AlexanderA
Member
If any company would produce a 100% accurate copy of the classic WW2 M1911A1, I would buy it. None of them do, however. What is this obsession with "improvements"?
Springfield 1911 A1 v Loaded help
- Thread starter JPSauer
- Start date
JTQ
Member
Aren't you the guy that disabled the decocker on his Beretta 92FS?
chicharrones
needs more ammo
AlexanderA
Member
I was referring to the manufacturers not making the original design M1911A1. When you consider what WW2 guns are selling for these days, it's surprising that some manufacturers are not getting a piece of the action. After all, OOW is getting more than $4,000 for semi versions of the BAR.
I removed the decocker on my Berettas precisely because I like the way the M1911A1 can be carried "cocked and locked." And anyway the change is not permanent. I saved all the decocker parts.
But I'm pursuing the Taurus versions now. Their frame-mounted safety is what the Beretta should have. (The Tauruses have their own issues, which I'm discussing in other threads.)
Hammer bite is not an issue with the longer grip safety of the M1911A1, unless you have fat hands. And the WW2-era sights were much improved over the original M1911's.
chicharrones
needs more ammo
Sooooo . . . the WWII era 1911 had improvements added over the WWI era 1911.
Why stop there?
https://www.tactical-life.com/guns/colt-m45a1-cqbp/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEU(SOC)_pistol
Last edited:
AlexanderA
Member
Historical context. As much as I like the 1911, I realize that it's not a "modern" gun. Post-1945 "improvements" make as much sense as putting a Picatinny rail on a matchlock.
Jim Watson
Member
Trivia Alert
In the 1980s trials that led up to the Beretta when we committed to 9mm so as to be more able to help our friends who used to be our enemies, the Army got two unsolicited proposals, both of which were roundly ignored because they did not meet the spec of a DA/SA 9mm.
But interesting.
The 1911A2 was a 1911 with more prominent sights, zeroed for the company's recommended 185 grain reduced recoil ammo; beveled magazine well, beavertail, and cast-in front strap checkering.
The other was a conversion process that would turn a 1911A1 into a 9mm with the original slide. There were no published details as to how they got 9mm to feed and extract with a .45 slide.
In the 1980s trials that led up to the Beretta when we committed to 9mm so as to be more able to help our friends who used to be our enemies, the Army got two unsolicited proposals, both of which were roundly ignored because they did not meet the spec of a DA/SA 9mm.
But interesting.
The 1911A2 was a 1911 with more prominent sights, zeroed for the company's recommended 185 grain reduced recoil ammo; beveled magazine well, beavertail, and cast-in front strap checkering.
The other was a conversion process that would turn a 1911A1 into a 9mm with the original slide. There were no published details as to how they got 9mm to feed and extract with a .45 slide.
chicharrones
needs more ammo
That makes me think of my brother with a CRFFL. His collection is bought almost entirely for owning a piece of history. He doesn't buy modern clones or copies of any milsurp gun.
My reason for owning firearms is completely different than my brother's. No matter if it's an old single action revolver design, I don't buy my guns for history, I buy my guns to launch bullets down the bore.
Due to my views on firearms, I like and can use post-WWII 1911 design changes. Considering all the commercial variants of the 1911 sold in the last 40 years, I'd say a lot of folks feel the same.
Last edited:
Vern Humphrey
Member
I've carried an M1911 for over 60 years. When it comes to "improvements", I LIKE:
Improved trigger pull -- the pull on my old Kimber Custom Classic is about as good as it gets.
Higher and wider sights. Again, my old Kimber Custom Classis is close to ideal.
Beavertail safety with "memory bump."
Lowered and beveled ejection port for more reliability and less damage to ejected cases.
I DON'T like:
Forward slide serrations (they drag on the holster.)
Omitting the lanyard loop -- I ride horses and jump out of airplanes and like to have my gun tied to me.
I would LIKE to see:
A notch in the barrel hood that would let you check the chamber without partially retracting the slide.
A ramped barrel.
Improved trigger pull -- the pull on my old Kimber Custom Classic is about as good as it gets.
Higher and wider sights. Again, my old Kimber Custom Classis is close to ideal.
Beavertail safety with "memory bump."
Lowered and beveled ejection port for more reliability and less damage to ejected cases.
I DON'T like:
Forward slide serrations (they drag on the holster.)
Omitting the lanyard loop -- I ride horses and jump out of airplanes and like to have my gun tied to me.
I would LIKE to see:
A notch in the barrel hood that would let you check the chamber without partially retracting the slide.
A ramped barrel.
chicharrones
needs more ammo
vanfunk
Member
They told you a 1911 barrel would last only 5,000 rounds? Oh my. I have a USGI Remington-Rand 1911 (.45, obviously), that had countless rounds put through it in WWII, Korea and Vietnam before I got it. I shot it a lot, a little over 87,000 rounds to be in the ballpark, before it had a problem - the firing pin broke in half. I paid like $7 for a USGI replacement and the gun was back in action. I put 125,000 rounds through it until hanging it up in 2012 but have just started shooting it again now that my son is interested. Yes, the gun you have in question is not USGI but I cannot fathom what would cause the barrel of a current-production Springfield to wear out in 5,000 rounds. Fire at will, and don’t worry!
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
