1911: Colt, Springfield, or S&W?

[lux_aeternae]

I'm trying to decide which 1911 to spend my hard earned cash on. Plans are to modify over a period of time as I shoot and get accustomed to the gun.
I have been reading up on the forums and respect all of your opinions, even though some are quite bold and outrageous. But nevertheless, I'd like to know what you guys would put your money and life on if you had to carry this firearm into door to door room entry in Fallujah - IMHO the Beretta 9mm is not an option. It must be a 5" Barrel, be reliable in urban desert conditions, and be had for a maximum of 2 grand total (which includes modifications and gunsmithing anywhere in the states).

Colt: Been making 1911's since 1911. I like this fact, also the made in America with American steel fact. I have heard only great things about them. A little play in the slide, but a compromise for reliability.

Springfield or SA Pro: I like the idea of fitted parts, except that if you're deployed the parts won't be easily replaced. I dislike the idea of imported Brazilian stock, but like the idea of American machining. Anyone have any issues with the Springfield? I have only heard good things about them but can't get over Brazilian steel, but perhaps I'm just biased because the US produces some fine machinery.

S&W: Trusted American brand, but have not been making 1911's for very long. I have heard issues of their firing pin safety, which I am not too fond of, but have not heard anything put praise for the S&W 1911.

What would you choose, what would you do, and which gunsmith (realistically) would you choose and why?

I'd appreciate your thoughts. Thanks guys.

[Torch]

From your list I like the Springer the best. Given your criteria though I'd get a Kimber or a Dan Wesson.

Good Luck.

[natjohnb]

I love my S&W 1911, and would recommend it to anyone. But with two grand to play with, I'd go with the Colt.

[vox rationis]

Another thing to consider, if you are so inclined, is that 2 grand puts you into [semi-custom] Ed Brown and even Wilson territory. I think you can get an Ed Brown Special Forces for slightly less than 2 grand, and while a Wilson CQB is a touch over 2 grand, if you look, you could probably get one for under 2 grand, even if it is slightly used. Just something to think about. Here's a link to the range report I did on my Wilson CQB. Note also the very nice Wilson Protector that was bought in the 1500 range if I remember correctly.

[OneClownDown]

SIG

[Playboypenguin]

My favorite 1911 is my Springer Loaded Champion...but with your criteria I would say the Colt is the best option.

[lux_aeternae]

I have heard nothing but good reviews of Wilson and Ed Brown. Do they use Colt or Springfield bases?

I'm sorry OneClownDown. I wanted to like the SIG because of reliability and fine worksmanship, but I couldn't hit a damn thing with it.

[ECHOONE]

Springfield Mil-Spec you can't beat it's price or reliability on your salary you can save and when stateside you can purchase the upgrades you want to put on gun or have a smith do it,that way the 1911 is custom to the way you want it to be not the way someone else built it! that's the way I did it love mine,shoots good and stake my life on it!

[IdahoG36]

I like Springers and S&W 1911s.

[Rinspeed]

Les Baer TRS or Springfield PRO would get my vote. The TRS is running right around $1700, I paid $1490 for mine three years ago and it's one of the best purchases I've made. Sporting Arms might have a PRO in stock and either them or Pro Load will have a TRS on the shelf.

[bikerbill]

Something I'd wonder about if I was taking the gun into desert combat .. have often read that custom guns are built so tightly that they don't function well when they get dirty because there is not enough clearance to deal with the grit ... that might lead me to an OTC 1911 -- like my Springer Loaded Champion, which has never failed to fire and is my nightstand gun ...

[vox rationis]

That's a really cool pistol..I didn't know that they were below 2 grand, or else I'd have mentioned them too!

I have heard nothing but good reviews of Wilson and Ed Brown. Do they use Colt or Springfield bases?

As far as I know, Wilson and I believe Brown and Les Baer make their own frames, and none use any metal injection molded (MIM) parts, but rather forged parts.

[vox rationis]

Something I'd wonder about if I was taking the gun into desert combat .. have often read that custom guns are built so tightly that they don't function well when they get dirty because there is not enough clearance to deal with the grit ... that might lead me to an OTC 1911 -- like my Springer Loaded Champion, which has never failed to fire and is my nightstand gun ...

I don't know about Baers, as it is commonly said that they are especially tight guns, but a Wilson CQB did very well in this 1911 Torture Test (pdf file to open/download)
, as well as did a Kimber Warrior and a Charles Daly (cheap less tight 1911 for comparison).

Based on my research the Wilson CQB is a gun that is both tight and reliable out of the box (this mirrors my personal experience with mine), and based on that torture test it is definitely not a safe queen (it also comes with a 1" at 25 meters guarantee to boot). This is what attracted me to the CQB before I bought it.

I suspect that the Ed Brown Special Forces is at least as good as the Wilson and would do just as well in that type of torture test.

You do tend to hear that the Baers are really really tight, maybe too tight, and that it is not uncommon for them to require a break in period. That's not necessarily a bad thing as those things will probably still be tight by the time your great grandson bequeaths the gun. Once they smooth out, they too ought to withstand a torture test just like a Wilson CQB.

The only thing is that the CQB comes standard its Armor Tuff coating which is apparently one of the best in the industry.

The Ed Brown Special Forces also comes with a protective coating (Gen III), which I frankly think looks a little better in the pictures (haven't seen it in person) than the Wilson's Armor Tuff, as it looks a little closer to traditional bluing (the Armor Tuff is a bit more matte). I don't know which one is ultimately more rugged to be honest. In real life I really like the all business look of my CQB in its all black Armor Tuff finish.

Anyway, Baer also offers a protective coating on their guns, but as you can see the TRS doesn't come with it standard, and adding one (Bear Coat) adds $170 AND $190 to the slide and frame respectively, based on his website. Baer ALSO charges extra for his accuracy package.

Lastly, speaking of sand, for what its worth, here is, reprinted in all of its glory, or infamy, depending on your inclinations , Larry Vickers' sand test:

p.s. I believe this originates before his work as a consultant in the design of the HK45

Originally from 1911forum.com IIRC:

Quote:
Larry Vickers

Sand Test
Just had a chance to do a harsh sand test on few different handguns. This test was not scientific but was very enlightening.

Pistols tested were; HK USP Tactical
Customized 1911
rack grade GI 1911
Glock 21

Test consisted of placing each pistol loaded in a Bianchi GI field holster inside a plastic bag with approx 2 cups of fine/medium grit sand ( North Carolina type). Then the bag was shaken vigorously for 10 seconds while holding onto the pistol butt for safety. The pistol was then taken out and 3 mags were fired through the 1911 and 2 fully loaded mags were fired through the HK and Glock - roughly the same amount of ammo. The sand coverage was very good and uniformly covered the pistols. The pistols were loaded in the mode you would expect in a field environment - condition 3 for the 1911, loaded for the Glock and loaded in DA mode for the USP.A test was done dry and lubed with TW 25B. This test represented EXTREME sand conditions - not normal field use, even in sandy conditions.A brief rundown of the results follow;

1)Carrying your gun dry in this environment is a NO GO despite what some will say. All pistols performed worse dry than lubed.

2)All pistols required some manipulation in order to fire - none would function normally straight out of the holster.

3)Overall the HK USP performed the best - the performance of it dry was roughly the same as the customized 1911 but was definately the best lubed. Overall it performed well.

4)The custom 1911 was second - interestingly enough the trigger track was not a real problem - the sand that went in through the ejection port to the bottom lugs area caused the most problems. Once the sand shifted in this area the pistol functioned better.

5)The rack grade GI 1911 was a distant third - the custom 1911 had an 18 pound recoil spring and that helped with feeding greatly vs the rack grade gun. Swap out the recoil spring and it probably would have done better.

6)The shocker of the day - the Glock 21 FAILED terribly. The big problem was failure of the trigger to reset. Also at times the pistol would not fire due to sand in the trigger mechanism. The dry test could not even be completed with the Glock due to this.This surprised all of us as we expected the Glock to do quite well.

Moral of the story; The 1911, even in its customized mode, can get the job done if you set it up to succeed. Lube it right, carry it in the right holster and in the proper mode, and it won't let you down - just like it hasn't for nearly a 100 years.

The HK USP series are good guns - well designed and well made - for service pistols. The ergonomics hurt the pistol dramatically but for an out of the box service pistol/field gun, they get my endorsement.

The Glock 21 is a dog - always has been. It has the rep of being the worst gun Glock makes. I have a Glock 17 and 19 and like them for what they are - but don't get sucked into the Glock hype - they are not magical guns. Remember what your dad said when you were in 3rd grade; don't believe everything you read.

Hope you guys got something out of this - I did.

Larry Vickers

[HK123]

If i was going into the desert and needed a gun that worked ALL the time without failures of any kind I wouldn't take any 1911.

Actually the only guns that can do this aren't sidearms (pistols) at all. The AK47 and Israeli Galeal(spelling?) are the only 2 firearms that I'd trust to always function no matter what.

If you had to pick a sidearm I'd take an HK before anything. That's just me.


However, being that we're not going over to the desert for combat(you cannot bring your own firearm with you into combat) I'd take a Dan Wesson 1911. For what you get they give the best value per dollar IMO.

[tony pasley]

I can not speak to the sandbox part, but I can say that a Colt 1911a1 the I carried while on a tropical vacation for my uncle was 100% reliable thru all the conditions.

[Rinspeed]

That's a really cool pistol..I didn't know that they were below 2 grand, or else I'd have mentioned them too!

Thanks, the Baer PII is a little over $1500 which is a very good deal when you consider the amount of handfitting and quality of parts. As far as the Baer pistols being too tight to take into desert combat I think that's bunch of hogwash myself.

[Playboypenguin]

Please remove those grips from your weapon and send them to me. I will provide you reimbursement for shipping.

[IdahoG36]

If i was going into the desert and needed a gun that worked ALL the time without failures of any kind I wouldn't take any 1911

I agree. As much as I hate to say it, I would probably have to take a GLOCK 21SF to the sandbox if I needed a sidearm that would hold up to the hostile conditions found in the desert.
I really don't care for GLOCKs anymore, and they would be one of my last choices for a private gun purchase. But, if I had to stake my life on any semi auto in a combat environment, GLOCK would be at the top of my list.

[Kreyzhorse]

All three are fine 1911s, you can't go wrong with any of them.

When I bought mine, I looked at S&W, Kimber and Colt but ended up buying a Springfield TRP. In my opinion, I thought the Springfield had a better fit, finish and overall feel and haven't regretted my purchase.

[HK123]

I agree. As much as I hate to say it, I would probably have to take a GLOCK 21SF to the sandbox if I needed a sidearm that would hold up to the hostile conditions found in the desert.
I really don't care for GLOCKs anymore, and they would be one of my last choices for a private gun purchase. But, if I had to stake my life on any semi auto in a combat environment, GLOCK would be at the top of my list.

Look at the test above, Larry Vickers finds that the Glock21 is the WORST, worse than a poor quality 1911.

[Rinspeed]

When I bought mine, I looked at S&W, Kimber and Colt but ended up buying a Springfield TRP. In my opinion, I thought the Springfield had a better fit, finish and overall feel and haven't regretted my purchase.

The TRP is one of the very top production pistols in my opinion.

[vox rationis]

Look at the test above, Larry Vickers finds that the Glock21 is the WORST, worse than a poor quality 1911.

I can't find the post, and I'd hate to spread rumors but I'm positive that in a follow up post on m4carbine.net, LV mentioned that the problem was related to sand entering the hollow space in the rear of the grip and working its way into the rear of the frame.

Looking at my own Glock, this is obviously where the trigger mechanism housing, along with the trigger bar and spring, sit, and there is definitely communication with that hollow space.

Because of this it was mentioned that one should install a butt plug in the rear of the grip as insurance, to keep potential sand working its way into that trigger housing and binding things up (eg, keeping the trigger from reseting).

[lux_aeternae]

Thank you Son of Vlad Tepes. Butt plug, I will remember this to keep the sand out.

[HK123]

lol butt plug, but yeah I do remember seeing that when I owned my G17 long ago.

[Unregistered]

If I was going door to door, I think I would rather have a HK USP or USP Expert, simply because I could hang a light off the front end of it. A Glock 21 would be my second choice.

That said, I love 1911s, I just am not sure I would want to use one for what you describe.

If I did, I would absolutely go with a Colt or Smith and Wesson. I would not go with a Springfield, even if someone gave it to me. I would sell it to the first person who would buy it. I have owned 4 or 5 Springfields, kept giving them a try, but none were 100 percent reliable. I do not want a Springfield at all. I would rather go house clearing with my Keltec P32, its more reliable.