What makes the RO not a carry gun?

Good point WC. I carried the S&W model 66, then 586, then 686 every working day over a period of about 12 years. All with adjustable sights. I did at times have the opportunity to roll around on the deck with suspects. Back then, I never heard anyone express any concern about an adjustable sight being somehow inappropriate for use on a duty/carry gun. To the best of my recollection, that all started when the Novak, Heinie and other fixed "combat" sights became popular. It seems to me that when this or that fixed sight became the accepted norm for a duty/carry/"combat" pistol, then by extension, whatever came before, i.e., "fragile" adjustable sights, must at least undesireable. Or worse yet, Untacticool ;-)

Ps, not knocking the fixed sights. I have guns with Novak, Heinie, etc fixed sights. I do prefer the sight picture and adjustability of the Bo-Mar type sights with corners softened, for actually shooting, as opposed to just carrying.....ymmv
 
How would the adjustable sights hold up if you need to use them for a one handed manipulation? Legitimately curious, I have never tried this. Certainly wasn't something the folks running revolvers had to worry about.
 
I carried the S&W model 66, then 586, then 686 every working day over a period of about 12 years. All with adjustable sights. I did at times have the opportunity to roll around on the deck with suspects.
Click to expand...

While losing adjustment (to me, anyway) is a very minor worry, one really not even worth worrying about compared to others, there's another concern with them that police officers generally don't worry about- ripping the ever loving tarnation out of cover garments. If one has a holster that prevents this, well and good, but I'd be pretty loathe to haul around something that has a hard or sharpish edge on the rear sight if it might catch on the clothing. Revolver holsters generally cover that part. Semiauto holsters, not so much.

I'm not sure if the RO's rear sight is all that sharp or not, I'm just saying it's something I'd definitely pay attention to.
 
How would the adjustable sights hold up if you need to use them for a one handed manipulation? Legitimately curious, I have never tried this. Certainly wasn't something the folks running revolvers had to worry about.
Click to expand...
Don't know, but there are alternatives to using the rear sight for one handed slide manipulation.
 
It would be a great carry gun, some folks carry full size 1911 guns. It has target sights on it, they work fine as is. Some carry Gold Cups, I don't see a problem.
 
How would the adjustable sights hold up if you need to use them for a one handed manipulation?
Click to expand...
pretty good you actually use the front of the sight where the base meets the pivot and it really doesn't have any chance of damaging or knocking it out of adjustment.
I'll also add they work better than the Novak sight vaunted as the CCW sight.
 
Would not be my choice for the job but really no harm in using it if it floats your boat which in the end is all that really matters.
 
MOST guns need a dehorn to make them truly comfortable for daily wear.
Click to expand...

They do? My gun rides in a Crossbreed Suptertuck. The leather back is what interacts with me and the gun, and the kydex part could care less if the pistol was dehorned. IMO the holster is infinitely more important than dehorning. Not to mention if you were talking in reference to the Novak sights, those ride in the holster anyway. They don't touch the body and if the front of the sights is squared off how is that uncomfortable? Again it's in the holster.
 
1911s are great carry guns, they're thin and well balanced, and with a proper belt and holster are very comfortable to carry
Click to expand...

+1 on the above. Been carrying a 1911 concealed since 1970. Started off with a Colt Government, when I was a lot younger and before my back injury. Somewhere, I think in the early 80's I switched to a 4.25", Kimber Stainless Steel Pro Carry. It was somewhat lighter and the gun was purdy. Wear a 1911 every day and it doesn't take long to get used to it being on your side. A good belt like an Instructor Belt or good leather belt and a specific model holster is a must. Never could get used to an IWB holster and probably not the type of holster to wear with a Government Model 1911.
 
Looks like a smaller more concealable R/O. 4" barrel and 6 round "size" frame.
Click to expand...
Looks like they are really just leveraging the Range Officer name. The RO was designed and marketed for range/competition use with adjustable sights and good trigger. The all-steel frame is helpful for recoil control. The ROC has fixed sights, shorter barrel, aluminum frame, and shorter grip frame. The fixed sights and shorter barrel make practical accuracy more difficult for range use and people with big hands usually don't like the reduced size grip frame. The aluminum frame increases felt recoil. The light frame and reduced muzzle length increases muzzle flip. Recoil and flip are not desirable in competition pistols.

In other words, they've turned a pistol marketed for range and competition into a concealed carry gun. That's fine with me. That is exactly the kind of 1911 I carry (my daily carry is currently a Dan Wesson CCO). I just like the irony of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top