Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns So, I'm gonna be slummin a Springfield LOL! Which one?

These are the choices:
1:Range Officer Operator @ $860.


2: Range Officer Target Stainless @ $1000


3: Ronin @ $900


4: Range Officer Elite @ $1200


Advice on what I get or do not get with each model would be welcomed by this neophyte. Honestly, I am kind of leaning toward the RO Elite in 10mm. I can load them to short and weak levels if I need, to cushion the arthritis in the hands.

Tell my why the Elite is not worth 33% more than the Ronin, or perhaps it is?

Or is the Target with adjustable rear sight the smarter purchase?

10mms can be kinda fussy to fool with I've had one around since the Colt Delta Elites came out. They can be a PITA, or really sweet. I've been lucky, but I know more 10mm owners whose luck went south when they overdid things either way.

. I'd go with the RO SS Target model 9mm, because I favor adjustable sights, and the ammo is cheaper and more important, available easily right now, It wouldn't be any trick at all to swap out springs, tickle the extractor, maybe, and put in a Super barrel, which is kinda where you want to be anyway, right? If you're not wedded to adjustable sights, the Ronin is pretty good. All the Springfield 9mms have ramped barrels now, so you're already fixed up for the Super when the time comes. I DID swap out the miserable 9lb. spring in my RO to a 12.5lb spring, for more positive feeding.
Some of those guns you've pictured have accessory rails, which makes them harder to find a holster for, another consideration. Railed 1911s are a PITA for that reason alone, in my book. (I have a railed 10mm, still haven't found a commercial holster to fit it right, I had to make my own).
There are lots of things to consider, but those are things to think about. Good luck with whatever you choose.

I have never desired laser or flash light on a hand gun. So the rail is of no advantage to me. Now I know it is actually a disadvantage for my use. Thanks

Whatever I buy? Yes, it will get adjustable target sights soon after purchase and add another 100 bucks to the purchase price.

Another good solid point toward #2.

Other than metal finish, does anyone know of any not so obvious differences between the models in fit or function?

Any difference in triggers?

They "should" be the same, but there might be individual differences, which is utterly normal, of course. I looked over the Springfield RO and the Ruger Target models in .45 when I was looking for another .45, and picked the Ruger for the trigger pull alone (and the rear sight notch was wider, which I like). Life is easier when you start from a good place.

If these were normal times and you could look at the pistols side-by-side, it would aid immensely in making your pick, but these are not normal times. You'll probably be in good shape either way, really, I haven't felt a truly horrible trigger on a 1911 in years. I've picked up two RIA pistols in the past few months, and even bone-stock, they have pretty decent triggers. I think either the Ronin or the SS RO will suit you well. If I had it to do over again, I might have bought a Ronin, but I haven't seen one for sale locally yet, and I get around a LOT to the local shops and online peddlers.

Good luck with whatever you choose. The 1911 journey is a lot of fun.

You've already gotten plenty of good advice from several people & now you're running yourself around in more circles going from a 38 S, to a 9mm & now to a 10mm.

The 10mm is the last round for an arthritic old man to jump on, even downloaded & is never a really fun plinking round.

If you want to download, then the 45 is just as easy or easier to download, & benefits by doing that just as much or more than the 10mm with lots of availability of components for both the gun & the ammo to make it work easily...................there is a limit as to how far you can download w/o needing to make some spring weight adjustments to both the recoil spring & the mainspring to a 1911.

A 185 gr bullet in a 45 ACP loaded down to 650-700 FPS is a very mild plinking load.

I've gone as low as 3.2 gr of Bullseye with a 185 gr SWC.

Of the guns you are now considering, you need to decide whether or not you want adjustable sights as that's really the biggest difference other than color.

And, yes, I do own more than a dozen 1911's..........................all in 45 ACP.

MM

Go with a rail

Deleted them all from the favorites except the Stainless Target models in 9mm.

I'll give the LGS a chance to find one Tuesday, or do the transfer for me.

Thanks for all the help.

Good Choice.

I had a stainless target 45 acp, no flies, was an excellent pistol.

I see you are already there, but I was going to suggest 9MM. It's about all that I am shooting right now as jacketed 45 bullets (in bulk) are a bit scarce. Irregardless, 45 bullets are always more money. There's "usually" a lot more 9mm range pick-up brass available, even if there isn't, once-fired 9 brass is still quite inexpensive.

I feel a 1911 in 9mm is one of the best choices for someone with arthritic hands. You can load it down to the point that it's almost like shooting a 22 rimfire. As Montana Man noted, if you go with very light loads you may need to replace the mainspring (hammer spring) and/or the recoil spring. It's a balancing act, but I find it kind of enjoyable messing around with it. The springs (or spring packs of multiple wights) are inexpensive and changing them out is definitely something you can do without help (paying someone).

If you do toy around with light loads, you will be glad that you chose the model with adjustable sights.

Enjoy the Journey,

Jerry

Well, as soon as Gunbroker lets me Into my account, I will get one ordered. I have not made a purchase there in many years and the account is locked. Since it is tied to my only email address, I can not open a second account.

I got an email. " We are working on it".

Thats okay. In the meantime, someone else has listed "5" of the same gun, only in blue for $830 instead of $1000. That is almost enough to pay for the Super barrel.

I am very happy with my RO, I suspect you will enjoy yours when you get it. I would definitely get a 12.5lb. spring for it,then shoot the heck out of it.

Honestly?

Really like the look of the RO.

But then, there's not much this $500 Mil-Spec w/ the 12.5# spring won't do just as well, sans light.






GR

In my experience, 1911's with forward serrations tend to chew up leather holsters...if that matters to you.

I like that. I've currently got a Loaded model that's...well, loaded. I've had several base models in the past that honestly, were probably about as good.

Not to push you away from a Springfield, but have you looked at the Colt Series 70 Competition? It can be had in 9mm and 45, shoots a bit softer with double recoil springs, and comes standard with Novak adjustable sights. I got mine for $899. I tossed the blue grips in a box and put VZ rosewood colored grips on it.

Before I considered paying the 1200 for a Springfield I'd give Dan Wesson a look. Might be a couple hundred more depending on the model you choose but I think you would end up with a much better 1911. I'd even look at the used market if I had too. A new model Colt wouldn't even be considered. Unless
of course you needed it to double as a baby rattle.

Sub1k I think a springer might be a good choice, even the Ruger SR1911 seems likes a well made pistol. Out of those choices you listed above I think I'd go with the RO in 9mm minus the rail......would be a great choice. Especially for arthritic hands, as a 9mm 1911 is a real pleasure to shoot.

Bill Wilson made me a couple "baby Rattles". They shoot great. I often laugh at people at gun shops that rattle 1911's. Then they talk. Even more funny.

Cool story......I've got one of those too......and it in fact does NOT rattle. Tight as a drum, as are my Dan Wessons, and my buddies Ed Brown. Shoot, my Glock doesn't even rattle. News for you though....Bill Wilson didn't make it for you.....probably never even laid eyes on the pistol or cares who you are lol.

Might wanna get those looked at sweetheart.

Im glad you can parrot Bill Wilson, you have a good memory.....I do too. I've watched his videos along with Vickers and Hackathorn and have heard all about the "slide to frame fit doesn't mean a thing" Maybe it doesn't , maybe it does and maybe not to you but it does to me. When I can buy a gun that doesn't rattle......well, that's the one I'm gonna buy. Sounds like you drank the kool-aid😂. You gonna let the Mercedes or Porsche rep salesman tell you not to worry about the rattle in the engine bay, the car is still fast? 😂😂😂

What's sad to me is people base a guess worth on accuracy alone. By that logic we should all be shooting Savage rifles. Every single Colt that I have ever picked up has had pretty bad fit and finish, was a rattle trap, had very mushy safeties, and pretty crude triggers including the last one I looked at which was a commander elite for 1400$. Again, that's Dan Wesson territory. No way in this world would I pay that when I get get better quality for the same money elsewhere.





Oh and here's the latest "rattle trap" it looks nice, but the gleaming qualities of the pistol stop right there.

I’ll say this much, my two recent-production Colts aren’t nearly as tight as my Dan Wesson. In regards to finish, there’s no comparison. The roll marks on the Colts are rough enough to snag fibers.

The issue is...the Colts run flawlessly and have yet to choke on any ammo I run through them. The Dan Wesson has been a serious work in progress to get it to run reliably. Small sample size though.

See what I mean. He's talking and I'm laughing. Ha!

Rattle on brother! They are both good guns. Contain your hate.

PS: I do like your fishing pictures of bass and Muskie. You can't be all bad.

Gary, the sights and barrel fit in the slide are WAY more important than how the slide fits on the frame, if you think about it a little bit, you will realize that frame/slide fit is much less important than how the barrel fits into the slide.

A little rattle does not make any difference in how they shoot, only in perception of same.