And they were made and put together by machinist not cnc machines.
Them's the facts.
And they were made and put together by machinist not cnc machines.
How so? Where did you see a "class argument"?
That is an interesting argument. Let me me ask this, change the word 1911 for Mercedes or BMW or Rolex and then answer your own questionmcdonl said:Well, there are some of us who CAN'T pay big bucks for a gun. Do we not deserve to own one?
As has been said, there is nothing wrong with that. We only point out that good enough, isn't the same as good and that bad is relative to your expectations.So what is wrong with my $369 1911 if it can do what I need it to do?
We agree here, these have been a constant irritation in my side...and it pains me, because when Kimber first came on the market, they really changed the 1911 landscape (even more than Springfield Armory)rellascout said:Again on the other side of the coin higher $$$ does not always mean value. IMHO Kimber is a high priced 1911 built in many cases to fail. I think Sigs 1911 are very much the same...
...If looks matter more than substance then you once again are getting the "value" you asked for. To me this range is the one that erks me the most. High rate of diminishing returns at this level but I am still not willing to say these are bad 1911s. For many people they are good if not great 1911s. They shoot, they look good and do the job.
Elmer said:It's the amount of people that think their gun will do what they need it to, based on nothing but hope, that's the issue.
...and that is the criteria I use when recommending a 1911. Would you bet your life on it. If it is just a toy to plink with...have at it. Competition is the gray area, so then it comes down to how serious do you want to competeThankfully most will never need their guns to do that......because most of them won't. If they really wanted a bulletproof $600 pistol, they'd be better off with a Glock or SIG.
I think you'll find that kind of argument rare among serious 1911 folks. When you really learn about the 1911, there really isn't much to argue about except preferred styles of workmanship.I hate it when these class arguments come up. I was used to it, then I figured that when I entered the 1911 world everyone was just nice and played well with each other. I see that is not the case here either.
I guess I'm a bit younger than you. When I bought my first Commander, they didn't have the LW designation, because all Commanders had alloy frames. If you wanted a steel frame, you went with the Combat Commander.Elmer said:I'm old my friend..... there was only one Commander made, when I bought the 4 that I own......
And I may have paid as much as $250 for a couple of them. New of course....
We agree here, these have been a constant irritation in my side...and it pains me, because when Kimber first came on the market, they really changed the 1911 landscape (even more than Springfield Armory)
Quote: Originally Posted by mcdonl
Well, there are some of us who CAN'T pay big bucks for a gun. Do we not deserve to own one?
Quote: Originally Posted by 9mmepiphany That is an interesting argument. Let me me ask this, change the word 1911 for Mercedes or BMW or Rolex and then answer your own question
Any class argument I've seen usually comes from folks who want their entry level 1911s to be the same as the high end guns...or at least the high end production guns.
Obviously you've taken what I've posted the wrong way. Since this is a 1911 thread, I thought that's what we were discussingSir, I said GUN... not 1911
As has been said, there is nothing wrong with that. We only point out that good enough, isn't the same as good and that bad is relative to your expectations.
I guess I'm a bit younger than you. When I bought my first Commander, they didn't have the LW designation, because all Commanders had alloy frames. If you wanted a steel frame, you went with the Combat Commander.
I bought mine for <$400 as a duty pistol and it went straight from the store to my gunsmith to be serviceable...this was back in the days of mounting the S&W K-frame sights on the slide
You know, even some of the worst guns ever made, have satisfied customers. I've owned several guns that were more reliable, or more accurate, than reports from those who have worked with great numbers of them would indicate. I have a couple of Mini 14's that will shoot close to an inch at 100 yards. I don't resent those who have not seen that as the norm. I just consider myself fortunate.A few years back, I decided to purchase my first handgun. I desperately wanted a 1911, but feared I could not afford a "good-one". I talked to a friend of my father in law's who had owned several over the years, and apparently several high-end ones.
He recommended a Taurus PT-1911. I researched the gun and found many glowing reviews. Perhaps it's not a Les Baer, but it was a fine choice for a grad-student that wanted a reliable, accurate firearm.
I made what I consider an informed decision and I like the PT-1911 more than any other gun I own (including my Super Black Eagle II). Perhaps you (all) can see why folks denouncing "low-end" guns that many of us use and love, and calling us ill-informed can be a tad annoying
okay, so what about the GI 1911 and 1911a1 of yesteryear, obviously no one buys them to run them hard anymore, but how are their built quality compared with today's Springfield? Kimber? Rock Island? Ed Brown? Would they qualify as a pistol that can be ran hard by the experts? I really dont think so but....
Would past owners of Auto Ordnance 1911s speak up?You know, even some of the worst guns ever made, have satisfied customers.
from what research i have done most/lots of gunsmiths dont like my norinco because they are using low grade machining bits to pound out work as fast as possible... now that sounds very Chinese to me... not to knock them... it is business these days.. but the world has lost its pride in workmanship levels that used to exist... its a shame too
The low waged, yet skilled labor of the US was not used because of pride. It was used because of cost. We were cheaper than the rest of Europe. Bombs did not destroy our major cities. We had tons of raw labor which we turned into skilled labor replacing the more expensive "old world craftsman". It was not love of hand fitting that necessitated this model it was cost. The cost of machinery far outweighted the cost of labor. As that changed you saw more and more machines which has positives and negatives. Now without machines the majority of products would never be produced. If they were produced at all they would be cost prohibitive for most of us. If this was not the case most of us would not be driving cars. We would not be on computers typing on the internet.You have to bear in mind that they were built at a time when handwork was cheaper than machine work.