After over 55 years of shooting, I finally bought my first 1911. After some research for the most affordable yet still reliable offering, I came across Tisas USA (made in Turkey). My favorite LGS had several, so I took the plunge...

What I got... Tisas 1911 Service Special 45. Five-year warranty and lifetime service warranty. Made in Turkey like so many other bargain-priced but reliable guns are these days. Lockable hard case, 2 mags, cleaning rod and brush, barrel bushing tools. List price of $459.00, and I got mine for $329.00 brand new (plus tax of course). Hard Ceracote finish with original style plastic grip panels, Series 70 lock-work, upgraded hammer spur, etc.

Certainly not a Kimber, Springfield, or anything similar, but for the price, I couldn't NOT buy it! First few mags had everything functioning 100%, so cannot complain about that either!




Edit to add some additional points and observations...

The safety could be smoother in operation, but no doubt will get much better as I use it and it gets broken-in; same goes for the trigger. But since I bought it as a "toy" to play around with and customize over time, I didn't expect it to be any better than it currently is; works without jamming, but could be a bit more refined. For $329.00, what would one expect?

Fit is surprisingly good... not as tight as a Kimber for example, but still pretty darned good; definitely better than would expect for the price! One big downside to it that I knew before I bought it is the fact that the slide is not dove-tailed for the sights, so replacing them with nightsights would be a challenge with machining involved!

Regarding Turkish-made guns... I also have a 12ga O/U shotgun on layaway that is Turkish made, and it is sooo nice for the price! Nice checkered Turkish walnut, engraved satin nickel receiver, good bluing, raised vent rib, full assortment of screw-in chokes, absolutely perfect fit and on target when I shoulder it. For a mere $399.00 plus tax, it is another big win for a guy on a small fixed income!

Looks like a good, basic, no-frills 1911. As long as the production quality is up to snuff, it should make for a good base for future tinkering and customization.

It's close to a USGI-style 1911, but I like how they've addressed three of the major drawbacks of the USGI 1911 with a few improvements that you'll definitely appreciate, including the rounded commander-style hammer to prevent hammer bite since it doesn't have an extended beavertail, slightly better sights than the crude and stubby standard USGI sights, and a flat mainspring housing instead of the arched housing found on just about every USGI 1911.

Those are definitely my top 3 complaints about a USGI 1911, though not everyone experiences hammer bite with the standard USGI hammer, and mainspring housing shape is more of a personal preference thing. Some people love the arched ones, but I certainly do not, and all of my 1911s have had flat MSHs, even if it meant swapping in an aftermarket flat one myself.

(The USGI 1911 originally had a flat MSH, but the arched one was added in the A1 upgrade just after WW1 in the early 1920s, with subsequent USGI production over the next several decades featuring it and older 1911s being retrofitted with the arched MSH.)

sounds like a great deal to me.

I would have been sorely tempted and I'm not even a 1911 guy. (Gave mine along with the ammo to a friend last year)

Now you need to run about 500 rounds through it to break it in... from what I've heard. Just realized, that is going to cost you more than what you paid for the pistol.

Cool!

I hear good things about the Tisas- I would grab one if we could get them here in the PRC.

You can't beat it for the price!

Nice pick up for a good price. We look forward to ongoing range report (please!).

Nice pistol, OP. I hope you keep updating this thread as you use it...I'm interested to hear how these hold up over time.

I keep going back and forth on whether or not I need one of these. I used to have a 1943 Remington Rand through work, but we recently shipped those back to Anniston. Hopefully they resell them through the CMP instead of melting them down, as that would break my heart. If they do resell them, some folks are going to get some really nice guns...we had 11 and they were all in pretty good shape. There was even a Union Switch and Signal in there.

I had a love hate relationship with that gun. Like Rogue said, the sights sucked (how the US Military could field the excellent sighting system on the M1 Garand and the worthless bumps on the 1911 at the same time is beyond me), the arched mainspring housing was annoying, and the hammer bit the web of my hand every chance it got. But it was just such a cool piece of history and fun to shoot.

I keep telling myself that I already have a nice 1911 and I don't need to spend money on a worse one. I've also been less than satisfied with cheap guns in the past. But when you think about it, isn't that basically what the mil-spec 1911 was? A bargain basement, low-bid, mass-produced tool for an organization that put a lot of emphasis on rifles and very little on handguns? I know I can't justify the $1000+ for a CMP 1911, but for the money, I'm really tempted to grab one of these (the one with the awful arched mainspring housing, crummy sights, and bitey hammer) just for the nostalgia, and because it would be fun to take to the range with my Garand, 1917, and 03A3!

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
how the US Military could field the excellent sighting system on the M1 Garand and the worthless bumps on the 1911 at the same time is beyond me

To be fair, they were introduced at significantly different times.

The M1911's sights were designed and adopted in the late 1900s and early 1910s. In that turn-of-the-century time period, most handguns had sights that were almost an afterthought, being tiny and near-useless, with many having only a front sight or even just an aiming trough instead of distinct sights.

The M1 Garand was designed and adopted in the mid-1930s, over 2 decades later. And the Garand's sights were borrowed from the M1917, which were copied from the British P14 design, so we actually have the British designers at Enfield to thank for the "USGI sight picture" we know and love, with a rear peep sight and a winged front sight.


In addition, during the WW1-WW2 period, much of the emphasis in the US military on handgun marksmanship was centered around instinctive "point shooting". Point shooting in combat is what was taught to recruits, along with what appears to us nowadays to be an odd wide crouched one-handed stance intended to help facilitate "combat point shooting":

True, but they upgraded other stuff during that time (like the 1903 to the 03A3), so the opportunity was there to do the handguns, too, if they'd had a mind to. A bunch of them were still being produced well into WWII, and the design could have easily been improved to a "1911A2". Case-in-point, the simple improvements to the OP's handgun could have been easily implemented without much cost to yield a better overall product...I think it just wasn't that big of a priority.

And yes, the doctrine behind handgun shooting technique at that time probably played a role in that decision as well.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
I think it just wasn't that big of a priority.

Yep. No sights needed for point shooting at close ranges.

In addition, by the time WW2 rolled around, the M1 Carbine had replaced the 1911 as the primary weapon for nearly everyone that previously had been armed only with a pistol. Pistols had then become almost exclusively secondary sidearms for close-range backup defense if someone went wrong with your primary weapon, as they are in the modern military.

But if there was no M1 Carbine, and there were still a bunch of servicemen relying on just the 1911 as their primary weapon into WW2, perhaps there would have been more of an impetus to work on a further upgraded M1911A2. As it stood, the M1911A1 was still good enough for a "backup" weapon less likely to see actual combat use, even several decades after its initial adoption.

Lol, the best part of that video is where they're talking about safety, and all the trainees are standing in a semi-circle facing the instructor, pull their guns out and point them at him with their fingers on the trigger...!

Gun Safety Rule #1: Assume all guns are unloaded, until you hear an unexpected bang.
Gun Safety Rule #2: Keep your finger on the trigger at all times; you never know when you might need to shoot.

Or something like that...

Lol, yeah, I guess maybe we have learned a few things and made some changes for the better in the last 80 years after all. Oh, and thanks for reminding me that I still need a carbine, too !

Nice looking GI style model.

I can’t justify carrying any of my full size steel 1911 for ccw. Weight, lack of capacity and size is not conducive to ccw with my lifestyle of not much of heavy clothing in FL. But at the range or open field carry they sure are fun. I have picked up 2 Springfield mil specs in the last few years had for about the same money as you paid. The rest are colts.

Got my first one in 1961. Every shooter should have at least one.

Great price, especially since it seems to be reliable. One thing I would try and confirm is whether it is truly mil-spec. If not, some aftermarket components could be a problem from the fit perspective.

I bought one of these not that long ago when we had them as a Black Friday doorbuster for $299. A sub-300 1911...kind of a no-brainer. Surprisingly good trigger on the one I got, much smoother than either the Mil-Spec and Garrison Springfields we also had in the display case at the time. Yeah the sights are tough on my old eyes, but it shoots very well and so far works without hiccup with every 7 and 8 round mag I've tried to date. Roughly 250 rounds through so far and aside from the sights it's been a winner.

Caniks have been some of my favorite guns for the past few years, and Girsan seems to get a lot of love everywhere (including here on the forum) so I'm not surprised with the high level of quality coming out of Turkey these days.

My introduction to the 1911 at Advanced Infantry Training at Ft. Gordon. Took us to a range and let each person go through a couple of magazines. I remember the gun was "loose" and rattled when shaken. Nobody did well on the targets. We were told by the range sgt. "Let them get close, let them get real close and then throw it at 'em." In Vietnam given one in much better shape as a backup. Realized the M-16 was a way superior tool.

quote:

Originally posted by Nipper:
<<snip>>
One thing I would try and confirm is whether it is truly mil-spec. If not, some aftermarket components could be a problem from the fit perspective.

The only issue I have read about so far is someone on the interwebz complained that the hinge pin hole in the grip safety was in a different location from an aftermarket one they'd ordered. They drilled a new hole in the right location and was good to go.

I'll take that as "hear say" until I can find more complaints like it though. At this moment, the only change I am thinking about is wood grip panels, and possibly having the slide dovetailed for replaceable sights...

quote:

Originally posted by bronicabill:
the only change I am thinking about is wood grip panels

Bill-
When you get into 1911 grips, you also get into 1911 grip bushings. Slim ones, regular ones, etc. It's good to know which ones you have, and which ones you'll need for grips you may put on in the future.
https://www.challisgrips.com/p...and-Accessories.aspx
is where I learned a TON about this. It helped me understand my Colt Defender and eventually be able to swap out different grips to get the ones that worked best for me.