Stainless Steel Auto-Ordinance 1911

IMHO, a comparison between a stock pistol and a customized pistol is irrelevent. If you would leave a Dan Wesson unmodified, why would you not leave a Thompson unmodified?
Click to expand...

Its relevant because hes thinking about buying the AO and spending money to customize it up nearer the DW that he'd rather have if money were not a barrier.
I'm encouraging him to just wait for the DW.
I would leave the AO as-is, or not buy it in the first place.

Conversely, how a custom job will turn out is more a function of the gunsmith doing the work than it is a function of the base pistol. A ham-handed "gunsmith" could just as easily mess up a $3,000 Guncrafters 1911 or a $5,000 Cabot as a Thompson. That's not a reflection on the pistol, it's a reflection on the gunsmith.
Click to expand...

Not sure of the point there? We seem to agree.
I was saying that spending good coin on the AO, then take the risk of customizing it, plus cost, does not seem like a good option vs just buying a DW or similar thats built the way he wants from the start.
 
Originally Posted by RickB
The A-O pistols made in more recent times, since Kahr moved the operation from NY to MA, are pretty good, but I don't think they have as good a reputation as some other guns in the same general price range.

But how much of that is the damage done to the brand name by the former owner, Numrich? Pretty much any actual reports on A-Os produced by Kahr are positive, but it takes a lot to rebuild a tarnished reputation.

The M1911.org e-zine has tested two A-O 1911s, the Thompson to which I posted a link above, and some time before that a GI model. Both reviews, by two different reviewers, were favorable.
Click to expand...

You might be right, that the only issue is the reputation of West Hurley guns still hanging over the Worcester products.
I think A-O's G.I. is probably, among guns in current production, the closest to replicating a M1911A1 on the market.
I'm still not a fan of mostly cast guns as a basis for customization.
 
Its relevant because hes thinking about buying the AO and spending money to customize it up nearer the DW that he'd rather have if money were not a barrier.
Click to expand...

I can totally see what you are saying but odds are he'd customize either one probably port it thru the slide maybe a bushing comp (thats his thing:rolleyes:)

He's trying to ask if he should start with cheaper donor pistol that meets some of his criteria (mainly frame checkering) and allows for more custom work to be done or start with a higher end gun and get less of the custom work he wants.

If hes sending it out for accessorizing and fitting most of the semi fitting on the DW will be wasted either DW will have done it or the smith will have to redo it.

If he wants to fit a new ported barrel and slide all the fitting DW did again doesn't matter. IMO hes just paying for things he will probably end up removing or altering anyway during the custom work.
 
^I'm confused...

He says... "Just about any 1911 gun short of a Dan Wesson, I'm going to play with a bit."
I read that as he'd be satisfied with the DW as-is and leave it alone...?

I'm saying go straight to the DW with good parts and features from the start, bypass the AO and the "smiths" and the questionable outcome.

The value retention of DW makes up the difference in price in the long run if ever sold.. He'd get his money back out of the DW (maybe more after many years) vs probably losing money selling a modified AO that he might not even like after its worked on.
 
Well, it is a little confusing because I am throwing around ideas to see what might work for me. Venom1956 knows me personally, and there isn't a gun I own that isn't customized somewhat.

For me, putting a barrel bushing compensator on a DW 1911 wouldn't count as "customizing," because I could easily return it to a factory condition. The only thing that I would do to a DW Valor would be change the grips (either due to texture or color--but sticking with G-10 VZ grips) and add a bushing compensator. That and I'm not really sold on the DW triggers when compared with custom trigger jobs on other guns.

Venom is right. I have a condition where I feel the compulsive need to port or compensate everything I own... My carry piece has an extended ported barrel, even (a factory but after purchase accessory from Kahr). Heck, I have a Tacsol comp on my 22/45. My Springfield XD even came with internal porting, and I got an extended ported barrel, just to see the difference.

Now here comes the relatively embarrassing part: I am gravitating towards a .45 ACP 1911's precisely because they can be ported with a barrel bushing compensator. Why .45 ACP? Because nobody makes a 9mm barrel bushing. Why does this matter? Because a .45 ACP barrel bushing will have the possibility of working better with a .45 ACP cartridge instead of a 9mm. A barrel bushing compensator is relatively cheap when you compare that with getting a gun Magnaported.

Venom is talking about internally porting (like Magna Porting) guns, because that's probably my preference as far as porting goes. I really don't like screw-on compensators, because they need to be indexed and my spidey senses tell me that I'll rattle the compensator off the gun. I like internal porting because there are no additional parts to screw up and the gun breaks down pretty much the same, and internal porting is more effective at reducing muzzle flip and felt recoil.

Barrel bushings are attractive to me, because they seem like they will stay put, unlike a screw-on compensator.

But, if I "have to" go with internal porting, I will probably just veer towards a CZ75 and get it Magnaported and get my custom work done by the CZ Custom Shop. If somebody ever made a 9mm barrel bushing compensator for CZ accu-bushing, it would rock.
 
Last edited:
In general, I am more leaning towards a full custom CZ 75 than a 1911, but I feel like I should start kicking some 1911 tires, which is why I want to know more about the Thompson Ordnance 1911 (and really 1911's in general).

I like the type, having seen good examples in Dan Wessons and a Springfield Range Officer, and I love the parts availability. I've toyed with the idea of getting a 9mm 1911, but I really like the idea of sticking to close to stock, for the parts availability.
 
Ok, I read post 25 three times... Your all over the place and have no idea what you want other than porting, and none of that was mentioned in the OP so here we are wandering around with you. :D

I'll rejoin the fray by tossing out a few thoughts/questions:
- 1911's are expensive - make sure your really getting what you want.
- I sure wouldn't bother to port a CZ75. My CZ75 SA had very little recoil, it was just a notch above shooting a smaller 22lr.
- Perhaps a nicely done CZ Custom is the way to go, should hold its value, but will be somewhat boring in that you wont tinker much with it yourself?
- Mucking up a beautiful DW Valor is somehow blasphemous! Even if it can be returned to stock.
- If your hellbent to customize a 1911 I suppose the AO is as good a starting point as any...
- Maybe look into the Glock 35. Its slide is already opened for porting, you can buy a barrel in just about any caliber and threaded combination you want and using the vast array of aftermarket parts available you can self-smith it into just about anything you want, except for the non-existent grips.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickB
I'm still not a fan of mostly cast guns as a basis for customization.

???

As far as I know, A-O 1911s have forged slides and forged frames.
Click to expand...

The West Hurley guns were all cast, and with a $500-$600 price point today, I'd be very surprised if the frame is forged. Imported guns with cast frames cost that much, so doubtful an American-made, forged gun could be priced the same.

I've done some googling, and there's little agreement. One guy claims the slides and frames are machined barstock, and another says, "Kahr says the frames are cast". I'll stick with my contention that the price point says cast frame.
The slides could have been upgraded.
The Kahr/Worcester guns certainly look much better than the West Hurleys.
 
Last edited:
The review is answering many of my questions.
Click to expand...
Here are a couple more you might want to ask.Take a close look at that thumb
safety's position,it has clearly not reached the end of travel to safe and you can see this because the plunger is not yet engaged.
This is because it is already blocking the sear and can't move up any further,it
will not click.Why do they keep installing these parts?
The fellow who reviewed the pistol kindly mentioned that he only experienced one fte. but that was it.What?He returned it afterwards so we'll never know if
it ever did it again,Kahr knows what the cause is for both issues,it is remedied
with QC so why don't they fix them.
 
Darker Loaf said:
Oh, the Auto-Ordnance website says the frame is forged and the slide is milled.
Click to expand...

http://www.auto-ordnance.com/Firearms/Thompson-1911TCA.asp

Actually, the web site says the frame is cast, but the A-O rep in my region (who is a personal friend of the guy who owns the range where I shoot) told me last year that they have switched to forged receivers.

And saying that a slide is "milled" is meaningless. ALL slides are milled -- the question is: what's the base chunk before milling? There are three options: (1) a forging; (2) an investment casting; or (3) An extrusion, otherwise known as a billet. The A-O web site says their slides are machined from billets. The fact is, a billet is essentially the same as a forging, because the steel is rolled under pressure into a rough cross-sectional shape and then sliced to length. The rolling process accomplishes pretty much the same as the forging process -- and some people who know more about metals than I consider the two processes to both be forgings.
 
RE: Aguila: Sorry for the mis-information on my part. It was not a careful read on my part. Regarding milling: that's an interesting take to know that milling is meaningless. I was always under the impression that milling was better (like DW milled frames vs. forged frames), but I had never considered that the original chunk of metal might not be of quality.
 
Last edited:
RE: The Hound:

I do know what I want: I want a high-quality, all stainless frame, with checkering (front and back strap), a custom trigger job, narrow front sight post with preferably a brass or gold dot--but fiber optic or lamps would do, adjustable rear sights (or simply high quality rear but adjustable are preferable), G-10 grips (not black) VZ, and porting.

I plan on customizing a CZ75 stainless via the CZ Custom Shop. I agree it'd be a good way to go. I know you say I don't need porting. I also don't "need" another handgun, really. I just want a precision handgun that's better than my full custom Springfield XD V-10, but has many of the same features. I've fired CZ75's a fair amount. I know they don't recoil much... I just want them to recoil as little as possible. I also will probably get two barrels, if I internally port a CZ75, like my XD V-10. I have a threaded barrel for my XD, that if I don't want porting (let's say for a new shooter), I can throw it into my gun.

But, a 1911, I'll admit, appeals to me, too. I apologize if I seem scattered. I have more ideas than dollars. The reason I am asking about T.O. 1911's is just because it has some of the features I'd want. Pretty much nobody has a gun sub-$2,000 that fulfills my desires, so building a gun up makes a lot of sense to me. I'll go back to the barrel bushing comp again, because a 1911 with a bushing compensator would save me the expense of having two barrel sets AND Magnaporting.

I think that a full-custom CZ75 might present the best value to me over a 1911, but I may want a 1911 someday anyway, which is why I am asking questions and trying to learn more about the type. I really appreciate your and other people's feedback.

I've thought about the G34 route before, especially a full-custom Lone Wolf build, because it is super easy to do porting and non-porting, but the whole reason I want a new gun is because I want a "better" gun than my custom XD. A Glock/Lonewolf is just not much of a step up from my XD, and having fired Venom1956's CZ75 a lot, I know I shoot a CZ better than my XD, even a stock one.

I like 1911's but pretty much the only 1911's that I've fired that have impressed me were a 9mm Springfield Range Officer, a DW Pointman 9, and a DW Valor.

Do I make more or less sense than I did before? I'm guessing less...
 
Last edited:
Darker Loaf said:
RE: Aguila: Sorry for the mis-information on my part. It was not a careful read on my part. Regarding milling: that's an interesting take to know that milling is meaningless. I was always under the impression that milling was better (like DW milled frames vs. forged frames), but I had never considered that the original chunk of metal might not be of quality.
Click to expand...
"Milling" is "machining." Cast, forged, or machined from a cubic block or steel or aluminum alloy, no firearms receiver springs out of the mold or forge completely finished to a dimensional tolerance of a few thousandths of an inch. They are ALL "milled" -- with much of the work done (traditionally) in a Bridgeport milling machine (hence the term). Today, of course, virtually all manufacturers use modern CNC machining centers, but the principle remains the same: the raw forging, casting, or billet has to be machined to final dimensions.

Here's a raw Colt 1911 forging:

Coltframeforging.jpg


Here's a raw Caspian casting:

attachment.php


Here's a Cabot receiver, already partially machined from a billet:

th
 

Attachments

  • Caspian003.jpg
    Caspian003.jpg
    96.2 KB · Views: 11
  • Coltframeforging.jpg
    Coltframeforging.jpg
    7 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
Still not "buying" forged receivers on A-O. Price points are pretty distinct along cast/forged lines, and A-O is very much on the cast side. I doubt they would make the change with no fanfare and, more importantly, no $200-$300 price increase.
Remington has introduced some forged-frame models, after the initial cast-frame G.I. style pistol, and prices went up considerably.
All of this clouds the general perception that cast frames are plenty good enough. Caspian has made almost nothing but cast frames, and they enjoy a very good reputation for initial quality and durability.
I bought one of the barstock frames that they made briefly (double the price of their cast frames), and it was a real beauty, with perfect lines and contours, but apparently one or two of them had warranty problems, so Caspian dropped the barstock frames and went back to cast only, which they claim have never failed.
 
All of this clouds the general perception that cast frames are plenty good enough.
Click to expand...
They are plenty good enough and that's probably why they are so generally perceived.The process is highly refined and the product is just as suitable but
like any other industrial application quality is a factor,materials and casting techniques ultimately determine how good the part is. Precision machining also
adds to function and value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top