Buying new - Colt or Springfield
- Thread starter fauxpa46
- Start date
ammo.crafter
New member
which one
Colt, because I have confidence in their products.
Colt, because I have confidence in their products.
To be honest, I was not aware colt was even still making 1911's....
After looking through colts offers I am under whelmed and have sticker shock. But their web site was easy to navigate
After looing at springfields website, its a pain in the behind to navigate. and they are a bit more expensive than I would have expected. up in the kimber range.
I guess it really depends on what kind of gun you want, and what you are looking to do with it, and how much you are willing to spend.... along with what you can actually get...
Personally I would be looking at a Kimber. I know the pedigree of colt, but nothing looked particularly good to me. Springfield looked just ok. And again, I have not heard anything about their new ones in a very long time.
After looking through colts offers I am under whelmed and have sticker shock. But their web site was easy to navigate
After looing at springfields website, its a pain in the behind to navigate. and they are a bit more expensive than I would have expected. up in the kimber range.
I guess it really depends on what kind of gun you want, and what you are looking to do with it, and how much you are willing to spend.... along with what you can actually get...
Personally I would be looking at a Kimber. I know the pedigree of colt, but nothing looked particularly good to me. Springfield looked just ok. And again, I have not heard anything about their new ones in a very long time.
I just went through this last year. I had no SD type handgun. That’s crazy when I owned 54 handguns mostly revolvers with 6” or longer barrels. All Target and Hunting type guns. 2 center fire autos both competition models.
So I decided I wanted a 1911. 50 yrs ago I was fooling with them and bought a new Commander 9mm and a used GC 45 as well as many GI guns.
I decided on Colt but not new series 80 or the series 70 remake.
I decided I wanted original series 70 or Commander made before 1980. This had two reasons. The 1st is these pre 80 guns were finished better than later guns. This has nothing to do with series 80 other than time frame. Second, buy Colt and take care of it and it will at least break even when or if you sell. Most cases you might make a buck.
I have a decent hoard now. Ended up with more 1911s than I needed. That brings me to another point. The biggest percentage of handguns bought before this panic were by Joe Citizen that thought he wanted a 45, 44 ect. He didn’t shoot it very often and kept very good care of it. Just like his Shotgun and deer rifle. This is where I bought my 1911s. Along the way I did buy a couple Springfields. Only because they were killer deals. I didn’t shoot them but stripped them to clean and saw nothing that would cause me pause to use one. The price is high enough that I wouldn’t buy new. The resale is poor. They are in the bracket that you are going to loose money on used gun.
I don’t know what’s up with Colt / CZ deal. There is no doubt in my mind Colt will hold or increase in value.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So I decided I wanted a 1911. 50 yrs ago I was fooling with them and bought a new Commander 9mm and a used GC 45 as well as many GI guns.
I decided on Colt but not new series 80 or the series 70 remake.
I decided I wanted original series 70 or Commander made before 1980. This had two reasons. The 1st is these pre 80 guns were finished better than later guns. This has nothing to do with series 80 other than time frame. Second, buy Colt and take care of it and it will at least break even when or if you sell. Most cases you might make a buck.
I have a decent hoard now. Ended up with more 1911s than I needed. That brings me to another point. The biggest percentage of handguns bought before this panic were by Joe Citizen that thought he wanted a 45, 44 ect. He didn’t shoot it very often and kept very good care of it. Just like his Shotgun and deer rifle. This is where I bought my 1911s. Along the way I did buy a couple Springfields. Only because they were killer deals. I didn’t shoot them but stripped them to clean and saw nothing that would cause me pause to use one. The price is high enough that I wouldn’t buy new. The resale is poor. They are in the bracket that you are going to loose money on used gun.
I don’t know what’s up with Colt / CZ deal. There is no doubt in my mind Colt will hold or increase in value.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Between Colt and Springfield, both of the Springfields I've owned had better fit and finish than the Colt I owned and the Colts I've handled in shops recently (which had loose slide to frame fit and poorly fitted safeties). I do think a Colt will hold its value better than Springfield.
For years now I've been told Kimber is not what is once was and to stay away from them, but I have no firsthand experience.
You'll get many opinions on this. The forum is filled with 1911 threads, so check some historical ones out as well, not to mention the countless such threads on other forums.
For years now I've been told Kimber is not what is once was and to stay away from them, but I have no firsthand experience.
You'll get many opinions on this. The forum is filled with 1911 threads, so check some historical ones out as well, not to mention the countless such threads on other forums.
101combatvet
New member
Colt is better.
DubC-Hicks
New member
Definitely Springfield over Colt these days, and don't even waste time looking at Kimber.
BornFighting88
New member
I am sure they are still made to the same quality standards after the acquisition by CZ (Who I believe also owns Dan Wesson, am I correct in this?). Even with this information, I would choose Colt over SA. 90% of SA that I know of is imported. Colt at least still made here, correct?? I know the SA-35 is said to be made here, but I'd still go Colt, just my $0.02.
As I surmised, I got many, and various opinions as an answer to my question. In fact, it was split 50-50 in responses. No surprises there.
Peoples' responses are generally based on experience. Experience teaches us that any given product can produce a lemon of sorts. Also, "You get what you pay for" is not always a perfect adage, either (ie: lemon). This muddies the water somewhat of course.
My personal thoughts on this particular issue, being Colt vs. Springfield, is that I hear very little about Colt anymore. Is this because of the CZ buyout and lack of marketing? Possibly. In any case, this gives me pause. As one poster above acknowledged, look for an older model of Colt in that case. And, although Springfield is a respected manufacturer of 1911 guns, I am somewhat befuddled by the amount of models offered, which confuses me all the more. I guess a manufacturer gives the public what it wants, but I fail to see why the public needs so many choices, especially if those choices resemble each other so closely. In other words, when so many choices are given it waters down the legitimacy of the product to me. (Are they putting their best efforts into any one model?) But that's just me.
Thank you for your answers and attempts to answer my quandary. Always good to hear how others think. I think.
Peoples' responses are generally based on experience. Experience teaches us that any given product can produce a lemon of sorts. Also, "You get what you pay for" is not always a perfect adage, either (ie: lemon). This muddies the water somewhat of course.
My personal thoughts on this particular issue, being Colt vs. Springfield, is that I hear very little about Colt anymore. Is this because of the CZ buyout and lack of marketing? Possibly. In any case, this gives me pause. As one poster above acknowledged, look for an older model of Colt in that case. And, although Springfield is a respected manufacturer of 1911 guns, I am somewhat befuddled by the amount of models offered, which confuses me all the more. I guess a manufacturer gives the public what it wants, but I fail to see why the public needs so many choices, especially if those choices resemble each other so closely. In other words, when so many choices are given it waters down the legitimacy of the product to me. (Are they putting their best efforts into any one model?) But that's just me.
Thank you for your answers and attempts to answer my quandary. Always good to hear how others think. I think.
Last Spring my nephew bought a Springfield Range Officer and invited me over to shoot it. He had a trigger job done to it before he even shot it himself. I brought my Colt along for comparison. My Colt has a trigger job and a Kart barrel. I couldn't put that Springfield down. Beat the heck out of my Colt. Maybe he got a good one?
Think it thru this way: the worst case scenario test ...
Let's say both the Colt and the Springer prove to be unrecalcitrant jambot-skis right outta da box.
Instead of throwing big $$$ at a 1911-smith to get the gun running right, you decide to sell it, cut your losses, and spend the proceeds on the polymer gun you shoulda bought in the first place.
Which make of now 'pre-owned' 1911 would command a higher resale value at a gun shop, gun show, or on one of the auction sites (e.g., GunJoker)?
Pretty clearly ... the one with the Pony on it.
Easy peasy.
Thank you to the OP for posting again in this thread. The first post was a bit too vague for me to understand the post and thread. Now it seems we're speaking of 1911 handguns, only.
I've had three Colt 1911 pistols over the years. Don't own them any longer. I never liked the "Series 80" internals as I'm lazy and got frustrated lining up those Series 80 parts after a full detail strip. My old 1988 "Combat Elite" was the best of the three but I sold it off for lack of need (at the time).
My other two were .45ACP Commanders. I had two because Colt replaced the first one due to its frame beginning to crack. Both of the Commanders had the front sights totally come off while shooting. These sights were the kind which were staked in and apparently, Colt lost the knowledge/ability to manufacture 1911s with staked in sights. I believe Colt no longer has these old-school models with this type of front sight. There are other personal preference reasons I didn't like about my final Colt Commander and sold it off.
While I own two Springfields, they are rifles. With that now known, if I were to buy a Springfield 1911, I'd likely want the Professional model, which is at Springfield's highest end.
https://www.springfield-armory.com/1911-series-handguns/custom-handguns/
At my older age, I just don't want to go through the debugging and break-in of a regular off-the-shelf 1911 which might involve replacing and fitting various small parts; or a trip back to the manufacturer for some type of warranty work (could easily be 6 weeks turnaround); getting it back and starting over with the shooting & testing involving perhaps another 1000 rounds. Hopefully, a "Professional" model will have a better chance of being 100% from brand new.
At the $3K range, more or less, there are other 1911 brands which I'd also be considering. I'm actually wondering and somewhat concerned as to how long Colt will even be in the 1911 business. I don't quite understand how CZ-USA is planning to manage both Colt and Dan Wesson both having 1911 pistols.
I'm just thinking out-loud. I'm going now.
Edited to add:
From the original Post 1, I'd have said, I'd be willing to try a Colt Cobra revolver, but nothing else suits my wants from Colt.
For Springfield-Armory, I keep looking at its regular product-line 1911s, whether Ronin, Garrison, or TRP, but would really want one of its "Professional" models. That is if I was looking for a 5" 1911. If I wanted a 4.25" 1911, I'd likely look elsewhere from Dan Wesson to Wilson-Combat plus a few other companies.
I wouldn't buy another Springfield AR-15 as that had to go back for warranty/re-work, taking six weeks. My M1A "Scout" has been working ok, but it's been years since I've shot it.
I've had three Colt 1911 pistols over the years. Don't own them any longer. I never liked the "Series 80" internals as I'm lazy and got frustrated lining up those Series 80 parts after a full detail strip. My old 1988 "Combat Elite" was the best of the three but I sold it off for lack of need (at the time).
My other two were .45ACP Commanders. I had two because Colt replaced the first one due to its frame beginning to crack. Both of the Commanders had the front sights totally come off while shooting. These sights were the kind which were staked in and apparently, Colt lost the knowledge/ability to manufacture 1911s with staked in sights. I believe Colt no longer has these old-school models with this type of front sight. There are other personal preference reasons I didn't like about my final Colt Commander and sold it off.
While I own two Springfields, they are rifles. With that now known, if I were to buy a Springfield 1911, I'd likely want the Professional model, which is at Springfield's highest end.
https://www.springfield-armory.com/1911-series-handguns/custom-handguns/
At my older age, I just don't want to go through the debugging and break-in of a regular off-the-shelf 1911 which might involve replacing and fitting various small parts; or a trip back to the manufacturer for some type of warranty work (could easily be 6 weeks turnaround); getting it back and starting over with the shooting & testing involving perhaps another 1000 rounds. Hopefully, a "Professional" model will have a better chance of being 100% from brand new.
At the $3K range, more or less, there are other 1911 brands which I'd also be considering. I'm actually wondering and somewhat concerned as to how long Colt will even be in the 1911 business. I don't quite understand how CZ-USA is planning to manage both Colt and Dan Wesson both having 1911 pistols.
I'm just thinking out-loud. I'm going now.
Edited to add:
From the original Post 1, I'd have said, I'd be willing to try a Colt Cobra revolver, but nothing else suits my wants from Colt.
For Springfield-Armory, I keep looking at its regular product-line 1911s, whether Ronin, Garrison, or TRP, but would really want one of its "Professional" models. That is if I was looking for a 5" 1911. If I wanted a 4.25" 1911, I'd likely look elsewhere from Dan Wesson to Wilson-Combat plus a few other companies.
I wouldn't buy another Springfield AR-15 as that had to go back for warranty/re-work, taking six weeks. My M1A "Scout" has been working ok, but it's been years since I've shot it.
Last edited:
lll Otto lll
New member
Assuming it's a 45ACP, I'd pass on both Colt and Springfield. Rather have a CZ 97 or a Bul Armory 1911.