He cheats! :D

The grips gave away #1 at least, with your follow up shot, and anyone that has owned a Sig could probably tell from the front shots...

NICE 1911's Bonz! nanner

This is what he means by "boxier."
http://www.cotep.org/forum/picture.p...&pictureid=761

But if that is an issue, Sig makes round top 1911s too, which they call "1911 Traditional Models"
http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProdu...al-models.aspx

:wf: :D

The perfect illustration!

Not really an "issue", just don't care for the look. I did not realize they made traditional ones, thanks.

:D

Exactly..

Since both my Sigs are short barreled, the extra heft is welcome, especially on the Ultra Carry. I credit that hefty slide for the Ultra having better manageable recoil than your typical Officer/Defender length 1911.

Shunned?
 

I have to SIG 1911s, both are very early initial production GSRs, pre-Revolution, pre-1911. They have been flawless. They replaced an early GSR I sold at one point and later regretted selling because I just liked the gun. What follows is my completely personal and largely unrefined opinion. I am however a huge fan of SIG Sauer pistols along with Dan Wesson.

Why might they not get much attention?

1. SIG is know for their P-series. They have been in the 1911 business for only about 10 years unlike Springfield Armory, Kimber, Dan Wesson and others who have made almost exclusively 1911, or were first 1911 makers then branched out, like Springfield Armory.

2. Their initial 1911 offering does have a non-traditional slide profile which means holsters done really fit very well unless made for the gun. many people don't like the look. As a result SIG now makes a "Traditional" model, but only a couple of variations. They are committed to the SIG look. That is why the gun was designed that way, to have a SIG looking 1911. They said that outright.

3. The initial history was very, very rough. The GSRs were, for many a bit of a disappointment, they were fraught with problems and issues. SIG started changing parts and finally ended production for a time to get their act together. Matt Lerner, who was on the design team supposedly, left. When the gun came out in 2004 o5 2005 is was $1100 -$1300 street price. I bought my first one used not too long after from a disappointed initial buyer for $750.

4. Then came the Revolution in a non-railed version and a flood of guns which were, to the informed eye, clearly parts guns. They were cleaning out the parts bins. They started making all kinds of variations and there were reliability issues. There was little uniformity within models from one to another gun. I could recognize parts from the original SIG GSR in all these guns and that was just the external visible part, until the parts ran out. As much as I like SIG, I would not at that time recommend their 1911.

5. The Revolution and GSR are now a thing of the past. SIG has settled down with there SIG 1911 brand and are churning all all kinds of variations the differences between which are mostly just superficial. They have come to rest in the $800 to $1100 niche (street price). The guns are now solid, reliable and attractive. I would be prepared to recommend them now for a lower end but quality 1911.

I doubt SIG will ever really be known as a maker of 1911s or as a premiere 1911 manufacturer. Unless CZ who, admittedly bought their 1911 business, 1911 will, I expect always be a sideline for SIG; a jump on the bandwagon business.

Initially SIG officianodos hoped that SIG was going to bring it's considerable weight and experience to bear and design and make a premium 1911, not necessarily on the high custom end, but well into the premium semi-custom end. Rather than focus on high-quality and working gradually to improve and move up the food-chain, they have settled into the middle to lower-middle tier and focused on variation coming out with things like their Zombie edition and there Spartan edition and so on. For me it makes it difficult to take them too, too seriously. They just change finishes, grips, add garish banners and trendy models along with some slight changes in designs like squiggly cocking serrations different slide polishing schemes. They are all still, basically the same guns just dressed up differently.

Of course, they do some of the same with their P-series which came with a change in management. I believe it started with an influx of management formerly at Kimber. Perhaps it has helped SIG stay competitive. However, they do make quality guns and even the 1911s are more quality than they used to be.

I just don't think they will be taken as seriously as DW if they continue on this path.

Yeah, that makes sense now. I was at the range and a guy next to me was shooting a Sig P226. I held my Sig Ultra 1911 next to it and there was a striking similarly between the slides of the two guns.

I had wondered why they made the slide on my Sig 1911 like that, and now I understand. It is most definitely a "Sig Look."

The Ultra ran like a top right out of the box without any break-in period. And that was with some dirty shooting low powered handloads. The slide to frame fit is very tight BTW.

I tried every type of bullet in it, including some 255 grain Keith Style SWCs made for 45 Colt, and it ate them all without complaining. And I tried every kind of mag I had. (Checkmate hybrid, Chip McCormick, Wilson, USGI, etc) Then I loaded a bullet backwards and it fed fine too. So I decided to give the ULTIMATE feed test...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR3pHVSic1A

If it will feed an empty case, it will feed ANYTHING!