I am in the market for a new pistol. I have EDC carry guns. I am thinking something full sized, or at least close to it, I want a shooter. I have some 9MM, .357/.38 and .40 ammo, I can reload .45. Budget is $700ish.

For that money, I'd look at one of the lower 1911s from Springfield. Ruger 1911 is also a consideration and a strong value.

I'd say make a list of four or five models in which you are interested, and then buy whichever one presents the best deal. There aren't a lot of bargains floating around these days, so I'd suggest looking for the best bang for your buck.

Every American should own at least one Glock 17.

I have a Sig P226 I've been thinking about selling and it's in that range. West-German made and shoots really well.

I have always wanted a 1911. but I didn't want to buy a cheap knockoff just to have one. I will look into it some more.



I carried a Glock 22 when I was in law enforcement. I don't have a problem there, just exploring my options.



I might be interested, let know know if you decide to sell.

Sig 320 in 357sig

This is making me think ...

My cousin bought the Ruger 1911 from academy and he loved it.
I love all my Kimber but they are $1k+.
I take a 1911 single action over any other double action guns any day.

Is watch for used Colt 1911. Have to bump your budget $100 but they come around occasionally

Ruger GP100

What year was it made?

To the OP, HK VP9

FIFY

I don't recall off the top....1995-ish

I second the springfield 1911. I like old school thumpers and i shoot the crap out of them. On a budget a springfield mil spec fits the bill.
I have a Colt 70 series Government model and a Springfield mil spec. Fit and finish on the Colt is better than the Springer and it shoots good. The Colt looks, well, like a Colt Government. I wanted to like it better.
The Springer is the one I like best. It is not flashy but it is parkerized so water and sweat just wipe off. No rust. The arched mainspring housing on the Springer makes it point true in my hands. . The Springer mil spec has a better trigger and better sights. The Springer is not picky about mags and has been 100% reliable. The Colt is 100% reliable with quality mags. Both have match grade barrels and there is no slop in the barrel bushing on either. Both are surprisingly tight. Both are very accurate pistols. The Springer is more accurate off a rest and easier to shoot accurately free hand. For a shooter 1911 on a budget, the Springer has a lot going for it.

Interesting take. I have owned both a Springfield mil-spec and a Colt Series 80. The Springfield got sold quickly. The Colt will be passed on to my son one day. It has a better trigger, smoother action, handles a wider range of ammo without jams, and in general is a much nicer gun.

I have shot a Springfield Operator and it's a much nicer pistol than the mil-spec. I think in the same price range, the difference in Colt/Springfield is mostly just feel. But the cheaper springfields are a major step down from Colt/Ruger/Springfield/Kimber performance & quality, in my experience. The trigger and smoothness of the mil-spec weren't even in the same league as any $500+ 1911 (I paid $400 for the mil-spec at the time and sold it for $475).

Makes me think he misspelled 1911.


In my opinion the Ruger 1911 is superior to anything in its price range.

I thought everyone already had a 1911.

I was moving on to the next one.

I’ll have to take a hard pass on a G-17. Absolutely great gun that is insanely boring and only works every time you pull the trigger. Just uncomfortable to me.

Yeah. I tried to convince myself to buy a glock a few times but they fit me so poorly that I just couldn't do it.

Maybe both of you should concentrate on becoming better shooters of ANY firearm, than being little b!tches.

Ha. I’ll gladly run my P226 against you. It’s funny though, I shoot the exact same score with a Glock (26 & 17) as I do with my trusty P226. So I guess I have mastered BOTH platforms.

MR920.