As some one who owns allot of Colts I don't see it as bashing. It's more like for god sakes Colt you know you have these same issues for decades and you don't fix them? I have a Delta currently going under a full house build. It was made around 1991 and just like my 1991A1 45acp the frame pin holes aren't square and aren't even very round.

My Kimber custom shop eclipse has none of these issues, has all the custom parts installed and has never sent it's front site down range like ALL of my Colt 1911's have. How long has Kimber been making 1911s? VS. Colt?

I have held the "New" Delte. It's the same gun from the 80s-90s with all the slide rattle and barrel slop. I would use it as a foundation gun for a build but that would be a very expensive project.

Most of all I am just plane disappointed, I was really hoping the new Deltas would kick some ass.

panzermk2: "As some one who owns allot of Colts I don't see it as bashing. It's more like for god sakes Colt you know you have these same issues for decades and you don't fix them? I have a Delta currently going under a full house build. It was made around 1991 and just like my 1991A1 45acp the frame pin holes aren't square and aren't even very round.

My Kimber custom shop eclipse has none of these issues, has all the custom parts installed and has never sent it's front site down range like ALL of my Colt 1911's have. How long has Kimber been making 1911s? VS. Colt?

I have held the "New" Delte. It's the same gun from the 80s-90s with all the slide rattle and barrel slop. I would use it as a foundation gun for a build but that would be a very expensive project.

Most of all I am just plane disappointed, I was really hoping the new Deltas would kick some ass".



The prosecution... rests.

To be fair Colt has more than its share of faithful as well as detractors.
I own Colts as well as other brands and I am neither.

Disappointed is my evaluation. Doesn't make it a bad pistol.

This post has been edited by remat457: August 9th 2009 10:05 PM

remat457: "Disappointed is my evaluation. Doesn't make it a bad pistol".

While it doesn't make it a "bad" pistol, it dosn't speak well for it either! If you can't keep up with the competition, you will eventually relegate yourself to obsolecence.. Other manufacturers produce a vastly improved product at a slightly higher cost. This is a pattern that Colt has followed for years.

I have a Colt M1991-A1 in .45 ACP. If I knew in 2000, what I know now, I would have purchased either a Springfield Armory "loaded" pistol, or another manufacturer's Series 70 1911-A1. I am seriously considering letting it go. I don't need a "builder" I want a shooter!

Oh, well. Live and learn!

Scott

No...not quite enough...

My new DE has a spectacular trigger and will flat shoot the lights out.

The exterior of mine is flawless...really flawless. Like I care about internal scratches?

From where I sit, the mediocre accuracy you mention may have less to do with the piece and more to do with other factors.

Of course, YMMV...

From what I understand, I am not the only one speaking of Colt no longer living up to its proud tradition. If you want to deal with internal scratches, that's your business. But you are fooling yourself if you think that turning a blind eye to the fact that Colt isn't performing up to modern standards will champion their cause... that is foolishness.

Colt just isn't keeping up with the competition. Paying more attention to detail, buying (and using) more accurate barrel/bushing setups as well as "user friendly" peripherals, are what today's buyer wants. Paying $200.00 more for better "out of the box" perfromance, beats having to "add on" all the bells and whistles (for an extra $400.00) every time.

Scott

This post has been edited by gunfan: August 11th 2009 1:00 AM

"A barrel that rides on the barrel link, contributing to mediocre accuracy".

How can you justify THAT? This wasn't MY evaluation, this is a person that owns several Colt pistols. After 98 years of manufacturing pistols, You'd think Colt would want to get THAT much right, wouldn't you?

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. That's all I'M hearing from the "blind faithful" that buy a Colt without giving the pistol a THOROUGH examination.

Oh, well. "A fool and his money are some party"! LOL!

Scott

Having said what I have said about the DE I am probably going to pick one up next week.
Rumor is that the one I saw that had outside tool marks/scratches was out of the norm. Will see if I can find one as clean as some of the photos that are on the interweb. Here is an example with some nice pics: http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=239522

The DE is what it is. It is a DE and it carries the nostalgia and the Colt name with it. With Colt, who knows how long it will be around...

This post has been edited by remat457: August 17th 2009 7:11 AM

Question concerning a conversion

I have an DE 10mm from the early 90's. looking to convert it to shoot 45 ACP, what all would this entail"? A complete upper or just some drop in / fitted parts like barrel, bushing, and ejector? Any input would be nice, scarcity and price of 10 mm in my location, makes me want to switch to a more available load.

Dok

The upper and the proper magazines are all that are needed to "make the change". The .45 ACP is a very good round The 10mm is just, well... superior. Change the pistol over, if you wish, but don't forget the 10mm. It really IS better!

Scott

Ejector?

Changing the Ejector, I forgot about that, sorry!

Scott

I want to point out that I own a Dan Wesson CBOB in 10mm and a new Colt Delta Elite. I am pleased with the Delta Elite.

I posted this in the non-current 10mm thread, but feel it is pertinent here since I did end up getting a DE after initially pooh-poohing it. I think that readers shouldn't have the impression that the DE is not a viable choice.


The DE is a fully functional pistol. I considered getting an RZ instead. The RZ was $1050 and the Colt was $850. The RZ did have more modern "accessories." But, after thinking about it:

1. stock beavertail is fine
2. stock slide lock is fine
3. stock safety is fine
4. dovetail front sight would have been nice but the front tenon is pretty thick. If I manage to knock the f.s. off I will dovetail it. Not a big deal.
5. front strap checkering would have been nice. The RZ does not have it either.
6. The RZ is indeed tighter. Funny how everyone on the internet is capable of outshooting a stock 1911 and needs a custom match fit barrel. That's not my experience teaching NRA pistol classes. My stock Springfield milspec 1911 from 1990 is still one of the most accurate pistols I own.
7. trigger - actually about the same
8. internals - actually the RZ had sharper internals and externals

Now before you accuse me of being a DW basher, I own and love my Commander Bobtail 10mm.

But, in my opinion to dismiss the DE because it lacks modern features is silly. New isn't necessarily better. I personally don't want front cocking serrations like on the Eclipse -- it serves no purpose for me.

For $850 I get a no frills, proven 10mm from Colt built the same way they did in the 90's.
The extra stuff just wasn't worth $200 to me.

This post has been edited by remat457: September 12th 2009 12:42 AM