What exactly makes a 1911 so much more expensive?

KyJim: said:
Yep, only the Bravo Company fanboys are going to pay that price for a gun with no history of 1911 manufacturing.
Click to expand...

That Bravo Company 1911 is built by Wilson Combat, I think it's their CQB model with some additional upgrades. That is a very nicely turned out Wilson 1911, they make some nice firearms, no disputing that, we can dispute the $3,290.00 price but thats about it.
 
Last edited:
In case it hasn't been mentioned, one of the values and benefits of owning one of them is the durability. Strength. In articles that I have read, a case failure inside a polymer receiver for a super high energy round can how it apart. It's not a matter of just pressure, it's the sheer energy releaed. A ten mm releases about twice what a nine does. A steel framed 1911 is going to choke on that.there will probably be damage. The barrel may even split, but chances are that you won't have it break apart. No matter what is said, no matter who said it, a poly frame is weaker and more brittle than forged or machine steel. The steel is harder and tougher. It can withstand things that would cause frame failure.

So set everything else aside. The alloy frame of a compact revolver is not the same as the full sized steel service revolver, or even the k frame meant for .357. It makes a difference.
 
I've never seen a metal-framed gun ka-boom, but had a front row seat when a buddy's Glock 20 did.
Mag spring and rounds blown out the bottom, bits of the trigger mechanism jutting out of the gaps between frame and slide.
I can't remember if the extractor quit the slide, or not?
My friend was mostly unhurt, but did have a 4" blood blister running from his trigger finger around to his thumb.
A new frame and trigger bits and the gun was back in action.
Maybe a steel-framed gun would have directed more of the blast down the magwell?
 
When 38super major loads were being developed, that is what was happening. The scooped out ramps people were using caused "glock" blowout above the web's of the case and yes, the magazine wound op on the ground, but sometimes, there was no serious structural damage.

The more powder you put in a round, the tighter you confine it, the faster the burden,the higher the pressure and weight of the projectile counted in with bullet resistance, the easier it is to cause destruction. You can take a .22 of reasonable strength and glue that barrel shut, and it will vent the gas somehow without blowing up or sustaining damage take an ordinary .38 and pack a super load .357in it and the damage sustained won't be all because of the pressure. A gun built of any plastic is not going to survive setting off a .44 magnum unless it weighs ten pound or even more. Plastic just isn't up to taking the strain.. this is who nobody has ever created plastic Automotive wheels for daily use.

I know a guy here who owns a Lamborghini Diablo. He bumped a curb and broke his cArbon fiber fender. Not only aS he really angry, the thing, rather than dieting, spit down the middle. You could have fixed steel..
 
Watch a video of a Les Baer, Wilson being made and shaped. It's not machine operators at all. Many don't know or like 1911s, surprising such an old gun. But everything is supply and demand, and 1911 have been in demand for a long long time.
 
Contrast that with a plastic-framed gun that is probably $5-worth of plastic and a metal insert that's cast and then minimally finish-machined.
Click to expand...

The OP's question was a good one - believe me, I get it, Plastics = low cost; Steel = more work therefore more cost.

But, compare a 1911 to a CZ 75B, for example. The 1911 is a simpler design, less parts, so what about a 1911 costs 3-7 times as much as a CZ 75B?:confused:

Personally, I think the profit margin on 1911's is exceptionally high. I.e., you really aren't getting what you pay for. I believe it's like having a Harley - there's nothing special about it, there are machines far more difficult to build that cost less than a Harley; it's just that everyone thinks its special so they will pay more for it.
 
I wonder how good old fashioned supply and demand factors into this. Almost every gun shop I visit has a large selection of GLOCKs, M&Ps, etc. However, the selection of 1911s is often very limited and sometimes simply non-existent. I have found a few shops that regularly carry some Rugers and Remingtons, but only one place about forty five minutes away that always has a decent selection of Colts.
 
Maybe a steel-framed gun would have directed more of the blast down the magwell?
Click to expand...
I've had 2 case ruptures in my Dan Wesson Pointman 7 10mm, First one cracked the wood grips and shot the guts out the bottom of the mag, the second one just shot the guts out of the mag and the VZ grips survived.

It's sitting in the safe waiting for a ramped barrel.
 
There is a concept called "design for manufacturability".
Technologies develop.They get applied.
John Moses Browning was a genius at elegant firearms designs suitable for military use.(Think,"field stripping")
Technology of the day was largely forging.Part geometry was influenced by the strengths/weaknesses of forging.
We don't do so much of that today.Forge dies and facilities are not easily afforded.
And,back in those days,the gang drill and drill fixtures,the broach,and the horizontal mill ,and the shaper got a lot of work done.
Those machines are stone knives and bearskins now.You don't see them in a modern shop.
Yet if a part was designed to be made from a forging,or to be broached,or made on a shaper,
Modern machines can be tough to make the part with.

Look at a 1911 slidestop.Finishing a forging is one thing.But then,where is the market to justify the capital investment in tooling?

So do you start with a piece of 2 in bar stock,put it in a lathe,turn the .200 dia pin,and then part off a large disc with the .200 dia sticking out of it?Then mill the lever out of that? Or do you slice off a piece of angle iron and figure out how to machine it?
Look at a 1911 magazine catch,think through making one.

And we get PO'd when Kimber goes to MIM parts!!

The plastic guns can use easily machined ,geometric steel parts,inserted into the molds,then molded over.

I've made a lot of plastic injection molds.

For geometric shapes,and modest size molds,A lot can be done with a lathe,a Bridgeport,a surface grinder and a sinker EDM.

Add CAD-Cam designing,3 axis CNC,and wire edm, and you can get some sophisticated work done.Those will make a lot of molds.In handgun shapes

The thin walled,precision casting techniques in 7075 alloy have really made the AR type rifles producible.
And we moved away from spot welded sheet steel receivers.

Bolt rifles are designed around tubing,mostly,these days.
Except for Ruger's investment casting genius.

Each of these production technologies has driven a change in firearms design.

Its interesting experience,and an education to make some old firearm part from scratch.

A lot of 1911 hammer/sear/disconnect parts are wire EDM'd out of hardened S-7 or A-2...
Price a bar of S-7 flat ground 1/4 in thick,1 1/2 wide,and 18 in long.
Check into the shop rate per hour to hire wire edm work.

Then look at the plastic molded /brass inserted garden hose sprinkler nozzles at the hardware store for $12
 
Last edited:
It has everything to do with demand. The 1911 was a new innovative design in its time. Nothing like it had ever before been seen. By today's standards, though, it wasn't perfect. Articles in gun magazines pitted revolvers against autos for years and many felt the occasional malfunction was too much of a chance to take when one's life was on the line. But many never lost faith in the 1911 and the subsequent guns based on its designs.

Then S&W introduced the Model 59, a modern double action high-capacity 9mm pistol that was beautiful, well balanced and malfunctioned so often that people began calling it a "jam-omatic." That it looked like a 1911 only made matters worse. But then, as the military trials approached, a new pistol appeared that was the first of what became the ultra-reliables. It was the Beretta Model 92 and in initial trials for the military it had a malfunction rate of only once every 2,000 rounds. S&W, at about that same time, fixed the design problems in its 39/59 series of pistols and introduced its 439/459 (aluminum) and 559 (steel) models. In preliminary trials, it came in next to the Beretta with a once in 952 malfunction rate. Then came the Glocks and its innumerable cousins, and suddenly all the articles about reliability ceased.

I don't know if the new technology has been applied to 1911s across the board, but saw a number of early Kimber 1911s malfunction at my local range, and those are very expensive guns. I was surprised to see that they would malfunction, period. S&W 1911s, on the other hand, seem to be very jam resistant. Kimber certainly has had time to make its guns ultra-reliable, and perhaps they have by now, but having a gun that nice and that expensive that malfunctions at all is inexcusable.

So why are the 1911s so expensive while used all-steel S&W autos are much less? I suppose it's because people want the 1911s more. I suspect that producing all-steel autos of any type will soon set back buyers at least a grand. And manufacturerers have everything to gain by selling you a light, plastic striker-fired auto that never misses a beat.





I've never wanted a 1911 in my collection, but I love the S&W line of autos. All steel
and they never jam.
 
Last edited:
The linked BCM is a trifle high at $3,200, ahem, but I am certain someone wants it.

There are more affordable M1911's in 9mm but while M1911's are more expensive than other types, I really don't know why the quantum jump in prices for the things. We do know that the M1911 was made in an era when manufacturing costs were basically ignored by designers. So were logistic considerations. Now days, total lifecycle cost is something Militaries ask for estimates with the bids. The Program Manager for the 9mm Project gave my Gun Club a lecture. He was in charge from the creation of the source selection criteria to award. He stated that SIG's lifecycle cost is why the contract was awarded to Berretta. Both were considered equally acceptable, but SIG's repair part costs were so high that in terms of total lifecycle cost, they were too high. As an owner of a SIG P220, I can attest that SIG parts are very expensive.

With today's design teams, manufacturing and logistic representatives are on the team, providing input as to the tooling, materials, etc, for modern designs. You take a look at older military designs, many parts required special tooling, fixtures, to make. This is very expensive to have to make a special machine or machine tool. It is even more expensive to have a decided human operating a machine. I have no doubt that early M1911 factories had a lot of single operation machines run by a person, and that most parts required a lot of special machines and special machine tooling.

However, with the CNC revolution, we have seen prices on M1911's come down. The cheaper versions are quite affordable, especially compared to the bad old days when only Colt made M1911's. Adjust Colt prices for inflation and see. Plus, back then, just getting a M1911 was an accomplishment, they were hard to find. I really don't know why in today's machining and manufacturing world why M1911's still command a premium. Older guns were file and fit at the end, but with today's Computer manufacturing, machining and tolerancing, I don't see why anyone has to file a part to fit. Maybe the design is time consuming to make compared to others. Or maybe, it is that American's will pay the price, heck if I know.
 
Maybe the design is time consuming to make compared to others
Click to expand...
It is. The Luger, I think, was more so.

They were limited in those days in terms of what could be manufactured. That led to higher parts count. An the methods of making those parts was more costly.
 
That Bravo Company 1911 is built by Wilson Combat, I think it's their CQB model with some additional upgrades.
Click to expand...
Wilson certainly knows how to make a good 1911, no doubt. I was unaware from the thread that Wilson built the Bravo Company 1911.
 
I believe th a supply/demand is trust the wrong thought. If thev1911 went into wartime production of hundreds of thousands of mil spec units and every maker, even Microsoft had their companies turned to wartime production, the 1911 design would never, ever be able to reach a scale of economy that the nylon guns could reach under identical conditions.

How is a glock mag made? Two lips are placed in a mold and some machine splorks in a glob of polymer. How is a colt magazine made? Sheet steel is punched into shape, hooked into a banding jig, welded into a tube, milled, etc.

How about the hammer? E other it's milled or forged from ordinary stock, or molded an finished. Wait, glock doesn't have one!

We can't compare any steel framed gun with polymer, and imo, it's pointless. The things aren't apples and oranges, they are cranberries and turnips. They are not both the same thing. Any steel frame is going to be very different. The difference begins with the fact that a steel frame gun starts out with a slide, barrel, and frame made of steel, with many other steel parts, and a nylon gun completely bypasses the steel frame and the cost.

I'd rather have a steel frame.
 
So why are the 1911s so expensive while used all-steel S&W autos are much less?
Click to expand...

Part of it, I'm convinced, is that there are so darned many different gun makers out there making 1911s (with different levels of build quality) that no one gun maker can really achieve the economies of scale needed to offer much lower prices. (Ruger may come close, however.)

Nobody else made the S&W all-steel autos. You'll notice, too, that S&W isn't making THOSE guns any more...
 
I only have them because I like them. And have A Colt and a RIA, the quality difference to price is clearly to Colt. But RIA also makes higher priced to their Mil Spec. While I'm comparing to Colts milspec. Many things to get cought up in when choosing, shooting a 1911. It's fun, easy, comfortable are big reasons it's the best handgun in my opinion. I'm talking easy to shoot and maintain, not big recoil. And a natural feel in point of aim.
 
As I said there's a lot of hype that goes into making a 1911 cost so much.
The gun in this picture was built with quality top shelf parts, hand fit, some such as the thumb safety hand fabricated.
It's a 9mm, the barrel is hard fit and I can guarantee that it would shoot holes in holes, many a X shooter would have loved this one.
The gun sold new for less then half of the list price of the Bravo gun.

07232008i.jpg


Best Regards
Bob Hunter
 
Is that from one of those alternate history video games, where WWII lasts until 1985?
Click to expand...
No it's called a hypothetical scenario, and not sure if you realize it but WWII isn't the only war in history;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top