To return to the barrel bushing for short comment; When shopping for another 1911 to complement the one I have, I looked at many versions that have eliminated the bushing altogether, and I was 'on the fence' whether I wanted one, as it is a traditional part of the pistol, even though the ones today are a redesign. However after firing one, and field stripping it, I've come to like the bushingless version, with its full length recoil spring rod, as well as the bushing versions. I find it quicker to field strip, and its function is just as good.
I don't like full length guide rods. I have had my overly long reloads jam the slide of several of my 1911's. This is my fault of course but it revealed a failure mode that I did not like. When a round is thousandth's of an inch too long, and jams in the throat, I do not have the hand strength to rack the slide and clear the jam. Nor, is the slide far enough forward to fire the round. This jam can be easily cleared in 1911's without guide rods. You place the muzzle over the edge of a table, recoil spring plug resting on the table, and push on the grip. The jammed round will clear. Now, if you have a guide rod, you are going to have a lot more fun clearing this type of jam.
So, the heck with guide rods. I never saw any real reason for the things except more profit for aftermarket parts vendors. No Bullseye shooter I know uses one, if they improved accuracy or function one iota, everyone would have one. Hench, they are
advertising induced behavior.
I like much about the original GI configuration except for the sights!. Nineteen century sights are hard to use. But, they don't snag, and if you use your 1911 within spitting distance, you don't really need them anyway!
Only my Clackamus Kimber and my Les Baer wadcutter functioned 100% without tweaking. My Colt Combat Elite had too many problems to list, when it was new. Wilson Combat made the thing perfect though, those guys are great.
All other 1911's required some work or tweaking to get them to run perfectly. My most recent 1911 purchase was the pictured RIA. Magazines unlatched, RIA sent me a new part, and magazines stayed in the pistol.
I sent the pistol back complaining about excessive recoil, elevation being way off, and heavy copper fouling in the tube. Lead bullets cannot be used as they lead foul the barrel at an unbelievable rate. RIA fixed the sights, more or less. Did something so the pistol does not recoil as hard, it does not eat up a shock buff within 100 rounds. The fouling is the same, can only use jacketed bullets as lead fouling is excessive and hard to clear. The pistol shoots closer to aim than before, RIA sent me this target, so it shoots better than I can hold.
One of these days I will spend the hour or so typing in the period documents making the case that this pistol was not designed to be carried cocked and locked. This issue came up before 1913 and was discussed at the very top of the Ordnance Bureau. As was said at the time, the
safety is not a safety. It is not a safety in terms of a positive mechanical safety, like that on the 03 rifle, or M98 Mauser. On those weapons, the firing pin is positively cammed back and even if the firing pin is hit with a hammer, the safety will hold. The 1911 safety is a sear blocking safety, subject to shearing if the hammer is hit, and should not, and was not, trusted at the time.
Cocked and locked is the foundational tenant of Cult Cocked and Locked, but from the get go, this pistol was to be carried hammer down with a round in the chamber, in the flap holster. The men who procured this pistol (and I mean General Crozier) thought carrying cocked and locked too damn dangerous for their men, and from the paper trail, there were examples of the safety bumping off, in the flap holster, when carried cocked and locked. The safety was a temporary measure until the trooper could use two hands and get the hammer down. The original GI configuration had wide hammer spurs and a small tang safety so the pistol would be easy to thumb cock. I don't mind the A1 version as the tang safety still allows thumb cocking. De cocking still takes two hands, and I think this is the most fool proof way to lower the hammer
These show where the various fingers are placed,
Combine the placement of fingers
hand all over the rear, obscuring the view, but everything is in place.
Lowering the hammer with the thumb only will result in an accidental discharge. At some time in the future the hammer will slip and the gun will go bang. Once the hammer is down, the pistol can be dropped on the hammer, and the rebounding firing pin will not contact the primer. The pistol is not to be carried on the half cock, or the full cock, as a blow to the hammer will shear the sear surfaces and cause an accidental discharge.
. 
