Some purists will scream, but I'm not sure that these days there is all that much difference. Aesthetically speaking, do you like the looks of one more than the other? For an intangible, does the little prancing pony mean that much to you? Outside of that, I would say that they are both pretty decent production guns. Either way you go, you might find that there are issues with little things that might either require you to tinker with them or to send them to a gunsmith to have tuned up. If your expectations are too high, you might find either one will disappoint you. Either would make a great base gun for a custom build.

 

This is about one of the most accurate statements to this kind of question, I've seen in a while! ☕

 

Too many bad or issues with SA guns, I’d go Colt no questions

 

You could same the same thing for any production gun. It's a toss up. Just make sure you can inspect it first.

 

Base gun: Colt

Out of the box: Springfield

 

I agree with this, and if you really want ready to go out of the box, have a look at the new TRP Commander.

 

No matter what else you say..........One will always say COLT and the other will always say SA.
Up to the individual what that is worth or even if it matters....
IMHO...COLT means alot.
TR

 

Colt

 

My sample size is small, but my experience has been that Springfield 1911's were nicer in fit and finish for me, versus the Colts I have had.
My Springer models: Mil-Spec (3 different examples)/ Operator/Garrison
My Colt models: Wiley Clapp Government (2 examples)/O1911C/Series 70 blued "reissue" model

Both brands ran fine out of box, but the Springfields had much better fit and finish.
The Colts mostly had horrible thumb safety fitment and loose fitting grip safety.
Some of the Colt models also had machining marks and burrs.

I like Colt better than Springfield, but... if the product that Colt is currently putting out had a different name rollmarked (or laser engraved, ugh) on the slide... there would be WAY more complaints about quality.

 

From the late 70s to late 1990s I had numerous Colt Commanders in both weights and just .45. A few years ago when SA brought out the Ronin, then Garrison I’ve had a few in 9mm and they were all stellar. I got a stainless Garrison .45 Commander right after it was released and it’s been great! I changed the grips and sights to suit my tastes. Couldn’t be happier, briefly tried to sell then came to my senses lol. Moved some other stuff instead.

 

OP,
I recently (early December 23) purchased a colt 9mm combat commander, I went with the Colt as 9mm Colt commanders are/were not readily available just below a grand In pricing (new) I purchased it with the intent to have it slightly massaged (Sights, trigger, reliability) extras new Wilson TS, Solid trigger arched MSH. nothing more.
The SA garrison commanders were not Available when I purchased the colt. Would I buy the colt again? yes
BUT, I’m also thinking of adding a SA Commander at some point.

 

Of the two, I'd lean toward Colt.

 

Have both. As stated, production guns are similar today. I did get lucky with a Colt Commander. Fit, finish and function is great. Nothing wrong with the SAs either.

 

I'll second the SA TRP CDR

 

In 9mm....always Springfield. Colt still does not put a ramped barrel in a 9mm.


And im a colt guy...

 

I have both. I'd say the workmanship is similar, but I'm not a gunsmith. With the Colt you get the 80 series firing pin lock. It's a complication that I believe is unnecessary, and I'd rather not have it. The sights and sight cuts are actual Novak's, so upgrading the sights is easy. Colt uses a small diameter barrel for 9mm. If you decide to install a bushing with tighter tolerances, you'll have need a company such as EGW to make a custom bushing. Colt uses an un-ramped barrel. Many folks say these will experience feeding problems with 9mm ammunition. I have never had any problems with mine. The Colt thumb safety has a bit of spongy over travel in the off position. The grip safeties on my examples fit loosely and rattle. My big problem with the Colt is the undercut where the trigger guard meets the front of the frame. It allows the gun to sit a bit lower in the hand, but the grip safety Colt uses doesn't allow that. At least in my hands. So, I install an Ed Brown model which requires filing on the frame and re-finishing. But when I'm done it fits like nothing else.
The Springfield has Novak styled sights and it's a bit more involved to find replacements. Some fit and some don't. The Springfield 9mm uses a ramped barrel, it works fine for me. The internal parts on the Springfield are MIM, If I encounter problems I'll change them with high grade parts. For me, the Springfield has the most comfortable and useable thumb safety pad of any I've found. I have a big problem with the Springfield also, it's the cast slide stop they use. Some have casting marks on the pin. These are sharp enough to put grooves in the lower barrel lugs that rest on the pin. I plan on replacing the slide stop on any Springfield I buy. My 9mm is a Springfield Ronin 4.25, the .45 is a Colt Lightweight Commander. I believe each has its quirks, but they are easily fixed. Good luck, I hope this helps.

 

I think it depends on preferences. The current Colt Commanders have the Series 80 firing pin safety, the SAs don't. From a shooting standpoint I don't care, some people do. From a self-maintenance standpoint, I think working on the Series 70 FCG is easier - for me. The Colt comes in blued finish only, if you want stainless steel you have to pay a few hundred extra for the Combat Elite. The SAs go for $700-800, the blued Colt goes for around $950-1K, and the stainless Commander Elite goes for $1200-1300. It also depends on your patience - the SA Garrison 4.25" barrel is easy to find in stock, the Colts... not so easy to find in stock anywhere, at least for me.

I have a Colt Commander made in 2015 and a Garrison 4.25" I just got, both SS, both nice guns, both keepers.

 

I think it depends on preferences. The current Colt Commanders have the Series 80 firing pin safety, the SAs don't. From a shooting standpoint I don't care, some people do. From a self-maintenance standpoint, I think working on the Series 70 FCG is easier - for me. The Colt comes in blued finish only, if you want stainless steel you have to pay a few hundred extra for the Combat Elite. The SAs go for $700-800, the blued Colt goes for around $950-1K, and the stainless Commander Elite goes for $1200-1300. It also depends on your patience - the SA Garrison 4.25" barrel is easy to find in stock, the Colts... not so easy to find in stock anywhere, at least for me.

I have a Colt Commander made in 2015 and a Garrison 4.25" I just got, both SS, both nice guns, both keepers.

I agree with all this. Nice pair of guns there sir, beautiful.

 

If your buying new I would say Colt. If the Colt is used and built pre CZ then I would say Springfield. But seriously take a look at the new TRP commander if you decide on going 45

 

uggg. I hate to say it, but It's a toss up at this point. Colot makes a decent base gun, but that's it. Springfield the same thing. they make a really nice production gun, but it's nothing fancy. Pick and choose which roll makr you want. Neither are going to be Nighthawks or Dan Wessons, or Wilson's, but they are nice production 1911s that both manufacturer's have gotten down pretty pat.

but personlly, I'd go in and finger bang some of the new Colt's before you drop down coin. the newer ones are REALLY rought and slightly disappointing

 

Flip a coin they booth have different features

 

Just an fyi the rear sight on the Springfield is a Novak cut-I ordered the correct height from 10-8, no cutting necessary for my smith to install it.

Novak makes front sights for SA’s front sight cut-my slide had the front sight installed and shipped back to me on the same day.

 

All great points and good info. I have an older MC Operator in .45 and it has been great for me. Colt I think is more of the name and it’s 1911 history that intrigued me. At the end of the day, while I probably can’t go wrong long term with either I’m leaning Springfield after reading the replies and comments. The TRP looks great and could be a future consideration.

Thank you all again for the responses and info. It is appreciated. I’ll be sure to report back once I have it.

 

As a rabid Colt fan, I’ll honestly say that if it wasn’t for my Colt fetish, I would check out each one in person and buy based on that and go with the cheaper gun.

I’ll ‘third’ the mushy over-travel TS and loose fitting GS on my LW Commander, but any Springers you pick up might have a flaw, too.

 

I feel as tho unless you go with a custom/high end brand you are bound to get a few that end up with some issues. More so than with a semi- production or custom type 1911/2011. Cosmetic flaws while aggravating don’t bother me as much as functionality flaws. And I’ve experienced both in my life.

 

Colt. Either way I can’t keep anything stock, I’d tune up and modify both.

 

I like both but that Colt rollmark wins every time. Colt can definitely churn out a turd though (and Springfield too) so its a bit of a crap shoot either way. I don't care about ramped vs non ramped barrels, and I'm not afraid of quality MIM parts either. I like guns that run properly and don't wear in strange ways that show poor fit.

I tend to like the older Springfields more although seriously those blued Garrisons do look really sweet. Get both?

 

Cant say anything about Colt, dont own one. But my Springfield Garrisons have run like a top with no issues. Replaced sights (just prefer fiber optic front with blacked out rear) and had my local gunsmith work on the trigger (just tightens up and sets the overtravel screw correctly for me). Dont think you can go wrong either way. I have been blessed and not had a problem with my TRP, Garrison, Prodigy or Echelon. Just lucky I guess.

 

I love colt and I like springfield

 

Doc45, thanks for the info about the Novak sights. My Ronin has a rear cut that is slightly too big for a Novak made sight. It can be installed with finger pressure, but an Ed Brown fits nice and tight. Drop-in and 1911 shouldn't be used in the same sentence. LOL.

 

Good to know! The 10-8 rear sight fit perfectly in my Garrison, never tried a Novak rear-words to the wise my friend.