[Frito Bandito]

I'm looking to buy another pistol (the wife loves that) and am thinking about getting a .45 ACP. I can't decide between Glock and Springfield. I like Glock because I know they are incredibly tough guns. I like Springfield because I've heard that they are very high quality for the money. Both fit my hand. Both are in my price range. Suggestions, anyone?

P.S. - I don't want to have to do any work to the GI to make it work, if that has ever been a problem.

 

[Asylum Keeper]

If you go for a Springfield 1911 dont get the GI, go for the Mil-Spec, only a little more cash but has better sights and a lowered and flared port. I have had a Mil-Spec for a few months now and love it, had zero problems with it.

 

[claybird]

FB, Get the 1911. I say this for Ammo cost alone. The Glock is not supposed to like lead bullets. Could even be dangerous using them. Something about the Glock rifling.
With Ammo cost going out of sight. ,home cast can give you some cheap shooting. More shooting ,more fun and better training.
I beleive in Gun Control. To me,that means hitting your target.
What ever way you go , enjoy.

 

[Fuelburns2]

I recommend the Springfield Milspec as well. The GI is a good gun too but what you get for the extra money is worth the price to me.

I just don't like Glocks because of the look, grip angle, the lightweight frame does less for recoil and a few other personal biases I happen to have.

 

[Frito Bandito]

Thanks for the input, guys. You know, I actually kind of like the military-style sights on the GI. Does the lower and flared port on the Mil-Spec improve function in any way, though? Because that would be worth the extra money.

 

[Fuelburns2]

I've never had a standard port to compare it to. The GI spec 1911's certainly worked for the military so I doubt there are any significant issues to worry about with the GI.

 

[Asylum Keeper]

I do know that the lowered and flared port makes it easier to remove an unfire round from the chamber. The bullet can catch the edge of the un-flared port, but that isnt really a big deal. I would say if you are getting the gun for defence go with the Mil-Spec, if it is a pleasure gun and most likely wont see use as a defensive weapon go with the GI if you like it, both are great guns.

 

[hoashooter]

Another nod for the Springfield :wink:

 

[Frito Bandito]

Thanks again, everybody. The .45 would be a "for fun" gun. I have a snub nose revolver and a SIG 9mm for concealed purposes. I just want something to take to the range or on the trail.

 

[New_Geezer]

I have SA GI-45 I'm happy with. Basically the flared port allows a cleaner shell ejection. While I've never had a casing get stuck in over 2K rounds - the casings do get dinged on the way out which matters if you save the brass or reload. Also occasionally a shell gets ejected straight back and down the shirt. A flared port avoids this. The small sights were a bit of a pain. I put some bright white nail polish on the front and either side of the rear notch which makes them easier to use. I've gotten used to them by now and am pretty accurate with it but honestly better sights might be prefered for a fun gun if fun is more precise shooting. As for HD, most of those situations are close range and don't afford the luxory of precise aiming - the GI-45 just points naturally in most hands and will do fine.