Smith 1911 for Bullseye

[Longfellow]

Opportunity to grab a basic, blued (108285) model and happen to need a base gun for a wad gun build. I never see anything but Springfields and Colts and customs on the line but I have no particular allegiance to them. I just need a solid base gun to send off to my smith, capable of the high volume of shooting. I know of the safety and ext extractor and am not concerned about the fixed sight as optics will be mounted.
Opinions / Thoughts?
Thanks folks.

 

[PPCSHOOTER]

IT SHOULD WORK FINE. BUT HAVING A PREMIER 1911 BUILDER WHO SPECIALIZES IN BULLSEYE GUNS I FEEL IS MORE IMPORTANT. TAKE A LOOK AT KC BELOW. GIVE HIM A CALL. HE'LL ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. JP

Home, KCsKustomCreations.com

 

[elpac3]

Take a look at Clark custom pistols as well: Page not found - Clark Custom Guns

Disregard the "page not found" it is really there

 

[rck281]

I think I would favor a forged slide over a cast one. They usually squeeze the slide to fit the rails. I don't know if the S&W is forged or cast.

 

[bobbyd]

Different builders have different experience and preferences in which model they like as a foundation.
Personally, I would first decide on the gunsmith to be used and then ask his advice in which gun he would suggest.

 

[Longfellow]

I've mentioned that I do have a Bullseye pistolsmith and he has no objections to working on S&W. I asked the question because this is the forum where I would think I might find fellow competitors who have put 20k-40k rounds through the aforementioned gun and could confirm they hold up as well as the Caspians, Colts, and Springfields that dominate the matches in my area.

 

[Troystat]

Isn't the extractor different on the S&W 1911's. If so that is probably one of the reasons you don't see too many bulleye S&W 1911's. I think in the bulleye world like many other competitive fields sucess breads imitation so that is why you see so many of the guns mentioned. For what it is worth I know if a bulleye gunsmith who just for ducks has made several bulleye guns with outstanding accuracy out of cheep Philippine made 1911's I seem to remember he even kept the stock barrel. From what I understand barrel bushing fit and slide to barrel fit is where the most accuracy gains over stock are to be had. That being said S&W parts are of high quality and I am sure your smith can make you a good one. If you do go that route show us pictures.

 

[Wise_A]

I would talk to the 'smith and then see about the gun.

The Springfield Range Officer is popular because it's really a workable gun right out of the box, and it's relatively inexpensive, especially compared to a Smith and Wesson. At most, a guy might either work on the stock RO hammer/sear/trigger or replace the hammer and sear, and then (maybe) do a little frame/side fitting, depending on the budget and the goals.

If you start off with too nice a gun, then you really could have gone with a full build using a Caspian frame and slide. If you try and do a budget build and start out with a cheap-o Rock Island, then by the time you're done making it suck less you could have just gotten yourself an RO.

FWIW, I use my Springfield Loaded and a Nelson conversion for rimfire BW. The work I've done on it:

--Replaced mainspring w/ 19# for .22 functionality and trigger pull, replaced MSH from the stock striped to a checkered for looks and grip.

--Replaced and tuned sear spring a couple times to lighten trigger pull

--Replaced grips for looks

--Added poor man's stippling (grip tape) to front strap

Haven't stoned a thing. Trigger is a crisp 2.7#. Shot a nice 286 this week--97 slow, 93 timed (ugh), 96 rapid.

 

[Wise_A]

Oh, and just remembered--

A few brands aren't worth trying to 'smith into a match gun because they simply can't be fixed. One of the more common problems that you'll see is in the frame holes for the hammer and sear pins. If they aren't properly and precisely located, then fitting a match hammer/spring combination requires filling and re-drilling the pin holes, at which point you might as well just a different frame. Remember that the engagement surface between the hammer and sear on a match gun is only .020", and is very frequently much shorter.

Anyways.

I would suggest talking to the 'smith first. Even then, the Springfield RO is a better choice due to price considerations. The SW1911 doesn't offer any advantages and costs more. If it's worth it to you to shoot a Smith, though, go for it.

 

[epj]

The S&W guns are high quality guns. Frames and slides are forged I'm pretty sure. I saw one right out of the box in a Ransom rest fire a one ragged hole group at 25 yards. This was a stainless base model E series gun just like mine. Other than a little trigger tuning, it might not need much to be competitive. An adjustable rear sight is nice to have, but not absolutely essential. It's an easy add on for any gunsmith worth his salt.

 

[Wise_A]

Yeah, but what's it like at 50? "One ragged hole" at 25 can very easily become a 5-6" group at 50. Anyways, I don't think I own a single handgun that can't produce a "one hole" group at that distance.

The E1911's are nice pistols, tight lockup, and a crisp break (lawyer-safe trigger pull weight, though), but they're not magic.

If you're gonna go through the trouble--and depreciation--of 'smithing up a gun anyway, I can't think of any special reason to justify one.