TexasCHLforum.com

By the way, an acquaintance of mine called me yesterday to say he's trying to sell a 5" Colt 1991 series pistol. From his description, I think it is a parkerized or blued "basic" model. I believe he wants around $600-$650 for it. I asked him if he knows the round count. He doesn't. He bought it used. He describes it as in "pretty good condition," but I haven't seen the pistol so I can't vouch for it.

Mike from Texas wrote:I concur with going with at least a 4" length. I've had a couple of the 3" 1911s and have found no disadvantage of going with the longer barrel but have experienced the problems mentioned with the 3" models.

I am missing a 4" 1911 from my battery. I like my 3" Kimber, and it is light and easy to carry. I also have a 5" Springfield, but I don't carry it nearly as often. The reason I don't is because it's an all steel gun and my bad back doesn't like the weight of it for extended periods. But that said, it carries better than the 3" gun because the longer slide/barrel forces the grip frame to hug closer to my body. This makes the larger grip of the 5" gun actually conceal better and print less than the abbreviated grip frame of the 3" gun, which tends to hug my body less closely. I don't know if this description makes sense or not, but it there it is. So my thinking is that the longer slide/barrel of the 4" gun would affect the carrying just like the 5" gun does, and I would have a longer sight radius and one more round of capacity over the 3" gun. So I think that an alloy framed 4" 1911 might just be the ultimate carry pistol.

I'm going to probably sell both of my .380s (a Colt Government and a Keltec) to help finance the cost of a new pistol. I've been looking at single stack 9mm guns like the Kahr P9/PM9/CW9 or the Kimber Solo, but a 4" 1911 may just win the day.

jason237m wrote:How much are you looking to spend?

That's the real question.