Decent Nineteen Elevens

>>33347383
I've got the basic Mil Spec 1911, fit and finish seems good, only the tiniest rattle from the dustcover when I shake it. The hammer is MIM, but that's pretty common. All I've feed it is Winchester White Box and never had a problem. I don't know about the mags it came with, I took /k/s advice and bought some Wilson Combat 8 rounders and never used the 7 rounders it came with. I might be putting some grip tape or something else on the front strap as the gun feels like it slides around when my hands get sweaty. as for bump in the night, I keep it on/in the night stand as well.

File: 1911_9mm_1000_2.jpg (494KB, 1000x650px) Image search: [Google]

494KB, 1000x650px

>>33347383
Springfield pretty decent

>>33347441

Okay, cool, thanks. I had the pleasure recently of holding it and gripping it the same model, and it felt great. My family may be getting an M9 soon (which they'll probably transfer to me), but I'll probably buy the SF Milspec myself and keep it as my personal.

>>33347505
Neat

>>33347383
You can look at Citadel, Armscor, or Rock Island, I've got a Citadel and it's compareable to the lower end Springfields while being cheaper by a couple hundred dollars. A few thousand rounds later and mine runs like a champ with no issues and no rattle, just wish I had some night sights is all

File: image.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px)

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>33347383
Springfield armory loaded I got mine for like $750

Fucking love it no malfunctions yet which is good for a bulky out dated design

>>33347383
Anything in that price range is going to be fine. Springfield is a solid choice, personally I would spend a little more for a Colt series 70 because they are nicer quality but it's just cosmetics.

>>33347642
>modern Colt
>Nicer quality
I have some bad news for you buddy

>>33347657

>Posting a 20 year old meme

Colts that have been coming off the line in the last few years have been getting good reviews. Colt QC was objectively bad in the early 90's to the early 2000's but they've improved a lot since 2005

>>33347657
The problem with modern Colt is their price, not their quality. Their 1911s, law enforcement ARs like the 6920, and their Single Action Armies are all very good, and they are guaranteed to hold their value simply by having a horse on the gun.

>>33347383
Springfield has a yearly sale around summer where they knock 100-150 off their 1911s or include a range bag and mags

>>33347692

They're not too overpriced in the grand scheme of things though. /k/ has always said the Ruger SR1911 is a good entry/mid level 1911 purchase. SR1911's go for about $650 online and you can get a Colt 1991 in either 9mm or .45acp for around $700

>>33347657
Colts quality is currently better than at any time since the 70s. I have a recent s70 and gold cup, both are flawless.

>>33347715
It depends which of their products you mean. Their non-expanse ARs are good, but are considerably overpriced. A 6920 costs ~$1100, when you can get an AR that meets all of the same specifications for $700 or less in the current market. The Single Action Armies have the same issue; they are $1500 when an Uberti replica of comparable quality and finish will run you $600 tops.

I agree with you that their 1911s are actually a good buy though. They cost more out of the gate, but people put a premium on the rollmark that pays off should you ever need to sell or trade the gun. Furthermore, if Colt goes through another period of declining quality or, better yet, goes completely out of business, a well-kept Colt 1911 will go the way of the Python and double or triple in value.

>>33347710

That's fucking great. I'll look into that.

>>33347768

>A 6920 costs ~$1100

I'm not sure where you're pulling that number from but you can get OEM model 6920's for $750 all day online. $850-$900 if you want it complete with factory furniture and flip up sights.

>>33347383
>What's a decent 1911 that costs between $600-$800 that I can use for a bump in the night or for fun?

I have a SA 1911A1 that's tight as a nun and shoots sweet; one ragged hole on the X ring at fifty feet.

I'd look at the Rock Island if I were shopping for a new 1911. Starting price is around $450, and the tolerances are better than original GI due to CNC machinery and better measuring devices for QC. Then you'll have cash left for mags and ammo.

>>33347715
>good entry/mid-level
I see this a lot, can someone explain what exactly that means? The Ruger one seems like a damn fine gun from what I can see online.

Then again, I could just be retarded.

>>33347685
It was it's worst in the 80s during the strike, but new colts are g2g.

File: IMG_2064.jpg (3MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4032x3024px

I like Springfield 1911s.

>>33350397
>Tfw passed on a trp half rail for 1100
Fuck getting married, shits expensive.

>>33350430
Dats fukked man, I might be getting married in the next couple of years so I'm spending myself broke to get all the shit I wasn't now.

Does anyone here have experience with auto ordinance 1911s? I want something that is bare bones WWII replica and the AO seemed like a good choice but a friend had warned me about quality. Are they good guns?

>>33347383
>Decent 1911

I haven't really run into any 1911 that wasn't kimber or a Para, that was really bad. And even the para wasn't that bad.

Here are some at that price range
>Ruger
>RIA
>ATI
>Iver Johnson(Shut up they got better, the hawk looks and shoots pretty decently now)
>Springfield
>American Classic
>SIG, if you can find it for a deal
Most of those will do fine. I own 2 American Classics, a Sig and a Llama, but I've owned a Para Ordnance(Stay away, their guns only like their mags), RIA, ATI, Llama and Sig.

So yea.

>>33350514
All those low end 1911s have reliability issues, you lose quality control. Pretty much anything that could be wrong with it you could diagnose and fix yourself though.

>>33350573
As long as it isn't too much of a fuck up, for sure. 1911 parts are everywhere. I'll have to do some digging but what I have seen so far of the AO ones, they are decent.

>>33349424
Thats pretty much correct. Basic Colts, Springfields, and Rugers have great finish, function, and fitment for the price. Which is probably what he meant by entry/mid-level, its hard to go wrong with any of them.
1911s are a weird market, kinda like ar15s in which you can basically spend as much as you feel like even though most of them will work perfectly well outside of the 400-500 dollar level, and even then most of them will do okay.

File: 1911.jpg (70KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 528x960px

Ruger SR1911 is what I went with for a carry and bump in the night 1911.

>>33347383
Get a CZ 97 B

>>33347630
I owned this gun a few years ago. Great weapon, never had a hiccup. As long as you run good mags you'll be golden.

>>33351315
Love the SR1911! so clean. Looking to buy a SR556 soon. Based Ruger.

File: 002.jpg (770KB, 1382x777px) Image search: [Google]

770KB, 1382x777px

>>33347383
Auto Ordnance

What's the word on kimbers?

>>33352283

Have fun finding one.

File: 1443550799201.jpg (616KB, 1950x2400px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 1950x2400px

>>33347383

File: ILSLarge.jpg (27KB, 481x558px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 481x558px

>>33353287
No Springfield belongs in top tier.

>>33353287
>Kimber

Fuck this list and fuck you for posting it

>>33352827
Overpriced and under-performing

>>33353331
Kimber is overpriced garbage

Maybe I have been spoiled by the ar15 market but why don't these companies nitride or do some sort of PVD?

What I'm about to say is the equivalent of sunlight to a vampire for some on /k/, but I have a 2010 Taurus PT-1911 that has been great. Of course time has passed since I bought it, so I'd probably buy a ruger 1911 now.

>>33352827
Pricey but serviceable depending on what you want on it IMO. I'd put them on par with Colt as far as paying for the privilege of owning one.

The two-tone standard Kimbers can be had for moderately cheap (think 500-650) which isn't bad for the quality of gun you're getting.

>>33347715
SR1911s come backed by Rugers literal bulletproof warranty that transfers to anyone and those guns can take a beating. They aren't show pieces, but for a gun that works and will take abuse you can't find a better choice. Anons can take them, leave them in wells and send them in to get fixed.

>>33347630
Must second this, great gun, never had any problems.

Shamelessly shilling for Metro Arms.

File: 2016-08-08_171709.png (69KB, 778x286px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 778x286px

>>33352283

kys

>>33353309
I've never seen a springfield in person that has one of those

File: pistol&knife.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>33347383
Springfield Mil-Specs work great and make great project guns. Get one hombre.
Mine feeds all manner of ball easy and feeds Hydrashoks without fail.

File: IMG_1483.png (394KB, 532x495px)

394KB, 532x495px

Currently debating between a Kimber Custom TLE (tritium night sights), and a Gen 4 Glock 19 as my next purchase. I can get the Kimber brand new for $630 and the 19 brand new for $398.
What would /k/ do?

Colt

its nice, why bother with anything else for a 1911. THAT or be poorfag and get a rock island.

>>33355297
I've OWNED a springfield that has one of those.

It was a NIB Stainless GI. I traded it. I do not regret that trade..

>>33355883
I wasn't impressed w friends $1400 Kimber so cheaper one probably worse
Get a glock

>>33355883
Kimber is fucking garbage. I've never seen one that worked and every time I see them on display I wonder how they're in business still.

>inb4 mine has a gajillion rounds with no issue
csb, it's shit too.

>>33357642
Did it come from a cuck state?

File: 1390106311757.jpg (1MB, 4000x2653px)

1MB, 4000x2653px

>>33357943
this kimbers are shit
>>33347383
go high end or low end mid range 1911s just arent worth it

>>33357943
>>33359143
So if it works, it is shit? Is that what you are saying?

Mine works, and I love it.

File: totally-noguns.jpg (154KB, 1000x770px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1000x770px

>>33359157
You either got luck got an early one or its a ticking time bomb.
Sell it before it falls apart.

>>33357943
I have an image in my head of the average kimber owner. It's a middle aged southern man, pot belly, divorced, pays $800/month on his 2006 mustang (automatic), wears sunglasses indoors, and you can see the bottom of his on-size-fits-all uncle mikes owb holster poking out below his inappropriately tight generic motorcycle t-shirt.

>>33359224
This is accurate.
Except also just gun noobs who dont know better then viciously defend their ignorant decision.

>>33351315
>Trusting your life with Ruger

File: E-Series.jpg (17KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 500x500px

>>33347383
I got a S&W E-Series 1911. It felt better and had more features than the slightly cheaper Springfield Mil-Spec.

File: Check him out.jpg (134KB, 496x496px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 496x496px

>>33359246
I have over 3000 rounds through this with no a single failure. You bet your ass..

>>33359113
It was made in Illinois.

And unless Georgia is a cuck state, no, it did not.,