New Colt Combat Commander
- Thread starter bullseye
- Start date
- Status
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Given Colt is abandoning the civilian
handgun market, I would give it a pass
on RKBA grounds.
I'm not a big 1911 expert but a friend
who is some sort of 1911 champ is a Kimber
fan.
Glenn http://www.enconnect.net/cyberguns
handgun market, I would give it a pass
on RKBA grounds.
I'm not a big 1911 expert but a friend
who is some sort of 1911 champ is a Kimber
fan.
Glenn http://www.enconnect.net/cyberguns
Ed Brunner
New member
Good point, but Colt has already made their money on this gun, so buy it if yoyu like it.
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
------------------
Better days to be,
Ed
I love mine - a series 70. IMX, it is very accurate for a short barrel 45 and it is a fast pointer for me. I have added a few goodies, Bo-mar sights, Pachmayr grips, some Ed Brown stuff. It will take everything I feed it. The price you were quoted doesn't sound out of line.
The Colt's situation may make a difference to you or not. Like they said, it's up to you. On the other hand, there will always be parts available.
The Colt's situation may make a difference to you or not. Like they said, it's up to you. On the other hand, there will always be parts available.
Not a bad price, but I'd personally would opt for a Kimber Pro Carry, if you don't mind an alloy frame, or a Springfield Armory Champion.
I'm guessing, but for the price, that Commander probably doesn't have a beavertail grip or good sights. You will have those if you get the Kimber or Springfield.
[This message has been edited by Mute (edited October 13, 1999).]
I'm guessing, but for the price, that Commander probably doesn't have a beavertail grip or good sights. You will have those if you get the Kimber or Springfield.
[This message has been edited by Mute (edited October 13, 1999).]
Barry in IN
New member
I bought one like that, only in all stainless, about a year ago.
I'm not a 1911 nut(or Colts in general), but I've had a few, and I like this one best. I think the Commanders have a better balance to them than 5" 1911's do. Personal opinion there. This Commander is the first 1911 I've had with the enhanced features and I think they are changes for the better. The sights (that sorta Novak style with a better sight picture)are great.
I ditched the rubber grips first thing. You probably already know this, but they aren't the best choice for carry. That rubber tends to grab onto shirt material, and you draw your shirt with your pistol. Rosewood looks nice against stainless. Those rubber ones do feel nice though, don't they?
I agree wholeheartedly with Ed above about buying a Colt now. Colt got their money when the distributor got the gun, probably months ago. You aren't going to break them by not buying it. Somebody else will buy it if you don't.
I'm not a 1911 nut(or Colts in general), but I've had a few, and I like this one best. I think the Commanders have a better balance to them than 5" 1911's do. Personal opinion there. This Commander is the first 1911 I've had with the enhanced features and I think they are changes for the better. The sights (that sorta Novak style with a better sight picture)are great.
I ditched the rubber grips first thing. You probably already know this, but they aren't the best choice for carry. That rubber tends to grab onto shirt material, and you draw your shirt with your pistol. Rosewood looks nice against stainless. Those rubber ones do feel nice though, don't they?
I agree wholeheartedly with Ed above about buying a Colt now. Colt got their money when the distributor got the gun, probably months ago. You aren't going to break them by not buying it. Somebody else will buy it if you don't.
Paul Revere
New member
Preference is for the Series 80 Combat Elite (this is a stainless frame, blued slide). The Combat Commander has a trigger that really sucks. The Combat Elite has a wonderful trigger (adjustable). The Elite is a full size 1911, whereas the Commander is a smaller frame.
Pass on the Commander. But, if you've got to have one, I'd sell you one for less than that dealer's asking.
Pass on the Commander. But, if you've got to have one, I'd sell you one for less than that dealer's asking.
Judge Blackhawk
New member
I have two Kimbers, Custom Stainless, and Compact Stainless.... the guns are great and the customer service is FIRST RATE. Kimber sent me a manual and disassemble tools at no cost, even though I order to pay for them.
Colt has abandoned us the people. And I dont give a darn what the real reason is for abandoning us. Colt is saying it if for the gun liability,,, hell they are just as bad as the professional politicians. They are trying to blame someone else for Colts own failures.....
DONT BUY A COLT.....Who will service it and it will need service....
Well have fun...
Colt has abandoned us the people. And I dont give a darn what the real reason is for abandoning us. Colt is saying it if for the gun liability,,, hell they are just as bad as the professional politicians. They are trying to blame someone else for Colts own failures.....
DONT BUY A COLT.....Who will service it and it will need service....
Well have fun...
The Combat Elite is very well executed. However, like Barry, I find the balance of the Commander sized pistols to work better for me. I can shoot a Commander much better than a full size. If that's the case with you, stick to the Commander. The trigger issue is a minor one. There are a great number of smiths who can give you an awesome trigger for a reasonable price. Even if it is a series 80 trigger.
Bullseye, I have a Colt CCO (Commander slide and barrel, officers aluminum frame) that I bought back in June. I have put about 250 rounds through it: 185 grain Winchester Silvertips, Lawman 230 grain ball, Speer Gold Dot 185 grainers, generic 230 grain ball, Federal 230 grain Hydrashoks. It eats it all. No malfunctions. Last week at the range I was down to my last mag of ammo. I put three rounds into a 1.5 inch circle at 30 feet. Did the same again. Last shot hit point of aim. And I am not a pistoleer by any stretch of imagination. If you like it, buy it!
BG, I don't have anything against Colts per se, but your statement about everything else being a copy is meaningless drivel. Colt has made some good guns, and they have also made some stinkers. Up till very recently, EVERYTHING they made was way overpriced, and it was only pressure from other 1911 makers such as Kimber and Springfield, who were turning out better guns at lower prices, that forced Colt to introduce their "factory custom" O Series 1911s at a reasonable price.
So sure, get one of the new Colt O Series if you want, they are a very good buy. But you can get a gun that is just as good, if not better, by buying a Kimber, and get a gun that is almost as good at a STILL cheaper price by buying a Springfield. And the fact that they are a "copy" has no bearing on the subject whatsoever.
So sure, get one of the new Colt O Series if you want, they are a very good buy. But you can get a gun that is just as good, if not better, by buying a Kimber, and get a gun that is almost as good at a STILL cheaper price by buying a Springfield. And the fact that they are a "copy" has no bearing on the subject whatsoever.
Rik: Just want to go on record that the only good guns COLT ever made, IMO, are the 45 Automatic and the AR15. That is despite the 160 year history of the firm. I know that the single action revolver, in its day, particularly during the Mexican War, did fine service as it was high tech for the time. A pair of revolvers beats a bow and arrow every time!
What am I trying to say? COLT has never been a choice for me if I was buying anything other than an AR15 or a 1911 Pistol. But COLT has always been my choice for either of the above.
That said, I understand perfectly the quality control issues, politics, financial challenges, etc., COLT has been embroiled in too. You are right, they are overpriced and there is no two ways about it. They had the whole 45 market to themselves until recently.
But they are still the best. They have been building the 1911 pistol for about 90 years. That's a lot different than 5 or 10 years.
When in the market for a 45 or AR I carefully select my weapons because COLTs are built by United Auto Workers union labor, and I know the type of products they can produce. Typically, I buy used, well cared for weapons. That's all I'm saying. Anybody can produce a 1911 type pistol today. The Chinese do it. The Philippinos do it. The Canadians do it. It don't necessarily mean they are put together right, maybe they are, but you have to be knowledgeable to know for sure.
But a COLT 45 Automatic, when properly executed, is the finest commercial pistol on the planet.
PS: I'm not denigrating custom pistol smiths like Kuhnhausen, Heinie, Bilby, Baer, etc., etc. These guys are craftsmen of the highest order, and if you require a pistol for a particular purpose, be it bullseye, or IPSC Open Class, get one of these guys to build it. But, if you're buying a commercial 45, especially if you don't know much about the animal, it's safer to get a COLT. If you're an expert, you can make your own decision. Just telling you what mine is. Regards
------------------
There is the science of Ballistics and the Art of Bullistics
Yankee Doodle
What am I trying to say? COLT has never been a choice for me if I was buying anything other than an AR15 or a 1911 Pistol. But COLT has always been my choice for either of the above.
That said, I understand perfectly the quality control issues, politics, financial challenges, etc., COLT has been embroiled in too. You are right, they are overpriced and there is no two ways about it. They had the whole 45 market to themselves until recently.
But they are still the best. They have been building the 1911 pistol for about 90 years. That's a lot different than 5 or 10 years.
When in the market for a 45 or AR I carefully select my weapons because COLTs are built by United Auto Workers union labor, and I know the type of products they can produce. Typically, I buy used, well cared for weapons. That's all I'm saying. Anybody can produce a 1911 type pistol today. The Chinese do it. The Philippinos do it. The Canadians do it. It don't necessarily mean they are put together right, maybe they are, but you have to be knowledgeable to know for sure.
But a COLT 45 Automatic, when properly executed, is the finest commercial pistol on the planet.
PS: I'm not denigrating custom pistol smiths like Kuhnhausen, Heinie, Bilby, Baer, etc., etc. These guys are craftsmen of the highest order, and if you require a pistol for a particular purpose, be it bullseye, or IPSC Open Class, get one of these guys to build it. But, if you're buying a commercial 45, especially if you don't know much about the animal, it's safer to get a COLT. If you're an expert, you can make your own decision. Just telling you what mine is. Regards
------------------
There is the science of Ballistics and the Art of Bullistics
Yankee Doodle
Barry in IN
New member
Big G-
That's pretty much the way I feel about Colt-I'll take one of their 1911's or an AR, but the other stuff they can keep. And the 1911 I'll want to look over real good first. I've never had much use for their other products. But the ones I like, I like.
Now time for my Colt rant, which is where poor Bullseye's simple question seems to have lead. Sorry everybody, but I've built up about 20 years of steam, and have kept fairly quiet since Colt's announcement.
Colt will probably come out of this smelling like a rose. This "streamlining" of their operation is what they should've done about 15 years ago on their own, as a business decision, not a legal one. Does anybody really miss the Boa, Commando, or King Cobra? And I'm afraid to even get started on the All-American 2000 pistol. I'm surprised Colt stayed around as long as they have.
While S&W was backlogged on M29's for years, Colt waited 20 years to come out with a .44 magnum. And later, when the nation's police were switching over to autos, Colt provided us with countless new .38 and .357 revolvers. OK revolvers I guess, but offered nothing over their predecessors. And sure didn't make any money for Colt.
Then when AR-15 sales skyrocketed, it was time to drop them for a while.
All just excellent business decisions, weren't they? A merger with another manufacturer with some sense would've been better.
All of Colt's guns were over-priced. But they finally got a clue when Springfield Armory started selling 1911's in the mid-eighties. Colt was it's usual slow self on the uptake, but they came out with the 1991 series to compete.
Then Kimber came along, and blew them both away with a better-featured gun. Springfield tried to keep up with the "loaded" models. And Colt started the O-X series like the Commander I have, and that Bullseye is looking at. Should he buy it?
Myself, I don't plan on buying another Colt anyway. Mostly because the few guns they make that I like-I already own, including a Commander. But like I said before, Bullseye, or anybody else, isn't going to hurt anybody but the dealer by not buying a gun that Colt has already been paid for.
That's pretty much the way I feel about Colt-I'll take one of their 1911's or an AR, but the other stuff they can keep. And the 1911 I'll want to look over real good first. I've never had much use for their other products. But the ones I like, I like.
Now time for my Colt rant, which is where poor Bullseye's simple question seems to have lead. Sorry everybody, but I've built up about 20 years of steam, and have kept fairly quiet since Colt's announcement.
Colt will probably come out of this smelling like a rose. This "streamlining" of their operation is what they should've done about 15 years ago on their own, as a business decision, not a legal one. Does anybody really miss the Boa, Commando, or King Cobra? And I'm afraid to even get started on the All-American 2000 pistol. I'm surprised Colt stayed around as long as they have.
While S&W was backlogged on M29's for years, Colt waited 20 years to come out with a .44 magnum. And later, when the nation's police were switching over to autos, Colt provided us with countless new .38 and .357 revolvers. OK revolvers I guess, but offered nothing over their predecessors. And sure didn't make any money for Colt.
Then when AR-15 sales skyrocketed, it was time to drop them for a while.
All just excellent business decisions, weren't they? A merger with another manufacturer with some sense would've been better.
All of Colt's guns were over-priced. But they finally got a clue when Springfield Armory started selling 1911's in the mid-eighties. Colt was it's usual slow self on the uptake, but they came out with the 1991 series to compete.
Then Kimber came along, and blew them both away with a better-featured gun. Springfield tried to keep up with the "loaded" models. And Colt started the O-X series like the Commander I have, and that Bullseye is looking at. Should he buy it?
Myself, I don't plan on buying another Colt anyway. Mostly because the few guns they make that I like-I already own, including a Commander. But like I said before, Bullseye, or anybody else, isn't going to hurt anybody but the dealer by not buying a gun that Colt has already been paid for.
BigG, I understand what you are trying to say, but you yourself admitted you usually buy older, used Colts. What about someone who doesn't know what to look for in a used gun? They go to a gunshop, and until very recently, have only the choice of a Colt 1991A1 or a Kimber or Springfield. It may be different where you live, but non-1991A1 Colts are pretty scarce many places in the country, simply because dealers didn't want to pay through the nose for them.
So, they can get a 1991A1 for (in these parts) $450-500, a stainless Springfield Loaded 1911 for around $500 or a Kimber Classic Custom for around $575-600. And you think they should opt for the Colt???
Not a chance. It would take at least $300 worth of work to make the Colt into the gun that either the Springfield or the Kimber is out of the box.
Now, with the new O Series Colts, that gap may have been closed, but it's too early to tell.
I can only go on my personal experiences and those of numerous people who I have talked with in person and online, but for the vast majority, Kimber has been the answer. There are three Kimber Master Dealers within a half hour of each other in my not-so-large town, and between the three of them, they have sold hundreds of Kimbers in this small area. They literally have trouble keeping them in stock. Yet they have, between them, sent back only three guns the last time I checked, for any reason whatsoever.
I know several people who have bought multiple Kimbers, and none of them have had any jams or parts breakage and all of them have been eminently satisfied with the accuracy of the guns.
I personally have had four Kimbers---have two now, but would still have all four had I not been forced to sell some guns to get the downpayment for a house several months ago--and have put well over 7,000 rounds through them combined with not a single jam.
So, they can get a 1991A1 for (in these parts) $450-500, a stainless Springfield Loaded 1911 for around $500 or a Kimber Classic Custom for around $575-600. And you think they should opt for the Colt???
Not a chance. It would take at least $300 worth of work to make the Colt into the gun that either the Springfield or the Kimber is out of the box.
Now, with the new O Series Colts, that gap may have been closed, but it's too early to tell.
I can only go on my personal experiences and those of numerous people who I have talked with in person and online, but for the vast majority, Kimber has been the answer. There are three Kimber Master Dealers within a half hour of each other in my not-so-large town, and between the three of them, they have sold hundreds of Kimbers in this small area. They literally have trouble keeping them in stock. Yet they have, between them, sent back only three guns the last time I checked, for any reason whatsoever.
I know several people who have bought multiple Kimbers, and none of them have had any jams or parts breakage and all of them have been eminently satisfied with the accuracy of the guns.
I personally have had four Kimbers---have two now, but would still have all four had I not been forced to sell some guns to get the downpayment for a house several months ago--and have put well over 7,000 rounds through them combined with not a single jam.
You got a point Rik, for comparing a 1991 to a loaded Kimber, there isn't much comparison.
The guys in small towns basically are $crewed --they gotta take what is available. That's what they call a seller's market.
Also, I advocate learning as much as you can about the gun you want before you buy. unfortunately, you often have to buy the gun before you learn about it. It's the sad truth: Education costs money
We really agree pretty much, IMHO. Regards!
The guys in small towns basically are $crewed --they gotta take what is available. That's what they call a seller's market.
Also, I advocate learning as much as you can about the gun you want before you buy. unfortunately, you often have to buy the gun before you learn about it. It's the sad truth: Education costs money
We really agree pretty much, IMHO. Regards!
- Status