I’m looking at the Remington R1 and Springfield Armory Milspec (regular Milspec model and Defender version). Does anyone have any opinions on one over the other? I know the Remington is a 80 series with flat mainspring housing and dovetail sights. I also know the Springfield is a 70 series with curved mainspring housing and a staked front sight. The Remington frame is casted and the Springfield is forged.

I have a Springfield and my buddy has a Remington. I don't think you can go wrong with either as we are both pleased with our choice.

I would opt for the SA. Not a fan of the firing pin safety in the R1, but that's just me.

I'm very happy with my SA Milspec. I've never handled an R1 so cannot comment. It boils down to series 80 or series 70. Anything else can be easily changed up, mainspring housing, short VS long trigger, firing pins etc. One area people seem to be very pleased with is Springfield Armory's warranty & customer service. I've never had the need to utilize it but I have heard very good things, not sure about Remington these days.

I have a R1, blued, .45ACP, I bought it new, now it has 500 rounds shot through it, its a very nice gun, I had some issues with the original magazines, FTF issues, I replaced them with original GI issue magazines and its all ok now.It gives decent groups at 25yds with standard 230gr FMJ, off hand 4" ,for 5 shots,be sure to have the low front sight mounted, because, if not, if it has the tall one, at 25yds it shoots 3,5" low of point of aim!!!!, at 10 yds it is dead on with the high profile sight, about the same at 15yds from 20yds on it hits very low, you must compensate!!!

__________________
"Off we go..."

Had both, kept the R1. Better sights for me than the Mil Spec. Otherwise, no difference I could discern.

I've got an r1 carry, government size.... only complaint I have is that I didnt buy the commander too....

If you want to use GI holsters, keep the sights in mind.

I have both a Remington R1 and several Springfields. Both are outstanding pistols. I think you'd be happy with either one.
I will give Springfield an edge simply because of their excellent customer service if you should ever need it.

I will give the standard forum reply when choosing between two good guns. get them both. I did. To be truthful, I shoot the Milspec more often probably because of the finish, but they both perform very reliably and accurately. One detail that I did not know before I bought them was that they work best with 7 round magazines. The larger magazines that I have used, block the receiver from returning to battery. I am sure there are larger capacity magazines that work, I just do not know what they are, and as they are range weapons (so far), it has not really mattered.

Attached Images

	45ACPRemingtonR11911.jpg (48.0 KB, 62 views)
	45ACPSPRMILSPECB.jpg (83.5 KB, 61 views)

A great place to read all sorts of comparative opinions is over on the 1911 Forum.

__________________
John

I had both while both are fine 1911's I would go with the Springfield.

__________________
Randy

Remington = CAST

Springfield = FORGED

Need any thing else be said?

I ordered the Springfield Armory Mil-Spec model. The only thing I plan on doing is switching out the grips and replacing the stainless barrel bushing with a blued or parkerized one. I ordered the parkerized “non-defender” model.

I have a new R1 commander. its at a GS right now. It wouldnt even begin to feed HPs. The manual does recommend FMJ though. My Springfield Mil spec does fine. This is a bit older mil spec GI model, dont think they make it anymore.

Never handled a Remington. But I have shot the SA milspec and really liked it. And SA is a good company Ti deal with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I own a Remington R1S. I haven't had any problems with it, its a good shooter, that said I won it at a DU banquet. Forged steel is stronger that cast but, I really doubt you would wear it out in 5 lifetimes.

Personally, I'd be willing to roll the dice with Remington, but then again, I feel that Springfield Armory is overpriced considering that it's basically just the big name equivalent of European-American Armory, Zenith, or Tri-Star. Just an importer using the name of a defunct US Military Armory and charging a premium for said name.

So yeah, if I'm going to pay for a name, then I'd rather it be Remington, and from what I hear their 1911s are just rebranded Para Ordnance 1911s, so that's a darn good 1911 for the price, made by a well-known North American firearms company.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

If you plan on having the trigger tuned any good 1911 gunsmith will tell you that it’s much easier to tune up a 70 series and get better results. You can only do so much to an 80 series before your at your limits.

How about a tangible explanation regarding what practical difference that actually makes when it comes to modern manufacturing in terms of function/longevity, backed by current documented facts rather than assumption, supposition, or outdated anecdotal evidence?

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

S.A. 1911's are made in Illinois with forged frames and slides done in the U.S.A. You have to go back 7 or 8 years ago when they were using frames and slides by Imbel in Brazil, and further back then that when the whole pistol was by Imbel. And those are well made 1911's.
The polymer framed XD series are made in Croatia. Originally and still sold in Europe as the HS2000.

I bought the MilSpec Defender and paid like $375 for it last year. A freaking steal. Made in America. Forged frame. 600 rounds of FMJ and 100 rounds of Federal HST hollow points so far and no jams. The sites are competent and much better than the old GI style. Far better than any made in Turkey or Philippines gun.

The slide on the Remington is forged.... the frame is cast. Also made in America.

I personally wouldn't touch any Remington pistol with a ten foot pole with you holding the pole.

I say this as a person that a while back posted about recent experience with Remington 700 rifles. In addition to a recent purchase of a Remain that has the typical blind person fitting the wood to metal. Two phone calls & one online chat with the sorry excuse they call customer service has led me to no longer purchase anything currently made by them.

I'll stick to old mfg'd offerings from them. Sorry for the old man rant, but this Remlin experience has completely turned me off to them forever.

Get off my lawn.

ha ha

Cory

__________________
Cory
SWCA #3015 SWHF #465

I have a Mil-spec that I had made into a wad cutter gun. It shoots well.

I have a R1 and have no complaints. To be fair it’s the only 1911 I have and I have not shot the SA. I picked it up for $399 a few years ago on Black Friday. I’m sure there are nicer 1911’s out there but for the price I’m beyond pleased.

Cast vs forged: A properly cast M1911 receiver is every bit as good as a forged receiver, unless you plan on tightening the slide rails (pretty much only done on NRA Bullseye competition pistols). Both Remington and Springfield used slides milled from a bar of forged steel.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

Ruger parts are cast, as were MK III Browning 9mm's. Both are quite strong. The Brownings are stronger than with the former forged frames. Better metallurgy.

Caspian frames are also cast . IMHO if you plan on leaving it stock either will do . However if you plan to customize / modify get the SA . Bear in mind both have all MIM internals ( except barrels ) . A series 80 trigger can be made just as nice as a series 70 trigger with a tad more work . While personally I won't have a series 80 for a duty / defensive gun , not everyone feels that way . Again it comes down to what your intended purpose is & what upgrades you plan . I also believe an SA will hold more resale value than a Rem .

I don't think S.A. does a series 80 1911. Both of mine are 70's.
If I can make a comment, I really like 1911's, don't like mil-spec ones. Every time I shoot one I bleed from hammer bite. I also don't care for mil-spec sights. Tiny and the front has no dovetail. Costs to have someone machine the slide just to upgrade the sights.
I have a S&W 1911cs, a 5" Sig, S.A. RO 5" in 9mm and a just acquired RO elite compact also in 9mm. I would highly recommend any of them.

Based on how they sell, the Remington has not "caught-on" yet. You can almost purchase an R1 down closer to RIA prices....and I don't know why. I don't own an R1, but the Remington product line has always been a good one in any weapon they made....generally speaking and I do not see why the R1 would be any different. You can snatch and older 90's Springer mil-spec down in the $500-$575 range depending on it's finish and condition (blued vs. stainless). If you call it an advantage....the Springer has no firing pin block as such, so there are fewer movin' parts. SA handles the drop-test with a titanium firing pin and stronger FP spring.

I own Springers and Colts and I am not ashamed AT ALL that my Springers are mid-90's models that have "F. I. Brazil" on them. People don't seem to know that even the US made SA has a Brazilian blood-line. The parts are made "down there" and assembled "up here" to meet the conditions of being called made in the USA.

If I had to make a choice....I would pick-up a good older model Springfield as opposed to an R1. Most of which is because I know the Springer and it is a good solid piece and you can own one for less than the cost of a new R1, which is an unknown to me at this point.

Just to add, IMBEL is a world class arms manufacturer. None of the older S.A. models with Imbel parts manufacturing would give anyone a moment of grief IMO. And the 2 piece barrel assemblies on some of the older models are a non-issue. They hold up fine. Read up on how it's done sometime if you're curious.

I'd buy the Springfield but only because it's forged and S70. Springfield is very Colt like in a lot of ways. All of my 1911's are Colts.

__________________
That's just somebody talkin.

I guess my mid 80's marked 1911-A1 is even pre Imbel. Bought it as new at a show in 1985. A gunsmith had taken new SAI 1911s and reworked them for reliability/defensive use. Nothing radical, stuff that you would likely do for a carry piece. Fitted beavertail, Commander type hammer, Commander ejector, three hole trigger, King-Tappan sights (all parts were from Kings Gun Works), and so on. The guy knew what he was about, as everything was well fitted and ran perfect from the git go.

It is still my favorite 1911 to shoot, even over the Colts I have.

Rob

I beg to differ . The older 2 piece SA barrels while functionable are **** for accuracy . The newer one piece are much better . We have taken many SA 1911's fitted new bushings & larger diameter slide stops . They're capable then of holding the 10 ring on a 50yd slow fire target . Even better if you replace the internal fire control parts & do a good trigger job .

I have owned and shot dozens of 1911s. I have sold and traded away most of them, but the Remington R1 will never be let go. For me personally, it's the best shooting 1911 and I like it better than 1911s three times the price. I would choose the R1 over the SA 10/10 times.

__________________
Find a way or make one.

I picked my R1 up from the GS today, runs great now with the ramp work.

This is just about the funniest post I've read today. Asking for a tangible explanation "rather than assumption, supposition, or outdated anecdotal evidence," when you're most previous post shown below is full of "assumption, supposition, or outdated anecdotal evidence." Thanks for the chuckle.

__________________
Live long and prosper