Home
[Linked Image]

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=480437

Looks like someone either botched the rear sight cut, or had an undersized rear sight, was in a hurry, and this was their solution. Clearly it worked since the guy's sights were rock solid for a decade, but it certainly ain't pretty.

Baer's are all hand fit, they don't spend much time on milling machines. But those guys they have working there appear to be really under the gun to turn them out fast, because I've found more than a few functionally perfect Baer's that had some pretty shabby cosmetic flaws from rapid assembly. Still a great gun, but I wish they'd slow down a touch.
�..week before last (at SHOT) Les told me that he's two years out now.
CJ got my PII/ I.5 to me lickity split.
I'd be very disappointed. That's unacceptable for a Les Baer 1911.
Everything on a custom pistol in that league should be perfect.
Originally Posted by MontanaMarine
Everything on a custom pistol in that league should be perfect.



Agreed.





msrtex msrtex is online now
Member

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by heidad01 View Post


Are you serious Jim??
I was expecting to hear something along the line of a $400 imported Norinco or a RIA or some kitchen table bubba made slide not a Les Baer.


In their defense, they did reply that there is no way this left the factory this way. I bought what was labeled a new pistol from a dealer 17 years ago and it has performed flawlessly ever since. Rear sight has dimmed and this is the reason for replacing it. Not sure how this happened or who is at fault but I believe John Harrison hit the nail on the head, "just fit your new sight and move on".
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by jwp475
In their defense, they did reply that there is no way this left the factory this way.


BWAAHAHAA!!

That ol' Les is such a kidder.
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


Harrison makes a good point----if it were done with symmetry and not free hand, everyone would think, "wow, that's cool."
Originally Posted by gmoats
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


Harrison makes a good point----if it were done with symmetry and not free hand, everyone would think, "wow, that's cool."


Para Ordinance used to use hot glue to secure sights. Baer using Loctite is a bonus upgrade. smirk
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


So you are saying that this was done by Les Baer Custom Inc.?

G
Originally Posted by GeoW
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


So you are saying that this was done by Les Baer Custom Inc.?

G


Yes it was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlchemyCustom
"This one was overdone, and is visually stunning."

Quote of the week above. I was, I guess trying to give them the benefit of doubt but I do not believe them.
Originally Posted by GeoW
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


So you are saying that this was done by Les Baer Custom Inc.?

G
I'm not saying anything, just re-posting what I found. But if you want me to comment, if the OP is right and truthful, then it appears to me that indeed came from the factory that way.


Didn't the man buy the gun in question used 17 years ago, Kevin?
I am the OP and yes I did buy it 17 years ago, new.
Look at the replies from the two gunsmiths in the original post, they have seen this before from the same manufacture. Sight worked fine for a long time including carried some and used in a class, I was just a bit amazed at the hatchet job done to fit it.
Originally Posted by GunGeek
Originally Posted by GeoW
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


So you are saying that this was done by Les Baer Custom Inc.?

G
I'm not saying anything, just re-posting what I found. But if you want me to comment, if the OP is right and truthful, then it appears to me that indeed came from the factory that way.


Kevin,

I've know msrtex longer than he's had that pistol, and he's a stand up guy. In fact, I remember when he bought it. I put a few mags through it shortly after he got it. I also know the guys at the store where he purchased it. He bought it factory new.

I have no doubt at all that the pistol came from the factory that way.

That two pistolsmiths identified it as a Baer before they were told it was a Baer, tells me LB does this a good bit.

As msrtex points out, it has worked. It's just not the level of craftsmanship he would have hoped for in a expensive "custom" pistol and I don't blame him. He has right to be disappointed.

Les Baer's response of denial of responsibility is worse than the craftsmanship issue. If outside smiths can identify it as a Baer, the LB shop certainly can too. They know damn well how they put them together.

If I were in the market for an expensive 1911, I'd look elsewhere. I expect better quality and customer service when I spend that kind of money.
Originally Posted by TexasPhotog
As msrtex points out, it has worked. It's just not the level of craftsmanship he would have hoped for in a expensive "custom" pistol and I don't blame him.


I don't have any complaints about Baer pistols, but their lower priced models definitely aren't refined - nor are they expensive customs. Lots of Baer pistols sport that kind of workmanship or worse.
Originally Posted by GunGeek
Originally Posted by GeoW
Originally Posted by GunGeek
We'll of course that's what they're going to say. Just read the WHOLE thread.


So you are saying that this was done by Les Baer Custom Inc.?

G
I'm not saying anything, just re-posting what I found. But if you want me to comment, if the OP is right and truthful, then it appears to me that indeed came from the factory that way.


Then not a big deal if both you and the original buyer can prove it. confused I have known those who would lie and others who would swear to it..

But as long as you have the proof you're golden smile


Geo
Originally Posted by jwp475


Didn't the man buy the gun in question used 17 years ago, Kevin?
The owner of the gun stated this:

Quote
I bought what was labeled a new pistol from a dealer 17 years ago and it has performed flawlessly ever since


He bought it new, they are the original sights, draw your own conclusions.
Originally Posted by msrtex
... Sight worked fine for a long time including carried some and used in a class, I was just a bit amazed at the hatchet job done to fit it.


….I guess I don't get the complaint……it was done to give the locktite something to adhere to……by your admission, it worked…….it doesn't effect the esthetics of the gun whatsoever……would you have been happier if:
1. The grooves weren't cut, increasing the possibility of the sights coming off, or
2. The grooves had been machine-cut with some symmetry, even tho it wouldn't be more effective, still wouldn't show and would have probably increased the cost of production??????

Not trying to be confrontational, but I just don't get the complaint. If the modification was ineffective (i.e. the sights fell off)---if the sights were indexed incorrectly/crooked/etc. or if any of the modification were visible, detracting from the appearance, I'd get it. Sorry, I guess I'm more slow witted than normal.

JMO--of course, I could be wrong.
Finding a way to salvage either a bad sight or a bad sight cut is something that a gunsmith has to do from time to time. Tooling wears, dovetails sometimes come out undersized, or even oversized...only takes .001 or less to make a good dovetail into a bad dovetail. When a cutter wears, it will cut under-sized. So you have to run it through again to make up the difference, and it's not hard for that second pass to take off just the slightest amount too much off, leaving you with an oversized dovetail and a problem. This happens WAY more than most will ever know.

So from the outside it appears they did salvage it quite well, the OP was unaware of anything amiss at all. To me it's not the fact that they had to make something work, I'd expect that when you turn out as many guns as Baer does. But to find someone's initials shabbily carved into the slide, well that's surprising.

The S&W that I carry daily has a botched rear sight dovetail, they chose to put a shim under the sight. I'm betting the OP's Baer looked a whole lot better on that sight/dovetail mating than my S&W does. So what Baer did worked and it looked right. And any other time I'd say who cares what it looks like UNDER the sight, but this is the one time I'd say...wow, I wouldn't expect to see that under the sight.

But who knows why people do the things that people do.
Loctite does not need grooves to 'adhere to'. if using Steelbed or epoxy, maybe, but Loctite does best with minimal gaps.

second, I'd be disappointed seeing that on a $500 handgun, let alone a Les Baer
Originally Posted by toad
Loctite does not need grooves to 'adhere to'. if using Steelbed or epoxy, maybe, but Loctite does best with minimal gaps.


Loctite doesn't adhere to coatings, hard chrome, etc. Baer uses Loctite to prevent the sight from moving around, so they expose some metal. The dovetail cut can be perfect and Baer will still use Loctite as do lots of other gunsmiths.
Originally Posted by toad
Loctite does not need grooves to 'adhere to'. if using Steelbed or epoxy, maybe, but Loctite does best with minimal gaps.

second, I'd be disappointed seeing that on a $500 handgun, let alone a Les Baer
Yeah if anything he lessened what it had to adhere to. The deep gouges would have helped with some form of epoxy, but not with Locktite.
ok, my bad…..I just mentioned locktite because it was mentioned in the original thread….I still don't get it tho.
Originally Posted by gmoats
….I guess I don't get the complaint


It was just an observation. As mentioned, the gouges defeat the purpose of the Loctite, removing too much material.

People keep thinking I am pissed. This is the best 1911 I have shot. I was just making an observation. Proper sight cuts are not as common as we would like but the job of correcting the fit looks like crap. Not what you expect in a (I believe I paid) $1600 hand fitted 1911.
Yeah I wouldn't lose any sleep over it if it was my pistol, but the initials are what make me snicker, kinda odd. But from both a functional and aesthetic standpoint, the gun is still good to go, and it sounds to me like you got your money's worth.

I have never used any adhesives with sights, I always rely on the set screw. There should be a good friction fit, but even when the friction fit isn't as tight as you like it, proper tightening of the set screw will lock the sight in there real good. If one were wanting to take it a touch further, you could mill a small dimple where the set screw goes into the dovetail to give it a mechanical lock into place.
Originally Posted by JOG
Originally Posted by TexasPhotog
As msrtex points out, it has worked. It's just not the level of craftsmanship he would have hoped for in a expensive "custom" pistol and I don't blame him.


I don't have any complaints about Baer pistols, but their lower priced models definitely aren't refined - nor are they expensive customs. Lots of Baer pistols sport that kind of workmanship or worse.


Your mileage may vary, but I expect better workmanship than that in a $1600 pistol, not to mention I expect them to own up to it.
Is the pistol coated?
Blued.
Bummer - even less reason for it. Without the Loctite is there a gap between the sight and slide when the set-screw is tightened?
No, etchings are not in the location of the set screw. new sight seems pretty secure, of course I'll let you all know in 17 more years!
© 24hourcampfire