want a 1911 need advice on which one

[trickyasafox]

first of all, hello and thanks for putting together a great forum. i've been lurking for a few months now.

ok, i've decided i want to take the 1911 plunge.
i want the gun to be more then a range gun. i will carry it occasionally, but that will not be its primary purpose. when it is carried it will most likely be open carry, in the woods while hunting and such. the gun will also double as a bedside gun. and finally, i want it to last if i put a lot of rounds down range with it.

i was thinking a springfield armory mil-spec. however that being said, reading the forum i notice a lot of people calling mil-spec's GI's. is the website wrong? or are people confusing the two. my understanding is teh Mil-Spec has slightly more features, or at least should to warrent the slightly higher price tag.

if upgraded, the path will likely be slow and basic.

do you guys think i should get this, or save a little more and try for something a touch nicer?

any and all comments welcome!

oh a final note: i would also like to venture into the world of reloading, as such, i'd like a gun that wont be too anti-lead rounds. please let me know if this should factor into my considerations for pistol choice or if most will digest the lead fine

i say this because i know lead in glocks is a no no, and was unaware if other manufacturers had simliar instructions

thanks again

trick

 

[stans]

Springfield makes at least two very different MilSpecs these days.
The MilSpec comes with a lowered ejection port wall and large sights.
The MilSpec GI looks almost identical in every respect (except stocks) to the U.S. Army M1911-A1 produced from about mid 1943 to 1945.
Both are good, but if you want easy to see sights and a few enhancements, get the MilSpec. If want the absolute cheapest or want that original military look, get the MilSpec GI.

 

[geo57]

another consideration is a NRM Colt govt. i got 1 last year & couldnt be happier. it will be $100 more than the Springer, but for this you get a pistol that is 100 % American made, an extractor made from bar stock steel, a 1 piece barrel, fewer MIM parts and it being a Colt will have a tendancy to hold it's value longer and would arguably be a better long term investment. I'm sure the Springfield is a fine gun too and i don't have any agenda on running 1 down just because i own something else. I would not hesitate in buying 1. For me though, the difference in cost was well worth buying the Colt considering the above mentioned points. It has been 100 % reliable and is very accurate. I guess the bottom line is that after doing research on other owners' opinions of them, I opted for the Colt. i wish you the best of luck on the .45 you end up with regardless of what maker you decide to go with.

 

[clipse]

If you don't mind Series 80 parts (Firing Pin Safety) then go with a Colt NRM. I have a Springfield Armory GI. I opted for the GI because because I wanted something very very similar to what my grandfather carried in WWII. Unfortunately I have an isolated incident with a very loose bushing. If you aren't getting it as a WWII nastalgia piece then go for the regular Mil-Spec my SA.

Either way you go, you won't be dissappointed.

clipse

 

[farscott]

I would also recommend the Colt 1991 model, the one that is often called the "NRM" for "New Roll Mark", for a few reasons:

1) Colt is still using steel firing pins and original design mainspring housings and internals. Springfield has a system called "ILS" that uses some non-standard parts in the mainspring housing. I understand that Colt is planning to transistion (in 2005) to titanium firing pins as part of a process to get more pistols approved for some states, so this "reason" may disappear.

2) The Series '80 firing pin safety system might be a benefit in a carry pistol, especially an open carry pistol that might fall out of a holster. In any event, Colt has almost twenty-two years of experience with the Series '80 system, and it works well.

3) In the event that you decide a 1911 is not for you, the Colt will have a higher resale value.

 

[cslinger]

Another vote for the NRM 1991A1 Colt.

Chris

 

[ruger357]

NRM Colt.

 

[cstreu1026]

Well I just bought a 1911. A loaded stainless Springfield to be exact. I have yet to fire it so I can't give any real impression about the gun other than it seems to be a very well made gun. I originally went to buy a parkarized mil spec that was on sale locally but I didn't like the sights on it. And since the 1911 I bought was used there wasn't much of a price (less than $100 from the stainless mil spec).

 

[bama1911]

When looking for a 1911 the $$$ your willing to spend and the option that you want will have alot to do with your final decision. I am a big fan of the 70 series Colt, very good out of the box and can be built. Also have enjoyed my Kimbers(both 4" pro models).

 

[gc70]

I have both a SA WWII GI and a Colt 1991 NRM. The Colt has higher quality internal parts and better sights. The SA parts fit tighter and the flats have a higher polish than the Colt. Nevertheless, the Colt looks good and shoots great.

If you can spare the extra $$$, get the Colt; if not, the SA is a good gun.

 

[Pointman1776]

Kimber.

Whatever your choice, I've experienced much better reliability and performance from an American-made 1911 than any other.

Of the USA 1911's, I couldn't beat the performance and value ratio of the Kimbers. The entry Custom II's shoot so good that the only reason to get a more expensive Kimber is for the different options (target/night sights, stainless, trigger pull weight, ambidextrous safety, mag well, etc. etc.), not for significantly better accuracy or durability or reliability (they're all basically that good).

Try a Kimber, and you'll be astonished at the performance out-of-the-box (mine shoot like they have a freakin' radar), especially considering prices for which you can steal...err, buy...them.

Be safe. Have fun!

 

[K-Man]

I just purchased a Kimber Pro CDP II, but have not had a chance to shoot it yet. I also looked close at the Springfield line and was very tempted. After all things considered, I chose the Kimber because I was able to get it for just a few dollars more. The Springfield's are great guns, too, my first choice just happens to be Kimber.

 

[Black Majik]

I also agree to the NRM Colt Government (as always )

The NRM Government is in almost every way better than the SA milspec.

- The fit is better
- the blued finish is a lot better than the parkerized on the milspec
- less MIM parts in the new Colts.
- Its a Colt

The Milspec is a good gun though, its a great pistol to get into the 1911 world, but for just a little more, go for a Colt. I'm wearing mine as I type.