It will take the roughness out of it and smooth it out like an expensive trigger job was done on it.

I'm not sure if i'd go for a high dollar 1911 or not. Too many wants and hobbies.

Jim_Ole_Timer · « **Reply #98 on:** October 01, 2011, 02:24:42 PM »

Quote from: 1911crazy on September 28, 2011, 03:40:54 PM

Some of the older auto ordnance 1911's were good pistols. Some guys swear by them. My new '05 AO($389) is awesome right out of the box for 500rds+ now with no ftf or jams or stove pipes. She passed the 500rd test so i can carry it with confidence.(CCW) My '05 springfield armory GI Mil Spec($424) is in the 500rd test right now. I test fired it with only a few mags and she's been flawless right out of the box. My 1990 springfield armory NM ($350)that stove piped 1rd per mag now has gone thru a few mags without stove piping too. (tuned the extractor). My bad luck has finally changed. The 1911 is a sweet pistol when they function correctly.

Bad trigger put some moly on it. It will take the roughness out of it and smooth it out like an expensive trigger job was done on it.

I'm not sure if i'd go for a high dollar 1911 or not. Too many wants and hobbies.

Are you shooting reloads or factory ammo? I'm guessing semi wad cutters?

rodeo kid · « **Reply #99 on:** November 13, 2011, 08:35:57 AM »

I have a Springfield I bought last year for $425, a Colt Govt in bright stainless I bought this year for $1150 to get the 100 years roll mark, and I have a Les Baer Comanche in .38super ordered for $1950 I will get next year. My Springer and Colt both shoot well, the Colt has a better finish and trigger pull and is slightly more accurate. I was able to visit Baer on the way back from delivering some puppies and am convinced he builds a superior firearm. So I will have the inexpensive, medium, and high end 1911's covered.

From my history, the more you pay the better the quality is, the Colt is nicer than the Springer, and the Baer tops both. God Bless.

Dixiejack · « **Reply #100 on:** November 13, 2011, 09:30:01 AM »

Way to go. I have a Colt .38 super, well used but with a slick trigger pull and it is more accurate than I can shoot it. I just bought a S-W 4566 that is so so. The double action can't hold a candle to a single action auto. Fixing to break down and buy an all steel Kimber with a 4" barrel. Then I'm gonna pay Kimber another $300. to convert it to .38 Super. All them toys.

Mikey · « **Reply #101 on:** November 13, 2011, 12:43:58 PM »

Dixiejack: I just picked up a Taurus PT1911 in 38 Super and have shot the absolute snot out of it since I got it. The price was right around $425 and this is the only 38 Super I have ever owned that performed perfectly with every load and bullet type I have ever wanted a Super to shoot. Accuracy is great. This one is going into my belt...

Dixiejack · « **Reply #102 on:** November 13, 2011, 01:32:19 PM »

Hey Mikey,
What I am wanting is a carry pistol. I had a bad experience with Taurus years ago--lots of problems with gun and customer service. No doubt, you got a fine one but once bit-- you know. Who knows when you gonna get a lemon from Kimber and I got a S-W to send back because of a recall. The S-W is not a carry.

jcn59 · « **Reply #103 on:** November 13, 2011, 03:17:58 PM »

Has anyone here had a bad 1911 in the last 5 years? It seems that people all over the globe are making them and no one says they have one that doesn't work. I see a difference in the finish, trigger pull, and "embellishments" between the high & low dollar ones. And not much else.

darkgael · « **Reply #104 on:** November 14, 2011, 01:03:22 AM »

Quote

Ruger and remington are going to put these guy in need of a bail out. just as well for most of us.

I don't think so. I don't own any high dollar pistols but there is always a market for custom guns. I don't suppose that Les Baer or Ed Brown have any trouble selling their pistols.
A lot of the worth of different guns - less expensive vs. Very expensive -depends on the intended use. If it is a carry/combat gun then reliability is paramount; the gun doesn't have to shoot X-groups at 50 yards. If all you need is pie plate accuracy at 25 yards, the same thing applies. It's when one gets to the "more accurate than that" requirements that costs start to mount. If you have a 1911 that will shoot two and a half inches at 50 yards, you have a very accurate pistol in your hands. If, however, you want a gun that will shoot X-ring groups at that distance - that is 1.6" - then you are in different territory; that last inch is tough to get (remember that a 1.6" group is less than half the size of a 2.5" group).
Many - most - all of the modifications that are needed for that kind of accuracy can be done to a good stock gun by the owner if they are competent with tooling and guns or by a knowledgeable gunsmith (like the late George Madore who did my Colt). If a shooter wants that kind of accuracy out of the box, well....sorry, you are not going to get it from stock guns by Ruger, Remington, Kimber, Taurus, RIA, Colt, Auto-Ord - not unless you are very lucky. Very.
Want guaranteed out of the box 1.5" accuracy at 50 yards? Be prepared to pay for it.
Pete

Savage · « **Reply #105 on:** November 14, 2011, 04:17:12 AM »

With modern CNC machinery and tooling, most anyone can produce a reasonably accurate and reliable 1911. Most will be happy with a $300 pistol that works and is accurate enough. By far the majority of gun owners will never shoot enough to wear one out in two lifetimes. I have some inexpensive 1911s that are reliable and reasonably accurate, IAI/Charles Daly/Taurus. They don't make it our of the safe much as I have other 1911s I prefer. The others cost a bit more, but for my money they're worth it.

If, on the other hand, you can appreciate something handcrafted with good known quality materials that inspire pride of ownership, is a joy to own and shoot. One that makes you a better shooter, you might want to pay a little more for your 1911.

Kinda like owning a KIA or a BMW. They both get you there, but I'm betting most of us would prefer the BMW if we could afford either one.

Savage

anachronism · « **Reply #106 on:** November 15, 2011, 02:15:30 PM »

You always get what you pay for, and not one pennys worth more. I tried cheap guns a couple of times, and they never worked out for me. I've had a couple of Auto Ordinance 1911s, and sold them rather quickly after the frames showed signs of peening in the first year. My Colts & Springfields have never done this. Even the alloy framed ones. And for the record, yes, I do know the correct spring weights for 1911 recoil springs. A lot of the low budget manufacturers seem to be metallurgically challenged, to say the least.

williamlayton · « **Reply #107 on:** November 19, 2011, 01:53:50 AM »

You know---and maybe this is telling off on myownself--I can't say that I have had a bad one, out of the box, because I haven't tried.
I did purchase and shoot the "on a bet" Norinco and it shot fine as a used gun. I always purchase used guns and shoot them before I have them worked on.
I always have my 1911's worked on by a Smith--just to have some changes made that I like, have the parts fitted better that they come from the factory or changed out for parts that I have aprefrence for (and fitted)--so I don't know how they would stand up under a lot of heat.
I do enjoy the way I do it and it makes the gun mine.
Gun projects are fun.
Blessings

anachronism · « **Reply #108 on:** November 19, 2011, 02:05:13 AM »

I've always wondered why the Chinese could make really durable if somewhat coarse weapons, but can't make a kitchen spoon that doesn't bend under normal use, or auto parts that continue to work outside the specified warranty period. I almost bought a Norinco 1911, with the intention of "pulling the pins", and tossing everything except the slide & the frame. I ended up buying a Springfield that was 90% closer to my objective, without all the work. I do agree that some of the cheaper guns can be made into something special, and I do enjoy buying "base" guns and updating them too.

darkgael · « **Reply #109 on:** November 20, 2011, 01:11:28 AM »

Quote

I read lots of reveiws of alot of high end 1911 and the best the group is usually 2.5 at 25yrd.

I was happy to see that that idea was dealt with early on in this thread. My first thought upon reading that, no disrespect intended, was that you haven't read enough reviews. That 2.5" @ 25 yards translates into 5" @50 yards. Since many of us tend to think linearly, note that a 1.5" group (an X-ring group on a B-6 target. Les Baer, Ed Brown and others) is about eleven times smaller than the five inch group. Accuracy costs.
Getting a 1911 to shoot that well does not necessarily cost two grand but buying the gun, a Ruger, a S&W, a Kimber, and getting it to do that requires the attention of a competent gunsmith as well as the cost of the gun.
Pete

jcn59 · « **Reply #110 on:** November 20, 2011, 05:52:27 AM »

From what I can see in the 1911 test reviews is a $500. 1911 (Taurus, RIA, Auto-Ordance, etc.) shoots 3-4" at 25 yards, and $1000. 1911s shoot 2 1/2 - 3 1/2 " . So it doesn't look look the accuracy gets much better for the extra $500.

I have a Les Baer Custom in addition to 4 less expensive 1911s & I shoot the LB slightly better than the others, mostly because of the good trigger. So for me, I really get my needs met with a 500 dollar gun. I only wish I could find one made in the USA, and from what I read, that leaves out Springfield, if they import their frames these days.

Avyctes · « **Reply #111 on:** November 21, 2011, 04:46:17 AM »

My first Springfield 1911 I bought in '93 was built I believe in Ogden, UT.

My last Springfield 1911 I bought in '09 was built in Imbel, Brazil.

There was a definite difference in finish quality. Machine marks were present in various places on the new one.

I wish to high heaven I'd never sold my original one, but I'd found a guitar I thought I couldn't live without at the time.... Oh well...

1911crazy · « **Reply #112 on:** December 04, 2011, 09:05:39 AM »

Quote from: Jim_Ole_Timer on October 01, 2011, 02:24:42 PM

Quote from: 1911crazy on September 28, 2011, 03:40:54 PM
Some of the older auto ordnance 1911's were good pistols. Some guys swear by them. My new '05 AO($389) is awesome right out of the box for 500rds+ now with no ftf or jams or stove pipes. She passed the 500rd test so i can carry it with confidence.(CCW) My '05 springfield armory GI Mil Spec($424) is in the 500rd test right now. I test fired it with only a few mags and she's been flawless right out of the box. My 1990 springfield armory NM ($350)that stove piped 1rd per mag now has gone thru a few mags without stove piping too. (tuned the extractor). My bad luck has finally changed. The 1911 is a sweet pistol when they function correctly.

Bad trigger put some moly on it. It will take the roughness out of it and smooth it out like an expensive trigger job was done on it.

I'm not sure if i'd go for a high dollar 1911 or not. Too many wants and hobbies.

Are you shooting reloads or factory ammo? I'm guessing semi wad cutters?

I purchased many cases of the wolf ammo in 45acp ball when it was $6.87 a box of 50rds. I try to stay consistant with using the same ammo all the time. So far all my 1911's function with it with the #18 recoil spring. Stupid me i have some reloads from the 70's that are swc 200gr's. I need to benchrest my 1911's for accuracy next at 25yds. I got one of those rifle benchrests that splits for handguns for last christmas. Bill

Dixiejack · « **Reply #113 on:** January 28, 2012, 04:54:16 PM »

I bought a Remington 1911R1 today. It is the plain Jane model. I posted in August (I think) about the first Remington I saw. Pretty negative post. The one my wife bought me today looked and operated very different from the first one. No machine marks that I could find on the outside. The trigger has a smooth pull. I had decided to not to wait on a Ruger and the Kimbers are nice, but the Remington just felt good. For $649. including a box of hardball PMC's, I figured I could not go wrong. I will see. My wife told the salesman that since she was buying the Remington for me she wanted a CCW and wound up with a Ruger LCP, box of .380 hardball PMC, and a pocket holster for $289. The gun gods were smiling on us today. I wonder who can convert it to a .38 Super, since it's my favorite caliber?

jcn59 · « **Reply #114 on:** January 28, 2012, 05:47:34 PM »

RIA can convert the Remington to a .38 Super for 4-500. bucks. Send me the Remington. I'll handle the paperwork.

Dixiejack · « **Reply #115 on:** January 29, 2012, 02:41:05 AM »

LOL. This one is going to stay stock for now. I have a Colt 1911 70 series in .38 Super that's good for a few thousand more rounds (I hope) before a tune-up. Thanks for wanting to help out.

ole 5 hole group · « **Reply #116 on:** January 29, 2012, 07:19:18 AM »

Darkgael - your posts are well stated and spot on.

Avyctes · « **Reply #117 on:** January 30, 2012, 03:40:56 AM »

Quote

...remember that a 1.6" group is less than half the size of a 2.5" group

Darkgael, can you explain that? Are you talking Diameter or Area?

Thanks.

williamlayton · « **Reply #118 on:** January 31, 2012, 01:39:30 AM »

Mikey
It must be a good'un if you put it on---but, for the love of God, it is a Taurus. Now I aint being a racist or anything but--for the love of God-- and-- peace with GB--it IS a Taurus.

Blessings

Mikey · « **Reply #119 on:** January 31, 2012, 03:14:09 AM »

Oh I know but, it works perfectly right out of the box and not one of the other 38 Supers (6) I have owned ever did that. In the day I used to have 3 different European made 9mm Largo/38 Super pistols and every single one of them worked perfectly with whatever load I could stuff into them. I then went to Colt 38 Supers - two C-series pistols and one Series 70 and not one of the dang things would feed anything except factory hardball or reloads with round nose slugs and it drove me nutz. I went almost 30 years without having any real fun with a 38 Super. Some of the guys I knew overcame the feeding problem by going to supported barrels or by sending the pistol to a shop like Wilson's for a work-up.

John Taffin recently wrote about his Series 80 Colt 38 Super that patterned as badly as some of my Colts at 25 yds and he sent his off to Wilson for a barrel and a attendant work-up and it fixed his problems. He also provided some load data for the swc slugs I have always wanted to use in the Super and I have a trial batch loaded up and am just waiting for tomorrow's 48-50 degree temps so I can try out my new brass catcher (lolol). Taffin claims one inch groups with his loads at 25 yds, with 158 gn cast or gas checked slugs to 1150'/sec and if I can just double his group size to 2" at that distance I will be in 38 Super heaven.

I have also 'converted' 45s to 38 Super but always encouontered the same problem of feeding blunt nosed slugs and I now know why. I don't know if Colt has fixed its problem with the Super but it doesn't matter as I won't purchase one - not when I have to wait over one year for a $1100 pistol. I think Colt simply took the 1911 frame for the 45 and installed 38 Super parts on it and it would work with ball ammo (which was all there was back when) but the feed ramp on the frame was cut for the larger 45 caliber and that would allow or cause the blunt nosed swc narrower 38 Super cartridges to nosedive from the magazine and hit the frame ramp and stop flat, jamming the pistol; hardball would feed however.

The Taurus Pt1911 in 38 Super has the feed ramp on the frame cut properly for the narrower 9mm/38 Super cartridge (you can easily see the difference when comparing a 45 frame to the Taurus 38 Super frame) and that allows every single swc, hp, rn, flat point or whatever slug I have loaded up to properly feed and chamber (haven't yet tried empty cases). And the dang thing cost me only $400. I really like that pistol. I was in the process of brewing up different loadings with different slugs to find my most accurate heavy cast load, just before Taffin penned his article in the March/April issue of American Handgunner and I am waiting for the weather to break to test his loadings. It is my hope that I can e-mail him a letter thanking him for his information, especially if they shoot as well in my stock Taurus as they shoot in his Wilson workover Colt.

I will letcha know.