1911Forum banner
21 - 37 of 37 Posts
I bought a newer Standard full size colt a few years back, it was the biggest piece of crap I have ever seen, I would rate it right up there with the llama that was sitting next to it in the case (same crappy plastic trigger, the finish on the llama was better). I have never held, seen, shot an older Colt and after dumping that first one, I have no desire to. I guess first impressions are a very powerful thing.
The Springfield that I replaced it with has been as faithful and dependable as my German Shepherd and because of that I will always have a soft spot for SA's even though my Kimbers are obviously higher quality.
I think Colt did the same thing that the american automotive industry did, they sat back on thier haunches thinking they were untouchable, and they got left in the dust.
I hope they can recover, I would like very much to add a nice Colt to my collection, I just don't think there's a nice one made today. Not yet. (I own a 4" Anaconda .44 mag revolver that is SWEET, so I am referring only to thier line of 1911's)
 
I have a half-dozen Colts that I shoot regularly, made between 1918 and 1998, and they are all good looking, good shooting, dependable firearms. I can't ask for much more. If I saw a crappy gun for sale, I wouldn't buy it; why did you?
 
Discussion starter · #23 ·
Originally posted by Rail Gun:
.

Basically any 1911 which is not GI is a clone, including Colt, Springfield, Kimber, and all the rest. They're ALL clones.
OK, I'll go with that.
 
I have 4 Colt's and 1 clone. The Colt's are all newer models. They all work fine. Many bash the later made Colt's, but I doubt they ever owned one, or are comparing them to some custom they built (the same people that bitch because a Mini 14 is not a 1 MOA rifle at 100 yards)
. All have opinions - Mine is but the real deal - Colt.

MD
--------------------------------------------
"Stupidity should hurt" -- someone on the net
 
colts problems began when the old german gunsmiths who worked for them retired / died off...
the quality those guys produced was unbelieveable... then UAW got their claws in colt and quality dissappeared almost overnight...
some decent guns still made it out the door but it happened less and less often...
my s-70's never made it past 6K rnds without major problems...s-80's were an abomination for the most part...
if the new 1911a1's are truely what colt used to be ,i will buy one just to have a real colt again...
i find myself being more and more drawn to the old basic unscrewed -with 1911a1 pistol...
ive had my new "clintonized'' springfield for 3 months and still haven't fired it...
it's not that the SA is a bad gun ,i just don't like all the crap they hang on the new pistols...:( :confused:
 
i must retract my earlier statement of buying a colt 1911a1... just found out they retail for $1175.00!!!!!
for that price i can buy 2 SA's milspec w/$$$ left over ,or 3 AO milspecs ,or 4 RIA milspec's...
should have known,if it's too good to be true , it's too good to be true...
SOD; people , that would pay for most of a les baer pistol...:eek: :(
 
artis formaly Redzone

As to your question about pre70's Gold Cups. IMO I don't think there is a nicer Colt made, excluding the pre war National Matches, but good luck finding one and affording one.
The Pre 70's are great guns, especially the 1957-1967 period.
This is before the war build up.
I have owned 2 1960 NM, my dad has a 1966 NM and my uncle has a 1958 NM, all are shooters, all are dead nuts accurate and beautiful guns.
My dads has well over 40k, mostly 185 gr swc and my uncles comes pretty close to 30k.
I currently only own one,
I don't shoot mine much anymore, don't like the hammer bite with the grip I use, but I still take it out and rub it down and hold her and wish that could have guns like this again for what it sold for new in 1960 - $49.50 ( I have the original bill of sale!!!)





 
Colt The Real Deal

Guys I presently own 19 different variants of 1911s made by just about every body under the sun, from Randall, Paraordnance, ODI, Kimber, Springfield Armory, Series 80s, Series 70s, Preseries 70s, Colt 1911A-1s, 1911s and the guns that I prize the most are the real deal Colts, those made from 1970 back thru 1912. Those guns are THE REAL DEAL and all else are clones, they maybe nice clones, even very expensive clones, but all clones nonetheless...7th
 
Clones...hardly. No more than Colt is a clone itself.
 
Buy a Colt or buy a copy? By saying "copy" it seems to suggest that the copies are somehow not as good as the original.

Let's look at it this way. The only real 1911 I am aware of was made by Colt and by several other companies under contract such a Remington UMC.

The came the 1911A1 which is not the same as a 1911 in the technical sense.

Note that many of the copies being made today are comparable or superior to a lot of the production Colt 1911s. Also note that the Colts made today are not the same as were made originally. So, even a modern Colt can be considered a copy, as such.

Those living in the Colt Cult will always claim that any 1911 not made by Colt is just a copy and copies have lesser status. So it is in a cult.
 
I currently own two Govt. Models, and have a Gold Cup on the way. My first Colt was a used Custom Gun that I absolutely love. I bought a 1991 that I was going to have some custom work done to it initially before I even shot it. After I shot, I decided to leave the gun as stock. If I do change anything on my 1991, it will be to put a stock 1911 metal trigger on their. I am debating buying a Kimber Custom, but overall, I still think that Colts feel the best in my hand. What people like is personal preference, mine is Colt for a 1911.
 
Nobody here is saying that the clones aren't every bit as good, if not better than a Colt 1911. Just because they're clones in and of itself doesn't make them inferior, on the contrary many are far superior to an original Colt due to improvements in metaurgy and modern improvements, such as the high dollar after market 1911s offer. One would be mentally deficient to say that an original 1911 is a good in the sense of being a more capable weapon than one of the better after market custom 1911s.

But OTOH, Colt does have name recoginition with the general public, that the others will never have. Take one of your high dollar custom after market 1911s into a run of the mill Pawn Shop, along with a nice clean Series 70 and see which one gets the most attention and proably money from the dweeb behind the counter. Everybody on this planet has heard of Colt, but the general public has never heard of Bill Wilson.

7th
 
Colt (the company) was smart enough and influential enough, throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, to build a large number of very significant guns. The M1911 and M-16 are very closely associated with Colt, even if the designs didn't spring entirely from Colt's own people. Other guns, not really associated with Colt, but having about the same relationship to them as the M1911 and M-16, are the Gatling Gun, BAR, Thompson Submachine Gun; M1917, M1919 and M2 "Browning" machine guns.
Obviously, there were "clone" guns being made before WWI, by Springfield Armory. Colt ruled the roost until the 1980's, because there was no competition. When clone-making got into full swing, and it became obvious that people were willing to pay a lot of money for guns that were built to tighter tolerances (the "looseness" of Colt Government Models is due to that fact that they are built to [go figure!] the tolerances specified by the government!), or built of inferior materials to save a buck, Colt didn't jump on the bandwagon. Clearly, they preferred to stick to building the GM as it was.
The market for "feature"-loaded 1911s appears insatiable, but if I want a stock 1911, I'll take a basic Colt, and if I want a custom, I'll build a gun to my specifications on a Colt. Anything else is just a copy.
 
Actually, the union wasn't the biggest cause of the problems - Colt was...that is, Colt INDUSTRIES.

The holding company that owned Colt firearms basically sucked all the profits out of the gun division and killed all efforts to modernize - wouldn't allow any reinvestment in new designs and equipment. The clones were made in startup operations, in new factories, and guess what? They could be made cheaper on modern CNC equipment, and the guns were also fitted tighter.

Colt did have quality problems in the '80's. I saw one Diamondback with the logo stamped upside down. Dad bought a .380 Government Model, that was a neat concept - and fired twice with each trigger pull. After warranty service, he still didn't trust it, and sold it.

Colt Industries did the exact same thing to Holley Carburetor, and to Fairbanks Morse - both premier companies in their fields when the 60's began, now shadows of their former selves. My brother worked for the latter, and he was appalled at how that company's reputation was squandered.

The 1911 was designed to function when extremely dirty, on a battlefield, hence it is kinda loose. Even on a target range, guns get dirty, and I have seen a number of tight-fitted clones jam as soon as they get dirty. Do all of them jam? No, but I have seen it happen.

I own two Colts of fairly recent manufacture - A Defender and a 1991A1. Both are very reliable, and both can out-shoot me any day. The 1991 has been mildly customized by me. The Defender is bone stock, except for a Wilson mag.

In layaway at the moment is a used Series 80 Enhanced Gold Cup. It will get mild tuning, but the trigger is already better than most clones I have seen, including some higher grade Kimbers. I did verify that the Series 80 firing pin safety works, too. The price is well under what a Kimber Eclipse or Gold Match costs.

I have no qualms about buying newer Colts. I wish them good luck, and will patronize them whenever practical.
 
To Rick B.

Hey Rick I could be wrong on this one but I do have old catalogs that give a Costa Mesa address for the Armalite C0. that manufactured an autoloading shotgun and a semi-auto assault type rifle called the AR18 that used an interanl gas piston arragement. The company later licensed the Howa Mfg. Co. in Japan to make the rifle and later gave the license to Sterling of England where it was renamed the AR 180. It is my understanding that this rifle will soon be resurrected once more and made once again in the U.S. W.R.
 
Armalite was a division of Hughes Aircraft, I believe, and they were almost exclusively designers of firearms. They didn't produce anything in quantity. The idea was that Armalite would do the design work and then sell it to an interested government, who would then be responsible for making it. I don't doubt that there were guns stamped with the Armalite name, but I think they were all manufactured by someone else, as the AR-15/M-16 is by Colt.
 
Armalite produced in quantity the AR-18 and its nuetered twin the AR-180. Both started production in Costs Mesa and later were contracted out overseas. They had many unique designs that were never produced in any quantity.
The AR-18 bolt/carrier/gas system has been copied into many of the latest designs, most notably by HK. It works better than the direct gas sytem. Unfortunately Armalite had more craftsman than salesman and their designs were overshadowed by those that had bigger bucks to put in politicians pockets. Here is a link to some of the stuff I play with.

http://ar18s.freeservers.com/

Also the original AR-15 was a select-fire as manufactured by Colt. These are known as the Colt Armalite AR-15 Model 601. The designation M-16 was later adopted when the military named it such.
 
21 - 37 of 37 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top