SA 1911-A1 desirability?

[RA40]

I have a Springfield 1911-A1 bought back in the mid 90's. Ser# NM118XXX.

Wasn't sure if the newer or older ones may have more appeal? I'm debating selling as they are readily available to replace if I should miss it.

Thoughts and or history on some of their offerings over the years?

 

[CoalCrackerAl]

Sellers remorse stinks. If you don't need the money keep it.

 

[bannockburn]

RA40

I think I got my SA M1911-A1 about that same time period. I originally got it to have it customized into a gun for IPSC. But then life got in the way of things so that never came to fruition. So I have it still in it's original factory condition, using it as a blueprint for when I built my own M1911 from the frame on up. It was very helpful to have it completely apart as I could then see how my gun was supposed to go together based on what I could see in the SA version.

Wanted to give it to my B-I-L but his wife won't let him have any guns in the house. Too old to start playing a young man's game even if I got it customized today. As such I keep it around as a sometimes vehicle gun. Still I have no immediate plans to sell it or trade it in on something new.


This is the gun I built after studying my SA 1911-A1; an Essex frame with a TacSol .22 conversion assembly on top.

 

[Howland937]

There's been quite a bit of back and forth with really no clear answers that I've seen. Springfield used bunches of frames made in Brazil over the years, but (someone help if you know) sometime in the late 2000's, were making some of their frames in house.

To people who care about those things, knowing where your frame was made could affect the appeal.

On the whole, I've not seen anything that suggests earlier or later is more desirable. If it runs well, you shoot it well, and you like it you might as well keep it.
1911's are pretty simple but can be a little fickle...though they do make new ones every day, you aren't guaranteed to get another one as good (or bad) next time.

 

[Bazoo]

I think all their frames were/are forged in Brazil but some were finished here and can be marked made in USA. I don’t care either way. It’s a good gun either way.

 

[JTQ]

I think all their frames were/are forged in Brazil but some were finished here and can be marked made in USA. I don’t care either way. It’s a good gun either way.

They were. Springfield ended their arrangement with IMBEL of Brazil about a decade ago.

There was an era of two piece barrels that had some interesting failures that were posted on the internet. However, most gunsmiths that I've seen posting on the subject have commented the two piece barrels were fine.

 

[Tacoma]

Having owned both, I feel the newer SA 1911's have considerably better fit, finish and triggers than the older models. I'm not saying the older ones were bad, just that the newer ones are more refined as is true of many current production 1911's today. Production methods and tolerances have just greatly improved over the years.. As I've aged, my school of thought has evolved into : If I don't love a gun enough to shoot it regularly,, and it is replaceable for similar $, then it's likely going to get sold/traded towards something I do love. ( i.e No more owning "just because"" ) FWIW, my 1911-A1 is long gone but I still keep a recent SA Range Officer 1911 in 9mm that has become a real favorite. It shoots right up there with my $$$ SW Pro series 1911 9mm.at a fraction of the price.

 

[md7]

SA has a good reputation for making production class 1911’s that work. That’s been the case for a while, and I doubt a good example from one era vs another era has any different appeal or value in the market.

 

[9mmepiphany]

Hilton Yam examined recent production SA models recently and reported that he was pleasantly surprised to find that the assembly and finishing quality had improved across their whole line. There used to be a marked difference between models from the A1 through the TRP. While the Professional remains their semi-custom offering, most off the lessor models are now mainly separated by the features you want.

Your mid-90s 1911 A1 was likely manufactured…as all models were back then… and then assembled in Brazil

 

[RA40]

Thanks for the background on these. Mine shoots and runs well now. A few parts were replaced and some tuning worked it out. It doesn't have any special strings with me other than I've had it this long. This one doesn't have a high level of machining nor fitment, quite typical of the base A1. The recent releases like the Loaded or MC Operator are already configured sufficiently out of the box. For Hilton to make that comment that makes these recent releases more appealing. I haven't played with a newer SA so might go see how they are.

 

[Riomouse911]

If you’re considering a new SA Loaded 1911 I really like mine, it’s the 5” .45 ACP version. The fit and finish is really nice, the trigger was clean and roughly 4.5 lbs out of the box on my Lyman gauge, the Novak-esque sights are snag-free and easy to see and it’s been accurate and 100 pct reliable since day one.

They may be pricier than you think right now due to supply issues (COVID, the gun-run etc.) but they are cool guns if you can get your hands on one. (I also have a SA Ronin 4.25” 9mm, the Ronin .45/9 1911 guns are also great pistols .)

Stay safe.

 

[Rob96]

I have a Loaded Target Black Stainless from 2003. Not many out there. I could probably list it, but I won't.

 

[trackskippy]

I think a lot is going to depend on what era gun you have. The earliest guns seem to have been the best, and that goes for their M1A rifles, as well as their 1911 handguns.

The first couple of their 1911's I had, I got back in the mid to late 80's and they were great guns. They were "kit" guns, and came in pieces in a plastic bag, and had to be assembled. Cost me $250 ea. They looked just like Bannockburn's A1, and functioned and shot like my Colts and GI guns.

Later Springfields I owned were all over the place and were mostly more trouble and aggravation than they were worth.

The Brazilian frames were all over the place size/spec-wise, and grip size and shape, and dust cover shape were often very different.

Those two spots are the easiest to see without having to measure anything. On some guns, the dust cover is almost "square", with very little radius on the edges, on others, they might look more correct. Kydex, and even some leather holsters sized for a Colt or GI gun would not take a Springfield, that's how far off they were.

If you look at the front of the grips on different guns, you'll see a lot of difference between the gaps of the front of the grips and the radius on the front straps. Some look like a Colt, where the radius comes back to just short of hitting the front of the grip, where others have over a quarter of an inch of "flat" before the radius starts. The difference in how those guns feel in your hand is stark and annoying.

I bought a Loaded model when they first came out and it wouldn't feed ball ammo out of the box.

Had two "Mil-Spec" models when they first came out that where in the same serial number range and not all that far apart, with totally different frames. One close to correct, one with the boxier grip and dust cover. On both of those guns, they had taken an electro pen and carved the serial numbers into the disconnector rail on the underside of the slide. Felt like the gun was full of sand when you racked the slide.

I gave up on them back around the turn of the century and swore Id never buy another handgun or rifle from them. Gave in a couple of years back here and bought one of their "Defender" Government models and pretty much instantly regretted it. It looked like they had got their stuff back together, and they did seem to get the frame sizing issues straightened out, but the gun was so tight that you needed a tool to get it apart, and the more I shot it, the more troubles it was having function wise.

If you're thinking of getting one, Id look VERY carefully and critically at it before you put your money down. Dont think it just feels like it does because its new or dry and will straighten out with some shooting.

I carried a 1911 on a daily basis for over 25 years, and while I tried a bunch of the "clones" over the years, I only ever trusted the Colts or GI guns to carry. Early on, even they needed a little "something" to get them where I was comfortable with carrying them with anything but ball ammo, but they always worked and with the least amount of fiddling.

 

[mavracer]

I had one about that era. It was a solid and reliable gun, even did nightstand duty for a while. They just made too many of them to add any appreciable collector value.
I kept mine around for a while to go with the Garand but my 100th anniversary Colt keeps company now.

 

[Rule3]

It's a 1911, if you like it and it shoots well then it it is still a 1911
Spend more on bells and whistles, looks cool, it's still a 1911

I got rid of all mine and bought a Dan Wesson, it;s better than me and still a 1911

 

[RA40]

Was in a small shop the other day and they had an A1 and Loaded on display. The overall impression of fit and finish was better than my variant. Mine took some refinement to run well and fortunately parts costs was minimal. Sending it back to them didn't occur to me as the 'smith said these typically needed some additional work to run properly. Compared the to Sig 1911 the SA I have is lacking. The current A1 variants appear to have more finishing attention. I don't now how their reputation is for running well out of the box these days.

This is my 90's variant:

 

[halfmoonclip]

Had a GI Springer, liked it, regretted trading it toward a G43.
It was a b-flat 1911, looked and felt GI, especially with some vintage grips installed.
It had all the GI virtues and vices, including the young man's sights. Mine was either Brazilian or Filipino.
Have other 1911s, Colts, and like them, but wanted another GI 1911, just as a knock-around gun.
Ended up with a Turk Tisas, which is really nicely fit, decent trigger, Series 70.
So for the OP, you won't pull all that much money out of it, unless there is a really compelling reason (just can't keep em' all...) to sell it.
Moon

 

[Slamfire]

If it runs well, keep it. A new 1911 is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you will get. Might run great, might require shipping it back to customer service, replacing parts, finding the magazine that works. Once you get a 1911 that runs reliably, shoots to point of aim, don't get rid of it.

mine has a lot of custom work, a fitted Kart barrel.



the frame to slide is still tight, no rattle. I am keeping it.

 

[Jeff62]

Mine is about the same age as OP. Other than the front sight coming loose I don’t think it has ever failed. It is very loose and rattles like a sack of scrap iron.
From what I’ve seen the newer pistols are tighter and more consistent. However, I love a project so a loose 1911 is not a deal breaker

 

[trackskippy]

If it runs well, keep it. A new 1911 is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you will get. Might run great, might require shipping it back to customer service, replacing parts, finding the magazine that works. Once you get a 1911 that runs reliably, shoots to point of aim, don't get rid of it.

Thats about sums it up. You just never know until you get it and shoot the snot out of it.

I recently picked up an older, 1980's, 9mm Colt Commander, that rumor has it, was a reimport Israeli police trade-in. Whoever had it before me did some "upgrades" to it, a FLGR, what looks to be a Wilson beavertail grip safety, and somebody's flat MSH with what apparently is some sort of "chainlink" treatment. At some point, it looks like it must have had some rust issues and it got a satin nickel re-do. Gun seemed tight and didn't rattle when I got it. It sorta ran OK, but not really. Fair amount of weird stoppages.

Took the FLGR out, replaced it with a standard plug, guide, and spring and it straightened right up function-wise. Hasnt missed a lick since and shoots pretty good.

The MSH had a lot of play in it and it really didnt seem to fit right. Dont like the flat versions anyway. Replaced that with a proper satin nickel arched MSH, and now the gun feels right in my hand and points where Im looking.

Ive thought about replacing the grip safety with an original if I can find one in satin nickel, may still yet, but the Wilson works, and Im really liking the "bump" on the bottom, as it does seem to stop the annoying dead trigger you often get because you got to high a grip on it and it works against itself enough to not trip the trigger.

So, take the "junk" out and get it back to as close to proper spec as you can, and it rattles when you shake it, points and shoots where youre looking, and shoots reliably. Whats not to like, other than the staked in front sight did what they usually do if you shoot them enough and decided to leave the gun.

Ahh, the joys of 1911 ownership. Fiddle, fiddle, fiddle.

 

[bangswitch]

I have a Springfield 1911-A1 bought back in the mid 90's. Ser# NM118XXX.

Wasn't sure if the newer or older ones may have more appeal? I'm debating selling as they are readily available to replace if I should miss it.

Thoughts and or history on some of their offerings over the years?

Why sell if just to buy another one like it? Keep that one, and buy another one with more "bells and whistles". Get one in a different caliber, or brand, buy a smaller version (Commander of Officer), look for a really old one, etc. Appeal is in the eye of the beholder and handler. I tend to like the fairly basic versions, no ambi safety unless there's no option, I want the Series 70, and like different calibers. Of the four I have, two are SA, one is Ruger and one is Rock Island. All four are A1 types, all four are different calibers, two have extended dovetails and nicer sights, and the SA's are different sizes. Each has its own appeal, so I don't worry about selling one only to look for another one like it.

 

[gotboostvr]

I'd probably kick it down the road as I know I don't like GI models. I'd turn the cash into something a little more "modern" like a Kimber Custom II, RIA Tactical or something along those lines.

 

[RA40]

One of my main premises is that I'm simplifying, if this were a regular shooter I'd be inclined to keep it. One of the cycles in life that I realize that the accumulation of items doesn't hold that same value. I had my fun with it and can use the $ for something else. Ten years ago and even up until 3 years ago if someone had suggested I'd sell guns, I'd say when I'm dead, that's changed. I'll mull it over a bit more.

Appreciate the insights shared.

 

[shoobe01]

I had several 1911s for years I shot basically only for classes and to have because that was The Proper Gun to have. When the modern era caught up, I went to a class where Larry Vickers asked why I had a 1911 (and I told him it was my class gun, he said stop it) etc I stopped using them. Once dusty, I sold them off.

One was a Springfield... something. Not the straight 1911-A1 but slightly more modern styled, and I had it stippled and better grip safety and safety and refinish and stuff. I knew it was a Brazilian frame and said so, no idea if that's better or worse. A not especially impressive base gun, changes done by people you wouldn't know, and... went for more than the average. I think because lots of photos and I was ultra clear of the history of it all, round count etc.

My impression therefore is that there is no particular specialness or collectibility etc to guns of this era. Best price is if it's an auction sort of place and a good shooting gun and you explain that and all you did or did not do to it to give confidence to the buyers so they bid it up.

 

[bangswitch]

If a Delta Force guy ever asked me why I had a 1911, I'd say "Because I like them better than the plastic stuff, and they shoot just as well as an H-K does". He's familiar enough with 1911's to know they are a good weapon. I guess it's all about magazine capacity today.