I'm looking to buy a 1911 and the SR1911 is basically exactly what I want...

>Implying Colt is better than Ruger
>Implying a sub-$900 1911 that is reliable and not made out of pot metal isn't a good deal.

>"Ruger is actually BETTER than Colt"
>"Colts are made out of POT METAL"
>"You implied a thing as if you were too passive-aggressive to come out and say it, that means I win!"

No way real people exist who are this stupid.

Attached: 1536507349956.jpg (484x577, 69K)

>a decent 1911 should cost $100 less than a fucking Glock
Uh huh. Also, an SR1911 costs less than a base model Colt and has more features.

not that user, but I shot both and the Ruger is better and that's what I ended up buying

>Am I just max autismo?
Aesthetic preferences have nothing to do with autism.

What a fucking racist OP is. Black guns matter.

Convince me to get a Colt Competition over a Ruger. The Competition looks like the closest in features to what Ruger offers.

You spend more money for a name that means fuck all anymore because they've been coasting on their heritage for decades while their quality of product diminished.

Attached: 1508015818215.jpg (250x250, 16K)

>I'm looking to buy a 1911 and the SR1911 is basically exactly what I want
Is good gun with great features at the price point. fitting is about what you'd expect at that price point, ok but nothing stellar. Mine developed a little play after several hundreds of rounds. Really like the sights in particular.
>Am I just max autismo?
Yes, but you're also right, the black pieces are pretty fucking grody. Maybe try to hunt down one of the all black talo exclusives?

What about the 10mm one?

I can't think of any 1911 pistol made by Colt today which is under $1000.

>"Ruger is actually BETTER than Colt"
He didn't say that, but I will, it's true, nuColt is fucking garbage.

>"Colts are made out of POT METAL"
Which he never said, he probably alluded towards the Rock Island Armory pistols, which aren't so much made from pot metal as they're just crudely made (yet functional) overall.

>"You implied a thing as if you were too passive-aggressive to come out and say it, that means I win!"
No, your aspergers made you imagine things.

IMHO spending any more than 700 bucks on a full production 1911 like a colt, ruger, or sig is just silly when you can find like new dan wessons floating around for 1000-1150 depending on model. 700 bucks on a reliable base model makes perfect sense since its about the cheapest you can get a good 1911 at from a reputable company. Great way to dip your toes in. If you're thinking about spending 800-1000 you really might as well just save up your pennies for another couple months...

>Also, an SR1911 costs less than a base model Colt and has more features.
They are in the same $650-700 price bracket. Right now, I can't find any Colts that are cheaper than the Ruger, but prices vary. I've certainly seem them go for less in the past. As for "features," it's a 1911, so it was perfect when John Moses originally designed it. Also, it sounds like it's your first 1911, so you aren't going to gain anything from the Novak style sights, the hammer with the hole in it, the trigger with holes in it, etc. Just get a real 1911, not a "budget" (your word) copy that costs basically the same price as the real thing.

If you own a Ruger, you definitely do not OWN both, though. Tell me how I knew that.

No, I will not.

Under $700:
gunsmidwest.com/colt-1991a1-gi-45acp-5-blue.html

Under $800:
gunsmidwest.com/colt-series-70-govt-45acp-blue.html

>hurrdurr, he didn't say those things, only implied them, nanner-nanner-na-na!
He didn't make a strong argument, but instead blurted out that other bullshit. What was I supposed to do with it?

Although I haven't been keeping meticulous track of all the Rugers I've owned, a large number have had to be sent back to the manufacturer before they were even reliable. For the same price, you can get a much higher quality firearm, and one that isn't a copy at that.

Attached: _IGP0866.jpg (1728x1152, 846K)

I would absolutely pick a Dan Wesson over a Colt.

>one that isn't a copy
Given how much Colt has gone out of business, and how they've changed the design of the 1911, isn't theirs just kind of a copy by this point anyway? They're hardly the same people.

but Colt is actually shit though, compared to some of their more talented competition. too much resting on their laurels and SAA money. and they're on the side of the grabbers.

>Given how much Colt has gone out of business, and how they've changed the design of the 1911, isn't theirs just kind of a copy by this point anyway? They're hardly the same people.
By that logic, since Bill Ruger died, yet the company continued to use his name on its products, the Ruger LCP is a bootleg Ruger firearm.

The only "shit" I've ever seen with the Colt name on it was the newer reproduction 1903's which were actually contracted out to US Armament, and not produced in house. I put around 1700 rounds through my 1911 pictured here before I ended up selling it (needed to raise money for a new house). I know that's not a hugely impressive round count, but I remember it because I buy ammo by the case so it was easy to keep track of how much I'd shot it. That gun never malfunctioned on me once.

because I told you, retard

You're comparing GI models to firearm with many more features at the same price point. that isn't fair at all.
>Although I haven't been keeping meticulous track of all the Rugers I've owned, a large number have had to be sent back to the manufacturer before they were even reliable
Really, how many rugers do you own? how many have gone back to the factory? how about the colts? a vague anecdote like that doesn't really mean much on Jow Forums, friend. In general the reputation for the SR1911 has been hit or miss fit with good reliability and great features for the price. If you feel they're so much more inferior then that im gonna need some proofs or at least specifics.
>one that isn't a copy at that.
Only a empty skulled brain fag would care about that when it comes to 1911s at this point. Colt hasn't been the topic of the market for decades on decades and they've steadily gone down hill to the point of being mid-tier at best.

Brand fag* had skulls n brains on the brain when i typed that.

>muh pony!

Attached: aegis-no-thanks.jpg (500x515, 65K)

Fair enough. I own zero Rugers today. I have owned in the past....

10/22 TD - No issues.
LCP - Needed to call Ruger CS because magazines would not seat properly. They sent replacement thinner magazine floorplates, which solved the problem but every time I bought a new magazine, I'd have the same issue so the problem was really the gun.
LCP Custom - Gun had rough rifling (bore looked literally pitted). Called Ruger CS and they sent a replacement barrel.
LCP II - Magazine springs wore out when I left mags loaded. The worn magazines would fail to lock the slide back when manipulating the gun on a table, although there were no issues while shooting.
SRH .454 Casull - Gun had to go back to the factory because the cylinder would lock up while firing. I paid return shipping ($55). It still had the issue when I received it.
SP101 3" .357 mag - No issues, but my brother has one that had the same issue as my SRH where the cylinder would lock up while firing. Ruger sent him a totally new gun.
SP101 4.2" .357 mag - No issues.
Super Blackhawk .357 - No real issues, but pretty tight chambers that wouldn't chamber some ammo.
P95DC - No real issues, but sight paint started to flake.
P89DC - Decocker lever broke off on the right side.

>Vs. Colt....
1991 - No issues.
1908 .25 Vest Pocket (4x owned) - No issues.
1903 .32 Pocket Hammerless (3x owned) - No issues.
LE6960CCU - No issues.

Don't say I didn't give Ruger a fair shake before I made my claim or throw the A-word at me again.

>0 issues with any SR191s, 0 sr1911s even owned
>1 colt 1911 owned, with zero issues for the 1700 rounds you put through it
Oh, ok, clearly an expert on comparing the sr1911 and colt 1911s. Not even gonna get into your nitpicking on some of those ruger "issues" with different models.

It's a 70% defect or failure rate for Ruger vs 0% defect/failure rate for Colt. Do I have to own a SR1911 to recommend against them? I don't think so.

You can easily find matching finish parts to replace the black ones, which I agree look awful on a lighter tone 1911. This will give you the benefit of being able to choose specific custom parts to tone your gun to you.

Ive had absolutely zero issues with any of my rugers, 3 revolvers. However with my Colts I had a Python and that thing was a fragile fat cunt, the timing went out and replacing parts required a level of complexity to surpass Kraut space magic, unlike Rugers simple design.
Ones a gentlemans firearm the others a working mans gun.

I've shot 1700+ rds through my SR1911 and have had 1 FTF
>70%
faggot

>1 FTF

I personally like the look
if it really bothers you though you can just polish the bluing off

On a semi unrelated note, can anybody tell what type of finish I have? I bought it unused and it was labeled as O1991 custom, or something like that. I know it isn’t stainless, but it doesn’t appear to be blues either

Attached: F718CEFA-8C70-44A6-AC50-44FF89B7866A.jpg (2048x1536, 1010K)

I own an older colt 1911, a newer colt 1911, and a ruger SR1911
old colt>ruger>new colt
the ruger is better than kimber garbage, the remington 1911R, the springfield 1911, and the equal to the S&W 1911
getting a better 1911 will cost you a shit load of money

Define better.

looks like parkerizing

Better than i can say for my glocks, M&Ps, sigs, and CZs I've owned. any hasguns who owns autoloaders can tell you they'll fuck up a little here or there sooner or later.
2nding this

it goes bang every time with easily 4k rounds through it
accurate enough to keep 3 inch groups at 100yd
a nice clean trigger
fit and finish are right
better

>shooting a handgun at 100 yards
>thinks he's going to get 3 inch groups with any handgun at that distance
Just stop talking. You are outing yourself as the noob you are.

I shoot my handguns at that range
I spent the time and the money to get the skills
I'm not unique, you can do it too

Now you're committed to the lie. There is no deterring you.

if you're in the Tacoma area, come shoot with me
otherwise, shut the fuck up

Is a Remington 1911 alright?

You could always put stainless parts on it or save the extra hundred or so dollars and get a Springfield or low end Kimber. Personally I like the stainless Remington more for that price range.

it's a good start
out of the box it's ok but you'll need to spend some money to really get it to sing

a low end kimber isn't worthy of the SR1911
kimber is way over rated

shopwilsoncombat.com/1911-Accessories/departments/13/
you can get stainless everything here
you don't even have to do it all at once
a complete pin set is only $19
shopwilsoncombat.com/Complete-Pin-Set-Stainless/productinfo/315S/

Remington anything is complete garbage.

Ok

Probably a stupid question, but I'm thinking about buying a Springfield Range Officer, but I'd rather have something like Novaks for sights than what comes stock on it. What will I need to do to change the sights?

Attached: springfield-armory-range-officer.jpg (661x496, 211K)

going from GI to Novac sights requires a flat cut behind the rear sight dovetail
almost always it requires the dovetail itself to be widened
given how precise the cut needs to be, take it to a gun smith if you aren't a machinist

Wait, does it not have the same cut already? I thought it did.

Attached: Range-Master-L.jpg (900x576, 81K)

>Not seeing something stick out like a sore thumb in peripheral vision
Oh, so you're blind.

look at he cut on this pic and compare
in your pic, you have target sights with another cut all together
it's better to start with GI sights

Attached: baercustom.png (650x423, 211K)

Harrison Custom makes a fixed replacement for the adjustable sight.

You’ll probably have to change the front sight as well to keep poa/poi.

Get it. The first handgun I ever shot then Jow Forums convinced me to buy a glock 19.

which do you prefer

Im merely a gun finish realist