I own a number of 1911s and have owned others which I have passed on. The least expensive was a basic Kimber. The most expensive is a customized Colt Delta Elite. In the middle are three Dan Wesson pistols in the $1200 to $2200 range along with a couple of old SIG GSRs I have had customized.

I'm curious about the opinions of those who own 1911s on the "point of diminishing returns". If you do not consider the cost of purely aesthetic aspects, just the fit, finish, accuracy and durability, is there a point of diminishing returns?

It seems that even with a hand made pistol by a master builder, you can only eek so much performance out of a piece of machinery.

What, in your personal opinion, is the price point after which you are paying for either aesthetics only and/or intangibles.

I'd say around $1,200-$1,500

One of the hard gun lessons i have learned in my 26 years of owning guns and shooting is that the high end 1911, can give you as much in terms of problems and performance as the low end 1911. I have owned, Colt, Kimbers, Les Baers, Nighthawks, presently own Dan Wessons, Wilsons, i had stroke moment and bought a Remington (customized but was junk) Springfield (junk).
Dan Wesson are in the sweet spot. Just my opinion.

I'll start out by saying, I have a Wilson Combat and an Ed Brown Kobra 5" (my favorite and some of the favoritism is looks).

I think for 98% shooters and including myself (not including the aesthetic portion) yes. You get diminisihing returns after $1000-1200. Case in point

I bought a Colt Competition S/S government 9mm sight unseen when the S/S first came out for around $850. It's barrel bushing fit and slide to frame fit are extremely tight, as tight as my WC or Brown. The gun has all of the bells and whistles I want and need (sights, etc.) and is a great shooter, more accurate than I am....I'd say I'm better than most shooters, but shoot a 6" group at 25 yards, not 1.5" LOLOLOL Anyways, the trigger is good, very little take up and a crisp clean albeit heavy break. That gun with a $200 trigger job would serve all of my needs and most everyone else's.

I have a Triangle Shooting sports 1911 - run about 3K. It’s a world smoother etc than a Wilson, etc.

$1200ish. Beyond that, you don’t see much difference in a $1200 gun and a $3000 gun until 10-15k rounds.

While I would agree with some here that the point of diminishing returns is probably around $1200-$1500, I have a handful of 1911s (and have bought / sold / traded quiet a few more over time), two of which are north of that point. A Les Baer and an Ed Brown. Both of which were purchased in excellent used condition, so I was able to save a bit vs. buying them new but with the added bonus that both were spec’d almost perfectly (to me), almost exactly as I’d have ordered them if new. For one of the two (the Brown) I wouldn’t change a thing; on the other, I’d make the relatively simple change of a front sight, and that would be it.

That becomes the bigger issue to me with 1911s. There are so many options (FCS vs. no FCS, short trigger vs. long, sights, finish, front strap checkering, the list goes on and on) that, to find one that is at or near “perfect” to me has a value of its own.

Granted, one can buy a plain 1911 and then have a number of things done to it, but I’ll admit to both some impatience and a lack of desire to spend more $ on top of the gun.

I mean, all I want is what I want and I want it all NOW, right? Haha...

I will be the first to admit that, in my hands, anyway, most 1911s I’ve owned / tried / fired all shoot just about the same. I do detect a little edge to the higher-end ones, but it’s slight.

Yep. $1200-$1500ish.

Dan Wesson is definitely the sweet spot. They absolutely dominate the $1000-$1500ish 1911 market.

At least twice the gun of a full factory 1911, at only a few hundred dollars more. And ~80% the gun of a full custom 1911, at half to a quarter of the price.

I have limited experience with the 1911 platform.

However, I shoot my 80's Combat Commander in .38 super better than the Wilson Combat Elite Professional in .38 Super. I sold the Wilson last year, I still have the Colt.

I look at it this way:
Is a $800 pistol twice as good as a $400 pistol- almost certainly!
Is a $1600 pistol 2x as good as an 800- probably
Is a 2400 pistol 50% better than the 1600- maybe
Is the $4000 almost twice as good as the 2400 not likely
As price goes up increments of improvement or refinement get smaller.
For example ( I know these prices are dated) at one time a run of the mill les Baer was around $1800 while the Wilson combat was around 3 grand, or a little over 50% more expensive, but I don’t think the Wilson was or is 50% better than a Baer

I want a 3K custom 1911 but cant justify that kind of money when my Ruger SR 1911 shoots so well.
My budget cutoff is $1200. I plan on a DW A2 in the future.

A higher price point, but I looked at an advertisement for a perfectly serviceable "semi-custom" (low volume manufacturer) 1911 for $2400. I went down the a la carte option list and quickly ran up $1400 for options that added no functionality but are regarded as essential by a lot of Extravagant Cool Guys.

I'm not a 1911 guy -- what are you getting (functionally) for your extra buckage? I truly have no idea.

If the idea is to make holes at a certain point on the paper are you saying the $1200 gun does it better than the $800, but that's the end of the road and the $2000 doesn't do it any better than the $1200? If so, are you getting more longevity out of the extra bucks, or more reliability, or more aesthetics, or some combination of all those, or what?

I see $1000+ Sigs in the case at the gun shop and know in my heart that, as cool as it looks, the holes in the paper would be in the same place as they are with my P320Cs, at least when I'm at the helm. So I move on along.

I'm a cyclist, and I buy crazy-ass expensive bicycles about every 5-6 years, just because I get a wild hair. I keep the older ones, and when I switch back I'm not one bit slower (that I can measure, anyway) than I am with the blingy newest model. But hey... I just like them, so sue me.

Is that kind of how it is with Mr. Fancypants 1911s, after a certain point?

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
I want a 3K custom 1911 but cant justify that kind of money when my Ruger SR 1911 shoots so well.
My budget cutoff is $1200. I plan on a DW A2 in the future.

Love my sr1911 also Its e
verything i want in a 1911 My favorite range toy

It seems there are at least a couple different units of measure that can be used.

First, actual performance. Will a $2000 pistol shoot 2x as well as a $1000. Probably not, but some improvement should be noticeable. I own several really nice pistols that are certainly capable of shooting to a much better level of accuracy than I am capable of. My last few purchases are a CZ Shadow 2, a Beretta 92X Performance and a CZ AccuShadow 2, all very accurate pistols. When I do my part I can shoot them as well as I have ever shot a pistol. What I find is that these pistols allow me to more easily approach the best of my abilities due mainly to the inherent advantages provided by the upgrades of the pistols but also to the confidence they inspire in me as a shooter. At times I can shoot my P226RX SAO as well as these pistols as it has an awesome trigger and the sight works very well for me, but not quite as consistently.

Second, is the enjoyment the shooter gets from owning a fine piece of artillery. I just like nice stuff and get lots of enjoyment from owning and shooting them, and studying the improvements made to the base model pistol and how it is advantageous. Whether the level of enjoyment I get is equal to the extra $$ is difficult to ascertain. Having already bought a Shadow 2 there was no reason for me to put out the $$ for the AccuShadow in many respects, and I mulled it over for days. Once the decision was made I have no regrets. To me the extra amount I paid was worth it.

At some point you're definitely paying for kinetic art. That doesn't have to be a bad thing. But where that line is, exactly, and how far you're willing to go beyond it, depends on the person.

I have come to the conclusion that, for me, as many have pointed out, $1500 to $2000 is the sweet spot. Most of the money has gone into the fit and finish of the gun and while they are aesthetically pleasing and a pleasure to own, none of it is really "bling".

I can also understand that unless you are going to be shooting a lot of rounds through it, durability, like much else listed here, will likely not be much different between a $1500 or $1200 gun and a $2000 or $2500 gun.

I am definitely swayed to an extent, by the joy of ownership. If you don't really like the look and feel of the gun and take pleasure in taking it out for a spin, even if there is no bling, then why buy it.

Until you have handled a truly custom gun like one built by Jason Burton, you won’t understand. They are flawless in every way. A lot of aesthetics, sure, but every part is perfect, the slide moving on the frame is smoother than anything you’ve ever felt. The safety engaging and disengaging perfectly. The consistent accuracy. The trigger crisper than any gun you have ever held.

Is all of that needed? No, but it sure is nice.

I’d say an average priced Wilson is the point of diminishing returns. In my opinion they are twice as good as an off the shelf gun.

Remember, There are people running around with $2,500 glocks when a $500 one works every time.

I'll join the chorus of folks stating that a Dan Wesson is a very attainable sweet spot in terms of aesthetics, performance, and price. I picked up a new to me Guardian a few years ago and it is my "nightstand gun." Just shot it last weekend.

Yesterday a gunsmith on FB got right huffy because I failed to express unalloyed admiration for one of his styling gimmicks that I thought impaired functionality. You have to be careful around the Deluxe Fans.