Colt Commemoratives Crash

Status
Not open for further replies.
jmorris said:
Oh, you might like these then…;)

https://14kgoldteeth.com/
Click to expand...

Great link, I might need a pair soon!

As for Colt Commemoratives, last month at the local gun store handled a 1911 Unknown Soldier Commemorative by Colt. Highly polished. lots of gold inlay, and it rattled. I think it was going for a couple of thousands of bucks. I would have bought it for $500 to $600 just because it is a Colt, but I don't think I will live long enough for the price to drop to my level.

I was looking for a 1911 Tisas anyway, and got one. For $329 before taxes, I think I got the better deal.

GN6tc57.jpg

The Blue Book of Gun Values used to have page after page of Colt and Winchester Commemoratives. There is a commemorative for every day, occasion, and event. Might be a Pomegranate Pickers Commemorative, based on the number of variations. When a Pomegranate Pickers Commemorative drops in value, does it go "splat"?

Need to run out and buy a lot of cryptocurrencies along with those Commemoratives. My investment strategy is to buy high and sell low!
 
hawg said:
I want a Tisas Army model. Its about as close to a Colt GI as you can get.
Click to expand...
I bought the Tisas A1 black model. After a polish job, it feed on a empty case! Good gun for the money! will be looking for the Green GI model next
 
Slamfire said:
I was looking for a 1911 Tisas anyway, and got one. For $329 before taxes, I think I got the better deal.
Click to expand...
hawg said:
I want a Tisas Army model. Its about as close to a Colt GI as you can get.
Click to expand...
Hmm... I might have to look into one for my next GI clone build. From what I can see, the sights, hammer, safety, mainspring housing, and magazine (at a minimum) would have to be replaced. Does it have a Series 80 firing pin safety?

ETA: I see Tisas offers other models that might be a better starting point. And they have Series 70 internals. Biggest hangup is the lowered ejection port.
 
Last edited:
AlexanderA said:
Hmm... I might have to look into one for my next GI clone build. From what I can see, the sights, hammer, safety, mainspring housing, and magazine (at a minimum) would have to be replaced. Does it have a Series 80 firing pin safety?

ETA: I see Tisas offers other models that might be a better starting point. And they have Series 70 internals. Biggest hangup is the lowered ejection port.
Click to expand...

The Tisas, my RIA, my Charles Daly, and my ATI are all series 70 actions.

I did replace the "Commander" type hammer with a "GI" type hammer.

Ki0n1x3.jpg


I am not a cocked and locked type. The original pistol was designed by John Browning with the "safety position" being the half cock. I think lowering any hammer by thumb alone, which is what John Browning intended, to be so risky as to be insane. Many users lost control of the hammer when they used the thumb. The Army first intended carry mode was round in the chamber, hammer down. The thumb safety was there at the instance of the Cavalry, to make the pistol safe with one hand, as the other hand was controlling the horsey. When horsey issues were settled, troopers were supposed to unload, or, make safe by lowering the hammer all the way down, before putting the pistol into the flap holster.

I use the middle finger of the support hand as a hammer block, and the forefinger fits into the hammer spur, when lowering the hammer

NO6n9Rg.jpg


5HYV4lv.jpg

I use the forefinger to block the downward movement of the hammer, and I get the trigger finger off the trigger to ensure the half cock engages the hammer. I pull out the middle finger slowly, get that hammer on the half cock, and re position my hand. At half cock there is no space left for a blocking finger, so I have to control the hammer with the forefinger in the hammer spur. With the hammer on the half cock, I lift it gently till I feel the sear clear the half cock notch, pull the trigger, and slowly lower the hammer with the fore finger.

This is something that cannot be rushed when there is a round in the chamber!

sEp9lnF.jpg

The Commander type hammer does not provide enough of a rest to be controlled by the forefinger. So I removed it. I much prefer the wider, early GI type hammer on a 1911 as it was designed to be easy to thumb cock.

Pistols with beavertails block access to the hammer and it is positively dangerous to attempt to lower the hammer on a loaded round no matter how many hands and fingers you use. I have played with my beavertail 1911's and the only one beavertail that allows condition two carry is the old Clark beavertail.

zW8wZuT.jpg


This arrangement of hammer and grip safety preclude any carry mode but Condition 1 or Condition 3. And the long thumb safety has to be ridden by the thumb.

tBNBgr0.jpg

Personally, I consider the Tisas ready to go with the GI hammer. If you want an arched mainspring housing, go for it. I find shooting with one hand, the arched housing has its benefits by making a tighter grip.


puM83SO.jpg


I have short fingers so the trigger is the right length. The GI grip safety will wear on the web of your hand, but it is easy to get around and thumb cock the action. Beavertail grip safeties made access to the hammer difficult to impossible, though they are very comfortable to use.

I don't ride the safety, the GI configuration pushes the hand down, and the GI safety is small enough that your thumb has to be way out of position to bump, and it is only bumped out of position if the spring is very weak. However, if you plan to have an extended safety, riding the safety is imperative as the length of an extended safety over powers the spring/indent and makes rotation of the safety very easy. And you would need to go to a higher grip safety to get your hand up and in position for thumb riding the extended safety.


The sights are fine on the Tisas and ATI.

GQeGIs8.jpg


6gw4zjM.jpg

They are all regulated for a 230 grain bullet going 800 fps. Which is fine for me. I have shot 185 JHP's and the difference in point of impact is trivial at 7 yards. Assuming there is a way to figure out the group center.

FdliUXS.jpg


okqXfvY.jpg

The RIA and Charles Daly have short rear sights and thin blade front sights, which are closer to the WW1 era sights. Those sights are great for twentysome's shooting against bullseye targets, but horrible otherwise. If you have ever shot Bullseye Pistol with irons, being able to get a precise 6 OC hold will get you better, tighter groups. Fat front sights, which I consider better in all other circumstances, are blobby when pushed into the bull. This is an example where training simulations resulted in sub optimal sights in the real world. The tiny M1903 front sight is another period example. Great in a 6OC hold at the bottom of a 5V bull in bright sunlight, but horrible every where else. What is now NRA Highpower and Bullseye, and are fun precision games, was considered combat training between WW1 and WW2. And what you see as sighting systems in the weapons of the period reflect what is necessary to shoot high scores on contrasting paper targets with round, black bulls. And there were those who defended the tiny sights, because they really and truly believed paper punching represented combat conditions.

RIA rear sight, short, small notch. Front is a thin short blade.

fVALrLI.jpg

w2d4YUL.jpg

The Charles Daly front and rear are similarly thin and short.

lRbdZ5Y.jpg

in good light conditions, you can still group at an acceptable distance with the things, but I consider the original WW1 sights to be sub optimal.

qmfUHjK.jpg

CmquQAl.jpg

All of these inexpensive 1911's are tighter than any Colt Series 80 I own. And they are tighter than the average new Colt I have handled. There was one new Colt I handled that was as tight, but three to four times more expensive.

If you get one, ask the guy behind the counter to let you pick the best out of three. And take an oil bottle and drip oil on the slide rails, muzzle at barrel bushings, barrel hood in slide, and trigger sear. That way you can feel the smoothness of the slide rack, and get a realistic appreciation of the trigger pull. Dried oil will give a false trigger creep and may create lock up issues on a new piece. I lubed the ATI, the Charles Daly, and the Tisas to bring the pistol to the level of lubrication I use them, and then cycled them, pulled the trigger, checked the muzzle to barrel bushing fit, the barrel hood/link tightness, and slide to frame fit.

I am amazed how modern machining has made these inexpensive pistols tighter than the Colt NM pistols of the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's. And the materials are outstanding. Tisas Customer service said their pistol is M4065 steel. Could not find that but did find MIM4065 and the material properties were very good. The Charpy impact of MIM 4065 is very good, this is a good tough steel, which is desirable for a high fatigue life in an impact loading environment. The RIA, ATI, and Charles Daly are all 4140 steel, which is also greatly superior to the original GI SAE 1035 of the frame, and 1050 of the slide. The only GI heat treatment was for the first two inches on the slide. A bud suggested slide noses broke off before the heat treatment was phased in. I have no idea if the slide and frame were surface hardened by a salt bath, or gas nitriding. I doubt it, they are probably dead soft. The GI 1911 choice of materials and heat treatments were the minimum necessary for a 6000 round lifetime. They were not built for the ages.

PeiHoiv.jpg
 
Last edited:
I don't ride the thumb safety on my Rock Island or any other 1911 and it's not hard to decock altho why you would want to is beyond me. The Tisas army model is much closer to a GI model except for the lowered ejection port.

8ATLm3fl.jpg
 
hawg said:
I don't ride the thumb safety on my Rock Island or any other 1911 and it's not hard to decock altho why you would want to is beyond me. The Tisas army model is much closer to a GI model except for the lowered ejection port.

View attachment 1114502
Click to expand...

I never had a 1911 with the higher ejection port, was told that it dented brass. The higher sidewall could have been there to prevent cracking with the cheap 1050 steels of the era. I think 1050 is now lawn mower blade material, tough, easy to sharpen, impact resistant, and cheap, cheap, cheap. I am absolutely sure the military cared not one whit about your dented brass or reloading other than to collect the brass and turn it in, and get the scrap value.

I do not know when the lowered ejection port began, I remember being on the phone with Colt Customer Service in the early1980's and talking to some Colt representative who had made sure the lowered ejection port was in my Colt Combat Elite. My Bill Wilson The Combat Automatic (1984) probably recommends lowering the port. If you get a copy of that book, look how many of the features which at the time required sending your 1911 to a gunsmith, are now standard! Basically, you purchased a Colt, which was hard to find, took off most of the parts, except frame and slide, and replaced them all.

I have never lived with the higher ejection port, and am happy with the lowered.

Why I don't trust a cocked and locked 1911 is a very long discussion in itself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

rdstrain49
  • Locked
Any thoughts on Colt 2nd Gen.?
Replies
13
Views
861
TheRodDoc
T
Redcoat3340
  • Locked
Commemorative Revolvers: What's the Story???
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
MI2600
M
arcticap
  • Locked
Colt Cochise Commemorative
Replies
10
Views
2K
Smokin_Gun
S
arcticap
  • Locked
2011 Pietta Starr Commemorative - 150th Civil War Anniversary
Replies
2
Views
282
1KPerDay
1KPerDay
S
  • Locked
Robert E.Lee Commemorative 1851
Replies
16
Views
2K
Matchlock
M
Back
Top