Picked up a Springfield 1911 today...

[shooter]

I've been looking for a Ruger 1911, but haven't found one, and I hear rumors that they will be introducing the Commander size model later this year. That's really what I want. Well, my brother knows all this, and today I get a picture message with a Commander size Springfield 1911 with beaver tail grip safety, skeletonized hammer and trigger, ramp rear sight with a blade front sight both dovetailed.

My brother is a mechanic and evidently a guy owed his boss some money for work done on a vehicle. He didn't have the money so he offered the Springfield as trade and the boss accepted. His boss only wanted what was owed for the work....$450. I thought it was a pretty good deal and will hold me over at least till the Rugers start hitting the shelves regularly. I may just love this gun and forget about the Ruger all together for now.

One thing my dad told me was that he thinks it has had some work done to it, as the action is very smooth, and it has a thicker than normal barrel on it with no barrel bushing. I'm no 1911 expert, but I don't know the significance of this.

[JerryB]

It sounds like you got your $450 worth and then some.

[stickfred]

Congrats, shooter, on your 1911. If I decide to get a handgun, it will be a 1911. also. And it would be a Springfield. COSteve had some info about them in an earlier post and they seem like one of the best "bang for your buck" that's available.

[Old Savage]

I bought one of the military lookalikes in about 1988, I put about 5,000 rounds through it. I traded off the two Colts I had because the Springfield was better.

[Grizzly Adams]

Sweet! Congratulations!

[shooter]

Thanks guys! This one isn't one of the Mil-Spec versions. It's pretty tricked out. I like the Mil-Specs as far as function, looks and reliability, but the sights suck. I had one and sold it. I regret selling it, but I couldn't hit a thing with it. The one I got today has the 3 dot "combat" style sights on it.

I still wanna see one of the Rugers, but at the price I got it for I may just hang on to it for a while.

[stickfred]

That's a shame about your earlier Mil-Spec. They've got the 3 dot sights on them now.

[damienph]

Is it a Champion? It seems like some of those have a bushingless bull barrel. You shouldn't have any trouble getting your money back if you decide to trade for the Ruger when you find one.

[Griff]

Let's see... you GOT a picture... and didn't SHARE it?

Don't get me wrong, Ruger makes fine products... I've even owned... 3 of them. A Single-Six, a Blackhawk, and a 10-22. They're exceedingly practical. The Single-Six got traded for a sleeper couch... the Blackhawk (after a short detour thru the hands of a thief), was traded for a Marlin 336, which a bit of kafkaesque karma, got traded for the 10-22... and came back to me from my Dad. All of which is a long-winded way to say, Ruger's lack soul. The only Ruger I ever WANTED to own was the original Silhouette Super Blackhawk w/10-½" barrel.

One thing I've heard about the Ruger version of the 1911 is that it will not accept standard 1911 accessories. I think that's unfortunate. And I sorta hope it's not true. Few guns are universal in their ergonomics. But, being able to fit various aftermarket grips, extended safeties, slide releases and such would make them far more versatile for the great unwashed.

A couple of weeks ago, I was intruduced to a young man... and the gist of that was, "... you need to ask Griff about your choices in a gun, he knows a lot about..." As I shook hands with the man, I couldn't help but notice that his hands, while very stout... where probably half the size of mine. I have (I think) rather average sized hands, wear a large glove if I don't mind slightly short fingers... but my palms don't fill out an XL size. I asked what he was thinking of? He said, a "Para... double stack in a .40." My first thought was that he'd be wasting money. Cartridge choice is highly personal... but that double stack frame would never get wrapped around by his hands. I aked if he'd ever thought of just a single stack 1911 instead. He said, no, he wanted the capacity. As he further explained, I learned that it wasn't for any particular need, just he felt he needed that many rounds. I can tell you that he'd struggle with that thick grip. He said that he couldn't handle a regular 1911, "...I can't reach the controls without twisting the gun in my hand;" the double stack would be near impossible for him. I told him to try a pistol with extended safety, slide release and mag release... maybe try one with an ambi- mag release. The guy that introduced us had one for him to try... I'll have to check back to see how that went. But... my point is, those little touches will probably be slow in coming to the Ruger 1911 market. And IMO, those are what will increase both the useability of the Ruger and allow its popularity to expand greatly over the "off-the-shelf" versions they'll make.

Anyway, sorry for the lecture... I hope you enjoy your "new-to-you" Remington! I think the bushingless barrel provides a steadier platform for accuracy. The tolerances for the barrel and bushing in the slide is one of the accuracy limiting factors in the 1911. I think the Commander size is the perfect carry size. Some like bigger pieces, some smaller... but the median Commander is the best of both.

[shooter]

Let's see... you GOT a picture... and didn't SHARE it?

Don't get me wrong, Ruger makes fine products... I've even owned... 3 of them. A Single-Six, a Blackhawk, and a 10-22. They're exceedingly practical. The Single-Six got traded for a sleeper couch... the Blackhawk (after a short detour thru the hands of a thief), was traded for a Marlin 336, which a bit of kafkaesque karma, got traded for the 10-22... and came back to me from my Dad. All of which is a long-winded way to say, Ruger's lack soul. The only Ruger I ever WANTED to own was the original Silhouette Super Blackhawk w/10-½" barrel.

One thing I've heard about the Ruger version of the 1911 is that it will not accept standard 1911 accessories. I think that's unfortunate. And I sorta hope it's not true. Few guns are universal in their ergonomics. But, being able to fit various aftermarket grips, extended safeties, slide releases and such would make them far more versatile for the great unwashed.

A couple of weeks ago, I was intruduced to a young man... and the gist of that was, "... you need to ask Griff about your choices in a gun, he knows a lot about..." As I shook hands with the man, I couldn't help but notice that his hands, while very stout... where probably half the size of mine. I have (I think) rather average sized hands, wear a large glove if I don't mind slightly short fingers... but my palms don't fill out an XL size. I asked what he was thinking of? He said, a "Para... double stack in a .40." My first thought was that he'd be wasting money. Cartridge choice is highly personal... but that double stack frame would never get wrapped around by his hands. I aked if he'd ever thought of just a single stack 1911 instead. He said, no, he wanted the capacity. As he further explained, I learned that it wasn't for any particular need, just he felt he needed that many rounds. I can tell you that he'd struggle with that thick grip. He said that he couldn't handle a regular 1911, "...I can't reach the controls without twisting the gun in my hand;" the double stack would be near impossible for him. I told him to try a pistol with extended safety, slide release and mag release... maybe try one with an ambi- mag release. The guy that introduced us had one for him to try... I'll have to check back to see how that went. But... my point is, those little touches will probably be slow in coming to the Ruger 1911 market. And IMO, those are what will increase both the useability of the Ruger and allow its popularity to expand greatly over the "off-the-shelf" versions they'll make.

Anyway, sorry for the lecture... I hope you enjoy your "new-to-you" Remington! I think the bushingless barrel provides a steadier platform for accuracy. The tolerances for the barrel and bushing in the slide is one of the accuracy limiting factors in the 1911. I think the Commander size is the perfect carry size. Some like bigger pieces, some smaller... but the median Commander is the best of both.

Griff, if that is true about the Ruger not accepting standard parts, that's very unfortunate. I'll have to look into that. I was real interested in the Ruger because I love 1911's. They seem to have a lot of "extra" features on theirs for a pretty decent price. I know Taurus is in a similar price range, and there's nothing wrong with Taurus at all, but in my experience it's hard to beat Ruger for price and quality. You can get higher quality guns, but they come at a considerably higher price. Sometimes you can pay considerably more for a gun and it's still not the same (or at least not any better) quality as a Ruger. Or at least that used to be the case. Ruger's prices seem to have come up considerably in the past few years.

As for the reason I want one....I don't have a concealed carry gun currently. I think the new Rugers are pretty sharp looking, but was really hoping for a smaller size one. You're right in that the Commander size is, IMO, the best of both worlds, which is why I jumped on this one. I don't find many good deals anymore, and I thought this one was pretty decent.

P.S. I will post pics when I actually get the gun in my possession. The one I received is a poor quality cell phone pic that doesn't do the gun justice from what I'm told.

[1894c]

great gun--great company--LE approved in many departments--you won't need the Ruger... :)

[COSteve]

Deleted

[Hobie]

My understanding is that the Ruger 1911 WILL accept all the 1911 standard parts and that there isn't anything particularly proprietary about it. BUT I haven't seen one... yet.

I discovered yesterday that the Springfield MILSPEC is available in .38 Super. Now that might be interesting! (all my Colts are .45 ACP )

[damienph]

Thanks guys! This one isn't one of the Mil-Spec versions. It's pretty tricked out. I like the Mil-Specs as far as function, looks and reliability, but the sights suck. I had one and sold it. I regret selling it, but I couldn't hit a thing with it. The one I got today has the 3 dot "combat" style sights on it.

I still wanna see one of the Rugers, but at the price I got it for I may just hang on to it for a while.

Actually, the version you got rid of was probably the basic GI version that they refer to sometimes as being mil-spec. The actual Springfield Mil-Spec version [p/n PB9108LP] is described as, "A step up from the G.I., the Mil-Spec includes many improvements utilized by the military during the 1911's years of service. These features include: High Profile 3Dot sights, high handgrip, beveled magazine well, polished feed ramp and throated barrel, lowered and flared ejection port, and angled slide serrations." Further, my understanding is that the 'NM' version of the Mil-Spec I have, besides being assembled in the US, also has a one piece barrel and SS bushing for better accuracy.

The higher 3dot sights are visible in this shot of mine.



Interestingly, I checked on Springfield's website for the GI version's p/n to reference it here and found that they no longer list the GI version even though they still refer to it in discussing the Mil-Spec version.

I would be surprised if it really is discontinued, I thought that they were fairly popular as a base gun to modify.

Mine; pretty close to the ones that were issued when I was an MP.


Biggest difference between my GI and Steve's MIl-Spec is the small "GI" sights, the high ejection port, the straight slide serrations (instead of slanted), lanyard loop and plastic grips instead of wood.

[shooter]

COsteve, you're correct. The one I had was the GI version like damien's. If mine would have had the upgrades that your Mil-Spec version has, especially the sights, I probably wouldn't have gotten rid of it.

[Griff]

My understanding is that the Ruger 1911 WILL accept all the 1911 standard parts and that there isn't anything particularly proprietary about it. BUT I haven't seen one... yet...

Hope you're right. Gotta admit, I HATE leaving a 1911 "as is"!

[Pisgah]

One thing I've heard about the Ruger version of the 1911 is that it will not accept standard 1911 accessories. I think that's unfortunate.

Utterly untrue. Rugers are built to Series 70 Colt specs. If it'll work on a Series 70, it'll work on a Ruger.

I know Springfields are highly regarded, and I know my experience of them is limited. But I have owned two of them, a GI and an Officer's-size version of the same, and neither was satisfactory. Both had horrible feeding problems, even with ball ammo and even after several trips back to Springfield. Perhaps if I got a third one it would be fine, but I will never know 'cause I am done with them. My current 1911 Officer's is the RIA version, and it has been superb in every way.

My main problem with bull-barrel 1911s is the full-length recoil spring guide most, if not all, have. I know a few -- very few -- still believe these enhance accuracy; I don't know about that, but I do know they complicate field-stripping, sometimes to the pain-in-the-, er, um, neck level. My little RIA compact has the neatest solution I have yet seen, and interior guide rod bushing that simply slides out once the slide/barrel unit is removed from the frame. No tools needed, not even a paperclip. Takedown of it is even easier than a standard 1911.

[AJMD429]

All of which is a long-winded way to say, Ruger's lack soul.

Blasphemy...!

Some of my Rugers have been 'utilitarian', but some definitely have had 'soul'...

[Pitchy]

I have the Springfield fully loaded and put Crimson laser grips on it, been a good shooter thus far.