It is sad that Colt has fallen so far - especially in terms of quality - when they could have controlled the market if they had chosen to. But honestly, even for a basic gun like that, it doesn't sound like their prices are out of line.
You're right Pat - if I was on a real limited budget, I would probably spend the money on a Springfield or something else - rather than the Colt at that price point or any price point for that matter - if I was looking for a "plain" 1911.
I was trying to comment on how sad it is that Colt has fallen so far in terms of semi-autos. Although you could argue, that they never were that good. I'm a Vietnam era vet - and the Colt .45 ACP's were never that good a gun. We would often have a gunners mate take 5 or 6 of them and put the best of the parts together to make up a "decent" gun. But they were never very reliable or very accurate unless someone really "tuned" one up.
In terms of entry level 1911's - for reliability and accuracy - I would put Springfield near the top. I would probably put Taurus down a little - but I don't know much about their 1911's. I think SIG is probably improving in the 1911 world - and Kimber has fallen a little - but a lot of that really depends on which model you pick. Kimber, as an example, makes a lot of guns and there is a big difference in one out of their true custom shop like the Raptor vs some of their less expensive models.
I'm not a poly fan - from any mfg - not even Wilson Combat. But I think Wilson Combat makes some of the finest custom and production 1911's on the market ( in 9mm and .45 ACP) - even better than Ed Brown or Les Baer ( but that's just my opinion ), how they feel, fit my hand, etc. But paying $2,500 for a production 1911 is not what everyone wants to do. But I'd rather have 1 Wilson Combat - than 3 lesser guns too - and there are a few out there in the used market at a good savings - just have to be patient. Take care / didn't mean to mislead you.