1911Forum banner

Is Spingfield the true Gov't Model for the Money?

1517 Views 8 Replies 9 Participants Last post by  Archer
I badly want a Gov't Model 1911. I've had a S&W 1911 and a RIA but I want another Gov't Model, one that's more true to the Colt design and look. Would the Springfield Mil-Spec or WWII 1911s be the gun of choice? I Don't think I can afford a colt and I hear they're hit and miss, I'd like to do better than a RIA, and the new A/O/Karh Thompson 1911s worry me some. So, would the Springfield be my best bet? I'd love to hear opinions.
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
162 Posts
call me a Colt Snob but i think the Colt is TRUER to the specs than the SA.

i have current versions of both (neither 'usgi' repros) and the springfield is NOT the closest to original. i used a 1945 remington-rand as a model...

its the better priced gun but not necessarily the more original...

david
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,963 Posts
Springfield is indeed the most bang for your hard earned.

Mister G said:
I Don't think I can afford a colt and I hear they're hit and miss, I'd like to do better than a RIA, and the new A/O/Karh Thompson 1911s worry me some. So, would the Springfield be my best bet?
Yep. It is. (I don't agree that Colt is all that bad. Let's not go there, OK? I will agree with you that Springfield is hands down the best for the money when it comes to GI type 1911 no kidding around. I own one (at least) of each of the large mfr's, so no favoritism here.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,462 Posts
LtDave +1,
Save your money and buy a Colt. If you want a Colt "spec" model, get the real thing. If you've read other posts, you'll see Every manufacturer has probs, some a lot more than others. The most complaints I see here are with Kimber and SA. Colt has a few, but almost everyone gets it fixed right the first time ( if there are any probs) Not so with the posts regarding Kim and SA. Just my observations and opinion. I was a died in the wool SA man til I had my probs w/SA. Still haven't got all probs worked out and I doubt I'll give their cust service another chance. Threads here say Kimber is worse. I'm now a Colt only man. My Gunsite and wife's Special Combat were fantastic right out of the box.
True, they are higher $$$ than a milspec, but they run and run and run.
Save your money for a Colt. 70S or 80S or any other model, it doesn't matter. Tracy
 

· Registered
Joined
·
888 Posts
The most complaints I see here are with Kimber and SA. Colt has a few, but almost everyone gets it fixed right the first time ( if there are any probs) Not so with the posts regarding Kim and SA. Just my observations and opinion.
Well you're certainly entitled to your opinion. However perhaps you should consider something.

According to the BATF, in 2003, Kimber sold 44,250 .45 caliber pistols (we can assume most of these were 1911 styles) and Springfield sold 60,042.

Colt's sold 11,985 .45 caliber pistols, let's also assume those were 1911 types.

That means combined, that SA and Kimber sold more than TEN TIMES MORE 1911 pistols than Colt's.

Statistically, though I have no data, let us venture that the problem rates of all three manufacturers are probably pretty much the same.

So, it would follow that the raw number of people with a Colt's issue would be about 10 times lower than those with an SA or Kimber problem.

Therefore, assuming this logic is supported by facts, I would not be surprised that on an internet forum you would read about more problems with these makes.

I own three (quite tight, superbly accurate and completely reliable) SA's, a (rattly as a box of rocks, very accurate and mostly reliable) Colt's (Gunsite CCO) and no Kimbers. I am very happy with the firearms I have from SA and acceptably happy with the one from Colt's. In the big scheme of things all that matters is your individual experience.
 
1 - 9 of 9 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