Apples and oranges. Those two guns you mentioned aren’t exactly brisk sellers. If you want a CZ75 in SAO they sell those models in droves. It’s called the Tac Sport, Orange, Czechmate, S2 SAO. The other thing is those are manufactured overseas and shipped in. Beretta Italian made guns suffer the same issue. They make a batch, import them and when they sell out they are unobtainable till the next batch. Go try to find a Beretta Cheetah of any flavor right now. The new Colt will be made here and will be available readily. The P10’s that are made in Kansas City are way more available than the imported ones were. This shouldn’t be an issue.

I now own two Cz/Dan Wesson 1911's. Only the custom makers manufacture a better 1911. At a much higher price. This is good news for the industry.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
Oh, no argument about their premium stuff being very good. I'm just sick of the only "good" option being a "premium" option, as is the case with Dan Wesson 1911s.

This is NOT the case with Dan Wesson. Their Vigil line is outstanding considering their price point of about $1200. I for one, don't want CZ to turn Colt into Taurus, Ruger, HiPoint or SIG Sauer. Those brands offer plenty of options for those not willing to pony up to a quality product.

$800 for a (quality) 1911? That's laughable.

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
Oh, no argument about their premium stuff being very good. I'm just sick of the only "good" option being a "premium" option, as is the case with Dan Wesson 1911s.

This is NOT the case with Dan Wesson. Their Vigil line is outstanding considering their price point of about $1200. I for one, don't want CZ to turn Colt into Taurus, Ruger, HiPoint or SIG Sauer. Those brands offer plenty of options for those not willing to pony up to a quality product.

$800 for a (quality) 1911? That's laughable.

Colt makes just that for less than 10% more. About 3 years ago I bought a Colt competition 9mm government in stainless. It also comes in .45 and blued. It has FO front site, all of the bells and whistles. The slide to frame fit and barrel bushing fit rivals my Ed Brown and WC, the trigger has very little take up and breaks extremely clean but a little heavier, 5lbs maybe. The grip safety has a little side to side play and trigger has a little up and down play, but for the $865 I paid for it delivered to my gunsmith, it is one hell of a nice 1911 and accurate. Cosmetically it is perfect.

quote:

considering their price point of about $1200

You and I have very, very different definitions of good vs premium. Colt can and almost certainly will offer higher end 1911s in the future, but if you're laughing at an $800 price point then I don't think you know what I'm talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

considering their price point of about $1200

You and I have very, very different definitions of good vs premium. Colt can and almost certainly will offer higher end 1911s in the future, but if you're laughing at an $800 price point then I don't think you know what I'm talking about.

I don't think you truly appreciate what goes into building a 1911 vs modern pistols. We're talking about an all metal pistol with lots of components that need to have the right metallurgy and fit in order to offer the owner a reliable product with a good service life and minimal gunsmith intervention.

Most people look at a Ruger and a Wilson Combat in a photo. They see they look similar but the prices vary significantly. They often don't grasp the difference or comprehend why the Wilson costs so much more.

Seriously, $1200 is NOT going to get you a "premium" 1911. $800 will get you a factory made 1911 with a host of cost saving manufacturing shortcuts. Hell, many 1911s that cost north of $1200 have MIM and cast parts. Dan Wesson is an outlier in this regard.

The basic 1911 Classic retails at $800, and like I said, it will have MIM and cast parts, not to mention it's their most basic configuration lacking most features people want in a modern 1911 like a beavertail safety, lowered & scalloped ejection port and low mass commander style hammer.

https://www.colt.com/series/TRADITIONAL_SERIES

To offer more features for the same price, Colt would have to do what the budget makers do and cut the quality and durability of more of the internals. Offer cast frames and/or slides, more MIM parts, etc. Further, you're going to get sloppier tolerances for the barrel/slide/frame fit.

None of these things will be welcomed by Colt owners/collectors.

If current Colt owners and collectors are Colt's market, then I think you've proved my point. Colt isn't making it on its current devotees, and what collectors want is irrelevant if the goal is to broaden the market. Besides, Colt can always make pistols for those who insist on non-MIM parts, Commander style hammers, etcetera, and are willing to consider $1,200 a bargain for what they want. Come to think of it, doesn't Springfield Armory already offer all of those things on their ($849 MSRP) Ronin 1911s?

BTW, the only thing on the Traditional series I would want different besides a Model 80 firing pin safety is a beavertail grip safety. Grip safeties don't cost all that much, and I'd be happy to pick my own.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
If current Colt owners and collectors are Colt's market, then I think you've proved my point. Colt isn't making it on its current devotees, and what collectors want is irrelevant if the goal is to broaden the market. Besides, Colt can always make pistols for those who insist on non-MIM parts, Commander style hammers, etcetera, and are willing to consider $1,200 a bargain for what they want. Come to think of it, doesn't Springfield Armory already offer all of those things on their ($849 MSRP) Ronin 1911s?

BTW, the only thing on the Traditional series I would want different besides a Model 80 firing pin safety is a beavertail grip safety. Grip safeties don't cost all that much, and I'd be happy to pick my own.

Aside from government/LE/FMS contracts, Colt fans are a major part of what give the brand it's resale value. Start cutting corners (any more than they already have), and it will sour the market on anything Colt makes. Colt's financial issues have a LOT more to do with mismanagement and unions, compounded by being located in a very expensive state to run a business.

Springfield Armory does make the Ronin and its a decent factory gun. But it sounds like you want Colt to become a budget brand. That would certainly not be the way to go, especially in the 1911 world. Colt is considered a benchmark of sorts as far as mass produced factory 1911s. They rely on their history and brand recognition. Cheapening their pistols further than they already are wouldn't be a sound move. If you want to see people get pissed at Colt, just watch what happens if CZ decides to start turning 6920s into Bushmasters.

Fortunately, I doubt CZ would do any of that. Maybe they will bring some of their Dan Wesson expertise to Colt's production line and improve their overall quality. Colt could certainly use help with that.

You're making a few assumptions.

First, resale value has little or nothing to do with making sales unless you're a collector or one of those few people who sees the guns they own as purely a piggy bank. Panics and Peacemakers aside, people almost always lose money on reselling a gun anyway.

Second, Colt's "financial issues" have nothing to do with the general popularity (or not) of their products.

Third, I never asked that Colt become a budget brand, and you have no reason to try to put those words in my mouth. I'm asking for a Colt that's competitive with a Springfield Armory, which is something else entirely. I do object to CZ's having turned Dan Wesson, an excellent revolver company, into nothing more than a boutique 1911 brand. (Yes, I'm aware that Dan Wesson made 1911s before CZ bought the company. At the time my hopes for the revolvers rested on the then-owners' representation to the public at large that one reason for making 1911s was that 1911 sales would generate income that would help make it possible to build and sell revolvers that were more competitive across the market of revolver buyers.) But the point I've been trying to make in this thread is that I would like Colt to make 1911s that would be competitive with (for example) Springfield Armory's Ronin line.

Fourth, exactly who do you expect the people are who will "get pissed at Colt" if they do produce pistols that are competitive with $849 MSRP Springfield Armory pistols? Current Colt owners and collectors? I'm talking about people who'd like to buy a 1911 in general.

Fifth, why would CZ try to turn Colt into a more expensive 1911 company when they've already done that to Dan Wesson? The fact that they already have Dan Wesson and have spent a long time developing the Dan Wesson brand in the market sure makes it look like they had some other purpose in mind when they bought Colt.

quote:

First, resale value has little or nothing to do with making sales unless you're a collector or one of those few people who sees the guns they own as purely a piggy bank. Panics and Peacemakers aside, people almost always lose money on reselling a gun anyway.

That doesn't make any sense at all. If a product has shitty resale value, there's usually a reason for it. One such reason is if a company compromises their products (which is what you're wanting CZ to do with Colt.

Pre-64 Winchesters are far more desirable than newer Winchesters, because Winchester started making them cheaper. German SIG Sauers are similarly more desirable than newer models. Swiss P210s will always be more valuable than the US made ones.

The idea that you can't make money selling pre-owned guns isn't accurate either. I could easily get double (or more) what I paid for my P210, P7, P9S, Python, Series-70 Gold Cup, etc. When Colt got the Marine Corps contract for the M45A1. They sold USMC marked M45A1s for about $1500. The Corps didn't like the idea of Colt selling "USMC" roll marked pistols to civilians, so Colt started roll marking the slides "M45A1". As a result, those original USMC marked pistols sell for thousands on the secondary market. Colt's custom shop made a run of 100 railed Special Combat pistols. Those were the most customized pistols the custom shop had ever produced. They had all the best internals and the best fit & Ion Bond finish. Those pistols also sell for far more than they originally retailed for. Colt has made all manner of limited run guns that have gone on to become wildly collectable.

quote:

Second, Colt's "financial issues" have nothing to do with the general popularity (or not) of their products.

Actually, it does. If a company is in bankruptcy or like Remington, who went out of business, they aren't likely to sell as many guns as if they are financially stable. Believe it or not, most companies actually encourage brand loyalty. The more loyal customers they have, the more word of mouth free advertising they get. Basic business 101.

quote:

Third, I never asked that Colt become a budget brand, and you have no reason to try to put those words in my mouth. I'm asking for a Colt that's competitive with a Springfield Armory, which is something else entirely.

You want Colt to produce a gun to an arbitrary price point. Like I said before, Colt is located in one of the most business hostile States in the US. Further they have to contend with the most zealous union members (the UAW). All that gets baked into the price of their products. Also, you're actually comparing apples and oranges. Springfield Armory is essentially a clone company. What we call "Springfield Armory" today has nothing to do with the real "Springfield Armory" that was actually a military weapon depot. Whereas Colt IS the original 1911 OEM. That's why they say "Colt, Anything else is a copy" So, you can expect to pay a certain premium for the brand.

quote:

I do object to CZ's having turned Dan Wesson, an excellent revolver company, into nothing more than a boutique 1911 brand.

Dan Wesson is a bit more than a boutique 1911 brand. They offer a product that has bar stock components, excellent fit & finish and a well established reputation as a good value for what you get. While people who really don't know much about 1911s may think they are expensive, experienced 1911 shooters typically realize the value they offer.

quote:

But the point I've been trying to make in this thread is that I would like Colt to make 1911s that would be competitive with (for example) Springfield Armory's Ronin line.

The Ronin is actually a copy of Colt's original Combat Elite, which predated the Ronin by several decades. Yes, they cost more than a Ronin. Just like a 6920 typically costs more than a Bushmaster. What you're suggesting is Colt should cut corners to make a cheaper product, and race Springfield Armory to the bottom, which would diminish the Colt brand. That would be imprudent. An OEM manufacturer shouldn't compete with a clone maker to make cheaper products.

quote:

Fourth, exactly who do you expect the people are who will "get pissed at Colt" if they do produce pistols that are competitive with $849 MSRP Springfield Armory pistols? Current Colt owners and collectors? I'm talking about people who'd like to buy a 1911 in general.

1911 shoppers who consider purchasing a Colt want a product with an established reputation and good resale value. Resale value is one of the hallmarks of owning a Colt over a copy in the factory 1911 market. They may check out the numerous 1911 specific forums. If word gets out that Colt has started in with more cost savings measures than they already do, people will be less likely to purchase a Colt, especially when other brands are cheaper. Collectors will be less likely to purchase new Colts and instead hit up the secondary market for vintage models, or switch to another brand.

What CZ should do, is build every factory production Colt pistol with bar stock internals and reasonable fit & finish with an emphasis on reliability. I think it's possible if they find ways to cut their overhead. I'd rather see them make better 1911s for their current prices than make a crappier 1911 for less money. There will always be economy brands to be had for those who can't appreciate a proper 1911.

quote:

Fifth, why would CZ try to turn Colt into a more expensive 1911 company when they've already done that to Dan Wesson? The fact that they already have Dan Wesson and have spent a long time developing the Dan Wesson brand in the market sure makes it look like they had some other purpose in mind when they bought Colt.

I'm not sure they would necessarily make Colt products more expensive. What they might do is streamline their production and improve QC and offer new products with features that Colt has been resistant to offer in the past.

Hmmm.... My Ruger 1911 has about 1500 rounds down the pipe without any problem. And it was $400 cheaper than my Colt Commander. Which would not run with its factory magazines but did run after I bought Wilsons for it. But, hey, Colt has only been making Commanders for 60+ years. They must still be working out the bugs. Thanks for pointing out what poor quality the Ruger is.
And my Ruger Blackhawk is undoubtedly low quality too. Paid $450 bucks for it new. And it works! I wonder what a Colt would cost, provided I could get one. And provided it actually worked. I have not seen a new Colt Single Action in a gun shop display case since the 70s.
What I hope to see from CZ / Colt is a good quality gun in appearance, durability, fit and function that offers a good price point in comparison to other gun makers products that have overtaken Colts market.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Hmmm.... My Ruger 1911 has about 1500 rounds down the pipe without any problem. And it was $400 cheaper than my Colt Commander. Which would not run with its factory magazines but did run after I bought Wilsons for it. But, hey, Colt has only been making Commanders for 60+ years. They must still be working out the bugs. Thanks for pointing out what poor quality the Ruger is.
And my Ruger Blackhawk is undoubtedly low quality too. Paid $450 bucks for it new. And it works! I wonder what a Colt would cost, provided I could get one. And provided it actually worked. I have not seen a new Colt Single Action in a gun shop display case since the 70s.
What I hope to see from CZ / Colt is a good quality gun in appearance, durability, fit and function that offers a good price point in comparison to other gun products that have overtaken Colts market.

Yeah, I’m pretty sure I mentioned Colt’s quality control problems more than once in my previous posts. Rest assured, whatever (apparently minor) issues you’ve had with yours, I’ve had tenfold with my 40+ years of collecting Colt pistols.

But surely, cutting corners and endeavoring to make even shittier pistols won’t improve their quality much. Hopefully CZ understands this. I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings regarding your Ruger. I’m sure it meets your needs. BTW, let me know when Ruger gets a military contract to build them in quantity for a major department or agency like Colt’s Marine Corps contract.

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:
BTW, let me know when Ruger gets a military contract to build them in quantity for a major department or agency like Colt’s Marine Corps contract.

We get it, you’re a colt fanboi, but I’ll tell ya a little something about military contracts. They don’t impress me. They go to the lowest bidder and have shit for quality control. My issued M16A2 was a Colt. 4 MOA gun at best. Got a FN M4 a few months into my deployment to Iraq and it was way better as far as fit, finish and accuracy goes. Colt has been living off of its name for some time now (1911’s or otherwise). What does it say about Colt that FN was able to undercut them and still offer a better product?

Also, regarding USMC and their handgun contract: it actually belongs to Glock so....

Yeah, I was gonna say - didn't that MEU contract kinda come and go a while ago?

BTW, BB, you're still kinda stuck on your own personal definition of current Colt shoppers. That leads to circular logic. The gun buying public is not composed entirely of collectors, and it doesn't help that you brag about having had so many problems over 40 years as a collector or patronize someone who wanted something else from a 1911 than you did.

quote:

We get it, you’re a colt fanboi,

No, if you've ever read any of my past or even my most recent posts, I can tell you nothing could be further from the truth. Yes I own a number of Colts, but I have also been vocally critical of their quality issues. If anything, I am a realist with respect to Colt products. More so than any true fanboi.

quote:

but I’ll tell ya a little something about military contracts. They don’t impress me. They go to the lowest bidder and have shit for quality control.

LOL, there's not much you're likely to tell me about military contracts, considering I've been involved in military contracting for better than 30 years. That one was funny! Suffice it to say its a BIT more complex than most civilians understand.

quote:

My issued M16A2 was a Colt. 4 MOA gun at best. Got a FN M4 a few months into my deployment to Iraq and it was way better as far as fit, finish and accuracy goes.

No shit... The M16 I had was a piece of shit too. Though often when people complain about issued Colt vs FN M16s, they're comparing an old beat to shit Colt that has been overhauled and treated like shit to a brand new initial issue FN that was issued right out of the crate. No doubt FN makes a better product. That's one of the reasons I have 5 SCARs. But in all honesty, I also have 5 6920s too. Dude, I could tell you personal stories about Colt issues I've had that would curl your toe nails. As much as you may hate Colt, I can tell you that you likely haven't seen one iota of the level of QC issues I've seen with Colt products.

quote:

Colt has been living off of its name for some time now (1911’s or otherwise). What does it say about Colt that FN was able to undercut them and still offer a better product?

It says this... Colts are made by lazy union slugs who work for inept management in the crooked leftwing shit hole state of Connecticut. The people making a Colt firearm are likely lifelong democRAT voters who, if it's election day, are likely to head to the pole and vote for Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden.

Does that sound like a Colt fanboy?

quote:

Also, regarding USMC and their handgun contract: it actually belongs to Glock so....

Yeah, it does now. BUT... Colt did have a contract for the M45A1, whereas Ruger did not.

OK, guys, cool it, please. No one here wants to wade through a bunch of bickering in this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
Yeah, I was gonna say - didn't that MEU contract kinda come and go a while ago?

BTW, BB, you're still kinda stuck on your own personal definition of current Colt shoppers. That leads to circular logic. The gun buying public is not composed entirely of collectors, and it doesn't help that you brag about having had so many problems over 40 years as a collector or patronize someone who wanted something else from a 1911 than you did.

Obviously you missed my point, so I'll move the dots a little closer together so maybe you can connect those dots...

Yes, I have been collecting Colts for decades. Yes, I have enjoyed many of my Colts, BUT I have also witnessed some hideous QC issues that should NEVER have occurred considering Colt's long history of making guns.

This will be my last post on the subject.

Never did I say that Colt's buying public was entirely composed of collectors. YOU said that, not me. That being said, collectors are one component of their sales. I seriously doubt any three letter agency is likely to adopt a gold inlaid 1911 or for that matter, a single action revolver. Cold does compete in the marketplace mostly with their ARs. In that regard, they continue to deliver on contracts with numerous LE agencies and FMS. They lost the contract to make M16s and M4s to FN because FN is better able to deliver products with acceptable QC for a better price than Colt, for the reasons previously mentioned.

Anyone on this forum who knows me know's I won't hold back my criticism when I see a poor business model of shitty QC... QC is pretty important to me, you might even say I live QC. Besides lambasting Colt, I am also on record for lambasting SIG Sauer for their equally ridiculous QC gaffs and obscenely poor engineering choices.

I am what some might call a standard bearer. I have brand loyalty to a point, but I will never hesitate to speak up when any manufacturer short changes quality for increased profit margin. Because at the end of the day, we're not talking about flat screen TVs, stereo equipment. Firearms are, for all practical terms life saving tools that Military, LE, and civilians may rely upon when their lives are in danger. In that moment, when the only thing standing between a person's life and certain death, the last thing anyone will be thinking is how happy they are they saved a few bucks because their firearm was manufactured in the cheapest, most expedient method possible to maximize profit margin at the expense of absolute reliability and performance.

The irony is people, the real fanbois often hate what I have to say about their pet brand name, but in truth, I am only making my voice heard in an attempt to spur these manufacturers to make a better product. With respect to CZ purchasing Colt, I see the potential of that very thing happening, though I do have some reservations about yet another American gun company being owned by a foreign entity.

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:
Obviously you missed my point, so I'll move the dots a little closer together so maybe you can connect those dots...

I said COOL IT

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:
Obviously you missed my point, so I'll move the dots a little closer together so maybe you can connect those dots...

I said COOL IT

Sorry, I was composing that post at the time, and didn’t see your post until I had posted mine.

FWIW, TFB's interview with Lubomir Kovarik, President of CZ Group, on what CZ plans to do with Colt. Warning: Be prepared to wade through corporate jargon.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/.../02/15/cz-buys-colt/

Alas, no word on making 7.62x39 BRENs in the US.

Short version - CZ wants access to the US, UK and other military markets via Colt and Colt Canada; CZ plans on leaving current Colt management team in place; CZ will be using Colt production capacity and distribution network to expand access to US market; CZ will be seeking to expand Colt's offerings and production; Colt's recent revolver sales look good to CZ; CZ is crazy enough to keep Colt in Connecticut.