If you enjoyed reading about "Update: "Older" 9mm Combat Commander Rebuild" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
January 28, 2010, 12:03 PM
Sounds great. We need "before" pics. ;)
January 28, 2010, 12:26 PM
The first pic is the "before pic.
January 28, 2010, 01:12 PM
Is that the same frame as a .45 combat commander?
January 28, 2010, 02:06 PM
Yes, it's the same steel frame as a .45 "Combat Commander".
Unless it's designated "Combat", the Commander frames were lightweight alloy and purported not to hold up to high round counts as well as the Combat Commanders.
1911 experts are welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.
January 28, 2010, 07:33 PM
Unless it's designated "Combat", the Commander frames were lightweight alloy
Yes, until recently. Colt screwed that up, among other things, in its model naming history. Groan...
1950 - 1970: One model, called "Commander" - lightweight frame.
1970 - 200?: Two models - "Lightweight Commander" with alloy frame; "Combat Commander" with steel frame.
200? - now: Two models - "Lightweight Commander"/alloy frame; "Commander" with steel frame.
They still catalog the steel one as the "Combat Commander" but they don't put it on the slide. The slide just says "Commander." So, like what "Series '70" means, they've changed the definition in the last 10 years and it's not so simple.
Here's a recent production, all-steel, "Combat Commander 04691." Note the lack of "Combat" on the slide despite that being the cataloged model name:
January 28, 2010, 09:24 PM
Very nice doc540! Novaks revived a 71 Combat Commander for me 4 years ago. Wasn't as bad as yours, but they did me right also. Mine is in 9mm though.