Sig 1911 XO

[breakingtime91]

We have one at my work for 840 and I have been toying with the idea of picking it up. I know it's not high grade or anything and it would be mostly for me to learn the platform/tinker with the gun with quality parts from Wilson. this would be my first 1911 and I am wondering of this is worth it/ a good candidate to learn the platform on.

[will_1400]

I could be wrong, but I think Colt Series 70s went for about that much pre-panic and are much more highly thought of as a base for modification. I'll defer to the resident experts on this though.

[jetfire]

After attending the 10-8 Advanced Armorer's course this weekend, I now officially have the heebie-jeebies about factory 1911s that don't say "Colt" or "Springfield" on the slide.

[Tamara]

After attending the 10-8 Advanced Armorer's course this weekend, I now officially have the heebie-jeebies about factory 1911s that don't say "Colt" or "Springfield" on the slide.

Generally agree with this.^^^^

If you're buying the gun as a base for a build, go with one of those two, otherwise just bite the bullet and go semi-custom from the jump-off is the simplest advice.

(There are particular models/vintages of S&W or DW or... *spit* ...Kimber I'd be willing to roll the dice on, but that's getting into esoterica.)

[BLR]

With all due deference to everyone at the table, there are no safe bets.

The absolute worst, as in worse than a 90's Auto Ord, 1911 I have ever seen was a Springer. Nothing square, straight, and it looked like it was machined with a lawn mower. Pictures of it's suckiness are on the forum here.

If internet wisdom is true, than the Kimber DW I have in front of me should not be able to run through a single mag without choking. Yet it runs like a top.

You really need to take a good hard look at the individual gun. Using dummy rounds. 30 minutes of inspection is not out of the realm of prudence IMO.

[Tamara]

With all due deference to everyone at the table, there are no safe bets.

No, but there sure are safER bets.


If internet wisdom is true, than the Kimber DW I have in front of me should not be able to run through a single mag without choking. Yet it runs like a top.

I won fifteen bucks on a two dollar scratch-off ticket before. You should run out and buy you one. :p

EDIT: Maybe you missed where I said "(There are particular models/vintages of S&W or DW or... *spit* ...Kimber I'd be willing to roll the dice on, but that's getting into esoterica.)" But that is getting into esoterica. You could write a thread... a book... an entire multi-contributor web forum... on what to look for in a reliable 1911. Or you could just say, "Hey, your odds are best if you do X." Not everybody is an engineer with borderline aspie tendencies who wants to spend a weekend wandering the aisles of a gun show with feeler gauges, dummy rounds, and dial calipers. Sometimes you gotta throw the dice and hope you gambled on a high-percentage horse that won't need much fixin'. ;)

[Tamara]

EDITED TO ADD: ...unless some really smart engineer were to come out with a handy gauge set that could fit in a pocket and be carried to gun shows and used to check out 1911s. 'Cause you know that would be handy as a pocket on a shirt. ;)

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Pretty sure I have also commented on the value of a set of gauges as described...and have possibly also requested that verbal communications cease, and financial recompense for the above-mentioned gauges commence.

http://www.coverslike.com/thumbs/shut_up_and_take_my_money-t2.jpg

[breakingtime91]

Thank you guys for the replies, I took your advice and passed on getting it. Ended up picking up a 92fs instead that I'm gonna toy around with and possibly send off to Allegheny Gun Works when I have the spare cash. Thanks for replying Caleb, I read your post on the 1911 class you took before I posted the OP and was hoping to get your input.

[BLR]

Pretty sure I have also commented on the value of a set of gauges as described...and have possibly also requested that verbal communications cease, and financial recompense for the above-mentioned gauges commence.

http://www.coverslike.com/thumbs/shut_up_and_take_my_money-t2.jpg

It's sitting on the bench, needing adjustment.

Something has come up this year that has been my focus as of late. A "pet" project. :D

[BLR]

Not everybody is an engineer with borderline aspie tendencies who wants to spend a weekend wandering the aisles of a gun show with feeler gauges, dummy rounds, and dial calipers.

Borderline, eh?

You clearly haven't been paying attention.

[Mark]

I have to completely disagree with the negative comments. My Sig 1911 has been 100% reliable since I've owned it. I find it to be the best production 1911 out there and I've owned Springfield, Kimber, S&W, and Wilson Combat. While the Wilson is better fit, but not 3 times better fit. Another SWAT guy at my department carries one as his duty weapon as well and has out allot of rounds down range and is very fond of his. Most of the complaint I've read seem to be internet lore (Richard Heini made this same observation about the Sig 1911). Just like the original S&W external extractors. People (yes I know Hilton Yam was one) got worked up over the extractor positioning on the case rim. But I didn't know anyone who actually experienced failures for this reason. I knew one guy who broke his scandium frame at about 45,000 rounds.....but the extractor was never an issue. The Sig 1911 is a best buy in 1911's in my opinion.

[jetfire]

I have to completely disagree with the negative comments. My Sig 1911 has been 100% reliable since I've owned it. I find it to be the best production 1911 out there and I've owned Springfield, Kimber, S&W, and Wilson Combat. While the Wilson is better fit, but not 3 times better fit. Another SWAT guy at my department carries one as his duty weapon as well and has out allot of rounds down range and is very fond of his. Most of the complaint I've read seem to be internet lore (Richard Heini made this same observation about the Sig 1911). Just like the original S&W external extractors. People (yes I know Hilton Yam was one) got worked up over the extractor positioning on the case rim. But I didn't know anyone who actually experienced failures for this reason. I knew one guy who broke his scandium frame at about 45,000 rounds.....but the extractor was never an issue. The Sig 1911 is a best buy in 1911's in my opinion.

Do you keep a count of all the rounds you've fired through it?

[TheNewbie]

After attending the 10-8 Advanced Armorer's course this weekend, I now officially have the heebie-jeebies about factory 1911s that don't say "Colt" or "Springfield" on the slide.

Do you mind elaborating on this a bit? I do trust what you are saying, but I am also curious.

Thank you

[jetfire]

Do you mind elaborating on this a bit? I do trust what you are saying, but I am also curious.

Thank you

A little backstory - I have at various times owned Para Ordnance, Colt, Sig, Kimber, amd other 1911s including an 80's era Wilson Combat open gun in .38 Super. Some of them worked better than others, and some of the ones that conventional wisdom says shouldn't have worked well did.

But one of the things that I leaned recently is about 1911 build quality. Yes, you can buy a Rock Island or a Sig or Taurus and it might work really well. You could also buy a Colt or a Springfield that doesn't work, but because of the way Colt and Springfield build their guns, the odds of getting a good gun that doesn't require a lot of aftermarket work are better when you buy a Colt or Springfield.

Basically, buying a Colt/Springfield gives me say, am 80% chance of getting a solid gun out of the box. Buying another brand I could still get a good gun, but the odds are lower so why risk it?

[PPGMD]

The question is where does STI stack in the 1911 tree?

I am seriously considering a STI Trojan or USPSA 9mm for steel challenge single stack.

[JAD]

I think you'll find what Caleb said echoed by the top 1911 gunsmiths, too. When you ask most of them what platform they're willing to build a full house gun out of, the answers are pretty consistent.

It doesn't mean other guns can't be good. I'm very curious about the Remington R1 and Ruger SR1911. It just means that the really safe bets are Colt's and Springers.

[Dan_S]

I'm very curious about the...Ruger SR1911.

I'm no 1911 expert by any stretch of the imagination, and I've never so much as fired an SR1911, but...

If I were to take a stab at it based upon what I know about Ruger, it'd have to place somewhere down on the list between Kel-Tec and Highpoint. On the off chance you got one that worked, and didn't need to be recalled...


:(

[JAD]

That's interesting. Specific to the SR 1911, so far I just have a collection of limited anecdotes -- everybody who's bought one is "happy with it" and they sell as soon as they come in stock. I am waiting for a few people to get a round count with them.

More generally, I've never met anyone who asserted that post-P series Rugers don't work. They're ugly, odd, unergonomic, and clunky; but they run, and are usually pretty durable. I've not heard them compared to Kel Tec before.

[Dan_S]

That's interesting. Specific to the SR 1911, so far I just have a collection of limited anecdotes -- everybody who's bought one is "happy with it" and they sell as soon as they come in stock. I am waiting for a few people to get a round count with them.

More generally, I've never met anyone who asserted that post-P series Rugers don't work. They're ugly, odd, unergonomic, and clunky; but they run, and are usually pretty durable. I've not heard them compared to Kel Tec before.

Hey, I'm not saying that they all don't work - just that I'm not willing to bet with my hard-earned money that they will, and I honestly can't imagine why anyone else would either. I've been burned with Ruger in the past, and don't intend to repeat the same mistake again (something about fool me once shame on you but fool me twice....)

After the whole fiasco with the SR9, I'd have thought that alone would be enough to suggest that perhaps Ruger doesn't have a clue....

[jetfire]

I think you'll find what Caleb said echoed by the top 1911 gunsmiths, too. When you ask most of them what platform they're willing to build a full house gun out of, the answers are pretty consistent.

It doesn't mean other guns can't be good. I'm very curious about the Remington R1 and Ruger SR1911. It just means that the really safe bets are Colt's and Springers.

Word on the street on the Ruger SR1911 is it's basically a Caspian 1911 assembled by Ruger. At the price point the build quality is pretty decent, and I'd climb over a mountain of Kimbers to get one.

As far as STI goes, they have a pretty decent rep as long as you go Trojan and above in their catalog.

[Dan_S]

Word on the street on the Ruger SR1911 is it's basically a Caspian 1911 assembled by Ruger. At the price point the build quality is pretty decent, and I'd climb over a mountain of Kimbers to get one.

As far as STI goes, they have a pretty decent rep as long as you go Trojan and above in their catalog.

I don't know where you get your "word on the street" but I doubt that. Being local to Ruger, and knowing some of the people that were, ah, instrumental in some of Rugers past, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that there's some stuff you don't know about where Ruger gets their parts...

[jetfire]

I was making a gross generalization, since Caspian uses Ruger's casting facility to make their frames...the same casting facility where Ruger now casts their 1911 frames.

And my "word on the street" is more like "word from fellow members of the media and industry reps from Ruger" but I generally find name dropping to be grotesque.

And I'd still rather have a factory Ruger 1911 than a Kimber.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Do you have any inside info on the small parts? Possibly sourced from Caspian?

To me that implies that an SR1911 might be a good 1911 for someone with the skill to tune a gun with slight fitment issues. If the raw material is there, the end product could be very good.

I hear assembly on the Rugers is pretty...varied.

[Dan_S]

Do you have any inside info on the small parts? Possibly sourced from Caspian?

To me that implies that an SR1911 might be a good 1911 for someone with the skill to tune a gun with slight fitment issues. If the raw material is there, the end product could be very good.

I hear assembly on the Rugers is pretty...varied.

:rolleyes:



Pine Tree Castings, a Ruger subsidiary makes frames, and internals.

Caspian, my foot.....

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Pine Tree also makes the castings Caspian uses for frames.

The question is, what else does Pine Tree make for Caspian? Or what other parts of Caspian's supply chain are shared with Ruger?

[ToddG]

Caspian, my foot.....

caleb didn't say it was built on a Caspian. He said it was "basically a Caspian." Since Ruger makes the Caspian frame, I think it's pretty straightforward.

[Mark]

Caleb, how did your Sig 1911 perform? What was your hands on experience with it? Did it give you any problems?

[jetfire]

Caleb, how did your Sig 1911 perform? What was your hands on experience with it? Did it give you any problems?

Actually, no. Mine ran quite well for the 5,000ish rounds I put through it (all of which I logged). The only issues I encountered were with 10 round mags giving it a case of premature slidelockulation with 2 or 3 rounds left in the mag. The biggest problem with it were the small parts - trigger, safety, slide stop - those all showed signs of aggressive wear after less than 2500 rounds, so I dumped them and replaced them with 10-8 and Wilson Combat parts.

I had a Sig 1911 TacOps at the same time as I was running a Colt XSE Rail gun - the Sig "felt" tighter, but once again proving that feelings are frequently BS, the Colt shot rings around the Sig in terms of accuracy.

[WDW]

I don't have a ton of time/rounds behind the 1911, but what I have found is that the coveted slide to frame fit means very little when it comes to accuracy. Barrel & bushing fit are what matter. Also, sure, some Sig 1911's may run fine. But, their small parts quality is definitely inferior to say Colt or SA. If you want something that says Sig & and launches .45's, why not just get a 220. Same single stack feel & much less likely to have problems.

[Mark]

See this is what confuses me. Some people say it's their small parts that concern them but that their everyday function is fine. Hilton Yam tested a Sig 1911 and said, "Great build and small parts quality at the price point, which is around $1000-1100." He also goes on to say that it performed well in his use but he has concerns about the external extractor so does not recommend it. Caleb reports that the gun ran well but he was concerned about the small parts quality. So on the one hand people say it performs good but the small parts quality concerns them but then Yam says the small parts at its price point is "great" and that it performed well unless you did the extractor test with no magazine inserted. Problem is mine passed the test but my HK USP 45 did not. I guess I'm confused because I've never met or talked to anyone who had a problem with a Sig or pre E series S&W 1911 whose gun failed and it was tied back to the extractor design. Sure some that I've read of have had their extractors replaced just like IE 1911's but the design itself I've just yet to hear of significant numbers of guns failing. It's all based on projections of what may happen but hasn't yet. Then guys like I believe it was Heini bought a couple off of gunbroker to test and reported that they were fine and he thinks its all Internet rumor as to the EE issues.

[jetfire]

It's worth noting that the Sig I tested was two years ago, and when I look at the small parts on current product line Sig 1911s they appear to be much better than what I had on my gun in 2011.

I am by no means a 1911 expert; and despite my relative positive experience with my Sig 1911 TacOps, I can't really recommend it as a "regular use" gun. If I was going to buy a 1911 that cost about a grand and wasn't a Colt, Springfield, or STI Trojan (not spartan), I'd probably go with an E-Series S&W. But I'd do it knowing that S&W's external extractor uses a spring to keep tension, and S&W makes three different weights of spring for the gun...but if it's not tensioned right, instead of just selling you a new spring of different weight, they make you ship the gun to the factory.

[Mark]

Caleb, I don't in any way want to come across like I'm picking on you, I really am not. I just don't always understand where things come from. Everyone talks about the 1911 being designed for .45 and how other calibers don't work well. You also here that it's an enthusiasts gun that dictates that you must be your own armorer to run it and if you use it to just shoot and then put away without allot of fine tuning to keep it running then you should get a modern polymer gun. Then we have Todd who gets a 9mm 1911 and (no offense Todd) pretty much just shoots it with a lack of maintenance that most would expect to make a Glock or HK choke and the gun does just fine.

At the same time since 2004 and 2005 I've been watching S&W and Sig 1911's run by our SWAT guys and have yet to see this external extractor issue show itself. I've seen other issues but aside from Kimber's who admittedly I've seen and experienced lots of issues the S&W and Sig 1911's haven't been any more problematic then a Glock 21 and less problematic then a few Ed Browns. Granted most of these guns are probably at less then 30k rounds but in reality so what. Personally I have decided that I will shoot my carry gun 1000 rounds and then about 500 rounds a year in training and quals to ensure reliability and the rest will go to a second dedicated training gun so my carry gun probably will never hit more then 10k before I retire. If my training gun breaks, so what, it will be a good learning experience and Sig (or S&W) will fix it. I also here that there are simply better options at the price point. I can go to my local LE Sig dealer and get the LE price that will grab me an XO for $751 or a Tacops for $887. Where can I get a Colt Rail Gun or MC Operator with a magwell and front strap checkering for $887 with or without LE pricing? I have not found that deal.

I guess I'm just wondering if this is all just conjecture and in the process is a really good value and good performing 1911 being discounted for no real substantiated reason other the Internet rumor and personal bias?

[Maple Syrup Actual]

Mark, you may well have made this clear elsewhere and I just missed it, but can you tell us your connection to the guns being used by your SWAT guys?

The reason I ask is simply because I am trying to gauge the probability that you would necessarily know what the ultimate reliability of those guns has been. The reason I question that is that I've known a lot of guys who had a gun with "thousands of flawless rounds" through it...who were not actually actively logging their rounds, and who consequently had had various issues crop up, then get forgotten, because they only shot a few mags through it here and there, and couldn't be trusted to really understand what was happening with their gun.

Not that I think this describes you or your SWAT guys; I am simply trying to illustrate that I have seen guys I personally know argue that their guns have been "flawless" when it's a gun that I myself have seen choke. They aren't intentionally lying; they've just forgotten how it all went. And introducing a whole other layer of separation between you and the guns - as in they belong to your SWAT guys, not you - makes me wonder exactly how easy it would be to tell the difference between something 99.5% reliable, which is very easy for $1000 1911s, and something 99.95% reliable, which is much less common.

So if you're the armourer, say, that layer of separation isn't really there. But if they are just SWAT guys at the same department as you, would you really be confident in saying that their guns have been 99.95% reliable RATHER than 99.5% reliable? I think that would be difficult for most people.

[Mark]

I am not an armorer, just another officer who is a firearms enthusiast. My info comes from direct observations at training and qualifications and obviously conversations due to my interests. I understand your question but I think it illustrates my point pretty well. My direct observations and the end user statements have been that these guns are reliable and perform well. So you suppose that they probably just forgot the malfunctions and I just wasn't there the times when they did happen. So again we're not basing it on documented failures or problems but rather the assumption that said failures must have happened and if they haven't been reported its just because they were forgotten. For obvious reasons I'm not comfortable with that as my evidence but even if I were to accept it then how does that explain all the problems with a bunch of Kimber's, with a single Glock 21, with 2 Ed Browns, and personally with sub par accuracy from a Springfield? Why did people remember the problems from those guns and why did I personally witness them but have forgotten what I must have seen from Smith (well not the SW99's but I'm actively trying to forget those), Sig, HK, Wilson (although one did have sporadic failures to lock back on new Wilson Mags), Nighthawk, Les Baer, and just about most of the other Glocks (except for Glock 22's with WML and old magazines)? Again I don't doubt anyone's experience, it's just that I haven't heard much of that, it's mostly predictions of what stacking tolerances may do one day with high round counts and the results of a no mag test that my HK45 can't pass but which has been the paragon of reliability otherwise.

I guess I think we're all a little bit victims of group think (myself included) where as a group we decide things and just accept it as fact when it really hasn't ever been even close to substantiated in real world conditions. Why do we do that?

[JodyH]

Just to piggyback on the subject or reality vs. perception re: reliability.
Our club put on a LEO benefit 3-gun match which was attended by several SWAT officers (not to pick on SWAT but...).
The first stage (carbine/pistol) had several 8" plates at 75 yards, the first guy up was a disaster.
His duty HK416 (straight from his cruiser trunk to the firing line) had never been zeroed... ever.
He had multiple feed issues that usually indicate bad magazines (he was using HK mags) and/or not enough lube.
After sending 60 rounds downrange with no effect on the steel and only 5 or 6 rounds between malfunctions he gave up.
We went to the safety table and lubed his AR generously then loaned him some PMags.
We also "Kentucky windage" zeroed his EoTech by guessing how far off he missed the plates and adjusting it by that approximate number of clicks.
The next stage he shot with the carbine went much better, still no real zero but at least it ran and he was in the IPSC A/C out to 35 yards.
When the match was over guess what he did?
Zero his carbine? Nope.
Ask where to buy PMags? Nope.
He cleaned and dried his rifle (wiped all the lube off) loaded up his HK mags and put it back in the trunk while declaring it was good to go since it finished the match with no malfunctions and he managed to hit paper out to 35 yards with it..
:confused:
:p

[Mark]

Was there an observed failure of a Sig or S&W 1911 (pre E series) due to the external extractor design or small parts quality in there that I missed?

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I am not an armorer, just another officer who is a firearms enthusiast. My info comes from direct observations at training and qualifications and obviously conversations due to my interests. I understand your question but I think it illustrates my point pretty well. My direct observations and the end user statements have been that these guns are reliable and perform well. So you suppose that they probably just forgot the malfunctions and I just wasn't there the times when they did happen. So again we're not basing it on documented failures or problems but rather the assumption that said failures must have happened and if they haven't been reported its just because they were forgotten. For obvious reasons I'm not comfortable with that as my evidence but even if I were to accept it then how does that explain all the problems with a bunch of Kimber's, with a single Glock 21, with 2 Ed Browns, and personally with sub par accuracy from a Springfield? Why did people remember the problems from those guns and why did I personally witness them but have forgotten what I must have seen from Smith (well not the SW99's but I'm actively trying to forget those), Sig, HK, Wilson (although one did have sporadic failures to lock back on new Wilson Mags), Nighthawk, Les Baer, and just about most of the other Glocks (except for Glock 22's with WML and old magazines)? Again I don't doubt anyone's experience, it's just that I haven't heard much of that, it's mostly predictions of what stacking tolerances may do one day with high round counts and the results of a no mag test that my HK45 can't pass but which has been the paragon of reliability otherwise.

I guess I think we're all a little bit victims of group think (myself included) where as a group we decide things and just accept it as fact when it really hasn't ever been even close to substantiated in real world conditions. Why do we do that?

I suppose nothing at all; I simply describe a common phenomenon with gun users and question whether it is possible that this common occurrence could be happening in this case. If you know that it is not happening and have tracked the rounds carefully, that changes the data.

That is why I asked the question...more data allows for more accurate analysis.

[Mark]

I see what your saying. I guess my point would be that there is no data in either direction that I'm aware of to demonstrate that the external extractors on Sig 1911's are any more problematic then any other 1911 extractor design. At least none that I've ever been able to find and no end user first person accounts that I've ever heard from via face to face or even via Internet that demonstrates the design to be intrinsically flawed. It's always based on some second hand or some out of design parameter specific test like the magless extractor test that, again my HK can't pass. If there were a significant problem you'd think it'd be widely complained about. Like 4th gen Glock Springs or M&P9 accuracy issues. It seems to only exist in Internet forums, yet people discuss it as if its a regularly observed fact.

[ToddG]

Like 4th gen Glock Springs or M&P9 accuracy issues. It seems to only exist in Internet forums, yet people discuss it as if its a regularly observed fact.

Wow.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

I see what your saying. I guess my point would be that there is no data in either direction that I'm aware of to demonstrate that the external extractors on Sig 1911's are any more problematic then any other 1911 extractor design. At least none that I've ever been able to find and no end user first person accounts that I've ever heard from via face to face or even via Internet that demonstrates the design to be intrinsically flawed. It's always based on some second hand or some out of design parameter specific test like the magless extractor test that, again my HK can't pass. If there were a significant problem you'd think it'd be widely complained about. Like 4th gen Glock Springs or M&P9 accuracy issues. It seems to only exist in Internet forums, yet people discuss it as if its a regularly observed fact.

Credibility = reduced to...something pretty small.

Seen both, repeatedly, in person, as have many (maybe most) here, I would guess.

[TCinVA]

Like 4th gen Glock Springs or M&P9 accuracy issues. It seems to only exist in Internet forums, yet people discuss it as if its a regularly observed fact.

Todd and LittleLebowski have had problems with springs in their personally owned 4th Gen Glocks, as have others here. Several members of staff have been on the range with M&Ps that have lockup issues. OrionZ06 had/has a dog of an M&P that wouldn't shoot groups for anything.

...and I could go on and on.

If you aren't seeing issues, you're either charmed or aren't exposed to a large enough sample size to witness it with your own eyes.

[JV_]

I've owned (2) M&Ps that had accuracy issues. I've had (2) Gen4 19s that stopped running (well) after 4000'ish rounds (not RSA related).

[Drang]

I don't have a ton of time/rounds behind the 1911, but what I have found is that the coveted slide to frame fit means very little when it comes to accuracy...
;)
When I was in college, back in the Dark Ages, a friend got a 1911 from Interarms. No question, it had been built up from parts, and parts of dubious origin, at that. You could practically read the Detroit News through the slide-frame gap. He whined and sniveled about how inaccurate it was, so one day, while plinking, he handed it to me and said "Here, you try!"
At this point in my life, I had pretty much ZERO handgun experience.
I proceeded to send the coffee can we were plinking down the range, 7 hits for 7 shots.
The next thing I heard was the bayonet being fitted to the 98k he bought at the same time.
Turns out, of course, that he had put about 150-200 rounds through it, and I had been the first one shooting the newly "broken in" pistol. (Note to shooters who weren't born when I was having this experience: Ask your father about break in periods for semi-autos.)

[Mark]

Wow.. Easy guys don't jump up and call people's credibility small before finding out for sure what is meant. Obviously I didnt write it well since it was misunderstood but my point was that those ARE well documented problems and if the Sig extractor issue was such a problem then it would have the same coverage and number of direct first person examples as you guys were easily able to give examples of with the 9mm M&P and 4th Gen Glocks. You'd expect to see exactly what Misanthropists, and TCinva reported, yet no one can or has done that with the Sig 1911 extractor designs. In a way my poorly written example really demonstrates what I'm saying. Look how easy it was to give examples, you guys jumped all over me with immediate first person examples and Todd just wrote wow because those examples are so obvious to him, yet no one here, or at least not a significant percentage have sworn off 4th gen Glocks or 9mm M&P's to the degree the Sig 1911 is shot down. I have to wonder why.

[ToddG]

Mark, reading your post a second time I absolutely see how it could be interpreted the way you're saying. Speaking just for myself, I apologize for jumping the gun and jumping to conclusions about your meaning.


....yet no one here, or at least not a significant percentage have sworn off 4th gen Glocks or 9mm M&P's to the degree the Sig 1911 is shot down. I have to wonder why.

First, you will definitely find plenty of folks who've sworn off (or chose not to choose, as it were) gen4 Glocks or 9mm M&Ps. In fact, I imagine you'll find more folks here who've decided against one of those guns than you'll find people who've ever even owned a SIG 1911.

Which raises the second point, which is that you're comparing widely distributed incredibly popular guns (Glocks and M&Ps) to a single brand of 1911 made by a company not primarily known for its 1911s. If you're looking for equal numbers of people/guns to compare, it will never happen. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that there are more Glock owners in my small state of Maryland than SIG 1911 owners in the entire country. I'd also be willing to bet there are more Glock owners logged into PF right now than there are SIG 1911 owners who've ever registered here.

My personal experience with SIG 1911s comes from early generation guns while I worked there. Those experiences were mediocre to negative depending on whose hands put the gun together. I've got no idea if that's still the case today. I do know that external extractor 1911s in general have had a very checkered past. SIG's reputation for quality over the past decade has likewise been checkered. Putting those two facts together, you'll probably find a lot of folks who aren't willing to drop $1k+ on a SIG when they can get a similar gun with similar features from a manufacturer with more 1911 experience and a better reputation for quality.

That doesn't mean SIG 1911s are crap. Heck, for all I know they're the best deal in 1911s today.

But it's a fallacy to assume that the absence of evidence is the same as evidence of absence.

[Mark]

Todd, I get what your saying about sample numbers and your right. I also understand the idea of absence of evidence. I worked as a detective in our special victims unit for a time (never more relieved then when I got out of that unit) and one of the things I learned was that it is much easier to prove a crime occurred then to prove it didn't occur. The best we could tell guys who had been accused of some horrific crimes even when the evidence or what evidence there was pointed to their innocence was that there was insufficient evidence to charge them with a crime. It always bothered me that we couldn't make a more compelling statement of innocence but again how do you prove something didn't happen....it's very difficult. There were some occasions when people who had reported crimes were shown the conflicting nature of evidence and statements and they acknowledged that what they had reported was not entirely accurate but that was the exception and not the rule.

That's kind of how I view the Sig 1911, only minus the life altering implications and as more of an entertaining debate rather then as a potential horrible miscarriage of justice. If its really that bad, it shouldn't be hard to prove. If its really as good as my experience suggests, well that's not so easy to prove. I was actually hoping that you'd do a Sig 1911 test when you mentioned a possible future .45 1911 test, but having read further I understand the odds of that happening are remote, I would have loved to see it though.

[ToddG]

The caveats made above by misanthropist and others are what I'd really keep in mind: it's very easy to have minor stoppages slip through the cracks of our memory. Things get blamed on grip, mags, ammo, or simply forgotten. I've spent literally thousands of hours on the firing line watching shooters under my control and wouldn't for a moment pretend I was aware of every stoppage experienced by every one of them.

OTOH, if you've got a reasonable sample size within your team and those guns have reached a reasonable round count and the general consensus is that the guns work, they probably work. So long as you keep in mind that (1) it's a less thoroughly tested gun than, e.g., Glocks & Smiths and (2) the design has a feature that historically has been problematic, you know what to look for in terms of evaluating and maintaining the guns.

[jetfire]

That doesn't mean SIG 1911s are crap. Heck, for all I know they're the best deal in 1911s today.

But it's a fallacy to assume that the absence of evidence is the same as evidence of absence.

If memory serves, my Sig 1911 ran better than your Gen 4 Glock at Speed Kills up here in Washington.

Which isn't saying much, because that was when your Gen 4 Glock was still in its early "turd" stage.

[Maple Syrup Actual]

OTOH, if you've got a reasonable sample size within your team and those guns have reached a reasonable round count and the general consensus is that the guns work, they probably work. So long as you keep in mind that (1) it's a less thoroughly tested gun than, e.g., Glocks & Smiths and (2) the design has a feature that historically has been problematic, you know what to look for in terms of evaluating and maintaining the guns.

Not that this statement really needs confirmation from me, but that would definitely be my read on it as well. If you have 20 or 30 guns with several thousand rounds per, and everybody involved says the guns are great, my instinct is to say "they're probably good, buy one and run it".

[Tamara]

I owned a fairly early GSR, after the disastrous run of initial guns, but still back when they had the cool-looking SIGesque slide.

It wouldn't feed ball reliably from the ACT mags that shipped with the gun (and which I therefore ditched on day one) but had no malfunctions with 47Ds in the limited amount of shooting I did with it before finances forced its sale.

[TheNewbie]

After reading this thread, and various articles around the net, it made me curious. Of course there is the excellent 10-8 article on this exact question.

What would be the minimum that all of you would choose in a 1911 for duty use?

Would a SA Loaded be good pick, or is one just wasting their time at that level? These can be found right at $700.

You can get an STI Trojan for $1000, but how do they compare to Colts and SAs?

[Josh Runkle]

I have an early 2012 Sig 1911 TacOps. It has a little over 2k rounds through it. I have not had a single malfunction. I'd estimate that about 1200 were unsuppressed and 800-900 were suppressed. I have only used factory mags. It is very accurate. Much more accurate than I can shoot. It holds quarter inch groups at 5 yards. Unfortunately, that's about the best I can shoot unsupported, so I can't tell you how it does further downrange.

I had a Springfield operator that did not function nearly as well. I've never seen a student's Kimber make it through a class without choking. I've only shot 2 colt 1911's extensively: a 1991 and a 70's series. Neither were (subjectively) as accurate as my sig. I do not prefer 1911's, and don't know tons of details about the "geekdom" surrounding them. I only know my experience: Accurate, comfortable and flawless.

[TCinVA]

After reading this thread, and various articles around the net, it made me curious. Of course there is the excellent 10-8 article on this exact question.

What would be the minimum that all of you would choose in a 1911 for duty use?

Would a SA Loaded be good pick, or is one just wasting their time at that level? These can be found right at $700.

You can get an STI Trojan for $1000, but how do they compare to Colts and SAs?

I had a Loaded 1911...and it was a horrid piece of junk.

If I were selecting a bare minimum non-custom gun, I'd buy a Colt.

[BLR]

After reading this thread, and various articles around the net, it made me curious. Of course there is the excellent 10-8 article on this exact question.

What would be the minimum that all of you would choose in a 1911 for duty use?

Would a SA Loaded be good pick, or is one just wasting their time at that level? These can be found right at $700.

You can get an STI Trojan for $1000, but how do they compare to Colts and SAs?

Of the above, I'd get the Colt.

[Vinh]

What would be the minimum that all of you would choose in a 1911 for duty use?
I'm just a civilian, but for life-saving purposes my minimum standard for 1911s is the Springfield Pro. I've had better and worse, but that particular model meets my personal criteria and the price is right.

That said, I'd love to add a couple of Colt Rail Guns to the collection in the future.

For real, it doesn't matter what someone else's standard is, just pick whatever you like and hope for the best.

[WDW]

If you wanna drop $1k on a 1911 that has a great chance of running, I would get one of the Colt CCG's. The barrel fit on mine is damn near perfect and it's run great for the 1,000 or so rds I've put through it. Not a ton of rounds mind you, but barring some weirds part breakage or extractor issue, I have no reason to believe it'll stop running anytime soon. Nat'l Match barrel, Novak sights, undercut trigger guard, and a nice bluing job.

[Mark]

For a sub $1000 1911 with traditional internal extractor you could always go Springfield Range Officer. It's built to the same standards as the MC Operator and TRP which Yam endorses and if you can find them they can be had for around $800.

[Tamara]

You can get an STI Trojan for $1000, but how do they compare to Colts and SAs?

As was said above, at that price point in a new gun, the safest bet is the Colt.

[Corvus]

I purchased a Trojan in .40 last November. Fit and accuracy is better than any Colt I have had but for full disclosure I have not purchased a Colt since the '90s and they may be better these days.

Three issues with the one I bought if you want to call them that.

1. The pistols come with lighter springs. I replaced the competition weight springs with duty weight. It ran fine with the lighter springs but I load heavy even for practice ammo and bumped up the weights a bit.

2. Front sight was slightly bent. I mount tritium front sights so this was going to be replaced anyway. After changing out the sight and seeing how tight the dovetail was it is easy to see how it got bent , very tight dovetail fit on the sights which is a good thing to me.

3. I had a few mags that would not lock open on the last round. The slide stop had a slight bow to it that could be seen if you put the slide stop in the frame with the slide off the pistol. I replaced it with a Harrison Designs slide stop and all mags work fine now. I am using Chip McCormick 45 Powermags for my carry mags and they have yet to not function right even with the original slide stop.

I also put in a GI spec recoil spring guide rod and ordered a 10mm chamber reamer.

[Robinson]

I have two of the SA Loaded pistols and they've been fine for me -- in fact I like them. The 9mm passed the 2K Challenge with no problems. That doesn't mean the Loaded product line are great pistols, just that mine have worked well for me. Of course, I have changed out certain parts based on my preference.

I also have a Colt Series 70 repro -- I like the gun just fine and haven't had problems but it doesn't have nearly the same round count through it yet.

[JonInWA]

Seven pages into this thread and I finally get around to responding...I have a 2006-vintage GSR XO, one of the "Gen 2" GSRs, i.e., one with the high-end parts procured by SIG from highly reputable 1911 vendors, with the frame, barrel and receiver manufactured by SIG themselves(as opposed to Caspian for the "Gen 1" GSR's slide and receiver, and Storm Lake for the barrels). Mine was one of the first of the XOs, which at that time represented quality internals, quality assembly, but with some minor some cosmetic flaws (mine has some cutter divots on the slide by the dust cover), and lower-priced sights (Champion rears, vs Novak's) (but with a Novak pinned front).

Initially mine had some chambering issues (which went away by the 350-450 round count), and some reset issues (resolved by SIG with a new disconnector), a heavy triggerpull (5.14-5.19 lbs), and a grip safety that was rubbing on the hammer strut. For the latter, IG performed an action job, and replaced the grip safety.

Mine came with the Novak/ACT magazines, which, as they were wont, quickly developed cracks at the right rear feed lip; SIG immediately replaced them. I charitably consider these magazines to be junk, and have relegated them to holding up my cardboard targets in my office dryfire practice range; for carry and competition they have been replaced with Check-Mate and CerTac magazines.

My Champion rear sight, with it's rather odd convex rear dots was replaced with a plain black Novak LowMount Wide Notch .140 sight, which works quite nicely with the OEM Novak .125 white dot front sight.

At approximately the 510 round, the ejector tip broke off; the ejector assumed almos a perfect "milspec" profile, which both Bruce Gray and Mike Guarnieri recommended I simply dress by filing, and continue to march; the dressed/"milspec" profile ejector soldiered on without incident.

Much more seriously, at the approximate round count of 901, the rearmost peg of the plunger tube lost its staking, making the gun practically inoperable, as it could only be off-safed by judiciously manipulation of the plunger tube pin and plunger tube position administratively. SIG immediately send me a shipping label, and not only replaced the unstaked plunger tube, but also thoroughly went through the entire gun, providing another action job, replacing the recoil spring guide, and also replacing the broken/dressed ejector with a replacement-and the head of the shop did the work himself, and got the GSR back to me within a week.

My gun is also a long-term test-bed for one of Bruce Gray's carbon steel extractors; while the OEM one had performed without incident, Bruce informed me when they switched it out, approximately 30% of the extractor hook had chipped away. The Grayguns extractor performs superbly, and has been in place since March of 2009; in fairness to SIG, they subsequently have significantly modified their OEM extractors (both materially and geometrically) also and I've not heard of any subsequent extractor failures, although Hilton Yam was highly critical of it in a recent test of a current SIG 1911 on his Modern Service Weapons website.

The OEM Ergo grips provided with the XO were excellent, but SIG comp'ed me a set of their dressier Black Dymondwood ones, which I liked, at least until Todd sung the praises of VCD grips; I now have a set of olive VCD grips on mine, and I too thing they're absolutely superb grips, and have quantifiably increased my scoring.

SO-all this said, where do I stand on the SIG 1911s? I guess ambivalently. I've heard mixed reports on the amount of MIM content in the fire-control components (Hilton Yam's review is probably the most reliable current one)-basically, I'm skeptical of SIG's decision to use a MIM composition slide release (the previous tool steel Greider one was far better both materially and ergonomically, in my opinion); my counsel to SIG owners is to consider replacing the current OEM MIM slide release with a quality tool steel one for, if only for increased peace of mind. The other MIM components (reportedly the disconnector, firing pin retaining plate, and safety lever (and possibly the grip safety) I could live with without any undue concern.

Since 2006, all the SIG GSRs/1911s that I've seen and handled have appeared to have been quite competently fitted and assembled-SIG learned an expensive lesson with the Gen 1 GSRs, that merely quality components alone without skilled fitting and assembly are a recipe to disaster-and that the aftermarket cottage industry is not necessarily geared up to provide consistent quality and consistent quantities of parts necessary for a major manufacturer's production needs without compromising quality-SIG has gradually shifted parts sourcings to other vendors, or by producing them in-house. Whether there is a concurrent diminishment in quality and longevity from the original high-quality components spec'ed by Matt McClearn when he was running the GSR operation remains to be seen; a senior SIG-Sauer executive assured me several years ago when he and I specifically discussed this issue(s) that the vendor switching was done without any compromise to quality. While others (Bruce Gray notably) have felt differently, I simply have not heard of many issues, and no recurring/systemic ones regarding current production SIG-Sauer 1911s within the past several years.

They do seem to represent an excellent value-and frankly, Colt 1911s also have MIM fire control components also. The SIG 1911s are significantly better dehorned than Colts out of the box. The SIGs also come with excellent machine-cut 25 LPI frontstrap checkering, which is a significant value. While at the end of the day my gut feel is that the Colt components are probably a bit superior, the ones provided in the SIG, with the possible exception of the slide stop, are quite "do-able." The SIG stainless steel slide/receiver (or stainless steel slide/alloy receiver) are more rust-resistant than carbon steel ones, which is a plus for the SIG. A friend of mine who heavily uses his recent production SIG 1911 in IDPA, and recently at a Front Sight class has been very pleased with his-the only isue he's had to deal with is that his front sight retaining pin drifted out while at Front Sight (the sight did not drift out of the dovetail), resolved by Front Sight's gunsmith.

So I feel that the current SIG 1911s are a good value, and are well backed by SIG's customer support. They also seem to be pretty readily available, in a variety of configurations. I would put them at the upper end of currently available factory non-custom/non-semi-custom 1911s, and one of the few 1911s that provide decent out-of-the-box reliability/durability for under the $1,000 price point.

Best, Jon