[Simian]

Just saw one sitting at my local shop. The piece looks nice and it has a nice sized price tag at around $1050. I am not completely convinced that I need or want it bad enough as you can find the real deal GI guns in great condition for just a bit more. I am thinking that I would rather put the money into another Single Action Army as a mate for the one I already have. The 1911 is beautiful though. Anyone want to try and convice me or give me a helping hand here?

------------------
Simian

NRA Life Member

 

[RickB]

As a collector piece, the M1911A1 might be nice to have, but if you're looking for a shooter, I'd say (again . . .) that you'd be better off with a M1991A1 that has had the cast internals replaced with best-grade aftermarket parts. You'd end up with a better gun at a lower price.

 

[Billy Ray]

What RickB said. I'd pass on it.

Billy Ray

 

[dsk]

Ditto. In the event you decide you want one you can find them cheaper than that. Or else like you said you can still find the originals for between $1100-$1400 in mint condition. Either that, or go buy one that's 70% finish for $750 and go get it reparkerized.

BTW you can easily find a decent Ithaca or Remington Rand for $600-$700 as well.

------------------
D. Kamm
USGI M1911/M1911A1 Pistols Website
http://www.geocities.com/M1911_M1911A1

 

[Simian]

Thanks! I know that but it just looks so nice in the window! I don't think I am going to get it. It would be a shame to have it and not shoot it, but by the same token it would be a shame to get it and shoot/carry it, if you know what I mean. By the way, anyone in NOVA who wants on I saw it at Gilberts right off of I-95.

------------------
Simian

NRA Life Member

 

[KenH]

Get it as a partner to your SAA. I have a 4-3/4" Nickel Colt SAA. It's kind of neat to have two 45s with such an historical heritage. The two are becoming buddies!

Neither the reproduction 1911A1 or my 3rd generation SAA are exactly like the original productions down to every details. But the SAA is closer than any of its clones; and the 1911A1 is closer than any of Colt's other models or its clones.

People seem to either like the reproduction gun or profess to dislike it. It will become a collectible regardless. I would suggest getting it, unless you have access to the real thing.

I have seen numerous mentionings of the availability of purchasing mint WWII vintage 1911A1s for just slightly more. No offense to anyone, but just where does one find one in that condition at that price? I live in Dallas where we have gun shows almost every weekend. Most Colts, Remingtons,etc. I see in that range are beaters. Are you sure the ones you are seeing are WWII vintage or could they be later vintage? Regardless, where would I find one? I would love the real thing in mint condition but I haven't seen such a thing.

TIA

 

[Simian]

I have a 1917 USGI already so I do have access. I have also seen several USGI in the stated condition and price range here in VA at gun shows. This has been a toss up in my mind as the gun looks nice but I can not see myself having it and not shooting it. My SAA is for shooting, my 1917 isn't really (though I have shot it).

------------------
Simian

NRA Life Member

 

[Redzone]

I would say take a chance on an oldie. I bought a 1918 Rem UMC in 75% all original. And I have'nt touched it for 8 months. Its in a safe at dads. I also have a Colt Commercial 1916 in 97%. I know its all the original parts. But have'nt a clue about original finish. I would have to say finish is much younger than gun, maybe 40 yrs old or so. But its a great gun as are any from Colt and others young and old. I think if you got the money, you are quite sure of what your getting. Where as in a 40s A1 your getting a military & or civilian project piece. Who cares its your money and gun if wanted the A1 or A1 remake.

 

[dsk]

Originally posted by KenH:
Neither the reproduction 1911A1 or my 3rd generation SAA are exactly like the original productions down to every details
TIA

I finally saw one at a local dealer here in WA state. I agree entirely that it is in no way going to fool a seasoned collector. But it looks close enough that I could see Colt selling a ton of 'em if they would only knock about $300 off the price.


------------------
D. Kamm
USGI M1911/M1911A1 Pistols Website
http://www.geocities.com/M1911_M1911A1

 

[PigPen]

Originally posted by Simian:
Anyone want to try and convice me or give me a helping hand here?

Quite the contrary! I would love to see yours.....for about five minutes and perhaps fire it a couple of times (if you really insisted) but not own it.

I think I have this straight tonight but like many I suspect I frequently cross the line between reasonable and unreasonable when it comes to pistols.

If I bought a 1911, it would either be to collect (and occasionally shoot) or shoot and carry a lot but not both.

If I was buying a "collector" it would have to be an original; the real article; preferably with a story behind it. When you held it you could imagine who may have used it and for what purpose. You would have a piece of history in your hand which might inspire a little research into the background. Yeah, I might (probably would) fire it a few times but it wouldn't be as much fun to fire as my modern 1911s. No Videki trigger, beavertail safety, night sights, etc.

Now if I bought it to shoot, I would want the afore mentioned features (Improvements).

A reproduction can't (IMHO) fill the role of either a collector (It ain't actually been there) or a shooter (It lacks the modern improvements needed to make it as enjoyable to shoot).

This is someimes hard for me to remember when I am standing and looking at a beautiful old piece but wanting a shooter.

When a pistol can serve as both, it's great but this is not often the case.

PigPen

 

[dsk]

If it wasn't so darned expensive I doubt anybody would be arguing over it!

------------------
D. Kamm
USGI M1911/M1911A1 Pistols Website
http://www.geocities.com/M1911_M1911A1

 

[KenH]

It's not for everyone. FYI, Colt does not market this as an instant collectible, as they do the SAA. They just market it as a reproduction.


Once again, I think you've got to look at who it's designed for. It's similar to the Colt SAAs. Neither the repro 1911A1 nor the SAA are built exactly like the 1940s 1911A1 nor the 1870s version SAA, but they are the closest you can get in a currently produced gun. Neither gun was used by Audie Murphy 1911A1 nor Wyatt Earp (SAA), but once again they are the closest you can get. Neither used a Gold Cup, 1991A1, Vaquero or Uberti either.

You can buy better built guns for less money. My Ruger stainless Vaquero is a much better built gun than the SAA. My Kimber Stainless is a much better gun than any Colt, BUT they can never lay claim to any of the heritage associated with these two timeless designs. As good as they are, they're not Colt. Sure Colt may have changed ownership many times -- our country has changed Presidents many time. But Colt is still Colt and we are still the USA.

The Colt reproduction 1911A1 is the closest thing you can find to the original WWII gun IF you want a newly manufactured pistol. If you want a new 1911A1 but don't care about the style, then you have many options.

 

[RickB]

Your Kimber is a much better gun than any Colt? That's a pretty big blanket.

 

[KenH]

Sorry, I meant better than any of Colt's current offerings. The older Colt's exhibited a pride in workmanship that seems missing from the new ones.

 

[Claybob]

I do not believe Kimbers are of a higher quality than the current Colts. At the very least, the two makes are probably comparable. Kimber sells lots of guns by marketing a gun with more features for slightly less money. Both makes utilize CNC machinery and cast parts, not to mention the wonderful plastic mainspring housings.

I have noticed the "Colt-Kimber" debate on this forum is very similar to the "Colt-Bushmaster" debate at AR15.com. As with the Kimber forum here, the Bushmaster supporters sing the song of praise about Bushmaster's service dept. and how they will make right the guns that don't work. Good for them. Haven't had a problem with a Colt.....Maybe I'm just lucky.

 

[dsk]

Originally posted by Claybob:
I have noticed the "Colt-Kimber" debate on this forum is very similar to the "Colt-Bushmaster" debate at AR15.com. As with the Kimber forum here, the Bushmaster supporters sing the song of praise about Bushmaster's service dept. and how they will make right the guns that don't work. Good for them. Haven't had a problem with a Colt.....Maybe I'm just lucky.

Not trying to take this off-topic, but I'd buy the Bushmaster even if it WAS priced the same as a Colt! Bushys have chrome bores, less plastic parts (except for the trigger guard), and the right-sized pins! The Colt ARs of old were great, but lately I've seen way too many shortcuts with the way they're made, even the LEO guns.


------------------
D. Kamm
USGI M1911/M1911A1 Pistols Website
http://www.geocities.com/M1911_M1911A1

 

[KenH]

I own a Kimber and a Colt. My observations about Colt are based upon recent evaluation of their 1991s and Gold Cups and is based soley upon the quality of their finish. I have heard the new Colts shoot better than ever, but I'm more of a collector than a shooter. Colts have been sought after by collectors for years so their finish quality is an issue.

I have examined probably 50 over the last four months and have yet to find one that didn't have a poor finish, for a new gun. Everyone, without exception,was scratched up. That's fine for a shooter. Many of the ones I examined were straight out of the box from Colt. My thoughts were that if Colt put no more care into the external appearance they put probably less into the internal construction and quality.

The Colts I saw were not the Colts of old. Perhaps they shoot better, but for those of us who are more collection oriented the finish counts a lot. For now, anyway, Kimber appears to assemble their guns with greater pride. I'm kind of picky, but I want a new gun to look new when I buy it. In defense of Colt, I think the finish on the Springfields and Sigs could be improved too. S&W has also slipped in the finish department.

Having said all of that, the last gun I bought was the Colt repro 1911A1. I also own S&Ws and have owned Sigs. I just feel like many of the manufacturers are just slapping them together nowadays.

 

[SamColtFan]

Hello KenH...
Quality of Colt's finish slipping? I have seen many of the Colt 91A1s in stainless and matte blue. The fit and finish of the current crop of Colts is the best that it has been in many years. I have yet to see a bad finish on an out of the box 91A1 or a Gold Cup Trophy, even with Colt's financial problems. Nearly 50% of the new Kimber Eclipse II guns that I have handled, out of the box have had a thin, scratched finish and real creepy triggers. The Kimbers at $350 to $400 more than a 91A1 should be pristine, in my experience nearly 50% are not. Amazing when you consider Kimber doesn't have the financial problems of Colt.
Regards,
Sam

 

[Redzone]

Even the SAA has a Colt knockoff the Cowboy. Which was an instant success for them and rightly so. With composite grips, case hardened finish and, action which are very pre 1900 SAAisk. That is according to history books, I was'nt alive back then, duh. I think one of these gems is my next acquisition. They are very fun to look at, play with and, I would assume shoot. Plus it will be a step away from the 1911 while remaining with my gun god Colt.

 

[KenH]

SamColtFan,

Colt's my favorite gun company, followed closely by Smith & Wesson, and then Ruger. In spite of my disappointment in Colt's quality decline, my last two gun purchases were a Colt SAA in nickel and the 1911A1 reproduction.

I sort of dropped out of the gun world after the Brady think happened (1995). I'm kind of an impulse buyer and the Brady Bill did a real number on us impulse buyers. FYI, my last purchase before dropping out was one of the Colt Ultimate Stainless 45s (back when they were available and affordable). I've owned Aces, Diamondbacks, Troopers, 1911s in the past.

I rekindled my interests this Spring and started to replinish my inventory. I was unaware of the S&W controversy and Colt's problems. I was shocked when I went looking for their guns. S&W's product line really changed. IMHO, they ruined the 60, 649, etc. by adding that heavy barrel and chambering them for 357. Many of my favorites were grossly changed (10 shot 617) or eliminated 63, 4006, 4506. I'm glad I retained my old 66 and 649.

Colt's were also changed. I remember when the finish on Colt's was immaculate. I searched the gun shows and stores in DFW for 4 months looking for a quality 1911. I so much wanted to buy a Colt! I even found several older ultimate stainless 38 supers that I considered, just to get the pony. Every, without exception, new Colt was scratched. I don't have the capability to remove scratches on the sand/bead blasted areas or I would have bought one and touched it up. I then thought that I've consider a blued(?) Colt, thinking the color would hide the scratches -- not so. I was also turned off by the plastic trigger and 1991 rollmarks.

I then decided that I might need to look elsewhere for a quality one. I thought the Springfields were not finished any better. I then started looking at the Kimbers. Most Kimbers on display would exhibit some handling imperfections, but the ones not on display were perfectly finished. So I bought a Kimber Stainless. I shot it a few times and put it up. By the way it was an excellent shooter. It was very attractive too. But it wasn't a Colt.

I'm curious about the new Colts you've seen. I know that I'm somewhat of a perfectionist on the finishes (obsessive-compulsive probably), probably way beyond what would be considered normal. But I honestly haven't seen a new Colt without imperfections. Even my SAA and 1911A1 had some, whereas, my Kimber didn't. And I've seen many a Ruger with blemish free finishes too. In contrast, I've also noticed a lot of scratches in the bead blasting area of the new S&Ws -- they weren't like that just 6 years ago when I was an active trader.

I still think Kimber puts more quality into the 1911s than Colt. BUT, after all is said and done, I traded my Kimber in on the reproduction 1911A1. Down the road I'll buy another Kimber, but my 1911A1 won't be a trader. It along with my Colt SAA, Walther TPH, 66, 649 and High Gloss Stainless Single Six have all reached that no trade status.