So, who's going to be the first?

BigJimP said:
I was comparing what I think is one of the best 1911's on the market to a $900 CZ ..../... silly, no ---- there are far too many guys in gun stores every week that think $1,000 - or even $ 1,500 ....ought to buy the best 1911's that can be made.../ and its a perspective that should be discussed ...



I don't think CZ's badged Dan Wesson 1911's are very good guns / and I doubt the CZ badged guns are any better - in fact they may be identical with the exception of the cosmetics.... but my perception is based on the Dan Wesson 1911's I've seen and fired at my local range in the last year or so.



Some folks think spending $ 3,500 - $8,000 on a quality 1911 from Wilson Combat...is a waste of money / I don't .../ and all I was trying to say is where the value on decently made 1911's are - if you don't have the budget to look at Wilson or Ed Brown...then look at the Springfield TRP in the $ 1,500 price range.../ I think the TRP will be a way better gun than anything CZ or Dan Weson puts out.../ or save your money and purchase a Wilson down the road - over anything made under the name of Dan Wesson by CZ - or under the CZ name.



I understand CZ has their fans...and I respect Aarond's question and opinion and others that contributed.../ I just don't think the CZ 1911 is a gun worth taking a chance on ...
Click to expand...


Seems silly to me then. I don't see anyone saying the $900 CZ will be the best 1911 ever made. Dan Wesson has a pretty good reputation and similar quality for what will be a different roll mark is appealing to some for good reasons. I'm not sure why you think the TRP is the gold standard. As for spending 3.5-8k on a 1911 I have no issues with how people spend their money. What I do have issues with is that people who often buy Wilsons have bought into the Kool-Aid per se and act as if spending that much is required to have a reliable 1911. That I don't agree with. I also don't think spending $850 or so is taking that much of a chance. It's a lot more palatable to me than spending as much as a decent used car.
 
I just don't think the CZ 1911 is a gun worth taking a chance on ...
Click to expand...

I think you need to further define what "chance" you're taking. The DW 1911's are really well made 1911's - the CZ is being made by DW. What chance (an undefined, open-ended word) do you think someone is taking?

There's always a chance with any gun, no matter who makes it, that it will have problems. That includes guns made by Wilson, Les Baer, Ed Brown, HK, Glock, SIG, Ruger, S&W, Colt, etc. No manufacturer can claim to be 100% defect free - manufacturing doesn't work like that despite the best efforts of everyone involved.
 
I still out shoot him every time with those lowly Glocks too
Click to expand...

You're conflating the cost of the gun with the person using it - and it's truly a specious claim as it means nothing about the gun at all and everything about the person using it.

As an example, I'm betting Rob Leatham or Todd Jarrett could use a 1911 and outshoot you and most anyone else that doesn't compete professionally.
 
There's always a chance with any gun, no matter who makes it, that it will have problems. That includes guns made by Wilson, Les Baer, Ed Brown, HK, Glock, SIG, Ruger, S&W, Colt, etc. No manufacturer can claim to be 100% defect free - manufacturing doesn't work like that despite the best efforts of everyone involved.
Click to expand...
Although its been close to 15 years now, my experience with the 1911 clones has been that they do/did in fact, have a much higher instance of problems right out of the box, compared to similarly or less priced SIG's, HK's, Glocks, etc, that Ive had as well. Im not talking insignificant numbers here either, Ive owned close to 40 1911's over the years, and probably a few more than that of the others combined. Of those, the only one I remember having an issue with, was a SIG P238, which really is just another, poorly done 1911 clone.

The non 1911's all seemed to have no troubles just loading the mags out of the box, and running fine from then on. The 1911's were certainly "fiddly", on the good side, and down right frustrating in many cases, and some never worked reliably at all, even after wasting a lot of time and ammo on breaking them in. The only guns I ever trusted to carry, were older Colts and GI guns, and most of them still needed a little something, to be able to feed all ammo types reliably.


I would certainly hope that the higher end guns dont require a break in and fiddling like the lower cost guns usually have/had. If youre paying that much, I would hope they would take care of that for you before they shipped them.

The other issue for me was, I want duplicates of what I carry/use, and I can get that, 3-4+ fold with most of the others, for what one of the higher end 1911's cost.

You're conflating the cost of the gun with the person using it - and it's truly a specious claim as it means nothing about the gun at all and everything about the person using it.

As an example, I'm betting Rob Leatham or Todd Jarrett could use a 1911 and outshoot you and most anyone else that doesn't compete professionally.
Click to expand...
Im sure they could. My point was, many seem to think the higher cost of the gun will make up for their lack of skill. It wont.

If you want to be a better shooter, buy a reasonably priced gun that works, and take whats left over, and buy lots of ammo and practice your ass off.
 
Although its been close to 15 years now, my experience with the 1911 clones has been that they do/did in fact, have a much higher instance of problems right out of the box, compared to similarly or less priced SIG's, HK's, Glocks, etc, that Ive had as well.
Click to expand...

Probably true due to the need for hand fitting of certain critical parts, setup and "tweaking" of parts like the extractor, lubrication requirements, and need for care and preventative maintenance.

But, this thread is about the new CZ 1911, and not a comparison of the 1911 in general against every other gun manufactured. Whether it is a "clone" or a Colt makes little difference. The two worst functioning, inaccurate 1911's I've owned were manufactured by Colt - "The Original" (for what little that's worth).

The 1911 is not a gun for new shooters unless they are willing to work with the gun and understand its operation, maintenance requirements, and certain limitations that may appear in feeding specific types of bullets and/or loads.

Nowhere did I say that spending more money equates to making you a better shooter. That's like claiming buying a $7,000 camera makes you a better photographer. But, many people fall into that trap also, and have to have the most expensive and latest piece of photo equipment - while still making incredibly bad photographs no matter what camera they're using.

And - nowhere did I say that buying an expensive 1911 automatically equates to perfect functionality - it doesn't.

But, they're really is a "sweet spot" in manufacturing of price versus performance of products where the manufacturer can allot money for materials / labor / quality control that results in better product reliability.

With 1911's, I 've found that point to be about $700, and when you get into the $1,000+ area out-of-the-box functionality increases again.

I have a 1911 that cost $850. The first day I owned it, I shot 300 rounds through it with zero problems - and the gun has kept up it's reliability through an additional 4K+ rounds.

I have another 1911 (to relate to this thread - a DW Valor) that I purposely did not clean or add additional lubrication for 1800+ rounds - and it functioned flawlessly.

Generally, as with most products, you get what you pay for. 1911's are more expensive to manufacture than polymer pistols - so you pay more for them.

Whether that makes them "better" is a personal value judgment and not a universal truth - and neither is spending less money for a polymer pistol with more ammunition.
 
Last edited:
Look guys....nobody's opinions are 100% factual / we each give our opinions on a variety of guns based on what we've each seen from these mfg's and based on their guns we've fired...

I'm not trying to say every 1911 under $ 1,500 is unreliable...and the TRP is certainly not a gold standard. To me, the TRP is an acceptable gun - with pretty good parts in it - fit and finish is pretty good - and the ones I've seen and fired / and some of my buddies have 20,000 rds or so thru them with very good results. So I think your chance of getting a pretty good gun for $1,500 out of a TRP is pretty high.

I'm not saying everything CZ makes in terms of 1911's ( under their name or the Dan Wesson name is junk )...but what I am saying is the one's I've seen and fired were not very good ( fit and finish or on their triggers - were well below acceptable to me). But based on that - I think buying a Dan Wesson or a CZ 1911 is a poor choice / and you're taking a big chance ...

I do think Wilson Combat sets the gold standard in 1911's ...and that Ed Brown is a close 2nd....but there are a lot of guns out there - Cabot, etc that cost more money. The moderately priced Wilsons - like the CQB at around $ 3,500 is an excellent gun ....based on my own CQB and others that I know that own them...as are all of the rest of the Wilson's I've seen and fired.- or that are owned by friends.

I'm not just picking on CZ or Dan Wesson - because I own Wilsons - I also own a Les Baer and some Kimbers...and I will tell you hands down I think I wasted my money on both the Les Baer and the Kimbers...they are all a significant disappointment ( and one of the Kimbers is a true custom shop gun at $2,000 plus )...but they are just not worth the money in my view.

I hope anyone that buys a Dan Wesson or CZ 1911 has great luck with them ....and maybe I've just seen the lemons ...

But I'd rather see a guy save his money - than buy a CZ or Dan Wesson and at least consider the Springfield TRP as an entry level 1911...
 
Why are we comparing the features and expectations of a $850 MSRP basic, bare bones 1911s to $3,000 - $5,000 customs?

I was out in the sun a long time today, but not that long.
 
The only real competition for the new CZ, besides the Mil-Spec, is the Colt '91; basic, G.I.-style pistols with the major components machined from forgings, and upgraded sights.
If you want something else altogether, there are dozens of options.
 
I don't think CZ's badged Dan Wesson 1911's are very good guns
Click to expand...
I'm not saying everything CZ makes in terms of 1911's ( under their name or the Dan Wesson name is junk )...but what I am saying is the one's I've seen and fired were not very good
Click to expand...
I disagree. I own 1911s from Wilson, Ed Brown, Baer, Dan Wesson, and others. Dan Wessons are below the level of Wilson or Brown in fit and finish, but their top shelf gun is at least a thousand dollars less. Their lower tier 1911s (not counting the new CZ) are two thousand dollars less. DWs are routinely better than other 1911s comparably priced.

BTW, you referred to the TRP as "entry level." I think your definition differs from just about anybody whom I've heard using that term. To most, "entry level" refers to RIA and other Philippine-made guns, Tisas, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top