Springfield vs S&W 1911

[boy&hisdogs]

So, I'm stuck. I want a 1911 but can't decide which one. Money/time/hassle being no object, I'd go with the S&W E-Series, but those are off-roster and extremely hard to find for sale used in CA, so I'd have to order it either new or used from out of state and have it SSE'd. Since I live on the central coast I'm at least $200 in gas away from any other state, so anything bought outside CA I wouldn't be able to check out in person.

Or I could just go down to my LGS any time and buy one of the half-million Loaded Springfields they have in stock, which costs less than the S&W to begin with, even before SSE costs, out of state transfer, and shipping.

What would you guys do?

[TMB 1]

I'd just get one that's at lgs

[tacticalcity]

Well if money is no object you should be looking at Ed Brown, Wilson Combat, Nighthawk or Les Baer. Now those are some nice 1911s.

So I assume money is an issue to some degree since you're looking at guns just above the entry level mark for 1911s.

There are a lot of other really nice contenders at that level as well. I personally don't have experience with the two 1911s you are considering. Been reading a lot of negative things about Springfield's quality and control lately. They have a huge following in their camp, and an equally huge camp of detractors. So I've been leery to go there. That said, so does Kimber and that is the brand of 1911 I've owned and really enjoyed. The Custom II can be had for a little bit less money with much the same features as a Springfield Loaded. I enjoyed mine a lot.

I shot a Sig 1911 recently. Was very impressed by it. I also had a chance to checkout the ParaOrdnance line at Shot Show. Amazing trigger, more of what you would expect from a 1911 at twice the price. If I were in the market for another entry level 1911 I probably would give a Para a try. I was that impressed by them. Seeing and feeling really is believing with them. I would never have thought I would feel that way before getting to handle and dry fire them right next to a laundry list of other 1911s at SHOT show. You don't see them that often here in CA. But I was really blown away by them.

Ask a dozen 1911s fans which one you should get and you will get 12 different answers my friend. Sorry.

[pklin1297]

Like Tacticalcity, I own several Kimbers and have found them to be very accurate, tight, and overall great guns, but QC issues have plagued them in recent years (mine were at least 10 years old)...

If it matters at all, almost all of the custom 1911 builders I have had a chance to talk to and have work done by (Chuck Rogers, CT Brian, Ned Christensen, et. al.), will not do full custom builds on guns that do not say Colt or Springfield on them. They may do some simple tuning and/or minor cosmetic changes however. Maybe they have changed their tune as of late, but if you want to eventually get work done by one of these master craftsmen, I would keep that in mind...

[fmunk]

So, I'm stuck. I want a 1911 but can't decide which one. Money/time/hassle being no object, I'd go with the S&W E-Series, but those are off-roster and extremely hard to find for sale used in CA, so I'd have to order it either new or used from out of state and have it SSE'd. Since I live on the central coast I'm at least $200 in gas away from any other state, so anything bought outside CA I wouldn't be able to check out in person.

Or I could just go down to my LGS any time and buy one of the half-million Loaded Springfields they have in stock, which costs less than the S&W to begin with, even before SSE costs, out of state transfer, and shipping.

What would you guys do?

It's YOUR money. What would YOU do? Which one do YOU like more?

In terms of quality, they are equals. There is no need to see one in person. If there is a problem upon delivery, return it to the seller. If there is a problem after DROS, contact S&W Customer Service promptly. S&W CS is said to be the best by many in the industry. From my own experience, they are far more prompt in responding than any other (within a day, in my case).

It all depends on what you want: be one of the herd, or something less common. If the Smith is what your gut really wants, settling for the Springer will never scratch that itch; it will nag at you. And, after 1/1, it will all be too late.

http://www.slickguns.com/product/smith-and-wesson-sw1911-45acp-stainless-ports-133294-shipped

[Lead Waster]

Get the Springfield and get in on the "3 free mags and pouch" deal. No brainer!
No SSE, excellent gun, bonus mags!

[boy&hisdogs]

Ask a dozen 1911s fans which one you should get and you will get 12 different answers my friend. Sorry.

Yeah, I figured some of this would be going on. The S&W seems to have the smallest detractor to fan ratio (from what I read on the internet at least). I was leaning away from Kimber because of the inconsistency. I have a friend at work who shoots IDPA with his and he's got nothing but good things to say about it. On the other hand, I have an uncle who used to CC a Kimber Carry, but it was constantly giving him issues. I hear both extremes all the time. Some people have 5 Kimbers that have ran flawlessly for 10 years, and some people who can't shoot a full box through theirs without a malfunction.

[tacticalcity]

If I remember correctly from previous posts Lead Waster has a lot more experience with 1911s than I do. So if he thinks the Springfield is a good deal, I'd tend to believe him.

Your uncle may have had a compact Ultra (Officer size) 1911 if he was carrying it concealed. Those small 1911s (regardless of brand) tend to be really quirky. As a rule of thumb, the 5" versions tend to give people less trouble. That said, you will find people who carry the small ones without issue. It is all hit and miss. Plus like you I am getting most of this from what I have read here and not what I have experienced in real life. I've only owned one 1911, a Kimber Custom II entry level gun and loved it. Sold it to help raise money to buy my house (along with the vast majority of my collection). My father owns a Sig 1911 and I was really impressed by it, though the trigger is heavier than my Kimber's was. I also spent a couple days a Shot Show comparing all the various 1911s through dry firing them...which is not the same as owning them but is unique in that you rarely get a chance to handle so many different brands one right after the other. You would be surprised how many I thought I would like, and did...but liked something I thought I would not like better.

The thing about the S&W is that you are also starting off with a much smaller base to begin with. Like Remington, or Ruger they have a pretty small segment of the 1911 market despite having been in the 1911 game for a while. That is not necessarily a bad thing. S&W has so many different models they don't throw their marketing into them all that heavy and that effects market share. Their Shield line being the exception to that rule. I am sure they make an excellent gun. I know I was considering one for a while before I found a smoking deal on a Kimber and went there strictly based on price. But I am also sure that to some degree the fact that less people have tried them explains why they get less hate mail. Haters are gonna hate whether there is a problem or not. The bigger you are, the more haters are gonna react to that. So you never know if there really are issues, or people who never should have gone down the 1911 road are just being the jerks they are by nature.

Odds are both are great choices. I just don't have first hand experience with them to know. There are just so many choices these days. More than ever before. Makes it hard to know. But I am betting you will LOVE whatever you buy. It is really, really hard not to like a 1911 no matter who makes it.

[fmunk]

Well, I've owned both and there no difference aside from superficial ones. You may hear less about them here, but that is because few Smiths are on the roster. Springfield is a natural choice for the masses simply because people associate old pattern guns with the Springfield name. 1911s and M1As. For many years, that's all they made. Without counting the CA SSE markup, side-by-side, I'd say the Springers are a little on the overpriced side. It's like Nike shoes vs Merrell. Both are similar in construction, materials and function. You pay a little more for the widely recognized Nike brand name.

Free mags and mag carrier is nice, but not a huge deal. 1911 mags are relatively inexpensive. If saving money was the objective, I'd say get a Sig 1911 TacOps. All the bells and whistles with 4 mags right out of the box at around $1000 with SSE and DROS. No manufacturer's rebate/offer form to fill out and wait for weeks for the "free" mags to arrive.

The Smith and Springer are gone, and I still have the Sig.

[nahpungnome]

S&W doesn't make 1911s, the purists will say (external extractor), but the people that have them enjoy them very much. Both companies provide excellent CS. The E series are definitely nice looking 1911s. I'd probably go for that over the Springfield since the roster doesn't affect those.

Take a look at Sig 1911s also, I enjoy mine very much.

[boy&hisdogs]

Well, I've owned both and there no difference aside from superficial ones. You may hear less about them here, but that is because few Smiths are on the roster. Springfield is a natural choice for the masses simply because people associate old pattern guns with the Springfield name. 1911s and M1As. For many years, that's all they made. Without counting the CA SSE markup, side-by-side, I'd say the Springers are a little on the overpriced side. It's like Nike shoes vs Merrell. Both are similar in construction, materials and function. You pay a little more for the widely recognized Nike brand name.

Free mags and mag carrier is nice, but not a huge deal. 1911 mags are relatively inexpensive. If saving money was the objective, I'd say get a Sig 1911 TacOps. All the bells and whistles with 4 mags at around $1000 with SSE and DROS.

The Smith and Springer are gone, and I still have the Sig.

I just looked and Buds has the railed E-Series for 1065, and the un-railed for 776. That's hard to beat for a Smith. Sigs seem like a solid gun but I can't get past that extra line on the slide. I want a 1911 that looks like a 1911, not just another generic Sig. I know that's really trivial but with so many choices all around the same price then why not?

Like fmunk said, my gut wants an S&W. My grandpa carried on during his career as a LEO and it's saved his bacon a couple of times, and he still carries it to this day. I know that just one gun isn't a very scientific study, but it's hard to argue when he's been carrying and shooting it on a daily basis for longer than I've been alive with no major complaints.

[boy&hisdogs]

S&W doesn't make 1911s, the purists will say (external extractor), but the people that have them enjoy them very much. Both companies provide excellent CS. The E series are definitely nice looking 1911s. I'd probably go for that over the Springfield since the roster doesn't affect those.

Take a look at Sig 1911s also, I enjoy mine very much.

The external extractor is such a small deal. I don't care about internal vs external as long as it works.

Besides, Our Lord And Savior John Moses Browning went along and put an external extractor on the Hi Power. There must have been something to it to made him go external.

[Spawn]

Just get the S&W

[TMB 1]

Like fmunk said, my gut wants an S&W.

Then you should get the S&W

[gigante]

I own 1911s from nearly every mfg. from Les Baer on down, with multiples of some mfgs., and in 3 different calibers. If I were to keep only one, it would be the Baer. If I were to keep only 2, it would be the Baer and the S&W. I have nothing negative to say about any of them as they have all performed well for me, but in my experience, they are not all the same. I love shooting my Smith. It gets more range time than any other of my 1911s, the Baer included. My brother bought an E series, and i have been trying to pry it away from him, to no avail. I doubt you will be disappointed with S&W