Jump to content
Practically Shooting

Llama 1911 .45acp value?


Pablo
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't buy a Llama anything. I bought two 380s in 1976 to carry when I traveled. They were cheap so If I lost them through the airlines no biggie. I would not ever buy a Llama. As for a 1911 there is nothing finer than a high quality manufactured one. The more you spent the happier you will be. Dan Wessons are really nice. Most 1911s over a $1000.00 start to be good. I am a stickler about 1911s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: G-MAN
or are these "1911 snobs"?

You mean like Steve S.?

I have shot many 1911s in various calibers and I can honestly say the more they cost the better they are to shoot . I am sure I have posted this before but I'll do it again. I was able to shoot a full out 1911 race gun It cost the guy big bucks more than I would spent. I finally realized what the term a trigger that feels like a glass rod breaking and accuracy means, I could go on and on. I also been able to shoot many times my buds Wilson combats he has two,very nice. I have shot many big buck customs ,Colt Gold Cups ,high end Springfields and Kimbers. None were mine. I really am impressed with the Dan wesson line they are really a bargain for what you get. You may be able to buy a bottom end GI 1911 that works just fine but a higher end 1911 will make life worth living as far as 1911s go. I would rather have a Glock S@W M@P or an XD etc. than a low end 1911.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get what Steve is saying, I think.

It costs a certain amount of money to build a good 1911. The 1911 design came from a time when people made guns, not just assembled them, and was designed accordingly. Labor was cheap, so guns could get more attention when made. The assembly line was a new and radical idea in manufacturing.

Not needing long hours of hand-fitting, the 1911 was designed for military service and didn't need near as much attention as most guns of the time. But it still got more attention than most guns get today. They were very specific over how it was to be made, and from what materials. The 1911 extractor, for example, was designed to be self-powered to eliminate a spring and other parts, which was a plus for a military gun. But it came at a price. Every extractor had to be made correctly and from the specific type of steel called for.

So while it doesn't need hand-fitting start to finish, a 1911 does have to be made right. That definition of "right" is narrower than with some other guns designed since assembly from parts bins became the norm.

So yes, it costs a certain amount of money to build a 1911.

If you spend more you might get more. But if you spend less, the savings have to come from somewhere. There is only so much room there.

If one is spending Glock money, get a Glock. If trying to get a 1911 for a Glock price, don't expect much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great input. I have nothing but time and learning at this point.

Trust me, I don't want a Glock! grin

Within manufacturers, take Springfield - are the works of the lowest starter models greatly different than upper models?

The "works" of any 1911, whether it's a $500 RIA made in the Philippines or a $2500 Ed Brown made in Missouri, are all essentially identical. The difference is in the fit and finish and the quality of the materials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: Pablo
Great input. I have nothing but time and learning at this point.

Trust me, I don't want a Glock! grin

Within manufacturers, take Springfield - are the works of the lowest starter models greatly different than upper models?

The "works" of any 1911, whether it's a $500 RIA made in the Philippines or a $2500 Ed Brown made in Missouri, are all essentially identical. The difference is in the fit and finish and the quality of the materials.

That's what I meant by "the works" - I fully understand they are nearly identical. The works meaning the entire package - OK the fit and finish are not so good in a lower Springfield vs. an upper Springfield. Maybe better steel alloys in the upper model as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trust me, I don't want a Glock! grin

Within manufacturers, take Springfield - are the works of the lowest starter models greatly different than upper models?

Nothing wrong with a Glock (if that's what one prefers). Just don't expect much of a 1911 for the going rate of a Glock. That should be obvious, but I guess not, because I see enough people spending $500 on a 1911 then trading it off six months later swearing off 1911s forever because "they are junk".

Sometimes you get lucky. When the Taurus 1911s came out, I thought they might do better. The first four sold to people I know of around here got dumped (sold or traded) within a month or two of purchase because of various little problems. That's a small sample, but still- four out of four? The next one I knew about is still going strong. It belongs to a guy I see at matches who has shot the living tar out of it and is happy as could be. You never know.

I think you do get what you pay for with Springfield (for example) up to a point...say, up through the TRP. After that, you still get what you pay for, but it gets harder to find the difference you bought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I was saying. I was not insulting the Glock, it's just that I have zero desire to own one. Sorta like me and BMW. Fine car, trust me I don't want to buy one.

Now if I some how could find a TRP for under $1000, I would raise my limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cain't afford the 1911 I want. So I ain't getting a 1911.

You probably will be happier with out, than with one you are not happy about. My self I would like a top end race gun and all the goodies but I can't justify $5,000.00 for a 1911. 1911s are cool but I wouldn't buy one,it is better to shoot someone elses 1911. The plastic guns are a better value for the $$$$ and will last as long or longer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the pictured gun is what they bought, I'm not at all surprised they had trouble. Whoever ordered them screwed up.

I have yet to find a compact 1911-type that I would trust, and I sure wouldn't order a bunch of them to issue. Maybe if I could place a big order and test them all to find the better ones for issue, but I doubt that would go over.

I haven't been here long enough to go on one of my rants about short 1911-types.

Now is as good a time as any.

Short 1911-types are a great way to ask for trouble.

No matter who makes it or what it costs, a short 1911-type will never be as reliable as a full-size.

Notice I said 1911-types, not 1911s. A 1911 is a steel frame, 5-inch barreled, 45 ACP chambered, single stack pistol. Variations from those listed things (and others) make them 1911-types, not 1911s. Those things are also risks. In my opinion, the farther one gets from that list, the more they gamble.

It's also my opinion that all pistols are most reliable in their original form. Some are fairly forgiving in this respect. The 1911 isn't one of them. It was designed to function in a certain form- as a military sidearm- with little or no inkling of people trying to use them as a belly gun.

When an auto cycles, a bunch of stuff has to happen. Each one has to happen within a certain window of time, and in the right order. When an auto's slide travel is reduced by shortening the slide/barrel, those windows narrow.

I was bored one day and measured the slide travel on some 1911-types.

Colt Gov't Model............. 2.136"

Colt Commander............. 1.945"

Kimber TLE (5").............. 2.144"

Kimber Compact (4")....... 1.923"

In the Colts, going from a Gov't to a Commander reduced slide travel by .191". In the Kimbers, going to a 4" reduced travel by .221". That's getting close to losing a quarter inch of slide travel, and that's a lot. Going to a smaller 1911-type like an Officers size the travel is reduced even more.

And maybe we should double that loss because the travel is shorter coming back and going forward both.

This is speculative and I can't prove it without instrumentation, but I have little doubt: In addition to traveling a shorter distance, I think the slide is moving faster too. It has less ground to cover for one thing, and for another it's lighter from the reduced weight. So now the "function window" is not only smaller, but time is compacted. The same functions still have to be accomplished at the right time, so that timing has to be even better.

So what I'm saying is: The shorter slide 1911-types are less forgiving.

If a 5" 1911 is fired and there is a small problem like a mag spring that's just a little weak, or a case rim is a little small and doesn't hit the ejector very well, the gun might still work just fine and you would never know the difference. If it happens on a Commander, it might work but you might feel it operate less smoothly. If it happens on an Officers ACP, it might malfunction.

The margin of error is reduced. I want that margin increased.

I don't think it's worth the risk in order to have a gun more or less an inch shorter.

After trying to get a trustworthy compact 1911-type, I gave up. There was always some sort of problem. If I would have found one that worked OK, I would have always worried it was right on the edge of not working. I went to full-size only for a while, but have been carrying a Commander-length S&W some in the last two or three years. I won't go any shorter than that in a 1911-type.

I love the 1911, but when I need a smaller gun...

I carry something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Springfield Mil-Spec that I paid about $625 for two years ago. Great gun. Has all the improvements I wanted on the original design and a fine looking parkerized finish. I've put close to 1000 rounds through it and the only thing I changed was the mainspring housing for a flat model for a cost of $2O. I did that because I don't like the round one and I wanted to get rid of the lawyer lock that the gun came with in the original MSH. All that crap about the only good 1911s costing a grand and up is crap.

Oh, and for my birthday this year my wife got me some aluminum slim grips from Brownells with the slim bushings and screws. So those parts have been changed, too. Fine looking gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: CamuMahubah
I cain't afford the 1911 I want. So I ain't getting a 1911.

You probably will be happier with out, than with one you are not happy about. My self I would like a top end race gun and all the goodies but I can't justify $5,000.00 for a 1911. 1911s are cool but I wouldn't buy one,it is better to shoot someone elses 1911. The plastic guns are a better value for the $$$$ and will last as long or longer.

I don't want a $5000 gun I want a $2000something gun...really bad...but not bad enough to get out the credit card...I'll pay cash someday.

http://edbrown.com/kobra.htm

That said I bet a Smith&Wesson for a thousand bucks would make me pretty happy. I really like the external extractor design on that one.

And ummm...I like the Springfields too! I just don't have the desire for 1911's like I do other platforms. The only one that makes me drool is the Ed Brown and I just want the "plain jane" Kobra in stainless.

That would be my one and only "Safe Queen".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...