I’m not AC, but I did recommend a Series 70. Firstly, it’s a Colt which (like it or not) does mean it will hold value better than others. It’s made in the U.S., is forged steel, generally follows the original TDP. I’ve personally witnessed fewer reliability issues with base-model Colts than other makes. Fit and finish are generally better than other weapons in the same price range.
Plus, every pistolsmith out there will work on Colts.
Preference admittedly plays a role, but it reaches far deeper than that. Aside from the fact that Colt’s is the original 1911, etc., etc. the reality is that their quality has never been better. New machinery and tooling (finally) has them turning out the best frames and slides that they have ever made. The metallurgy is right. The lines of the guns are right. Their internals have always been the best available in a production gun. Sure, they still have a few sharp edges, but on balance, you aren’t going to find a better-built basic 1911. You can get more bells and whistles, of course, but just recognize that most production guns are being built to a price point, and if you add more features, you’re likely taking quality (or quality control) out of the gun somewhere else – which is what we’ve seen destroy Kimber’s reputation.
A box stock Colt will shoot surprisingly well, will be backed-up by the factory, will hold its value, and will deliver pride-of-ownership that no other 1911 can match. Perhaps more to the point, it will provide the ideal platform upon which to customize later. I’m not saying that the gun isn’t going to be ready to go “as is,” but every 1911 owner sooner or later is going to at least consider sending a base gun to a favored pistolsmith to be transformed into something decidedly more personal. There isn’t a 1911 made that is more suitable as a full-house custom candidate than a Hartford original.
When looking at the 1911 market, what you find is a crowded field with many excellent contenders. If you’re looking for a best-grade shooter that will never need to have another thing done to it, buy a Wilson CQB. If you want a solid 1911 that will perform well from Day One, but which will also have the potential to grow with you as your tastes and needs change over time, buy a Colt. You can spend your money elsewhere and get a decent gun for the here-and-now, but if you care to take a longer term view on all of this, there is simply no way you’re going to beat Colt at its own game. They do, after all, have a 100-year head start. =]
AC
Thank you. I appreciate the explanation. For pistol, I shoot mainly Glock now and once in a while Sig. I keep toying with the idea of buying a 1911 rail gun and the TRP is/was very high on my list as I’ve put a few hundred rounds though one and liked the way it handled.
Wilson Combat CQB rail and Springfield Professional Rail were both guns I looked at but are quite honestly out of my price range.
I’ll do some more research on the Colt Rail gun. Thanks again.
This is a really nice option, try finding bad reviews, few and far between when it comes to S&W 1911’s…
I built up a 1911 using a Caspian frame and slide. Might be a bit ambitious for a first 1911, but a rally good way to learn how they work.
Very well put…
I have been considering a 1911 lately, while I would really like a Colt rail gun It’s out of my range at the moment. I have read a few good reviews on the STI Spartan. Does anyone have any hands one time with one?
If you keep an eye out, you might find a deal on one. I got this very slightly used one at a local shop for $880.47 out the door. That’s a lot of value for the money!
Here’s a link to my actual SW rail gun, it’s a model 1911PD. I picked it up lightly used from my local gun store for $650 plus tax… 
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=71459&goto=newpost
Here’s my rail gun
For that amount of money, see if you can snatch up a Dan Wesson… you wont regret it. Otherwise, Kimber would be my pick, they are fantastic pistols, no matter what the naysayers will tell you. Ive owned two and had no issues through thousands of rounds. Thw Raptor is actually going to be my next one most likely.
I had a Kimber that was kind of rough like the parts were made in the third world. A friend of mind has one that jammed until going to a good smith.
Avoid any Colt made after about 1990. Utter junk. There’s a reason Kimber exists.
You’re funny, guy.
I worked for a large Kimber dealer for almost 2 years and they were absolute shit. I saw stuff you would not believe. Only ever had one Colt come back. The only guns Kimber ever made that were consistently worth a rat’s ass were the Series I guns.
Sig 1911 TACOPS, or an Dan Wesson.
FYI. Dawson precision stopped producing the rails.
I really like my les Baer UTC. But for a railed 1911 I have to say that I love my trp operator.
I use it with a tlr-1s in a Raven Concealment holster. It’s OWB holster and a big setup, but its very easy to conceal. Especially in the winter with a jacket.
Hmmm. I’d take any series 70 colt over any Kimber.
You are behind the times. Colt’s quality has come way up (and some of their stuff in the 80’s wasn’t great).
I wouldn’t have a current Kimber either. Between the firing pin safety and poor parts it’s one of the biggest rip offs in 1911s’. Colt or Springfield, full size, carbon steel, would be the only choice in an entry 1911.
I’ve recently had a full-house custom gun built up on an STI Trojan, and while the jury is still out on long-term performance, in terms of feature set and quality, this isn’t a bad point of entry into the 1911 world. Keep in mind that we’re talking about their traditional single-stack 1911, and not the company’s better-known double-stack 2011 series.
STI’s recoil reduction system should be replaced with a conventional guide rod and spring, and you may want to upgrade a few other things here and there, but the bones of these guns are solid, and barrel quality is excellent. On that note, the primary difference between the STI and most other 1911s is that STI uses a fully-supported, ramped barrel that improves the feed characteristics of the gun with a wider variety of ammunition loads. Ramped barrels are nothing new in the 1911, of course, but they are unusual in .45 ACP guns.
Do I prefer STI over Colt in an entry-level gun? No. Can STI produce a decent single-stack with considerable potential? Yes. The problem you run into here is that a few hundred dollars can make a world of difference in terms of what you’re able to afford, and there are so many lightly-used semi-custom guns out there that it can often be tempting to go that route if you’re looking in the $1,500 to $2,000 range.
AC
There were indeed some curious examples of the 1911/1991 coming out of Hartford in the late 80s and early 90s, but it’s a far reach to label them “utter junk.” Some models carried less appeal as base gun candidates because of the way that the factory integrated certain upgrades like grip safeties and sights. The Series 80 safety system was unpopular with purists. Production was spotty, and the guns were often hard to get. Even within the same model line, it was admittedly hard to predict which combination of parts the gun was likely to ship with. The usual Colt idiocyncracies with respect to the lines of the gun were often in evidence. The company was consistently “on the ropes,” and at odds with the union.
Many dealers looked at all of this – coupled with the fact that their wholesalers rarely had the guns – and just wrote Colt off. It was far easier to point the customer to an in-stock Kimber with a number of desireable upgrades for the same money than it was to recommend a Colt that they didn’t have, didn’t know when they would get, and had no idea what it was going to look like when it arrived. As we all know, this feature-rich/entry-level pricing model led to very great success at Kimber.
It is also what killed them.
Granted, Kimber is still a strong market competitor in terms of overall sales, but the quality of their guns is such that they can no longer be recommended for any serious applications. Suspect parts quality and poor quality control have consigned them to irrelevance for the most part; meanwhile, Colt has almost completely turned things around. They have updated their configurations, invested in more modern tooling, and put considerable emphasis upon making sure that they are getting the guns right. Factor in contemporary metallurgy, and you end up with the previous observation that the current production Colts are the best 1911s the company has ever made. I would concede that it makes sense to look closely at any 20-something Colt just to make sure you know exactly what you’re getting; that said, I certainly wouldn’t dismiss them out of hand.
As for Kimber, the easiest way to respond to this would be to say that, if you’re the kind of shooter who is comfortable with a Bushmaster or DPMS AR-15, then you’ve probably nothing to fear from a Kimber 1911. If your needs/preferences track more along the lines of professional-grade, or you simply have a different concept of value than the typical gun buyer, then Kimber isn’t likely to earn a place on your list of serious contenders.
AC