Colt M1991A1 — The “Modern” Model 1911 with Series 80 firing system

Next Monday I’ll be presenting a review of the firearm pictured here, but today I want to devote this blog to one of the most iconic and historically important handguns ever produced — John Moses Browning’s superlatively designed, stunningly beautiful achievement the Colt Model 1911 designed for the potent .45 ACP cartridge.

You’ve seen the 1911 before, by the way.  In fact, whether you know it or not, you’ve seen it literally thousands of times over the years.  And, as a purveyor of fiction, I simply must note that you’ve seen it mentioned in countless novels as well — Even agent 007 used it in Ian Fleming‘s novel Moonraker and in the short story From a View to a Kill in the For Your Eyes Only collection of works.  You simply cannot escape it’s ubiquitous presence in television, movies, literature, and any serious history on the U.S. military over the past 100+ years.

For instance it was Thomas Sullivan Magnum’s favorite weapon.

Tom Magnum on the case with his trusty Series 70 M1911— Image from Internet Movie Firearms Database (www.imfdb.org)

Mike Hammer called his 1911 “Betsy.”

Mickey Spillane’s Mike Hammer (Stacy Keach) with “Betsy”

And even John Shaft used one.

John Shaft’s M1911 — For those times when his Colt Detective Special just wasn’t enough firepower

Indeed, you’ll see an M1911 used by either the hero or a bad guy in almost any film or television show in which firearms play a prominent roll in the storyline.  In real life the M1911 was used by various law enforcement agencies (and still in use by some, including certain FBI units), mobsters, gangsters, and spies.

M1911 “Government Model”

But the Model 1911 (M1911 for short) gained its fame on the battlefields of World War I, World War II, Vietnam, Korea, etc., etc., etc.  Indeed the M1911 was first adopted by the U.S. Army in early 1911 — hence the name — and was the primary sidearm of the U.S. military until it was replaced by the vastly inferior 9mm Beretta M9 (military version of the Beretta 92) in 1985.

9mm Beretta M9 — The Army’s idea of a “replacement” for the M1911

The M1911’s story with the U.S. military did not end there, however.  It continues in service to this day with  U.S. Marine Expeditionary Units under its new designation as the M45 MEU(SOC) pistol.  More recently the USMC has acquired directly from Colt a railed version of the 1911 designated the M45A1 CQBP — Close Quarter Battle Pistol — for use by both the Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) and Marine Special Operations Command (MARSOC).

M45A1 CQBP — Made by Colt and equipped with an accessory rail

Between the original M1911 and the M1911A1 version  that succeeded it in 1924, the U.S. military acquired an astounding 2.7 million copies made by Colt, Springfield Armory (the former U.S. government arsenal, and not the current company using that name), Remington, North American Arms, Ithaca Gun Company (known for shotguns), Remington Rand (the typewriter/computer company), Singer (another typewriter manufacturer), and even a maker of railroad signalling gear — Union Switch & Signal.

M1911 “Government Model”

After World War II the U.S. military had enough M1911s on hand to last until their ultimate replacement some forty years later by the aforementioned M9 Beretta.  These M1911s were refurbished as needed at the Rock Island Arsenal (not to be confused with Armscor’s Rock Island Armory brand name), the U.S. Government Springfield Armory, and other military depots and arsenals.

In other words, if you’ve seen a war movie involving U.S. troops set in time from 1911 until at least 1986, chances are you saw an M1911 in the picture.  And if you’ve watched a movie concerning the U.S. Marine Corps after 1985, there’s still a good chance you’ve seen a version of the M1911.

Today everybody and his fourth cousin twice removed make some version of the M1911 — Colt (the true original), Springfield Armory (the company, not the original U.S. government armory), SIG, Kimber, Wilson Combat, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Remington, Para Ordinance, Taurus (Brazil), Rock Island Armory (the Armscor Filipino subsidiary), and even a .22 version marked under the Walther banner but made in Turkey for parent company Umarex. That’s just a partial list, by the way.  Past and present there have been well over 100 companies that have made versions of the M1911 in some form or another, and in calibers ranging from the original .45 ACP to at least ten other calibers from the diminutive (.22) to the ridiculous (.460 Rowland).

And who came up with this still popular design?  Why, John Moses Browning, of course.  You’ll recall that name from my series on Winchester lever-action rifles (see: Winchester Rifles — Part 1;  and Winchester Rifles — Part 2), another iconic series of historic firearms.  But to make a semiautomatic pistol that was still somewhat compact and relatively light, yet would stand up to the power of the .45 ACP cartridge, John Browning would have to invent an entirely new recoil mechanism.  Existing locked breech mechanisms of the era were complex, costly to manufacture, and unreliable.  So, what Browning came up with was a short-recoil, tilting barrel, locked breech design.  A simplified form of that Browning invention is still used to this day in nearly every semiautomatic handgun made for powerful calibers beginning with the 9mm Parabellum.  This short-recoil locked-breech mechanism works by briefly locking the barrel and slide together as a unit after the firing of the bullet.  The slide and barrel recoil back a short distance until the barrel tilts and disengages from the “locking” mechanism affixing it to the slide.  The slide continues reward, opening the breech, at which time the spent cartridge is extracted from the chamber and ejected through the now exposed port at the top of the pistol.  The slide then reverses, strips a fresh round from the magazine, and forces it into the chamber before reengaging the barrel and returning to battery (meaning the slide and barrel seated fully forward into firing position atop the frame of the weapon).

Here’s a demonstration to put all that mumbo-jumbo together for you:

As the M1911 was originally developed by John Browning under contract to Colt, I’ll now stick specifically to Colt civilian models rather that even thinking of touching upon the 100+ other manufacturers and their variants.  The most common Colt civilian variants of the full-size M1911 (not Commander nor Officer models with reduced length barrels and slides) are:

• Colt Government Mk. IV Series 70 (1970 to 1983) — Revised “Collet” barrel bushing that supposedly increased accuracy, but was also prone to breakage thus reducing reliability.
• Colt Government Mk. IV Series 80 (two basic versions)
  1. 1983 to 1988 — New internal firing pin block for additional safety against accidental discharges resulting from dropping the weapon; retained the Series 70 Collet barrel bushing.
  2. 1988 to present — same internal firing pin block; return to the solid bushing pre-Series 70.
• Colt Government Mk. IV Series 70 (2001 to present) — A return to the original design that drops the internal firing pin safety of the Series 80; earlier 70 Series Collet bushing replaced with original-style solid bushing
  Note:  The return to the Series 70 firing system without the internal firing pin block was in response to criticism that it was more difficult to perform a trigger job on the Series 80.
• Colt GovernmentM1991A1 (two basic versions)
  1. “Old Roll Mark” (ORM) version 1991 to 2001 — Series 80 firing pin block and original, pre-Series 70 barrel bushing; plastic trigger; cheap Parkerized finish; large and, to some, ugly “COLT M1991A” roll mark on slide.
  2. “New Roll Mark” (NRM) version 2001 to present — As with ORM above except an anodized aluminum trigger; much more attractive brushed-blue finish (stainless steel version also available); smaller, more sedate “COLT’S GOVERNMENT MODEL .45 AUTOMATIC CALIBER” slide roll mark.

Here’s a link list to the current Colt models mentioned immediately above as well as other variations I’ve not mentioned (including the .380 ACP variant known as the Colt Mustang):

• Colt M1991A1
• Colt XSE (a high-end Series 80 derivative)
• Colt Combat Elite (tactical version of the Series 80 also available in 10mm)
• Colt Rail Gun (Series 80 version with Picatinny accessory rail)
• Colt Gold Cup (Series 80 target model with match-grade barrel, adjustable sights, and other enhancements)
• Colt Series 70
• Colt Defender (short-barrel Series 80 version optimized for concealed carry)
• Colt New Agent (another short-barrel Series 80 version)
• Colt Special Combat Government (larger, long-barrel Series 80 variant for open carry, law enforcement, and home defense)
• Colt CQBP (current railed military version of the Series 80)
• Colt .380 Mustang (extremely compact pocket pistol chambered for the .380 ACP/9mm kurz and using a Series 80 firing system and about ⅓ the weight of a typical M1911 pistol)

Remember to return next Monday to find out what it’s like to operate an M1911 (specifically an M1991A1 version) at the range, and find out why this firearm is still so popular over 100 years after its development.

Bibliography:

• .45 ACP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_ACP
• Blowback versus Locked Breech: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-automatic_pistol#Actions:_blowback_versus_locked_breech
• Colt’s Manufacturing Company: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt%27s_Manufacturing_Company
• John Browning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Browning
• M1911: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1911_pistol
• Short recoil operation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recoil_operation#Short_recoil_operation

Colt M1991A1 Government Model

A word for the shooting enthusiast:  This review is geared toward novices in general and writers of fiction in particular.  If you’re a shooter or a fan of the M1911 you’ll still enjoy it, but please bear with some of the more extraneous background stuff.  For someone looking for a review of the M1991A1 with a purchase in mind, read through to the end for a detailed look at the fit, finish, and other particulars for this model.

Last Monday we took a look at John Browning’s handgun masterpiece — the Colt Model 1911 — and later advancements made to his original design by the company that commissioned him to develop it.  Today we’ll take a look at what it’s like to operate and actually fire a modern version of this century-old design.  But before we do, let’s make a size comparison of the M1911 with another favorite of mine, the Walther PPK/S.  The PP-series of pistols are much smaller, and they are straight blow-backs designed for smaller calibers such as the .32 ACP/7.65mm and .380 ACP/9mm kurz.

Two Pieces of History — Colt M1911 and Walther PP-series

That “ACP” designation in .45 ACP, .32 ACP, and .380 ACP stands for Automatic Colt Pistol, and all ACP cartridges were designed for either Fabrique Nationale de Herstal (FNH) of Belgium or the U.S. Colt’s Manufacturing Company by one man — again, John Browning.  Other Browning designed ACP cartridges are the .25 ACP and the all but discontinued.38 ACP.

If you compare the size of the M1911 to something considerably more concealable you’ll find that the M1911 is by no means a small pistol.  It is in fact quite large and very heavy.  The PPK/S you see below weighs in at around 22.4 ounces/635 grams, including an empty magazine.  The M1911 on the other hand tips the scales at almost 2½ pounds — 39 ounces/1.1 kilograms with an empty magazine for the original government model.  The modern M1991A1 in standard configuration beats that, but just barely at 37.78 ounces/1071 grams according to my kitchen scales.

Size comparison with a Walther PPK/S

Does that make the standard M1911 impractical for concealed carry?  Not at all.  I know several people who conceal the full-size version, and others who pack smaller versions.  Despite it’s 8.6-inch/217mm length the M1911 is particularly well suited for inside-the-waistband carry because it is relatively narrow — around 1.34 inches/34mm at the grip and an almost unbelievably narrow .91 inches/23mm at the slide.  The only real downside to concealed carry would have to be a hefty weight which requires a very good belt.

Surprisingly Thin

The M1911 is normally carried in the cocked-and-locked configuration (also called “condition one).  Cocked-and-locked means that there is a live round in the chamber and the hammer is fully cocked and ready to fire.  A thumb-operable external safety is engaged in condition one to prevent accidental discharge.

“Cocked-and-Locked”

So, should you consider adding an M1911 to your collection?  Absolutely.  It’s the iconic U.S. semiautomatic, and has been since, well, 1911 (see: Historical Firearms — The Colt Model 1911).  It’s simply a wonderful range toy even if you opt to carry something more modern — intuitive to aim, fun to shoot, easily controlled despite being chambered in .45 ACP, and it’s one of the most accurate handguns ever devised.

Cocked and ready to fire — Safety off

Which brings us to some of the features incorporated into the M1911.  In addition to the external thumb safety there is an additional safety built into the grip.  If the grip is not properly held and the grip safety depressed, the weapon will not fire.  In what has become a familiar standard here in the U.S., the magazine is released via manipulation of the magazine release button located on the frame just aft of the trigger.  Internally, at least since 1983 on Colt Series 80 pistols such as the M1991A1 depicted here, there is also a firing pin block that only disengages when the trigger is pulled, which in turn can only occur if the external safety is disengaged and the grip safety is squeezed into the grip.

Standard M1911 controls

That last Series 80 feature is a bit controversial.  Some claim that it unnecessarily complicated the original design, degraded the trigger by making it stiffer and adding an almost imperceptible (in my view) amount of trigger creep before the hammer trips, and gunsmiths complained that the new design is more difficult to tune to competition standards.  My personal opinion?  It’s still one of the best triggers out there, and according to my research any gunsmith worthy of the title will be able to tune your trigger with just a bit more effort.  But even out of the box, I’d be hard pressed to understand why anyone would think this weapon needs any tuning whatsoever.  If the shooter can’t hold this weapon on target, then it’s the shooter who has a problem rather than the trigger and firing system on this weapon.

Range review:  I’ve fired other M1911 models in the past, including a Series 70 Gold Cup with National Match barrel.  And while it’s been awhile since then, I have no complaints concerning the current M1991A1 Series 80.  Trigger take-up is in the neighborhood of ⅛ inch/3mm.  The aforementioned trigger “creep” is less than even that.  As such, the hammer trip is very clean and exceedingly crisp, especially when compared to most modern trigger designs.  Trigger reset is equally short with a very positive tactile feedback and audible “click.”  Reliability is superb with the two ammo types I fed through it — full metal jacket and jacketed hollow points.  As for accuracy, this pistol without any modification whatsoever is capable of better accuracy than most any shooter who will fire one, and you can’t ask for better than that.  Indeed, take a look at this demonstration video from one of my favorite handgun reviewers, Hickok45:

Don’t Fear the Recoil:  Many people unfairly in my view criticize the .45 ACP cartridge as being “uncontrollable,” and thus fairly inaccurate especially on followup shots.  A lot of that is not born out by the physics, however.  The original .45 ACP design called for a 230-grain/.526-ounce/14.9-gram bullet traveling subsonically at around 830 feet/253 meters per second.  That works out to around 352 foot-pounds/477 Joules of force.  Compare that to the original specifications of the “much more controllable” 9mm Parabellum.  That cartridge was designed around a 115-grain/.263-ounce/7.45-gram bullet traveling at the supersonic velocity of 1,300 feet/390 meters per second.  Total energy from that round is 420 foot-pounds/570 Joules.  Bear in mind that 9mm weapons are for the most part considerably lighter than the M1911, yet as you can see they transmit more recoil force back through the weapon and ultimately to the shooter’s hand.  In my opinion the 9mm has a sharper, quicker recoil whereas the .45 ACP imparts a steady, even, thrust-like reaction.  Recoil management is thus easy to accomplish and target reacquisition is very quick.

A little side story on that slower .45 ACP velocity.  Back in my younger uncorrected vision days I could actually follow with my eye a .45 ACP bullet heading downrange, especially when shooting in bright sunlight at long ranges against a light-colored backdrop.  It was a truly bizarre experience, and I cannot recall being able to do that with any other bullet I’ve ever fired.

But back to what it’s like to fire an M1911 in .45 ACP (fiction writers in particular take note):  The noise from a .45 ACP is unlike most smaller caliber handguns such as the 9mm in that it imparts a slightly deeper, almost cannon-like “boom” rather than a sharp “bang.”  That’s not to say the .45 ACP is louder.  It isn’t.  What I’m describing is just a slightly deeper, lower frequency with less “crack,” probably as a result of comparing a subsonic round (.45 ACP) to one that will emit the “crack” of a sonic boom (9mm).  Recoil is surprisingly light.  Muzzle flip is negligible, especially with a proper grip.  Target reacquisition is quick and efficient, and followup shots are easily managed.

Now a look at the current fit-and-finish of the “New Roll Mark” post-2001 version of the Colt M1991A1:  If you’re considering adding an M1911 variant to your collection you can do a lot worse than this particular version.  This is first and foremost a real Colt and not a pretender.  Slide-to-frame fit is extremely tight with almost no perceptible play.  Barrel-to-bushing tolerance is so tight that I cannot induce any wobble at all in my example.

As for finish, the satin bluing is one of the prettiest I’ve ever seen in recent years, and light-years beyond the Parkerized finish of the original “Old Roll Mark” version of the M1991A1:

Satin Blue Finish

The grips that come with the Colt M1991A1 are nicely textured, beautifully stained, semi-gloss rosewood:

Textured Rosewood Grips

Specifications:

• Length: 8.54 inches/217mm
• Barrel Length: 5.03 inches/128mm
• Slide Width: .91 inches/23mm
• Maximum Width: 1.34 inches/34mm
• Weight with empty magazine: 37.78 ounces/1,071 grams
• Capacity: 7+1

Pricing:  This particular Colt M1991A1 with blued finish and rosewood grips is Colt model number O1991.  The manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) is $974, but you can find them available for under $900 and Bud’s Gun Shop is listing one at $834 as of this writing.

Colt .38 Super

Before we get to the Colt M1991A1 chambered in .38 Super +P, there will first be a giant rant on Colt’s mismanagement team:

In case you hadn’t heard the news, Colt Defense, which owns Colt’s Manufacturing Company, last week went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Chapter 11 theoretically means that Colt will continue to operate, reorganize and restructure its huge debt load, and eventually emerge as a viable company.

Don’t bet on it.

Sciens Capital Management has pretty much looted the company into unsustainability. Sciens even went so far as to put Colt’s $300 million into recapitalized debt. And where did that money go? Growing the company? Positioning Colt to take advantage of the recent unprecedented surge in consumer demand for firearms? Hardly. That money was “redistributed” right back into Sciens’ coffers. That means it lined pockets. In other words, Samuel Colt’s company dating back to 1855 (1836 if you trace back to Colt’s first attempt at a firearm company) is merely another victim of yet one more slash-and-burn private equity firm more concerned with turning a quick buck rather than actually producing anything of lasting value.

Colt .38 Super

It takes a special kind of greed to bankrupt an American firearms icon during a period when nearly every other manufacturer of firearms in the U.S. is reporting record sales and record profits, but congratulations, Sciens. You managed it! Or, rather, mismanaged it. Too bad we don’t reward this type of “investment” with jail time. If we did, Wall Street would be a ghost town and AIG and Citibank would be synonymous with Alcatraz. Instead, we leave others holding the now-empty bag and throw more U.S. labor out of work while these robber barons make off with enough booty for a third vacation home on some island and a yacht.

Oh, how I so despise these private equity plunderers.

Look for Sciens to now cash in by breaking up Colt Defense and Colt’s Manufacturing into separate entities (again), selling off assets from both, and very possibly even auctioning off the single biggest asset still left to Colt — the right to the Colt name itself. This is what happened to the iconic Winchester name, which was sold off to the Belgians while current production of Winchester lever action rifles — the rifles that tamed the Wild West — moved to Japan of all places.

Colt .38 Super

Now some background on the .38 Super round, or to be technically correct, the .38 Super +P.

In the beginning Gun God John Moses Browning created .38 ACP. And it was good. But .38 ACP was too powerful for the Colt M1900 for which it was originally designed. So .38 ACP (not to be confused with that other John Moses Browning creation, the similarly sounding .380 ACP) was downgraded in power.

Colt .38 Super

Then Gun God Browning created the incredibly powerful .45 ACP and the more robust Colt Model 1911. And it was good. So good that it was discovered that the original power of the .38 ACP could once again be restored to its former all-powerful glory and chambered into the tank-like M1911 without undue concern with damaging both pistol and shooter.

Thus was born in the year of 1928 (and shipped in January of 1929) a new variant of the M1911 called the Colt .38 Super. So, you see, .38 Super wasn’t originally the name of the round. It was, rather, the name for the pistol in which the now fully charged .38 ACP went. But to avoid potentially devastating and dangerous firearm destruction in earlier .38 ACP weapons, a new designation was created and thus today we have the term .38 Super +P to differentiate a round that is dimensionally identical to, and visually indistinguishable from, the original .38 ACP.

Colt .38 Super

So, how powerful is the .38 Super +P round? Powerful enough that it could do something even the heavier yet slower .45 ACP round could not do with reliability and consistency. It could penetrate the thick steel bodies of cars produced in that era (much to the chagrin of Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow), granting to law enforcement officers a capability they simply did not have in any other handgun round of that era. The .38 Super could also penetrate contemporary “padded vest” body armor.

In other words, the .38 Super +P round was the .357 Magnum of its day, and it had the additional advantages of giving law enforcement more rounds (9+1 vs. 6 for a revolver or 7+1 for an M1911 chambered in .45 ACP) in a quick-loading (or reloading) semiautomatic with the inherent increased shooter accuracy of a single-action trigger.

A Pair to Draw to

Unfortunately for the .38 Super +P (and for today’s shooters it turns out), that round only had five years to catch on before the slightly more powerful .357 Magnum round debuted. I say “unfortunately” because the .38 Super +P was designed for semiautomatic weaponry whereas the .357 Magnum is almost strictly a revolver round (excluding Magnum Research’s Desert Eagle of course). And .357 SIG? It fits in between .38 Super +P and .357 Magnum, but it’s expensive and sometimes hard to find. You’re better off to stick with the .357 Magnum if revolvers float your boat, or the .38 Super +P if semiautomatics ring your chimes. The .357 SIG was an answer to a question that had already been answered by the previous two rounds, and I doubt it’ll be around over the long haul.

By the way, what was the whole raison d’être for the .40 S&W? Oh, I remember now — vehicle penetration. Good going, FBI. You managed to force the reinvention of a capability that’s existed for around a century, and you still managed to get a round that doesn’t have the energy of the .38 Super +P from 1928.

Colt .38 Super vs. Colt .45 ACP

Here are some comparisons of the original .38 ACP, the later downloaded .38 ACP, the original .38 Super +P load, and the original .357 Magnum load (bullet weight in grains; velocity in feet per second; muzzle energy in foot-pounds):

.38 Super +P Ballistics Comparison

You’ll note that the original .357 Magnum data is from a ridiculously long barrel, so let’s take a look at what you can expect coming out something a bit more reasonable using a modern load:

.357 Magnum Ballistics — 4″ barrel

And how do .40 S&W and .357 SIG stack up to the .38 Super +P and .357 Magnum from 1928 and 1935?  Let’s take a look:

.357 SIG and .40 S&W Ballistics

As you can see, the .40 S&W originally didn’t have a lot going for it in comparison to even the original .38 ACP loads, hence the derisive nickname, “.40 Short & Weak.”  Newer loadings have upped the performance a bit, but I’m still not impressed.  The .357 SIG looks good using its original development load, but those numbers don’t hold up with with most commercial loads available today.  In practice, .357 SIG falls just above .38 Super +P and well below .357 Magnum in muzzle energy.

Now let us look at today’s firearm — a stainless steel version of the original Colt Model 1911 chambered in the uncommon .38 Super +P round, modified with the Series 80 trigger, redesignated officially as an M1991A, and sold under the model designation of O2091 (that first character being the letter “O” rather than the number zero). The blued version is the O2991.

Colt .38 Super

What’s included:

• Colt .38 Super “Government Model” M1991A1 with brushed stainless slide and frame flats (vertical sides) and matte finish elsewhere; solid aluminum trigger; spur hammer; composite rubber grips; lowered ejection port; single-action only Series 80 firing system
• Two 9-round magazines
• Firearm lock
• Plastic “empty chamber” flag
• Instruction manual
• Attractive Colt blue hard-sided, foam-lined case
• Bright orange, stop sign-shaped, Christmas Story-type “You’ll shoot your eye out, kid” warning tag
• The ubiquitous “Join the NRA or you’ll lose all your guns and be imprisoned for life by a week from Friday” enlistment package (Note to NRA in general and Wayne LaPierre specifically: If you want to be taken seriously as an advocate for gun ownership rights then don’t endorse for president the one candidate with the worst gun-rights record in the history of presidential elections. That just makes you look silly. Stupid silly. And quit hyping phony fear stories while you’re at it.)

Colt .38 Super

M1991A1 (Model O2091) dimensions:

• Length: 8.54 inches/217mm
• Barrel Length: 5.03 inches/128mm
• Slide Width: .91 inches/23mm
• Maximum Width: 1.34 inches/34mm
• Weight with empty magazine: 38 ounces/1,077 grams
• Magazine Capacity: 9+1

I’ve already reviewed a .45 ACP version of this weapon in A 1911 by Any Other Name Would Be . . . an M1991A1 — Shooting Review. As such I won’t be giving a firing review here. The trigger is the same as in the .45 ACP M1991A1, so I’ll just repeat here what I said about the trigger on the M1991A1 in .45 ACP:

Internally, at least since 1983 on Colt Series 80 pistols such as the M1991A1 depicted here, there is also a firing pin block that only disengages when the trigger is pulled, which in turn can only occur if the external safety is disengaged and the grip safety is squeezed into the grip.

That last Series 80 feature is a bit controversial.  Some claim that it unnecessarily complicated the original design, degraded the trigger by making it stiffer and adding an almost imperceptible (in my view) amount of trigger creep before the hammer trips, and gunsmiths complained that the new design is more difficult to tune to competition standards.  My personal opinion?  It’s still one of the best triggers out there, and according to my research any gunsmith worthy of the title will be able to tune your trigger with just a bit more effort.  But even out of the box, I’d be hard pressed to understand why anyone would think this weapon needs any tuning whatsoever.  If the shooter can’t hold this weapon on target, then it’s the shooter who has a problem rather than the trigger and firing system on this weapon.

I’ve fired other M1911 models in the past, including a Series 70 Gold Cup with National Match barrel.  And while it’s been awhile since then, I have no complaints concerning the current M1991A1 Series 80.  Trigger take-up is in the neighborhood of ⅛ inch/3mm.  The aforementioned trigger “creep” is less than even that.  As such, the hammer trip is very clean and exceedingly crisp, especially when compared to most modern trigger designs.  Trigger reset is equally short with a very positive tactile feedback and audible “click.”

Colt Government Model

Now on to recoil.  Handgunners with M1911 pistols in both calibers report similar perceived recoil characteristics, with the .45 ACP described as more of a “push” and the .38 Super +P imparting a “quicker” but overall slightly more controllable impulse. Let’s face facts here, though — we’re talking about all-metal pistols weighing in at a whopping 38 ounces (with empty magazine). That’s a lot of mass, so either weapon is going to be more manageable than a miniscule 22.4-ounce Walther PPK/S firing the much lower powered .380 ACP round coming in at around half the energy of either the .38 Super +P or the .45 ACP.

Colt .38 Super

Fit and finish are nearly as good as on my previously reviewed blued M1991A1. Slide-to-frame fit is exceedingly tight. If you vigorously shake the weapon there is one minor rattle emanating from the grip safety, but otherwise the entire assembly is tight, tight, tight. In other words, it’s a modern Colt through and through, and it shows in the quality.

Colt .38 Super

Magazine insertion is another story. Both magazines slide smoothly into the magazine well until about 1 9/16 inches/39.69mm to go, then stop hard. It requires either a hearty slap at the base of the magazine or a hefty push to complete insertion. I don’t recall this being the case on my .45 ACP M1991A1, so I checked. Resistance is met at the same point of insertion, but it required only a fraction of the force to overcome and fully insert the .45 ACP magazine into the magazine well. This may be a break-in issue, but that’s not going to happen with this example. It’s not going to be fired.

Colt .38 Super

So, why no shooting review? Because this particular example was acquired more as an investment. If Colt does break apart, or if quality suffers because production is ramped up to cover creditors, or (shudder) the Colt name gets auctioned off to some maker of cheap 1911 knock-offs in China, then pre-bankruptcy Colts will command a premium over post-bankruptcy examples.

Colt .38 Super

Hey, the robber barons at Sciens Capital Management shouldn’t be the only ones to capitalize on their own mismanagement, right? Now if only I could get Ursula to spring for blued and perhaps a stainless Colt M1911A1 to keep this safe queen company, also never to be fired.

Colt’s Custom Shop Mk. IV Series 70 in stainless

This week we’re taking a break from travel and photography and concentrating on another of my varied areas of interest — firearms. We’ll begin with a rather rare bird, a new Colt Mk. IV Series 70. The example you see here is in stainless steel.

But first a history lesson on the Colt “Government Model” M1911 Series 70 versus the Series 80, and the controversy surrounding the latter.

Colt’s Custom Shop Mk. IV Series 70 in stainless

The Mk. IV Series 70 dates from the year 1970. It differed from the previous M1911A1 (1924) in that the pistol had installed a split barrel bushing (sometimes referred to as a “collet bushing”) to increase accuracy of an already very accurate handgun. The following photos from Hooper Gun Works illustrate the difference between the two bushings. The first show the differing bushings installed onto a Colt barrel, and the second is a close-up of the actual bushings:

Traditional bushing (left); Series 70 split barrel “collet” bushing (right); both installed on barrels

Traditional bushing left; split barrel bushing right

To be brutally frank about it, the split barrel “collet” bushing was a bit of a disaster. The fingers had a tendency to break off and jam the pistol. So, by 1988 the split barrel bushing gave way to a return to the solid bushing in later iterations of the Colt M1911 line.

Colt Mk IV roll mark

Colt ended the Mk. IV Series 70 in 1983 with the introduction of the Series 80. This M1911 initially retained the split barrel bushing, but it incorporated a new feature hated by M1911 purists. It is theoretically possible that if a cocked-and-locked M1911 is dropped onto a hard surface in such a way that the muzzle strikes first, the free-floating firing pin may have enough inertia to overcome the tension of the firing pin spring and thus impact the bullet primer. This could produce an unintended discharge.

M1991A1 roll mark

Colt addressed this concern in 1983 by redesigning the firing system to incorporate a firing pin block. The firing pin block is disengaged by the trigger mechanism as the trigger is pulled. So, why the controversy among 1911 purists? After all, isn’t increased firearm safety a good thing?

Apparently, not if it adversely impacts a great single-action trigger . . . or even if it’s merely imagined to do so.

Mk IV reverse side

Many claim that this trigger-deactivated firing pin block increased trigger weight and friction. I’ll be testing this claim on Wednesday with a video of a test I performed that pits Mk. IV Series 70 pictured here up against a Colt M1991A1 with the so-called Series 80 trigger. Not in the video but outlined in the text on Wednesday are additional comparisons I performed with a stainless Colt M1991A1 chambered in .38 Super and another .45 ACP Colt M1991A1 identical to the one used in the video. I believe you’ll find the results most enlightening, and I’m sure very controversial among M1911 purists.

M1991A1 reverse side

By now you’re asking, how the heck did Series 70 come to mean a trigger that dates from 1911 to 1983, while Series 80 describes the trigger system with a firing pin block incorporated in 1983? Good question, since the Series 70 was so designated not because of the trigger system, but rather because of the split barrel “collet” bushing — a bushing that continued on in the Series 80 pistol for some five years. The answer is convenience. It’s just easier to differentiate between the original internal trigger design of the M1911 to the later firing pin block design by referring to the two designs as “Series 70” and “Series 80” firing systems.

Here is another photo from Hooper Gun Works that illustrates one of the modifications made, in this case to the hammer:

Notched Series 70 hammer on left; shelved Series 80 hammer on right

(Note: There is a competing firing pin block design out there for the M1911 in which the firing pin block is deactivated by the grip safety rather than the trigger. It’s called the Swartz Firing Pin Safety, and it’s used by some competing M1911 producers such as Kimber and Smith & Wesson. Ironically, Colt pioneered the Swartz system in 1938, but dropped it after only three years because the U.S. military balked at the added expense, as did the civilian market. Modern manufacturing processes have allowed the economical reintroduction of the Swartz system, but Colt have stuck with the Series 80 firing system.)

Around the turn of the century it began to dawn on Colt that M1911 purists were leaving the fold for competing M1911s produced without the “trigger degrading” Series 80 firing pin block. This resulted in Colt reintroducing a “Mk. IV Series 70” that really isn’t much like the one produced from 1970 to 1983. For one thing, there was no return to the split barrel bushing. The Series 80 slide and frame were also retained, even if the firing pin block was removed. Of interest to some may be the fact that Colt continues to use in the reintroduced Series 70 the internals of the Series 80. That means the shelved hammer pictured above is still used rather than the earlier notched hammer. What Colt is giving you with the new Mk. IV Series 70 is in fact a Series 80 pistol with Series 80 trigger system parts, only without the actual firing pin block. This removes from the trigger-feel equation the internal movement that disengages the firing pin block.

Well, there is one other difference. The new Mk. IV Series 70 is produced in very limited runs in the Colt Custom Shop. That means if you find one, you’re laying your hands fairly rare pistol. My source puts the annual production numbers of Colt Custom Shop Mk. IV Series 70s at between 500 and 1,000. Additionally, as these pistols originate from the Custom Shop, they ship in the famous blue “Colt Custom Shop” box, which alone is worth probably north of a hundred bucks.

Standard Colt plastic case next to Colt Custom Shop box

Colt Mk. IV Series 70

Colt M1991A1

Colt Custom Shop close-up

Now let’s compare a Mk. IV Series 70 to an M1991A1 Series 80. Externally they appear much the same. Both are roll marked as “Government Models”. Both have nicely checkered rosewood grips. Finish is equally nice on these two examples, and slide-to-frame fit is exceedingly tight, as is the barrel-to-bushing fit. These are very tight pistols which I personally would not hesitate to put up against pistols costing two and three times as much.

Now for the differences:

• The most obvious are the sights. Both pistols come equipped with High-Profile sights, but the M1991A1 sights use the three-dot system while the Mk. IV Series 70 is absent any such visual cue.

Combat sights vs. three-dot sights

• Less obvious is the trigger placement. The aluminum M1991A1 trigger is a longish affair protruding almost half way across the span inside the trigger guard. The stainless Mk. IV Series 70 is much shorter in length.

Short Mk. IV Series 70 trigger (top) next to the M1991A1 long trigger

• Least obvious of all is the backstrap below the grip safety. Both backstraps are grooved in this area, but the M1991A1 backstrap is straight while the Mk. IV Series 70 backstrap has a slight curve.

Mk. IV Series 70 curved backstrap (bottom); M1991A1 flat backstrap (top)

On Wednesday we’ll test conventional wisdom and put the Series 70 trigger to the test against the Series 80.

I would like to take this time to acknowledge the fine photo work of Hooper Gun Works, to which I linked in this blog.  Hooper probably explain the Series 70 and Series 80 difference better than I, so please give their wonderful article a look as well by clicking on the link below:

Hooper Gun Works article on the Colt Series 70

Colt’s Custom Shop Mk. IV Series 70 in stainless

On Monday I posted an initial look at the Colt Mk. IV Series 70 — a current version from Colt’s Custom Shop.  In that article I explained how the Series 70 came about, how the Series 70 firing system differs from the Series 80 system used in Colt M1911 pistols since 1983, and why Colt reintroduced the Series 70 in limited runs beginning in 2001.

Colt Mk. IV Series 70 (stainless); Colt M1991A1 (blue)

In the M1911 world, there is a persistent, often repeated claim that the Series 70 firing system results in a superior trigger to the much maligned Series 80 system.  But does this claim hold validity when put to the test?

Mk. IV Series 70 versus M1991A1 Series 80

To find out I took a new, fresh from the box Colt Mk. IV Series 70 .45 ACP and directly compared the trigger to three Series 80 pistols.  The video below shows how the Series 70 stacked up against a blued, 2014-vintage Colt M1991A1 Series 80 .45 ACP.  Not in the video — but also used in comparison — were two unfired Colt M1991A1 Series 80 pistols.  One is another blued .45 ACP identical to the test pistol but of slightly later vintage; the other is stainless and chambered in .38 Super +P (see: Stainless Colt .38 Super +P M1991A1 — How do you go bankrupt making something this good?).  Here are all four Colts posing for a family portrait:

Colt Mk. IV Series 70 swimming against school of M1991A1

This was a pretty simple test of triggers, and admittedly perhaps a bit subjective as I used no measuring equipment in this test.  On each cocked weapon I depressed the grip safety, took up the trigger slack, and then slowly and carefully squeezed the trigger until the sear tripped and the hammer fell.  I took video of the first test, which pitted the Mk. IV Series 70 against the aforementioned M1991A1.  This particular M1991A1 has perhaps 100 rounds of .45 ACP through it, so break-in shouldn’t have been a factor.  The results of this test were thus:

I was pretty shocked at the results of this comparison.  I previously reviewed the M1991A1 used in the above video (see: A 1911 by Any Other Name Would Be . . . an M1991A1 — Shooting Review), so I already knew that the Series 80 trigger is one of the best I’ve ever encountered in a semiautomatic.  In that article I said of the Series 80 firing pin block and the reported effect on the trigger:

That last Series 80 feature is a bit controversial. Some claim that it unnecessarily complicated the original design, degraded the trigger by making it stiffer and adding an almost imperceptible (in my view) amount of trigger creep before the hammer trips, and gunsmiths complained that the new design is more difficult to tune to competition standards. My personal opinion? It’s still one of the best triggers out there, and according to my research any gunsmith worthy of the title will be able to tune your trigger with just a bit more effort. But even out of the box, I’d be hard pressed to understand why anyone would think this weapon needs any tuning whatsoever. If the shooter can’t hold this weapon on target, then it’s the shooter who has a problem rather than the trigger and firing system on this weapon.

Still, after having read so many Colt M1911 purists touting the Series 70’s superiority, I thought there was a chance that this particular M1991A1 was perhaps exceptional.  I was wrong.  Compared to the two additional comparisons I ran on the second and third unfired M1991A1 pistols, the one with some rounds through it wasn’t even quite as good.  Darn close, mind you, but it has just a hint of creep between slack take-up and sear trip.  The other pistols had none . . . at least none that I could feel, and the .38 Super +P was the best of the lot as the trigger was noticeably lighter than either of the other two Series 80 pistols or the Mk. IV Series 70.

Is three against one fair fight? Apparently not!

Incredibly, the Mk. IV Series 70 was the worst of the lot.  But even the worst M1911 trigger bests pretty much anything else out there in the semiautomatic world.  From the descriptions I’ve read of the Series 80 trigger I expected all three would in comparison be stiffer, display more creep, and exhibit at least a degree of grittiness.  But this wasn’t the case on two of the Series 80s, and on the third the ever-so-slight trigger creep and any “grittiness” were noticeably less than that of the Series 70.  In quantifiable terms, the Series 70 crept for between ⅛ to ¼ inch (3.2mm to 6.3mm) from slack take-up to sear trip, and there was a faintly detectable grittiness to the feel.  The M1991A1 in the video in comparison had less than ⅛ inch creep (in other words, nearly none), and no grittiness in the feel of the trigger.

The Series 80 Competition

So, is the Mk. IV Series 70 from Colt’s Custom Shop worth the price premium over a Series 80 M1991A1, or even the slightly more expensive Series 80 M1911A1?  Not if you’re looking for a better out-of-the-box trigger, because this isn’t it.

Is the Mk. IV Series 70 worth the premium to round out a Colt Collection?  Probably.  If you can get the price down from the MSRP.  This is especially the case now that Colt have reduced the MSRP on the M1991A1.  When I first reviewed the M1991A1 the MSRP was $974, and the pistol reviewed was purchased for $950.  Now MSRP on the M1991A1 is $799, and the unfired example in today’s post was snagged for $775.  The somewhat rare stainless chambered in .38 Super +P cost $900 back in June.

In comparison, MSRP for the Mk. IV Series 70 is $979 (at the time of this writing), but it seems prices are falling since the purchase of this example for a buck more than the MSRP (and some $200 less than the gun store was originally asking because of its exclusive, hard-to-get nature).  Probably because of Colt’s recent excursion into bankruptcy, you can find Mk. IV Series 70 pistols at online gun stores for well south of $900, and is some cases even below the $850 mark.  That makes this a good time to add one to the collection, as these pistols were going from several hundreds of dollars more just a few months ago before Colt’s recent bankruptcy announcement.

Colt M1991A1 .38 Super +P

You may recall that I gave a first-look review of this intriguing weapon and caliber before.  I had no intentions of firing that weapon, and still don’t as it’s a pre-bankruptcy example of the venerable Colt M1911 design in a somewhat rare caliber.

What’s in the box

Fortunately I satisfied my itch to try the M1911 in .38 Super +P by acquiring a second copy.  As with the first copy, this one is also a Model 1991A1 in stainless, and outwardly it’s identical.  The only difference appears to be the included magazines, as the firing example came with rubberized footings screwed onto the bottoms.  See below for a comparison:

Rubberized footing on magazines

Previous magazine footplate

So, finally, I got around to firing this incredible combination — the classic Colt M1911 chambered in the powerfully exquisite .38 Super +P cartridge.  For an explanation on how this combination came about in 1929, and a brief history on the .38 Super +P cartridge, read my first-look review by clicking on the link below.  I’m sure you’ll find it both informative and entertaining.

• Stainless Colt .38 Super +P M1991A1 — How do you go bankrupt making something this good?

The Prancing Horse

Being the M1991A1, today’s Colt has the  Series 80 trigger.  For an explanation on that and a comparison with the Series 70 trigger go to these links:

• A Look at the Colt Mk. IV Series 70
• Colt’s Series 70 Trigger Put to the Test — Series 70 vs. Series 80

Starboard view

And since I’ve covered the trigger on the Colt M1911 in those past articles, I won’t cover that again here today except to say that it’s what you’d expect from the M1911 design.  In a word — Superb.

Slide locked back

As I’ve stated previously in the above articles, the Colt M1911 was originally designed around the .45 ACP cartridge.  Only in 1929 — when law enforcement had trouble going up against Depression-era desperados in thick steel-bodied cars and wearing body armor impervious to the .45 — did Colt get around to putting a bit more oomph through the Colt M1911.  That resulted in what is basically the forerunner to the Magnum load — the .38 Super +P, which would for six years reign as the most powerful handgun cartridge until the advent of the .357 Magnum revolver in 1935.  The .38 Super +P still beats the .40 SW, and even compares favorably with most commercial loads of the .357 SIG.

Slide forward

Considering the increased muzzle energy and higher velocity of the lighter .38 Super +P round, one would expect more recoil over an M1911 chambered in .45 ACP.  In actual practice it turns out just the opposite.  M1911 recoil with the much slower, quite heavy .45 ACP is very controllable, but it does have a “push” to it that gives some muzzle rise.  I refer to this recoil as a “push” because that’s the best way to describe what you feel.  If you read my article on firing the .45 ACP M1991A1 at the link below, you’ll find this description:

“In my opinion the 9mm has a sharper, quicker recoil whereas the .45 ACP imparts a steady, even, thrust-like reaction.  Recoil management is thus easy to accomplish and target reacquisition is very quick.”

• A 1911 by Any Other Name Would Be . . . an M1991A1 — Shooting Review

Cocked and locked

If anything, the .38 Super +P feels more like the recoil one experiences when firing a standard locked-breech 9mm Parabellum when shot from a SIG P229.  The recoil impulse feels quicker than with an M1911 firing a .45 ACP, but the muzzle rise seems less and reacquisition on target is about the same.  There is one difference, however.  That’s in muzzle flash.  I shot this M1991A1 .38 Super at an indoor range with somewhat dim lighting.  The flash was . . . impressive.  Not .357 Magnum-out-of-a-two-inch-barrel impressive, but you’ll definitely notice a flash coming out of the muzzle.

Port view

My impressions after firing the .38 Super +P is that this is probably my new favorite handgun shooting round, and the M1991A1 in stainless is now my new favorite hiking piece except in brown bear country.  For that I’ll rely upon bear spray and shop around for something even more powerful as a backup to the spray, perhaps a Smith & Wesson .500 revolver with ported barrel.

Colt M1991A1 .38 Super +P in stainless — A real winner

Yep, the Colt M1991A1 is simply that fun to shoot.  This is also an incredibly accurate combination in an very controllable package.

Next week I begin another travel series — 54 days at sea on a trip that took us on two transatlantic crossings and a tour of both the Mediterranean and Black Seas. But for this week I’m returning to the subject that garners my highest audience, firearms.

An original Colt MK IV Series 70

It’s not often you come across a 36-year-old firearm in this condition. And according to the previous owner, the original Colt MK IV Series 70 has less than 100 rounds through it.

Colt MK IV Series 70 circa 1982

There are a few flaws in the original Colt satin blue finish, but I’d rate this pistol at around 98%. The wood grips also had some minor dings, as well, but also very minor.

Colt MK IV Series 70 original grip with Colt medallion

If you read my previous blog article on the new MK IV Series 70 (see: A Look at the Colt MK IV Series 70), then you know that the originals differed from the original in more than just the trigger. The original run from 1970 to 1983 also included a fingered “collet” bushing over a barrel with a widened muzzle end. This change was incorporated to improve the barrel-to-bushing fit in order to improve accuracy.

Series 70 collet bushing and wide-end barrel

The collet bushing held over into the Series 80 line until the late 1980s, but reports of bushing failures led Colt to revert back to the solid bushing which carries over to the reintroduced Series 70 pistols of today.

An original Colt MK IV Series 70 disassembled

The example here has a 70B prefixed serial number. That places this 1911 at the very end of the original MK IV Series 70 run, as the 70B serial number began in 1981 and ran through the end of production in 1983. The rest of the serial number leads me to believe that the actual year of production was probably 1982.

Colt 70B serial number places manufacture between 1981 and 1983

In my second article on the current Series 70 (see: Colt’s Series 70 Trigger Put to the Test — Series 70 vs. Series 80) I noted that the trigger was not all it was cracked up to be my Colt 1911 enthusiasts. I’ve since repeated my experiment (see video below) on side-by-side comparisons between probably half a dozen new Series 70 Colts and the current line of Series 80. Results were always the same. Out of the box, the current Colt Series 80 routinely beats the current Series 70 on every gun I’ve tried.

So, what about the original MK IV Series 70? Not so in this case. This truly the trigger I’ve seen praised. That’s not to say that the current Series 70 trigger is bad, as no Colt 1911/1991A1 trigger can be described as such from my experience, it’s just that the new Series 70 has more creep after take up and displays a degree of grittiness that simply doesn’t exist in any other Series 80 Colt I’ve tried.

Colt MK IV Series 70 slide stamp

COLT’S GOVERNMENT MODEL slide stamp

Sights on the original Series 70 match the current crop. They’re nothing about which to write home. I much prefer the three-dot sights Colt uses on the current Series 80.

Colt MK IV Series 70 rear sight

Colt MK IV Series 70 front sight

Here’s a comparison between a new Series 70 and a Series 80 M1991A1 to illistrate what I mean:

New MK IV Series 70 left; new M1991A1 Series 80 right

Fortunately, both the original and previous owners of this pistol did something that far too few people do; they retained the original box and owner’s manual.

Colt MK IV Series 70 box and owner’s manual ©1981

Here is this original Mk IV Series 70 posing with the box it came in:

Colt MK IV Series 70 with original box

But the box has definitely seen better days, and the Styrofoam insert inside was partially melted away from gun lubricant. Fortunately, that didn’t mar the finish on the pistol.

Colt MK IV Series 70 box

Colt’s MK IV/Series 80′ Mustang Plus II

In May, 2017, I ran a three-article series on pocket pistols. The pistols viewed that week were the Beretta 3032 Tomcat (.32 ACP/7.65mm) and the Colt Mustang Lite (.380 ACP/9mm kurz). That series culminated in a shoot off between the two, as well as a size/weight comparison between them of the Walther PPK and PPK/S.

Colt’s MK IV/Series 80 Mustang Plus II

While researching that article, I found information on the Colt MK IV/Series 80 Government Model 380 (a scaled down version of the Series 80 Model 1911 introduced in 1984), and the even smaller early Colt Mustangs, which arrived two years later and continued in the market until around 1998 (reintroduced in 2011). What I did not include in that article was information on another Colt .380 ACP/9mm kurz pistol that starting in 1988 bridged the size gap between the Government Model 380 and the Mustang.

Colt’s MK IV/Series 80 Mustang Plus II

That pistol is the Colt MK IV/Series 80 Mustang Plus II. The Mustang Plus II took the all steel 7+1 capacity frame of the Government Model 380, and mated to it the shorter slide and barrel from the 5+1 (later increased to 6+1 after 1992) capacity Mustang — two additional rounds, hence the name Mustang Plus II. These original Mustang Plus II pistols were blued steel, but sometime around 1990 Colt came out with a stainless version. Production of the stainless Mustang Plus II was thus only around seven or eight years, making this a bit of a rarity. At least I’d never seen one, up until July of last year.

Colt’s MK IV/Series 80 Mustang Plus II

The MK IV/Series 80 Mustang Plus II you see here today was manufactured in 1991, and appears very lightly used with no holster wear marring the stainless slide. It came with three factory magazines, which on the base are stamped with the Rampant Colt trademark, the letter ‘M’ on all three magazines, and the letter ‘S’ also on the nickel plated magazine, and the words ‘Colt .380 Auto.’ on all three.

Original Mustang Plus II/Government Model 380 magazines

The left side of the slide top line reads, “COLT MK IV/SERIES’ 80.” Below that in a smaller font is, “—MUSTANG-380 AUTO—.” The Rampant Colt is to the right of both lines. On the reverse side ahead of the ejection port, the slide is stamped, “PLUS II.” The barrel inside the ejection port reads, “CAL 380.”

Colt Mustang Plus II — Slide stamp

Comparing the slide markings to a more recent (circa 2016) polymer-frame Mustang Lite, the two lines on the left side read, “—MUSTANG—,” and “COLT 380 AUTO.” The right side of the newer Mustang Lite is blank, but, “CAL 380,” is stamped on that portion of the barrel visible through the ejection port.

Mustang Plus II and Mustang Lite (formerly XSP)

Dimensionally, the two guns are very similar. Slide and barrel length are, of course, the same, but the slightly longer beavertail of the Mustang Plus II adds perhaps a millimeter of length. The height differs, as one would expect. The Mustang Lite comes in at 3.9 inches/99mm, whereas the Mustang Plus II measures about 4.5 inches/114mm.

Mustang Plus II and Mustang Lite — Height comparison

But it’s the weight that most distinguishes the two. The Mustang Lite with it’s lightweight polymer frame, is a mere 12.54 ounces/356 grams including a empty magazine 11.2 ounces/318 grams without magazine). The slightly larger, all steel Mustang Plus II tips my scale at 19.42 ounces/551 grams (17.9 ounces/508 grams without magazine).

Colt’s MK IV/Series 80 Mustang Plus II

Magazine capacity only differs by a grand total of one—7+1 for the Mustang Plus II vs. 6+1 for the Mustang Lite when using the included (but in my case nonfunctioning) factory magazine. There are aftermarket (and more importantly reliable) magazines that give the Mustang Lite 7+1 capacity, but at the expense of an extra full inch/25mm of height because of the magazine’s finger rest configuration. Comparing the Plus II magazine to the extended aftermarket magazine for the Lite, it appears Metalform could knock off a half-inch/12.5mm of that penalty if they just left off the finger rest extension. But that extra length does allow for a more secure grip, as the pinky finger is no longer left dangling beneath the frame when the extended magazine is used.

Mustang Plus II and Mustang Lite — Height comparison

I’ve yet to fire the Mustang Plus II, and I look forward to a direct comparison with the Mustang Lite. The additional weight probably won’t help much in the recoil department, as I find the Mustang Lite already very controllable even without the 6.88 ounces/195 grams of added mass.

Mustang Plus II (1991) and Mustang Lite (2016)

So, if I were to choose between the two for a concealed carry piece, which would I pick? Hard choice. The Mustang Lite has the advantage of an ambidextrous safety, which is not really relevant to me as a right-hander (unless I had to use it with my left hand, of course), and the Mustang Plus II wins out in the height department by a small amount if you equip the Mustang Lite with an extended magazine to match the capacity of the Plus II. Weight difference isn’t really a factor on something already under 18 ounces, but I’ll admit that I do enjoy the additional heft and overall balance in the hand of the marginally heavier Plus II.

Colt Mustang Plus II — Rear sight

There is, however, a subtle difference in the triggers. The Mustang Lite takes up quickly and consistently, then has perhaps an eight of an inch of creep before breaking. The Plus II, on the other hand, displays more resistance on the longer take up, almost to the point of feeling mushy. And there’s a tactile, almost second-stage feel during the take-up pull. But the break requires less pull and feels cleaner with no creep at the end. Both triggers are exceptional, but I believe I prefer the feel of the Plus II in this department.

Mustang Plus II — Front sight