testtest

SA 1911 Opinions: Garrison vs. Loaded

wmg1299

Professional
I don’t have much experience with 1911s, but I’ve been thinking about getting a mid-level 1911. I bought a stainless Springfield 1911 Mil-Spec last year from the IOP program and have been very impressed with it. My other 1911 is a Remington R1 Enhanced Commander that I purchased a few years back when Remington had a $75 rebate and a local shop had it on sale (it was under $500 after rebate and I’m a sucker for a good deal). The R1 has been a good gun, but it turns out that I prefer full-size 1911s.

I have never liked two-tone guns, so the Ronin and Emissary lines do not appeal to me. I don’t need a bunch of features on a 1911. The Mil-Spec would actually be close to perfect if it had an extended beaver-tail and didn’t have a staked front sight. Both the Garrison and the Loaded 1911’s look like they offer the features I want for a price I'm willing to pay.

I’m leaning towards the Garrison, but I don’t want to write-off the Loaded series if they are better guns. Besides the ambi-safety and night sights, are there any significant differences between the two? Is there anything about the Loaded that I’m overlooking that would make it a better choice than the Garrison?
 
I have both the Ronin (one from not long after they hit the market) and a stainless Garrison. Both .45.
Ronin’s fitting and it’s trigger seems better. Garrison a bit rougher around the edges, for lack of a better term, and a handful of failures early on (those worked themselves out in 250 rds, in true 1911 fashion).
Point is, the Loaded may be a similar difference.

One (potential) thing:
Garrison comes stock with thin grips (so does Ronin, btw). A plus for me as I’m a small guy and wanted them anyway. I think Loaded will be regular (1/4” ?) grips….
It’s nothing major to change them out, but it’s added $$ and something to consider.
 
I think you found the 2 main differences, the ambi safety and the sights. The Garrison also has rear only cocking grooves, while the Loaded has rear and forward. If you want those features, the Loaded may be the way to go. OTOH, both have match grade barrels, which would indicate to me they may have an equal shooting basis. I would be curious to see testing results to confirm.
Ambi appeals to some, while sites can be replaced if desired.
 
I don’t have much experience with 1911s, but I’ve been thinking about getting a mid-level 1911. I bought a stainless Springfield 1911 Mil-Spec last year from the IOP program and have been very impressed with it. My other 1911 is a Remington R1 Enhanced Commander that I purchased a few years back when Remington had a $75 rebate and a local shop had it on sale (it was under $500 after rebate and I’m a sucker for a good deal). The R1 has been a good gun, but it turns out that I prefer full-size 1911s.

I have never liked two-tone guns, so the Ronin and Emissary lines do not appeal to me. I don’t need a bunch of features on a 1911. The Mil-Spec would actually be close to perfect if it had an extended beaver-tail and didn’t have a staked front sight. Both the Garrison and the Loaded 1911’s look like they offer the features I want for a price I'm willing to pay.

I’m leaning towards the Garrison, but I don’t want to write-off the Loaded series if they are better guns. Besides the ambi-safety and night sights, are there any significant differences between the two? Is there anything about the Loaded that I’m overlooking that would make it a better choice than the Garrison?
I just joined to reposed to your comment. I too bought a mil spec this past year .45 staineless. And I don’t like two tone guns either. I am deciding between the loaded and garrison the loaded has a full length guid rod that needs an Allen wrench. I think it can be remedied though. I just bought a Kimber stainless ll. It is my favorite so far. Mil spec is just a little more basic
 
Back
Top