Colt Lightweight Combat Commander XSE

[Dobe]

I'm thinking about adding this to my stable. I originally wanted a DW CBOB, but couldn't find one.

Now, I have rethought the commander sized 1911, and wonder, if the aluminium frame may be a better option for my purpose (light weight carry of a .45 cal)

I understand at one time Colt used a softer alloy. I don't know, if that is true, and if it is, if they still do, or have switched to a harder alloy.

From reading the specs online, Colt says they coat their alloy frame with teflon. That seems like a good idea, and should reduce friction.

Also, I assume it is still a good idea to use a nylon follower in the magazines.

So, I am wondering what you LW Commander folks think of your Colt.

 

[Playboypenguin]

My personal opinion is that I will never buy a gun with an aluminum frame if the same gun is available in a steel frame. The small amount of weight saved is not worth the shorter life span and less forgiving material.

 

[Dobe]

I once felt the same way, but Sig has had a very good run with their line of handguns. Thus the reason I asked about the harder alloy.

 

[Playboypenguin]

They are not exactly an ancient production. I would not say they have had any more success with their aluminum framed models than most other makers. When I buy a Sig I buy all steel.

 

[J.Smith]

I think if you plan on running +p loads on a daily basis then Steel would be better, but for carry often fire seldom carry .45s then the aluminum alloy frame should be fine. I plan shooting target ammo and carry 230grain Speer GDs in my everyday carry mags.

 

[45_Shooter]

My Colt CCO is an aluminum frame and it serves it's purpose well. However, that purpose is a carry alot shoot a little gun; I have full size steel 1911's that get the brunt of my .45 shooting, and definitely would not enjoy putting the amount of rounds though the CCO as I do the full sizers.

My opinion of the aluminum frame is much like PBP, steel is almost always a better option. But, as a dedicated carry gun that is not expected to be shot alot (you won't want to anyways; recoil is considerably more brisk than steel frames) the alloy frame works well.

I generally hate aluminum frames, but I do own two (a 642 S&W and the CCO) that work well as carry guns.

 

[MK11]

The longevity and sales record of the P226 doesn't stand out compared to other guns made of similar materials? As much as I love my 220ST, steel is a latecomer for Sig--which has been making aluminum alloy guns since the 70s--and is an area where they've had many of their recent problems.

One thing to watch with lightweight 1911s is the feed ramp. The soft metal gets very scuffed very quickly thanks to magazines and hollowpoint rounds.

 

[swman]

I have two XSEs: One CC and the other a LWC. I shoot the CC more and carry the LWC more. As for SIGs, I don't have all steel and have never had issues with the P220 or P226.

 

[RickB]

I've heard that the very early Commanders - early 1950s - had Alcoa-made frames that are "better" than what came later; who knows?
For a gun that is going to ride on the hip every day, the LW Commander (note: Combat Commander is all steel, so you can't have a LW Combat Commander) is probably the best compromise of size and weight among the various 1911 derivatives. A Combat Commander is only four or five ounces lighter than a full-sized Government Model, and not really much more compact. But when you lop off 3/4" of barrel AND twelve ounces of weight, the package is a lot handier. I don't often carry on the belt, but if it became a daily habit, I'd pack my Commander.

 

[Playboypenguin]

I generally hate aluminum frames, but I do own two (a 642 S&W and the CCO) that work well as carry guns.

I have two also. A Rohrbaugh R9s and a Beretta 92FS Compact. Neither us available in all steel and neither is shot often.

 

[azredhawk44]

I carry my Commander Lightweight XSE just about daily.

I don't find it difficult to shoot in comparison to a full sized 1911. Hardly notice the weight difference in hand when firing. Definitely notice it when carrying, though.

I had the same concerns about longevity though, and considered this:
1. It would take at least 20K rounds to wear it out, if true that aluminum will wear out more quickly than steel. 20K was pulled out of the thin blue air, but sounds reasonable to me.
2. 20K rounds of reloaded .45acp using lead bullets is (20K primers @ $25/1000, 8lb jug of titegroup and 20K lead bullets from mastercast) is about $3000 in ammo. Retail ammo would be about $6000 (WWB @ $30 each).
3. Given the ammo expense to wear the gun out and my proclivity to buying new guns, it's unlikely I would wear it out before I bought a new one anyways.
4. If I wore it out, I'd send it back to Colt to be fixed either under warranty or as a chargeable service that would cost less than a new gun anyways.

I have no reservations about putting rounds through it at the range. I've only got about 500 through it so far since I shoot rifles a lot more often than handguns... but it's my EDC. I shoot either it or my SP101 (alternate EDC) each handgun range session since it is my carry gun.

 

[Archie]

I very much like them.

I've had a Colt Commander (which is by definition 'lightweight') of one form or other for the last thirty some years. In fact, I've had a total of three.

The first was not really a Colt. It was an A&R sales light frame and Colt workings otherwise. It was in .45 ACP and I commonly used either WW Silvertip ammo or my hardball equivalent handloads. I shot it very regularly for five or six years until the frame rails started peeling off the frame from the rear. When I finally noticed, the rails had torn off from the rear of the frame to about half-way through the magazine well at the top of the frame. I found it was broken when I field stripped the pistol to clean it. I had shot a match with that day with zero malfunctions.

I retired that frame and very shortly thereafter fell into a genuine Colt Commander with three slide and barrel assemblies for it. I could swap the top ends with reasonable impunity. There are those who will claim this cannot be done, as the ejector is not the same. In fact, I had two (2) ejectors made by Wilson Combat (or so I was told by the gunsmith who sold them to me) that was a 'compromise' version that would work with either the .45 ACP, Super .38 or 9x19 slides. They aren't made any more, I understand. (Who knows why...)

That pistol and I ran together for probably ten or fifteen years until I sold it back (in a great fit of stupid) to the man from whom I purchased it. As far as I know it is still running and ticking along, usually in Super .38 these days. No idea of round count.

I have another one for the last six or seven years. It's another Colt. I carry it a lot and don't shoot it a lot. I put some rounds through it for function check and verify zero a couple times a year. I have no idea how many rounds were through it before I got it and I probably put no more than 100 rounds a year through it.

So, whereas the lightweight frame guns were not made for sustained daily unrestrained blasting, they aren't really delicate little flowers or china tea cups, either.

And they are much better for carrying all day long.

 

[longeyes]

In general I prefer steel too, but it's nice to have an alloy-framed 1911 around, at least one. In my case it's a S&W 1911PD I really like.

 

[BlueTrain]

Although I don't have either one now, I've had both a lightweight Commander and a lightweight Officer's ACP. The Officer's ACP was rather better for carrying but the Commander was rather better for shooting. In fact, as I recall, I think I shot it better than any other .45 or 1911 I ever had (not all the 1911s were .45s). I always found the standard sized 1911 to eventually seem quite heavy. For some reason, I have none of them now.

Skeeter Skelton did a "shoot to death" test of a Lightweight Commander as well as a Gold Cup (I think it was), probably 30 years ago. There had been the idea that the Gold Cup was somehow constructed more lightly than a standard model but it held up OK, as I recall. He did manage to crack the frame on the Commander, however, but they had put an awful lot of rounds through it, something most people never do (I imagine) with standard 1911s.

I know Springfield Armory produced a lightweight model with a five inch barrel, though I've never seen one. Given that Colt seems to have produced about every other variation of the 1911, as well as the .380 Government Model, over the years, I wonder why they never did a full size lightweight?

 

[Colt1911forever]

Nothing wrong with an alloy frame. 99% of the guns bought in this country are never going to be shot enough to wear out a well made alloy frame.

Sigs do just fine. I have a Colt CCO and IMHO the difference in weighted makes a huge difference for daily carry.