Real 1911?

[joesolo]

I recently bought a Sig Revolution 1911. I really like the way it feels in my hand, points and shoots. In showing it to a friend, he claimed it wasn't a "real 1991." This wasn't a condescending comment from him but just part of our discussion on guns, CCW, etc. I'm no expert but what is a "real 1911" and/or what makes the Sig Revolution NOT one?

 

[tbtrout]

IIRC the Sig has an external extractor, full length guide rod and a firing pin safety that he original does not. It also has Sigs own flare on its slide. It does not make it bad but some purists do not want modifications.To each their own. Enjoy it.

 

[TimboKhan]

I suspect that all he means is that when compared mechanically to a GI issue 1911, most modern 1911's are not the same. For me, the argument boils down to tighter tolerances, beavertails, better sights and things like that. With that said, your 1911 is a 1911. Just because it doesn't follow Brownings original design exactly doesn't take away from the fact that it is obviously strongly based on the original. Doesn't mean that it is better or worse than the original design, just means that it isn't the original design.

 

[1911Tuner]

In the pure sense, he's correct. Technically, there hasn't been a 1911 built since the end-run of the government contract in mid-1919. All the pre Transition/1911 Improved models were commercial Government Models, and were so named, as were the commercial pistols that had all the 1911A1 improvements. "Government Model" is a Colt trademark. Model of 1911 and Model of 1911A1 were both military/government designations.

The next generation was the Model of 1911A1 US Army...and it wasn't a real 1911, either. It had all the A1 improvements. When the end came in 1945, they again became commercial Government Models.

Technically, neither the Colt Commander nor the Officer's Model are 1911s OR 1911A1s. They...like the Sig and all other 1911-pattern pistols with added safety features or modified slide/barrel lengths...are 1911A1 variants. The ones that don't have added parts...such as the pre-ILS Springfields and Norincos..are 1911A1 Clones. Those that incorporate features from both 1911 and 1911A1 pistols...such as the scalloped cuts beside the trigger guard with long triggers and flat mainspring housings are probably correctly referred to as "hybrids"...but that's splittin' hairs a little too fine.

 

[Hoppy590]

anyone that says anything is a "real 1911" should be taken with a grain of salt. thats like saying a new 325I isnt a BMW cause its not as old as my 85 535i or doesnt have that same... raw yet refined feel of a 70's 2002

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

It is Sigarms' interpretation of a 1911. It is as much a "real" 1911 as a Colt Series 80 (with which it shares its firing pin lock), Smith & Wesson, CZ/Dan Wesson, Springfield, and a whole host of other makers of the same basic design. The different slide contours do make it difficult to fit into some holsters.

(BTW, some Revolution models do have a FLGR, but my stainless Carry does not.)

I hope the OP has better luck with his SIG 1911 than I've had with mine. And a Colt Series 80 I picked up recently is a five-shot pistol at best, although it has at least not (yet) broken any parts.

 

[silversport]

My full sized STX does not have the full sized guide rod either...works great and very accurate...
Bill

 

[Old Fuff]

In my view, the issues are not so much in the design or optional accessories, as the execution of the design - meaning the way the guns are made.

The original conception was a military service pistol, where functional reliability under any and all circumstances was "the" important feature. Carefully calculated clearances were built in to insure functional reliability, and the best available materials were used. In addition, detailed inspection procedures were used during the entire manufacturing process from component parts to finished pistol to insure that the specified quality was there.

None of the currently made copies and (almost) clones meets the dimensional and material specifications of the pre-1965 (give or take) guns. In my view, the issues are not so much in the design, as the execution of the design - meaning the way the guns are made.

And it shows. A review of the posts on this and other forums show more complaints about current or recent 1911 style guns having functional problems then all other pistols combined. On the other hand I can’t remember even one concerning an older 1911/Governent Model over a several years period, although I suppose I may have missed some.

What denotes a “real” 1911 from the others made today is consistent functional reliability, not the style of the grip safety or serrations on the front of the slide.

 

[HammerBite]

I go along with 1911Tuner on this. When I speak of a GI issue 1911 I say "1911." When I speak of a clone I say "1911-pattern."

I know it's a technicality but if I don't observe it I might as well use the terms "clip" and "magazine" interchangeably.

Not too many years ago Chevrolet and Oldsmobile made cars which were virtually identical. At least they had the grace to use different model names.

 

[Hoppy590]

Not too many years ago Chevrolet and Oldsmobile made cars which were virtually identical. At least they had the grace to use different model names.

not too long ago Jaguar offered a car built on a for taures frame. calling the same thing something differant ended with alot of angry jaguar owners selling off your over priced taurus

 

[SuperNaut]

I had a good long look at one of the SIG 1911's last week, and I didn't hate it.

However, I thought they took some unnecessary liberties with the 1911 form. The grip safety has an odd shape that doesn't work any better, so it is just a cosmetic change. The slide has a different shape that at first was off-putting to me, but I got used to it. This shape doesn't affect functionality, so once again; cosmetic. I really, REALLY didn't like the lock on the slide, at least Springfield put theirs in a location that doesn't futz with the steel. The hammer looks like a skeletonized hammer, but it was filled, a choice that makes little sense to me, again probably cosmetic. I'm also not a big fan of external extractors, but if they work for you, WTH. I'm also curious if SIG parts are compatible with other 1911's.

At the price it is a very crowded market with some truly great guns as competition. I'm not sure that a few purely cosmetic changes (some questionable IMO) separates the Johnny-come-lately SIG from the competition at all.

Is it a "real" 1911? If you aren't a collector, I'm not sure why it matters.