Cool gun news

[Perd Hapley]

Sorry if this is old news, but I just found out that Remington is making a steel, 4.25" 1911, with the features I like. I think some of you will like it, as well.



Tritium front sight, GI guide rod. I don't know how it's set up, as far as internal safeties, but I presume it has whatever the full-sized Remingtons do.

Not sure what makes it a $1200 gun, but...

[TommyGunn]

Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!  But the PRICE!

[Ben]

I just saw Ruger is also making a Commander sized 1911.

[SADShooter]

Excuse me while I change my shorts. Been questing for a LW Commander, but I might have to reconsider. Daddy like! 

[Perd Hapley]

I just saw Ruger is also making a Commander sized 1911.

Stainless. 

[Fly320s]

It has been out for awhile.  I think the retail price is much less than $1200, but I can't remember for certain. I saw one at my local gun store last year.

[seeker_two]

I don't understand why everyone introducing a Commander-style gun lately is using a steel frame. The Commander is supposed to be a CCW gun, and the original was built on an aluminum alloy frame. Using a steel frame doesn't give you any advantage over the full-sized 1911. What gives? 

[Fitz]

I don't understand why everyone introducing a Commander-style gun lately is using a steel frame. The Commander is supposed to be a CCW gun, and the original was built on an aluminum alloy frame. Using a steel frame doesn't give you any advantage over the full-sized 1911. What gives? 

Commander size is smaller yes?

There ya go. Smaller = ccw gun

[Bob F.]

LGS was selling the full-sixed 1911 R-1 for about $900. I'd love a truly light wt Commander. S&W's 1911 PD is sweet! Dunno if they're still producing them.

[roo_ster]

LGS was selling the full-sixed 1911 R-1 for about $900. I'd love a truly light wt Commander. S&W's 1911 PD is sweet! Dunno if they're still producing them.

Yes, they are.  Just bought one on 01JAN2013.

A Remington 1911 Cdr is a good thing, though, and a Remington LW Cdr is a better thing.

[Hutch]

I'm barely old enough to remember that a Commander was by default an alloy-framed pistol, and the Combat Commander was a steel-framed variant.  Now, it seems the Commander is a steel-framed pistol, and he Lightweight Commander is an alloy-framed variant.  Anybody remember when this change occurred?

[Devonai]

Well, according to Wikipedia, the aluminum-frame Commander was introduced in 1949, and when the all-steel Combat Commander was introduced in 1970, the original was renamed the Lightweight Commander.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Combat_Commander

[Triphammer]

I carry, full time, a steel framed commander sized 1911 & find it much easier to carry than the sam gun in 5".
 I've seen, lusted for but haven't owned a 4 1/4" 1911 on an Officer sized grip. Seems to me that would be an even better carry gun!  I understand the 3" guns can be a reliability nightmare.

[Gewehr98]

I carry an all-steel 3.5" Caspian Officer's ACP.

I'd rather have the durability and endure the difference in weight between mine and an aluminum framed version.

[Blakenzy]

Commander size helps when you have to sit down.

[Boomhauer]

I prefer all steel in 1911s for the weight helps to dampen recoil, and I'm all about less recoil.

[Perd Hapley]

I'd rather have the durability and endure the difference in weight between mine and an aluminum framed version.

That's why I prefer a steel gun. I don't know that I'd actually shoot an aluminum Commander enough for it to be an actual problem, but something about an aluminum gun just doesn't appeal to me nearly as much.

[RoadKingLarry]

I don't have any problems carrying a full size 1911 but I have gotten to where I prefer my Rock Island steel frame compact. 3.5" barrel and officer size grip.
I also carry a S&W 642 alloy frame revolver but with a good belt and holster the difference in weight just isn't an issue for me.

[Hawkmoon]

I don't understand why everyone introducing a Commander-style gun lately is using a steel frame. The Commander is supposed to be a CCW gun, and the original was built on an aluminum alloy frame. Using a steel frame doesn't give you any advantage over the full-sized 1911. What gives? 

Longevity.

For people with multiple pistols, for whom the carry gun is carried often and shot only enough to verify that it still works, a lightweight receiver makes sense. For those who only have one pistol and use it for both carry and general range blasting, the steel receiver will hold up a lot better and longer.

I think the Commander size is the optimum form factor for the 1911. All mine are steel receivers,

[Ben]

I will carry both my TRP and my Combat Commander. Either are no problem weight-wise with a good holster and belt, but there is definitely a difference with the Commander for stuff like the aforementioned sitting down, like in a vehicle. You wouldn't think 3/4" makes that much difference, but it does.

The big difference is between either of those two guns and my Springfield Micro-Compact. That thing just plain disappears in a Wild Bill concealment holster and is small enough that the all steel frame is not a big weight issue. I have had hesitancy to carry it on a regular basis in the past because it tended towards ~95% reliable, which is not good enough for me. I've been shooting it a LOT more over the last year though, with different types of ammo, and am finding it getting to 99% reliability, which is defensive carry-worthy for me.

[French G.]

I cannot figure my apathy/disdain towards all the modern 1911 makers. I mean I come from IPSC, am fine with all the custom and semi-custom stuff there, but every time I hear that someone else is going to make a 1911 I can do no better than meh. Only new gun lust I have there is a Les Baer that is NM legal. I bought a very fine pre-CZ Dan Wesson and I know it's a fine gun but I have zero interest in it except as a receptacle for my .22 conversion.