One custom gun manufacturer says that a particular gun isn't suitable for a conversion to a more powerful caliber that the gun was never designed for. Hardly seems a reason to condemn the gun. It's like saying a Toyota Camry is a piece of junk because it might fail if you stuff a big-block V8 under the hood.
Worst production 1911?
- Thread starter Thermactor
- Start date
- Status
larryh1108
Member
When you sell 10x more 1911s, you get 10x more unhappy customers if the "lemon" rate is the same. They sell 10x more for a reason and if it was just marketing (like so many claim) they'd fall flat in a hurry. They make a decent gun for a decent price but for some reason they pizz off the guys who didn't buy one.
Thermactor
member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 992
That's a false analogy. 1911s are built to common specifications and share a common design. When they are made by many makers to many different price points, some will be unsuitable for Rowland conversion due to having a factor of safety that barely covers standard 45acp loads (i.e. Phillippine 1911s)
MagnunJoe
Member
You did not list perhaps the worst 1911 ever made. TAURUS.
Welding Rod
Member
I don't have experience with the cheaper guns, but I say Kimbers should be way better than they are due to their cost. I had two guns, a TLE and a Grand Raptor and both had severe function problems out of box, and worse, both could quite possibly be considered unsafe. All the problems were due to poor workmanship and lacking quality control measures. If you want the details you can search my user name, I have described the problems here before.
If I buy another factory 1911 it will be a Colt. I have owned several and had good experiences with them as far as functionality.
If I buy another factory 1911 it will be a Colt. I have owned several and had good experiences with them as far as functionality.
alexander45
Member
Just got done with looking them up. Its a very High end custom shop that had its hey day befor I was born, was started by a compitition shooter that retired (from compitition) when my mom was 9, and died when I was ten.
I would feel safe in saying that they are fairly obscure to the vast majority of the under 35 crowd short of those that That have been intressted in the fading sport of nra bullseye compitition.
rswartsell
Member
Except for the fact that World Champ Jerry Miculek married his daughter (not the only members of the family that compete on a very high level), lives and works out of their "compound" (many acres of range and un-assuming cinder block buildings that house the business) on Shoot-Out Lane just southeast of Shreveport, LA. And that they branched out into a very busy trade in competition .22s and Smith revolvers (who sponsor Mr. Miculek), off and on build custom guns (but generally these days do whatever they damn well want). All Mr. Miculek's youtube series originate from there, and to my knowledge all of the relatively few employees are the creme de la creme of high precision 'smithing (a few others can make that claim, Cylider and Slide in Nebraska comes to mind).
I up until recently lived in Shreveport and had the pleasure to sample their work for a "service action job" on a pretty, old Smith 10-5, converted a Kimber Custom II that I bought for the purpose to .460 Rowland (sold it at a profit) and covet some of their .22 work. There are probably several different reasons for their "preferred list", not all of which directly relate to manufacture quality of various 1911 brands.
Of course YMMV.
P.S. I voted Llama due to the worst gun purchase I ever made. A Llama "1911" at a gun show. I should have put the $ into several Ravens.
I up until recently lived in Shreveport and had the pleasure to sample their work for a "service action job" on a pretty, old Smith 10-5, converted a Kimber Custom II that I bought for the purpose to .460 Rowland (sold it at a profit) and covet some of their .22 work. There are probably several different reasons for their "preferred list", not all of which directly relate to manufacture quality of various 1911 brands.
Of course YMMV.
P.S. I voted Llama due to the worst gun purchase I ever made. A Llama "1911" at a gun show. I should have put the $ into several Ravens.
Last edited:
JeeperCreeper
Member
What about Iver Johnson???
I know nothing about them other than the crazy hydrodipping. Any good?? Who makes them as I know I.J. is just the importer. Phillipine guns correct?
I know nothing about them other than the crazy hydrodipping. Any good?? Who makes them as I know I.J. is just the importer. Phillipine guns correct?
243winxb
Member
Llama - Good to know that others had problems. It wasnt me or my reloads.
I voted Para because my 90's P13 was a lemon from day 1. It was never reliable...I really wanted to like it...I wish I got a good one like you did.
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
It is useful for folks, shooters anyway, to know who the Clark family is and their ongoing contributions to the shooting sports (3 gun competition, hunting, bullseye, revolver and pistol competition of all types, etc.). But I don't expect people to. No folks are born with a knowledge of them and it doesn't invalidate someone's opinion if they don't know.
But if you do know anything about the Clarks then you know that they don't go publishing lists of "bad" 1911s. The idea that they would oughta make you suspicious and invite a check on the source...which I did do.
Llama (Gabilondo y Cia) was a Spanish gunmaker from the Basque country of Spain. A long tradition there of gunmaking. They made a lot of good guns over the decades before they went out of business. They also made some poor ones.
But they made few 1911's. They did make a lot of 1911 pattern guns with different firing systems and altered frames and slides. They made guns in 9mm, 38 Super and 9mm largo that had lighter slides and frames than a 1911. They figured ya didn't need the extra weight for 9mm so make the gun lighter. Anyway like the Clark's say avoid the Llama guns if you want to convert to 460 Rowland. Too many differences between them and a 1911.
tipoc
But if you do know anything about the Clarks then you know that they don't go publishing lists of "bad" 1911s. The idea that they would oughta make you suspicious and invite a check on the source...which I did do.
Llama (Gabilondo y Cia) was a Spanish gunmaker from the Basque country of Spain. A long tradition there of gunmaking. They made a lot of good guns over the decades before they went out of business. They also made some poor ones.
But they made few 1911's. They did make a lot of 1911 pattern guns with different firing systems and altered frames and slides. They made guns in 9mm, 38 Super and 9mm largo that had lighter slides and frames than a 1911. They figured ya didn't need the extra weight for 9mm so make the gun lighter. Anyway like the Clark's say avoid the Llama guns if you want to convert to 460 Rowland. Too many differences between them and a 1911.
tipoc
Gun Master
Member
I voted Llama before I checked the poll. 
I felt vindicated after seeing most of others believed the same.
Lot of good Spanish guns. Llama ain't one of 'em.
I felt vindicated after seeing most of others believed the same.
Lot of good Spanish guns. Llama ain't one of 'em.
larryh1108
Member
I'll be one of the few that will defend the Llamas. They were a lower end production 1911 but they were the Rock Island of their day. Many good, too many bad. I've had great luck with my Llamas and know quite a few people who also love theirs. Of course, there and many bad stories out there as well. Perhaps there a some other lower quality 1911s out there but the Llama seems to have the top spot locked up. Too bad. They can be very nice especially the mini-1911 smaller bore models.
jerkface11
Member
Whoa whoa whoa. Savage was the name of the man who founded the company.
I have no idea what was (is) the worst 1911 ever made, but the worst 1911's I have ever owned were Kimbers. I had a SS Target II and a limited edition Target Master. I shot each of them in competition and ran many 1,000's of rds through each. Each was well made, very accurate and quite beautiful inside and out even after years of competition and practice. The problem was reliability: Neither could ever quite make it to 100 rds in a row without some sort of malfunction.
Kimber customer service personnel were very nice and the work they did to try to achieve 100% reliability looked first class and did decrease the malfunction rate, but in the end I sold them and got a base Springfield Loaded and a Les Baer. The Springfield has been very reliable, but has nowhere near the accuracy of either Kimber. The LB is both reliable and accurate.
Kimber customer service personnel were very nice and the work they did to try to achieve 100% reliability looked first class and did decrease the malfunction rate, but in the end I sold them and got a base Springfield Loaded and a Les Baer. The Springfield has been very reliable, but has nowhere near the accuracy of either Kimber. The LB is both reliable and accurate.
AustinTX
Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 743
From what I've seen, Taurus definitely gets my vote as the worst 1911 currently produced.
I'm sure someone already has said it, but Llamas were/are not true 1911s. They're 1911 look-alikes with parts that do not interchange. While they are generally junk, they're not 1911s for purposes of "worst production 1911." (Maybe somewhere among all their models was a true 1911 clone, but I've never heard of that being the case.)
As bad as the Taurus 1911 is, there are several out-of-production 1911s that were worse. AMTs were bad, especially the early models made of soft stainless steel. Older Paras were garbage. I have no experience with the Para USA guns; I've heard they're better, but I can't offer an opinion one way or the other. The pre-Kahr Auto-Ordnance 1911s were pretty terrible too. Take your pick.
I'm sure someone already has said it, but Llamas were/are not true 1911s. They're 1911 look-alikes with parts that do not interchange. While they are generally junk, they're not 1911s for purposes of "worst production 1911." (Maybe somewhere among all their models was a true 1911 clone, but I've never heard of that being the case.)
As bad as the Taurus 1911 is, there are several out-of-production 1911s that were worse. AMTs were bad, especially the early models made of soft stainless steel. Older Paras were garbage. I have no experience with the Para USA guns; I've heard they're better, but I can't offer an opinion one way or the other. The pre-Kahr Auto-Ordnance 1911s were pretty terrible too. Take your pick.
wojownik
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 2,086
^^ Agree. The Llamas are not true 1911s, as with the Ballester Molinas. Both look like 1911s, but both have parts that do not interchange. Among other things, the Llamas have been noted to have soft metallurgy, poor fitment, very finicky with ammo, etc... OTOH, the Ballester - while also not a true 1911 - was a very nice pistol from Argentina - underrated IMHO.
Gun Master
Member
wojownik and AustinTX, ditto & ditto. I totally agree with you both in the above statements.
Gun Master
Member
My Star Model P (larger than the PD) functions well, and operates easier than the PD. As I remember looking at a PD in a pawnshop several years ago, it appeared to be about the size of a Colt Commander. The PD's slide and trigger were very stiff. I later bought the Star Model P (a full 1911 sized) at another pawnshop. It had a broken firing, but has functioned well since it was fixed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
