Gold Cup vs something else

Status
Not open for further replies.
I always hear this statement, and it begs the question,”Why?”.
If another pistol is better, for the same price, why would a Colt hold value better?

Not singling you out, I just hear it often and the logic does not fit my brain.

I'll share a (somewhat) related anecdote:

I used to hang out quite a bit on the 1911Pro forum before it was shut down. This was an insiders forum made up of the top rated pistol smiths (you had to be approved to join, so I'm not not sure why they let me in. Probably because I said "please") and they shared a lot of detailed build info. and heavy technical stuff (lots of pics of how they did their milling machine set ups, how they measured parts, etc....). Really cool stuff, even if most of it was a bit over my head. The opinion there seemed uniform that if a customer wanted a full custom job done on their pistol, they wanted the customer to acquire and send them a Colt to build on.

I think historically there are more Colts out there and their geometry is the base line from which most aftermarket parts are designed. So they have more confidence that things will fit correctly with minimal fitting or additional machining.

When the Remington came out with their R1, one of the smiths there did a full build on it and detailed having to do a lot of extra work to get everything fitting correctly. He turned out a beautiful gun in the end, but it was a longer, harder path to get there.
 
he older Gold Cup models have several differences from the standard 1911 pattern. The Gold Cup triggers are wider, so the channel in the frame for the trigger has special Gold Cup dimensions. There are very few aftermarket triggers available for the Gold Cup. The barrel shroud is also different, so only a Gold Cup barrel will fit. And the older Gold Cup models also have different sear, as well as a sear depressor and a tiny spring.

The modern re-issue of the S70 GCNM (in blue) does not have the wide trigger, nor the sear depressor/spring. It has a standard width light weight aluminum trigger (with 3 holes in it)... so it's not prone to trigger bounce... making the sear depressor unneeded/obsolete.

I'm not sure about the barrel shroud. I'll have to check it vs. my commander tonight.
 
Colt or Dan Wesson would be my pick in a 1911 under $1500 dollars . I have a Pointman and a 70 Series . I sold a TRP , Kimber Compact Stainless and Ruger . The Ruger IMO is a good budget 1911 . I didn't like the sharp front strap and ambi. safety on the TRP . Nothing really wrong with my Kimber , sold it to buy the TRP , mistake .
 
My old friend ! I traded my older series 70 for a new Stainless series 80 when they came out. Then spent $1500 changing back to series 70 target format and other tweaks . Finally these days my son has it and has had the slide cut for a low mounted RMR ! It is finished ! as is said at Easter :)
practicalstuff037_zpsa6ac0864.jpg
practicalstuff038_zpsede3245f.jpg

Those are Esmeralda Flute grade Ebony grips .
 
I have two stainless Gold Cups from very late 80's early90's One is standard .45 the other is a Delta Gold cup, 10mm auto. The 10 will outshoot the .45 any day.
 
Not trying to be persnickety, but what is your "cut-off' date defining "older"?

Please keep in mind, I'm not advertising myself as a 1911 expert or Colt expert.... just trying to share some of the things I've learned. The term "Gold Cup" and "National Match" have been used to describe several different pistols over the years..... but outside of the Camp Perry scene (the true National Match... where stock pistols are never going to make an appearance) they mostly refer to these two guns:

new_old_series70_GCsC_zps9ral6vqy.jpg

The one on top is the "classic" Gold Cup from the 80's (wide steel trigger, adjustable rear sight, sear lever w/spring, GC sear & hammer, etc...)

The one on the bottom is the ~2015 re-issue of the Series 70 GCNM (AL trigger, no sear lever/spring, etc...)

When I say older, I mean prior to the 2015 re-issue.
 
Gold Cups produced in the 1960's and maybe the early 1970's are probably the "cat's meow" for accurate M1911's.

That said, the current cataloged Gold Cup National Match pistols are pretty good and probably better than most folks can shoot them.

I'm happy with mine.

I've had both old and new, and have found the new ones more accurate. Here's mine with a target from 30'. I had the Series 80 parts removed and put on an arched MSH. The rubber factory grips make it comfortable to shoot.

I had a Dan Wesson Valor, it was nice but didn't like the too sharp front strap checkering, it also had a rattling grip safety. I actually shot the Colt better than the Valor. 002_2.JPG
 
Last edited:
Can anyone provide insight into the use of MIM parts,

Well, that is the process used to make the connecting rods in Formula One race engines...
If it can keep a piston attached to the crankshaft at ten thousand RPMs, it should be fine for an assembly pin.:)

What parts are MIM in a Colt? Oh. That, I don’t know.

The real question is, Arched or Flat?
Choose correctly, or we can’t be friends anymore...




The 1911. Custom grip modules, before custom back straps were even cool.:cool:
 
Go to 1911forums.com for the answer on mim. I think disconnector and mag release is mim. MSH prolly polymer.
 
I ended up getting my answer over there and ordered one. Put some Altamonts on it. Taking it out for the maiden voyage this morning

3qsamff.jpg

oQuVRGe.jpg

Stunning beauty. While dry firing, the trigger superb.
 
MSH prolly polymer.

On the several new Colt 1911's that I have purchased over the past few years, they all have a polymer main spring housing. I think they are were flat main spring housing but I have slept a bit since then.

In any case, since I prefer the arched main spring housing, I've replaced them with metal mainsprings housing. If any were polymer arched mainspring housings, I just swapped them out anyway.

Of course, aftermarket metal flat mainspring housings are available.

I've not heard of any problems with the polymer mainspring housings, it just conflicts a bit with my archaic engineering background.:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top