Colt Forum banner
1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
My youngest son bought a used 1991A1 in 2001, as soon as he turned 21.

At that time I had a Para 7-45 LDA and have since had some other 1911's, including some old WWII era slides on aftermarket frames (a Colt Govt and a Remington Rand), put together by previous owners.

I was using a used Wilson Elite Professional (4.25" bbl) at local club level IDPA matches, but wanted to get back to 5" so sold it to fund a Nighthawk Talon.

Since these custom makers all have send-it-to-us-for-life warranties I figured I should have a spare so picked up a new Sig Sauer 1911 Target which quickly became my first choice (I don't know why really, except I shoot it better than the Nighthawk, which is currently for sale).

Meanwhile I have been more and more impressed with my son's 1991A1 over time. Originally I thought he must've just got "a good one" and thought it was just standard production except he put Pachmyr grips on it. But it shoots the one ragged hole drill very well!

However recently I noticed some tell-tale signs that it was worked on by the previous owner, so that actually may be telling the tale.

All that to say this: I recently came across a new production 1991A1 (it starts DROS tomorrow):cool:. I like the trigger feel (feels like about 5 pounds and resets nicely).

This will now be my spare for the Sig when I go to the range or IDPA matches.

So I'll ask those in the know here: How are the new production Colt 1991A1's? Any love for them here?

In the pic below, the black 1911 is my son's 1991A1, and the stainless job is my Sig Sauer. And yes, the SS revolver is a S&W 625 JM:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,466 Posts
I avoided them like the plague for myself, but my father wanted a 1911 pattern pistol so i purchased one of the 90's production 1991's a while back. The thing runs like a top and exhibits more than acceptable accuracy to boot. I do not have a lot that I can say negative about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
I traded into 2 of the old roll marked guns a year ago with intention of selling or trading them off. Got both for $1100.00. Took them to the range just to make sure they shot ok. Well, they shot more than ok and are still hanging around to this day. Just a basic god solid 1911. I have tinkered with the hammer and trigger on one and changed out the rear site to an adjustable. Plan on keeping that one. The other, my son is wanting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
I purchased a new 1991 in late 1990. I've used it for the range. I've used it for LE. Never an issue with it right out of the brown plastic box. It's accurate, well built and has a factory parkerized finish that still looks good. Funny, I've traded or sold more expensive 1911s but I've held onto the ORM 1991. The current crop of 1991s are great guns from all accounts. My only complaint is the new 1991, double diamond wood grips are not sized correctly and detract from the otherwise excellent appearance of the NRM 1991s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks guys.

So far I have figured out that the 1991A1's are Colt's most basic model. I know the older ones with the lighter troll markings had plastic mainspring housings, triggers and recoil spring caps.

If that stuff bothered me I'd just change those items out from parts I have kicking around here, but certainly I intend to shoot it in first. I may never change that stuff anyway.

After adding magazine wells, beavertails, and trigger jobs to a few 1911's I'm getting to where I just run 'em as they come unless there's a problem. I've even taken to blacking out white dots on sights for a better picture, though I'll admit the gold bead on my S&W is nice.

I've kind of gotten over the "gotta have a 3.5lb trigger pull" thing, frankly. I prefer the primer actually detonates every time the hammer comes down. I shoot as well with a 5lb+ trigger, as I do with a lighter trigger anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
"So far I have figured out that the 1991A1's are Colt's most basic model. I know the older ones with the lighter troll markings had plastic mainspring housings, triggers and recoil spring caps."

To my knowledge they are aluminum not plastic. At least both of mine are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
<<
Since these custom makers all have send-it-to-us-for-life warranties I figured I should have a spare so picked up a new Sig Sauer 1911 Target which quickly became my first choice (I don't know why really, except I shoot it better than the Nighthawk, which is currently for sale).>>You shoot better with the Sig than the Talon?I think that there is a problem.The Talon is 100 times better pistol than the Sig.I cant understund why you have this opinion :(

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
377 Posts
So far I have figured out that the 1991A1's are Colt's most basic model. I know the older ones with the lighter troll markings had plastic mainspring housings, triggers and recoil spring caps.
Are you referring to the M1991A1 or the 1991 series? The M1991A1 was listed as a New Model in Colt's 1992 catalog. The M1991A1 had composite/plastic triggers, mainspring housings, and magazine releases. The M1991A1 also had the matte/parkerized finish. While originally only offered in the Government Model the M1991A1 expanded into a series of models: Commander and Compact/Officers along with 9mm, 38 super and 40 S&W chamberings, and stainless steel models as well; all marked with the "M1991A1" roll mark on the slide. Colt eventually dropped the M1991A1 series and replaced it with the 1991 series (currently in production today) which only has a composite mainspring housing and "polished" blued/stainless finished. I have never seen any documentation from Colt referring to a "1991A1" model/series; think it's an old habit/carry over from a lot of guys being used to the 1911A1.

The M1991A1's were a real sleeper and bargains up until a few years back. You could pick them up for under $500 LNIB on the auction sites and got a lot of gun for your buck. You won't find a bad word about them, some refer to them as the cheap/entry level model of the 90's. I encourage that mindset to try and keep others from pursing the model to keep the prices low; but the secret is out now. Those who have them and shoot them know fit and performance wise, there's no difference between them and any other Colt 1911.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
Basically, the M1991A1 was eventually upgraded with a new rollmark, (several complaints about the lack of a Rampant Colt on the slide) new finish both in blue and stainless and a few parts were changed. The M1991A1 was Colt's effort to compete against the basic Springfield Mil-Spec 1911A1. Colt even advertised that the M1991A1s were using a continuation of the serial numbers that Colt left off with at the end of WWII. I bought mine new for $399.00 as I remember.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
"Those who have them and shoot them know fit and performance wise, there's no difference between them and any other Colt 1911. "

Dang it gunbroke...you let the cat out of the bag....there goes the prices.
Still worked for me though, I picked up a 1991 at a local shop a month or so ago. Said people came in and looked at it but didn't want a 1991 since they had never heard of it. Can't convince people it's the same thing, they just assume it was replaced with the 1911. Got it under 500bucks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 · (Edited)
...The Talon is 100 times better pistol than the Sig.I cant understund why you have this opinion :(


Coming from a Wilson which shot extremely well to point of aim despite a 4.25" barrel, the Nighthawk action seems to glide as-if on ball bearings BUT the sight picture isn't as good as on the Sig Sauer target. I noticed that for my IDPA uses the Sig Sauer was just as accurate at the distances IDPA shoots at, feeds my reloads without problems, and doesn't fail to sometimes detonate primers with a light hit (the Nighthawk has a 3.5lb trigger, the Sig Sauer a 5lb4oz trigger.

I felt the Nighthawk, despite its reputation, was not a Wilson. So why have that much money tied up in it?

Yes agree it is a better built pistol than the production Sig by quite a bit, but in my opinion not worth three times as much money when I shoot the Sig as well or better and it runs 100%.

The Nighthawk is just not for me for my uses. I'd like another Wilson Combat.

I have the Nighthawk up for sale on consignment but I'm not giving it away. It it doesn't sell at my price I'll keep it and work with it some more: likely a stronger firing pin spring (or a lighter spring in front of the firing pin first probably), then the sights like on the Sig. Never had any problem with the Wilson's 3.5lb trigger.

The Nighthawk guarantees 1.25" groups at 25 yards. It probably does that, but the Sig is not far behind and good enough for me and my uses.

The Nighthawk is very well built and worth the $3K to most shooters. My Wilson was $3K USED, but I'd buy it again. The Nighthawk probably not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
488 Posts
"So far I have figured out that the 1991A1's are Colt's most basic model. I know the older ones with the lighter troll markings had plastic mainspring housings, triggers and recoil spring caps."

To my knowledge they are aluminum not plastic. At least both of mine are.
They are steel, not aluminum. The recoil spring would chew through an aluminum one is short order.

The blued O1991 and stainless O1091 are excellent guns, built with the same quality as their supposedly "premium" XSE models. You won't be disappointed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Now I'm confused.

I won't see the pistol currently being DROS and on the ten day wait until next Sunday, but I could swear it said (in heavy rollmark) 1991A1 on the side, and it is a new in plastic Colt box pistol in semi matt black with double diamond rosewood grips.

Yet when I go to the Colt site, it shows no such model but DOES have 01991 models in carbon steel and stainless (and there was a stainless version in the same glass showcase as the one I bought and I thought it looked the same with the same 1991A1 heavy rollmark, but in stainless).

Am I seeing things? That heavy rollmark 1991A1 is what caught my attention, as my son has the older version with the lighter rollmark he bought in 1981.

I will certainly post pics when I get it. :confused: Call me a confused geezer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
Now I'm confused.

I won't see the pistol currently being DROS and on the ten day wait until next Sunday, but I could swear it said (in heavy rollmark) 1991A1 on the side, and it is a new in plastic Colt box pistol in semi matt black with double diamond rosewood grips.

Yet when I go to the Colt site, it shows no such model but DOES have 01991 models in carbon steel and stainless (and there was a stainless version in the same glass showcase as the one I bought and I thought it looked the same with the same 1991A1 heavy rollmark, but in stainless).

Am I seeing things? That heavy rollmark 1991A1 is what caught my attention, as my son has the older version with the lighter rollmark he bought in 1981.

I will certainly post pics when I get it. :confused: Call me a confused geezer.
What you saw were Old Rollmark (ORM) "M1991A1"s, not the New Rollmarked (NRM) O1991s (The new rollmark O1991s do not have "1991" included in the rollmark on the slide.)
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top