Most reliable 1911 for under 1000.
- Thread starter TheProf
- Start date
- Status
Trey Veston
Member
Isn't buying a used 1911 like buying a used Dodge at a Toyota dealer? You're likely buying someone else's headache...
Old Dog
Member
No reason not to buy new. Both Colt and Springfield Armory have 1911s in the $750 - $1000 price range that should prove accurate, reliable and fun to shoot. Can always put out some cash later to get a few custom touches.
rpenmanparker
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,456
Actually spending part of the $1,000 for a cheaper, solid gun and the rest of the money for upgrades could be a really smart approach. My Ruger SR1911 9mm Commander cost me about $700 all in and I’m pretty sure I could have done even better if I had known about www.gun.deals at the time. I love it, but $300+ worth of improvements would make it a dream gun. Actually, truth be told, I have already spent that extra on an ambi safety and red dot sight and mount. And I am sure I am not done yet. Starting with a solid, yet less expensive choice, allows you to spend some more to make the gun “your own”.
People sell guns for all sorts of reasons.
John G C 1
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2013
- Messages
- 314
someone mentioned his Citadel has a good trigger pull. Is that common for Citadels? Or is one of these less expensive 1911s known for a nicer trigger than the others. The Springfield RO I tried had a heavy trigger.
Most of the inexpensive 1911s have triggers that can be improved with a little polishing and spring adjusting. But you do need to know what you are doing!
Some of them come with a decent trigger in the 5lb range or better. More expensive 1911s have probably had a bit of trigger tuning or better fitting trigger components.
Premium 1911s have fully fitted and adjusted triggers and related components. Sear, disconnector, sear spring, trigger bow, thumb safety, grip safety all can affect the trigger pull if not fit correctly.
Again, easy to correct/improve IF you know what to do. Even the “cheap” 1911s can have a nice trigger pull.
Some of them come with a decent trigger in the 5lb range or better. More expensive 1911s have probably had a bit of trigger tuning or better fitting trigger components.
Premium 1911s have fully fitted and adjusted triggers and related components. Sear, disconnector, sear spring, trigger bow, thumb safety, grip safety all can affect the trigger pull if not fit correctly.
Again, easy to correct/improve IF you know what to do. Even the “cheap” 1911s can have a nice trigger pull.
JTQ
Member
It's all relative.
If you're comparing it to another production 1911, and you have experience with DA revolvers, DA/SA semi-auto's, striker fired guns, etc., it'll be in the ball park with other 1911's relative to other types of triggers.
If your only other shooting experience is limited to an Ed Brown, Wilson, or custom 1911's, or single action revolvers, you may be disappointed.
Old Dog
Member
I quite agree with tarosean. I've bought several used 1911s over the years; amazingly, none have had any issues.
Kano383
Member
Nope... Taking time and with a bit of luck, you can see one once in a while between $1,500-$2,000, with the occasional Les Baer $1,000-$1,500. You can easily find Dan Wessons around the $1,000 mark.
Definitely but the gun can be easily ruined if you get too aggressive with the modifications, grinding and polishing.
I got started working on M1911's in the mid-1980s. There was some good information available in printed books written by folks who knew what they were doing and had good reputations of building accurate, reliable M1911s.
Be cautious looking at what information might be available on the internet these days.
TfflHndn
Member
I've had several 1911s, and my most reliable have been a Remington R1 Enhanced, and a Citadel commander-size. The Remington has the best trigger of any 1911 I have owned.
RON in PA
Member
My experience with basic model 1911s from Colt, Ruger, Remington and Rock Island is that they are all very reliable with 230 grain ball ammo.
LiveLife
Member
Many 1911s used to be "combat accurate" with enough looseness to be "combat reliable".
But over the decades, with quest for accuracy and tighter and tighter tolerance of high end 1911s people drooled over, 1911s got tighter and tighter and now many are no longer combat reliable.While I love the tightness and buttery smoothness of my Sig 1911 XO, after a few hundred rounds of 200 gr Lead SWC, it will slow down and need a cleaning due to tightest chamber I have shot.
In comparison, friend's RIA Tactical will feed and chamber even sloppy reloads long after 500+ rounds because it has larger flared chamber mouth. I now call RIA "Glock of 1911s" and recommend them to people wanting reliable 1911s, especially if they reload 200 gr Lead SWC.
Accuracy wise, RIA Tactical has produced comparable groups as Sig 1911 out to 15 yards but groups opened up a bit at 25 yards. Citadel has tighter tolerances than RIA and actually produced slightly smaller group than Sig 1911 for me (Bullets loaded to max OAL for each barrel) -
Don't worry Sig fans, my Sig 1911 produced respectable groups at 25 yards.
And even after 7000 rounds, Sig 1911 still maintained accuracy with my plinking load, MBC 12 BHN 200 gr LSWC (Bullseye #1) and 4.0 gr Promo.
As to durability, both Sig 1911 and RIA Tactical are approaching 10,000 round count and only thing that needed to be replaced has been recoil springs. I run 16 lb Wolff variable power for target loads and 18.5 lb Wilson Combat for factory loads and ChipMcCormick Power Mag/Wilson Combat 47D 8 round magazines have been reliably feeding SWC reloads (If your magazine stops being reliable and lips are not damaged, spring may be worn and I like Wolff extra power mag springs).
Not a fan of Nutnfancy but the gunsmith doing the work sounds like the bullseye match shooting mentor who taught me to reload and do all the work on my match 1911.
Trigger Job by "Terry G", Part 1
Trigger Job by "Terry G", Part 2
Last edited:
JR24
Member
Yep. I got a LNIB DW Valkyrie CCO for a Sig 229 plus some cash on top. Considering what I had in the sig, total "cost" to me was less than $800. The DW had less than 100 rounds on it and a few spare mags, perfect shape.
Why did the seller get rid of it? He was having tendonitis issues with his thumb and couldn't work the thumb safety reliably, wanted to get back to DA/SA.
I finally got to look at these models, and they are very very nice for the money. Certainly would be my suggestion if you can find one around $1000.
Anything from Dan Wesson seems to be excellent value for the dollar, IMO.
Steve in NC
Member
Can't believe the Springfield Armory RO model didn't gather more votes. I'm by no means an expert on 1911. But I have had many apart and worked on them and currently finishing up a slide to frame fit custom built 10mmm using a original Colt Delta Elite slide onto a Les Baer frame and all other parts fitted and timed by myself.
Out of the box... the SA RO model is a very solid pistol at a very good price. DW stuff is good also, but command a higher price tag obviously.
My son has a RIA 10mm TacII that we went through and put in some tool steel parts and fitted a different MSH and sights and has been a solid pistol. It was decent out of the box for the price he paid for it. But not a gun I would pull out of the box, holstered it up, and bet my life on it though.
My opinion only.
Steve
Out of the box... the SA RO model is a very solid pistol at a very good price. DW stuff is good also, but command a higher price tag obviously.
My son has a RIA 10mm TacII that we went through and put in some tool steel parts and fitted a different MSH and sights and has been a solid pistol. It was decent out of the box for the price he paid for it. But not a gun I would pull out of the box, holstered it up, and bet my life on it though.
My opinion only.
Steve
rpenmanparker
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2018
- Messages
- 2,456
I think DW is the pivot point, the peak of value for the money. Almost as good as the custom marques, but at a ready-made price.
LiveLife
Member
During my short lifetime of shooting, I have seen guns fail from simply not going into full battery due to fouling build up to parts breakage, at times spectacularly resulting in damage to guns and body parts; of course, all of which would keep guns from protecting the shooters from threats.
To me, for a gun to "earn" my confidence enough to be used as defensive weapon, it has to reach a point of absolute reliability after several thousand rounds. I am abhorred to see and hear people just shooting a box of ammo and calling it good to use a new gun for self defense as gun parts breakage can happen after a few hundred to several thousand rounds.
Gun failure and parts breakage is not always bad. It means you tested the gun to the point of failure to address them to make the gun reliable (or not). Now, if the type and frequency of gun failure and parts breakage is not to your liking, that's when you replace the gun or choose a different brand of gun to evaluate as a "candidate" for defensive weapon.
Even though I am a fan of Glocks, I have seen Glocks fail. And if you shoot Glocks long enough, parts wear will make them less reliable and you need to replace worn parts to make them reliable again. Some people question the reliability of 1911s and that's not true either. My Sig 1911 XO has 10,000+ rounds through it and experienced no parts breakage. My friend's RIA Tactical is approaching 10,000 round count, and also no parts breakage. All they needed were recoil spring replacement.
Which would I choose between a new Glock or my 10,000+ round Sig 1911 to respond to potentially immediate threat? I would absolutely choose "my" Sig 1911 because it has "earned" my confidence of reliability. Of course, my Glock 22/23/27 have also earned my confidence as well so I would feel confident to reach for them.
So, I would not make my decision whether a gun is reliable enough to be used as defensive weapon based on brand name/model, rather based on individual experience and demonstration of reliability.
Last edited:
Steve in NC
Member
bds,
I hope you and/or anyone else didn't interpreted my statements above as implying that its OK to carry based on brand name? My intent was simply to show based on "out of the box" parts quality, amount of MIM parts, fit/finish, etc.... here is what I've seen from SA, RIA, DW, etc.
I personally agree with you 100% in your statements! I run a self imposed 500rds through a new gun hard with mag changes, different ammo, intended SD ammo etc. If in those first 500 rds it doesn't show any issues then I start using it for SD. Anything less and its re-evaluated and go from there.
Yea I don't like the statement, "It's just a truck gun" or "It's a 'just in case' gun".
Steve
I hope you and/or anyone else didn't interpreted my statements above as implying that its OK to carry based on brand name? My intent was simply to show based on "out of the box" parts quality, amount of MIM parts, fit/finish, etc.... here is what I've seen from SA, RIA, DW, etc.
I personally agree with you 100% in your statements! I run a self imposed 500rds through a new gun hard with mag changes, different ammo, intended SD ammo etc. If in those first 500 rds it doesn't show any issues then I start using it for SD. Anything less and its re-evaluated and go from there.
Yea I don't like the statement, "It's just a truck gun" or "It's a 'just in case' gun".
Steve
LiveLife
Member
And to be honest, friend's RIA Tactical with more generous flared chamber mouth will keep feeding and fully chamber 200 gr LSWC long after my Sig slows down from 200-300 rounds from fouling build up.
So OP's intent to use for range, if used with reloads, I would actually lean towards RIA as it will feed even sloppy reloads whereas Sig with tighter chamber will require reloads that met dimensional specs.
So OP's intent to use for range, if used with reloads, I would actually lean towards RIA as it will feed even sloppy reloads whereas Sig with tighter chamber will require reloads that met dimensional specs.
John G C 1
Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2013
- Messages
- 314
Are you sure combat accurate is all you want or do you think eventually you might want to shoot for small groups at longer distances? If all you want is a reliable pistol that puts out a group the size of your hand at ten yards, I think you can go with one of the lower priced guns. If you want more capability, then really think about sights and trigger, IMO. Lots of people have good things to say about the Rugers. The one I got to try at the range had a heavy trigger.
Deanimator
Member
ABSOLUTELY the best handgun I have EVER owned is my Giles .38 Special M1911.
It was bought used.
Hell, it was probably BUILT "used".
TheProf: said:
Shooting a .45ACP 1911 is going to be considerably more maintenance intensive than shooting a .45ACP Glock 21. If the expectation is to own & operate a 1911 that is reliable, “IMHO” first get it reliability tuned by a good gunsmith, then keep it cleaned & oiled at all times. Otherwise pick a .45ACP M&P, Walther PPQ or the aforementioned Glock 21 and go pound some rounds through it at the local range.
- Status