[MatthewVanitas]

Greetings. I recently saw the pics of the WWI repro that Colt put out not too long ago. Beautiful piece of gear, though I can't think of any immediately compelling reason to replace my Sistema with one, and would fret far too much about the bluing.

I noticed the differences from pre-A1 and A1 models, which appear to be:

1) Flat mainspring housing
2) Different hammer
3) Longer trigger
4) Shorter tail on grip safety
5) Different sights

I assume that few folks prefer pre-A1 sights, as folks complain about the Gov't model sights enough as it is (though I don't find them particularly unpleasant, but I'm only 25).

Under what conditions are the other three options preferable to the A1 variants? Any folks out there like the old MSH, trigger, hammer?

I'm pretty small-handed, so I've never been bothered by hammer bite. Thus I wonder if the pre-A1 hammer and smaller grip safety would have any advantages for me, or at least provide a distinctive look with no disadvantages. Ditto for the flat MSH. When I grip my Sistema, my hand barely even touches the swell of the MSH, so not sure that the bulkier version does any better job filling my particular hand.

So far as the older trigger, not sure if that would have any upside for me.

After grad school is out of the way, I may finally break down and get a custom 1911. I like retro (when not impractical), and am small-handed, so am idly considering getting a CCO with gov't or pre-A1 outfittings (maybe some minor concessions on sights). Basically a downsized war-era 1911, but in stainless for long-term durability. The project is still a couple years down the road, but it's fun to ponder.

Thanks for any info from those who have tried out pre-A1 configurations, and especially any happy owners (shooters?) or the Colt WWI repros.

-MV

[middy]

Put me in the pre-A1 camp except for the sights. I actually like the A1 sights, but I have good eyes.

The 1911 was originally designed for cavalry horsemen. I think the A1 "improvements" were to make them more suitable for the smaller hands of your average draftee...

[BigG]

The 1911 also did not have the half moon sculpting on the frame where the magazine release is.

Before you make up your mind and buy one based on a photo, you should try the old model in your hand.

[mec]

A few decades ago, it was common practice to retro the flat mainspring housing and the long trigger. Some match shooters prefered them and in the spirit of 1911ism, declared that they were absolutely necessary and that anybody who prefered the newer corruptions was a ass, a idiot. They are still popular options:
http://usera.imagecave.com/mec/gcrightsml2.jpg
Others take the opposit view.

[Moonclip]

I like the short trigger and flat mainspring housing better.

[gc70]

The flat mainspring housing and long trigger have regained popularity in recent years. Nevertheless, the combination of mainspring housing and trigger is nothing more than a matter of personal preference. The flat/long combination works okay for me, but it will never look "right" to my somewhat older eyes.

[Steelharp]

I personally prefer the original 1911 feel over the later A1... better sights are a plus, however... the flat MSH and longer trigger just feel natural to me... but I have really long fingers... at least, so I've been told... :o

[Bentley8]

I've tried both flat and arched MSH and it's definitely better for me to use the arched.

But to me the better feature of JM Browning's original 1911 design is something you don't notice that easily. It's the firing pin stop radius. It's a lot less curved, more abrupt. It makes it a tad harder to pull back the slide, but that also means that it cuts down on recoil. When I custom-fitted a slide with a smaller radius last year I found I could do follow-up shots a lot better as the recoil was more manageable. And I could almost swear it was more accurate, but I don't understand how a smaller radius would increase accuracy. Maybe it was locking up longer?

[TrapperReady]

The one 1911 I own is the WWI repro put out by Colt. It is a heck of a nice gun, both finish-wise and accuracy-wise. I find that the small sights work pretty well for indoor target use, although trying to shoot rapidly or in very bright conditions is difficult.

The one big downside for me is hammer-bite. Within 50 rounds, it's painful. Within 100 rounds, I'm bleeding. FWIW, I have small hands and never experienced significant hammer-bite with any other gun.

If I was to lose my mind and modify the gun, I'd swap out the hammer, put a mild beaver-tail on it, and have dovestails cut into the slide for newer style sights.

[middy]

If I was to lose my mind and modify the gun, I'd swap out the hammer, put a mild beaver-tail on it, and have dovestails cut into the slide for newer style sights.
:fire: Aaauuugh! Don't even joke about that!

;)

[Grayrider]

http://www.usfirearms.com/im/1911_2.jpg

My God that is beautiful!

Prefer, I don't know but want--absolutely!

GR

PS Don't even mention their 1910. Oh how I want that....

[Steelharp]

Grayrider... what is that??? "I gots to know"...

[ulflyer]

I found a WW1 Commemorative at a good price that is a darn good shooter.

[Grayrider]

http://www.usfirearms.com/

:D

They are going to make both a 1911 and a 1910. Over $1K, but to own one in perfect shape I just think it might be worth it. No info on their site as to when they ship though. I am thinking 1910 just because it is such an interesting part of history.

GR

[Steelharp]

That's interesting... but for "over $1k," a real one could be had that would be a genuine piece of history, instead of a modern production knockoff... I wonder how much over... the grip panels look kinda misshaped for a 1911 model. Which model is that one supposed to be? Last patent says 1905... I guess that's the way the panels looked 6 years earlier? Pardon my ignorance, just trying to learn...

Ok, I see... I found them on their website, finally... I'm a little slow... :o I would like to get a couple of those "two-tone" mags for my old 1918... ;)

[mec]

I think theyre both very pretty but a guy who knows about such things says the USFA 1911 grip frame is more like an 11A1. (is there a difference?) and the 1910 has a 1905 hammer. then showed a picture of a 1910 original which diid have a more 11ish hammer.

[1911Tuner]

I've tried both flat and arched MSH and it's definitely better for me to use the arched.

But to me the better feature of JM Browning's original 1911 design is something you don't notice that easily. It's the firing pin stop radius. It's a lot less curved, more abrupt. It makes it a tad harder to pull back the slide, but that also means that it cuts down on recoil. When I custom-fitted a slide with a smaller radius last year I found I could do follow-up shots a lot better as the recoil was more manageable. And I could almost swear it was more accurate, but I don't understand how a smaller radius would increase accuracy. Maybe it was locking up longer?

Yep. Been screamin' about that radius for a while now. :cool:

The reason that it seemed to be more accurate is probably because it is...a little. The slight delay of the slide lets the bullet get closer to the muzzle and less time to be influenced by the slide's movement before exiting. It usually shows less vertical stringing.

The perception of less recoil and muzzle flip are real too, even thought some will insist that because you THINK it's going to be less, you think it IS less...
but testing of split times with only the firing pin stops as the variation proves the puddin'.

Whenever I let somebody shoot one of mine...all of which have the EGW stop
with a .075 radius...they invariable ask how I got it to cycle so smoothly.
When I explain it to'em, the response is universal: "I want one!"

Gotta stop showin' it to everybody. I can't keep an EGW stop in stock to save me outta torment.

gc70...I found one for your Series 80 Colt. Drop by and I'll fit'er up for ya.

[45auto]

I may have to try one of those EGW parts. Seems like a good idea in particular since I don't like heavy recoil springs. And I always pull the hammer back before I rack the slide back to check...usually anyway.

Can you keep it "stock", or do you have to file a bit of radius to it?

[1911Tuner]

.45Auto,

The bottom of the stop is dead square, so it'll need a radius or a bevel.
Either one will work. Just make sure it's a light bevel or radius. I've used as little as a 16th inch...which is tiny...with good results.

[Hawkmoon]

I NEED a longer trigger and flat mainspring housing.

Can't comment on the frame scallops behind the trigger, 'cause I have never fired on that didn't have them.

Those USFA offerings look nice, but $1,500 to $1,600 is more than a bit over $1,000. That's 50% more than the Colts cost. And what's this 1910 Commercial thing? There wasn't one. Sounds like they're planning to build a copy of one of Browning's prototypes that wasn't accepted by the Army. What was the "original Browning wide design" they're flappin' their keyboard about?

[Steelharp]

USFA 1911 grip frame is more like an 11A1. (is there a difference?)

Yeah, it's a mixture; the flat MSH is 1911, but the short trigger and the scalloping in the frame behind it are A1 features. The typeset in the rollmarks looks cool, but... I'd rather have the Colt repro (and I do); it cost less, and it's more like the real thing... heck, it IS the real thing... it's a Colt! :D

[Old Dog]

I love 1911 threads when the cognoscenti chime in (even if Bentley8 and 1911Tuner are giving away 1911 secrets) ... aside from that issue, though, I muchly prefer A1 features -- gotta have the arched MSH and short trigger.

The old 1911 is a beautiful pistol for one's collection, though.

[1911Tuner]

I love 1911 threads when the cognoscenti chime in (even if Bentley8 and 1911Tuner are giving away 1911 secrets) ... aside from that issue, though, I muchly prefer A1 features -- gotta have the arched MSH and short trigger.

The old 1911 is a beautiful pistol for one's collection, though.

I am sorry! Thought it was a discussion that included some of the features of both designs.

Pace et Concordia!:cool:

[Old Dog]

Hey 'Tuner, was using the word as the synomym for:
brain, cereb, cognoscenti, egghead, expert, guru, intellectual, learned man, maestro, maven, philosopher, prof, savant, scholar, teach, thinker ...

[1911Tuner]

Hey 'Tuner, was using the word as the synomym for:
brain, cereb, cognoscenti, egghead, expert, guru, intellectual, learned man, maestro, maven, philosopher, prof, savant, scholar, teach, thinker ...


Ya forgot "Know-it-All" :D

Hey! Check your E-mail ol' Dawg.