Colt 1911 Quality

[roo_ster]

Howdy:

Does Colt build a quality 1911 nowadays?

Growing up, Colt build quality was considered a joke. Colt seems to have more models and I have heard they might not be hunks of junk.

 

[Old Dog]

"Growing up?" What years were those?

I've been around a minute and never heard that "Colt build quality was considered a joke." ​

Colt, like most of the other firearms manufacturers that have been around for a while, has gone through up and down cycles, periods during which quality control declined, experienced craftsmen retired or moved on, machinery and tooling became worn or broke down, a lot of executive mismanagement occurred followed by bad decisions and poorly executed new products. Cutting corners in the production process and trimming employees in the name of maximizing profit certainly occurred at Colt, along with the other major gun makers during the 80s, 90s and early 00s.

At any rate, Colt is putting out some terrific 1911s these days, and has been for the past few years. My principal gripe is that some of the models, at the price point at which Colt introduced them, should have come standard with night sights and front-strap checkering from the factory … oh, and yeah, with actual metal MSHs, rather than the nylon or plastic used in some models. But my Series 70 Reproduction, LW Commander, LW Commander XSE and Competition, all bought in the past five or six years, have been splendid.

But hey, you don't have to believe me; I'm not selling Colts for a living. Try one out yourself. Most of us who've taken a chance on one lately don't think they "hunks of junk." Nevertheless, this forum seems to have a handful of Colt-naysayers, so I'm sure the usual suspects will be around shortly (with the usual suggestion to buy a Dan Wesson, or even a Ruger, Remington or SIG 1911).

 

[TonyAngel]

From what I've seen, there's nothing wrong with the Colts. Not now and not when I bought my first Combat Commander in 1985. Whether they are a good bang for the buck is another discussion. It might be my imagination, but I don't think that all 1911's feel the same in the hand. Although a 1911 is a 1911, I think the Colt's feel the best in the hand. Maybe is the fuzzy horse's mane.

 

[Reinz]

From what I have seen Colts aren’t Junk at all. However, dollar for dollar you MAY get more for your money with another maker. After all there are a ton of 1911 manufacturers out there with various price points and options.

 

[WVsig]

https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...k-vs-semi-custom-vs-full-house-custom.864323/

The stock Colt with a NM barrel and stock everything shot really really well. It was just as accurate in my hands as my fancy boy pretty Colt. On paper at 15 yards there really was not any meaningful difference on paper. The targets are really more about me and my ability as a shooter or lack of ability depending how you are looking at it than the gun in my hand.

Now all that said there are somethings that the stock Colt did not do well. When people ask what is the difference between a $700 1911 and a $2000+ 1911 it is not just about accuracy. It is not just about its ability to fire reliably. It is about the overall workmanship, refinement and shootability of the gun. The stock Classic needs to be dehorned. It has sharp edges all over it including in the beavertaill area of the grip safety. I was tearing my hand up after about 50 rounds through it. The other 2 guns can go all day long. The same can be said about my stock Dan Wesson CBOB, Colt 70 Repro or Colt Combat Elite but those are both upgrades from the basic GI Colt.

The trigger after a bit of spring tweaking was breaking at 3.75 lb +/- but it has a some creep. The sights are good enough but would not be great for fast shooting. Black on black with no contrast. So there are things which need to be improved but all in all its a shooter. I can see why these new Colt Classics are selling for less than the old 70 Reproduction. The older 70 Repro was a much more finished gun. It had less sharp edges. It had polished flats. It has real rollmarks not laser engraving. It was a bit more refined and less rough around the edges. In this example you are getting what you are paying for. The little extra I paid for a stock Colt Series 70 Repro is visible on the gun. It translated directly to out of the box shootability. IMHO

 

[Paco42]

So, when the OP was growing up, he heard that Colts were ‘hunks o’ junk’, eh? Hmmm. Well, when I was growin’ up, we were supposed to all have died by now due to overpopulation or a frozen earth, nobody believed that they’d have their very own personal computers some day, and it was considered to be rightly decided by God himself that Ford and Chevy would rule the roads forever. Until Richard Petty started driving a Dodge, that is. So...maybe we shouldn’t be putting too much stock in what we heard as kids—or what we find being spouted out on the interwebs. Including even here. That said, if you have, say, a hunk-o-junk Colt Gold Cup NM you’re looking to get rid of, I’ll be happy to dispose of it for ya.

 

[WVsig]

I am a Colt fan but there have been time periods where they built a lot of Monday morning and Friday afternoon guns. If you look at Colts history most of its crappy production can be traced to labor issues where their production workers walked out and people who did not give a crap or did not have the skills required were the ones assembling the guns. The quality was hit or miss. The other dark times where when volume and the money to be made off the name were more important than the quality and they let the tooling get long in the tooth.

That is not the case these days. They make a pretty good 1911. Maybe a little overpriced but if you ask the best 1911 smiths in the world what base gun they want to work on most will still tell you Colt.

 

[Double_J]

My Taurus 1911 trigger is better than a friend of mina's colt commander. And the overall fit/finish are better on my Taurus, but I don't know about accuracy as we have not shot together in a while. I would not spend the premium for a normal Colt, but a Gold Cup would most assuredly get a premium from me.

 

[brunowbe]

My Colt’s build quality is fantastic. It’s a 9mm version and is less than 3 years old. My only complaint is the stainless slide scratches a lot more easily than my Ruger’s stainless slide (they’re very fine scratches, but oh well as I don’t plan on ever selling it).

 

[AZAndy]

I've had only two Colt 1911s-- a Defender, and a Compact. The Defender, though I despised the recoil spring system, shot very well indeed and never had a malfunction. The Compact, despite being a cheapo version of an Officer with a plastic mainspring housing and trigger, also shot very well and never malfunctioned. I'd say they know what they're doing, if they can get micro-sized .45s to work reliably.

 

[Howland937]

I briefly owned a Defender in .45. I wasn't crazy about the sights and would have preferred checkering on the front strap. That said, it still had a good feel. After I got it back from Colt to fix an issue with the slide sticking hard about 1/4" short of battery and it wasn't any better, I traded it back to the shop I got it from and haven't seen it since. Does it mean Colt's are junk? Not hardly. Doesn't even really mean that one was. I just lost patience (and confidence). Buy another one in a heartbeat.

 

[JFrank]

Colt is the only one in my opinion that holds value beyond NIB rivals
Look at the Gold Cup National Match for a superb pistol.
Even the latest version is really good

 

[9mmepiphany]

"Growing up?" What years were those?

Like the years just prior to Springfield Armory and Kimber Custom came on the market. Those two really forced Colt to up their QC (SA) and offer more features (KC) to try to keep up.

When I bought my first service 1911, early-70s, Colt was the only game in town. The common route to a reliable and usable defensive 1911 at that time was to go right from the shop where you bought it to your local pistol smith to 1) change the sights, 2) Clean up the trigger, and 3) tune it for reliable function. I went the extra step of having a long trigger and a flat MSH installed

 

[cfullgraf]

I'm a big fan of M1911 pistols regardless of the manufacture. I've assemble a couple from bare frames that shoot well, i.e. small groups.

I've purchased a couple current manufacture M1911Colts that shoot ammunition as advertised. They included 45 ACP as well as 38 Super.

I still consider Colt manufactured guns to be excellent. Some small adjustments may be required to make them 100% reliable but I'm comfortable with working with the platform so it is not an issue.

 

[bannockburn]

I have been buying and using Colt 1911s for well over 40 years. Back then you bought what you could find, new or used, and you made them work as best you could. Likewise there have been a number of good ones and some not so good. But overall I keep coming back to them because I have found for the most part that they are well made, reliable, accurate, and durable. Sure there have been a few lemons in the mix, due mainly to the reasons Old Dog alluded to in his post. But if you were a careful shopper even in those days you could still find some decent buys out there. Today I believe (as do several other knowledgeable people I know that are in the gun business), that Colt is turning out some of the best product that they have made in the last 30+ years. The Lightweight Government and Government I bought 8 or 9 years ago are testimony to that as is the Commander in .38 Super that I got at around the same time.

Some of my Colt family from the late '70s to '10/'11.

 

[sequins]

I have a modern series 70 and it's great. It's one of my most accurate pistols. I've had a couple gentlemen at the range comment on the groups and invite me to try bullseye matches at a local club.

 

[hotshot357]

I've got a GCNM that's 4 years old and it's my most prized possession !!!!! The trigger is fantastic and the fit & finish is awesome !!!

 

[wojownik]

OP - like some of the other are asking - what era did you grow up? (Of course, my wife would say I still haven't "grown up").

I have a 1970s vintage colt 1911 ... just a fine, fine pistol.
I had a 1991 Series 80 from the the mid 1990s. That was not their finest, I'll have to admit. Rattletrap from the factory, horrible trigger, roughly finished. Sold that off.
Colt Commander from the early 2000s - excellent, excellent pistol (and my EDC).
Colt Series 70 repro from the past 5 years or so ... another very fine pistol.
Colt WWI O1911 repro in Carbona blue ... fantastic beauty, tight and accurate.

So, in my limited experience, the 1990s might have been a glitch with their "Old Rollmark" ORM 1911s.

 

[jmorris]

I have a bunch of 1911 pistols, some more refined and accurate, some less refined and not as accurate, than the colts. I might call some “beaters” or “farm gun” but they still aren’t junk, if they work for the intended use.

I will say this, I have a Colt Ace, steel slide/floating chamber .22 LR conversion that the only 1911 frame I have that it fits on is my stainless goldcup. It’s a series 80 from the late ‘80’s and obviously “under” in dimensions to all my other frames. If used with a slide that would fit the other frames, it would become a “rattle trap”.

 

[roo_ster]

Didn't mean to pee in anybody's cheerios.

"Growing up?" What years were those?
I've been around a minute and never heard that "Colt build quality was considered a joke."

Started reading gun rags and having experience with hadguns in the 1980s. The gun rags had their own particular dialect or code to deal with troublesome or POS products. You knew if the author wrote that a particular handgun was, "combat accurate" it slung its pills all over the target. Or if there was fulsome praise regarding X company's customer service, you could assume the gun would not run reliably and had to be sent back. Maybe more than once. As for Colt 1911s, the writers were getting them from the factory and promptly turning them around to their favored gunsmith for reliability work.
And in the hands-on face-to-face department, many proud Colt 1911 owners said something to the effect of, "It has been 100% reliable--since I sent it off to X gunsmith to work on it." Meaning: out of the box--not so reliable.
And the VN veteran family & friends had nothing good to say about issue 1911s (though I later learned none of those 1911s were made after 1945 and had heavy use, so not surprising).
So, yeah, when I became handgun-aware in the 1980s, Colt and their 1911 did not have a great reputation. I am interested and hopeful Colt may have turned it around. And your subsequent comments do seem to corroborate my recollection of the times.

I am a Colt fan but there have been time periods where they built a lot of Monday morning and Friday afternoon guns. If you look at Colts history most of its crappy production can be traced to labor issues where their production workers walked out and people who did not give a crap or did not have the skills required were the ones assembling the guns. The quality was hit or miss. The other dark times where when volume and the money to be made off the name were more important than the quality and they let the tooling get long in the tooth.
That is not the case these days. They make a pretty good 1911. Maybe a little overpriced but if you ask the best 1911 smiths in the world what base gun they want to work on most will still tell you Colt.

See, that ^^^ is useful information, given I am considering putting my $$$ down on a 1911 and Colt has a couple offerings that interest me.

My Taurus 1911 trigger is better than a friend of mina's colt commander. And the overall fit/finish are better on my Taurus, but I don't know about accuracy as we have not shot together in a while. I would not spend the premium for a normal Colt, but a Gold Cup would most assuredly get a premium from me.

I bought a Taurus revolver on the basis of a better trigger than a similar S&W some years back. After I did some reliability work on it, the Taurus has been a good revolver, but I am not looking for a project out of the box.

My Colt’s build quality is fantastic. It’s a 9mm version and is less than 3 years old. My only complaint is the stainless slide scratches a lot more easily than my Ruger’s stainless slide (they’re very fine scratches, but oh well as I don’t plan on ever selling it).

Thanks for the data point. I am particularly interested in a 9x19mm 1911 and Colt has a couple variants that interest me.

Like the years just prior to Springfield Armory and Kimber Custom came on the market. Those two really forced Colt to up their QC (SA) and offer more features (KC) to try to keep up.
When I bought my first service 1911, early-70s, Colt was the only game in town. The common route to a reliable and usable defensive 1911 at that time was to go right from the shop where you bought it to your local pistol smith to 1) change the sights, 2) Clean up the trigger, and 3) tune it for reliable function. I went the extra step of having a long trigger and a flat MSH installed

That about nails my experience. A buddy of mine wanted "A 1911 bult with S&W semi-auto qualtiy." Then S&W produced a 1911 and I bought one. Then another. S&W made a 1911 shooter out of me.

I still consider Colt manufactured guns to be excellent. Some small adjustments may be required to make them 100% reliable but I'm comfortable with working with the platform so it is not an issue.

That is Kel-tec level QC. Now, I own 3 KTs, one of which required factory service. All 3 are now good-to-go and reliable for SD duty. But none of them cost me more than $240 out of the door. Dare we expect more from Colt than we expect from Kel-tec?

Today I believe (as do several other knowledgeable people I know that are in the gun business), that Colt is turning out some of the best product that they have made in the last 30+ years.

Thanks, that is handy to know.

I have a modern series 70 and it's great. It's one of my most accurate pistols. I've had a couple gentlemen at the range comment on the groups and invite me to try bullseye matches at a local club.

Had a bullseye shooter shoot my SW1911 and produce such teeny-tiny groups at 25 yards I had no idea it was capable of. Made me more confident in the weapon and gave me an appreciation of just how capable some of those BE shooters are.

I've got a GCNM that's 4 years old and it's my most prized possession !!!!! The trigger is fantastic and the fit & finish is awesome !!!

Beautful pistol. I never questioned the beauty of some of those blued Colts. Got to handle a GCNM that was some sort of factory special edition back in the 1990s. The blueing and finish was spectacular. Saw a 4" blued Python some years before that might have matched it.

OP - like some of the other are asking - what era did you grow up? (Of course, my wife would say I still haven't "grown up").
I have a 1970s vintage colt 1911 ... just a fine, fine pistol.
I had a 1991 Series 80 from the the mid 1990s. That was not their finest, I'll have to admit. Rattletrap from the factory, horrible trigger, roughly finished. Sold that off.
Colt Commander from the early 2000s - excellent, excellent pistol (and my EDC).
Colt Series 70 repro from the past 5 years or so ... another very fine pistol.
Colt WWI O1911 repro in Carbona blue ... fantastic beauty, tight and accurate.
So, in my limited experience, the 1990s might have been a glitch with their "Old Rollmark" ORM 1911s.

Thanks for your experiences with Colt 1911s over the decades. Yeah, those blued Colts can really be examples of "how its done" regarding a blued finish.
========
Looks like Colt produces a quality out-of-the-box product the last few years. Will have to consider them when I make the purchase. It will be a gift, so I don't want to hand someone a project out of the box.

 

[bannockburn]

roo_ster

Good job of summation and response to the posts we've written. There are a lot of decent 1911s out there; I'm just partial to Colt's but wouldn't say no to one from Dan Wesson, SIG, S&W, Ruger, Remington, and a bunch of others!

 

[9mmepiphany]

A buddy of mine wanted "A 1911 bult with S&W semi-auto qualtiy." Then S&W produced a 1911 and I bought one. Then another. S&W made a 1911 shooter out of me.

The S&W 1911 was what reignited my interest in the non-custom built 1911 models.

The last Colt I bought was a 1991 which was intended as the basis of a build. The pistolsmith found that Colt had bored the slide, for the barrel, off center; Colt claimed it was in-spec.

I had a chance to ask a top-tier 1911 piustolsmith why he only worked on Colt pistols, assuming they were a better basis for a build. His response surprised me a bit, "I'm already familiar with all the things that need to be corrected on them, so I don't have to look for new ones"

 

[bdickens]

...The gun rags had their own particular dialect or code to deal with troublesome or POS products. You knew if the author wrote that a particular handgun was, "combat accurate" it slung its pills all over the target. Or if there was fulsome praise regarding X company's customer service, you could assume the gun would not run reliably and had to be sent back....

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

 

[9mmepiphany]

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Back then it wasn't.

I had an opportunity to speak at length with a gun writer from that era. He had a bit higher standard of ethics. If a gun was crap, he returned it and declined to write a review of it

 

[bdickens]

No, you missed my point.

Overthinking. Mindreading. Reading into a statement things that aren't there, especially turning a mere fact into some kind of left handed compliment.

When a writer says a gun is "combat accurate," perhaps he means nothing more than "accurate enough for self defense but not for bullseye competition."

Saying that a company has excellent customer service could also mean nothing more than they have excellent customer service.