TexasCHLforum.com

I have owned & carried several Springer 1911s. Never that exact modle. One of our members carries one just like you pictured. We shoot at the same range.

I thought his screen name was rifleman but I did not find it.
Someone will know more about that modle than I do & post shortly.

I have a very high oppinion of SA 1911s. Across the board I believe them to be the best $$ value & the most accurate right out of the box of any on the MKT today.

The 3" barrel is going to have more to do w/ accuracy compared to your 27 than the fact of Make & platform change.

I like the looks of the stainless version too..

practical answer is to buy more .40 cal, some spare parts for your g27, and some additional mags or night sites for the G27. The answer you are looking for is BUY THE Springfield. They are nice, basic guns that will function very well. I find that the .45 is inherently more accurate based on its recoil pattern that is not the flip of a .40 cal. You will of course have to clean the pistol more often than your glock, but 1911 owners like cleaning guns...its very zen.

I have a 5" Springfield and a 3" Kimber. The Springfield is very well made, and LT is right... ....they are a very good quality for the price. That said, I don't know how easy it would be to shoot with a grip so abbreviated that it will only hold a six round magazine. My 3" Kimber shoots very well, but it's grip frame is long enough to accept a 7 round mag. Even so, like that micro .45, it does not have a checkered front strap, and keeping a firm grip on the gun which didn't loosen under recoil was somewhat problematic until I added a Hogue wraparound grip set with finger grooves. I do not have this problem with the full sized gun. It bears mentioning that I have largish hands.

I'm not saying that this is a reason to not buy the micro gun, but it would be a consideration for me. On the other hand, my BUG is a scandium J-framed .357 snubbie.

STI has quite a variety of 1911 configurations as well.

They're not cheap, but then again, no fine firearm is.

That's not to say you can't get a perfectly serviceable and reliable firearm at very reasonable cost: e.g., Glock, S&W M&P, etc.

In the 1911 world, my opinion, based on over 35 years with 1911/s, is that today you have to get into the $750 + range to get something that's worth carrying for self defense. Whether or not adding $250 - $350 to that to get the next grade of gun (at street, not MSRP pricing) from STI, Kimber, or others is worthwhile is a personal choice.

The same goes for adding another $1500+ to that to get a truly fine gun from Les Baer, Ed Brown, or Bill Wilson.

The Annoyed Man wrote:I have a 5" Springfield and a 3" Kimber. The Springfield is very well made, and LT is right... ....they are a very good quality for the price. That said, I don't know how easy it would be to shoot with a grip so abbreviated that it will only hold a six round magazine. My 3" Kimber shoots very well, but it's grip frame is long enough to accept a 7 round mag. .

I have the Kimber version and it is actually pretty easy to shoot. I am 6"/240lbs and my hands are not exactly small. When i grip it I just fold my pinkie under the mag and the hold is quite secure. You can put a 7 or 8 rd standard mag in it and it will function just fine but it does stick out a half inch or so. This helps in that you only need to carry full size spares but can carry it with the regular 6 rounder. Recoil isnt as bad as you might think and having large hands might be a major factor in that.

Excaliber wrote: That's not to say you can't get a perfectly serviceable and reliable firearm at very reasonable cost: e.g., Glock, S&W M&P, etc.

In the 1911 world, my opinion, based on over 35 years with 1911/s, is that today you have to get into the $750 + range to get something that's worth carrying for self defense. Whether or not adding $250 - $350 to that to get the next grade of gun (at street, not MSRP pricing) from STI, Kimber, or others is worthwhile is a personal choice.
.

I disagree. I have mostly Kimbers and Springers but I would not hesitate to carry a RIA into a situation. I have owned several and have never had an issue out of them. They are not IPSC guns by any stretch but you set the level at personal defense and they would excel at that. I have never shot the 3" RIA but have shot 4" and 5" many times. Para makes a decent 1911 in the lower price range but I have seen issues with them to prohibit my being comfortable carrying for defense and have usually ended up selling them. I have seen used Colts in the $600 range as well. I only have about 15 years in the 1911 game but may learn different in the next 15. As the 1911 design has shown, it ain't going nowhere.

glock27 wrote:yeah i love the stainless look but the price is a turn off.

The gun you FISRT pictured is a GI Micro Compact. It is the only 3" Springfield 1911 Micro with a "steel" frame. The stainless versions have "alloy" frames and are much lighter. Don't lump all the Springfield 3" 1911s together. The GI Micro Compact weighs 34 oz with an empty mag, while your G27 weighs about 22 oz. with an empty mag. That makes the Springfield nearly a full pound heavier to carry than your Glock! Personally, I've shot it, and like it, and see it at Gun Shows for about $500. And, of course, SA customer service is second to none. Hope this helps.

Gun Tests reviewed the Kimber Eclipse, the Springfield Loaded, and the Colt Gold Cup 1911s. The Kimber and Springfield got As.

There's also a nice review on the new Colt 1911 XSE Rail Gun 1911...very impressive: http://gunnuts.net/2011/02/04/colt-1911 ... racy-test/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

rm9792 wrote:

Excaliber wrote: That's not to say you can't get a perfectly serviceable and reliable firearm at very reasonable cost: e.g., Glock, S&W M&P, etc.

In the 1911 world, my opinion, based on over 35 years with 1911/s, is that today you have to get into the $750 + range to get something that's worth carrying for self defense. Whether or not adding $250 - $350 to that to get the next grade of gun (at street, not MSRP pricing) from STI, Kimber, or others is worthwhile is a personal choice.
.

I disagree. I have mostly Kimbers and Springers but I would not hesitate to carry a RIA into a situation. I have owned several and have never had an issue out of them. They are not IPSC guns by any stretch but you set the level at personal defense and they would excel at that. I have never shot the 3" RIA but have shot 4" and 5" many times. Para makes a decent 1911 in the lower price range but I have seen issues with them to prohibit my being comfortable carrying for defense and have usually ended up selling them. I have seen used Colts in the $600 range as well. I only have about 15 years in the 1911 game but may learn different in the next 15. As the 1911 design has shown, it ain't going nowhere.

I have not owned any RIA's and have only shot a couple. Those guns were a bit rough in the finish and the triggers weren't up to my admittedly fussy standards, but they worked just fine and I have nothing bad to say about them. In my personal categorization I'd put them in the same box as the Glocks and S&W M&P's - affordable, functional and serviceable as basic tools. (I guess I'd have to revise that $750 price point down a bit).

I'm not a fan of the Colts after some of the production I saw from them years ago. I knew one of their factory reps who, when he was being kind, told his friends they were most serviceable as fast water fishing sinkers. I myself had poor experiences with a couple of 1911's they couldn't get to work right even after multiple returns to the factory. At that time they were very slow to convert to CNC machining, which is why Kimber at their lunch. I'm sure they've improved some, but once a company does that to me when I put my faith in one of their expensive products, I reach the point of no return. They wore out their welcome with me.

rm9792 wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I have a 5" Springfield and a 3" Kimber. The Springfield is very well made, and LT is right... ....they are a very good quality for the price. That said, I don't know how easy it would be to shoot with a grip so abbreviated that it will only hold a six round magazine. My 3" Kimber shoots very well, but it's grip frame is long enough to accept a 7 round mag. .

I have the Kimber version and it is actually pretty easy to shoot. I am 6"/240lbs and my hands are not exactly small. When i grip it I just fold my pinkie under the mag and the hold is quite secure. You can put a 7 or 8 rd standard mag in it and it will function just fine but it does stick out a half inch or so. This helps in that you only need to carry full size spares but can carry it with the regular 6 rounder. Recoil isnt as bad as you might think and having large hands might be a major factor in that.

I agree. It is easy to shoot. I have to fold my pinkie part way under with the 3" Kimber frame, which takes a 7 round mag. The OP was asking about the SA Micro .45, which has an even shorter grip frame, and which takes a 6 round magazine. Now that I have the Hogue grips on my Kimber, I have no trouble shooting it very well. It just struck me that with a really short grip frame, and lacking any checkering on the front strap, the SA Micro .45 might be a little difficult to get a good grip on it.

The first gun that comes to mind by way of comparison is the single stack Glock 36, also in .45 ACP, and which also takes a 6 round length of magazine. I have held one in my hand, but I've never fired one. The grip felt too short in my hand to feel secure, or at least, that was the impression I had. Under actual recoil the experience might be different. I'm not advocating against getting a SA Micro .45. I'm merely saying that one ought to really think about how it fits in the hand, taking into account what recoil on a pretty small .45 ACP might be like, before actually dropping the cash for one. That's all I meant.

rm9792 wrote:I disagree. I have mostly Kimbers and Springers but I would not hesitate to carry a RIA into a situation. I have owned several and have never had an issue out of them.

Another plug for RIA. I have the 5" and 3" versions, and they both run great.

The recoil difference is noticeable between the 2, but not unbearable by any stretch of the imagination.

That being said, I find it more natural and easier to aim with the 5 inch gun. Sight radius may have something to do with that.