Colt 1911 " Rail Gun "

[Jarhead]

anyone have any experience with it? Critique ...............

[21SF]

I only have two things to say.

Its off roster and I want it.

[John Browning]

I wouldn't buy a current Colt 1911 for half off. The have some major problems, even with zero maintenance you should be able to get 12,000 rounds down the tube without the thing destroying itself. Lucky for Colt, the quality of their government contacts and lobbyists exceeds that of their products.

http://soldiersystems.net/2012/07/20/marsoc-winning-colt-guns/

[Jarhead]

Seems after Iraq and Afghanistan the Marines prefer the .45ACP vs the 9MM.

I wouldn't buy a current Colt 1911 for half off. The have some major problems, even with zero maintenance you should be able to get 12,000 rounds down the tube without the thing destroying itself. Lucky for Colt, the quality of their government contacts and lobbyists exceeds that of their products.

http://soldiersystems.net/2012/07/20...ing-colt-guns/

[John Browning]

Seems after Iraq and Afghanistan the Marines prefer the .45ACP vs the 9MM.

It seems that after the Phillipines, World War I, the Banana Wars, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan they prefer the .45 to the .38/9mm. I'm sure there is a good reason why.

I prefer the .45, but I sure would prefer it in something other than a modern Colt. If you're talking a Pre-1960 Colt, those are as nice as they get. What they churn out now isn't as good and far behind other competitors at the same price point.

[jonzer77]

I would ignore the Colt bashers on Calguns and go for it. I have more then a few of their new built guns and they have all been reliable and accurate. If it didn't cost so much for a railgun after SSE then I would grab one.

[Jarhead]

Colt did get a Marine contract for 12,000 M45's ( Force Recon and SOC Units )

It seems that after the Phillipines, World War I, the Banana Wars, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan they prefer the .45 to the .38/9mm. I'm sure there is a good reason why.

I prefer the .45, but I sure would prefer it in something other than a modern Colt. If you're talking a Pre-1960 Colt, those are as nice as they get. What they churn out now isn't as good and far behind other competitors at the same price point.

[jcaoloveshine]

Honestly, for the $$ Colt wants I would pass.

You can get a railed Sig for less, and I've been impressed with the features you get on a Sig 1911 for the price point. Normally those features (checkered frontstrap, checkered MSH, match trigger) are found on guns that cost more.

http://10-8performance.blogspot.com/2012/09/colt-rail-gun-first-range-session.html

[alaokytrid]

Colt did get a Marine contract for 12,000 M45's ( Force Recon and SOC Units )

That contract wasnt awarded based on product quality. Most of the colts that they tested had catastrophic failures, read the article linked above.

New colts are crap. Pick up a colt, shake it, it sounds like a glock. New 1911s have no reason to be that loose anymore.

[John Browning]

Colt did get a Marine contract for 12,000 M45's ( Force Recon and SOC Units )

...and the guns tested so badly that the guys doing the tests had to whistle-blow and post up the pictures I linked to. If you've been in the military (I have, and I'm guessing you have, too) we know that the number of things the military gets right in procurement are roughly equal to the things they get wrong. Doesn't matter if it is underwear or the oxygen system on the F22, they screw it up all the time. Government contracts do not mean they had the best product.

A handgun should not destroy itself after 12,000 rounds. Of the five guns in the firing test, only one made it to 12,000 rounds without structural failure. The test was supposed to run to 15,000 rounds, but the brass (at the urging of Colt) stepped in and put a stop to the tests. That is inexcusable, especially when modern polymer handguns like the M&P or Glock can run 50,000 rounds without maintenance. Hell, even the WWII 1911a1s have certainly run into the hundreds of thousands of rounds with cleaning and no spring replacement.

I'm a Colt afficionado (see my avatar, that is one of the first hundred factory Colt cartridge conversions ever made...$$$$$$$$) and have MANY of their products. However, I'm not about to let a rollmark warp my brain. They got the contract because of their government contracts, not because of their product. I recently had $1100 to spend on my brothers 1911 as a gift. I bought a Dan Wesson, and Colt was never even a real consideration.

[1911Luvr]

I have a Colt Railgun and was a POS out of the box! I've spent a lot of $$$$ on it to get it right and although I like it very much now, it was a poor value. I have since purchased a Springfield Armory MC Operator which is a much better built gun for similar money- except that the Springer is on the roster so there will be no SSE or CA premium for it.

[BBB114]

Colt rail gun

I have a Rail Gun and I love it. I did have a problem initially with failing to feed every now and then. I called Colt and told them of my problem and that it was unaccaptable as a duty gun. They emailed me a FEDEX label within 5 minutes and within 30 mins I was at the local fedex hub sending it back.

I received the pistol back in 2 weeks and have not had 1 malfunction in over 2500 rounds. Reloads, FJM, duty JHP, frangible.......it eats everything up.

I dont understand why people dump money into "fixing" a warranty issue. Thats why they give you a warranty, and they stand by it. If it doesnt work, send it back.

I also have a Springfield MC Operator. It is also a great gun, but its annoying that Springfield sets them all up at a 6 O'Clock hold causing you to print high at around 12- 15 yards......possibly missing a head shot.

The Colt is easier to disassemble / assemble due to parts fit for me.

Boyan

[wash]

That Colt in the trials had failures for three reasons, #1 stress risers caused by a sharp corner milled in to the frame at the rail, #2, stress risers caused by forward cocking serrations with sharp inside corners running over the end of the slide rail cut and #3, not changing the recoil spring which is a wear part and allows slide and frame battering when worn out.

If they changed springs at 5,000 round intervals, the other two problems might not show up. They still should have not built major stress risers in to the design.

I don't know why it hasn't been fixed.

[locosway]

My XSE has run 100%, while not a rail gun, it is a new Colt.

[John Browning]

That Colt in the trials had failures for three reasons, #1 stress risers caused by a sharp corner milled in to the frame at the rail, #2, stress risers caused by forward cocking serrations with sharp inside corners running over the end of the slide rail cut and #3, not changing the recoil spring which is a wear part and allows slide and frame battering when worn out.

If they changed springs at 5,000 round intervals, the other two problems might not show up. They still should have not built major stress risers in to the design.

I don't know why it hasn't been fixed.

Just to be clear, it wasn't "that" Colt, it was 80% of the trials guns that did that. You're right on the changes that need to be made. However, I've seen 1911a1s with recoil springs a full inch+ shorter than stock new ones. I have no idea how many rounds that takes, but my guess is a lot. The frames and slides were still fine, even though they were beat up. My bet is that these new slides and frames are cast as well as having the stressors you mention.