Posted: 7/16/2009 7:50:08 AM EDT
| Are COLTs really all THAT!? Are they the standard which all others are judged?? |
|
Meh, All of the top makers have their strengths and weaknesses. Colt does make a good production gun. They have a good frame and slide, parts are fit pretty well and seem to be of good quality. However no one is perfect, I don’t know about the other models of Colt, but my series 70 repro had edges so sharp I could about shave with them, and I know that this is common with this model. Sharp edges aside it is a great gun and would buy another in a heartbeat. The new Colts I think are very reasonably priced, and if you want the pony like many (me included) than go for it and enjoy.
Jets |
|
Quoted:
Are COLTs really all THAT!? Are they the standard which all others are judged?? i think yes and no. look at it this way. people have a need to judge/compare things. since Colts were the first its only natural that people will compare anything after that with a COlt. if you were to remake the Deloran, the first thing automotive reviewers/users/collectors would do is to compare it against the original. aslo, when comparing you have to remember, there is time and technology on our side since the newer versions have hopefully had a chance to learn from Colts mistakes/issues. i personally wouldnt say that the Colts were the most accurate guns out there. I have a stock kimber that will outshoot most of my Colts. However, i do have a accurized Colt Commander that it probably if not more accurate them my Kimber. Im not sure where my Colt GCNM fits in since i havent had a chace to shoot it alot. iac, i have a fondness of a nice blued gun. The other finishes are nice and functional, but blue and CC/B are at the top of my list. i think if you are going to compare things, you have to keep things in perspective. |
|
Can't claim to be an expert, but I've really jumped in to the 1911 world in the past couple of years and find that there is plenty of non-Colt superior quality out there. I have had excellent luck with Springfileds, both lower and higher level guns (G.I. and TRP). Wouldn't trade 'em for three Colts.
Nothing at all wrong wrong with Colts, as far as I can tell. Just not the only game in town...not even. |
|
The following is from an old post at another forum regarding Colts that I thought was very well done and may answer your question: Gentlemen, I have read the opinions here with interest, and have participated in many similar discussions over the years. I was introduced to the Colt 1911 pistol by the writings of the late Lt. Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC in 1974. At that time, most police organizations used revolvers, and the "Colt .45 Auto" was "the Army pistol" to most. Ball ammo was the standard, and pistol competition meant 50 foot NRA Bullseye competition. And Colt was the ONLY 1911. The times were different, and the world was a different place. More civil, and more naive. Colt built quality pistols, and had innovated the Bullseye Match accurate .45 (National Match/Gold Cup), the lighter, more compact Carry .45 (the Commander - they were all initially "Lightweights"), as well as multiple calibers - .38 Super, 9MM. Colt also saw the genius in the AR-15 design and had debugged Stoner's modernistic prototype into the reliable and effective M16A1 for the US Military - still serving, as the M16A2/3/4 and M-4. Who made the first workable Production 3" 1911? Colt did, and then the clone makers copied the Defender. Quite a bit of "innovation", don't you think? Does anyone realize any of this? As far as quality, I know that every large manufacturer, to include Glock and Kimber, has occasional problems and has sold some less than perfect products. Does anyone remember Glock selling "remanufactured" Police pistols as a regular item? The Glock series is on it's fourth Generation. That was because some models had real problems and had to be redesigned. How about the frequent MIM parts failures in Kimbers, or the Kimber Series II lockwork that was Much more likely to fail than Colt's Series 80 design. (That's why Colt didn't use the Schwartz design they developed in the 1940's, and designed a better one.) As for proper fit, if you use a tight 1911 long enough, including a Kimber, it will wear to that original design spec (Yes, per John Moses Browning himself) - good barrel/bushing/slide lockup with slightly loose rails, all by itself. And it will give up very little accuracy while becoming more forgiving of bad magazines and less than perfect cartridges. The 1911 was designed as a Soldier's fighting handgun - but it was not designed to be inaccurate. Wartime production by multiple makers, mixed up parts and excessive wear gave the 1911 GI guns a false reputation that has continued to this day. Colt makes a good gun - if Colts were all dogs, the company would be long gone. For some of us, the Colt mystique, the legend, is quite enough, by itself. Since 1836, a great many disputes, individual and global have been settled with Colt's firearms. Millions of Americans - and others - have taken quiet confidence in the Colt they carried into harm's way - and still do, right now. From fighting Seminole Indians in Florida to Jihadists in Bagdad today, this very minute, Colts were and ARE There and taking care of business. The true stories are Legion - from the Mexican and Indian wars, the Civil War, Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders, Alvin York, and many, many individual Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Lawmen - all the way up to tomorrow's newspaper. The fact that you can still buy a Colt is remarkable - the same brand carried by Real Heros is still being made - but only by Colt. So you can get a half inch (or even a whole inch) better accuracy out of your Kimber. So what? Is it forged and machined? You can buy a cheaper gun from SA, you say? So sorry you can't afford the Real Thing. "This gun is tighter than a Colt". Should it be? What are you using it for, again? Colt's primary focus is large production - military rifles. It has to be - or it would be a minor player, like Wilson, or Rock River, etc. I hope they do turn the corner and decide to focus on the consumer as well. If they do, a lot of companies currently riding high had better look out! We can argue individual points all day - and they are irrelevant. Every point has it's counter. But Colts satisfy an awful lot of people - and they command more loyalty than most brand names on the planet. We're proud of the Colt Heritage - because it is an important part of the Heritage of America. You can't touch that. (But you can still buy it!) The gentleman who wrote this goes by the handle "Col. Colt." I found his writing terrific. |
|
Quoted: Did somebody say they were ? I haven't noticed anyone here setting up Colt as a standard. The choice of the maunufacturer of a pistol is just that; a choice. It's a combination of models offered, features you like, cost, influence by others and personal experience. We need to start more threads about how Kimbers are junk, SAs suck, RIAs are foreign crap, Taurus makes 1911s out of beer cans, Colt owners are all arrogant asshats and "real" 1911 guys buy nothing but Wilson, Brown, Baer or NH or even better, have a custom 1911 smith build up one from a hunk of iron ore. Then we can all be divided instead of united in our love of the 1911 style pistol. These threads serve no useful purpose other than to stir up the same shit, over and over and over. Buy what you want as I don't care because I buy what I want. I buy nothing but Colts in a 1911. If that makes you happy then fine but more important, it makes ME happy. Do the same for yourself with whatever brand pleases you. Life will be much less stressful if you do. Are COLTs really all THAT!? Are they the standard which all others are judged??  |
|
The long Colt opinion posted previously is pretty awesome.
I own two Colts. One of them is 82 years old, and it still operates flawlessly. I am a Springfield guy, by nature. Colt has been around since 1836, but Springer since 1794. While I am fully aware that it isn't the same company now that it once was when it was founded by Gen. Washington and run by the gov't, the history of the name (which is all it really is for me) is still there. So for me, it's mostly about Springfield, then Colt... but keep in mind... Colt did it first... well, second behind Mr. Browning. So everything else truly is a copy. Sure, some pistols are produced to tigther tolerances, or with more "custom" features, but as to whether or not Colt is the benchmark by which everything else is judged? No. It's just the original that everyone else copies. |
|
For me, it's a double-edged sword.
The biggest problem is that NO production 1911 (by manufacturer, not by specific product line) is really "all that". Take the most popular 10 or so outfits and you see their product and/or overall quality ranges from piece of shit to acceptable or perhaps "good". Stellar is nowhere on the map. In my opinion, there are only 3 manufacturers even worth considering: Colt, SA, STI (and STI is too damned fugly for my tastes). Colt has a longstanding history of product inconsistency, generally with regard to cosmetics. This means you can select three $800 Colt pistols at random, one of them being a steal so well executed it should have hit the $1,000+ mark, one that overall fits the "YGWYPF" expectation, and one that is a real abortion that should have never left the shop. What sets Colt apart from say Kimber, is that the former has a rock-solid reputation for consistent function (the most important issue), unlike the latter. The other edge of the sword coincides with why people "pay too much" for a Harley. One camp doesn't understand why one would pay so much just for the label instead of getting a Victory or maybe a metric, and the other camp believes "some people just don't understand... and they never will". It's buying into tradition and having an irrational appreciation or desire of having a horse on the slide. As long as form follows function however, there's nothing wrong with "irrational". People want what they want. It's also worth mentioning that buying a Colt today is a different situation than the late 1980s or 1990s where Colt's marketing and/or overall quality was in a slump and the competitive companies were priced $200-$300 less. $50-$175 for a better functioning product and the horse to boot makes a lot of sense these days. |
| Not an expert by any means, but I judge a 1911 by the drawing. Will standard parts fit? Will it function dependably? I have a 200.00 ugly " govt model" that I am comfortable with and know how it will perform. I am building a " frame up" GI appearing model that I look forward to shooting. Buy a pistol with a "mil spec " frame and slide and you will be ok. If you really want a Colt, thats ok too. I really would like a Colt too someday. |
|
Quoted:
...but my series 70 repro had edges so sharp I could about shave with them, and I know that this is common with this model. Sharp edges aside it is a great gun and would buy another in a heartbeat. The new Colts I think are very reasonably priced, and if you want the pony like many (me included) than go for it and enjoy. Jets yup, my 5 month old XSE also is so sharp you can shave with it. As for what to look for, some of them have frame rub on the dust cover (mine doesn't) and some have an offset plunger tube opening (mine does). That aside, it has fired everything i've fed it and that's what brought me back to another Colt (first one was a combat commander). and i may be a kool-aid drinker or a coltaholic, but that's ok, it makes ME happy (as someone mentioned earlier) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am a Springfield guy, by nature. Colt has been around since 1836, but Springer since 1794. not the same company..... 
Hey, good job... now, before getting super excited to call someone out and post something irrelevant to the topic, read the next line I wrote. While I am fully aware that it isn't the same company now that it once was when it was founded by Gen. Washington and run by the gov't, the history of the name (which is all it really is for me) is still there. And there's the emphasis on why I'm a Springfield guy... (The history of the name) Anyways; when you really think about it... with all the modern, accurizied 1911's out there, there is still nothing more impressive than seeing an original Colt 1911 from WW1 or a 1911A1 from WW2.... whether it be beat up and used, or in pristine condition... you know you're looking at a piece of history, and it's something that, no matter how good of a pistol Ed Brown or Les Baer may make, they can't duplicate. |