You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Colt Gold Cup or springfield armory range officer for carry
- Thread starter akinswi
- Start date
Hello and welcome. As long as both are totally reliable, you can't go wrong, IMHO. I have handled, but not owned, the ROs. They seem like very practical, well fitted guns to me. I have owned several Gold Cups and did carry one of my '70 Series GCs years ago. The very sharp corner of the Elliason rear sight cut me once while carrying, so I slightly rounded the corners of the sight. I carried the Gold Cup or a Government Model until changing to the Commander Model at some point, simply for the reduced weight. I have one of the new Stainless Gold Cup Trophy pistols with the Bo-Mar type rear sight. The rear sight corners are already slightly rounded and I would not hesitate to carry it if I felt like it...ymmv
Cost should not be a factor in which gun you carry.Which one do you shoot the best?
I sometimes carry my Colt 1911 5" or my SA Champion Loaded SS in a Bianchi X15 shoulder holster.
As a matter of fact my wife and I just got back from the supermarket and she did'nt realize I was carrying my SA in my shoulder holster till I took my shirt of when we got home.
I sometimes carry my Colt 1911 5" or my SA Champion Loaded SS in a Bianchi X15 shoulder holster.
As a matter of fact my wife and I just got back from the supermarket and she did'nt realize I was carrying my SA in my shoulder holster till I took my shirt of when we got home.
Coltman 77
New member
WESHOOT2:
+1
Great post.
bet for life
I would wear the most reliable and controllably accurate one.
Cost will NOT matter if you actually ever need it, ay?
+1
Great post.
Kreyzhorse
New member
So, you want to carry a gun for self defense but are willing to stake your life based on a gun that you chose because its the cheapest?
Now, I'd make the choice based on reliability and accuracy. Which is most reliable, which do you shoot best? Which now are you most comfortable with? If all that is equal, carry whatever you like.
Personally, and I own a Springfield TRP, price doesn't factor into my carry piece and my TRP is in my winter rotation.
Now, I'd make the choice based on reliability and accuracy. Which is most reliable, which do you shoot best? Which now are you most comfortable with? If all that is equal, carry whatever you like.
Personally, and I own a Springfield TRP, price doesn't factor into my carry piece and my TRP is in my winter rotation.
They can be fixed you know. It's not a design problem. It's a sloppy manufacturing problem.
Both of these were purchased NIB by me, at considerable expense I might add. I shouldn't have to "fix" a brand new pistol.
How is a 1911 not reliable? Sure its not as reliable as a revolver but I know alot of WWII vets who swore by there 1911's... Just wondering
Mine were both reliable-ISH, I won't try to sway anybody from carrying whatever they feel the need to carry, I won't carry one. I have been through all of this before, try this grease, try this ammo, I have to break it in, I heard all of this from 1911 fans. In the end I traded them both off, now I own a Glock 21 that I am much happier with.
How is a 1911 not reliable? Sure its not as reliable as a revolver but I know alot of WWII vets who swore by there 1911's... Just wondering
Because the 1911 you buy today isn't quite the same thing. They were often a lot looser in fit, meaning the tolerances were looser. These helps with reliability. I've handled some old ones that practically rattled. That and many manufacturers aren't going by JMB's original design. From different internal safeties to other changes it's not always the same gun, in most instances it's not. Sometimes this is a good thing, sometimes not. Lastly, and to me most importantly, was the difference in the times. While it's awesome that we have CNC machines these days, in a lot of ways it has become a crutch. Manufacturers think that because they have good tech they can get away from hiring gunsmiths to do hand fitting. Labor these days is more expensive than the machines, whereas labor was cheap back in the days of WW2. The 1911 is a design, IMHO, that requires a certain degree of hand fitting. That's why companies like Wilson Combat, Les Baer, etc have a large number of smiths on staff. And there are a number of manufacturers that simply aren't giving it that amount of hand fitting.
They are target pistols not defense combat guns IMHO.
My thoughts exactly. While the Gold Cup and Range Officer are both fantastic pistols in my opinion, neither is designed to be a defensive carry gun.
Tunnel Rat, if your talking about les baer customs, wilson combat etc they have even less tolerances, so wouldn't that make them less reliable according to your post just saying... The springfields I believe are forged by molds in By imbel in brazil then put together here in US as for Colts I dont know what there process is buts its a colt I believe thats enough said. I believe you get what you pay for.
also if its a targert gun not a combat gun, which in my mind you shoot hundreds of rounds even 1000 of rounds and rely on it in a competition... without jamming hows it not reliable just saying. I guess my argument is that if you are relying on it to perform under pressure in a match, how is that different than maybe once in a lifetime need to use it to defend your self with.
Why does it matter if it is a "target" gun or a "carry" gun if the gun won't function 100%? If it doesn't work out of the box it doesn't matter what you planned on "using" it for. Either get it fixed or get a refund. This whole "idea" people seem to have that tightly built "target" match pistols are inherently less reliable than a loose pistol is absurd. Reliability has nothing to do with how tightly the gun is fitted. It either works or it doesn't, either way.
Last edited:
Tunnel Rat, if your talking about les baer customs, wilson combat etc they have even less tolerances, so wouldn't that make them less reliable according to your post just saying
No because they have they have the gunsmiths on hand to make it work. Yes the pistols are tight but they spend a lot of time being hand fitted, that's really what you're paying for, the labor. My argument is that production companies that try to get them as tight as possible with as little hand fitting as possible open the way for issues to arise.
I'm not saying there is no 1911 I wouldn't trust my life to, or that you have to get a Les Baer to get a nice 1911. But you asked what could make them unreliable. My point was just to explain that the manufacturing processes of today as opposed to the 1940s are very different.