...title says it. Good, bad, ugly....comparable recommendations. About all I'm set on is stainless or stainless/alloy.

I bought one of the first Loaded models, seems like the late 1990s, but not sure. Later versions are improved from that one, though. For example, mine has a milled front sight while the new ones have a dovetailed front sight.

I have personally gone back to preferring more basic 1911s, i.e., without all the bells and whistles. Basically, the Loaded model is a bargain basement way of getting a 1911 with the bells and whistles that were at one time considered desirable custom features, i.e., you had to have your 1911 sent off to a custom smith to get them on, and it would cost you a pretty penny. Springfield saves you that expense by putting them all on there at the factory for you. No special tuning involved, just the features that used to be considered custom.

Springfields are good guns, and if you like all those features, the Loaded is a good way to go. It's not a custom tuned gun, though. If you want one with all those features, and want it with a nicely tuned action, then you're talking about the TRP. I've got one of those, too, and have been 100% happy with it.

My Loaded, when if first came from the factory, had problems, but Springfield fixed it up perfectly at no cost to me.

If I found myself without a 1911 today, and wanted one, I'd go with the stainless Mil Spec, which I have as well. It comes just the way I want it.

I've got the 'loaded' with the Bomar sight. Like it, no problems, so far probably only around 700 or so rounds through it. Got it because Jack Huntington of JRH custom guns recommended Springfields for my 45 Super. Got the 'loaded' as I need an ambidextrous safety and wanted sights easier to adjust than the mil-spec version. It is more accurate than I am, I have shot 1 1/2 inch groups at 25 yards (benched) upon occasion.

Hind sight; think I'd rather have the 'loaded' version that has the Novak sights (less bulk) for carrying, but not entirely sure as I haven't tried it (yet)

Dislikes; The mainspring housing has a key lock in it... easy to replace. the full length guide rod spring needs to be checked as it often starts to unscrew, replaced it.

Jerry

Yep, I always switch out to the standard length guide rod and plunger.

I've had one for a number of years. No problems.

I'll take a Springfield over a Kimber any day...
I still carry a 1985 GI in my truck

Thanks guys, I appreciate the feedback.

I don't think you can really go wrong on a Springer. If it has what you want in features - snag it.

That said - Joe Chambers built a pretty Ruger 1911 for a friend of his and I asked him what his opinion was of the Ruger as a base pistol to build off of. He liked it just below a Colt because guys will pay for the Colt name and he said he was impressed with it and would select it over a Springfield for something to build off.

Realize everyone's looking for something different and all but Joe builds one hell of a 1911 (they win a lot at Perry) and I value his opinion.

Loaded vs Ruger - no wrong answer but if the Ruger is easily available and cheaper, I know what I'd buy.

Springfield loaded is a lot of 1911 for the money. Like mine and wouldn't hesitate to buy another. I think they are one of the best entry level 1911's on the market.

Lover mine, SS with adjustable sights. Never jams, bobbles etc. Pretty much feeds anything well. Very accurate with most loads as well. Has the ambidextrous safety which I don't really use. All in all a very good pistol for the money.

Mine was stainless. The trigger was good enough to make hits on a 12x12in target at 60-75ish yards, if you took your time.

The only thing I hated about the one I had was the ambidextrous safety. I know I could have changed it out but... I traded it for something else. I still regret that, as it was a fine gun. Should have changed out the safety to right hand only.