Most authentic GI 45?

S

shafter

New member
I have an Auto Ordinance and it does not have a flared ejection port. It's been a fine gun so far with no issues although I probably only have a few hundred rounds at most through it.
 
R

Reloadron

New member
I have a Kahr Arms 1911 actually with the Auto Ordinance paper work.

(Removed oversize image)

Sorry not the best image. My WWII GI is a Remmington Rand.
Remington1.png


Without a doubt the Auto Ordinance 1911 has a larger ejection port. I also have an early circa 1914 pre WW1 GI which is similar to the Remington Rand gun. Anyway, the Auto Ordinance (Kahr Arms 1911) definitely has a larger ejection port as far as I can see.

Ron
 
Last edited:
A

Aguila Blanca

Staff
44caliberkid said:
This one.
https://www.cimarron-firearms.com/19...arkerized.html
Click to expand...
I didn't know Cimarron had picked that one up. It's an Armscor -- and the contour of the trigger window behind the trigger is so far off from an original M1911 that it offends my eyes every time I see one.

https://www.1911forum.com/threads/cimarron-arms-m1911.455023/

I took delivery of mine last Friday and it's a disappointment. It looks like the only things they DID get right are the frame without finger clearance cuts and the smooth back mainspring housing.

1. Trigger is not long and has a knurled face.
2. Grip safety tang is lengthened, should be short in this version.
3. Hammer spur is shortened and flat sided.
4. Wooden grips lack diamond patterns. (Even though they show it with the diamonds on their website.)
5. Front sight rounded, but not tapered.
6. Rear sight notch is square, should be U-shaped.
7. It has "1911-A1" stamped on the right side frame, below the slide.
8. Pistol is Parkerized, should be blued.

And would it have bankrupted them to have included a 7-shot magazine with lanyard loop instead of an 8 round magazine with a pad?!
Click to expand...

This review missed the lowered ejection port.
 
R

RickB

New member
Obviously, the Colt 01911A1 is going to be the most accurate, but it has been out of print for ten years, and will be quite pricey compared to the other near-misses.
 
R

RickB

New member
I don't like the Ballester-Molina-style trigger guards on all ARMSCOR products (including RIA), which can't be fixed via parts swapping.
 
A

Aguila Blanca

Staff
10-96 said:
On the last page, folks mentioned AO/Kahr 1911's. At one time, weren't all of those Series 80's?
Click to expand...
I believe that is correct, which is another plus for the Turkish pistol.

That said, if what's being sought is the one that looks the most like a USGI M1911A1, the presence or absence of a firing pin block isn't an issue.
 
J

Jim Watson

New member
It is a mystery to me. There is clearly a market for GI configuration, why don't the manufacturers make a faithful copy?

The Springfield GI was pretty good but they did not keep it in the lineup long. Not selling or taking sales away from more expensive models?
 
T

TunnelRat

New member
Jim Watson said:
It is a mystery to me. There is clearly a market for GI configuration, why don't the manufacturers make a faithful copy?

The Springfield GI was pretty good but they did not keep it in the lineup long. Not selling or taking sales away from more expensive models?
Click to expand...


Springfield Armory seems to be changing their 1911 lineup. Last I checked the Range Officer was discontinued, the non-CA compliant versions of the TRP showed as discontinued, etc. Maybe sales dropped off?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
G

GeauxTide

New member
I bought a Springfield Mil-Spec when they came out in 1988. Two differences from the original - lengthened ejector port and polished feed ramp. It was offered in a NM frame, which I got. They're jazzed up today with Match Barrel and 3 dot sights.
 
A

Aguila Blanca

Staff
GeauxTide said:
I bought a Springfield Mil-Spec when they came out in 1988. Two differences from the original - lengthened ejector port and polished feed ramp. It was offered in a NM frame, which I got. They're jazzed up today with Match Barrel and 3 dot sights.
Click to expand...
The Mil-Spec was always a bit more expensive than the GI. To the best of my recollection, the Mil-Spec has always had slanted cocking serrations. It always amused me that Springfield would take a model that is visibly NOT made to military specifications, and call it "Mil-Spec."
 
R

RickB

New member
Apparently, Springfield cancelled the G.I. because they "all" were returned for better sights or beavertails, and Springfield's product line had that well covered.
 
H

highpower3006

New member
Apparently, Springfield cancelled the G.I. because they "all" were returned for better sights or beavertails, and Springfield's product line had that well covered.
Click to expand...

Which begs the question, why buy a GI spec gun and then go out and spend the extra money for new sights etc.?

I could see it if the individual wanted a base 1911 to turn into some kind custom race gun. However, it seems to me that sending it back to Springfield for a set of their sights and other bits would be more expensive than just buying one that was already in their catalogue.

Of course, I'm the type of guy that would keep the standard GI 1911 and then buy another that was tricked out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top