1911Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I figured since I have a NIB Springfield Pro and a Wilson CQB I should do a range report since both were in the FBI testing, and because I have seen these two compared on several discussions in the past.

I will start by saying I have my preference going into this test with the Pro since I have owned a railed model for about a year, but I will keep a open mind. One of these two will become my primary carry pistol since I am going to go exclusively 1911, I may cheat with a Sig occasionally.

The aesthetic portion:

Finish:

The Pro still uses Black-T, which to me, is duller in appearance than I remember. It is claimed to be very durable, but I cannot agree or disagree since I have not carried it yet. The overall appearance is very consistent, my pictures will not show, but there are no blotchy areas or imperfections standing out.

The CQB uses Armor Tuff, which is claimed to be comparable to Black-T. I cannot remember where I read it, but supposedly, it is a harder finish where Black-T is softer? Anyway, it too is applied very consistently with no noticeable defects. I remember some of the CQB's I have seen in the past almost looked like the finish had orange-peel, but that is not the case here.

Trigger:

The Pro is set to FBI specs, and a part of those requirements is a heavier trigger, about 4.5-5 pounds. There is very little take-up with no noticeable over-travel and it breaks very well. It is not a smooth as my older Pro so maybe a few thousand rounds with do the trick.

So far, I have felt as the two were pretty even but this is one category where the Wilson shinned. One thing I have noticed is Wilson has one incredible trigger; my check sheet listed it at 3.25 pounds. The take-up is about the same as the Pro, as is the over-travel, but how the Wilson breaks is noticeable different. It is not easy to put into words but I think the term "breaks like glass" would explain it the best.

Sights:

The Pro uses the ever-common Novak rear with tritium inserts. The inserts are all green, which is not my favorite set-up. I have grown fond of the yellow rear/green front or a plain rear with tritium front. I cannot complain about this since changing a rear sight is not a big deal, so I think I will swap to a 10-8 .140 in the near future.

The CQB uses Wilson's combat pyramid design, which reminds me of another brand but I cannot remember who made them. The one thing I do like about these sights is the yellow rear/green front. I find this set-up extremely quick to acquire under low light, and in daylight shooting, I was a bit quick lining them up...maybe Wilson opens the rear a bit more.


Build Style:

This is where the two pistols distance themselves dramatically. The Pro is the tightest pistol I have handled, and that includes several Baer's including one with the 1.5" package. I saw three people struggle to open the slide, and they were not feeble by any means. I have not taken the Pro down yet but I did try to turn the bushing for giggles...not happening. The barrel locks up like a vault, just as I knew it would. It will take a good amount of use before it is like my current Pro and can be dissembled by hand.


The Wilson is a very tight pistol, but it is loose when compared to the Pro. There is no noticeable play in the slide/frame but the bushing can be turned without a wrench. The lock-up is not as tight as the Pro but is still firm, a little better than my Nighthawk.

I know tight isn't necessarily right but I still prefer a tighter pistol regardless.




The Range:

I used a varied of HP ammo, all 230gr unless noted: Hydra-Shoks, HST's, +P Bonded HST's, Gold-dots, Hornady XTP and 200gr +P, and Winchester SXT's. The bulk ammo was my economy reloads, I would have liked to find factory new but the prices are ridiculous.


Function: I don't know if the Pro still uses Metalform mags, but I used the mags with the Pro, Wilson ETM's, 47D's, and CMC's shooting-stars.


The Pro had one problem with the included mags that I have tracked to either a single magazine, my reloads, or just a very tight mag spring. When I would use the slide stop to chamber a round it would catch on the feed ramp and not strip the round off causing a misfeed. When I used the overhand method, I had no problems at all, so I'll see what happens next time out.

I only ran 100 rounds of ball and about 50 rounds of the various HP's, and I had not other issues. I really did not want to test either pistol with reloads but that's the way it is for now.


The CQB had one failure to extract using the HST bonded ammo...I have had problems with this brand in my Kimber and Mil-spec in that past, so it maybe the ammo. I had one dud round with some old Hydra-Shoks, but I can't blame the pistol. The CQB preformed very well besides these two issues, it had no problem feeding the different HP's.


Accuracy:

I never shoot from a rest so I may have to give in one day to see how much, if any, these two differ in accuracy. My skills are not what they used to be, but I need to get to the range more often...too bad 45 is so hard to find.


The Pro proved to be more accurate than I was; offhand headshots at 15 yards and small fist sized groups were easy. My reloads are not intended to be match ammo, so it would be a worthwhile test to see what quality ammo could do. My only complaint was the sights, the Novak sight picture works well but I am just prefer another setup. The Hydra-Shoks proved to be the most accurate of all the ammo I tested.


The CQB was just as accurate as the Pro, maybe a bit more consistent in my hands due to the lighter trigger and better sights. It provided the same sized groups with ease, and it too shot best with the Hydra-Shoks.


Overall:

I am still undecided on which pistol will become my primary carry; it will take some more range time before I decide. Both pistols have their strong points; I love the aggressive checkering, firm safety, larger pad on the grip safety, and magwell on the Pro.

The CQB has better sights, trigger, and is easier to manipulate at this time. I have found with a very high hold and the smaller pad on the CQB I wasn't always engaging the grip safely.

My conclusion is anyone who buys either of these two will be well suited for personal protection or competition, with 1911's it all comes down to what specs are wanted and buying from a quality builder.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Really? I figured it would be cheaper then the Wilson's.

Is there a difference between that one and say a $1500.00 dollars TRP Pro?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,405 Posts
Nice informative right-up. Detailed and unbiased.



I have found with a very high hold and the smaller pad on the CQB I wasn't always engaging the grip safely.
Is that because you were switching back and forth between pistols and it took time to get used to the smaller memory bump?

In other words, if you were to pick up the wilson cold turkey would you still have a problem engaging the grip safety??

With the wilson front strap checkered at 30LPI and the undercut more radical (under the trigger guard), how different is handling/pointing characteristics than the pro?

Do you prefer one magwell over the other?

At this point, which gun has the smoother slide to frame fit?

Thanks!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Nice informative right-up. Detailed and unbiased.





Is that because you were switching back and forth between pistols and it took time to get used to the smaller memory bump?

In other words, if you were to pick up the wilson cold turkey would you still have a problem engaging the grip safety??

With the wilson front strap checkered at 30LPI and the undercut more radical (under the trigger guard), how different is handling/pointing characteristics than the pro?

Do you prefer one magwell over the other?

At this point, which gun has the smoother slide to frame fit?

Thanks!!

1. It may have been a part of it switching between the two, but I have noticed the same with my NHC...the pad on the Wilson is just small enough that if I go very high hold without a firmer grip I don't always engage it.

2. I do like the uncut grip more and feel that it sets in my hand a bit better than the Pro. The recoil is similar, but I would say the Wilson is a bit softer, whether it is due to the highcut I don't know.

3. I prefer the S&A magwell on the Pro, no real reason.

4. It's very hard to pick on the smoothest slide/frame fit. The Pro is extremely tight but once it is opened it is like ball bearings, like a Les Baer, and while the CQB isn't a tight it still has the ultra-smooth feel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,378 Posts
Thank you for the comprehensive range report. We can "sensitize" your grip safety for you if you have a hard time disengaging it. There are a few ways to do this, PM me for more information.

Thanks,

WCR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,405 Posts
Thanks for clearing up my questions.

I will take all of this into consideration on my next custom order. (SA vs Wilson)

I Curently have a Wilson Classic on order now, I hope it will be as nice as either one you did your write up on. Should be in by late Feb.:bawling:

I really want a SA Custom Expert Limited and this is not helping.
I am a Springer man through and through. I have been eyeing up a Wilson Classic for a long time and that is what I caved for first.:biglaugh:

These are really tough decisions!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,403 Posts
Nice to see a Wilson without FCS. Two very nice test subjects you have there !

Great write up on the two. Keep us posted w/ some updates, ie. impressions of finish wear, reliability, etc.. Is that a stock TRP hammer on that Pro ? Just curious.

Enjoy those guns !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,402 Posts
Never having held nor shot either gun,I would choose the Wilson without a second thought and for many reasons. I can look at the high-cut and tell that would handle better for me/feel better in my hand.

The CQB just looks more refined to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,576 Posts
Springfield Custom makes some nice guns. I have a Custom Carry and it shoots right along with my Baer Concept II.

buck-boost, let us know when you get an Expert Limited. I've never seen one before and would love to hear some first-hand experiences of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
Thank you for the well presented field report, former11b. I will just add one point here to represent my thoughts:

I carry a GunCrafter Industries 1911 that was custom-made by two former employees at Wilson Combat -- I bought the weapon mainly because of the two gunsmiths who build/own the company, and the quality of Wilson Combat products and the skills of their smiths. Here comes my 2 cents:

IMO, the Wilson CQB government model is the finest dollar-for-dollar 1911 built by Wilson Combat, and can compete with most custom 1911's regardless of final price. I bought my GunCrafter for it's caliber and regulated my CQB for a back-up role and sometimes carry -- it's been at my hip for over a decade until the GunCrafter was purchased, and just feels at home in it's leather...

The Pro is a nice firearm, but the CQB is a better choice, IMO, for those looking for a .45ACP from a custom shop at a reasonable price...

In truth, Gentlemen, most custom 1911's are excellent -- all of them. It mainly gets down to price point for the final decision, and that's where the WC/CQB shines bright....good luck
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,909 Posts
In truth, Gentlemen, most custom 1911's are excellent -- all of them. It mainly gets down to price point for the final decision, and that's where the WC/CQB shines bright....good luck
It's not always about price, sometimes the standard specs fit the shooter. Specifically does Wilson do ala carte items like 20 LPI instead of 30? Or flatten the slide stop? (sure they could do that) or is everything an upcharge if you don't want it how they make it....the PRO is how it is from the CS and you don't get it how you want it. Just wondering if Wilson would do 20 LPI and flatten the slide stop shaft for free??

I just don't think it should cost extra to get 20 LPI instead of 30 LPI or have the slide stop shaft flush with the right side of the frame
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,405 Posts
It's not always about price, sometimes the standard specs fit the shooter. Specifically does Wilson do ala carte items like 20 LPI instead of 30? Or flatten the slide stop? (sure they could do that) or is everything an upcharge if you don't want it how they make it....the PRO is how it is from the CS and you don't get it how you want it. Just wondering if Wilson would do 20 LPI and flatten the slide stop shaft for free??
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=250771

I don't have the build sheet in front of me, but to have my way, cost is negligible. Can't wait to do my own range report! :):)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,405 Posts
Springfield Custom makes some nice guns. I have a Custom Carry and it shoots right along with my Baer Concept II.

buck-boost, let us know when you get an Expert Limited. I've never seen one before and would love to hear some first-hand experiences of it.
Whatever I do, I'll surely let you all know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
198 Posts
Nice write-up. I'll take the one that's left over that you don't want...........just kidd'n. Just out of curiosity, why no forward cocking serrations? Both are nice guns!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Nice review. It really makes me wish I would have sprung for a Wilson instead of this piece of crap colt 1991 that I bought. It would have been more economical to have just spent all the money up front because as it stands if I have it worked over by a smith I'll have more money invested and not as nice of a gun in the end.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top