45 question: RIA or Springfield?
- Thread starter L. Boscoe
- Start date
Jim Watson
New member
I think the RIAs are serviceable pistols but I don't see where they fit a collection, they are neither scarce nor of exceptional quality.
Collection is subjective. Some people collect Saturday night specials. A friend off mine has a collection of ww2 rifles, an Arisaka, Mosin, Lee Enfield, Mauser, several of which are not even operational. Another friend has a $4000 Sharps, has never shot it, says he never will, its a "collectors" gun.
The question is what kind of collection are you trying to curate?
I can understand many types of collections, but personally I have trouble relating to them. I collect shooters, I want guns that are functional and or fun. No safe queens for me of any kind, defeats the purpose of the item.
The question is what kind of collection are you trying to curate?
I can understand many types of collections, but personally I have trouble relating to them. I collect shooters, I want guns that are functional and or fun. No safe queens for me of any kind, defeats the purpose of the item.
My sample size is very small. One Springfield ,one RIA.and one ATI. I would not take any giant leaps toward conclusions.
The Philippine guns had frames that needed no corrections. I replaced some small parts that were working,but the appearance did not inspire confidence.
The Springfield had large machining burrs,the plunger tube was loose,and the feed ramp appeared to have been shaped by someone with a die grinder who was poorly trained or did not care. It was not a uniform slope. It had the profile of a beer belly. Rounds coming out of the magazine hit a surface that was too near vertical. They just stopped. I had enough steel to set it up in a mill and recut the feed ramp, Then it worked fine.
As I said,thats not ALL Springfields. Just a sample of one. No doubt many folks have a Springfield that is excellent. And I do not doubt there is an occasional Philippine Lemon.
I've been told the occasional Colt and Kimber might not be perfect.
It depends on what you are looking for. An RIA might be a perfectly functional tool for a good price. An equally perfectly functional Springfield will carry more status.
I like and keep and enjoy my 1911's. For the price of a basic,bargain 1911,there are 20 OZ or so compact striker guns from Glock,S+W, Springfield,SIG,etc that,for myself, are more likely to be in my holster,on my body than my 1911's. Suit yourself!
The Philippine guns had frames that needed no corrections. I replaced some small parts that were working,but the appearance did not inspire confidence.
The Springfield had large machining burrs,the plunger tube was loose,and the feed ramp appeared to have been shaped by someone with a die grinder who was poorly trained or did not care. It was not a uniform slope. It had the profile of a beer belly. Rounds coming out of the magazine hit a surface that was too near vertical. They just stopped. I had enough steel to set it up in a mill and recut the feed ramp, Then it worked fine.
As I said,thats not ALL Springfields. Just a sample of one. No doubt many folks have a Springfield that is excellent. And I do not doubt there is an occasional Philippine Lemon.
I've been told the occasional Colt and Kimber might not be perfect.
It depends on what you are looking for. An RIA might be a perfectly functional tool for a good price. An equally perfectly functional Springfield will carry more status.
I like and keep and enjoy my 1911's. For the price of a basic,bargain 1911,there are 20 OZ or so compact striker guns from Glock,S+W, Springfield,SIG,etc that,for myself, are more likely to be in my holster,on my body than my 1911's. Suit yourself!
RIA or Springfield
Ok, I need to clarify "collector" to me is different kinds of guns, especially the same caliber, in this case 45acp. Not interested in
any that would not qualify as good bullseye shooters. For example, right now CZ 97E, Sig 220 Match elite (no longer made), Tangfolio Stock Master, SAR K2-45 and the aforementioned Springfield. All must be good enough to make it at the range or they either get fixed or sold.
It is interesting to see how different mfgs approach the same caliber, IMHO.
Ok, I need to clarify "collector" to me is different kinds of guns, especially the same caliber, in this case 45acp. Not interested in
any that would not qualify as good bullseye shooters. For example, right now CZ 97E, Sig 220 Match elite (no longer made), Tangfolio Stock Master, SAR K2-45 and the aforementioned Springfield. All must be good enough to make it at the range or they either get fixed or sold.
It is interesting to see how different mfgs approach the same caliber, IMHO.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Your criteria are different from those of most collectors. Most collectors wouldn't think of shooting any of their collectible firearms.L.Boscoe said:
That said, either by the criteria of a serious collector or by your criteria, IMHO neither Springfield nor RIA would qualify. As to how different manufacturers approach 1911s, both Springfield Armory and Armscor (the makers of RIA) produce their guns using CNC machining and assembly using standard parts. A stock pistol from either company probably would not be up to snuff for bullseye shooting, and a stock pistol from either company could probably be modified into a bullseye-grade pistol.
Guns were made to be shot, not kept as pieces of art, at least thats how I feel about it.
To your point, as the OP stated, "springfield tactical that has had some work done on it".
stinkeypete
New member
I think most collectors are like me- we are interested in firearms and buy, sell and trade them to get hands on experience with them.
I think most collectors take a new-to-them firearm, take it apart, clean and lubricate it, take it to the range and shoot it. Shoot it without putting more dings in the stock or metal. Then we clean it properly, store it in a decent environment. Once something else takes a fancy, it’s fine to sell or trade what has lost interest.
In my family, guns are for shooting.
That said, it’s wrong to take every shotgun out duck hunting to be dropped in the boat, covered in muck, rinsed off with pond water. But a walk in the field on a sunny autumn day with the dog? That’s what a fine shotgun is for.
It’s not right to put a 100 year old Colt in a holster and go out horse riding with it in the dust, wearing what little finish it has even more. But kept free of abrasion, shooting it in a few Cowboy Action meetups per year is perfectly fine in my mind.
Taking old guns, preserving them from decay and using them… that’s what most of us do.
I think that buying a new revolver and putting it away without allowing the cylinder to even be turned once it leaves the factory is the rare fellow. That’s more like “investing in stamps” where ya don’t mail a letter with your stamp collection. It’s still fun for those who do it. I just don’t see the appeal.
Now.. the thing about the RIA is that it’s cheap enough to take apart, shoot, replace parts, tune up, and get your gun from it. Just as much fun as the Springfield but at less cost. I vote for the RIA. I bet it won’t be long before you can trade it at what you paid for it.
I used to own a Springfield National Match. That’s nicer than anything Springfield sells these days. They lost their panache but increased their volume.
I think most collectors take a new-to-them firearm, take it apart, clean and lubricate it, take it to the range and shoot it. Shoot it without putting more dings in the stock or metal. Then we clean it properly, store it in a decent environment. Once something else takes a fancy, it’s fine to sell or trade what has lost interest.
In my family, guns are for shooting.
That said, it’s wrong to take every shotgun out duck hunting to be dropped in the boat, covered in muck, rinsed off with pond water. But a walk in the field on a sunny autumn day with the dog? That’s what a fine shotgun is for.
It’s not right to put a 100 year old Colt in a holster and go out horse riding with it in the dust, wearing what little finish it has even more. But kept free of abrasion, shooting it in a few Cowboy Action meetups per year is perfectly fine in my mind.
Taking old guns, preserving them from decay and using them… that’s what most of us do.
I think that buying a new revolver and putting it away without allowing the cylinder to even be turned once it leaves the factory is the rare fellow. That’s more like “investing in stamps” where ya don’t mail a letter with your stamp collection. It’s still fun for those who do it. I just don’t see the appeal.
Now.. the thing about the RIA is that it’s cheap enough to take apart, shoot, replace parts, tune up, and get your gun from it. Just as much fun as the Springfield but at less cost. I vote for the RIA. I bet it won’t be long before you can trade it at what you paid for it.
I used to own a Springfield National Match. That’s nicer than anything Springfield sells these days. They lost their panache but increased their volume.
Last edited:
Jim Watson
New member
That makes the RIA a "base gun" if you wanted to get into DIY improvements. Learn how to fit a barrel bushing and long link or a whole new barrel, learn a trigger job, ramp cutting for semiwadcutters, etc.
For out of the box shooting, how about a HK45 or USP 45; an Expert if you could find one.
longrangeshooter
New member
Personally I think the Armscor 1911 is pretty good out of the box, mine certainly is. It is also a good starting place to build up a shooter for whatever you want to do, match shooting and so on. There are better but for the cost Armscor is a good value. I'd keep one around as a carry or bedside pistol as well.
LRS
LRS
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Yes, I saw that. The nature of his opening post in this thread suggested that he is looking only for a pistol that's ready for bullseye competition out of the box, and I don't think he will get that from either Springfield Armory or Rock Island Armory. Having owned both brands, and tested others from both brands, I'm fairly certain of that. They both make good, solid 1911s -- but not up to snuff for bullseye out of the the box.Shadow9mm said:
Any pistol from either company can be modified into a bullseye pistol, but I didn't think he was seeking another gunsmith project.
I am not shooting Bullseye. I'm not buying gun magazines or following the latest in 1911's.
The mfgrs have to pick a niche and focus. Depending on the model,both RIA and Springfield offer "pricepoint" guns. Pretty much along the lines of a service pistol.
I'm guessing if you buy an RIA or Springfield thats offered as a "Match" pistol,you'll get sights, a better trigger,and MAYBE tolerance selected parts.Better lockup. Fitted barrel bushing. Maybe it won't rattle if you shake it.
But you may not get a Master Smith hand fitting a competition pistol in the RIA/ SA budget range.
You might look at Dan Wesson if they are still around. Or S+W custom shop.
How is a Ruger?
Or see what the winners are using in the competition of your choice.
The mfgrs have to pick a niche and focus. Depending on the model,both RIA and Springfield offer "pricepoint" guns. Pretty much along the lines of a service pistol.
I'm guessing if you buy an RIA or Springfield thats offered as a "Match" pistol,you'll get sights, a better trigger,and MAYBE tolerance selected parts.Better lockup. Fitted barrel bushing. Maybe it won't rattle if you shake it.
But you may not get a Master Smith hand fitting a competition pistol in the RIA/ SA budget range.
You might look at Dan Wesson if they are still around. Or S+W custom shop.
How is a Ruger?
Or see what the winners are using in the competition of your choice.
RIA or Springfield
HiBC's post raises the question: ok, for a one handed shooter following the NRA pistol format, 3 guns, 25 and 50 yards, a really fine pistol costing over 2K, some in the 4k range is what the really good competition shooters will have.
For an 85 year old geezer, who has to use two hands, how good is
good? Ruger has a SR1911 for about 1K, my Tanfoglio was $1.5k,
and I don't think I can say it is not good enough for my "skills"
that is why I made the original post. I think a pistol that will produce 1.7in groups at 25 yds is enough and then some. It may
be that I should aim a bit higher than RIA?
HiBC's post raises the question: ok, for a one handed shooter following the NRA pistol format, 3 guns, 25 and 50 yards, a really fine pistol costing over 2K, some in the 4k range is what the really good competition shooters will have.
For an 85 year old geezer, who has to use two hands, how good is
good? Ruger has a SR1911 for about 1K, my Tanfoglio was $1.5k,
and I don't think I can say it is not good enough for my "skills"
that is why I made the original post. I think a pistol that will produce 1.7in groups at 25 yds is enough and then some. It may
be that I should aim a bit higher than RIA?
Jim Watson
New member
That is mostly 10s on the B16, all 10s on the B5, and Xs on the B8, the targets allowed for use in the Probationary One or Two Handed Match.
I'd read some of the payola in gunzines and gunboards to see what is even being claimed for the various low and middle class guns.
L Boscoe : You raise a good point.
Folks select their gear for all sorts of reasons.
Its not wrong to start with the best (buy once,cry once) But its not wrong to run what you have.
Some folks are driven by competition. Then you are up against what the other guy shoots.
Some folks are in competition with themselves. Improvement is the goal.
Some folks throw thousands into equipment hoping that will improve their standing.
Poor equipment can be limiting and discouraging. There is a balance.
For myself, an $800 pistol and $ 2200 of ammo and coaching will get more results than a $3000 pistol and a 50 round box of ammo.
Most $500 or $600 RIA's or SA's will shoot as well or better than I can,I think.
Folks select their gear for all sorts of reasons.
Its not wrong to start with the best (buy once,cry once) But its not wrong to run what you have.
Some folks are driven by competition. Then you are up against what the other guy shoots.
Some folks are in competition with themselves. Improvement is the goal.
Some folks throw thousands into equipment hoping that will improve their standing.
Poor equipment can be limiting and discouraging. There is a balance.
For myself, an $800 pistol and $ 2200 of ammo and coaching will get more results than a $3000 pistol and a 50 round box of ammo.
Most $500 or $600 RIA's or SA's will shoot as well or better than I can,I think.
stinkeypete
New member
If you think you can’t tell the difference between a $600 Springfield and a $1900 Rock River Armory (not RIA, rock river is just down the street from Springfield) you haven’t shot A club league or … well…
If your pistol can’t hold a group, you simply can not practice to improve your accuracy.
No amount of practice overcomes an inaccurate gun. If you miss, it could be your mistake or just bad luck. Hit the bullseye? That could be luck too.
This is important for .22 but even more so for .45. Flinch is very very real with .45 acp.
In our club league, the only fella that could shoot the same scores with his .45 as with his .22 was an NRA High Master. Even with the huge hole size scoring advantage and top quality bullseye guns. That big boom messes with your head.
The difference between an entry level target gun and a $600 general shooter is obvious to anyone shooting at targets and comparing their scores. Even a bozo like me.
Shoot some .45s at NRA targets at the proper distance with a friend’s bullseye gun and someone’s regular ol goes-bang .45. You will see it immediately.
Back in the day, getting a base gun made sense if you had a pistolsmith near you. Now they are extreme specialists. It’s far better to get a tuned factory gun from a place that will send you a 5 shot group from their ransom rest at 50 yards. Times have changed.
If your pistol can’t hold a group, you simply can not practice to improve your accuracy.
No amount of practice overcomes an inaccurate gun. If you miss, it could be your mistake or just bad luck. Hit the bullseye? That could be luck too.
This is important for .22 but even more so for .45. Flinch is very very real with .45 acp.
In our club league, the only fella that could shoot the same scores with his .45 as with his .22 was an NRA High Master. Even with the huge hole size scoring advantage and top quality bullseye guns. That big boom messes with your head.
The difference between an entry level target gun and a $600 general shooter is obvious to anyone shooting at targets and comparing their scores. Even a bozo like me.
Shoot some .45s at NRA targets at the proper distance with a friend’s bullseye gun and someone’s regular ol goes-bang .45. You will see it immediately.
Back in the day, getting a base gun made sense if you had a pistolsmith near you. Now they are extreme specialists. It’s far better to get a tuned factory gun from a place that will send you a 5 shot group from their ransom rest at 50 yards. Times have changed.
Last edited: