|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 8, 2012, 10:45 AM | #51 |
Member
Join Date: August 26, 2012
Posts: 25
|
That Kimber add is so convincing that I'm going to call their renowned "custom shop" and order me a true custom, hand built and fit Kimber with all the custom details I have always wanted on a 1911.
It will be a 5" government model with a bull barrel, tri top slide with 40lpi serrations. Schuemann AET barrel. Ed Brown grip safety and Maxiwell. Wilson Combat Bulletproof ignition components. I want it hard hat treated and with custom slide and frame serrations that I'll have to email them sketches of. Anyone have any idea what their current lead time is on their true custom builds? |
October 8, 2012, 03:34 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2010
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 346
|
The definition of "best" should be answered by the OP since that is a subjective definition. The "best" 1911 would be the one that most closely conforms to the OPs requirements. Specifics need to be defined (compact vs. full size, stainless vs. black, brand vs. custom, single stack vs. double stack, what caliber, what kind of sights, left-handed, right-handed, or both). Also, what bits and goodies would the OP want (ambidextrous safety, extended beavertail, speed hammer, trigger job, cross-drilled trigger, full length guide rod, bullet capacity, etc.)?
Once the requirements are gathered the question can be answered objectively. Until then, this entire discussion is an exercise in futility. |
October 8, 2012, 05:23 PM | #53 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 1, 2009
Posts: 4,232
|
Probably gonna get a flame job for this comment but my first 1911 was a Taurus PT 1911 which I got for around $650, last year bought a really nice Kimber. I have probably 5000 or so rounds through the Taurus and less than half that through the Kimber. The Taurus has been totally reliable as has the Kimber although the Kimber was a bit finicky about what it ate for the first 100 rounds or so where the Taurus has always shot whatever fits in the magazine. Both shoot a lot more accurately than I can, the Kimber has the better fit and finish and much higher price tag that reflected that fir and finish.
I can't speak for the CS since I never have had a problem with either pistol and those are the only 1911's I have ever owned. I had both at the range this afternoon and both went bang and the shots went pretty much where I aimed. When they did not it was the indian's fault not the arrows. Myself I say buy the best your wallet can stand but in the long run unless you are planning on getting a gun for competing in Bullseye competition and plan on going to the Nationals about any name brand will do you just fine.
__________________
“How do I get to the next level?” Well, you get to the next level by being the first one on the range and the last one to leave.” – Jerry Miculek |
October 8, 2012, 05:33 PM | #54 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: June 6, 2008
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
Posts: 521
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
October 8, 2012, 07:10 PM | #55 |
Member
Join Date: July 23, 2012
Location: Fishers, IN
Posts: 17
|
The original is still the greatest: COLT !!!!!
|
October 15, 2012, 10:31 PM | #56 |
Junior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2008
Posts: 3
|
The 1911, is probably the best handgun ever designed !
|
October 16, 2012, 09:02 AM | #57 |
Junior member
Join Date: February 2, 2008
Posts: 3,150
|
The "best" 1911? It doesn't begin with a "C" or a "K". It begins with an "L".
|
October 16, 2012, 01:18 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 22, 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 3,623
|
In a full length (5" barrel), 1911, for the money, I'd say Ruger. I've owned Colts for almost 50 yrs now, and loved them all, but the Ruger SR1911 is better right out of the box than any of the Gold Cup .45's I've owned and handled over the yrs. It's that good.
Great features without turning it into some sort of mall ninja space gun; to whit: Beveled mag well, two magazines furnished, stainless steel construction, target grade adj. trigger, humped and beavertailed grip safety, extended thumb safety and mag release button, Novak sights, 1911 mainspring housing ( not arched), and a checkered back strap....my only wish for was that they would have checkered the front strap as well...and that's it...I love the gun. And for $650 to $750 when you find them, they are beyond compare. I'm close to 2500 rounds through mine now with nearly 100% reliability...my hand loads with lead alloy bullets have mis-fed a cpl of times...but the gun is 100% with factory ammunition...round ball or JHP's. To get that kind of a 1911 will cost you the price of the gun and another $400-$500 in gunsmithing charges. Ruger did well with this one and spent their money on building a great gun, not on gun magazine advertising slick pictures, and no hoopla about needing 200-300 rounds to "break it in properly". The pic below shows some handloads and one of the first targets shot with the new piece. I shot it Weaver Stance, 15 yds, shooting controlled pairs. The hard ball groups were even better. Best Regards, Rod
__________________
Cherish our flag, honor it, defend it in word and deed, or get the hell out. Our Bill of Rights has been paid for by heros in uniform and shall not be diluted by misguided governmental social experiments. We owe this to our children, anything less is cowardice. USAF FAC, 5th Spl Forces, Vietnam Vet '69-'73. Last edited by rodfac; October 16, 2012 at 01:27 PM. |
October 16, 2012, 01:47 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
Mine is best
Yours stinks I've owned them and they are OK None of them are good You're buying a name You're buying garbage You're buying MIM You're buying castings Nobody makes them better Their finish is terrible Bad customer service Some years are bad The series 80 stinks The series 70 stinks The pre-70s stink Their QC is awful They charge too much Does that cover it? Damn. |
October 17, 2012, 03:16 AM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 12, 2010
Posts: 1,860
|
Taurus. Chris_B's post pretty much summed it up
|
October 17, 2012, 04:02 AM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2011
Location: Burien,WA
Posts: 897
|
i think i will invest in a ruger sr1911 when i think is time to to get a 1911.
__________________
Rugers:SR1911 CMD,MK 3 .22lr 6",Sec. Six '76 liberty .357 4",SRH .480 Ruger 7.5",Mini-14 188 5.56/.233 18.5", Marlins: 795 .22lr 16.5",30aw 30-30 20",Mossberg:Mav. 88 Tact. 12 ga, 18.5",ATR 100 .270 Win. 22",S&W:SW9VE 9mm 4",Springfield:XD .357sig 4", AKs:CAI PSL-54C, WASR 10/63, WW74,SLR-106c |
October 17, 2012, 06:26 AM | #62 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
|
Quote:
WWI WWII Korea Viet Nam <---places Colt has been that the others haven't... Regardless of who actually manufactured the gun itself,,,,,it was and always will be a Colt .45 automatic to a huge percentage of people - both vets and civilians alike. That recognition is why I say Colt is the best - even though there are better. |
|
October 17, 2012, 06:52 AM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
You're off in left field Hal
I like Colts. I own four of them. One of them an actual Model of 1911 made during WWI, which most folks don't really have I wasn't commenting on Colt. I was commenting on the argument |
October 17, 2012, 07:05 AM | #64 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
|
Quote:
Colt has the name & the mystique. The others simply don't. & as I mentioned in my initial post.... If it doesn't make sense to you it never will.. Some are going to agree w/it 100% - even if you feel it's "out in left field". |
|
October 17, 2012, 07:43 AM | #65 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
Quote:
Quote:
If we do count on nostalgia, then the Singer 1911A1 must be one of the absolute "best available" based on the name and mystique. But do people crow about the perfection of that pistol? No, they crow about it's rarity A pistol like an original Model of 1911 can't be 'the best' in many ways, and an important one is metallurgy. Simply put, compared to today, the metallurgy was bad. They didn't know how to really harden the slides. Even in WWII, the slides were 'half-hardened' Quote:
Last edited by Chris_B; October 17, 2012 at 07:59 AM. |
|||
October 17, 2012, 07:56 AM | #66 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
|
Quote:
It's you that somehow feels that I feel that you feel that I feel that you feel Colt is being bashed... Quote:
The Ruger is a whole lot better right? |
||
October 17, 2012, 08:02 AM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 9, 2007
Posts: 3,101
|
Jeez, Hal. Why do you keep assigning to me things I never said?
if you didn't think I was bad-mouthing colt you never would have defended Colt to me I didn't say that you should buy a Ruger I didn't say that Colt was no good I didn't say mine were no good You just want to fight. Go fight with yourself, amigo |
October 17, 2012, 08:27 AM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 22, 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 3,623
|
Does anyone have actual US Government figures on 1911 and 1911-A1 procurement? It's been my impression that the majority of 1911 types in US military and Gov't service were contract guns: Remington-Rand, Remington, Singer, Ithaca, Springfield Armory, and a cpl of vendors that I can't remember. The 1911's record in service is a good one to be sure, but it's spread over many manufacturers besides Colt...it was a Browning design, not Colt...and before I get flamed, I currently own 4 Colt 1911's of one sort or the other, and my sons each have several more. We love the venerable old Colts. Best Regards, Rod
__________________
Cherish our flag, honor it, defend it in word and deed, or get the hell out. Our Bill of Rights has been paid for by heros in uniform and shall not be diluted by misguided governmental social experiments. We owe this to our children, anything less is cowardice. USAF FAC, 5th Spl Forces, Vietnam Vet '69-'73. |
October 17, 2012, 03:32 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 12, 2010
Posts: 1,860
|
I think Colt is overrated and quite frankly there are many other gun companies building better 1911's. Im not stupid enough apparently to pay for a name. I like sinking my cash into quality. Lot better 1911's for alot less money. Screw colt.
|
October 17, 2012, 04:46 PM | #70 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 15, 2012
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,566
|
I think Colt is best for the money. Wilson if you don't have to consider cost.
|
October 17, 2012, 05:01 PM | #71 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
Were money no object, I'd get a custom job done by Cylinder and Slide...... maybe this one.....
http://www.cylinder-slide.com/index....how&ref=CSP901 |
October 18, 2012, 01:31 AM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 22, 2008
Location: Graham, WA
Posts: 145
|
Its funny but you can have the gun with all the bells and whistles on it but if you can't shoot worth a beans it isn't worth the money you spent for it.
My choice just for my taste and style would be the STI Off Duty as my CCW gun.
__________________
I was told once "if you don't have anything good to say don't say anything at all" |
October 18, 2012, 02:21 AM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 8,563
|
Quote:
(& no flames) Colt is still the owner of "the legend" - regardless of who actually manufactured the gun to fill the war time need. Here's what I found as far as WWII production numbers: "During the war, about 1.9 million units were procured by the U.S. Government for all forces, production being undertaken by several manufacturers, including Remington Rand (900,000 produced), Colt (400,000), Ithaca Gun Company (400,000), Union Switch & Signal (50,000), and Singer (500). " Colt - as the figures above show - really only made 1/4 of them. However - I'd bet that if you asked 1000 WWII vets what sidearm they carried, darn near all would say "A Colt .45". Legends are like that.. Colt is to the 1911 like Kleenex is to facial tissue. Oh - & Chris,,, I'm not looking for any kind of fight. You asked a simple question (Does that cover it?) & I gave you a simple answer. Matter of fact, by your own admission you seem to view, what up until your post had been a friendly discussion - as an argument. If you want to "argue" fine - knock yourself out. I won't be joining you. |
|
October 18, 2012, 04:50 AM | #74 |
Junior member
Join Date: July 24, 2011
Location: Saint Louis, Missouri
Posts: 849
|
Isn't it great that we have so many choices today?
The 1911 has come a long way. |
October 18, 2012, 06:43 PM | #75 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 1, 2005
Posts: 4,443
|
Quote:
Jim Last edited by laytonj1; October 18, 2012 at 07:04 PM. |
|
|
|