Colt is Baaaaaaaacccckkkkkk?
- Thread starter Slamfire
- Start date
- Status
I recently bought two Colt government models: a new production delta elite, and a blued 1991. Both are well made and have functioned flawlessly with about 1000 rounds through each of them. I too used to reject Colt based on the quality control issues that I had heard about, but I feel the company has really turned around as of late.
My Gold Cup Trophy is a fine piece of work. I've never had a problem with the gun. The only problem I can think of is that it is stainless and not blue 
In fact, my wife has claimed it as her own.
I also have a Combat Elite. I have had the slide rub problem that was common on the early part of the run. I don't know if they have fixed it yet on new guns, but they were supposed to. Colt will correct it if you send it back. I just haven't yet. The rear site came loose on the Combat Elite as well. The gun functions well though. I guess I am 50/50 with their 1911s.
I also have an old Trooper. It is great gun and may be my favorite handgun right now. I actually prefer the Colt revolvers to the S&W revolvers I have handled. I've never owned a S&W though. I wish Colt made revolvers today.
Colt is a strong brand that has recognition well beyond the firearms industry. It is very hard to kill brands that strong. If managed and marketed successfully, Colt could again be a force in the firearms industry.
In fact, my wife has claimed it as her own. I also have a Combat Elite. I have had the slide rub problem that was common on the early part of the run. I don't know if they have fixed it yet on new guns, but they were supposed to. Colt will correct it if you send it back. I just haven't yet. The rear site came loose on the Combat Elite as well. The gun functions well though. I guess I am 50/50 with their 1911s.
I also have an old Trooper. It is great gun and may be my favorite handgun right now. I actually prefer the Colt revolvers to the S&W revolvers I have handled. I've never owned a S&W though. I wish Colt made revolvers today.
Colt is a strong brand that has recognition well beyond the firearms industry. It is very hard to kill brands that strong. If managed and marketed successfully, Colt could again be a force in the firearms industry.
Gord
Member
Might pay $400-500 for one, especially when they're that ugly. At $1k+, which you know they'll be listing at - gotta pay the pony premium - there are a lot of other manufacturers who've been doing the tactical-1911 thing quite well while Colt has largely ignored the civvie market. I dunno that there's enough cachet in the brand to overcome that.
sebtool
Member
I bought my stainless steel Gold Cup National Match NIB around 1994-5. The only regret I have is that I couldn't swing the stainless Delta Elite to go with it!
It's accurate, reliable, and a blast to shoot. Currently my nightstand gun,as I've never had a FTF/FTE, regardless of what I pushed through it.
That's good enough for me. Every manufacturer seems to go thru spells of screwing up from a QC standpoint. Let's all hope they get their ducks in a row pretty quick - We don't need any American manufacturer going under. Even the auto workers, of which many are part of the problem. And I know a bunch of 'em!
It's accurate, reliable, and a blast to shoot. Currently my nightstand gun,as I've never had a FTF/FTE, regardless of what I pushed through it.
That's good enough for me. Every manufacturer seems to go thru spells of screwing up from a QC standpoint. Let's all hope they get their ducks in a row pretty quick - We don't need any American manufacturer going under. Even the auto workers, of which many are part of the problem. And I know a bunch of 'em!
ronbuick
Member
I have never fired a colt 45, I have fired many pistols, and sorry to say again, never a colt 1911, but the ones I have fired I really like the old russkies Tokarev's in 7.62x25,
they are very easy to shoot and clean, one bad thing is that the ammo is mil-surp and
corrosive and needs to be cleaned after every outing, but is very easy to do, never a
misfire and a really bad a#% round, very litle kick, they are so much fun I bought two
of them, plus they are inexpensive to own, just my experiences, thanks
Ron
they are very easy to shoot and clean, one bad thing is that the ammo is mil-surp and
corrosive and needs to be cleaned after every outing, but is very easy to do, never a
misfire and a really bad a#% round, very litle kick, they are so much fun I bought two
of them, plus they are inexpensive to own, just my experiences, thanks
Ron
Ridgerunner665
Member
Another way of looking at this...
Colt has figured out what a cash cow the gun buying public is...without the strict quality and manufacturing requirements of Uncle Sam.
In other words...we'll buy anything.
Thats my opinion...sorry its not a very high opinion and its not specific to Colt, but my last few purchases have left a bad taste in my mouth (poor quality control).
You really think Colt (or anyone else) is gonna spend all that $$$ doing all those stringent tests on a firearm intended for civilian use??? This ain't the 60's anymore...labor is not the "in" thing, its technology....which is a cheap, ineffective, and inferior replacement for labor.
OK...rant off, and don't get me started on the dead beats that would be doing the labor.
Colt has figured out what a cash cow the gun buying public is...without the strict quality and manufacturing requirements of Uncle Sam.
In other words...we'll buy anything.
Thats my opinion...sorry its not a very high opinion and its not specific to Colt, but my last few purchases have left a bad taste in my mouth (poor quality control).
You really think Colt (or anyone else) is gonna spend all that $$$ doing all those stringent tests on a firearm intended for civilian use??? This ain't the 60's anymore...labor is not the "in" thing, its technology....which is a cheap, ineffective, and inferior replacement for labor.
OK...rant off, and don't get me started on the dead beats that would be doing the labor.
trickyasafox
Member
I have a few older colts, and they are all fine. All bought used for a good price. I probably won't be buying new colts because they will be out of my $ range rather than a personal opinion on them.
hank327
Member
Over the last 28 years I've owned 6 Colt 1911s. All have been well made and all worked perfectly with never a problem out of them. I still own 3 of them, the others I sold or traded over the years to fund a newer gun acquisition. I wish I had held on to those other Colts. When I was buying one of those 1911s I was trying to decide between the Colt or a Springfield Armory 1911. I didn't much care for the way the Springfield looked with it's blocky handgrip but it was less the less expensive of the two. My friend said to me, "If you could have either of those two pistols for free, which one would you choose?" Well, that did it for me, I chose the Colt. I've never regretted it.
Well it is going to take many positive accounts of recent Colts before I think about getting back to them.
I was able to acquire a small collection of Detective Specials just when the cops were dumping them for auto pistols.
The older the Colt the better made. Pre WWII Colts show fine machining and very little file work. Details on the inner parts are sharp, crisp corners, etc. They are still good up to the early 60's.
The late model DS's, the internal parts look like they were carved from soap. It was evident that the production line was not producing parts close to a final dimension. These parts submitted to the finisher must have been huge, and the finisher had to do a lot of hand filing to get them to fit. The contours are sloppy, critical function surfaces irregular, just awful. From what I heard, from a guy who was offered the job as Production Manager, even the late 90's equipment was antique. Sounded like belt driven single stage equipment.
Colt needs to have something more in its product line than just Single Actions and M1911's. One of these days the Cowboy craze will fizzle, and the M1911 was a great combat pistol, but a single stack, single action 45ACP is an outdated concept. Sorry.
I looked again at Taffin's story. Two out of the three 45's he has pictured have staked in front sights. After the staked in front sight on my Combat Elite fell out, I have not had positive feelings toward staked front sights. I much prefer dovetailed front sights. Would have made it easy to replace the white dot front sight that came on the thing.
I was able to acquire a small collection of Detective Specials just when the cops were dumping them for auto pistols.
The older the Colt the better made. Pre WWII Colts show fine machining and very little file work. Details on the inner parts are sharp, crisp corners, etc. They are still good up to the early 60's.
The late model DS's, the internal parts look like they were carved from soap. It was evident that the production line was not producing parts close to a final dimension. These parts submitted to the finisher must have been huge, and the finisher had to do a lot of hand filing to get them to fit. The contours are sloppy, critical function surfaces irregular, just awful. From what I heard, from a guy who was offered the job as Production Manager, even the late 90's equipment was antique. Sounded like belt driven single stage equipment.
Colt needs to have something more in its product line than just Single Actions and M1911's. One of these days the Cowboy craze will fizzle, and the M1911 was a great combat pistol, but a single stack, single action 45ACP is an outdated concept. Sorry.
I looked again at Taffin's story. Two out of the three 45's he has pictured have staked in front sights. After the staked in front sight on my Combat Elite fell out, I have not had positive feelings toward staked front sights. I much prefer dovetailed front sights. Would have made it easy to replace the white dot front sight that came on the thing.
Spoken like someone who hasn't priced and tested Colts head-to-head with Kimbers and SA's - the main competition. They offer better build and parts quality on average at the same price. You just need to do the homework to learn what the current state of the market is. Too many folks like to coast on the past, or on internet rumors instead of facts.
Spoken like someone who hasn't really handled the current production guns and priced them. Current production quality and street prices among the "big Three" of 1911 sales leave Colt in the lead in any objective analysis.
I suppose that's why the market for them keeps shrinking, and producers of them leaving the market each year. Oh, hey, wait a minute...
The consumer likes the product. The product has virtues more modern designs cannot replicate. Some of this comes at a higher price because of 19th Century production methods, but there are consumers who are discerning enough to pay a little extra over a Glock for those virtues. We can see that by the wide variety of both budget, production, and boutique producers of the platform, and more entering the market each year. It's a winner and people like it.The idea that the right choice is a Clackamas Kimber is the market's cure makes me chuckle. Just head right down to the dealer and order a new one... I agree those were good guns, and at the time superior in price/performance to the Colt of the day. But that day is long gone and production facts and prices are not what they were a dozen years ago..
The last five or six 1911's I've bought were Colts. And I'm thrifty with my dollar and spend it on products only after lots of research and testing, and I've been shooting the 1911-style pistol for about 35 years. I had other's than "Colt" when the quality wasn't there. But it is there now. Ironically, I got this email about an hour ago. I sold one of my Colt's last week - a two year old Commander (model O4691). I sold it only to fund a Combat Elite and because I wasn't shooting it or carrying it, or because it had any flaws. Here was the buyer's response today when he finally got his hands on it at his FFL:
Last edited:
Jesse Heywood
Member
When Colt re-organized and remade their company the decision was made to focus on weapons for the military. The plan was that when the military sales declined, they would return to the civilian market. It is good to see them sticking to their word.
I have owned a few Colt firearms.
Army Special in 32-20
Diamondback in 38 spl.
Detective Special (3rd model)
Trooper Mk III
AR15M2 HBAR
And I have enjoyed each and every one.
I have owned a few Colt firearms.
Army Special in 32-20
Diamondback in 38 spl.
Detective Special (3rd model)
Trooper Mk III
AR15M2 HBAR
And I have enjoyed each and every one.
CajunBass
Member
That about sums it up for me. Not just for Colt either. There are a lot of good guns hanging on the "used" rack for a lot less money than in the "new" cabinet.
I will say the Colts I've owned have worked just fine. Only one of them was NIB though, and that was "back in the day."
Va Shooter
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2006
- Messages
- 83
I own a Colt and 2 Springfield Armory 1911's and love all 3 The Colt Officers Model is my winter time CCW, so I trust my bacon with it. Colt has a LONG way to go to get the public back, look at Springfield Armory & R.I.A. and their costumer.support, Colt/Kimber/Tauras/Para-USA/Ruger could learn from these 2. When your gun is on the gun store counter is SHOULD be ready to go out of the box and not sent back several times to make it right! Colt and others don't need Century's cast off monkeys working on repairs and taking weeks/months and still not fix them. I wish Colt well and like many others hope they return to making DA revolvers.
farscott
Member
Not sure if I will be buying any new Colt pistols or revolvers. I like what they make, but I already have a stable full, both revolvers and 1911s, from the 1940s through the 2000s.
What will probably happen is Colt will make a gun that I have to have, like the original Concealed Carry Officer that I bought. That was an innovative gun in that before Colt made it, the only ways to get one were to buy two pistols and swap uppers or have a smith build one. Now the pattern is a bit more common, and I have a few samples.
If I needed a 1911 with a rail as a base for a custom, I would take a hard look at the Colt Rail Gun as the frame is forged. Impressive as most other 1911 frames with integral rails are cast. Cast is strong enough, but high-polish finishes and cast metal are sometimes an issue.
What will probably happen is Colt will make a gun that I have to have, like the original Concealed Carry Officer that I bought. That was an innovative gun in that before Colt made it, the only ways to get one were to buy two pistols and swap uppers or have a smith build one. Now the pattern is a bit more common, and I have a few samples.
If I needed a 1911 with a rail as a base for a custom, I would take a hard look at the Colt Rail Gun as the frame is forged. Impressive as most other 1911 frames with integral rails are cast. Cast is strong enough, but high-polish finishes and cast metal are sometimes an issue.
Cost is a very large obstacle for Colt. Back in the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, and early into the 80’s, Colt had a monopoly on M1911’s. No longer. There are a number of high quality makers of M1911’s.
I got to look at a Dealer Catalog to compare Colt against a Springfield Armory pistol.
I attempted to compare models that were very close. So here are the dealer prices on these models:
Colt M1991A1 Stainless, Dealer price $721.95
http://www.coltsmfg.com/products-c5-q99-COLT_PISTOLS.aspx
Series 70 Colt Stainless Dealer price $771.95
http://www.coltsmfg.com/products-c5-q76-COLT_PISTOLS.aspx
Springfield Armory Mil Spec, Full size Stainless Dealer Price $585.50.
http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?version=10
Based on the descriptions, these pistols are very similiar. The Colt is $135.00 more.
Does the name advantage of the Colt overcome the price advantage of the Springfield Armory M1911?
I got to look at a Dealer Catalog to compare Colt against a Springfield Armory pistol.
I attempted to compare models that were very close. So here are the dealer prices on these models:
Colt M1991A1 Stainless, Dealer price $721.95
http://www.coltsmfg.com/products-c5-q99-COLT_PISTOLS.aspx
Series 70 Colt Stainless Dealer price $771.95
http://www.coltsmfg.com/products-c5-q76-COLT_PISTOLS.aspx
Springfield Armory Mil Spec, Full size Stainless Dealer Price $585.50.
http://www.springfield-armory.com/armory.php?version=10
Based on the descriptions, these pistols are very similiar. The Colt is $135.00 more.
Does the name advantage of the Colt overcome the price advantage of the Springfield Armory M1911?
earlthegoat2
Member
The 4196 Commander looks sharp.
Now they need to bring back a mass producable and more inexpensive version of the Detective Special, Cobra, and Agent.
Now they need to bring back a mass producable and more inexpensive version of the Detective Special, Cobra, and Agent.
SSN Vet
Member
I have a difficult time comparing Asia and MIM to USA and steel...
I'm not saying the Springfield Armory is not a fine weapon... it may even be superior...
but if Americans keep going down the trail that Walmart blazed, the only jobs left in this country are going to be politician, prison guard and geriatric health care provider.
I'm not saying the Springfield Armory is not a fine weapon... it may even be superior...
but if Americans keep going down the trail that Walmart blazed, the only jobs left in this country are going to be politician, prison guard and geriatric health care provider.
Neo-Luddite
Member
It would take a luddite to object to a safety system that works positively and unobtrusively.
Uh-huh. Or, just maybe--I disagree with that judgment (some do and assert it impacts ultimate reliability of the weapon--or they just don't *like it*). Or does Colt---know what is *better* for me when it I am fully aware of the nature and function of a 1911 and its possible limitations with respect to safety under certain conditions of carry/ handling?
This was a big tipping point for me (as was price) when I bought my SA 1911a1 in 1992. It still would be if I was in the market for a 1911-style pistol. I'm not.
Or would you just like to have some more sport with my handle maybe? It doesn't cost extra. Geeeez.
For what it's worth, the fit and finish on (especially) the historical 1911's looks terrific. Now if they would build me a brand new true-to-prints type III model M.....THAT I'd pony up some money for.
Uh-huh. Or, just maybe--I disagree with that judgment (some do and assert it impacts ultimate reliability of the weapon--or they just don't *like it*). Or does Colt---know what is *better* for me when it I am fully aware of the nature and function of a 1911 and its possible limitations with respect to safety under certain conditions of carry/ handling?
This was a big tipping point for me (as was price) when I bought my SA 1911a1 in 1992. It still would be if I was in the market for a 1911-style pistol. I'm not.
Or would you just like to have some more sport with my handle maybe? It doesn't cost extra. Geeeez.
For what it's worth, the fit and finish on (especially) the historical 1911's looks terrific. Now if they would build me a brand new true-to-prints type III model M.....THAT I'd pony up some money for.
Last edited:
MikePGS
Member
A fellow THRer was kind enough to let me shoot some of his Colts and I was amazed at the quality and fit, etc. The only thing that really prevents me from being especially interested in buying one is I don't know that I could really justify paying a premium to buy a colt when I could get a comparable firearm for less.
Captain Bligh
Member
I'll believe they are back when I can walk into a gun shop and find a Colt laying in the case that has the recoil spring tunnel and dust cover drilled on-center.
This has been such a common problem for a long time that Colt should be embarassed about their inability to manufacture a consistenly well-fit firearm.
Until then, mine will remain Springfields and Kimbers.
This has been such a common problem for a long time that Colt should be embarassed about their inability to manufacture a consistenly well-fit firearm.
Until then, mine will remain Springfields and Kimbers.
- Status
