[fgr39]

just saw a colt 1991 with the old ugly roll marks for a good price, what are the opinions from owners? It is used but looks like it is in good condition, nice fit, finish ok. I'm trying to decide if I should get it or pass it over, I am in MD and ordering a new one cant be done unless it was made before 1 Jan 03

please give me your opinions
thanks

[Steelharp]

Well, they're not making those rollmark ones anymore; if it's a decent price, you might want to grab it just so you have one. Never know down the road...

Mikey D...

[jc2]

I've had three of the old rollmark 1991A1s that pretty much ran the length of the production run (beginning, middle and end), and they were all superb weapons--accurate and reliable. I wouldn't hesitate to buy one--particularly if the price was right.

[Jim Watson]

My 1991A1 9mm with large rollmarks shoots just fine.
I think the markings are ugly but you are in a repressive jurisdiction and will just have to make the best of it.
Buy.

[dsk]

Nothing wrong with the "old rollmark" ones. They just aren't in demand as much now that the new rollmark, semi-polished models are out. But if it's below $450 I'd say go for it. A couple of local dealers still have one, and they want $600 or more for them. To say the least they're gonna be sitting on them for a long while.

[Sean Smith]

The new-rollmark guns are better guns than the old ones, and also happen to not be really ugly.

[jc2]

Sean -

I'll be glad to give you the "prettier" looks when it comes to the new rollmark guns--the older ones definitely had a more "functional" look, but how are they better?

My older ones fed everything I fed them including the old "flying ashtray" and some real nasty reloads. They worked straight from the box and were definitely accurate--in fact, the last one I had could only be described as exceptionally accurate. I don't even the think the XS Government Models were really better (and in fact, I held on to my 1991A1 when I let my XS go).

What makes the new rollmark better? It can't be anymore reliable. It can't be anymore accurate? It can't be materials--I had zero problems with my old models (again, sometimes with some real nasty ammuniton).

[Blueduck]

I've had two of them, one from the first few years of production one from one of the last few. Can't say I was too dissapointed with either.

Both were 100% reliable with anything I fed them, which was pleasant suprise to somebody who had read so much about how "finicky" 1911's were. Both were also fairly accurate, not great but pretty good.

One problem I did have with each was that they shot about 6" high at 15 yards. I've heard (but can't confirm) this was due to the fact they were sighted from the factory at 50 yards instead of 25 or 15 for some reason. Being spoiled by Glocks and blued guns I was very dissapointed with how easy the finish showed wear marks.

[Sean Smith]

Jc2,

I can only speak from my limited experience with the old 1991A1 vs the new one (which I own & shoot the hell out of).

Differences? The old ones I've seen had more slop in the slide-to-frame fit, heavier trigger pulls (and cheap plastic triggers instead of aluminum) and, yes, worse accuracy. Both guns are generally reliable from what I've seen, though the new ones have a re-designed barrel throat for better feed reliability and more case support.

And the old 1991A1 is ugly. :D

If you can get a killer deal on an old one (say $450 or less), I'd go for it and mill the "1991A1" off it.

[10-Ring]

I had one. IT was a fine performer, just was an ugly looker :D Maybe it's just being stuck in superficial SoCal where looks are everything has tainted my opinion. It would depend on your priorities...if you're looking for an good shooter, buy it. If looks are important too you, consider passing...But, if the price is good enough, it might be worth buying to try & see if it grows on you.

[dsk]

There's a common misconception that all the pistols Colt turned out during the late 80's to late 90's were junk. Colt still managed to produce a lot of excellent pistols, even if they took a real nose-dive in the aesthetics department. The old M1991A1 and the so-called "Enhanced" pistols may have looked ugly to many, but the majority of them worked perfectly. However, there were a lot more lemons coming out of the factory during that time period, and I saw a lot of them each time I went into a gun shop and took a close look at the new batch of Colts just in.

Generally speaking, if you find an old M1991A1 and it hasn't been dicked with you can usually assume it's just fine. The lemons probably all received a couple thousand in modifications just to turn them into something useful! :scrutiny:

[45auto]

Mine is 4 years old and is excellent in reliabilty, bbl fit, and accuracy with a match bushing. It truly is a trouble free handgun.
Finish is fair and it's ugly, but you don't have to worry about marring the finish, etc. There are advantage to having a "shooting" gun that's ugly.
The plunger tube may be loose so use grips that cover the tube, or replace it.
Colt still insists on installing short ejectors that have a tendancy to kick empties up and towards you face on occasion. Not a reliabilty issue, but an irritation to me at least. I would replace it with a longer ejector to kick empties out more to the left with more authority.
I would buy it at a good price.
Good luck

[fgr39]

just wanted to thank everyone for the info. I got it for 435 after tax and state police fee. cant pick it up till next saturday. I'm not worried with looks, I have a Kimber for that, just wanted a good shooter that i don't have to worry about getting scared up.

thanks

[ruger357]

Good price. I picked up a stainless old rollmark like new in box for $500. Have not had any problems at all.

[dsk]

You got an excellent deal. Now go shoot it.

[.45FMJoe]

I had one of the older rollmarks and sold it only a month later simply because I found a great deal on a new rollmark. The fit/finish of the older one was fantastic and it functioned flawlessly. Not one failure of any kind. I just happen to like the new rollmarks :)

[jimmy]

To me, rollmarks add a lot to the appearance of a gun. That said, I have a couple of 1991A1's with the big, ugly rollmarks, and for some reason I don't mind these markings. Maybe it's because they're consistent with the utility finish.

BTW, these guns are expensive at the local shop: $600-650 for NIB parkerized 1991A1's. That's too much, IMHO. But the customers pay anyway, I guess because the guns are Colts and aren't made like that any more. If a gun is worth whatever people are willing to pay, then presumably $600 qualifies. But it's still too much money for me. :cool:

[madhatta]

I have a commander 1991A1, and it is one of my favorite guns. I know a lot of people are kinda down on them and Colt's in general... but after the experience I have had with mind, I am honestly very surprised people have such harsh opinions of them.
All I know is I haven't done a thing too it, and everytime I shoot it along with my friend who has a thousand dollar Kimber, it continues to look like money well spent, especially considering all the jams he has with his and the fact that he cannot tell any difference in accuracy between mine and his.