1911Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There has been a lot of discussion about improving Colt quality control over the last few months. And while I do enjoy my NRM stainless government there are some feature that I wish Colt would change on it.
I was hoping to discuss my ideas on the product line and hear your ideas as well.
I like that the new 1991's pretty much give you a blank canvas for building whatever type of 1911 you want from retro to ultra-modern. And I like that the series 80 system is simple and time-tested as opposed to the other new "safeties" out there.
But the two things I really wish that Colt would change on the gun are the narrow barrel hood and the mag well bevel. I find the barrel hood to be very noticeable--I just happen to look at the top of 1911's and expect the mil-spec lines. It seems with the new 70 series guns being produced they could simply use the same barrels for the carbon and stainless guns respectively--please keep the new barrel throat as case support is good. The magwell bevel is just too far forward and leaves the base of the frontstrap thin and sharp--something more along the lines of Kimber (blasphemy, I know) seems to be in order here.

All other changes to the guns I can think of such as non-dot sights, carry bevel, MSH change, or extended safety are personal preference and much easier to change. Maybe if we make enough noise, Mark1648 might bring some things up to management.

-Chad

P.S. I also have to add that I wish that more of the stainless guns' small parts were actually made of stainless steel. And if colt every wants me to buy an XSE model when I get a hankering for Front serrations they need to change their high cut front strap--think Kimber/McC/Wilson--much more elegant.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
72,478 Posts
In my online review of these pistols I noted how the mag well bevel treatment is all wrong. A properly beveled mag well needs a chamfer at the rear and along the sides, NOT at the front where it does no good. The fact that the side bevels don't even continue to the rear makes them useless. You need a gunsmith to finish what Colt started anyway, so IMHO Colt might as well stop beveling the mag wells entirely if they're not going to do it right.

I also agree regarding the barrel hood treatment. Originally the idea was to make all Model "O" frame 1911 pistols use the same barrels. The Gold Cup Trophy and Enhanced/XS/XSE pistols use the narrow hood barrel as they followed the lines of the original Gold Cups; eventually the 1991 models followed suit. However, these days it seems the Series 70, WW1/WW2 replicas, and 1991 models are by far more popular than the Enhanced-pattern pistols. Furthermore, many owners and gunsmiths still insist on fitting an aftermarket match barrel, a task made less easy by requiring that the barrel hood be cut to allow it to fit the 1991 slide. While I can understand Colt's original idea of parts commonality, I think they went in the wrong direction and should have discontinued the narrow hood barrels instead of the more common (and popular) mil-spec ones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I expected DSK to chime in, but since nobody else said anything does this mean everyone agrees?

Okay, another cosmetic issue--dot matrix serial numbers?

Thoughts? Anyone?

-Chad
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
I agree, Colt should just stop beveling and use the time saved for quality control purposes!!

As for the dot matrix serial number, I thought Colt switch back to stamped serial number a while ago, so we shouldn't worry about anything (Unless I'm missing something?)
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
72,478 Posts
Maybe there is a valid reason for not making these changes, but I'd like to hear it. I have yet to come across a gunsmith who thinks the way Colt currently bevels the mag wells is smart. I too feel they could just save a dollar or two per pistol and simply no longer do it. One of the reasons for using a new Series 70 as a custom base is because the gunsmith can shape the mag well as he/she pleases without having to try to clean up the factory job.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
72,478 Posts
Mark, in a discussion forum such as this you're likely to hear all sorts of ideas and suggestions on how to improve Colt products. Some posters may have a good idea, some may have an idea that sounds good but isn't realistically feasible, and still others deserve a slap upside the head. If some ideas simply ain't gonna happen that's perfectly fine, but you can't blame owners for suggesting them. Sometimes it's necessary to put up with requests for a stainless .500 Linebaugh Colt 1860 Army in return for a few really good suggestions (like the one to change the slide rollmarks on a certain line of pistols).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,303 Posts
I sense frustration in Mark's recent posts, and not at our members.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
dsk said:
Sometimes it's necessary to put up with requests for a stainless .500 Linebaugh Colt 1860 Army in return for a few really good suggestions.
HEY!!! What's wrong with that idea?:(

Now I'll have to think of something else for Christmas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I really didn't want to ruffle Mark1648's feathers. I really appreciate the information he brings to the forum. Perhaps mistakenly or with too much pressure, we see him as our mouthpiece to a company whose products we love.
I hope Mark takes our suggestions as the overflow of enthusiasm that they are. And I hope that Mark's enthusiasm for the pistols proves infectious to his co-workers.
I love the fact that Colt is really in this game again and has made some wonderful changes to the product line (I can't think of another current production 1911 that I would take over a new Colt)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,128 Posts
Personally, I like Colt's super high cut XSE frames. And speaking of XSEs, a lot of members have shown their dislike of the pony being behind the rear cocking serrations, however, if you look at the original Colt 1911s, they pony was behind the rear cocking serrations.

Overall, I'm happy with Colt's efforts to improve the line, now if we can just get rid of the last bit of MIM and go to barstock, we'll be set.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
450 Posts
Mark1648 said:
:grumble: who needs a valid reason........
We all appreciate your presence here at 1911 forumboard and I would really be interested to hear why you don't think it is a good idea for Colt to simply phase out the mag well bevel on the 1991 models? I am in no way questioning your authority, just curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
634 Posts
First of all, no feathers ruffles what so ever, obviously my very kurt remarks didn't help. I get like that once and a while. AZ is absolutely correct, what was said was not directed to anyone on the forum all have been of great support and very helpful. I have reflected a bit on what AZ said about being frustrated, you know how sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees; what I need to do is suck it up, figure it out and fix it.

On to the issues, I think the narrow bbl hood came about with the start of the enhanced models, I believe the thinking was a narrow hood would leave less of a sharp edge once the rear of the port was flared. I am the one to blame for conversion across the line to simplify the mfg process, with the exception of the retro guns I really don't see this going away.

The beveling of the mag well could be brought back further. I know personally if I am doing a tactical style reload, my index fingue is on the front of the mag guiding it home without looking. to me the front bevel is of more help, but that is just me; I didn't design that in, I guess I just got use to it. Making some potential modifications is worth a look.

Dot matrix seriel numbers are here to stay much more reliable and less chance of a duplicate number, all computer controled. The manual number wheels will continued to be used on the classic line of guns. Just before a gun is packed the seriel number is entered into a computer so a lable can be made, there are times when the response comes back that this gun has already been shipped and more often than not it is a gun with a stamped number.

moorerwc, sorry
AZ, darkest, thanks
D, lighten up dude, its been a while since I have been kinda, sorta scolded .....;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,684 Posts
moorerwc said:
P.S. I also have to add that I wish that more of the stainless guns' small parts were actually made of stainless steel. And if colt every wants me to buy an XSE model when I get a hankering for Front serrations they need to change their high cut front strap--think Kimber/McC/Wilson--much more elegant.
I agree with the SS guns getting all SS parts, it's one of the great things with Colt models.

I happen to like the high cut front strap. It may not be the prettiest, but it's much better, especially for the Defender model. Most of the other makers don't do any kind of relief.

Now if the XSE's had a higher grip safety, it'd get more out of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
nothing to be sorry about--

Mark, we appreciate being listened to.
I can see why the dot matrix #'s are a good thing--anyway to keep computer control but make them deeper solid lines (okay, I guess I'm never happy).
Glad to hear you'll take the idea of the mag bevel under advisement.
Still not sure about the narrow hood--I'm having trouble seeing how it would put a sharper edge on the ejection port--I didn't know Colt's was opposed to sharp edges on it's guns :) -- Just asking you to think about it. Esp. given the "retro" nature of most of y'all's guns.

-Chad
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top