Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '1911 Forums' started by Carolina Drifter, Nov 1, 2010.
Taurus PT1911 or Para GI Expert to build on????
Of those two, I'd go Para.
Neither. They may be the two worst companies currently producing 1911s.
If I was forced to choose, I guess I'd go with the Taurus, as I feel the slide and frame is better quality than the cast Para parts. I don't mind the frame, but Para uses a cast slide, which I feel is ridiculous.
The Para is a better fit gun out of the box, but that isn't saying much. Taurus' parts fitting is horrible.
Given the two choices.....Glock 21 SF
Is there a reason it has to be one of those two choices?
I hope not.
Honestly, I'd choose one of the Phillipinos(especially the American classic)over the others. Even STI is using Phillipino parts and I suspect others such as Doublestar are as well.
If you know a gunsmith who's willing to use one of those as a base gun, you don't want to use him.
I agree. I was looking into an Olympic Arms 'Schuetzen Pistol Works' 1911 and, after inquiring about their components, received a reply that their frames and slides are both investment castings. I'm still not certain that this is completely accurate as I have seens and heard things which lead me to suspect that, while the stainless slides and frames are indeed both castings, the carbon steel slides may be forgings.
As for the stainless parts, this leads me to wonder if Olympic uses the same slide and frame supplier that Para Ordnance does?
Yeah, I agree.
I never heard of a serious smith touching one of those with a 10' pole.
The Filipino builders (Metro, Armscor, and SAM) are all better than Taurus and Para, in my opinion.
Para is sub par. Taurus flat-out sucks.
Well, as long as the forged frame and slide are fundamentally sound a Taurus might make as good a platform as any for a full custom build where you are likely to throw out most if not all of the other components anyway. I honestly don't know enough about the PT1911 to know if even the very basics iof the platform (the slide and frame) are solid or terrible.
Of course, even if we assume the best about the frame and slide the problem is that it would still be a Taurus PT1911 which would torch the value of a gun that would no doubt cost a small fortune to build. So I agree that a good smith would probably advise against it if for no other reason than long term value and their own reputation.
This is really unfortunate for Taurus too, because Taurus could have almost certainly stolen the very low end of this market from the Phillipino manufacturers if their version of the 1911 was better executed.
I think the scary part may be how right you probably are.
what is the OP's idea of "build on"?
for the cost of either of those 2 he could buy a Springfield GI or Mil-spec and get a nicely built gun. if it's a gun he wants to learn on, cut up/modify, then i would still go with a Filippino 1911.
I think this might have been a purely hypothetical 'which sucks less' barometer and nothing more. But then, I am straight up guessing here.