Put me in the camp of I don't see the angst. The only things I find objectionable are the color and the stylized X. On my 365's I can tolerate the goofy X because it's a beater gun, on a 1911 it looks moronic. As for the rail, I think railless looks better but I would be lying if I said I have never looked at the Dan Wesson Guardian which has a rail and don't find that objectionable. Rails don't bug me like rails and optic cuts bug you guys. Function trumps form in most cases, yes even in a 1911. lol

I also don't see a problem nor have I ever had an issue with a long external extractor. I think you guys hate the aesthetics but I can't keep up.

Picked one up like a week ago and just took it to the range to run nearly a hundred flawless rounds. First off in it’s Coyote bronze color it’s a great looking 1911!... that it is both optics ready and has a 1913 Picatinny rail are just pluses whether one decides to use these or not. It has a sweet AF trigger and the Sig X-Ray3 Day/Night iron sights that also can co-witness with the Romeo X more than do the job. The front checkered strap and the early G10 grips provided give this 1911 a no nonsense feel to it. Perhaps because I already own a Springfield Armory 1911 Loaded to appreciate the classic 1911 as well that I have a Sig MK25 as my home defense handgun along with a p365 XL as my EDC for the past 4 years but as a Sig aficionado I am truly elated with this purchase. Those that needlessly bash a Sig Sauer offering like this that hits the mark for many of us should perhaps reconsider why they are in this Forum as I'm guessing there's one just like it for Glock fan bois in which to do so... Just saying...

I own about 13 or 14 1911’s, including a IPSC racegun single stack and one built on the STI frame when it came out. I even own a Kimber that works!

This is not Sig’s first foray into the 1911 world. I suspect the size of the 1911 fanboy crowd was too tempting. I have avoided the old Sig 1911 version because I had heard the Sig engineers thought they knew between than JMB how to make a 1911 - and changed the feed ramp angle. That led to some reliability issues, expecially using hollow points. Don’t know whether they went back to the JMB ramp or not, but I would want to know that first.

Probably >80% of classical 1911 issues revolve around tuning the internal extractor. To that end, the concept of an external extractor is IMO a real improvement. The fact Kimber couldn’t make it work shouldn’t disqualify it from consideration; Kimber at that point had trouble making a 1911 that worked at all. (“A Kimber 1911 is a collection of parts that happen to be going in the same direction at the same time” was a saying of that time.)

I am personally not a big fan of railed frames in general. I have some Sig & HK’s that are railed, and my 227 has a Streamlight and is my night stand weapon. Still, I generally carry a non-railed Sig. Just my preference.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Devereaux,

My problems with the external extractor is if you're going to fix that problem, why not fix the rest of them? Why not change the barrel to where it locks up on the barrel hood instead of requiring links and lugs too? That would also take care of the need for a barrel bushing making takedown and fitting to the slide easier (along with simpler manufacturing).

So you prefer fixing either none of the issues or all of them? Lol

I sorta get your point but I have never had an issue with any external extractor ever. (also never owned a Kimber)

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
So you prefer fixing either none of the issues or all of them? Lol

I sorta get your point but I have never had an issue with any external extractor ever. (also never owned a Kimber)

You lucked out - no Kimber. Actually, there was a time they were quite good. But ever since they went to their version of firing pin block, they have pretty much sucked. Mine is of the old variety. It is also in .17 Mach2. Fun to shoot.

Losing the front bushing would make it easier to take down, but you would lose some of the accuracy potential. Note the S&W Model 52 has a bushing, but it’s different from the 1911 - it screws into the slide. Makes for a tighter fit IMO.

The swing link is a different animal. One thing about it is that it allows you to to tighten up the lock-up by changing the length of the swing link. You can’t do that with an Sig or HK, so when that gets too loose to shoot well, you trash the barrel. This way the barrel is saveable, at least until it, too, is trash. But barrels last a lot longer than swing links or solid lock-up.

One can argue about the upper lock-up. It is true that the 1911 is a lot bigger PITA to lock-up properly. For a combat gun, that isn’t crucial, but in a bullseye gun, it CAN be important. Our target guns when I was shooting on a Marine Reserve team were made and refreshed by the MTU at Quantico. Those guns even had a small plate welded into the slide to center the barrel over the firing pin so you got a perfectly centered strike. Couldn’t do that with today’s locking system.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Devereaux,

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
So you prefer fixing either none of the issues or all of them? Lol

I sorta get your point but I have never had an issue with any external extractor ever. (also never owned a Kimber)

If you're going away from standard 1911 parts, just do a clean break was the point. Otherwise you're just half assing it. I think the best example of this working is the American P210. They fixed several fiddly issues that made it easier to make and improved the durability.

quote:

Originally posted by DanH:

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
So you prefer fixing either none of the issues or all of them? Lol

I sorta get your point but I have never had an issue with any external extractor ever. (also never owned a Kimber)

If you're going away from standard 1911 parts, just do a clean break was the point. Otherwise you're just half assing it. I think the best example of this working is the American P210. They fixed several fiddly issues that made it easier to make and improved the durability.

Something to be said for incremental change. It allows for both observation whether the change works reliably AND it also allows gauging acceptance.