No thread title

[Stradawhovious]

http://www.thegunzone.com/1911a1-kb.html

Congrats! You found one!

One.

[sochr000]

eh, only looked for a minute or two. Give it time... lol

[sochr000]

Oh, since I've been bashing 1911s for a while now, figured I'd get a real one soon and wanted some opinions. I can't spend too terribly much, so thinking Springfield, something like what I'm posting below.

http://rrarms.com/catalog.php?prod=GPW9108LP

GI .45 5", Parkerized
Caliber: .45 ACP
Capacity: 7+1
Barrel: 5", 1:16 LH
Sights: Old GI Style
Sight Radius: 6.25"
Size: 36 oz., 8.5" overall length Trigger Pull: 5 to 6 lbs.
Magazines: 1

Is this a good gun, and is it worth the $500 it'll end up costing me if they can get one in?

[1911fan]

get the one with enhanced sights samebasic gun just better sights. GI nubbin sights are very hard to use fast.

[sochr000]

do the Springfields come with the enhanced sights? or is this something a gunsmith would/could put on?
and by enhanced sights, are you talking night sights, or something else? I checked Springfield's website and didn't see any mention of them on the GI or Milspec models.

[1911fan]

its the mil spec you want. Its a little $$ maybe twenty bucks IIRC but its a huge step up in usefulness.

I am working of my iPod. Can somebody post the difference between the mil spec sites and the GI style nubbin sights?

[sochr000]

okay, but the Springfield isn't a bad 1911 for the money? Believe me, I'd love to get a Wilson or some other fancy $2000 pistol, but not in the budget yet.

[Pat Cannon]

The consensus of what I've heard is that the Springfield is a great gun for the money. My brother bought the Operator version and is real happy with it, but I haven't heard much about reliability being a problem with even the lowest-end Springfields.

Here's the sights & links to a couple reviews:
the GI:


the Mil-Spec (much better):


Though if it's going to be a carry gun, you really want this style, which is getting you into the spendier models:

[sochr000]

if it turns into a carry pistol it'll be a while, I'm used to my G19 and am accurate enough with it for now. One day, I might use a 1911 as a carry gun, but for now, I just want one.

[Rem700]

A couple of other differences between theSpringfield GI and Mil spec, The Milspec comes with a lowered and flared ejection port, And the barrel is throated and barrel is also ramped. Also if memory serves which it doesnt always the GI comes with a flat mainspring houseing and the Milspec a rounded mainspring houseing. Just personnel preference I like the flat.

[mnglocker]

A couple of other differences between theSpringfield GI and Mil spec, The Milspec comes with a lowered and flared ejection port, And the barrel is throated and barrel is also ramped. Also if memory serves which it doesnt always the GI comes with a flat mainspring houseing and the Milspec a rounded mainspring houseing. Just personnel preference I like the flat.

Memory failed. The GI I had before the boating accident had a rounded mainspring housing.

[Veldy]

Buy a Glock. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better gun.

Yeah and just hope the Glock never goes K-BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would take a 1911 over a glock or any other gun that is made out of metal for that matter

What a bunch of baloney. The Glock isn't going to blow up any more often than any other gun [forget about the initial rush to market of the .40]. There are more Glocks in active duty of law enforcement than about any other gun .. and I haven't heard to may complaining about it. I shoot both and like both, but I shoot the 1911 better, but to be honest, they are over priced and relatively, the Glock's are not. If you want a good compromise, consider a Springfield XD or XD(m).

[Veldy]

For a range gun, I'd take a 1911 over a Glock any day. For self-defense, I'd take one of my 1911s over a Glock any day.

I'm with you. Glocks point about a foot high for me. I don't care how reliable a gun is if I can't shoot it.

It wouldn't if you used the sites and paid attention to trigger pull, anticipation, etc.

[rtk]

For a range gun, I'd take a 1911 over a Glock any day. For self-defense, I'd take one of my 1911s over a Glock any day.

I'm with you. Glocks point about a foot high for me. I don't care how reliable a gun is if I can't shoot it.

It wouldn't if you used the sites

[Veldy]

Stard this has nothing to do with 1911's. Ask John at GS about shooting lead out of Glocks.

you have a point, and this one isn't under your hat. Many of the 1911 only people out there use the "kaboom" and the "you can't shoot lead out of a Glock" as valid arguments against Glocks. I am trying to understand if this holds any water, and I don't believe that it does. I do however think it does in a round about way relate to how 1911 guys view Glocks in general, and could be a valid entry in this thread. Or not.

Buy a Glock and a new match grade barrel that will shoot lead and you are still cheaper than any decent 1911 out there and you have solved the lead problem [and have a more accurate barrel to boot]. I kept the stock barrels in my Glocks and shoot plated or jacketed bullets, but I also shoot a LOT of lead through my 1911 (SW1911PD 5") and all non-Glock guns.