ArmedinAZ
Buckeye
Shot show is officially ended and no Ruger 1911 announced. Even peeked on Ruger website to be sure. 
No 1911 ? :(
- Thread starter ArmedinAZ
- Start date
well, its still 2011... the 1911 was official adopted by the army on march 29, 1911.. I'm betting there will be more than a few 1911's officially released on march 29th....
We still have hope, at least till the end of march....
We still have hope, at least till the end of march....
Leucoandro
Single-Sixer
IMHO We have enough 1911's on the market. What I would love is a Ruger Luger. They would need to keep with the overall design, but some areas could used improved design. Redesigning how the striker set-up would be top on my list.
If it sold for less than $700 OTD, and did not have an internal lock, I would have one in short order.
Charlie
If it sold for less than $700 OTD, and did not have an internal lock, I would have one in short order.
Charlie
yogiboobooranger
Bearcat
I am disappointed too! I love 1911 pistols, carry one daily when weather/clothing allows it, and other than two other handguns from other companies, all my handguns are Ruger! I would snap up a Ruger branded 1911 in a heart beat.
barronbw
Bearcat
till then the remington 1911 will have to suffice!
2ndamd
Bearcat
Another 1911?
How about an SR45c?
How about an SR45c?
GhosT
Blackhawk
Ohh, I get the idea why so many "URGE" for a RUGER 1911...
But still blows me away.
If ya wanna great 1911...buy a COLT....
If you want a Great RUGER .45ACP......many models out there.
My 50 year old ass, must influence my choices.
I gotta admit, never got why Ruger guys want a copied...(even though
newer version) of another companies....design?
EXPECTING HITS for posting this
But still blows me away.
If ya wanna great 1911...buy a COLT....
If you want a Great RUGER .45ACP......many models out there.
My 50 year old ass, must influence my choices.
I gotta admit, never got why Ruger guys want a copied...(even though
newer version) of another companies....design?
EXPECTING HITS for posting this
Flash
Buckeye
GhosT said:Ohh, I get the idea why so many "URGE" for a RUGER 1911...
But still blows me away.
If ya wanna great 1911...buy a COLT....
If you want a Great RUGER .45ACP......many models out there.
My 50 year old ass, must influence my choices.
I gotta admit, never got why Ruger guys want a copied...(even though
newer version) of another companies....design?
EXPECTING HITS for posting this
Well let's see, Ruger copied the bolt action, the single action,the falling block, the double action, the over and under and semi automatic and you don't own any of these? All current guns are copies of designs from long ago but with suttle refinements.
dacaur said:
Care to list the 'many' 1911's that aren't great, in your opinion ?
I'm just wondering, because I think most 1911's on the market today are pretty darned good imo, and it would be pretty tough to pick a bad one. Sure there can be a bad example here and there, but no really bad ones that I know of.
Care to enlighten me ?
REV
Flash
Buckeye
I hate to chime in but the Argentine and Brazilian clones are garbage in my opinion. Great 1911's are Les Baer, Kimber, Wilson, Volkmann and a Ruger 1911 won't come close to these.
Flash said:
Brand names ???
Regarding the 'boutique' builders you mention. They SHOULD be good 1911's at the totally ridiculous prices that they charge. Regarding Kimber .... well .... Kimber is Kimber ... the monster cable of 1911's. No matter what you may think, Kimber is probably one of the cheapest built 1911's in existence ... they use more MIM parts than any other 1911 maker (hence the MIMber nickname). You don't get very much for your money with a Kimber.
I'd far rather have a higher end Rock Island Armory or Springfield gun for the same price of ANY Kimber.
I'd still like to hear some brand names of the 1911's that are supposedly 'junk' in your description ....
Where ya from in PA, Flash ???
REV
Flash
Buckeye
revhigh said:Flash said:
Brand names ???
Regarding the 'boutique' builders you mention. They SHOULD be good 1911's at the totally ridiculous prices that they charge. Regarding Kimber .... well .... Kimber is Kimber ... the monster cable of 1911's. No matter what you may think, Kimber is probably one of the cheapest built 1911's in existence ... they use more MIM parts than any other 1911 maker (hence the MIMber nickname). You don't get very much for your money with a Kimber.
I'd far rather have a higher end Rock Island Armory or Springfield gun for the same price of ANY Kimber.
I'd still like to hear some brand names of the 1911's that are supposedly 'junk' in your description ....
Where ya from in PA, Flash ???
REV
Just outside Gettysburg Rev. The junk i'm refering to is the Argentine 1911's that they copied under licensing from Colt. The Star is another one but that has no affiliation with Colt. It only resembles a 1911 with perhaps the grip panels being interchangable with Colts but that's about it.
I agree that the Springfield or the Rock Island is a fine handgun and they both do what a Les Baer will do but following that thought process, a Mossberg will do what a Parazzi will do so it's all in what you call junk and what you call great.
revhigh said:
You're the only one who insists on using that around here every chance you get old buddy. :? Your beloved Colts have MIM parts too.
Care to guess how many MIM and/or powdered metal parts are in that new technowonder car you're driving? Way more than you'd like given your distaste for these parts.
Nice derail BTW. Ruger 1911....
Rev's not the only one who can't figure just how much more accurate a $2,600 designer gun is than my $400 RIA.
If I use a 1911 to protect myself or my family, will the bad guy be deader quicker because of high polish and checkered wood grips?
I'd suspect that today's entry level 1911's are much more true to the original form than hand fitted, high polished, buffed, chromed, checkered, widgets, etc.
If I use a 1911 to protect myself or my family, will the bad guy be deader quicker because of high polish and checkered wood grips?
I'd suspect that today's entry level 1911's are much more true to the original form than hand fitted, high polished, buffed, chromed, checkered, widgets, etc.
toysoldier
Hunter
Leucoandro said:
+1!!!
I'd like to see one in .357 Sig. The reliable feeding of the original .30 Luger round, scaled up to .357 magnum performance. The designers could look at the Lahti and Nambu pistols for inspiration, too.
revhigh said:
I guess it really depends on your definition of a "great" gun.. for the record, I didnt say a lot of 1911's today are "BAD" guns, I said a lot of them arent "great" guns. IMO, a great gun is one you can trust your life to, and never have to worry about. Its 100% reliable.
Few guns have the right fall into that category, not even all of rugers guns are there. In this world, There are "great guns", there are "good guns", there are "OK guns", and there are "bad guns". The last category is lucky for us pretty sparce... The worst 1911 that I have personal experience with is a taurus. When it was freshly cleaned it was a good gun, but put 100 rounds down the pipe and it started to malfunction. That, to me, is a bad gun.
I understand the question of why would you want Ruger to add another 1911 to an already crowded market. However, I like Ruger's corporate strategy: built quality guns while undercutting most other companies on price. What would a Ruger 1911 come in at I wonder? Could I buy my first 1911 and get a quality pistol for around $500? The only way to do that now is to get a basic G.I. model (no thanks) or go RIA (maybe).
Flash
Buckeye
hittman said:
I give up, where did he mention that? Did you ever shoot a M1911 from service issue to see how they shoot?
We are talking about quality vs. junk. Not how fast a handgun kills.
Joni Lynn
Bearcat
I think that if Ruger was to make a Luger or a 1911 it would be a great gun and be easily identifiable as a Ruger. They would do something to make it uniquely their own.
I'd buy either if they were made available.
I'd buy either if they were made available.
Hey Rev ~ whadda ya think? Is a designer, high-dollar 1911 decidedly more accurate than a MilSpec Springfield?
Flash ~ no reason to give up. Seems you and I are simply approaching the subject from different directions. Does more expensive always translate into higher quality? Each individual should judge, I suppose.
And no, I've never shot a military issue 1911. That's why I stated "I suspect today's entry level 1911's are much more true to the original form than hand fitted ........". If you or others tell me the WWII issue 1911's were assembled in a Les Baer-like custom shop, I'll take your word for it.
Flash ~ no reason to give up. Seems you and I are simply approaching the subject from different directions. Does more expensive always translate into higher quality? Each individual should judge, I suppose.
And no, I've never shot a military issue 1911. That's why I stated "I suspect today's entry level 1911's are much more true to the original form than hand fitted ........". If you or others tell me the WWII issue 1911's were assembled in a Les Baer-like custom shop, I'll take your word for it.
Joni Lynn said:
It would be a fine line for Ruger to walk. Ruger fanboys will buy anything but 1911 guys will scream if anything is very far off of the 1911 pattern. I'm not interested in a straight GI pattern pistol but if it strays very much with some "new" feature not interested either. A well constructed ACCURATE pistol and above average trigger with a few of the now normal upgrades will hook me.
And PLEASE no front slide serrations.
