Colt 1911 quality

[bartv]

I read over at the Pistolsmith that old 1911s and the new ones were/are of exeptional quality and that the ''middle'' Colts were the ones that lacked quality control and subsiquently gave other manufacturers like springfield and kimber the lead in the 1911 sales.

So which dates are inclusive of the not so good batch of Colt 1911s and when did Colt start improving their quality control?

You see Im planning to get one and I would really like to know that Im not getting a pistol from the time when Colt was down in terms of quality.

Any dates or serial numbers would be helpful.

Thanks in advance

 

[popeye]

I never met a Colt 1911, I didn't at least "like". Colt came out with the 1991 line in attempt to compete with Springfields from Brazil. Ex: A Colt 80 Enhanced retailed for $600+. A Springfield could be had for $425. In short Colt had no average price range gun. (Kimber was an "upstart" as yet unproven) A new Colt 1991 could be had for $368. Everyone decides they need a super-duper 1911 with tight frame/slide and all bells n whistles. To take 1991 to that level is gonna cost another $600-$700 including refinish from crappy matte black. (crappy in the respect 1991 orig matte black was poor in wear resistance). Kimber jumps in wth a $600 gun that appears to have it all, and they get there foot in the door. Hope my rambling makes sense. I don't think their was a "bad" Colt era.

 

[dsk]

Colts made during the early to mid 1990's did indeed have some real sporadic quality control problems. The ones made in the past three years or so are much better. Basically, as long as you get one of the newer ones with the new slide rollmarks you'll be fine. Click here for more info:

http://usgi1911.tripod.com/series80

 

[Sean Smith]

People talk about how Colt's quality crapped out in the early 1990s, but oddy enough the one gun I've owned from that period (a Colt Delta Elite) was really quite exceptional for an out-of-the-box gun. The only bad thing about it was that it had alot of sharp edges on it, more so than the earlier Delta Elite or later 01991 I've owned.

 

[10-Ring]

The Colt I had was very well made & never failed to go bang. It was a '01 model '91a1

 

[bartv]

Thanks for the advice.

So I assume that if I get a Colt with the new roll marks I should be ok?

 

[Delmar]

You should be okay with any NIB Colt, but I am beginning to see a Colt purchase like sports cars-don't buy a used one because you never know how the previous owner treated it unless you know the owner.

If there is anything to watch for, it would be-the shorter the barrel, the greater likelyhood that you may have issues with it. Having said that, I know there are a lot of Colt Defender owners here who are thoroughly satisfied with their choice. I think Colt has really looked at the marketplace and listened to the people who have bought their products and are striving for a more reliable weapon. Hopefully, this fad with all the doo dads hanging off it is over.

 

[dsk]

Hopefully, this fad with all the doo dads hanging off it is over.

Amen!

 

[dfariswheel]

One more time: Guns are not vintages of wine. There are NO "good" years, or "bad" years. Each one must be judged on it's own merits.

By all accounts from new owners, the current Colt's are of good quality and getting better. It seems everyone else has peaked out and are declining in quality.

 

[Gunsnrovers]

early Colts

I have an Enhanced Commander made in 1991. Out of the box, it was testy. Ejected everywhere, failed to feed, and had a poor trigger at best. I was not happy.

That being said, Colt was good to their word regarding customer satisfaction. On hearing my complaint, they immediately put me in contact with Bain & Davis out here in Southern California and the gun was sent in to be cleaned up and tuned for reliability.

Since then, the gun has served me well over the last 12 years.

Jeff

 

[Rob96]

Have no experience with any Colt besides my NRM SS 1991A1. And that experience has been great.