Unregistered
Regular
- Location
- South Ontario
First impressions:
The only other 1911 I have experience with is the Norinco. Both full-sized 5" frame 1911s, the Norinco feels more "solid" and "classic" than the Spartan, and you can tell that the Spartan frame and slide are cast.
Working the action, the Spartan feels less "positive" in its slide movements than the Norinco. On the other hand, the Spartan is much smoother and requires less force to manually chamber a round using the slide.
Slide serrations on the Spartan are, in my opinion, somewhat less "gripping" than the Norinco. The Spartan serrations, like the other features on the pistol, are more smooth than the Norinco. There are no sharp edges on this pistol that I have encountered so far, unlike the Norinco. The safety and hammer require less force to operate. However, the safety again feels less "positive" than the Norinco.
The Spartan comes with some of the most popular "mods" for 1911s, such as front slide serrations (which were useful to me on one occasion), an extended beavertail, and grip stippling. The beavertail makes one-handed shooting more pleasant, though I have to compensate for it in my two-handed grip as it gets in the way compared to a stock beavertail. The magazine appears bevelled, and the magazines require less hammering in than the Norinco.
I am of mixed opinion on the grip stippling (which is on the rear of the grip - I think it should be on the front). It is handy when the pistol is covered in excess oil, or your hands are sweaty. But most of the time my grip is fine and the stippling only pokes my hand and makes shooting unpleasant.
The sights are good. The front sight incorporates an orange fiber optic that is very easy to pick up. Sight acquisition is very fast and easy, both for quick snap shooting, and bullseye aimed fire.
The STI Spartan's parkerized finish appears more durable than the Norinco's blueing. At least, with this limited use, there are almost no wear marks yet, and the finish has not given way.
I have not even tried to field strip it yet as I am not familiar with the full-length recoil spring guide at this time.
First trip to the range
I should mention that the trigger on this pistol is easily the lightest of any handgun that I own, resembling a used or tuned S&W revolver SA pull. You can feel a hint of the crunchiness before the gunsmith worked on it, but it is very easy to pull (absolutely unlike the Norinco).
I fired 100 rounds of factory UMC yellow-box .45 ACP using high-quality 1911 magazines, including the magazine that came with the pistol. There were no failures, it ran 100% reliably.
I was able to fire one 2.25" 5-round group at 20 yards, and one 2.75" 8-round group at 20 yards. I also produced what would have been a 1.5" 5-round group, had it not been for one flyer. I am not normally capable of firing much better than 2.25", so this makes it one of my more accurate pistols. A better or more experienced shooter would likely produce better groups. It may well be capable of 1.5" at 20 yards from what I have seen so far.
I took it out to 50 yards freehand and it will hit silhouettes, but requires you to compensate of course. At close ranges (7-10 yards) you are practically placing bullets on top of one another and it will shoot as accurately as you can.
Recoil seemed less than with the Norinco. That could be from the guide rod, from a potentially better grip, slightly different ammunition than usual, who knows? Speaking of the grips, they look nicer than the Norinco's plastic, obviously, though I don't know how much more functional they really are.
In summary, for the price range and compared to the Norinco, I would have to say that the pluses of this pistol are the sights, smooth operation, easily-improved trigger, very fast operation, and decent out-of-the-box accuracy if you do your part. It is set up for range use out of the box.
The negatives are the non-classic feel, "features" that may be redundant, and cast parts (though I have not yet seen any negative effect from the use of cast parts.)
The only other 1911 I have experience with is the Norinco. Both full-sized 5" frame 1911s, the Norinco feels more "solid" and "classic" than the Spartan, and you can tell that the Spartan frame and slide are cast.
Working the action, the Spartan feels less "positive" in its slide movements than the Norinco. On the other hand, the Spartan is much smoother and requires less force to manually chamber a round using the slide.
Slide serrations on the Spartan are, in my opinion, somewhat less "gripping" than the Norinco. The Spartan serrations, like the other features on the pistol, are more smooth than the Norinco. There are no sharp edges on this pistol that I have encountered so far, unlike the Norinco. The safety and hammer require less force to operate. However, the safety again feels less "positive" than the Norinco.
The Spartan comes with some of the most popular "mods" for 1911s, such as front slide serrations (which were useful to me on one occasion), an extended beavertail, and grip stippling. The beavertail makes one-handed shooting more pleasant, though I have to compensate for it in my two-handed grip as it gets in the way compared to a stock beavertail. The magazine appears bevelled, and the magazines require less hammering in than the Norinco.
I am of mixed opinion on the grip stippling (which is on the rear of the grip - I think it should be on the front). It is handy when the pistol is covered in excess oil, or your hands are sweaty. But most of the time my grip is fine and the stippling only pokes my hand and makes shooting unpleasant.
The sights are good. The front sight incorporates an orange fiber optic that is very easy to pick up. Sight acquisition is very fast and easy, both for quick snap shooting, and bullseye aimed fire.
The STI Spartan's parkerized finish appears more durable than the Norinco's blueing. At least, with this limited use, there are almost no wear marks yet, and the finish has not given way.
I have not even tried to field strip it yet as I am not familiar with the full-length recoil spring guide at this time.
First trip to the range
I should mention that the trigger on this pistol is easily the lightest of any handgun that I own, resembling a used or tuned S&W revolver SA pull. You can feel a hint of the crunchiness before the gunsmith worked on it, but it is very easy to pull (absolutely unlike the Norinco).
I fired 100 rounds of factory UMC yellow-box .45 ACP using high-quality 1911 magazines, including the magazine that came with the pistol. There were no failures, it ran 100% reliably.
I was able to fire one 2.25" 5-round group at 20 yards, and one 2.75" 8-round group at 20 yards. I also produced what would have been a 1.5" 5-round group, had it not been for one flyer. I am not normally capable of firing much better than 2.25", so this makes it one of my more accurate pistols. A better or more experienced shooter would likely produce better groups. It may well be capable of 1.5" at 20 yards from what I have seen so far.
I took it out to 50 yards freehand and it will hit silhouettes, but requires you to compensate of course. At close ranges (7-10 yards) you are practically placing bullets on top of one another and it will shoot as accurately as you can.
Recoil seemed less than with the Norinco. That could be from the guide rod, from a potentially better grip, slightly different ammunition than usual, who knows? Speaking of the grips, they look nicer than the Norinco's plastic, obviously, though I don't know how much more functional they really are.
In summary, for the price range and compared to the Norinco, I would have to say that the pluses of this pistol are the sights, smooth operation, easily-improved trigger, very fast operation, and decent out-of-the-box accuracy if you do your part. It is set up for range use out of the box.
The negatives are the non-classic feel, "features" that may be redundant, and cast parts (though I have not yet seen any negative effect from the use of cast parts.)
Last edited:
