OIF2, Your question brings about the ongoing conflict between cost and authenticity. The more authentic a reproduction pistol is to be, the higher the cost. Which is why so many classic revolvers and rifles are made in Italy.
A good example of this is in the current ad for USFA single action pistols. At this time I should also point out how the marketing people of a firearms manufacturer also tend to really muddy the waters. They really don't tell the truth when promoting a firearm, especially a repro. The USAF ad states that USAF makes "the finest, most authentic single action you can buy!" The ad continues to praise the quality of the pistol and how it is the most historically accurate revolver in the world. Now two points need to be made.
First is that right across town Colt is still making the single action (which, without so stating, the USAF is a replica of). So how can the USAF replica be more accurate than the original, still in production? Now you say, but the Colt SAA now being produced is not the same as that made in the late 1800s but is the third geberation. That brings me to point number two. Just reading the ad and looking at the two photos in the ad (and I must confess, they are beautiful guns); one can note that these are not correct replicas of the Colt made in the late 1880s when the West was won. The cylinder release pin (cross-pin frame) is era 1896 (even the ad has the wrong date). The front sight blade is 1902 and the rear sight is of 1940. The copywriters want the purchaser to belive he/she is buying one thing while the actual pistol has refinements running over a period of at least 77 years. Why? Because of costs and purchaser desirability. These guns are not being sold to collectors, but to shooters. Thus the easier to see sights, the easier to use transverse base pin retainer, etc. And I am sure thare are other differences due to manufacturer costs.
Now what does all of this have to do with the Colt WW II Reproduction Pistol Model 1911A1 (what the Colt engineers called it)? Several years ago I wrote an article on this reproduction and a comparison to the original WW II Colt 1911A1. To do this properly I had to spent a lot of time with the Colt people to understand the process of making the reproduction; and that goes back to the first sentence above of this reply. In order to reach a compromise between what retailers would pay and the profitable cost of making the gun, accuracy of parts was degraded. Colt would accept the closest to original spec parts from vendors at an affordable costs. Thus the historical configuration to the original parts, such as the trigger, suffered due to costs. And we are not talking about a small number of accurate parts but in the thousands. And even then, as manufacturing processed, so did parts configurations.
So how did Colt do? Differences between the repro and the original were partially due to costs; but also to current pistol manufacturing laws, technology (such as MIM which was not available in the 1940s), and manufacturing equipment. As I mentioned in my article, on quick glance comparing the repro to a 1943 Colt 1911A1 (which was my comparison pistol for this article) the two pistols look alike. On closer inspection, though, differences are apparent. In the run of just over 2400 guns Colt itself made only seven parts and the rest came from vendors. I found my gun (sn WK 01694) to be a well made pistol. It was reliable and as accurate as my five WW II 1911A1s. It groups at 2" at 25 yards which is a little more than the collective accuracy of my five WW II guns (I have a RR which averages 1.25"). Compare this repro to the other mil-specs available at that time such as Springfield. I think the Colt was far superior to that one, and the others.
To answer if Colt will bring back the WW II. Well, the sn arrangement was planned so they can do that. The problem might be lining up the vendors to make it. I would doubt it as long as the WW I repro sells as well as it does. Since the guns are not hand-crafted custom guns, the change of production lines to accomodate a new line may be too much to do. I don't know, ask Colt. Bob
