Seeking advice on entry level US made 1911

[BP7]

I think the issue of Norc 1911's closely mirrors the discussion about Norc M14 type rifles. Political considerations aside, there will be many who do not like the Norinco products because they generally do not meet US or European standards of fit and finish. Furthermore, some Norinco's appear to need some end user fine tuning to work properly ( not to make safe - they all seem safe enough but to work like an American or European product ). Some other buyers can see past the fit and finish issue, don't mind to do some work if required and see tremendous value in the guns at the price they are sold at.

It appears to be the feeling amongst most 1911 owners who actually have owned or at least handled the Norinco offering that they are great value buys - perhaps even more so than the M14 as, in the main, they require even less work to make as good as the more well-known brands.

i kind of agree with you, but with a major caveat, and here's where my own biggest issue is with the Norc. (and by the way, i don't feel like sorting out multi-quoting, so the below isn't directly aimed exclusively at you, i'm just using your post as a launching off point)

they are reliable. they use good strong metals. they are easy / affordable to get into.

BUT! and this is a MASSIVE but...

when you get into a 1911 chambered in .45ACP, the gun is a one-time cost, and isn't that huge at this level. the ammo you shoot will very quickly outpace the cost of the gun, even if you reload from the very first round you fire. so, saving $200 isn't really a big savings percentage-wise / in the grand scheme of things.

and even more - if you get a Norc, and it's the typical rough-around-the-edges-and-everywhere-else Norc, then you might get turned off from buying future 1911 pistols because of how unrefined your first 1911 happens to be.

while i am mechanically very inclined, my time is better spent shooting a gun than screwing around with its internals to make it what it should be. i would guess that even back in the 1920s, originally newly manufactured 1911s felt much nicer than what the Norc currently feels like. i can't be sure, of course, but - reliable as it may be - a Norc is just a cheap CHEAP way to buy a 1911.

the Ruger IS what the Norc SHOULD BE. however, it costs more. considering the economics of shooting .45ACP (reloads or factory), i'd say it isn't worthwhile going much lower down the ladder than the Ruger / Spartan.

 

[Tomochan]

i kind of agree with you, but with a major caveat, and here's where my own biggest issue is with the Norc. (and by the way, i don't feel like sorting out multi-quoting, so the below isn't directly aimed exclusively at you, i'm just using your post as a launching off point)

they are reliable. they use good strong metals. they are easy / affordable to get into.

BUT! and this is a MASSIVE but...

when you get into a 1911 chambered in .45ACP, the gun is a one-time cost, and isn't that huge at this level. the ammo you shoot will very quickly outpace the cost of the gun, even if you reload from the very first round you fire. so, saving $200 isn't really a big savings percentage-wise / in the grand scheme of things.

and even more - if you get a Norc, and it's the typical rough-around-the-edges-and-everywhere-else Norc, then you might get turned off from buying future 1911 pistols because of how unrefined your first 1911 happens to be.

while i am mechanically very inclined, my time is better spent shooting a gun than screwing around with its internals to make it what it should be. i would guess that even back in the 1920s, originally newly manufactured 1911s felt much nicer than what the Norc currently feels like. i can't be sure, of course, but - reliable as it may be - a Norc is just a cheap CHEAP way to buy a 1911.

the Ruger IS what the Norc SHOULD BE. however, it costs more. considering the economics of shooting .45ACP (reloads or factory), i'd say it isn't worthwhile going much lower down the ladder than the Ruger / Spartan.

I think there isn't much daylight between us; the Norc is an inexpensive way to get into the platform but may not ( probably isn't ) the ideal gun for the new shooter or the shooter who isn't inclined to work on his or her firearm. Norcs are a cheap way to see if you like a model but may actually turn someone off so it is a double-edged kind of thing. FWIW, the first 1911 I bought was a STI Spartan which, to answer the OP's original question, is probably my pick for the best entry level US branded 1911 pistol.

 

[triplepete]

the Ruger IS what the Norc SHOULD BE. however, it costs more. considering the economics of shooting .45ACP (reloads or factory), i'd say it isn't worthwhile going much lower down the ladder than the Ruger / Spartan.

What do you think the Norinco should really cost in Canada? I may be shooting my self in the foot but I am gonna guess there is probably a bigger profit margin on a new Norinco than most American brands. If the Norinco quality was as good as the cheapest American brand at the same price, what would you buy? I'd buy American personally. If the Norincos were as good as the Rugers, you would lose a lot of Ruger sales at current prices. Americans say they banned Norinco imports because they supplied guns to gangs - whatever.

I agree with you - STI, Ruger, or Remington are worth the extra money over Norcs.

 

[easyrider604]

If the Norinco quality was as good as the cheapest American brand at the same price, what would you buy? I'd buy American personally.

I am with you and will support North American manufacturing jobs if price is within reason. We got to define quality in our context. Norincos are durable, shoot reliably and accurately. Fit and finish are still below SAM, Remington, Ruger or STI. At the current price point, Norinco 1911s provide outstanding value.

For me, the Ruger SR1911 combines everything I desire in a 1911. U.S. made, durable (presumably as the SR1911 has no significant track record yet), has very good fit and finish, stainless, accurate and reliable. As well it comes with every 1911 accessory I need.

I have 4 Norkies and 1 Ruger. Very happy with all of them and will probably keep them all for a long time.

 

[sunray]

"...but then I..." Snicker. The slope is long and very slippery.
Don't discount used for your first pistol. It takes a great deal of abuse to damage any modern handgun. The only thing that's absolutely critical is that the pistol must fit your hand.

 

[BP7]

What do you think the Norinco should really cost in Canada? I may be shooting my self in the foot but I am gonna guess there is probably a bigger profit margin on a new Norinco than most American brands. If the Norinco quality was as good as the cheapest American brand at the same price, what would you buy? I'd buy American personally. If the Norincos were as good as the Rugers, you would lose a lot of Ruger sales at current prices. Americans say they banned Norinco imports because they supplied guns to gangs - whatever.

I agree with you - STI, Ruger, or Remington are worth the extra money over Norcs.

hmm, maybe I ought to clarify. I think that the Norinco is priced roughly (pun!) where it should be. BUT that doesn't mean it's a genuinely good firearm CONSIDERING that .45ACP ammo costs quite a lot and thus saving $300 or so on the gun is kinda moot. the $300 spent to move up to a Ruger / Spartan / etc WILL result in about 1000 less rounds of .45ACP ammo being available, but beyond that it will be a nicer looking / nicer feeling pistol.

would I trust a Norc to shove a .45 hunk of lead into someone who is trying to take MY life away? yup.
would I enjoy shooting a Norc at the range, and would I think that it looks appealing? nope.

for those who shoot very little, saving $300 or so is a noticeable amount of money. and the 'feel' of the Norc will likely ensure that they don't shoot it much anyways. self-fulfilling prophecy.
likewise, those who enjoy shooting a 1911 will easily spend way more than the $300 difference on ammo, so in the long run the gun cost will be immaterial. and they'll enjoy shooting it for a lot longer. again, self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Mark-II]

That's pretty much the decision I came to when I decided to go for the Ruger instead of the NOS Norc-n-ammo deal, with a similar thought process. Plus I'd rather shoot than be dicking with guns - I barely have time to reload, let alone faff with polishing "diamonds in the rough"

I made an exception with the m305, since I could never justify buying an M1A, and I begin to question that choice too as the gun sits idle awaiting the tender mercies of a hammer and locktite before it can operate again.

 

[enefgee]

hmm, maybe I ought to clarify. I think that the Norinco is priced roughly (pun!) where it should be. BUT that doesn't mean it's a genuinely good firearm CONSIDERING that .45ACP ammo costs quite a lot and thus saving $300 or so on the gun is kinda moot. the $300 spent to move up to a Ruger / Spartan / etc WILL result in about 1000 less rounds of .45ACP ammo being available, but beyond that it will be a nicer looking / nicer feeling pistol.

would I trust a Norc to shove a .45 hunk of lead into someone who is trying to take MY life away? yup.
would I enjoy shooting a Norc at the range, and would I think that it looks appealing? nope.

for those who shoot very little, saving $300 or so is a noticeable amount of money. and the 'feel' of the Norc will likely ensure that they don't shoot it much anyways. self-fulfilling prophecy.
likewise, those who enjoy shooting a 1911 will easily spend way more than the $300 difference on ammo, so in the long run the gun cost will be immaterial. and they'll enjoy shooting it for a lot longer. again, self-fulfilling prophecy.

I have over 5,000 rounds through a Norc Compact, and I have no clue what the hell you're talking about - who really gives a damn what a gun "looks" like, if you want jewelry, buy a watch, you'll get much more use out of it. I know I can trust my Norc compact to put all 8 into a large ragged hole in the head of a B27 at 20 yards - good enough for me. I also know I have had ZERO fails (FTF, FTE, FT-anything else) with this pistol. I don't shoot 45 as much as I used to, largely because the caliber (and the platform) is basically irrelevant, but I would certainly not feel that I was at a disadvantage with the Norc compared to any other 1911 pattern pistol, regardless of cost.