Tisas CMP 1911A1: Most Accurate WWII Reproduction 1911?

[AlexanderA]

I believe T-Sauce M1911A1 is there standard version (very accurate btw) but with wood grips and a few extra makings

The Tisas ASF (Armed Services Family), which is what the CMP is selling, is not like their standard Army version. For example, it doesn't have a lowered ejection port or a beveled magazine well. It's actually a better finished close copy of the 1943 Remington-Rand. (I posted a detailed review comparing the two, last year on this site.)

 

[Mark_Mark]

The Tisas ASF (Armed Services Family), which is what the CMP is selling, is not like their standard Army version. For example, it doesn't have a lowered ejection port or a beveled magazine well. It's actually a better finished close copy of the 1943 Remington-Rand. (I posted a detailed review comparing the two, last year on this site.)

would be cool to put a WW2 Colt Slide on the T-Sauce! I got one that my brother bought at a Yard Sale! HS barrel and WW2 parts too!

let me do that right now! one sec

 

[twofewscrews]

would be cool to put a WW2 Colt Slide on the T-Sauce! I got one that my brother bought at a Yard Sale! HS barrel and WW2 parts too!

let me do that right now! one sec

I hate you so much right now

 

[AlexanderA]

I have the Tisas ASF model, it looks very close to a Remington-Rand. Mine has been perfectly reliable (though I've only run FMJ in it). Accuracy is fine, but it's a bit difficult for me to pick up the tiny period correct front sight.

You don't buy the Tisas ASF for shooting accuracy. There are more modern 1911's for that. You buy it for historical authenticity.

 

[Mark_Mark]

I hate you so much right now

just messing around

RR 1911A1 & T-Sauce Cheap-o Service


Colt Slide on a T-Sauce cheap-O frame

 

[trackskippy]

You don't buy the Tisas ASF for shooting accuracy. There are more modern 1911's for that. You buy it for historical authenticity.

To be fair, and correct, you buy a USGI 1911 for historical accuracy and authenticity. Theres plenty around.

 

[Mark_Mark]

maybe swap out the T-Sauce lower parts for original parts!

 

[twofewscrews]

You don't buy the Tisas ASF for shooting accuracy. There are more modern 1911's for that. You buy it for historical authenticity.

To be fair, you don't buy the Tisas ASF for shooting accuracy. There are more modern 1911's for that.

You buy it to role play as a WWII Soldier . . .

 

[Mark_Mark]

To be fair, you don't buy the Tisas ASF for shooting accuracy. There are more modern 1911's for that.

You buy it to role play as a WWII Soldier . . .

1,000 percent! as long as you’re role playing on the American Side…. you keep the dirty birdy stuff hidden!

 

[AlexanderA]

would be cool to put a WW2 Colt Slide on the T-Sauce!

That would be a waste of the Colt slide, because the Tisas ASF slide is such a close copy already. What's not a close copy is the slide on the RIA (Philippines) GI model.

Here's the result when I put a postwar Colt replacement slide on an RIA GI model:



And here are all the non-authentic parts that had to be replaced on the RIA:



In contrast, the only parts that had to be replaced on the Tisas ASF (for the sake of authenticity) were the grips and magazines (plus the firing pin and firing pin stop, because these, oddly enough, were Series 80).

 

[halfmoonclip]

I'm a little interested in the TISAS GI replica, if for no more than the period correct ejection port. Have their generic 'GI replica', which has run just fine on softball 800'sec FMJ handloads. I might swap it for one, if I'm not too much taken to the cleaners.
BTW, the hammer on my TISAS liked to bite the hand that feeds it. A buddy had a similar experience.
I rounded the hammer spur's edge just a little, and the problem went away.
Have a Colt Black Army that I shoot (the horror!), great trigger, and fun to shoot, and a nice Remington Rand.
Oddly, don't recall dented brass from the Colt.
Moon

 

[trackskippy]

One thing that has always bugged the crap out of me with a lot of the 1911 clones is, the different makers all seem to have their own idea as to what the specs are, and they get the grip geometry wrong, and the guns instantly don't feel right in your hand, especially if you know what they should feel like. AlexanderA's RIA is a perfect example of the problem.

The clue is that gap on the frame, between the front of the grip panel and the edge of the frontstrap. Look at MarkMark's GI Remington, and Tisas, and you can see the difference. Springfield was a big offender of this, and even in the same version/model and serial number runs, the guns were often on very different frames. The offenders don't cut the radius's on the front straps right for one thing. Some guns are almost "flat" across the front, with very little radius. Others are better, but still feel off. Pick up a Colt or GI gun and then any of the others, and you'll see what I mean.

You get that problem, and then you get all the different and mixed-up trigger and MSH versions, and things just get worse. Its almost as if the specs are just a suggestion.

Tisas actually did a very good job of getting their guns closer than most to Colt/GI specs in that respect. I think if they took a little more care in assembly, fitting, and some key parts, as well as ditching the ramped barrels on the 9mm's, they could have a good version of the 1911, even if their price point went up a bit. I'd pay more for a gun I didn't have to fiddle with and break in, and that worked out of the box without any drama.

 

[halfmoonclip]

Have to get going right now, but yinz boys will send me to the safe, to make some comparisons. My only non-Colts are a RR and a TISAS.
Moon

 

[Mark_Mark]

That would be a waste of the Colt slide, because the Tisas ASF slide is such a close copy already. What's not a close copy is the slide on the RIA (Philippines) GI model.

Here's the result when I put a postwar Colt replacement slide on an RIA GI model:

View attachment 1262521

And here are all the non-authentic parts that had to be replaced on the RIA:

View attachment 1262522

In contrast, the only parts that had to be replaced on the Tisas ASF (for the sake of authenticity) were the grips and magazines (plus the firing pin and firing pin stop, because these, oddly enough, were Series 80).

I’m looking for a Colt Frame! seen a few over the past year

 

[CraigC]

I just ordered the $300 Gov't model from PSA. It'll be Tisas #5 for me. I always thought the bickering about fine details in these cheap GI replicas was comical. If I could buy a relatively accurate replica of the Colt SAA for $300, I'd buy a dozen of them and shut up about it.

 

[Mark_Mark]

I just ordered the $300 Gov't model from PSA. It'll be Tisas #5 for me. I always thought the bickering about fine details in these cheap GI replicas was comical. If I could buy a relatively accurate replica of the Colt SAA for $300, I'd buy a dozen of them and shut up about it.

tell it like it is Craig!

 

[Slamfire]

You get that problem, and then you get all the different and mixed-up trigger and MSH versions, and things just get worse. Its almost as if the specs are just a suggestion.

A bud of mine did get original 1911 drawings (I thought he said through a freedom of information request). He stated that the drawings had dimensional errors. I don't know how the original Government manufacturer's ensured "interchangeability", nor at what level. Could have been slides and magazines only being interchanged in acceptance tests. Or other interchangeability requirements could have been waived because it was more important in a shooting war to get firearms to the front lines, than scrap functional items due to nit picking concerns of "interchangeability". From what I read, Armorer's back then were expected to understand the relationship between parts, how the weapon functioned, and where material had to be removed with a file, or where a part was to be bent. Just as for engine fitters back then, just who fit the parts to an aircraft engine, and how expertly it was done, made a lot of difference between completing a mission, or crashing after the engine failed.

As for a handgun fitting one individual's hand, the current Military has to design for the 5% female. I was not around in 1900, so I don't know the standards of the time. No doubt users of the era were vocal in not liking this or that and expecting the world to revolve around them, just as today.

In so far as specs, I am unaware of any National Law, or National Standard that requires commercial 1911's to met any build to print standards. Commercial standards are what the commercial business wants. Be grateful that you can interchange anything on a 1911.

 

[AlexanderA]

I'm a little interested in the TISAS GI replica, if for no more than the period correct ejection port. Have their generic 'GI replica',

I forget to mention that the standard Tisas "Army" model has a Cerakote finish, while the ASF has a very nice Parkerizing. In fact the degree of finish puts the originals to shame.

For those that say, "if you want authenticity, why not get an original?" I would point out that the Tisas ASF has a retail price of $479 as opposed to maybe $2,000 for an original in excellent condition.

The next-best clone is the Kahr/Thompson/Auto Ordnance (it goes by different names). U.S.-made, but it has that pesky Series 80 firing pin safety.

 

[twofewscrews]

The next-best clone is the Kahr/Thompson/Auto Ordnance (it goes by different names). U.S.-made, but it has that pesky Series 80 firing pin safety.

I was very tempted by the Auto Ordinance offering but the amount of effort involved in getting rid of the Series 80 firing pin safety and various internals turned me away.

 

[halfmoonclip]

From what I read, Armorer's back then were expected to understand the relationship between parts, how the weapon functioned, and where material had to be removed with a file, or where a part was to be bent.

Do I recall the barrel link coming in a small variety of lengths, needed for correct lockup?
Moon

 

[nofendertom]

Nobody is going to make an exact COPY of the original. To me, it seems silly to nitpick over minor differences. I have a Rock Island because I wanted a basic 1911 that shot good, not
because I wanted a military replica. If I had gotten a Tisas, I would be just as contented.

 

[twofewscrews]

Do I recall the barrel link coming in a small variety of lengths, needed for correct lockup?
Moon

I don't know about during wartime but these days they do come in various sizes to ensure correct lockup/timing.

 

[AlexanderA]

I was very tempted by the Auto Ordnance offering but the amount of effort involved in getting rid of the Series 80 firing pin safety and various internals turned me away.

Here's my "defarbed" Kahr/Thompson/AO surrounded by the parts that were removed/replaced. The Series 80 parts are grouped in the upper left corner. The firing pin, extractor, firing pin stop, and plunger are located in the slide and the two levers are located in the frame. A special spacer (readily available) must be used to take the place of the two levers.



After removing the Series 80 parts and replacing them with standard parts, the only indication is if you pull back the slide and turn the pistol upside down. You then see the empty hole for the plunger.

 

[twofewscrews]

Here's my "defarbed" Kahr/Thompson/AO surrounded by the parts that were removed/replaced. The Series 80 parts are grouped in the upper left corner. The firing pin, extractor, firing pin stop, and plunger are located in the slide and the two levers are located in the frame. A special spacer (readily available) must be used to take the place of the two levers.

View attachment 1262613

After removing the Series 80 parts and replacing them with standard parts, the only indication is if you pull back the slide and turn the pistol upside down. You then see the empty hole for the plunger.

View attachment 1262615

I checked out your previous post after you mentioned it in this thread.

If it was a series 70 I wouldn't think twice.

Edit: I wrote some stuff about the additonal cost and time of converting a series 80 to series 70 and I'm pretty sure I was wrong.

I was under the impression you would have to replace the hammer, and then mate the hammer to the the sear, which would, after taxes and parts would increase the cost to 1k.

Is the only part needed to convert a series 80 to a series 70 the shim, or are other parts (hammer, sear, disconnector, leaf spring, etc) needed?

 

[Mark_Mark]

I checked out your previous post after you mentioned it in this thread.

If it was a series 70 I wouldn't think twice.

Edit: I wrote some stuff about the additonal cost and time of converting a series 80 to series 70 and I'm pretty sure I was wrong.

I was under the impression you would have to replace the hammer, and then mate the hammer to the the sear, which would, after taxes and parts would increase the cost to 1k.

Is the only part needed to convert a series 80 to a series 70 the shim, or are other parts (hammer, sear, disconnector, leaf spring, etc) needed?

Just get the CMP t-sauce, you would be the 1st here! cool show off piece