Springfield 1911 Mil-spec vs. Loaded

Another User Name · July 31, 2007, 12:27 PM

I am curious to know if there is much difference with these 2 guns?
Are the internals the same?

The Loaded is about $200 higher and I was wanting to know if there was much of a difference.

Going up to a TRP or Operatro the prices jump substanitally so I would imagine the internals and craftsmanship on thoses would be significantly better.

Later,
JP

evan1293 · July 31, 2007, 12:58 PM

The loaded has most of the "modern" features as oppose to the milspec which still has basic GI sights, short trigger , small thumb safety, standard grip safety. The loaded comes with novaks, long adj trigger , extended safety and bumped and raised grip safety. The loaded should also have a better trigger and better overall finish.

The Trp is much higher quality than the loaded. Its fit much better and has a better trigger to name a few things.

spyderdude · July 31, 2007, 01:26 PM

The GI45 is the model with low profile sights, standard ejection port, and all the other basic features found on John Browning's original design, except for the US grips. The Mil-Spec is the one I have, which is pretty basic except for taller 3 dot sights, lowered ejection port, and stainless steel barrel. I'd say go for the loaded model if you can.

Starsky · July 31, 2007, 02:21 PM

Yes there is quite a bit of difference. Night and Day really. If you sent a Mil-Spec back to SA to have the mods of a Loaded Model done you'd spend a whole lot more than the $200 difference. They're both great guns, but get the Loaded.

vanilla_gorilla · July 31, 2007, 02:27 PM

The Loaded possesses several options the GI model does not: Commander hammer and beavertail, extended ambi safety, Novak nightsights, lowered and flared ejection port and beveled mag well.

For the money, I see no reason NOT to buy the Loaded if it's to be a carry gun.

Rob96 · July 31, 2007, 03:20 PM

Here is what I did. I specifically was looking for a Mil-Spec with an "NM" serieal number prefix, as these are guns produced here in the USA from raw forgings imported from Imbel. They are produced by the same people that put together the TRP. At least mine they also share the same match grade stainless barrel and bushing. I then sent the gun into the Custom Shop with a 10-8 Performance rear sight and long trigger. Also had them install the skeleton hammer, beavertail, 4.5# trigger job and reparkerize the frame , slide and small parts. I did this way becasue the fit and finish is better from the Custom Shop than the assembly line that the Loaded comes off of. I was lucky to find the Mil-Spec used with only 50 rounds fired through it for $366. The work I had done to it cot me $420. It tunred out to be ab incredible build.

David the Gnome · July 31, 2007, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vanilla_gorilla

The Loaded possesses several options the GI model does not: Commander hammer and beavertail, extended ambi safety, Novak nightsights, lowered and flared ejection port and beveled mag well.

For the money, I see no reason NOT to buy the Loaded if it's to be a carry gun.

The two models in question are the Mil-Spec and the Loaded, not the GI model. The Mil-Spec has most of the improvements you've listed.

I would be more than happy with the Mil-Spec personally. If you are comfortable spending the extra money the added improvements of the Loaded are nice. The Mil-Spec has enough improvements over the GI model to be a very solid and reliable handgun.

gordo_gun_guy · July 31, 2007, 06:21 PM

First post.

The Mil-spec will do nicely, with caveats as follows:

If you get hammer bite in a std 1911, get the Loaded for the beavertail
If you require night sights or ambi safety, shell out for the Loaded
If you hate front cocking serrations for ruining JMB's clean lines on Old Slabsides, don't buy a Loaded

The mag well (found on most of the Loadeds) prints badly in strong-side carry and precludes improving concealment with slim-line grips.

BTW, I've shot a Black Stainless Loaded (w EGW tungsten guide rod and Carbon Creations grips) for a couple years in IDPA CDP with no complaints (other than the cost of .45 ammo). Still, I'm looking to get a Mil-spec soon for carry, perhaps staking in a fiber front sight....

Another User Name · July 31, 2007, 07:55 PM

Thanks again for the valuable advice.
At this time I'm leaning towards the Loaded. I haven't handled both in person but from pictures the Loaded seems a little polished and just suits my eye better.

Now I've come across some with adj sites, is this really necessary? I don't plan on carrying this now or in the future, so no need to worry about snaggin or banging the site.

CNate · August 1, 2007, 02:10 AM

The Loaded series comes with either the low mounts, or the adjustables. Check http://www.springfield-armory.com/.

The loaded is a good choice. It's got a lot of features that you'd end up having put on a mil-spec once you got it.

I carry a PX9151LP (SS Loaded, .45) myself. It's one of the smoothest, most reliable weapons I've ever used.

gordo_gun_guy · August 1, 2007, 12:17 PM

Re sights: KISS always applies, but I've never had mechanical trouble with the Bomar's on mine (close to the current PX9152LP, but came with the old plastic grips).

The left rear tritium vial did start to back out under recoil at about 800 rds. Springfield customer service offered to have me send in the slide for a free fix, but also confirmed my thought that Loc-tite wouldn't hurt anything. with the monthly match looming, I did one application of the blue stuff, and had no further problems.

If it's to be a plinker, you may enjoy having elevation adjustment as you scrounge through the 230 gr TAP +P after shooting your neighbor's 750 fps 185 gr wadcutter handload....

July 31, 2007, 12:27 PM	#1
Another User Name Member Join Date: July 19, 2007 Location: Fort Worth, TX Posts: 84	Springfield 1911 Mil-spec vs. Loaded I am curious to know if there is much difference with these 2 guns? Are the internals the same? The Loaded is about $200 higher and I was wanting to know if there was much of a difference. Going up to a TRP or Operatro the prices jump substanitally so I would imagine the internals and craftsmanship on thoses would be significantly better. Later, JP

July 31, 2007, 02:27 PM	#5
vanilla_gorilla Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Posts: 272	The Loaded possesses several options the GI model does not: Commander hammer and beavertail, extended ambi safety, Novak nightsights, lowered and flared ejection port and beveled mag well. For the money, I see no reason NOT to buy the Loaded if it's to be a carry gun. __________________ A gun is just a tool, the real weapon lies behind the face in the mirror.

July 31, 2007, 12:58 PM	#2
evan1293 Senior Member Join Date: February 16, 2007 Location: CT Posts: 783	The loaded has most of the "modern" features as oppose to the milspec which still has basic GI sights, short trigger , small thumb safety, standard grip safety. The loaded comes with novaks, long adj trigger , extended safety and bumped and raised grip safety. The loaded should also have a better trigger and better overall finish. The Trp is much higher quality than the loaded. Its fit much better and has a better trigger to name a few things.

July 31, 2007, 01:26 PM	#3
spyderdude Senior Member Join Date: March 6, 2006 Posts: 579	The GI45 is the model with low profile sights, standard ejection port, and all the other basic features found on John Browning's original design, except for the US grips. The Mil-Spec is the one I have, which is pretty basic except for taller 3 dot sights, lowered ejection port, and stainless steel barrel. I'd say go for the loaded model if you can.

July 31, 2007, 02:21 PM	#4
Starsky Senior Member Join Date: July 29, 2007 Posts: 111	Yes there is quite a bit of difference. Night and Day really. If you sent a Mil-Spec back to SA to have the mods of a Loaded Model done you'd spend a whole lot more than the $200 difference. They're both great guns, but get the Loaded.

July 31, 2007, 03:20 PM	#6
Rob96 Senior Member Join Date: August 31, 1999 Location: Allentown,PA Posts: 1,969	Here is what I did. I specifically was looking for a Mil-Spec with an "NM" serieal number prefix, as these are guns produced here in the USA from raw forgings imported from Imbel. They are produced by the same people that put together the TRP. At least mine they also share the same match grade stainless barrel and bushing. I then sent the gun into the Custom Shop with a 10-8 Performance rear sight and long trigger. Also had them install the skeleton hammer, beavertail, 4.5# trigger job and reparkerize the frame , slide and small parts. I did this way becasue the fit and finish is better from the Custom Shop than the assembly line that the Loaded comes off of. I was lucky to find the Mil-Spec used with only 50 rounds fired through it for $366. The work I had done to it cot me $420. It tunred out to be ab incredible build.

July 31, 2007, 06:21 PM	#8
gordo_gun_guy Senior Member Join Date: July 31, 2007 Posts: 250	First post. The Mil-spec will do nicely, with caveats as follows: If you get hammer bite in a std 1911, get the Loaded for the beavertail If you require night sights or ambi safety, shell out for the Loaded If you hate front cocking serrations for ruining JMB's clean lines on Old Slabsides, don't buy a Loaded The mag well (found on most of the Loadeds) prints badly in strong-side carry and precludes improving concealment with slim-line grips. BTW, I've shot a Black Stainless Loaded (w EGW tungsten guide rod and Carbon Creations grips) for a couple years in IDPA CDP with no complaints (other than the cost of .45 ammo). Still, I'm looking to get a Mil-spec soon for carry, perhaps staking in a fiber front sight....

July 31, 2007, 07:55 PM	#9
Another User Name Member Join Date: July 19, 2007 Location: Fort Worth, TX Posts: 84	Thanks again for the valuable advice. At this time I'm leaning towards the Loaded. I haven't handled both in person but from pictures the Loaded seems a little polished and just suits my eye better. Now I've come across some with adj sites, is this really necessary? I don't plan on carrying this now or in the future, so no need to worry about snaggin or banging the site.

August 1, 2007, 02:10 AM	#10
CNate Junior Member Join Date: July 15, 2007 Posts: 12	The Loaded series comes with either the low mounts, or the adjustables. Check http://www.springfield-armory.com/. The loaded is a good choice. It's got a lot of features that you'd end up having put on a mil-spec once you got it. I carry a PX9151LP (SS Loaded, .45) myself. It's one of the smoothest, most reliable weapons I've ever used.

August 1, 2007, 12:17 PM	#11
gordo_gun_guy Senior Member Join Date: July 31, 2007 Posts: 250	Re sights: KISS always applies, but I've never had mechanical trouble with the Bomar's on mine (close to the current PX9152LP, but came with the old plastic grips). The left rear tritium vial did start to back out under recoil at about 800 rds. Springfield customer service offered to have me send in the slide for a free fix, but also confirmed my thought that Loc-tite wouldn't hurt anything. with the monthly match looming, I did one application of the blue stuff, and had no further problems. If it's to be a plinker, you may enjoy having elevation adjustment as you scrounge through the 230 gr TAP +P after shooting your neighbor's 750 fps 185 gr wadcutter handload....