[Nightcrawler]

I've got an idea I wanted to run by the crowd. My Colt Series 80 Gov't Model is matte blued, with a stainless steel barrel. While I'm getting an ambi safety installed, I wonder. How would it look with a stainless hammer, safety, trigger, and slide lever? Too flashy, or nice?

Strongly considering some Tru-Ivory grips, too, but I think that'd be too much with the stainless parts installed also. Maybe. What do you guys think?

[Jim Watson]

I thought I would like that color scheme... until Para came out with it. Now I think it just looks flashy. Not for me, but beauty is in the eye of whoever is paying.

[Ala Dan]

Like my friend Jim Watson, I found that combo on Para's SSP and LTC
to be a bit too flashy; and not for me~!:eek: :D

[Nightcrawler]

Really? Hrm. I think then the only mods I'll do will be getting an ambi (non-extended) safety and an arched mainspring housing.

[Black Majik]

I agree with the others, polished controls just simply dont work on an all black/blued gun. The Para lines definitely show it, as well as some people's 1911s if you browse thru 1911forum.

IMO, the parts should match the same color as the frame.

If you have a two tone gun (blued slide, hardchromed frame) the controls should match the frame and be hardchrome.

Of course, YMMV.

Good luck :)

[XavierBreath]

I've always been of the opinion that a pistol, whether black or silver, or even nowadays, green, looks better if the small parts match the large parts. On a parkerized pistol I might consider a silver colored bushing, trigger and/or hammer, but that would be it. Even when the pistol is a two toned pistol, with a stainless upper and a black lower (or vice versa), I still think it looks best with the small parts matching the receiver.

When grip safeties, thumb safeties, slide stops and mainspring housings fail to match the receiver, the pistol starts to look like Stevie Wonder built it.

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder too.

[IndianaDean]

I don't like stainless 1911s. I think blued versions look much better.

[SouthpawShootr]

I didn't like it much when I did that to my series 80 Government model. I had a commander hammer installed, beavertail gripsafety, and a stainless thumb safety. I really don't like the stainless safety and I think I'm going to replace it next chance I get. To me, it ruins the look of the gun. The stainless hammer and trigger, for some reason, looks ok on a blued gun.

[Johnny Guest]

Your pistol, your choice, certainly. One nice thing, though - - At least it is a reversible choice to make. All the parts you mention are available over-the-counter in stainless and blue, and in most cases, in nickel plate. If you try it and don't like the appearence, you can go back.

Back during the 1960s and 70s, especially in Fort Worth and Dallas, it was the fashion for some guys to have those same parts *GOLD* plated. Sometimes, the grip safety as well. There were a lot of revolvers with gold hammer, trigger, and thumb latch. I've even seen the cylinder and ejector rod plated. I guess this rather cheap, gaudy, look was what turned me against the practice.

It's a funny thing, though. I really like the look of the old Colt revolver blue factory finish, with blue hammer and trigger having the sides polished to bare metal, and hammer sides on the autopistols. Smith and Wesson blued revolvers look GOOD with the case hardened colors on triggers and hammers.

This is probably an irrational preference on my part, but there it is. ;)

Best,
Johnny

[Slinger]

My opinion... don't spend your hard earned dollars pimpin' out your pistol, you would be much happier getting some quality smith work done on your 1911.
I had mine done over 20 years ago (a 1911 series 70). Had a slide guide, over sized barrel bushing, combat sights, lowered ejection port, adjustable trigger, and a heavy spring package. It shoots like a w*t dr**m. I have never been sorry to have spent that money. As far a changing the outside of the gun the only thing I did was install a nice set of Pachmar grips.

[Lone_Gunman]

Sounds yucky to me.