Tell me about the Colt 1911

[High Planes Drifter]

How reliable is the Colt 1911A1 ? This post isnt regarding accuracy, simply reliability. How reliable are Colt 1911A1's compared to both other 1911A1's and other .45's in general including Sigs, Glocks, HK's, S&W M&P's ? As posted on THR, I am in the market for another handgun to add to my growing collection. I am considering a few different pistols but nothing written in stone. The Colt 1991 is on the list.

 

[KyJim]

Colt 1911A1s are considered very reliable, probably at nor near the top for this style pistol. Not having owned HKs or Sigs (well I do have a Sig 1911), I can't really compare.

 

[HisSoldier]

An old design 100 years ahead of it's time Few can handle and shoot it without having affection for the weapon and it's designer. Sweeny in his books says they compare favorably with the current gold standard for reliability, the Glock, after his mud/sand/water etc. tests of current 1911's. Toss it into a muddy swamp, swish it around in the water half a second and shoot it.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

The 1911 certainly didn't achieve its level of success by being unreliable...

 

[The Tourist]

Other than having a competent gunsmith do a reliability package, I'd say that the operative word is "springs."

Make sure all of your springs are new, clean, and not bathed in oil. Replace them as the pistol ages.

BTW, I've had several plunger tubes loosen a bit. Have a gunsmith it re-stake for a tight fit. If there isn't enough metal for a good purchase, have them replaced.

It's also nice to have lots of magazines. If some fail, a good gunsmith can fit them over a mandril and tap the lips into place when the pistol is in for service. I've had some magazines built from scratch, although I like Wilson-Rogers.

And get big, huge, easily seen sights. Unless your pistol is doing fine target work, it will serve primarily as a defensive tool. Big sights. I use the older style Milletts.

 

[Bill DeShivs]

Oil certainly won't hurt springs, and springs should not be replaced unless they are defective, which they almost never are.

 

[michael t]

All my Colts are relieable. From my 1941 USGI to my Defender and now my new series 80 Govt. they just work plain and simple. Ive tried other companys and have had to many problems. I always return to Colt.
Only brand than been relieable as a Colt is the old Detonics I bought.

 

[The Tourist]

springs should not be replaced unless they are defective, which they almost never are.

I'm getting to the age where springs need retirement, as well. One custom dates back to the early 1980's.

When I strip my 1911's (not as much as I should), I sometimes notice that the recoil assembly on the older pistol is shorter than the newer.

Now granted, this doesn't happen often, and usually after one pistol has been fired more than the other.

I use downloads, so the firearms are not battered. I'd guess the best way to describe my actions is "preventitive maintenance."

I don't worry about it when falling off to sleep, either.

 

[michael t]

All my Colts are relieable. From my 1941 USGI to my Defender and now my new series 80 Govt. they just work plain and simple. Ive tried other companys and have had to many problems. I always return to Colt.
Only brand X than been relieable is the old Detonics I bought.

 

[High Planes Drifter]

Thanks for the info so far. I own a Springfield GI, and a Kimber Classic Custom so this wouldnt be my first 1911. I keep telling myself "why do you need another 1911, when you have 2 already? Try something else" , but the thought of a Colt 1991 keeps coming back in my head. I might have a problem, I think I might be addicted. I want a good, drop dead reliable 1911 , thats why I was asking questions about the Colt.

 

[RevolverLover]

Thanks for the info so far. I own a Springfield GI, and a Kimber Classic Custom so this wouldnt be my first 1911. I keep telling myself "why do you need another 1911, when you have 2 already? Try something else" , but the thought of a Colt 1991 keeps coming back in my head. I might have a problem, I think I might be addicted. I want a good, drop dead reliable 1911 , thats why I was asking questions about the Colt.

Thats usually how the addiction starts. Have you had any problems with your Springfield or Kimber?

 

[AK103K]

The Colt and GI guns have always been the most reliable for me. All the others always seemed to have some sort of issue and required some sort of work.

I carried a Colt Commander most of my adult life, with an occasional Government Model in there too. Never trusted any of the other 1911's in that capacity.

These days, I no longer carry a 1911 at all, and have retired the few Colts I kept to the safe. I moved on to SIG's. First staying with the .45 for awhile, with a couple of P220's and a P245, and now with higher capacity P226's, P229's and a P239 in the hotter 357SIG.

While the Colts always worked for the most part, I still had to swap out some things to suit me, especially with the newer guns. I dont have to do a thing to the SIG's, and they come as I want them, right out of the box.

I have owned handguns from pretty much all the major makers out there. The only ones I've never had to send back for problems have been Colt, HK, and SIG.

 

[IdahoG36]

They aren't bad, but you will have people tell you that Colt is the only way to go. That may have been true 30 years ago, but today there are many high quality makers of 1911's that meet or exceed the quality of a Colt.

 

[AK103K]

Just curious, but within the reasonably priced, factory made guns, and the custom guns aside, who would that be? Certainly not Springfield, and Kimber aint all that much better. At this point, I probably wouldnt buy a 1911 from SIG either.

 

[RickB]

Thirty years ago, it was all but literally true. Other than Detonics, Randall, and maybe a couple of others, there weren't any "1911s" (back then, non-Colts were called "clones", and "1911" wasn't used until the '90s) but Colt. A lot of companies have developed their own alternate dimensions for a lot of the parts, and you never know if the guy who came up with them was as smart as Colt/Browning/Army Ordnance, or not. Colts are made pretty-much the way they were when the army adopted them, for better or worse. The last new Colt I bought was a stainless .38 Super, and it's run perfectly, over 1000 handloaded rounds, since a failure to feed at round ~200. I had no failures whatsoever with a similar Springfield Mil-Spec Super, in a similar span; both guns are made to the "fits, but not tight" standard. Might be something to that.

 

[High Planes Drifter]

Thats usually how the addiction starts. Have you had any problems with your Springfield or Kimber?

The Kimber is kind of fussy, its very accurate and makes a fun range gun but no way would I trust my life to it. The Springer GI, believe it or not, is much more reliable than the Kimber. I actually carry the GI daily. Are there any other 1911's I should be looking at? Im mainly concerned about overall quality and reliability.

 

[Sarge]

Best of the breed.

 

[J.T.Hartsfield]

Let's put it this way, a time tested design, many have tried to improve on but failed. After all they didn't call John Browning "the master" for nothing.

 

[44 AMP]

1911A1 and 230gr FMJ (Ball)

Is as reliable as it gets. Made correctly (and I think the folks at Colt know how) it works. Is it absolutely perfect? No. Nothing made or designed by man is, or can be. But the Colt 1911A1 does a good job of coming close.

Pushing 100 years of service, and still one of, if not the most popular autopistol in the US. Hard to argue with that.

 

[RevolverLover]

Are there any other 1911's I should be looking at? Im mainly concerned about overall quality and reliability.

Besides Colt, I would be looking at Dan Wesson 1911's. If I remember correctly, they are based on the S70. There are also the semi-custom 1911's like Ed Brown, Les Baer, NightHawk, Wilson, etc.