ThePaul
Member
"the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
Posts: 24
|
Post by ThePaul on Mar 24, 2004 15:14:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mikolev on Mar 24, 2004 17:15:11 GMT -5
Ya, this gun looks awesome. I'm definitely looking forward to shooting one, along with the Sig GSR, and I think it has a whole ton of potential. BUT, it's MSRP is very high, and I couldn't bring my self to spend $1000 or more on a gun, when I can get so many quality 1911's for less. It does look like it's going to be an exciting new gun, though.  |
|
|
|
Post by "DoubleAction" on Mar 24, 2004 19:28:34 GMT -5
I fired the SW 1911, and it shot very good with the exception of a trigger which seemed to drag. Still, at around 40 feet, I was able to put one hole on top of another after shooting the first magazine. If all this pistol requires is polishing to internals, I think the asking price,from the dealers, might be worth a close look.
|
|
|
|
Post by XavierBreath on Mar 24, 2004 21:45:57 GMT -5
I was quoted $820 right off the bat for the Scandium Commander. I'm thinking they will be running about $500-600 in the used market. I'm a little concerned about the battering the Scandium frame will take. Scandium, as I understand it is similar to titanium. Titanium is not real strong when it comes to impact, at least that was our experience with aircraft. Ti is noncorrosive, and has great tensile and torsional strength however, making it the ideal revolver frame material. I could be wrong, but I suspect scandium is similar. Here's my link to a review of this pistol. handgunforum.proboards3.com/index.cgi?board=RangeResultsOpinions&action=display&n=1&thread=1721 SKU: 108283 Caliber: .45 ACP Capacity: 8 Rounds +1 Barrel Length: 4 1/4" Front Sight: White Dot Rear Sight: Novak Lo Mount Carry 2-Dot Grip: Wood Trigger: Skeletonized Hammer: Skeletonized External Safety: Single Side Frame: Small/Compact Finish: Black Overall length: 7.95" Material: Scandium/Alum.Alloy/Carbon Steel Weight Empty: 28 ounces MSRP $1029 Get Real Price $820 |
|
|
|
Post by Ricochet on Mar 24, 2004 22:43:32 GMT -5
Scandium is an element used to alloy with aluminum. It gives an aluminum alloy with improved yield strength and durability for essentially no weight gain over the older aluminums. It probably wears better than the non-Scandium aluminums. However, it is not as strong, not as stiff, and not as tough as titanium, and would not wear better either. The best material is still stainless steel, but it is heavy. See some Scandium Aluminum uses at www.home.no/al-sc/ |
|
|
|
Post by MitchHankSauer on Mar 25, 2004 0:13:33 GMT -5
Maybe it's just me, but I don't like how S&W billboards the "1911" across the slide, I mean something that conspicious might as well have neon on it. I prefer more subtle markings myself. |
|
|
|
Post by Ricochet on Mar 25, 2004 7:57:46 GMT -5
I agree, Mitch. That 1911 banner is just a little overdone.
|
|
|
|
Post by XavierBreath on Mar 25, 2004 8:25:17 GMT -5
I agree Mitch, but if I get a used one, strip the frame finish to bare, and hardchrome the slide, all the graffitti will be gone........ and I STILL have a lightweight Commander with Novaks installed. I'm figuring $450 used, pluse $90 at Fords for the hardchroming, so we are talking $550 or so........ I'm just waiting for them to hit the used racks. I feel like a vulture.......  |
|
|
|
Post by RogerC on Mar 25, 2004 9:13:59 GMT -5
Hate the billboard.
I've never seen a need for a lightweight 1911. Maybe it's just me, but I carry all steel 1911's all day long, so I just don't have a need for a lightweight one.
At least it isn't as ugly as some of their Scandium revolvers.
|
|
ThePaul
Member
"the road to hell is paved with good intentions"
Posts: 24
|
Post by ThePaul on Mar 25, 2004 12:50:24 GMT -5
I agree that the "Sc 1911" on the side is a little much. However, I still think it is a good looking gun. I just hope recoil is to bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by MitchHankSauer on Mar 25, 2004 20:05:01 GMT -5
Yeah the jury is still out for me. The novice that I am, my thoughts are that for me the 1911 is beautifully balanced as is for the most part depending on the materials used and the manufacturer's tolerances. Changing the materials in this case to scandium will probably give it a differnet feel I am sure compared to regular steel and stainless. It will be interesting and certainly a topic to debate further with the 1911.  It is a fine looking 1911 inspite of the "billboard". Someone's got the right idea, take it off if you can. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by MLB on Mar 26, 2004 19:41:01 GMT -5
I've got a question for the forum.
It seems as if stainless handguns are generally heavier than carbon steel in the same model. From what I can tell though, stainless is only about 1% heavier than the same amount of carbon steel. Am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ricochet on Mar 27, 2004 11:36:41 GMT -5
You are right MLB. The weight density of stainless steel will usually be within 1% of carbon or tool steel. So if there are greater weight differences between two handguns, it is from something other than the steel material itself.
You would have to see the material listed for all the pieces and components to find where the weight difference is coming from.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronbwolf on Mar 29, 2004 12:50:03 GMT -5
Interesting, but I too have felt little need for a LW version. I'm more intrigued by the new Sig version. But if I could get a S&W for $500.00, maybe...
|
|
