I took two old friends to the range yesterday...a 1918 Colt 1911 and a 1943 Remington Rand 1911A1.

I shot one target with each. I'm not all that fond of shooting at bullseye targets, so I found these on a shelf at the range and used them.

I'd bought the 1918 Colt last year and this was my first time shooting it. I'd had it professionally disassembled, examined, and cleaned soon after I bought it. My gunsmith friend assures me that none of its internals have been replaced or modified.

This 98-year-old pistol performed flawlessly. And I do mean flawlessly. No failures of any kind. And unlike my newer Colt Series 70, it didn't ping one single cartridge case off my forehead! I am pleased with the results at twenty yards and a two-hand hold. I chose to shoot at twenty yards because for me, that's a more real-world combat range. I fired with a steady rhythm...not slow, not fast, and shot a total of thirty-five rounds through it.

There were no surprises with the '43 Remington Rand. It's familiar to me. Perhaps a bit too familiar, because I pulled a couple of shots completely off the paper...probably over confident. Fired thirty-nine rounds through it (burned up four odd rounds).

So I'll reiterate my familiar point about old G.I. 1911s for all the naysayers who believe 1911s have to be modified to fulfill their purpose. These aren't target pistols, and were never intended to be. They're bone stock 1911s, just two of millions manufactured for soldiers in two world wars. They aren't pretty guns (well, they are to me) with fancy sights and finishes and custom grips and barrels.

They do what they were built to do, which is put big fat heavy bullets downrange into a torso-sized target and do it consistently at realistic combat distances.

I'm no marksman, but at my age and with my eyesight, I'm pleased that I kept the majority of shots in the upper torso area. Most of the shots I made would have put a bad guy down, I think.

So if you want to have some shooting fun, take an old 1911 to the range with you. Don't try to be Jeff Cooper, just enjoy the pistol for what it is.

Oh, and the Remington Rand no longer has the sweetheart grips on it...it's gone back to its original Keyes grips.

Attached Images

5.jpg (48.4 KB, 16 views)

Nice! Put a little bend in the 70s extractor,should help keep it from clocking.

I actually had the extractor worked on, but not because of pinging me with empty cases (which really doesn't bother me...didn't do it that much), just haven't shot it since then. I had it worked on because it stopped extracting/feeding the last round in the mag. May get around to shooting it today. Also had the feed ramp polished and put a flat grooved MSH on it. And soon as I get one, I'll switch that MSH for a checkered one.

I had bought one of the new series 70s several years ago and it was doing the same thing I finally got around to tweaking it and swapping out several parts to get back to JMB's original idea,I really like the way it's turned out and shoots

Excellent!! The model 1911 was designed for one purpose and one purpose only. It was designed as a man stopper. Period. Oh sure, over the years folks have used it as a target pistol, a woods gun, and just a fun ol' plinker. But when "push comes to shove," it's pretty darn hard to beat for what it was intended for.

It's funny you should post this today, Watchdog, because I've got a dental appointment this afternoon and was planning on swinging by the range with a 1911 on my way home from the dentist.

God bless John Browning.

Oh, as you well know, the 1911 has been designated Utah's State Gun...so I almost feel like it's my state patriotic duty to throw a few rounds down range with one today.

__________________
Pack light and cinch tight.

What is the story on the picture grip panel? If I recall correctly this was a WW2 fad of sorts.

terry

Nice guns and nice shooting. Just can't beat those original 1911's.

No real story. I'd seen the sweetheart grips in the 2014 film, Fury, with Brad Pitt, and the idea appealed to me. Until the film, I'd been unfamiliar with the concept, didn't know they were an actual thing that G.I.s did during the wars. Not sure they were done as much on 1911s as they were on revolvers, though.

So anyway, the photo on the Remington Rand is my mother in 1933, when she was nineteen-years-old.

Yes. Browning was a true genius. There are some weapons designers who have literally changed the course of world history, not to mention firearms history. Anyone who knows anything about firearms, design, and engineering will attest to the fact that John Browning was one of them.

The 1911 is one of the most, if not the most, recognizeable firearms in the known universe. When people say ".45 automatic" (even though it's a semi) the image of a 1911 immediately pops into their brain. It's simply iconic.

I actually did not know that. A state gun? Will wonders never cease. Living as I do on the fringe of the most PC city in North Carolina, I can unequivocally say that North Carolina will never have a state gun. But at least we have a state dog (the Plott Hound).

Going off-topic for a minute or two here, I actually shot three targets yesterday. The third target (which I won't bore people by posting here) was with my EDC...a Glock 30S (Short Frame), which I shot just to reassure myself I'm still proficient with the thing. What a letdown after shooting the two 1911s. The results show a generically boring level of competency on my part with a generically boring dime-a-dozen pistol. I actually like the pistol and its results, but I despise the trigger. I have to concentrate too damn hard on technique to really totally like shooting it. Whereas the 1911s exhibit that "breaking glass rod" trigger pull, with the Glock it's like "How much more do I have to pull on this trigger to get it to fire?!?" I'm getting a phobia about it, I think. I'm starting to jerk the trigger. Not a good thing.

I've reached the conclusion that if I'm going to carry a smaller .45, I'd be better off with something other than the Glock. So I'm actively searching for an older Series 70 steel frame Colt Combat Commander, a blued one. And I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that I'm not going to find one in the condition I want for less than $1K. There are none available locally, so I'm gonna have to go online to find one.

So I reckon I'll see what happens.

Watchdog:

Just a couple of random thoughts here, don't mean to derail your thread. First, West Virginia has a state firearm also: the Hall BREECH loading flintlock rifle of 1819. It was first produced at the federal armory at Harper's Ferry. Ahead of its time, but they were used up until Civil War times.

Yes, JMB was THE firearms genius of all time. And the .45 ACP is one of the most effective cartridges ever devised, and the 1911 was probably one of the most brilliant firearms ever devised. I have a 1970s series Colt Gold Cup in 45, an original 1960s Commander in 38 Super, and what might be one of the best choices for a carry 45, a Kimber Ultra CDP II. It is extremely compact, has night sights, and is an absolute dream to shoot. I believe that it may be more accurate than my Gold Cup.

Here is the Kimber right after I got it. The girl that works on my office at school bought me the holster, and one of my boys bought me the Ivory grips. At the time that this photo was taken, the gun was pretty new, had only been shot a couple of hundred rounds, and was just being broken in. The holster had only been worn a few times. Sorry I don't have any recent photos. Will post some later.



I have not mastered putting video on this site yet, so bear with me on this, I'll figure it out eventually!!! Anyway, for the time being, heres a short video of one of my sons shooting the Kimber at our camp on the North Fork. It's his first time shooting the little gun, and his first shot was a bullseye. I think it startled him:

http://vid1083.photobucket.com/album...psrdbitywk.mp4

For comparison, here is my 1968 Colt Commander. Some one on another thread told me that these grips may not be original, but they were on it when I got it. At the time that this gun was made, all commanders were alloy framed, so they were just called "Commander":



Yes, I have Glocks also, I was given my 23 when I retired from police work, and have shot it extensively over the last twenty some years. I also have a Glock "Mini" in .40 S&W also. But as innovative as the Glocks were, they still, in my mind don't touch the 1911 platform.

If you haven't tried the Kimber that I mentioned, see if you can find one to shoot. Mine has never stuttered, and it shoots tight groups, if you can hold them. As you noted above, that may not be necessary, just getting into the vitals will usually get the job done, but I sure like that little Kimber.

Don't get me wrong, I am at heart a revolver man. I love the Smith and Wesson revolver, particularly the older ones. And I love the Colt revolvers, particularly the older ones. Not that there are any new ones to compare with.

Best Regards, Les

__________________
SWCA 3084, SWHF 495, PGCA 3064

Awesome write-up. As much as I like my Glocks and more modern 1911s, I love seeing old war horses like these make it out to the range. I have a 1944 mfg Ithaca that I take out every once in a while and I'm always satisfied with how well it stands up to current mfg'd equipment. Thanks for sharing

I've no doubt the Kimber is a nice pistol and an excellent choice for concealed carry...but it has more goodies on it than I need. Like the ambi-safety and that big beavertail and night sights. I guess I just like to keep things simple...and I've never experienced hammer bite with any 1911, so the original style grip/grip safety works fine for me.

It's funny...I'm not even particularly fond of the higher sights that came on my Mark IV/Series 70 Government Model. The gun came with 'em, that's all. When I shoot 1911s, I'm not even all that conscious of using the sights and having proper sight alignment unless I'm really concentrating.

I believe the grips are original. A friend of mine has a 1974 Combat Commander that he bought new, and the grips appear to be identical.

We're in agreement on Glocks...they're a generic polymer pistol with no character, no soul. I carry one, but I'll never really love it. And as I've said before, if I ever did have to use it in a defensive situation, I'm sure law enforcement would confiscate it for a while, or perhaps forever. But I could leave the house right now, visit the LGS, and replace it in less than an hour. It's pretty much the ultimate keep-it-boringly-simple pistol.

Watchdog:

A few years ago I bought a new made Colt Commander, which is what they now call the all steel version. It is a pretty nice gun, and less than 1K in price, but one thing that I was disappointed in was that it had a plastic mainspring housing. I ordered a steel one from Brownell's and replaced it, but then ended up selling the gun to one of my son's colleagues who wanted it more than I did. Later, I bought the Kimber, and guess what? It had a plastic mainspring housing too!! And it cost more than 1K. So I replaced it also. I suppose that they would hold up, but it seems a pretty petty cost saving move not to use real metal parts on such an expensive gun (either the Colt or the Kimber)



Anyway, this is not a very good picture, just a cell phone shot, but they have kept pretty much to the sprit of the Commander in this version (except for the MSH) and it is an excellent shooter.

Actually, I agree about the big beavertail and the ambi safety, I could do without them also. I have never been "bitten" by the standard hammer/safety combination either. But I was attracted by the compact size, and the potential accuracy, which was born out in shooting after I got it. But I usually pocket carry a 5 shot Smith J frame anyway, I am just an experimenter and accumulator of firearms.

Best Regards, Les

__________________
SWCA 3084, SWHF 495, PGCA 3064

See, this is one reason I'm always more interested in/looking for old stuff. Today's 1911s (and others) look mostly the same, but we all know they aren't. Maybe it doesn't really matter to newer younger gun enthusiasts and shooters, I don't know.

Some of my friends good naturedly laugh at my penchant for buying old guns. When I show up at the range with the old Remington Rand, the guy behind the counter always says, "Jim, you still shootin' that ol' thing?" He's ribbin' me, of course. Or he better be, if he wants my money.

It does, doesn't it? "Petty" is a good word. But I understand marketing and production cost efficiency. And I reckon over thousands of units, the savings mount up. It's just the way things are.

I'm not a match shooter. Don't shoot bullseye. I'm not chasing two-inch groups. Or groups at all, now that I think about it. To me, the extra doodads are like automatic transmissions in cars and trucks. I don't need 'em, and it's just another part to fail. Especially if it's MIM and plastic stuff. But I don't begrudge anyone their choices. Whatever gives the shooter gun confidence, competency, and accuracy is fine with me.

Well, WATCHDOG, I seem to remember that you were kind enough to drop by my thread http://smith-wessonforum.com/firearm...-twenties.html and the guns that I posted over there represent the sort of guns that I am most attracted to.... The first post was my 1925 Colt 32 and 25 automatics. To me that era through the 1950s represented the best of manufacturing and quality production that we will ever see in America, or anywhere else. That little brainchild of John Moses Browning, the 1903 .32 auto was sort of a testing ground for his ultimate achievement: the 1911. Well, I'm pretty partial to his 1892 and 1894 Winchester rifles also.

But I agree with you that those old war horses of yours are spectacular firearms, and simple to maintain, and don't have any thing they don't need, and have everything they do need. Plus you can completely detail strip one with no tools except the parts of the gun itself!! What genius is that?

Until I started that thread, I really didn't know that I had so many older guns. I also jave a bunch of colt revolvers from the 40s through the 70s. But that is another subject, for another day.

Have fun with your 1911s!!!

Best Regards, Les

__________________
SWCA 3084, SWHF 495, PGCA 3064