Early 70s Colt Commander questions

[awp_101]

Im considering a 1911 project for my 50th birthday in a little over a year. I’m thinking about a birth year 9mm Commander and having a .38 Super barrel fit as well (or the other way around depending on what I can find).

It looks like .45s were available with steel or aluminum frames, what about the 9 and .38? One of my “wants” at the moment is a squared trigger guard. I know that can be done with a steel frame but I don’t know if it can be done to an aluminum frame. If it can’t and the 9/.38 were only offered in aluminum frames then I need to look into Plan B.

[JAD]

A buddy had a similar vintage piece. It was a combat Commander, so steel frame, and 9 mm. It had some issues. I think I would stick to 45 in a vintage colt.

[farscott]

Something to consider is that early Commander and Combat Commander slides had extra cuts to reduce weight. Later production removed those cuts to save machine time and because the weight savings were not that great. The slides with the weight removed were also more likely to crack even though Colt did a good job of using radii to not create stress risers. More gunk could find its way into the extractor channel, especially as lube made its way into the channel. Material is also removed near the locking lugs. The below pics (not mine) show the cuts between the locking lugs and the barrel bushing and in the two channels along the pickup/disconnect rail. Note that the extractor is visible through the slide.

The aluminum frame could be given a square trigger guard, but destruction of the frame is probable. I would not advise it.

If you are going to shoot it, the best choice is a five-inch steel pistol. A 1970/1971 Government Model lacks all of the issues that a 1970/1971 Commander has.

[awp_101]

Excellent information, thanks to both of you! Preparations B and C will move forward...:cool:

[tango-papa]

Im considering a 1911 project for my 50th birthday in a little over a year. I’m thinking about a birth year 9mm Commander and having a .38 Super barrel fit as well (or the other way around depending on what I can find).

It looks like .45s were available with steel or aluminum frames, what about the 9 and .38? One of my “wants” at the moment is a squared trigger guard. I know that can be done with a steel frame but I don’t know if it can be done to an aluminum frame. If it can’t and the 9/.38 were only offered in aluminum frames then I need to look into Plan B.

1971 or 1972?

I'm looking for a steel frame 1970 Commander in .45.
Let me know and if/when I come across the appropriate year, happy to let you know.

Suggest check with Jackson Armory - picked up an unfired/mint 1970 MK IV S70 from them a few months ago for a reasonable price. They had a 1972 MK IV S70 in the case at the time along with a few other early-mid 70's Colt 1911's.

Also suggest check with Collectors Firearms in Houston. Their inventory is amazing.

[theJanitor]

I've got a steel commander slated for my next project. That being said, I'd recommend a 5" government in 45, or a LW commander. Steel commanders don't carry better than government models, and are a touch less reliable. It's lose-lose

Oh, and order your holster NOW. Milt Sparks, and Sam Andrews have molds for square guards

[Coyote41]

While there is a nostalgia about old Colt 1911s, the truth is that old commercial models are full of bad workmanship, poor metallurgy, and weird kinks. If you just want to look at it, they’ll be fine. If you want a shooter, I would suggest having a good ‘smith look it over before buying.

I briefly went down this rabbit hole. It cost me quite a bit, but in the end, all my 2010s Colts were far better guns. I think a lot of people have lost sight of how far the 1911 has come in 50 years. In truth, I’d probably take a Rock Island 1911 over an old Colt, from personal experience.

Maybe consider a Colt revolver instead?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[psalms144.1]

I've got no first hand experience with Colts of that era - bought my first one in the late 80s, and my last one probably 10 years later. In that time, I owned 10+ Colt 1911s, two Detective Specials, and one "Pony" DAO .380. The DSs were excellent; the Pony ran flawlessly for the limited amount of shooting it saw. With two notable exceptions, not a SINGLE one of the 1911s worked worth a shit. None of them. I will admit, one of them was a plain-jane Officer's model, and I should have known better, but I was young and dumb at the time. The rest were Commander or Government model pistols, most of them "high end" Gold Cup, or "Combat" models. Several of them wouldn't reliably feed FMJ ammunition, and none of the problem guns would feed JHP of any kind. My experience with Colt 1911s is what drove me away from my first love, the 1911 platform, and into DA revolvers and Glocks.

The two exceptions were a 9mm "Commanding Officer's" model - LW Commander frame with a 9mm Officer upper - great pistol, carried well, shot better; and a "budget" 1991 5" .45 that, while rough on finish and sharp enough on the slide to shave with, ran like a champ with anything I fed it, and was exceptionally accurate. Had I kept either of those two pistols instead of searching for something "better," I might never have left the Cult of Colt.

But, everything happens for a reason, so now I'm very happy with a brace of Dan Wessons, one STI, and a lowly Range Officer...

[farscott]

I've got no first hand experience with Colts of that era - bought my first one in the late 80s, and my last one probably 10 years later. In that time, I owned 10+ Colt 1911s, two Detective Specials, and one "Pony" DAO .380. The DSs were excellent; the Pony ran flawlessly for the limited amount of shooting it saw. With two notable exceptions, not a SINGLE one of the 1911s worked worth a shit. None of them. I will admit, one of them was a plain-jane Officer's model, and I should have known better, but I was young and dumb at the time. The rest were Commander or Government model pistols, most of them "high end" Gold Cup, or "Combat" models. Several of them wouldn't reliably feed FMJ ammunition, and none of the problem guns would feed JHP of any kind. My experience with Colt 1911s is what drove me away from my first love, the 1911 platform, and into DA revolvers and Glocks.

The two exceptions were a 9mm "Commanding Officer's" model - LW Commander frame with a 9mm Officer upper - great pistol, carried well, shot better; and a "budget" 1991 5" .45 that, while rough on finish and sharp enough on the slide to shave with, ran like a champ with anything I fed it, and was exceptionally accurate. Had I kept either of those two pistols instead of searching for something "better," I might never have left the Cult of Colt.

But, everything happens for a reason, so now I'm very happy with a brace of Dan Wessons, one STI, and a lowly Range Officer...

There is a reason the custom 1911 smith became a thing. It was not because the pistols ran from the factory. It was because the rule was that if the ammo was not 230-grain ball the gun would not run. If it was 230-grain ball, it still may not run. Armand Swenson and Jim Hoag was needed because 1911s were not running in the hands of people who needed them to do so, first LEOs and then others. And back then, the 1911 choices were GI surplus or Colt. And Colt did not do much to make the guns better. There was the accuracy improvement of the Series '70, an attempt to get the benefits of a fitted bushing. But nothing on making the guns run with anything other than 230-grain ball until the "dimple" in the barrel long past the addition of the Series '80 firing pin safety. The next improvement was consistency, courtesy of the CNC machines added in the last decade.

So Colt is building better pistols today than ever, mostly due to improvements in metallurgy and adopting CNC machines. But Colt is no leader in making good 1911s; they gave that market away to many competitors, including Springfield Armory, STI, Kimber, and Wilson Combat. Those companies all got their start in the 1911 by doing what Colt would not do -- meeting market wants and building reliable pistols. Colt's answer to Kimber was the XS series; it was a good pistol until cost-reduced to become the XSE. It has only been recently that Colt offered a decent beavertail in a non-custom shop gun with the advent of the Competition models. Those guns came more than twenty years after STI embraced the action shooting sports.

[Robinson]

It has only been recently that Colt offered a decent beavertail in a non-custom shop gun with the advent of the Competition models. Those guns came more than twenty years after STI embraced the action shooting sports.

The Gold Cup Trophy was offered with a decent beavertail well before the Competition model. As was the Rail Gun, though it was a descendent of the XSE line.

The best guns Colt is selling these days are built by hand in the Custom Shop. But they are priced well above the production line guns, and a limited quantity are produced each year.

[awp_101]

1971 or 1972?
1971. Jackson Armory in Dallas? If so, I've never been over there but I keep meaning to fix that when I got a little more free time.


There is a reason the custom 1911 smith became a thing. It was not because the pistols ran from the factory. It was because the rule was that if the ammo was not 230-grain ball the gun would not run. If it was 230-grain ball, it still may not run. Armand Swenson and Jim Hoag was needed because 1911s were not running in the hands of people who needed them to do so, first LEOs and then others. And back then, the 1911 choices were GI surplus or Colt. And Colt did not do much to make the guns better.
I'm late to the 1911 game (less than 20 years ago) so I never made the connection between the custom smiths and general reliability. I always figured they came about driven by competition needs (Bullseye or IDPA) and because there's always someone who wants to look good while doing whatever it is they do.

None of my wants/plans are firm at this point. Heck, in the end I may end up going for a privacy fence and a small shop for wood turning and reloading. :eek:

[farscott]

The Gold Cup Trophy was offered with a decent beavertail well before the Competition model. As was the Rail Gun, though it was a descendent of the XSE line.

I guess our definition of decent beavertail might be different. I had a GCT and have a Rail Gun. The latter had a Wilson beavertail installed as the factory one was not well fit and was not consistent in terms of where the grip deactivated it.

[Greg]

There is no reason to not get an older Colt if they appeal to you. The finish and rollmarks are far better than anything they've made since the 1980s (and the 1980s aren't regarded as the highwater mark for Colt).

Better machining is found on the newer pistols, but it still takes somebody with a clue putting their hands on a 1911 to make them run well and feel good.

[tango-papa]

1971. Jackson Armory in Dallas? If so, I've never been over there but I keep meaning to fix that when I got a little more free time.

1971 - got it.

Yes, JA in Dallas. If you like old school blued steel and wood stocked guns, set aside a bit of time for your visit. Their inventory is basically a museum of guns.

http://www.jacksonarmory.com/JA/


Assuming you're aware of this link, but in case not, it's handy for checking the DOB:

https://www.colt.com/serial-lookup

[awp_101]

Assuming you're aware of this link, but in case not, it's handy for checking the DOB:

https://www.colt.com/serial-lookup
Thanks for that! I was using one off of sightm1911.org (IIRC) but I'm not sure how accurate it is.

[flyrodr]

This thread got me to take a look at a couple of older Commanders I have, both .45s. One is a Combat Commander, built in 1973. The other is a LW Commander, built in 1972. So, one steel-framed, one Al-framed. Both have the lightening cuts in the slide.

The Combat Commander I bought new, and I've mentioned on P-F before that it was customized by Armand Swenson a year or so after I bought it. Best I recall, it ran fine with hardball and 230 JHP as built, but the trigger wasn't great, and those original Colt sights were awful. It's had thousands of rounds through it, mostly range loads with Bullseye, but plenty of hardball and JHP. Can't remember the last time there was any failure. Beyond cleaning and lubing, it's only had a few spring changes.

The LWC I bought used (very slightly) and was customized by John Harrison. It was intended to be primarily a carry gun, and not often at that. I hesitate to call it a BBQ gun, but . . . whatever. It has run fine as well. John brought up the lightening cuts before doing any work. Best I recall, he noted their presence, said some people didn't want a custom gun built with them, and asked if I was aware and OK. I told him it wasn't intended to be a high round count gun, and asked if he thought that'd be OK. He did, and it's been fine.

Incidentally, I tossed them on my postal scale. The CC weighed 33.8 oz., and the LWC 24.2 oz., both without a magazine.

Loosely tying back in to the OP's question, the CC has a squared trigger guard; the LWC does not. To be honest, I asked for the squared trigger guard because, well, it was a Swenson, right. I've never used it (granted, I have smallish hands, shortish fingers). And found out back then that while holster makers would accommodate it on special order, seldom was it a stock design feature.

[tango-papa]

This thread got me to take a look at a couple of older Commanders I have, both .45s. One is a Combat Commander, built in 1973. The other is a LW Commander, built in 1972. So, one steel-framed, one Al-framed. Both have the lightening cuts in the slide.

The Combat Commander I bought new, and I've mentioned on P-F before that it was customized by Armand Swenson a year or so after I bought it. Best I recall, it ran fine with hardball and 230 JHP as built, but the trigger wasn't great, and those original Colt sights were awful. It's had thousands of rounds through it, mostly range loads with Bullseye, but plenty of hardball and JHP. Can't remember the last time there was any failure. Beyond cleaning and lubing, it's only had a few spring changes.

The LWC I bought used (very slightly) and was customized by John Harrison. It was intended to be primarily a carry gun, and not often at that. I hesitate to call it a BBQ gun, but . . . whatever. It has run fine as well. John brought up the lightening cuts before doing any work. Best I recall, he noted their presence, said some people didn't want a custom gun built with them, and asked if I was aware and OK. I told him it wasn't intended to be a high round count gun, and asked if he thought that'd be OK. He did, and it's been fine.

Incidentally, I tossed them on my postal scale. The CC weighed 33.8 oz., and the LWC 24.2 oz., both without a magazine.

Loosely tying back in to the OP's question, the CC has a squared trigger guard; the LWC does not. To be honest, I asked for the squared trigger guard because, well, it was a Swenson, right. I've never used it (granted, I have smallish hands, shortish fingers). And found out back then that while holster makers would accommodate it on special order, seldom was it a stock design feature.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure "the rules" mandate if you say you have an Armand Swenson custom Colt Combat Commander, that you "shall" post multiple photos of said gun.

Just sayin...

[awp_101]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure "the rules" mandate if you say you have an Armand Swenson custom Colt Combat Commander, that you "shall" post multiple photos of said gun.

Just sayin...

Quoted because I can only like this once.;)

60957

;)

[SW CQB 45]

Tagged for interest.

I did order a "Custom" Commander and wont see it till 2021. I get the 4.25 are a tad less reliable than the 5 inchers.

One reason I am going with a 4.25" is my arm length. With a 5", I have to tweak my body a touch for the muzzle to clear the holster. When I packed a 4" Champion.... it "broke leather" so effortlessly.

I would like to find an original blued Springer barrel bushing 4.25" model in decent condition. I am assuming they were named Champions too.

A former Asst Chief asked me to look at his .45 Colt Commander (which was the version that has the cuts in the slide). He told me it would lock the slide back prematurely. Well, when he dropped it off to me, it had an extended lever slide stop. I told him that was his problem but he want to keep it. His mags were horrible and soft springed, so I cleaned his piece, we got new mags (IIRC CMC) and it ran with the new mags the 30 or so rounds I shot through it. I hate non beavertail safety guns because of my hand size, I will get bitten.

I have a 1942 Kongsberg Colt in my office that I want to shoot, but I know it will draw blood.

On another note.... I did own a DW Valkryie 4.25 alloy frame 9mm. That piece was a dream to shoot (no felt recoil and accurate), easy to carry all day and fit very well. I only sold it to move away from 9mm 1911. I dont care for the finickiness of 9mm mags compared to .45.

[flyrodr]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure "the rules" mandate if you say you have an Armand Swenson custom Colt Combat Commander, that you "shall" post multiple photos of said gun.

Just sayin...

Thought I had posted photos some time ago, but can't find thread. Thus (with apologies for snapshot quality):

The Swenson Combat Commander:

60959

And the Harrison LWC:

60963

[Jim Watson]

I have not seen an aluminum Commander with squared trigger guard. Seems that welding, machining, and finishing would be a huge project with lots of opportunity for failure.

My 1970s Commander is almost a hardball gun. I have shot a fair number of Hornady XTPs in it with no misfeeds so far.
Otherwise it is not good with SWCs, Zero or Remington JHPs.

My Combat Commander is a Horsie of a different spectrum. It is accurate, reliable, and flexible. But it didn't come from Colt that way; it has been thoroughly accurized. In fact, it is my most accurate centerfire, it shot X ring groups at 50 yards with the last of my Winchester Super Match. From a Ransom Rest. The shorter sight radius and light muzzle mean I cannot hold it as well as a GM.

So I don't see anything wrong with a birthday Commander, if it isn't just right, it can be fixed.

[awp_101]

I have not seen an aluminum Commander with squared trigger guard. Seems that welding, machining, and finishing would be a huge project with lots of opportunity for failure.

JEM offers one but it's machined that way from the get go. I'm extremely tempted to go that route because I have an ever so slight connection to someone on the inside (distant relation by marriage/rumor). When we discussed a possible build a couple of years ago there was the slight chance I could go down there and watch the process. That coupled with a personalized serial make it very appealing...

[tango-papa]

Thought I had posted photos some time ago, but can't find thread. Thus (with apologies for snapshot quality):

The Swenson Combat Commander:

And the Harrison LWC:



Yeah, those pistols are classy - thanks for the photos.

Bonus points for posting close-ups of all the Swenson parts with his roll marks on them...

Really nice pair of Commanders.

[flyrodr]

Yeah, those pistols are classy - thanks for the photos.

Bonus points for posting close-ups of all the Swenson parts with his roll marks on them...

Really nice pair of Commanders.

Here's the S&W sight. Mr. Swenson added the "filler" for the original dovetail, and the "shear pin" just behind the hex-head screw on the sight. He also added the (barely visible) barrel tensioner. He adds the owner's initial to the pin and tensioner.

61015

And here's the right side paddle of the ambi-safety. Note that the safety is stamped "Fall Brook", but the stamp under the serial number is only "Calif.". Mr. Swenson's shop was originally in Gardena, and he later relocated to Fallbrook. I originally ordered the single-side extended safety, which was marked either "Gardena, Calif" or just "Calif.". Subsequently, i bought an ambi-safety from him that had the new Fallbrook location on it. The initial work on my gun was done during his transition, thus the "Calif." only marking. (At least that's how I recall it.)

61016

He also made, or at least fitted, a new barrel bushing, which tightened up the original Colt barrel.

Note the discolored grip screw. This gun was originally finished in satin nickel, and refinished in hard chrome by Swenson . . . except for the grip screws. (And I remember him fussing at me for sending him a nickel-finished gun, and asking him to refinish it in chrome. Seems he not only had to strip the nickel, but that Colt was a bit less careful with the finish prep prior to plating, and he had to file out some rough spots.)

[Totally aside, this spell checking is entertaining: "Ambitious" safety. "Gardens", Calif. etc.

[tango-papa]

Here's the S&W sight. Mr. Swenson added the "filler" for the original dovetail, and the "shear pin" just behind the hex-head screw on the sight. He also added the (barely visible) barrel tensioner. He adds the owner's initial to the pin and tensioner.

And here's the right side paddle of the ambi-safety. Note that the safety is stamped "Fall Brook", but the stamp under the serial number is only "Calif.". Mr. Swenson's shop was originally in Gardena, and he later relocated to Fallbrook. I originally ordered the single-side extended safety, which was marked either "Gardena, Calif" or just "Calif.". Subsequently, i bought an ambi-safety from him that had the new Fallbrook location on it. The initial work on my gun was done during his transition, thus the "Calif." only marking. (At least that's how I recall it.)

He also made, or at least fitted, a new barrel bushing, which tightened up the original Colt barrel.

Note the discolored grip screw. This gun was originally finished in satin nickel, and refinished in hard chrome by Swenson . . . except for the grip screws. (And I remember him fussing at me for sending him a nickel-finished gun, and asking him to refinish it in chrome. Seems he not only had to strip the nickel, but that Colt was a bit less careful with the finish prep prior to plating, and he had to file out some rough spots.)

[Totally aside, this spell checking is entertaining: "Ambitious" safety. "Gardens", Calif. etc.

So neat to see.
Thank you for those photos and related details about the back and forth regarding getting the work done.

How do we say?

"I'll be in my bunk..."

[awp_101]

flyrodr, that’s a heck of a piece of history! If it were mine it might go into the casket with me...

That rear sight gives me an idea. I’ve got a Clements pre-war S&W sight I picked up for a planned Vaquero project I’m not as keen on right now. I wonder....

Yeah, autocorrect can pound sand.

[SW CQB 45]

in the late 80s, my dad came home with twin Commanders that had S&W rears.

I said cool, till I picked one of them up and whoever machined them, put them on crooked.

I checked the other one and it was crooked too.

Much to my disappointment, they went back to the gunshop.


the pics of the Swenson took me back.... thanks for them "shots".

[Robinson]

I guess our definition of decent beavertail might be different. I had a GCT and have a Rail Gun. The latter had a Wilson beavertail installed as the factory one was not well fit and was not consistent in terms of where the grip deactivated it.

Nah, I doubt our definitions of a decent beavertail grip safety differ much. More likely I wasn't tuned in to the context of your post.

Colt has gotten better about fitting their grip safeties so they deactivate at the right amount of travel, but honestly the safeties on their traditional models have always worked pretty well IMO. Having a gun with an inconsistent grip safety is actually a strange problem to have, since it is just a matter of the geometry of the tang at the front of the safety. Usually it is either fit properly or it isn't but it will always deactivate at the same point.

One of the reasons I like the Custom Shop guns is that they fit the safeties by hand, something that simply isn't done on Colt's production line guns. They take a couple of swipes with a file at the sear engagement lug on the thumb safety and that's about it. I often have to clean them up a bit with a file and a stone to get them how I like them.

[Dave T]

This is the last of three Commanders I carried as off duty weapons and plain clothes duty guns.

61042

The first one just had a Micro fixed rear with a silver soldered front that I had to replace several times. I also stuck a releived Government grip safety on it to stop hammer bite. Second one had K-38 rear sight with a soldered and staked front. The pictured gun was that last one and I carried and shot it for 6 or 7 years.

All of them eventually cracked their aluminum frames because I believed in shooting what you carry. The one pictured is cracked in three places. I shot it in Steel combat matches and IDPA events. The cracks are bad enough I never felt comfortable selling it.

Dave

[03RN]

Now that we're talking about grips to support the safety Id like to find a pair.

Ive never noticed a set of grips saying they support the safety.

What to look for? Any grips usually work or do they normally need to be custom ordered?

[farscott]

Now that we're talking about grips to support the safety Id like to find a pair.

Ive never noticed a set of grips saying they support the safety.

What to look for? Any grips usually work or do they normally need to be custom ordered?

Mine have all been custom made for the pistol, so the grips support the safety when it is off while allowing full downward travel. Too many variables for a stock set of grips. The best possible would be oversize grips and trim/sand/finish to that pistol.

[03RN]

This is the last of three Commanders I carried as off duty weapons and plain clothes duty guns.

61042

The first one just had a Micro fixed rear with a silver soldered front that I had to replace several times. I also stuck a releived Government grip safety on it to stop hammer bite. Second one had K-38 rear sight with a soldered and staked front. The pictured gun was that last one and I carried and shot it for 6 or 7 years.

All of them eventually cracked their aluminum frames because I believed in shooting what you carry. The one pictured is cracked in three places. I shot it in Steel combat matches and IDPA events. The cracks are bad enough I never felt comfortable selling it.

Dave

Thats a nice looking commander. What loads were you shooting?

Im going to fit my lw champion with a squared fps today. I was shooting 200gr swc over 7gr unique l loaded up but think i need to drop it down to 6.5 or 6 for daily shooting so I dont do the same thing.

[Dave T]

03RN,

For years my practice and competition load was a 200g H&G #68 over 6g of 231. That gave me about 900 fps in a 5" Government Model. JMB's original concept and specifications for the 45 ACP cartridge was a 200g bullet @ 900 fps. I always figured if he thought it was a good idea, who am I to argue. (smile)

That Commander and the 1958 GM I had for a "match" gun at the time ate thousands and thousands of that load over 20 years or so.

Dave

[Jim Watson]

Here's the S&W sight. Mr. Swenson added the "filler" for the original dovetail, and the "shear pin" just behind the hex-head screw on the sight. He also added the (barely visible) barrel tensioner. He adds the owner's initial to the pin and tensioner.

61015.

I know he was a pioneer in a lot of stuff we consider standard on a nice production gun and essential to customization, but that serrated dovetail filler is just plain ugly.

I have a S&W sight in the "protected position" which largely means the gunsmith did not have to fill in the dovetail at all.
I have a gunsmith installed Accro sight with the dovetail welded up. It does have a tiny pinhole in the weld line, though.

[theJanitor]

That rear sight gives me an idea. I’ve got a Clements pre-war S&W sight I picked up for a planned Vaquero project I’m not as keen on right now. I wonder....


Please don't do this to your Commander project. Swenson and the like did these things out of necessity. But they have gone by the wayside, because better options now exist. The Bomar still provides the cleanest sight picture and is attractive when installed, if you're looking for adjustables.

[flyrodr]

Please don't do this to your Commander project. Swenson and the like did these things out of necessity. But they have gone by the wayside, because better options now exist. The Bomar still provides the cleanest sight picture and is attractive when installed, if you're looking for adjustables.

Very much true. There weren't a lot of mail-order 1911 parts a half century ago.

[SW CQB 45]

Now that we're talking about grips to support the safety Id like to find a pair.

Ive never noticed a set of grips saying they support the safety.

What to look for? Any grips usually work or do they normally need to be custom ordered?

VZ 320 covered
https://i.imgur.com/4fBGWrph.jpg

10-8 Signatures covered
https://i.imgur.com/AaaT5eMh.jpg

el cheapos...not really
https://i.imgur.com/0w3SsG5h.jpg

can't recall this one but he bought Monkey Grips
https://i.imgur.com/KMtX2GWh.jpg

magpuls - NOPE
https://i.imgur.com/3hwBta8h.jpg

[03RN]

VZ 320 covered
https://i.imgur.com/4fBGWrph.jpg

10-8 Signatures covered
https://i.imgur.com/AaaT5eMh.jpg

el cheapos...not really
https://i.imgur.com/0w3SsG5h.jpg

can't recall this one but he bought Monkey Grips
https://i.imgur.com/KMtX2GWh.jpg

magpuls - NOPE
https://i.imgur.com/3hwBta8h.jpg

Not the plunger tube, the starboard safety

[awp_101]

Please don't do this to your Commander project. Swenson and the like did these things out of necessity. But they have gone by the wayside, because better options now exist.


Very much true. There weren't a lot of mail-order 1911 parts a half century ago.
Yeah, it was more of a spur of the moment “what if” thought since the squared trigger guard is already a nod to the old school style. Maybe I’ll go with one of those Aristocrat 3 setting PPC sights instead...;)

[theJanitor]

Yeah, it was more of a spur of the moment “what if” thought since the squared trigger guard is already a nod to the old school style. Maybe I’ll go with one of those Aristocrat 3 setting PPC sights instead...;)

tJ leaves the chat


:D

[SW CQB 45]

double

[SW CQB 45]

Not the plunger tube, the starboard safety

my bad,

only my old Larry Davidsons Shredders go up high on the ejection side. LD cut a notch but I am not sure if its fitted or makes contact to act as a stop. I would have to dig them out.

https://i.imgur.com/VUBPmJdl.jpg

[SW CQB 45]

Maybe I’ll go with one of those Aristocrat 3 setting PPC sights instead...;)

:D
SACS Nowlin barrel Nina
https://i.imgur.com/z10KjuOl.jpg

[awp_101]

:D
SACS Nowlin barrel Nina
https://i.imgur.com/z10KjuOl.jpg

But is it a Commander?;)

There's a part of me that wants to pick up an old Bullseye or PPC gun instead of the 9/38 Combo Commander and those sights are much more appealing to me than the full on rib set ups.

[SW CQB 45]

no commander at the present time. Its on order.

I stopped shooting PPC in 2014, removed the tri rear and ordered a Aristocrat non tri rear sight to use in area matches.

this one shoots good, better than my current eyes. I have switched to my David Sams Custom Colt .45 and sadly this Nina has been sleeping for quite some time.

call me dumb.... I got way too much $$$$ in this one.

https://i.imgur.com/QDuUBMVl.jpg

[JAD]

Before and after.

6114561146

'68 lwc, purchased used with the goofy MMC sights. MARS custom: Kart barrel, custom thumb safety, countoured grip safety, stippled MSH and front strap, a bit of good trigger work, and maybe most importantly Harrison hardball rear sight with a serrated ramp tritium front, no dot.

It's literally the coolest pistol I've ever seen.

[Dave T]

JAD,


...custom thumb safety, countoured grip safety...

The thumb safety and grip safety in your last picture look stock to my eyes. What am I missing?

Dave

[awp_101]

[Wheels of Justification]It's really dumb to sort of want a .40 1911, isn't it? Especially when I don't compete but I already have a couple of other .40s and I (try to) have ammo on hand...[/Wheels of Justification]

[awp_101]

What’s the general consensus on the S&W Scandium 1911s? Are they basically a Lightweight Commander? Was it scandium or titanium that S&W had issues with certain cleaners?

The more I think about it, we should have a general 1911 thread to avoid hijacking the Art and Science technical thread for non-technical questions (guilty as charged). Maybe one of our #shitmods can rename this thread The Big Happy General Purpose 1911 thread or some such?

[Robinson]

What’s the general consensus on the S&W Scandium 1911s? Are they basically a Lightweight Commander? Was it scandium or titanium that S&W had issues with certain cleaners?

S&W has made both Commander and Government size guns with lightweight frames made of aluminum alloy containing a small amount of Scandium for strength. I've owned one of each and they were good guns.

The Scandium models they currently offer are both Commander size guns. One is the E-Series round butt model, the other is the Performance Center round butt model.

I've heard of certain solvents causing the clear coating on Scandium revolvers to flake off, but I don't know if the Scandium frame 1911s have the same issue. I never had any problems of that kind with the two Scandium framed guns I owned.

[awp_101]

Thanks! If only they made those round butts in a 9mm or .38 Super Commander!

[awp_101]

Just for fun I put the full rail TRP upper of the non-rail frame and...oh my the feels are good....

63236