which company makes the best 1911?

[curtiswr]

imported post

Just get yourself a Springfield Mil-Spec, a notch above their GI model. Shoot it. Figure out what upgrades you want, do some yourself, pal up with a smith in your area for others and you're golden.

You will not be disappointed.

 

[Dustin]

imported post

curtiswr wrote:

Just get yourself a Springfield Mil-Spec, a notch above their GI model. Shoot it. Figure out what upgrades you want, do some yourself, pal up with a smith in your area for others and you're golden.

You will not be disappointed.

I'll 2ndthat

 

[richarcm]

imported post

I vouch for the Taurus as that is what I had. The price is unbeatable and you actually get a pretty modern and well rounded gun with many of the bells and whistles already in place that you might have to purchase a la carte with other manufacturers. I never had a single problem with the Taurus.

But again, the 1911 is different from other guns in that they are all basically the same gun regardless of manufacturer. As long as you stick with a brand name you are going to love it.

Just buy one that you like and be done with it.

 

[HankT]

imported post

It's unlikely there is a "best." There's such a wide array of 1911 models available.

What a classic design. I've gotten the 1911 bug in recent years and now own several, Colt, Dan Wesson, Kimber and S&W in .45 and 10mm (mostly). My favorite right now is a S&W 1911PD and my least favorite is a 70 series Combat Commander which I've owned for 30 years.

I've yet to jump into the EB/Wilson/STI level and don't think I will. Well, probably not.

Best? I think it's a quicksand concept here. But it's fun to think about all the choices.

 

[arentol]

imported post

With almost any manufacturer you can get a really good 1911, but the "cheaper" manufacturers will have a higher percentage of guns with problems in either the short run, the long run, or both. So, basically it is a crap shoot, but your odds are "better" with the top manufacturers because they have tighter tolerances on their guns and generally higher quality parts overall.

I would say they order is something like this (Only including manufacturers with most guns under $1500):

The best:
Dan Wesson
Tightest tolerances, highest quality parts, fantastic warranty should you have the rare bad one, no MIM parts, and each gun has specially matched parts (thus the tight tolerances) and assembly is done entirely by hand. The only issue is that they are so popular now that they may be working too hard to meet demand as it seems like quality MAY have slipped a little recently. Though it could just be that their rising popularity has resulted in many new people buying their guns and then not oiling them enough. People new to Dan Wessons may not realize you need to put a ridiculous amount of oil on them for the first ~500 rounds because of the ridiculously tight tolerances.

Close second:
STI (pricier though)

Damn fine 1911's:
Kimber
Springfield

Very good 1911's:
Colt
S&W
Sig
Para-ordnance

Decent 1911's:
RIA/Armscor

Basically, you would be fine for general purposes with any of these, even the RIA. For defensive carry you might want a weapon that holds more rounds than normal, which not all manufacturers offer (ruling out Dan Wesson). However, if you want a target gun then you want to go with the Dan Wesson, STI, Kimber, or Springfield, and hopefully you get one of the better ones for the Kimber or Springfield. Of course, you could just as well go with any of these, and even with an RIA you might get SUPER lucky and have a particularly accurate one, as mentioned previously.

Also, since Dan Wesson's don't cost more than most of these there is no reason to not get one of those as far as I can tell. If you bought a cheaper gun (other than an RIA) and had it fixed up by a good gunsmith it would still cost more than the Dan Wesson, though it might be a better gun at that point.

 

[Dustin]

imported post

arentol wrote:

The best:
Dan Wesson
Tightest tolerances, highest quality parts, fantastic warranty should you have the rare bad one, no MIM parts, and each gun has specially matched parts (thus the tight tolerances) and assembly is done entirely by hand. The only issue is that they are so popular now that they may be working too hard to meet demand as it seems like quality MAY have slipped a little recently. Though it could just be that their rising popularity has resulted in many new people buying their guns and then not oiling them enough. People new to Dan Wessons may not realize you need to put a ridiculous amount of oil on them for the first ~500 rounds because of the ridiculously tight tolerances.

A friend at work got one of these the other day.

DW RZ-10

http://www.cz-usa.com/product_detail.php?id=80

The Tightness that your describing is right on point. I've NEVER felt a gun with such a sturdy, tight yet incredibly smooth slide before. I kept wanting to rack the slide back, and then ease it fwd. Out of all the 1911's I've fondled, the Dan Wesson feels like some sort of tight knit Custom gun compared to ALL the rest.

And this is coming from me, the Springfield Armory Guru Fan !

The only other 1911 I've felt that is close to being thta smooth but with a better trigger is the

Springfield Armory MC Operator

 

[arentol]

imported post

Yeah, Springfield makes a very nice 1911, and if I ever see one of their longslides on a store shelf it WILL be mine (Unless DW releases a longslide).

 

[Dustin]

imported post

arentol wrote:

Yeah, Springfield makes a very nice 1911, and if I ever see one of their longslides on a store shelf it WILL be mine (Unless DW releases a longslide).

Man you like those Long slides ? They look so big a nasty like a DE .50 lol !

Anyway here'sa Springfield LSfor decent price- http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=128032216

 

[Spectre]

imported post

richarcm wrote:

there is no "best 1911". They are all good.

Bingo! The thing that makes it the best is personal preference. Looking a facts though there is only two companies that I will not buy a 1911 from and that is Kimber and Smith and Wesson.

I sent almost $1000 on a S&W 1911PD with Novak sights, rail system, scandium frame, full length guide rod, and ambi safety. I had nothing but problems with it. I had to send it back to S&W twice for a faulty safety which they never fixed. I also had a fairly large chunk of the finish on he top of the slide slough off while cleaning. I got rid of it and neer looked back.

I also won't buy Kimber because Kimber is owned by Smith and Wesson and the quality control lately has dropped dramatically. Everyone I know who owns a recent production Kimber has nothing but negative comments about it. The only reason why people buy Kimber is because of hearsay and the name, much like the way it is with Colt.

 

[UtahRSO]

imported post

Which company makes the best 1911? You might as well ask what color hair the best wife has. Any of the major manufacturers make awfully good ones now. I bought a Springfield Loaded a couple of years ago for about $875. It was almost a coin flip between that and a Kimber Custom II.

I suppose there are features that could make a 1911 worth 3 times what I paid for mine, liketighter groups (although from a sandbag rest mine is freaky good with some loads), or all forged parts, or whatever. But for now I'm happy with things as they are.

 

[Blaidd]

imported post

Personally, I don't like Taurus. I know people that love them, but I don't like the fit and feel along with heard some horror stories of their customer service. I've beenlooking at the Para's now and like what I've seen. The only problem is that they are hard to come by in my neck of the woods.

 

[Gordie]

imported post

Try Gunbroker, they start at less than $600 there.

 

[Vandal]

imported post

I am a very happy owner of a Kimber. I bought it on the 25th of January of this year. My election gun if you will. Kimber is not S&W owned, they used to get the frames from S&W but don't any more. They are all made in-house. There is a ton of Kimber hater-ade out there that typically comes from internet experts and second hand tales, like the Glock fanboy hate of the XD and M&P. When you make as many guns as Kimber and SA, you are going to have Friday guns. That is what the warranties are for.

There really is no best 1911 out there esp. when you take into consideration all of the customization you can do to one. The levels of quality differ along with price. RIA/ Armscor are the bottom of the barrel. I owned one for a week and just could not get past how rough the metal work was. The tops of my rear sights were of noticeably different heights and the square angels were not squared of at all. They run well but look like crap when you really take a hard look. Taurus is the next step up. The relatively reasonably priced, better quality 1911s come from Springfield and Kimber with the STI Spartan. Then you move into the upper end custom guns like Ed Brown, Dan Wesson, Wilson Combat, the upper end Kimbers and the race guns

 

[marshaul]

imported post

Vandal wrote:

RIA/ Armscor are the bottom of the barrel. I owned one for a week and just could not get past how rough the metal work was. The tops of my rear sights were of noticeably different heights and the square angels were not squared of at all. They run well but look like crap when you really take a hard look. Taurus is the next step up. The relatively reasonably priced, better quality 1911s

You must have had a bad run. My Rocks look great; they're hardly bottom of the barrel.

Kimbers have had really bad quality control issues in recent years, from virtually all accounts.

Most Rocks function 100% out of the box, whereas Kimbers no longer have such a reputation.

Which is exactly why descriptors like "best" or "bottom of the barrel" are completely subjective and have no merit (not trying to argue whether Kimber is better than RIA).

FWIW, if there were a "bottom of the barrel" 1911, it would be Llama (or Star if you consider those 1911s). At least there you can point to the fact that they're rarely if ever built "in-spec".

 

[Statesman]

imported post

arentol wrote:

With almost any manufacturer you can get a really good 1911, but the "cheaper" manufacturers will have a higher percentage of guns with problems in either the short run, the long run, or both. So, basically it is a crap shoot, but your odds are "better" with the top manufacturers because they have tighter tolerances on their guns and generally higher quality parts overall.

I would say they order is something like this (Only including manufacturers with most guns under $1500):

The best:
Dan Wesson
Tightest tolerances, highest quality parts, fantastic warranty should you have the rare bad one, no MIM parts, and each gun has specially matched parts (thus the tight tolerances) and assembly is done entirely by hand. The only issue is that they are so popular now that they may be working too hard to meet demand as it seems like quality MAY have slipped a little recently. Though it could just be that their rising popularity has resulted in many new people buying their guns and then not oiling them enough. People new to Dan Wessons may not realize you need to put a ridiculous amount of oil on them for the first ~500 rounds because of the ridiculously tight tolerances.

Close second:
STI (pricier though)

Damn fine 1911's:
Kimber
Springfield

Very good 1911's:
Colt
S&W
Sig
Para-ordnance

Decent 1911's:
RIA/Armscor

Basically, you would be fine for general purposes with any of these, even the RIA. For defensive carry you might want a weapon that holds more rounds than normal, which not all manufacturers offer (ruling out Dan Wesson). However, if you want a target gun then you want to go with the Dan Wesson, STI, Kimber, or Springfield, and hopefully you get one of the better ones for the Kimber or Springfield. Of course, you could just as well go with any of these, and even with an RIA you might get SUPER lucky and have a particularly accurate one, as mentioned previously.

Also, since Dan Wesson's don't cost more than most of these there is no reason to not get one of those as far as I can tell. If you bought a cheaper gun (other than an RIA) and had it fixed up by a good gunsmith it would still cost more than the Dan Wesson, though it might be a better gun at that point.

Have you not considered Wilson Combat or Ed Brown 1911s ?

 

[Statesman]

imported post

marshaul wrote:

Kimbers have had really bad quality control issues in recent years, from virtually all accounts.

I read about these alleged quality control issues prior to my purchase of a Kimber, but could not substantiate the claims. Issues with Kimbers that I read about, and to my knowledge, were due to the short barrel (Ultras) not feeding hollow point ammo reliably, which can be a problem with any short barrel 1911. Virtually all of these issues to my knowledge have been corrected by purchasing Wilson Combat magazines, and breaking in the gun with at least 500 FMJ rounds. I've been told to throw the supplied magazines in a box, and get Wilson Combat mags.

If there are any quality control issues, I think it's in regards to their magazines. They should start including KimPro mags instead of the standard issues.

 

[marshaul]

imported post

Statesman wrote:

marshaul wrote:

Kimbers have had really bad quality control issues in recent years, from virtually all accounts.

I read about these alleged quality control issues prior to my purchase of a Kimber, but could not substantiate the claims.  Issues with Kimbers that I read about, and to my knowledge, were due to the short barrel (Ultras) not feeding hollow point ammo reliably, which can be a problem with any short barrel 1911.  Virtually all of these issues to my knowledge have been corrected by purchasing Wilson Combat magazines, and breaking in the gun with at least 500 FMJ rounds.  I've been told to throw the supplied magazines in a box, and get Wilson Combat mags.

If there are any quality control issues, I think it's in regards to their magazines.  They should start including KimPro mags instead of the standard issues. 

There seems to be something to be said for that. However, I have not had good luck myself with KimPro 8-rounders. The 7-rnd ones are great, however, that's what I carry. So far, the only 8-rounder I have with a spring good enough for the mag to retain proper functionality is a Chip McCormick Shooting Star, which I use as a backup mag for snake shot (in the event I carrry any).

 

[bugly]

imported post

marshaul wrote:

Vandal wrote:

RIA/ Armscor are the bottom of the barrel. I owned one for a week and just could not get past how rough the metal work was. The tops of my rear sights were of noticeably different heights and the square angels were not squared of at all. They run well but look like crap when you really take a hard look. Taurus is the next step up. The relatively reasonably priced, better quality 1911s

You must have had a bad run. My Rocks look great; they're hardly bottom of the barrel.

Kimbers have had really bad quality control issues in recent years, from virtually all accounts.

Most Rocks function 100% out of the box, whereas Kimbers no longer have such a reputation.

Which is exactly why descriptors like "best" or "bottom of the barrel" are completely subjective and have no merit (not trying to argue whether Kimber is better than RIA).

FWIW, if there were a "bottom of the barrel" 1911, it would be Llama (or Star if you consider those 1911s). At least there you can point to the fact that they're rarely if ever built "in-spec".

I own and carry daily a RIA mil-spec (originally) 1911a1 in full-size. NEVER EVER had a malfunction that could be attributed to the gun itself, I have had a few bad hand-loads and that was from experimentation on amount of powder. I can load an empty cartridge from a magazine into it and it goes every time. If that's "bottom of the barrel", I'd like to see yours do better. BTW, shot groups are as good or better than with the Kimber CDPII I had until recently, and it had been customized twice by the Kimber custom shop at a total price of $2500.00. My RIA? $340.00 and a little home customizing.
Goes to show you, all 1911s can be excellent, it just takes a little effort unless you want to pay big bucks to get a Ted Yost or Les Baer custom.

 

[arentol]

imported post

Statesman wrote:

Have you not considered Wilson Combat or Ed Brown 1911s ?

Based on the OP's question and interested in Springfield and Taurus I assumed he wasn't referring to companies that make 2k+ "custom" firearms like Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Fusion, DL Sports, etc.. Therefore, as I stated, I kept this to companies that mostly sell 1911's for $1500 or less.

 

[Statesman]

imported post

arentol wrote:

Statesman wrote:

Have you not considered Wilson Combat or Ed Brown 1911s ?

Based on the OP's question and interested in Springfield and Taurus I assumed he wasn't referring to companies that make 2k+ "custom" firearms like Wilson Combat, Ed Brown, Fusion, DL Sports, etc.. Therefore, as I stated, I kept this to companies that mostly sell 1911's for $1500 or less.

Good point. I guess "affordable" is a subjective constraint when compared to income. I've held, and dry fired an Ed Brown. Very tight fitting piece! It's something everyone has to experience for theirselves.