Let's see all the 1911's!

[red442joe]

We formerly used a torch and GI magazine spring to build up lugs and hoods...still would sometimes end up with a carbide clump that would knock the teeth off a file. Nowadays, even a true GI magazine is getting harder and harder to find among all the fake ones, so no living in the past, even if someone wanted to do that. I don't know who invented the lug cutter for perfect mating of lugs with stop for particular frame/slide/barrel, whether Air Force gunsmiths for the team at Lackland, or somebody else, but Bob Day (Distinguished shooter and retired team gunsmith) in San Antonio certainly had one in his shop in the mid-70s, and HE learned from masters.

I was gonna buy the Brownells lug cutter, but decided to file them.
If I was doing a lot of barrels I would definitely get the lug cutter.

Joe

 

[Wojownik]

I have had exactly one bad Colt, a WWI Repro which used a wide spur outsourced hammer. The other three have been functionally perfect, two had purely cosmetic issues common as long as Colt has produced military guns. What problems did you have besides generic trashing of the brand?
Colts still use the least amount of cast and MIM parts of any brand, fyi, including forged/machined slide stops, extractors, hammers, frames, slides, etc., which generally means prettier guns made otherwise don't hold up to extensive shooting. Colt got sloppy about 20yrs ago, but my 2016 gun is utterly perfect in build and function.

Tisas has a good rep, most brands do, but most the folk praising them don't shoot them all that much or try to induce jams by limp wristing when fouled to see what happens in worst case.
Keep us posted on what shooting you do and how it holds up, as I certainly think the Tisas likely built as well or better than most standard production non-Colt 1911-type guns.

I like Colt, don’t get me wrong, but they’re not worth the cost in my opinion from my experience for what you’re getting. No I haven’t handled every model of every weapon they make, but my opinion from my experience from the handful of Colt weapons I have, they’re sloppy and the QC is horrible. I’m sure they do make some awesome products, I just haven’t experienced that with them personally and I will look elsewhere first from here on out.

I only have three 1911’s now so my experience with 1911’s specifically is very limited at this time as I haven’t had any of them very long. I just recently decided to get into it.

My Springfield Armory and Colt I got at about the same time. The Springfield Armory blew the Colt away in every aspect and the cost was the same as the Colt, so I was definitely disappointed although not surprised. I have since had work done to the Colt which made it a whole lot better, but it came at an additional cost. Only reason I even got the Colt was because “Colt 1911”.

I haven’t shot the Tisas yet as I just got it, but the fit and finished was better than the Colt out of the box. I’m in no way saying Tisas is top notch, is better than Colt or any other brand, or anything else as such. I was just saying I’m pleased so far with what I have based off of cost compared to others at this point. I have no doubt the Tisas will be a fine little shooter and will serve the purpose I bought it for, a “truck gun” if you will.

 

[JD8]

I have had exactly one bad Colt, a WWI Repro which used a wide spur outsourced hammer. The other three have been functionally perfect, two had purely cosmetic issues common as long as Colt has produced military guns. What problems did you have besides generic trashing of the brand?
Colts still use the least amount of cast and MIM parts of any brand, fyi, including forged/machined slide stops, extractors, hammers, frames, slides, etc., which generally means prettier guns made otherwise don't hold up to extensive shooting. Colt got sloppy about 20yrs ago, but my 2016 gun is utterly perfect in build and function.

Tisas has a good rep, most brands do, but most the folk praising them don't shoot them all that much or try to induce jams by limp wristing when fouled to see what happens in worst case.
Keep us posted on what shooting you do and how it holds up, as I certainly think the Tisas likely built as well or better than most standard production non-Colt 1911-type guns.

Tisas builds a better 1911 than Colt. That may change under CZ going forward, but Colts have been pretty unimpressive for a long time, outside of looking pretty.

Hopefully CZ turns Colt into something similar to Dan Wesson, with better CS.

 

[mtngunr]

All I hear is generalities backed up by nothing. Being into Colts, and no fanboy, for the last 40yrs, I know their pluses and minuses, and what time frames they've had their problems and generally what those problems were. And generally, they are very good weapons meeting original specifications in accuracy and reliability, most any of them able to hold 5" at 50yds with a competent shooter, and be exceptionally reliable with the ball ammo for which designed, and even work well with JHPs. I never had a single failure to feed and fire with any Colt owned that was still as delivered from the factory, only those altered with "improvements" by a prior owner. Colt's worst moment was back around 2000 when the bean counters decided to go MIM small parts such as the plunger tube with legs not long enough to be properly staked and shooting loose, and even more inexcusable, them copying other brands and using cast and MIM for critical parts such as extractors, but they learned and corrected. Most gripes with folk are strictly cosmetic and still within wartime spec as for slide overhang of frame, slide dustcover assymmetry, slide grind lines not straight, etc etc...nothing effecting function, while many of the "superior" new guns often mentioned are using cast and MIM parts where they will not hold up. But few modern critics shoot the guns that much to know that, them all about visuals and a very tight fit that would prove unreliable in adverse conditions.

 

[TerryMiller]

I've not been one to insist on having a 1911, but as far as those go, I'm not too interested unless I could be guaranteed that the one I was buying was the same one this guy was using.

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

I've not been one to insist on having a 1911, but as far as those go, I'm not too interested unless I could be guaranteed that the one I was buying was the same one this guy was using.

View attachment 535083

You could get in on the CMP 1911 sales next time they open it up. Never know...you might get that exact gun. I got a nice 1945 Colt from the second go-round.

 

[crispy]

I’ve never owned or shot a colt. But if I ever owned one, I’d buy an older one. I feel like the biggest con would be the price.

That being said, I’ve owned:

Tisas 1911s (9, 10, and 45)

an AO in 10mm,

RIAs in 9, 10 and 45

And 2 S&W in 45.

My favorites were the S&W and the AO, weirdly enough.

The Tisas are great for the price. I don’t recall having any issues with any of them.
I love the stingray in 9mm. The design and feel is fantastic. The finish isn’t the best and I’m not keen on the color. But it shoots very well. The 45 is a 45 is a 45 lol. The 10, I may have sold before I shot it.

But the AO in 10 ran like a top. I wish I never got rid of it.

I will never own another RIA again.

I’m a fan of S&W, so naturally I love their 1911s.

A WW2 or WW1 era colt would be a wonderful companion to my 1903 colt.

 

[JD8]

All I hear is generalities backed up by nothing. Being into Colts, and no fanboy, for the last 40yrs, I know their pluses and minuses, and what time frames they've had their problems and generally what those problems were. And generally, they are very good weapons meeting original specifications in accuracy and reliability, most any of them able to hold 5" at 50yds with a competent shooter, and be exceptionally reliable with the ball ammo for which designed, and even work well with JHPs. I never had a single failure to feed and fire with any Colt owned that was still as delivered from the factory, only those altered with "improvements" by a prior owner. Colt's worst moment was back around 2000 when the bean counters decided to go MIM small parts such as the plunger tube with legs not long enough to be properly staked and shooting loose, and even more inexcusable, them copying other brands and using cast and MIM for critical parts such as extractors, but they learned and corrected. Most gripes with folk are strictly cosmetic and still within wartime spec as for slide overhang of frame, slide dustcover assymmetry, slide grind lines not straight, etc etc...nothing effecting function, while many of the "superior" new guns often mentioned are using cast and MIM parts where they will not hold up. But few modern critics shoot the guns that much to know that, them all about visuals and a very tight fit that would prove unreliable in adverse conditions.

It's interesting that you complain about generalities then follow up with some of your own lol.....

Colt has had some inconsistency in the past 40 years, to say the very least. It was a poorly ran company, up until CZ bought them. Starting around in the 80s, it was a coin toss of what you would get in the box if you bought one. Sloppy frame to slide fits, horrible barrel fit, gritty safeties and triggers..... if specifics are needed. Quite sad indeed, but..... it surely allowed several other companies and gunsmiths to establish themselves by fixing Colt's shortcomings. Something which still happens today. Couple that with a stubbornness/refusal to put a halfway decent grip safety (dear lord that duckbill safety was horrendous), Novak cut, or maybe even some checkering, and you have a brand that lost a significant share of the market. Surely, none of that will matter to those that put 50 rounds a year through their guns, but it seems those that shoot a significant amount, typically want some upgrades, or at least some models that had better features.

Either way, the notion that Colt is a standard is quite dated, hate to say it, as I love old Colts, but the reality is that it just isn't any more. Surely there is some nostalgia, and I honestly believe CZ will turn it around, but they have some work to do. Compare a Delta Elite to a Rock Island 10mm or dare I say a DW 10mm. They both blow a Colt out of the water. I have one of the Tisas Raiders, it is better built than the Colt M45A1, which were quite embarrassing on behalf of Colt I might add.


Oh and the MIM parts issue is just fuddlore any more. When Kimber and eventually Taurus, were screwing up small parts, it was a big deal, but that's in the past for most quality brands. You shouldn't see them on $1500 guns and up for sure though.

Finally, the notion that a tight fit 1911 is less reliable is quite silly, granted the gun is properly fit. See Les Baer or Guncrafter for examples if needed.