Fly Navy
Member
I'm about to put a 1911 on order and I can't totally decide between the Springfield Mil-Spec or the WWII GI model. Any opinions?
Springfield Mil-Spec or WWII GI
- Thread starter Fly Navy
- Start date
- Status
Black Majik
Member
Well IMO, the mil-spec isn't all that much more than the GI. There are a few differences IIRC, the M.S. has lowered ejection port, different grips, flat MSH, slightly larger rear sights and few others I dont remember.
The GI is the basic 1911, but I actaully like the way the GI looks more than the mil-spec. But for the value, both guns are great, with a slight edge going to the mil-spec.
Target shooting, those GI sights really suck.
The GI is the basic 1911, but I actaully like the way the GI looks more than the mil-spec. But for the value, both guns are great, with a slight edge going to the mil-spec.
Target shooting, those GI sights really suck.
critter
Member
I have one of the ms's and am very pleased with it. It is 100% reliable and very accurate. I've shot it several thousand rounds and have had zero issues with it at all. Good luck with your choice. Although I have not tried the other one, I think you will be pleased with either one. Get what 'calls' to you!
Spoonman
Member
My Mil-Spec has been accurate and totally reliable w/ several thousand rounds fired. I can't think of a single negative comment. I like the finish and generally "utilitarian" look of it. I did replace the grips but that was personal preference, not due to any problem. The WWII GI is pretty cool and I wouldn't hesitate to buy one, if the right opportunity presented itself (y'know, like if I saw one for cheap and my wife was looking the other way 
). The grips are pretty lame but I'd replace them anyway. I expect you'll be satisfied with either. If you just can't decide, buy both and tell your significant other you'll get rid of one when you decide. (It will be a lie, though. )
Clif
). The grips are pretty lame but I'd replace them anyway. I expect you'll be satisfied with either. If you just can't decide, buy both and tell your significant other you'll get rid of one when you decide. (It will be a lie, though. )Clif
SpookyPistolero
Member
No worries, I have a tent you can borrow!
I don't know what intended uses you envision for your choice, but I don't feel a pistol can live without a good pair of sights. Defensively, this is paramount. The Mil-spec takes the nod due just to this. If it's more for fun or if you don't find that important, I can't think of any reason not to go with the cheaper GI.
I can only speak from second hand experience, but a friend who had a 4" GI had accuracy that was just fine, not noticeably inferior.
I don't know what intended uses you envision for your choice, but I don't feel a pistol can live without a good pair of sights. Defensively, this is paramount. The Mil-spec takes the nod due just to this. If it's more for fun or if you don't find that important, I can't think of any reason not to go with the cheaper GI.
I can only speak from second hand experience, but a friend who had a 4" GI had accuracy that was just fine, not noticeably inferior.
setxcypress
Member
I have the Mil-spec as well and love it. Eats the FMJ and the Remington JHPs without choking. Those three white dots line up to make the perfect sight picture. I'd recommend the Mil-spec.
In fact, on the GI are the grips plastic or wood?
In fact, on the GI are the grips plastic or wood?
Mil Spec unless the only purpose is to admire it. I started out as a kid with a WWII Remington Rand and even with young eyes the military sights left a lot to be desired. You need sights you can SEE.
Have a stainless Mil Spec that is turning out to be a nice pistol. Changed the front sight to a dovetail setup (had to go higher), put on a lanyard loop MSH, and a set of Spegel diamond stocks. Everything I need and nothing I don't.
Have a stainless Mil Spec that is turning out to be a nice pistol. Changed the front sight to a dovetail setup (had to go higher), put on a lanyard loop MSH, and a set of Spegel diamond stocks. Everything I need and nothing I don't.
Mil Spec has black plastic grips and the WWll pistol has spiffy wood grips made from god only knows what because it ain't 'walnut'.
I feel the Mil Spec guns have a bit more attention to detail and are better fitted than the WWll.
You gets whats you pays for.
I feel the Mil Spec guns have a bit more attention to detail and are better fitted than the WWll.
You gets whats you pays for.
jwhisler
Member
I own a Milspec in OD Green. Swapped the grips with Hogue wraparound.
Lonestar.45
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,077
I have a Champion GI which shoots outstanding. I looked at both before buying, and I thought at first I'd miss the better sights on the Mil Spec, but after having put 350 or so rounds through the GI, I don't think I'm missing anything by having the larger sights at all. This gun puts it where it's supposed to go, everytime.
B
boofus
Guest
The sights on the USGI are terrible.
I have a parkerized Mil Spec and a GI Champion 4". Both are excellent, but, if I had to choose, I'd definitely go with the Mil Spec. It's easily worth the small price difference to have the better sights and the beveled magwell. I also like some of the aesthetic features, like the angled slide serrations, and Springfield's crossed cannons logo. Merely swapping out the Mil Spec's lame plastic grips, for a nice set of custom hardwood grips, completely transforms the look and feel into that of a much higher $$$ gun. Either gun makes a great base for a custom gun, and I understand why a lot of people prefer the Mil Spec-ier GI model, but I give the edge to the Mil Spec because of its non-Mil Spec features.
Black Majik
Member
Neither is the Mil-spec.
Both can be used to shoot at paper/steel targets, but truth is, those combat sights, no matter big or small, just straight up sucks.
GunAdmirer
Member
Get the mil-spec if you are planning to do some custom work on it. It already has the ejection port lowered and flared, and the magazine well is already beveled. It will save you some money in the long run.
Get the GI .45 if you want something more original GI looking and do not plan to do a whole lot of upgrades.
That being said, I have the stainless GI .45 and it has been competely reliable and plenty accurate.
Get the GI .45 if you want something more original GI looking and do not plan to do a whole lot of upgrades.
That being said, I have the stainless GI .45 and it has been competely reliable and plenty accurate.
Zach S
Member
I can see the GI sights just fine, except when I take aim...
I went with the mil-spec.
I went with the mil-spec.
GunAdmirer
Member
The GI sights are not ideal but they are original if that matters to you. They are small. I have no problem if shooting slowly but would be handicapped in a defensive shooting situation. Springfield will upgrade the GI sights to the Mil-Spec sights for around $60. Most other sight options require milling dovetails in the slide. It gets expensive fast. King's and Millett offer low cost sight upgrades but most still have to be installed by a gunsmith.
This brings me to my point. If you want a WWII era type 1911 and do not plan to do a lot of upgrades or compete with it, get the GI .45. Otherwise, at least start with a Mil-Spec.
I got a gread deal on a GI .45 but wish I had bought a Mil-Spec. I want better sights and the lowered and flared ejection port. The beveled magazine well is a nice touch. My GI .45 has been completely reliable and plenty accurate. It is hard on brass, though (dings, smashed mouths).
This brings me to my point. If you want a WWII era type 1911 and do not plan to do a lot of upgrades or compete with it, get the GI .45. Otherwise, at least start with a Mil-Spec.
I got a gread deal on a GI .45 but wish I had bought a Mil-Spec. I want better sights and the lowered and flared ejection port. The beveled magazine well is a nice touch. My GI .45 has been completely reliable and plenty accurate. It is hard on brass, though (dings, smashed mouths).
GunAdmirer
Member
A pic of my stainless Springfield GI .45.
Last edited:
stealthmode
Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Messages
- 459
it costs more but if i was able i would choose the colt mil spec model that is out over the springfield. i have the springfield mil spec and its a fine gun but i would like to get the colt but they are not approved here in california.
DHart
Member
The mil-spec is similar enough to the GI for kicks 'n' giggles and offers much more utility... as others have already mentioned: lowered/flared port, beveled magwell, larger and easier-to-use sights. Personally, I would go with the stainless mil-spec. In fact, I think I will!
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Springfield WW-II G.I. Replicas
I have two Springfield WW-II G.I. models, one is parkerized and the other
is stainless. Both, shoot great and I haven't had a single problem with
either one~
I have two Springfield WW-II G.I. models, one is parkerized and the other
is stainless. Both, shoot great and I haven't had a single problem with
either one~
cxm
Member
Mixing Apples and Oranges
A Springfield GI model and a real WWII GI gun are really very different animals.
The WWII guns have very much become collectors' guns, with even pedestrian Ithicas going for around $1k in good condition... with Colts and some of the rarer examples going for more.
I have a couple of the Springfields, and they are decent guns...but the ones I have are not exactly the same measurements are the real guns... though most diminsions are ok... the frame is a bit bigger than a real 1911 and they have very sharp edges that need to be "broken" before the gun can be comfortably used. On the plus side, both have been good quality and once some issues were fixed shoot well now.
FWIW
Chuck
A Springfield GI model and a real WWII GI gun are really very different animals.
The WWII guns have very much become collectors' guns, with even pedestrian Ithicas going for around $1k in good condition... with Colts and some of the rarer examples going for more.
I have a couple of the Springfields, and they are decent guns...but the ones I have are not exactly the same measurements are the real guns... though most diminsions are ok... the frame is a bit bigger than a real 1911 and they have very sharp edges that need to be "broken" before the gun can be comfortably used. On the plus side, both have been good quality and once some issues were fixed shoot well now.
FWIW
Chuck
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
