Picked up one of these a few weeks ago, brand new for $265. For those not familiar, this firearm nearly duplicates the controls of the 1911 (it however lacks a grip safety). Mechanically, it's an entirely different gun; it is blowback operated and has a barrel that is fixed to the frame, chambered for .22lr. Unlike the GSG-1911's (the other well-known full size 1911-style gun available in .22lr), virtually no parts interchange with actual 1911's (other than maybe the grips).
The first impression wasn't positive, the gun has (without exaggeration) the worst fit and finish I have ever seen in any firearm, period. The slide has lots of play, to the point of rattling, a lot. The manual says this is deliberate and done for reliability purposes, but it sure feels cheap. The pot-metal Chiappalloy (or whatever they call it) doesn't feel particularly solid either. To add to my worries, the firearm would extract but rarely eject rounds when cycled manually. This may be due to the design, but still seems unusual and less than ideal. The sights are on the lousy side, perhaps more appropriate to a lower-end airsoft gun than an actual firearm. I had a hard time believing this would be a worthwhile, working gun. To be frank, it felt like a Saturday Night Special that sells for twice the price.
Here's some examples of the seemingly shoddy workmanship:
The guide rod:
The barrel bushing:
The surprising thing is how the gun actually performed when fired. Before firing, I cleaned the gun and oiled it appropriately. Fired 320 rounds in total, 200 CCI Mini-Mags, 50 CCI Stingers, and the rest was some sort of cheap Winchester bulk hollowpoints (to see how the gun performs with lousy ammo). I wasn't quite cruel enough to try Remington bulk just yet. Maybe after the manual-recommended break-in period is complete. The 1911-22 actually performed remarkably well. Out of those 320 rounds, there were only two stovepipes, and they occurred towards the end of the shooting session and one was with the cheap Winchester ammo, which also once failed to cycle the slide far enough to chamber a round. Not perfect performance, but again, the manual does recommend a break-in of a few hundred rounds using quality ammo, so it should improve in theory. Furthermore, the gun isn't a particularly good self-defense gun but rather a plinker that could also be a great tool for introducing a new shooter to semi-automatic handguns, something I do on a fairly routine basis. As a result, 100% reliability just isn't super important in this case.
Despite what other reviewers have said, the trigger isn't that bad. A little on the spongy side but not too heavy or otherwise bad. The gun also seems accurate. I haven't yet shot at any paper targets to see what kind of groups I'm able to get, but was able to chase around soda cans at 15 and even 25 yards with consistency.
Despite my initial misgivings, I am glad I bought the gun and think that it's a keeper. It looks cheap, feels cheap, but I guess that's ok, it's not a gun meant to be looked at, but to be fired, and the gun fires well. Despite the lousy sights, it's accurate, and despite the cheap construction it's pretty darn reliable for what it is.
The first impression wasn't positive, the gun has (without exaggeration) the worst fit and finish I have ever seen in any firearm, period. The slide has lots of play, to the point of rattling, a lot. The manual says this is deliberate and done for reliability purposes, but it sure feels cheap. The pot-metal Chiappalloy (or whatever they call it) doesn't feel particularly solid either. To add to my worries, the firearm would extract but rarely eject rounds when cycled manually. This may be due to the design, but still seems unusual and less than ideal. The sights are on the lousy side, perhaps more appropriate to a lower-end airsoft gun than an actual firearm. I had a hard time believing this would be a worthwhile, working gun. To be frank, it felt like a Saturday Night Special that sells for twice the price.
Here's some examples of the seemingly shoddy workmanship:
The guide rod:
The barrel bushing:
The surprising thing is how the gun actually performed when fired. Before firing, I cleaned the gun and oiled it appropriately. Fired 320 rounds in total, 200 CCI Mini-Mags, 50 CCI Stingers, and the rest was some sort of cheap Winchester bulk hollowpoints (to see how the gun performs with lousy ammo). I wasn't quite cruel enough to try Remington bulk just yet. Maybe after the manual-recommended break-in period is complete. The 1911-22 actually performed remarkably well. Out of those 320 rounds, there were only two stovepipes, and they occurred towards the end of the shooting session and one was with the cheap Winchester ammo, which also once failed to cycle the slide far enough to chamber a round. Not perfect performance, but again, the manual does recommend a break-in of a few hundred rounds using quality ammo, so it should improve in theory. Furthermore, the gun isn't a particularly good self-defense gun but rather a plinker that could also be a great tool for introducing a new shooter to semi-automatic handguns, something I do on a fairly routine basis. As a result, 100% reliability just isn't super important in this case.
Despite what other reviewers have said, the trigger isn't that bad. A little on the spongy side but not too heavy or otherwise bad. The gun also seems accurate. I haven't yet shot at any paper targets to see what kind of groups I'm able to get, but was able to chase around soda cans at 15 and even 25 yards with consistency.
Despite my initial misgivings, I am glad I bought the gun and think that it's a keeper. It looks cheap, feels cheap, but I guess that's ok, it's not a gun meant to be looked at, but to be fired, and the gun fires well. Despite the lousy sights, it's accurate, and despite the cheap construction it's pretty darn reliable for what it is.