PirateRadio
Member
I'm 99% sure that the Springfield 1911 Mil-Spec is my next gun. I'm just curious what Mil-Spec means?
What does "Mil-Spec" mean?
- Thread starter PirateRadio
- Start date
- Status
cdrt
Member
Military Specifications or basically a Govt Issue type 1911 or 199A1. But I'm sure someone will have a different take.
DFW1911
Member
IIRC, built to Military Specifications, so you won't get anything like a beaver tail safety, beveled magazine well, ambi safety, etc.
However, Mil Spec guns are cool, so you have that going for you, which is nice
!
Have fun,
DFW1911
However, Mil Spec guns are cool, so you have that going for you, which is nice
!Have fun,
DFW1911
UKarmourer
Member
if its anything like the rest of our kit,
Mil Spec means spec'ed down to the lowest possible point, for the most profit.
bitter and twisted?, maybe a little............
Mil Spec means spec'ed down to the lowest possible point, for the most profit.
bitter and twisted?, maybe a little............
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Anything built for the government is supposed to have a "spec" that any maker of the item must follow. That way, all items are built the same, regardless of who makes them. (one reason to be suspicious of any parts marked "surplus". )
The "Mil Spec" designation by Springfield is just a name. Springfield is by no means "built to spec", or at least, not to Colt/GI specs. Their frames especially.
If you want to see what that spec is, look at a "property" marked GI gun, or a basic, Series 70 Colt and before.
)The "Mil Spec" designation by Springfield is just a name. Springfield is by no means "built to spec", or at least, not to Colt/GI specs. Their frames especially.
If you want to see what that spec is, look at a "property" marked GI gun, or a basic, Series 70 Colt and before.
it really is just a name the Springfield uses...however is does make a great basis for a custom 1911...so my 1911 guy tells me
you have to throw out half the parts, but at least you didn't spend as much for the package
you have to throw out half the parts, but at least you didn't spend as much for the package
Technosavant
Member
By most users, it would be a gun built to the original GI 1911A1 pattern. Interestingly, that is not the Springfield Armory Mil-Spec model (from SA, that would be the GI, with the only exceptions of the firing pin and mainspring housing).
The SA "Mil-Spec" has been around longer than the SA GI, and is mostly to the GI specs (mostly when compared to the "Loaded" models; in fact, the term mil-spec here is more to differentiate from the loaded than to show its true config). With the Mil-Spec, the differences from the original GI models would be the ILS in the mainspring housing, the .38Super/9mm sized Ti firing pin, slanted rear cocking serrations, and a lowered and flared ejection port.
It is a fine gun, and actually makes for a very good platform for future upgrades if you think those may be in the cards.
The SA "Mil-Spec" has been around longer than the SA GI, and is mostly to the GI specs (mostly when compared to the "Loaded" models; in fact, the term mil-spec here is more to differentiate from the loaded than to show its true config). With the Mil-Spec, the differences from the original GI models would be the ILS in the mainspring housing, the .38Super/9mm sized Ti firing pin, slanted rear cocking serrations, and a lowered and flared ejection port.
It is a fine gun, and actually makes for a very good platform for future upgrades if you think those may be in the cards.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
The very early Springfields were very close to GI specs in all regards. As Springfielld became more popular, their guns started taking a life of their own, and soon about as close as they came was the general 1911 look.
Even their WWII series, which you would think would be close, has frames that vary quite a bit, even in the same serial number range. The difference in the frames is enough that two guns often will not fit in the same kydex holster due to it, and can be very tight between them in a leather holster. You can pretty much instantly feel the difference in the grip also, especially if your used to a Colt or GI gun.
This isnt the greatest pic, but you should be able to still see the differences. The top two are Springfield WWII guns, the bottom, a Colt Series 70. If you look at the Colts grip, the front strap radius comes around to the edge of the grip panel. That is the correct spec. The Springfields are different form the Colt, as well as being different from each other. The middle one being the worse of the two. The feel between all three is instantly noticeable.
If you also look at the dust covers, you'll see the one in the middle is very blocky, with very little radius cut on it. The upper one is closer to the Colt.
One thing you cant see by looking is slide to frame fit. This to can vary quite a bit with the different Springfields.
Closer look at the Springfields
Better look at a Colt (Series 80)
The Springfields frames vary across their entire line too. This is a Loaded model. It was a very tight fit in leather holsters I used for my Colts, tight enough that it was very difficult to get the gun out during a draw, and the kydex holsters had to be readjusted open, just to get it to go in. The grip was also very wide front to rear.
Kimbers frames are very close to Colt, if not right on.
Even their WWII series, which you would think would be close, has frames that vary quite a bit, even in the same serial number range. The difference in the frames is enough that two guns often will not fit in the same kydex holster due to it, and can be very tight between them in a leather holster. You can pretty much instantly feel the difference in the grip also, especially if your used to a Colt or GI gun.
This isnt the greatest pic, but you should be able to still see the differences. The top two are Springfield WWII guns, the bottom, a Colt Series 70. If you look at the Colts grip, the front strap radius comes around to the edge of the grip panel. That is the correct spec. The Springfields are different form the Colt, as well as being different from each other. The middle one being the worse of the two. The feel between all three is instantly noticeable.
If you also look at the dust covers, you'll see the one in the middle is very blocky, with very little radius cut on it. The upper one is closer to the Colt.
One thing you cant see by looking is slide to frame fit. This to can vary quite a bit with the different Springfields.
Closer look at the Springfields
Better look at a Colt (Series 80)
The Springfields frames vary across their entire line too. This is a Loaded model. It was a very tight fit in leather holsters I used for my Colts, tight enough that it was very difficult to get the gun out during a draw, and the kydex holsters had to be readjusted open, just to get it to go in. The grip was also very wide front to rear.
Kimbers frames are very close to Colt, if not right on.
true mil-spec is a 2 part process.1st is a verbal agreement between the Govt and the vendor on what is required. 2nd part is the prints,drawings,ect for the item. true mil-spec is only provided to the Govt. even when Colt was making M 16's and AR-15's the AR's were not exactly like the M 16's.the difference may be small,pin size,thread size type of metal,ect. but there is a difference. these days,items sold as mil-spec are as close to military as the law allows. jwr
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
