[Skunkabilly]

Caught this over at 1911forum. Seems like an even milspeccer than the Milspec Milspec! (notably different grips, sights and ejection port)

It'll be available for subjects of California by way of submission to the State of California gun racket.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=338167

[NIB]

:what:

Yipeeeeee!

I wanted one of the WWII repros that Colt had but since they declined to pay Kalifornias extortion fees I never got a chance.
I think the offering from SA will do just fine. I'm in for 2!

:D

[arinvolvo]

Any clues on pricing?

[Daniel T]

Any clues on pricing?

The pic shows a MSRP of $467.

[Skunkabilly]

Someone on 1911forums ordered one and said it ran him/her ~$390.

The Colts aren't going to be tested in CA and are twice the price. I don't know about the fit and finish on either.

[10-Ring]

Skunk, for roughly $400 you've got a good base to start your project gun!

[longeyes]

Can it handle hollow-points?

[Skunkabilly]

Oh...it'll also be avaiable with a light rail.
































Just kidding! :evil: :neener:

[Graystar]

Can it handle hollow-points? If it's mil-spec then it will have the same trouble with hollow points as other 1911s that don't have the feed ramp integrated with the barrel.

However, it may do fine with an expanding full metal jacket round.

[Ledbetter]

Wow. Authentic right down to the "loaded chamber indicator." Odds on it having a locking mainspring housing anyone?

[9x19]

Yeah, notching the barrel hood takes so much away from the whole gun... :rolleyes: The pic says "close" and it has the ILS system, but a new MSH is pretty cheap.

Some people will bitch, even if you hang them with a brand new rope. :scrutiny:

[Zer000]

~$390? Available in CA? Count me in!

[Blueduck]

THE NEW MIL-SPEC!- NOW AVAILABLE WITH NON-LOWERED EJECTION PORT TO BEAT UP YOUR BRASS, AND NOW COMPLETE WITH REALLY CRAPPY SIGHTS!!!


I will never understand you 1911 guys, but oh well have fun :neener:

[Tecolote]

I don't need no light rail!:neener:

The MilSpeccer MilSpec is going to outsell the much more MilSpeeecer traditionaler but expensiveer Colt.

[Ledbetter]

You live near me. Come by and I'll share some of my sense of humor with you, or see you up at Winchester Canyon tomorrow for some shootin'? I'll bring my no-longer Mil-Spec Mil-Spec.

Gotta start usin' those smilies.:scrutiny:

[Blueduck]

The MilSpeccer MilSpec is going to outsell the much more MilSpeeecer traditionaler but expensiveer Colt.

Man, now thats poetry :cool:

[Skunkabilly]

Tecolote:
The MilSpeccer MilSpec is going to outsell the much more MilSpeeecer traditionaler but expensiveer Colt.

But the Milspeccer Milspec is legaller than the milspeccer Horsey in a westerner state. :(

BLueduck:
THE NEW MIL-SPEC!- NOW AVAILABLE WITH NON-LOWERED EJECTION PORT TO BEAT UP YOUR BRASS, AND NOW COMPLETE WITH REALLY CRAPPY SIGHTS!!!
ROR...how true...sad but how true....we're congressive like that. I guess at least carbon fiber grips would be a stop gap? :neener:

[George Hill]

Watch the whole Band Of Brothers series on DVD and you'll want it.
I like it. I like it anytime a company produces an authentic replicant. It's history. I don't know about you guys but I am well aware of the "Improvements are made for a reason" argument... but I often prefer the original for it's historic value. I love history and there are few ways to be able to pick it up in your hands like you can with a firearm.

[Blueduck]

authentic replicant

Kinda ranks up there with "Millitary Intellegence" and "Friendly Fire" as a contradiction in terms in my book ;) But hey seems they are making a lot of folks happy by making them so good for'em.

[riverdog]

Authentic right down to the "loaded chamber indicator." Odds on it having a locking mainspring housing anyone? I've got an authentic WWII barrel and MSH. I wonder if they'll fit? ;)

[George Hill]

Idle thought...
I wonder if Springfield would come out with an M1 Carbine...

[Bren]

Well, I got two of these for $300 and less and niether dings brass or chokes on any type of ammo out of the box. :rolleyes:

[Thumper]

authentic replicant

Deckard?

[allan]

If SA is producing these replica guns (minus the MSH & LCI), you can bet it will be far closer to the original GI gun than the pistol that Colt issued as a GI gun. (The Colt GI Version 02) The Colt costs twice as much as as Springfields version and has a plastic MSH. PLASTIC

[riverdog]

Is this model replacing the current "Mil-Spec" or will it be in addition to the current model? Any thoughts on rollmarks ("PROPERTY OF U.S. ARMY", etc) on the frame and slide. Are they going for authenticity or just overall appearance?

[garrettwc]

This is good news..... for Colt :)

Colt must be starting to take back some of their market share, if Springfield felt the need to come out with their own WWII repro.

No flames. I like Springfields too. I just like Colts a little better. ;)

[riverdog]

I too prefer Colt, but CA has this thing about their certified list. Colt has decided to not take their repros thru the process, so the non-Series 80 pistols can't be had in CA. I may or may not get the Springfield, haven't really decided yet.

[Sean Smith]

If it's mil-spec then it will have the same trouble with hollow points as other 1911s that don't have the feed ramp integrated with the barrel.

"Feed ramp integrated with the barrel" (ramped barrel) isn't what makes newer 1911s reliable with hollowpoints. Because 90% of them don't have a ramped barrel, either. Almost all modern .45 ACP 1911-style pistols have exactly the same barrel with ramp-on-frame arrangement as the original GI guns. The only "modern" change is how the opening of the barrel is shaped... they are (almost) all unramped barrels. Modern 5" .45 Kimber, Colt, and SA guns are all unramped... as they should be.

More on topic, the Colt is a "true" reproduction, meaning it seeks to replicate the orignal fairly exactly down to small detals. The SA just has a superficial resemblance to a GI gun. So basically you are paying a premium for bad sights, ugly finish, and a lanyard loop you will never use.

[ether]

If SA is producing these replica guns (minus the MSH & LCI), you can bet it will be far closer to the original GI gun than the pistol that Colt issued as a GI gun. (The Colt GI Version 02) The Colt costs twice as much as as Springfields version and has a plastic MSH. PLASTIC


Colt's repro has a steel MSH. It doesn't have any plastic except for the grips. It's actually a very good rendering. The hammer is a little too 1927 though....I almost wish they'd used one more like Springfield's.

[garrettwc]

"Feed ramp integrated with the barrel" (ramped barrel) isn't what makes newer 1911s reliable with hollowpoints. Because 90% of them don't have a ramped barrel, either. Almost all modern .45 ACP 1911-style pistols have exactly the same barrel with ramp-on-frame arrangement as the original GI guns. The only "modern" change is how the opening of the barrel is shaped... they are (almost) all unramped barrels. Modern 5" .45 Kimber, Colt, and SA guns are all unramped... as they should be.

A-freakin'-men and hallelujah!!

The SA just has a superficial resemblance to a GI gun. So basically you are paying a premium for bad sights, ugly finish, and a lanyard loop you will never use.

Or you could buy a 1927 Sistema, a vintage leather flap holster, and a case of hardball. Which IMHO might be the better route to go.

However, for those of you stuck with those stupid California certifications, I guess it is a viable option. I think I would rather move first. :p

[Andrew Wyatt]

If it's mil-spec then it will have the same trouble with hollow points as other 1911s that don't have the feed ramp integrated with the barrel.

You mean the trouble mine has? you know. the trouble that makes it feed empty cases and full wadcutters perfectly.

[ruger357]

Thats on my list.:D

[Zer000]

ZerOOO
You live near me. Come by and I'll share some of my sense of humor with you, or see you up at Winchester Canyon tomorrow for some shootin'? I'll bring my no-longer Mil-Spec Mil-Spec.

Gotta start usin' those smilies.

Eh, couldn't make it up this weekend, but maybe I'll see ya next weekend!

[dsk]

Face it guys, there's a definite market for old-style 1911s, tiny sights and all. The factory custom market is about saturated, what with all the Kimbers, Wilsons, Baers, Wessons, Valtros, Browns, yadayadayada out there. Some folks aren't interested in Mortal Combat with their weapons, or if they are they already have one dedicated to that role. The ability to buy a new 1911 that looks like what Willie and Joe carried has a certain appeal. If not, then why all the Single Action Army clones?

BTW Band of Brothers was a real disappointment to me. Not only were there few 1911s in it, but heck you hardly ever saw anybody shoot their Garand either! Aside from the action seen in the second and third episodes, most of the rest of the series was just a bunch of GI's visiting each other in their foxholes.

[Black_Talon]

BTW Band of Brothers was a real disappointment to me. Not only were there few 1911s in it, but heck you hardly ever saw anybody shoot their Garand either!

Kinda wierd how one's perception works. I just watched it and was kind of impressed by how much Garand shooting that they showed. It's not as exciting as a Thompson or 30cal Browning etc so I was suprised about the amount of attention they gave to it.

[Pain]

"Authentic Replicant"


Is that kinda like "Jumbo Shimp"?????

[Tamara]

If it's mil-spec then it will have the same trouble with hollow points as other 1911s that don't have the feed ramp integrated with the barrel.

Which ones are those? :confused:

[Sean Smith]

Presumably that Baer and SA Pro you've been shooting that don't have ramped barrels... :D

[Tamara]

Don't forget the Colt and Kimber... ;)

(Ya know, since I started buying 200gr SWC ammo from GA Arms, I don't think I've shot any round-nose ball through my .45 1911's. I do shoot a fair amount of Fiocchi .38 Super FMJ, though... )

[Sean Smith]

Going off on a tangent inspired by dsk's comments...

You know, fundamentally there isn't a need for alot of the standard custom stuff done to the outside of 1911s. Now don't get me wrong, your generic swoopy custom job can be really neat (I've owned several guns with those sort of features). But some stuff people don't consider...

You can de-horn a standard GI grip safety and slightly bob & re-contour the spur hammer to get a very comfy, no-bite grip. Very few beavertails give you a radically higher grip, and a higher grip isn't by default better for everyone once you take everything into account. The traditional setup is only "bad" insofar as the corners of the grip safety that contact your hand aren't radiused & the hammer spur is just fractionally too long.

The thing about bigger thumb safeties is... they mainly help you switch the safety back ON more easily. The traditional thumb safety is not noticeably worse for taking the safety OFF, unless you are using a big "gas pedal" that isn't real practical... and it is dropping the safety with ease, not re-engaging it, that is important on a practical weapon.

As for sights... many trendy sights ARE better. Novaks, Heinies and Bo-Mars do give you great sight pictures. But there are also good practical sights that don't require radical slide cutting or anything like that. Pistolsmith Ted Yost, for instance, makes a rear sight that "does it all": traditional-looking, snag-free and with an excellent sight picture. Or you can put some Wilson Nite-Eyes on without having to break out the milling machine.

My point being... these old-school configuration 1911s are not nearly as far from being well suited as practical weapons as people seem to sometimes think. Which, of course, makes perfect sense when you realize that the 1911 was adopted as a weapon, not an heirloom.

[Tamara]

Flat MSH. Long trigger. Decent sights (no-milling-required Novaks on my most recent 1911).

I prefer a beavertail and a longer, ambi thumb safety, but I'm not lost without them.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=267729

That being said, I could carry a MilSpec with ball ammo and not be too upset about it. :cool:

[Sean Smith]

I never said goodies aren't nice. :D

[dsk]

Sean's comments were inspired by mine, so now these in turn are re-inspired by his:

The most popular mods for the 1911 were mostly created for the gamers. A beavertail makes it faster for one to get a positive grip on the pistol when drawing fast from the holster, and by holding the gun higher your shot-to-shot recovery times are a fraction or so of a second quicker. The extended safety makes it easier to swipe the safety off when you're drawing and firing at full speed, and of course a checkered front strap is probably a good idea if your hands are all sweaty from baking in the sun, waiting for your turn at the steel plates. Better sights are of course never a bad thing.

However, it must be remembered that in a true defensive scenario you won't be drawing your gun like Rob Leatham. You have to get the concealing garment out of the way, and then the pistol will usually be held close to the body for concealment so a fast draw is out of the question. Trying to out-draw somebody who's already pointing a gun or waving a knife at you isn't usually a good idea anyway. Beavertails "print" through concealing garments more, extended safeties are prone to being bumped to the "off" position or to hanging up on clothing duing the draw, and checkered surfaces tear up coat linings. While again better sights are nice, the ones that come stock on most new 1911s aren't really that bad. Even the ones on bone-stock Colt 1991's are fine once you've deepened the rear sight notch, which is too shallow for my tastes.

The bottom line is that standard "classic" or "mil-spec" 1911s actually have some advantages over so-called "custom" 1911s in many respects. If you prefer beavertails fine, but for the record I don't, and I'm glad I can still find new 1911s out there without them.

As for the upcoming Springfield WW2 Spec model, it's aimed at a niche market anyway, so who cares how good a defensive or gaming gun it is. If you buy it only to add bigger sights and lower the ejection port you bought the wrong model to begin with.

[Tamara]

Just as a riposte... ;)

Beavertails "print" through concealing garments more,

If anything, a good holster and belt should push them towards your body, not away from it. "Beavertails poke you in the ribs more..." might be more correct.

extended safeties are prone to being bumped to the "off" position or to hanging up on clothing duing the draw,

Not with a good holster; my DeSantis covers the tips of both thumb safeties on my carry gun to prevent this. Also, as long as the safety isn't some outrageously wide "gas pedal", why should it hang up on clothes? (At least any more than a factory "sure-snag" sight or spur hammer... ;) )

and checkered surfaces tear up coat linings.

I don't wear mine under fragile lined garments. :)

While again better sights are nice, the ones that come stock on most new 1911s isn't really that bad.

Well, at least Colt's has gotten away from their famous "two-dot" sights. ;) (My Series 80 spit out the right rear dot. Is that more common than the left rear dot? :D ) As far as Mil-Spec sights go, I guess if by "not really that bad" you mean "not completely invisible as long as you're in well-lighted conditions", that's true.

All in good fun. ;)

[45auto]

I'll agree you can get by with standard sights, if you wish. As I read, true self defense encounters are mostly very close.
And, to a great degree, they are no worse than what you find on many newer guns.
But, the cost of a "better" sight is very small if done at the time of manufacturer, i.e Kimber for example. Why not take advantage of it?

Many years ago, before I shot with my thumb on the safety, I thought the extended safety was not needed and, in fact, a hinderance.
So, thumb on safety, I think you need an extended.
Otherwise I don't think they are needed.

However, I'm not aware of any good modern gun that is designed with as many sharp edged and narrow configurations in the rear where the you grip the gun and where recoil impacts. It probably was just "okay", not good, in the days when people didn't shoot that many rounds, but in todays world, it's not acceptable. It is a design that JMB, himself, would have changed, as his customers changed their shooting habits. He was a very smart business man.

An extended beavertail removes all those edges and makes it very comfortable to shoot, just like many of the "newer" guns.
It can guide you hand on a "bad" draw or speed it up if you wish.
Hasn't anyone ever drawn and ended up with the spur in the web of your hand?
You can shoot high or low grip with one.
I see no downside to them, aside from looks.

Just opinions of course.

[Zip06]

It will be interesting to see how this one stacks up against the Norinco .45; the Norinco is all steel. Has anyone seen the new Springfield? Is it stuffed full of MIM parts or is it steel?

[Silent Bob]

I want one of these bad! I called Springfield Inc today and they are supposedly shipping out this week!

[dsk]

It will be interesting to see how this one stacks up against the Norinco .45; the Norinco is all steel. Has anyone seen the new Springfield? Is it stuffed full of MIM parts or is it steel?

MIM is steel, just formed a different way than the forged, machined parts you probably actually had in mind. While I'm no fan of MIM, I will admit that so far at least Springfield hasn't been having problems with it in their guns (yes, they're using MIM a lot now, like most everybody else).

As for why the Norincos could be made using all-forged parts yet sell for such a low price tag, well let's just say that some Chinese factory workers don't exactly get paid overtime and a full-hour lunch break.

And yes Tamara, I will concede that beavertail-equipped 1911's do serve a useful purpose as field-expedient bottle openers. ;)

[Tamara]

The only thing keeping me from getting really spun up over this new Springfield is the fact that I'm busily screwing up the courage to plunk down the bucks for a GI gun.

If a 1911 doesn't have a military pedigree, I just wouldn't be able to leave it "Mil-Spec", anyway. That'd be like buying a Harley and not putting one single custom part on it or moving into a new house and not hanging any pictures on the walls. :uhoh:

[dsk]

Tamara,

If you're trying to go for a true USGI 1911, feel free to e-mail me with any questions you may have regarding a prospective purchase. The biggest problem with true GI 1911's right now is that a lot of folks are "improving" them to up their selling price.

[dsk]

A member on the 1911 forum just spotted one of these Springfield WW2-spec models today. It has the blocky front strap and dust cover. What a disappointment.

[Tamara]

:scrutiny:

It'd be the only recent Springfield I've seen that does; they just using up old frames, or what?

Hey, dsk, didja see this (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29018)? :)

[dsk]

I was surprised to hear that as well, as I'd assumed Springfield finally realized that extra thick is great for milkshakes and burgers, but not handguns.

[dsk]

As I was told, it has the blocky front strap. :cuss:

[Skunkabilly]

BOOOOOO!!! BOOOOOOOOO!!!! :( :banghead: :cuss: :banghead: :barf:

[guy sajer]

Nice pic Dana ;)

here's the other with packaging

Mitch

[Tamara]

That's really confusing. :confused: All the Springers on my dealer's shelves are, by definition, older than that gun, yet have the new (original) frame contours. Is Springfield going away from the uglyframes or aren't they? :uhoh:

[guy sajer]

Hard to say . These are in a separate serial number range . WW- prefix . I have 5 more coming Thurs . I'll check them and compare to this one .

I have to call them about another issue . I'll try and remember to ask about the frames .

Mitch
www.oldeenglishoutfitters.com

[Sean Smith]

Sounds like they found a way to get rid of their leftover old-style frames.

On another forum, some dude was complaining that Colts don't have beefy frontstraps like a good ol' SA... :barf:

[dsk]

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. That pic came courtesy of guy sajer. :o

Yes Mitch, if you could inquire as to what the hell they were thinking regarding that frame I'd appreciate it. :scrutiny:

[Tamara]

Sounds like they found a way to get rid of their leftover old-style frames.

Well, yeah, that was my first thought, too. But if so, why not do it with a run of Limited Edition Superbeefyframeubertacticalspecials, instead of with a faux-"GI Spec" that's gonna cause everybody to point and laugh? :scrutiny:

[Sean Smith]

I didn't say it made sense, just that it was an explanation. :D

[Tecolote]

When did Springfield produce the blocky frames and slides? My buddy's 1989 Springfield has a standard frame and slide.

This must be Springfield's Un-MilSpec MilSpeecer MilSpec.

[dsk]

Springfield began making the frames blocky sometime around 1992 or so. It was allegedly to give gunsmiths more raw material to work with when checkering the front strap or adding optic mounts to the dust cover. In reality it just saved them on machining costs.

With that in mind, it now makes sense why they did that with this gun. After all, the price point is actually below their normal Mil-Spec. In other words, it was a marketing decision to make a 1911 that was as cheap as possible, and make it look like the currently fashionable WW2 models in order to gain more sales. Very shrewd. I honestly believe most buyers will be completely clueless about the differences in front strap profile unless they're actually shown.

[dude]

good thing I did not see this thread sooner!...............as I am taking the 1911 plunge (finally) by building my own so-called 'milspec' using a new PI frame and Essex slide along with a parts kit. Oh well, it's better this way as I will learn alot building it myself.

My gunsmith is helping me and provided the parts kit. Being a die hard P7 man this whole 1911 concept is intresting to say the least. It was the only other auto pistol I was intrested in owning but the trouble is I now feel the 'need' for an HK USC! Oh well

[varoadking]

Saw and handled one last week. If it shoots as good as it looks - no one is going to laugh...

[Tamara]

no one is going to laugh...

There's a bunch of folks doing just that already in this thread, and it's not like we're a bunch of 1911 haters, either.

Springfield's old-style blocky frontstrap and dust shield look as out of place on a "WWII-replica GI-spec" 1911 as a caplock ignition system would on a replica Brown Bess.

[varoadking]

Well, I guess "purists" have to have something to grouse about...wonder what it'll be tomorrow?

[Tamara]

"Something to grouse about"?

How about "don't call your gun a WWII replica when it's not"? How's that? ;)

Coming tomorrow: The new retro genuine Harley Road King, with a watercooled inline four engine. :scrutiny:

Purist? None of the four 1911's I own is "mil-spec". They all have beavertails, skeletonized hammers and triggers, modern sights, et cetera, but then again, none of them claims to be a "Genuine WWII GI copy". What's next? ParaOrd releasing a parkerized LDA that they call a "WWII mil-spec"? ;)

[dsk]

For me it's not an issue of not being "an exact copy". I didn't expect it to. But that blocky frame is the exact opposite of what most people want and looks/feels cheap as hell. The whole reason why Springfield did that was to save costs, as machining the frame to the more rounded contour requires extra passes and takes more time (and reduces tool life by that much).

If some of you guys like it, great. It's good to see there's finally something on the market that you really like. As for me, I'm through buying bargain-basement 1911's.

[dude]

............some (most) of you 1911 folks are a hoot!!! I'm gonna call my 1911 project a 'mil-spec' anyways

[varoadking]

I guess this was the rub for you - "Genuine." I don't recall seeing that word used in the SA marketing materials.

http://www.1911forum.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=426525

Look - it's a sub-$400 piece with some pretty damn good workmanship and will have a large appeal. Colt has tried to maket a similar pistol at a price point double this. I wouldn't think SA nor the buying public is intent upon passing it off as an "authentic" piece.

BTW - personally, I look forward to the day H-D puts a watercooled engine in their touring models. While I'd rather it be a V-twin, I really don't care what they call them - "it" will still be "Genuine."

Sorry - but ya got me with this laughing bit. It smacks of superiority.

[Tecolote]

The old MilSpec looks a lot better than the new Un-MilSpec MilSpeecer MilSpec. I can live with the out of spec slide serrations but the thicker frame and slide have no place on a MilSpec. I understand it cuts down cost, so I'm thinking, if Springfield is cutting corners on the frame and slide where else is it going cheap?

[Tamara]

Just noticed that the gun in the line drawing on the box cover doesn't have the blocky frame... Things that make you go "hmmmm". :D

[dsk]

That's right, nor did the initial publicity photo. I guess it's that "specifications subject to change without notice" B.S. again.

However, I'm through commenting on it. Lots of folks don't care anyway, as the price is right. At least we save another one from buying a Glock (another cheap, blocky handgun) and introduce them to the mighty 1911 each time. {Ducking for cover} :D

[dude]

exactly..........who cares if some folks still buy them even they are not to some sort of 'spec' and enjoy the hell out of shooting them??

[XavierBreath]

Hey guys, I just bought one, and kinda like it. Yeah, the front strap is blocky, and Springfield was probably trying to clear out some old frames.

The fact of the matter is, it has the ILS crap in it, (that can be swapped out) and the slotted barrel. It has the teardrop thumb safety as well. That can be swapped out. It wouldn't fool a purist, since it doesn't have the markings of a GI 1911. I'm not trying to decieve anyone with it though. It is fun to shoot with those itty bitty military sights again. It does feed reliably out of the box, and is reasonably accurate. Since this is a fun gun, not a carry weapon, I won't put HPs in it, so whether they feed or not doesn't concern me. What is fun is the experience of shooting with those sights.

The main thing is that the pistol was $410 out the door. Now you may sneer when you see my blocky frame, and say it's a piece of crap. Chances are I will shoot it more than you will shoot your Switch & Signal, and have a lot more fun doing it. I am actually looking forward to this gun getting finish wear. Can you say that with a real GI 1911?

For me, the choice was easy...... over $1000 for a Colt repro out the door, (and worry about every little scratch), buying a real GI pistol and shooting the bejesus out of it, or $410 for a Springer WWII. I think I can stand the blocky frame. It's about the fun of shooting, not one-up-manship over who has the most "authentic" reproduction. If you want a GI pistol, get the REAL thing, not a repro, Colt or not! (I'm shopping for a real GI 1911 too!)

Peace and have fun making ragged holes of bullseyes.

[Zip06]

XavierBreath - Good for you. Sometimes we forget that not only is it nice to shoot them, rather than collect them but just being able to afford one that is not a POS and be able to shoot the bejeezes out of it is a place we all have been. Keep us posted.

[WVleo]

Hi, I ahve been looking for 1 of these . At 1 of the shops I goto they wanted $489 + tax ! Anyone here know were they are on-line ? Thanks WVleo

[tex_n_cal]

I have a SA Mil-Spec bought new last year, in .38 Super. Yes, obviously not an "authentic" mil-spec caliber, but it was reasonably priced, and a hoot to shoot:D

Mine has the thinner front strap, ramped barrel, & ILS. The grips shown are from King's...probably made by S&A. It shoots verrryyy nicely with mild .38 ACP's, to hot +p Corbons. I also have an extra 9x23 barrel for it.

eventually it will get Bomars, checkering, and a 9mm barrel. I still prefer Colts, but this one is also a neat pistol. Even with the Corbons it's duck soup to rapid fire a full mag and get 100% COM hits.:D

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=164411

[natedog]

Even milspeceerer! http://www.springfield-armory.com/prod-pstl-1911-GI.shtml

[dsk]

Good grief natedog, where've you been for the past year? :neener:

I guess this is a good excuse for a follow-up with my WW2 Mil-Spec. Over 1000 rounds, and no problems. I bought it to beat up, but amazingly the finish is holding up very well even after carrying it daily. That's compared to my polished blue Colts that scratch if I breathe on them too hard. :fire:

[gyp_c2]

...'ya know that's the first picture of a SA MS that has had the older frame...Even the MS with the diagonal serrations weren't blocky like that...

http://www.springfield-armory.com/images/pistols/PW9609LLarge.jpg
...and here's another version...sheesh...

http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/smokin.gif

[Gewehr98]

And my dad has been asking me to find him a nice 1911 that's close to a USGI model. (He also wants my 1918 DWM Luger, but he can just wait for that) My own Norincos have been modded to IPSC and carry guns, so they're out of the picture.

DSK, has this Springfield WWII model kept the blocky frame, and has the price still stayed close to the $400 mark? :confused:

[Detritus]

i can answer part of that...

Yes as of about 3-4 weeks ago the prices were in the $400-450 range (prices at the two reasonable shops here in the houston area that have them are $410 and $435) when i put mine on layaway (rasafrackin 20hr weeks!!:cuss: :rolleyes: ).

sorry that i can't help with the Blocky frame issue, since i don't have it in front of me and frankly i wouldn't care if it DID have the old style frame, and therefore did not look too close for that.

will say that i THINK (yes dangerous thing to do and memory fails) that the example that i picked has the newer less blocky frame. but please don't hold me to that.

[Prodigalshooter]

I pick up mine this coming Friday, I'm kinda excited, cause this is going to be my first "old school" unaltered 1911. My other 1911s are "loaded" models.

[dsk]

...'ya know that's the first picture of a SA MS that has had the older frame...Even the MS with the diagonal serrations weren't blocky like that...

Yes they were, for a time. During much of the 1990's they were blocky. They finally changed back to the more rounded Colt-like contour around 2001 I believe.

The first WW2 Mil-Specs had the blocky frame, but they soon reverted to the rounded frame as well. I suspect Springfield had a surplus of old blocky frames and decided to use them up in the first batch of WW2 models. You can read a review of them on my website:

http://usgi1911.tripod.com/ww2milspec/