|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Member
Rob:
Should I send you one of my Les Baers to include in the comparison? (Please don't say yes, because I can't do it!)
BTW, thanks for the report. I have a WC CQB Compact. It's a nice pistol, but not my favorite. Looking forward to the comparison of a RRA with the others.
Former Member
Unfortunately the picture of the Brown safety was taken after the other two, and was the only one engaged. Other than that the photos are essentially identical.
In general I prefer a blended thum safety. I have heard the argument in the past that this weakens the part, and it does. However for me it is a trade-off and it's worth the slight weakening to get a comfortable firing grip. With that said, I do think that it's possible to over-blend the safety and take away more material that is necessary.
The Wilson is the most contoured of the three, with the gentlest slope and the most material removed from the top of the safety. I would say that the Yost is second, with a little material removed from the top, and the Brown is last having virtually no material removed from the top. I find the Brown to be more than adequate in terms of comfort. In truth, they all feel about the same when I have a firing grip. Since I also think that the Brown is the strongest (having the most material), I prefer it to the other two. Following the same logic, the one with the most material removed, the Wilson, is last.
Thumb Safety
Brown 3
Wilson 1
Yost 2
Total
Brown 18
Wilson 15
Yost 17
Former Member
See pics above and in "Front & Back Straps" post on page 1.
Grip safeties should be blended to the frame to make them as comfortable as possible when holding the pistol in a firing grip, and to ensure that they are engaged when one wishes to fire the pistol. Of the three, the Yost appears to have had the least blending. The pics above are of the grip safeties fully depressed, and you can see that the Yost part is blended the least of the three. There's also a pretty ugly gap between the safety and the tang.
The Brown piece, with it's "memory groove" bump feels the most solidly engaged of the three when firing. I don't know that the grooves provide any sort of tactile memory, but that's a non-issue for me.
This is really one of those parts that should be more heavily weighted. The gap in the Yost part, and the lesser amount of fitment REALLY bugs me. I don't know that either have any affect on function or not though.
Grip Safety
Brown 3
Wilson 2
Yost 1
Total
Brown 21
Wilson 17
Yost 18
Former Member
I don't believe that extractors need to be "timed" (i.e. fit so tight that they can't rotate in the slide) for reliability and wouldn't want a gun that did require it, so the fact that all three show some degree of rotation in this part is a non-issue for me.
The only thing that really bears mentioning here is the large gap in the slide to ejector on the Yost gun. Like the gap in the grip safety, I do not know if this has any effect on reliability or function, but it bugs the hell out of me. I assume that when Y-B bought the Springfield (I didn't send them the gun) it came like that from the factory. The difference here is that I trusted them to go over the gun before they began work on it to check for things like this and they obviously didn't. Had I purchased the gun myself to send in I would have chosen another example, but Y-B proceeded to do $1300 +/- of work on a sub-standard gun.
The Brown and Wilson are even in my estimation.
This is another one that should be weighted more heavily, but again I do not know if it affect function and it does not appear to have done so to date.
Slide Rear
Brown 3
Wilson 3
Yost 1
Totals
Brown 21
Wilson 18
Yost 18
Former Member
I tried to get a good picture of each with the slide on and the gun completely assembled because I don't think that the views below tell you much. The real test is how the two parts meet up when the gun is firing. I couldn't get the right amount of light down there the day I what photographing, so I may have to try again later. You're just going to have to make due with the pictures below and take my word for it.
When assembled, the Brown appears to have the smoothest fit of the three. Both the Yost and Wilson barrels appear to sit a little further forward when the gun is assembled than they do in the pictures below. If you went just off of the pictures below, I would say that the Yost appears to have the smoothest transition.
Barrel/Feedramp Fit
Brown 3
Wilson 2
Yost 1
Total
Brown 24
Wilson 20
Yost 19
Former Member
I don't know what the proper terminology for this part is, but I know that on stock Kimbers it pinches the hell out of me. It was a point (no pun intended) of concern for me when buying (sight unseen, mind you) each of these guns. In fairness, I got bit by the Brown shortly after buying it, and conveyed that to the Y-B folks and made sure they knew I wanted to be certain that these parts were relieved when I got their gun.
These pictures are probably not taken at the best angle for what I want to talk about, and one isn't even properly focused, but you can look at the front strap and mag well pictures also to get a better idea.
To put it bluntly, the Brown bit me so it loses on this one.
"Points" or "Horns"
Brown 1
Wilson 3
Yost 2
Total
Brown 25
Wilson 23
Yost 21
Former Member
I prefer the crowning method of the Wilson barrel to that of the other two. I like the fact that it stops short of the outside of the barrel and leaves more meat there. The other two continue the crown all the way to the outside and I think that leaves it a bit weakened and prone to get dinged. Yost evidently at least makes an attempt to protect the barrel by what at first appears to be an almost recessed barrel crown. In fact, this is achieved by the thicker barrel bushing. I do like the fact that the bushing is beefed up, and I really couldn't care less if they achieve the near-recess by cutting down the barrel or extending the bushing.
The Brown bushing is the only one that appears to have been beveled at all, but I can't really figure out what this is supposed to accomplish so I didn't give it any consideration.
Muzzle & Bushing
Brown 1
Wilson 3
Yost 2
total
Brown 26
Wilson 26
Yost 23
Former Member
You can use the pictures below, as well as the ones above to judge the level of bevel for yourselves. I think that overall the Brown is the cleanest, most uniform, and most extensive, followed by the Wilson. The Yost is somewhat hit-or-miss when it comes the bevel, and is the shallowest of the three and the least consistent.
Bevel
Brown 3
Wilson 2
Yost 1
Total
Brown 29
Wilson 28
Yost 24
Former Member
Brown and Wilson both use their own barrels, while the Yost maintains the stock Springfield part. This is pretty much a no-brainer to me. Brown vs. Wilson barrels is a debate I don't need to rehash.
Barrel
Brown 2
Wilson 2
Yost 1
Total
Brown 31
Wilson 30
Yost 25
Former Member
Had you asked me before I got into 1911s, I would have told you that a lowered and flared ejection port was critical to the function of a good fighting 1911. Having now owned and fired these three, I'm not so sure. Both the Brown and Yost appear to function just fine with only the flare; the Wilson being the only one that's lowered. Because of this, I actually now prefer the non-lowered because (much like the thumb-safety post) I prefer more material when it's not necessary to remove it. Of the Yost and Brown, the "flare" on the Yost appears to be almost a tease. While it appears to be sufficient for function, it almost has that "why bother" look to it. It's so subtle, in fact, that I had to visit the Springfield Armory website to be certain that it wasn't a stock flare.
Ejection Port
Brown 3
Wilson 1
Yost 2
Total
Brown 34
Wilson 31
Yost 27
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks