Ruger has introduced a Commander style 1911. You can see pictures on the Ruger site. I may consider trading my full size for the smaller one. Of course, I probably won't see one for a long time. My LGS has only had 3 of the full size in the past year.

A must have for me, but it may be a long time coming.

That Shopkeeper Bearcat is cool too.

I'm putting you two on my "ignore" list.

Didn't really need to read this thread. That Bearcat

__________________
Doesn't hasta call me Johnson

I wish Ruger would produce the 1911 in .38 super to go with my .45. I am sure they will sell every commander they make in about 3 minutes. I have a Colt commnader in .38 super and it is a great gun to shoot.

__________________
Jim
Many K and N Frames

I was certainly interested in what would come next. In addition to being crazy about S&W handguns, I am equally smitten with the 1911 platform. Out of curiosity I purchased one of their 1911's. Out of sheer pleasure I will keep it. It is one of the best 1911's available in it's price range. I gave 649 plus uncle's 6% for mine at a time when most shops didn't have any and when the one's that did were charging MSRP (799) plus for them.

My only complaint was a little heavier trigger than I like and it was corrected with a Cylinder and Slide 31/2 pound match trigger kit. The SR1911 is now one of my favorite handguns to shoot. It has been stone reliable through 6-700 rounds and it's accuracy is nothing short of amazing.

I have a commander size gun by another maker so I won't be buying another, but if the Ruger full size is any indication of the quality to expect, then anyone wanting a 4 inch gun would do well to buy one.

I wonder why the Commander is 7+1 and the full size is 8+1 when the grips frame looks identical in size?

__________________
Dick

The Commander grip frame is shorter. I have one by RIA which is a very nice gun, but whenever the Ruger actually becomes available (maybe a year?) I want one also.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

Hmmm...according to the Ruger spec sheet, the height of both pistols is 5.45", which would make me believe that the grip frame is the same. As far as I know, all commander-length pistols are the same grip frame as full size, since they can accept the same magazines, grips, etc. If the SR1911CMD does have a shorter grip frame, that will be very unusual. Officer size and compact pistols do have a shorter grip frame, and take smaller grips and magazines.

It may well be that the commander is indicated as 7 + 1 because it ships with 7 round magazines. The full size SR1911 comes with a 7 round and an 8 round magazine. Many full size Colt 1911s are indicated as 7 + 1 capacity, and they have a full size grip.

The dust cover is shorter :-)

It is a neat gun, I looked at both the new commander as well as the SR45.

The magazine is the difference.

The FS SR1911 comes with both an 8 rd mag with bumper pad and a 7 rd flush fit.

The 8 rounders usually have a weaker spring & shorter follower.

Ruger Commanders are available right now on Gunbroker. They're selling in the $800+ range.

If you want to have an 8 round magazine, I'd buy some that were designed and built to have an 8 round capacity, like Wilson ETMs, and not just a 7 round magazine that has been modified.

It only took 6 months, the LGS had the commander model today. It really didn't seem to balance or feel all that much different from the full size. Of course, it is not a lightweight model, like the Colt can be. I don't think I will be trading my full size for it. But, if I were to win the lottery, I would probably buy it.

Remington has also introduced a Commander length 1911A1 pistol.

As far as the frames being the same?

Yes and no.

Genuine Colt Commander frames (and slides) have several differences from Gov't Models.

There are some manufacturers that merely shorten the barrel/slide.


I like my all-steel Colts , but my LGS had a few nice Kimber Lightweight models under $700 that got me thinking!.

I have a couple of full size 1911's that I carry occasionally. I like the looks of the Commander size, but I'm trying to figure out the purpose or advantage of carrying a Commander style.

- 1 3/4 inch shorter barrel gets you what exactly? I would suspect not more accuracy than a full size.

- Roughly same frame size and magazine capacity of a full size.

- I don't see where it's any easier to carry concealed than a full size.

- Less than 3 oz weight difference.

- Other than maybe a balance difference with the shorter barrel (I've not held one), I am missing the attraction to the Commander.

__________________
- Change it back -

The original Commander model was made as a lightweight 9mm for the Army. 3/4in shorter barrel/slide and Duraluminum frame.

The Army rejected it and American civilians didn't take the 9mm seriously and the gun was later chambered in .38 Super and .45 ACP.

The .45 battered the early aluminum alloy frames and in 70 or so , the steel frame Combat Commander was born. Modern , tougher aluminum alloys have improved this situation.

Might not be much weight savings in the steel-framed Commanders , but many did appreciate the slightly shorter length. I do as I often carry mine 'Mexican' , just tucked into my waistband. I do have one of those side-clip things I use.

I carried a LW Colt Commander .45 for work long ago; loved that gun--light, accurate, quick. Even had a set of ivories on it!

It finally developed a crack at the slide stop hole. I should have stop-drilled it, which might have saved the frame, but did not. I did manage to find a new frame, and sent it all to a top 1911 smith with instructions to make it 100% reliable with JHP ammo. Alas, it never achieved that. By that time my agency decided that the Commander was "too dangerous" and that since they had not trained me on it I was untrained to boot.

I eventually sold the gun with full disclosure that it was only reliable with hardball. But I miss it to this day.

I looked at the Ruger Commander--which I sort of like-- but these days I find the standard 1911 sufficient for my needs. I also harbor doubts that the quality of 2013 guns are better or more reliable than back in 1975.

Personally I'd like to see Consumer's Report articles on defensive guns being fired 6000 rounds with good defensive ammo with zero failures. Age issues aside, my 1913 Colt would probably do it with hardball.

Just like Congress, it shouldn't be about flash, it's about getting the job done right. Yeah, I'm a dreamer...

Modern magazines with redesigned feed lips have just as much to do with 1911 reliability with modern bullet shapes as do expert ramp & throat work.

The original mags were designed for GI-spec FMJ and that's about it.

The old Remington 185gr JHP+p bullet with it's ball-profile and large HP cavity was a great defense round.

I have a Ruger Commander and I have several standard size M1911 clones and one Colt Series 70.

I could never explain it when I held my first Commander years ago and still cannot but the minimal differences in barrel length really seems to make the "Commander" style point and handle more efficiently.

And I like standard size M1911 pistols.

My Ruger Commander had to have the feed ramp and barrel throat polished to handle 200 grain lead SWC's efficiently but other than that it is stock. I did polish the frame and slide though for a little pizzazz!

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

I love my '43 Ithaca and I often think about getting another 1911 shooter....and I know it will be a Commander size because I like the shorter slide...but I also am jonesing for a P220 Elite dark....I think the SIG will win out when my finances allow.

__________________
Thirty characters. Exactly...