Rhscott Posted September 28, 2018 Share #1 Posted September 28, 2018 I have a matching 1943 (sn8783xx) Colt 1911A1 that the slide seems to have the smaller 1911 sights. The sights are in fact the same size front and rear as my 1918 Colt 1911. Wasn't one of the changes to the A1 a slight increase in width and height of the sights? Perhaps a unused slide Colt had and by 1943 they finally used it to made a pistol? The slide is properly numbered under the firing pin plate. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorin6 Posted September 28, 2018 Share #2 Posted September 28, 2018 Pictures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
everforward Posted September 28, 2018 Share #3 Posted September 28, 2018 I don't have the info in front of me as to when they made the change, but 8783xx is still pretty early in the Colt run for WW2 Pistols....the change may have come after this serial number. I had a November 1941 Colt A1 (7475xx) that had the early sights....are you sure your pistol isn't 1942 production..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacksmith Posted September 28, 2018 Share #4 Posted September 28, 2018 Hello - The height of the front sight remained unchanged as a result of the A1 improvements. Both were 0.5597” above bore axis. You are correct that width changed, to make it more durable in field conditions. To simplify the information, I’ll skip the interim specifications of the “transitional” / “improved” examples, and just cite 1911 versus 1911A1 measurements. Model 1911 front sights were tapered, from .058” at the base, to ~ .038” at the top. The A1 models (read, WWII), had a uniform thickness of .080”. If you have them next to each other, you can likely see the difference. If not, you could use a dial caliper for exact measurement. Specific to your 1943 Colt slide, it should have a “Type B” front sight, meaning smooth rounded - almost semi-circle - when viewed from the side. About 15,000 units later, Colt transitioned to a “Type C” front sight, which has a serrated ‘ramp’ cut into the aiming side, which changed the profile considerably. The reason your two sights look the same, is because their shape is identical, and only a minor width difference exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacksmith Posted September 28, 2018 Share #5 Posted September 28, 2018 The A1 changes - including wider front sight - came into production almost 20 years earlier (1924). His slide is definitely a 1943. I don't have the info in front of me as to when they made the change, but 8783xx is still pretty early in the Colt run for WW2 Pistols....the change may have come after this serial number. I had a November 1941 Colt A1 (7475xx) that had the early sights....are you sure your pistol isn't 1942 production..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhscott Posted September 28, 2018 Author Share #6 Posted September 28, 2018 878,3xx puts Mfg in 1943 but I suppose the parts could have been made in late 1942. The slide and frame share the same number so they have been together since production. Thank you much and I will measure the blade. The front and rear just look identical to the 1918 Mfg 1911 I have as both are narrow half round front sights and small U shaped rear notches. The Remington Rand I just sold had a square cut notch rear and wider front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1563621 Posted September 29, 2018 Share #7 Posted September 29, 2018 Look behind the firing pin plate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhscott Posted September 29, 2018 Author Share #8 Posted September 29, 2018 I have. The same sn on the frame is stamped there. 3 numbers on top, 3 below the FP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommatt3 Posted September 30, 2018 Share #9 Posted September 30, 2018 C.W. Clawsonj in his little 'Service Pistols' book states Colt continued to use the old small notch rear sights until used up in 1943. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhscott Posted September 30, 2018 Author Share #10 Posted September 30, 2018 Bingo! Thank you. Mine seems early 43 so I suppose there is the reason. Thank you much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhscott Posted October 1, 2018 Author Share #11 Posted October 1, 2018 Here she is. the listeners poem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gap Posted October 2, 2018 Share #12 Posted October 2, 2018 Is that the original finish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Costa Posted October 2, 2018 Share #13 Posted October 2, 2018 I was going to also say-- its a refinished piece. front sight may have been changed??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacksmith Posted October 2, 2018 Share #14 Posted October 2, 2018 Far from it sadly. This finish is relatively recent, and is a zinc phosphate finish, which is what causes the light gray color. This should be done in a manganese phosphate, which yields a darker color; which when immediately subjected to cosmoline, resulted in the greenish finish. Ive never seen a modern refinisher get the USGI 1911 Parkerization right. Some are closer than others, but none 100%. Even if they do get the color close, there were certain stamps and markings that were applied after finish. So, when viewed under magnification, will have bare or burnished metal on the vertical structures of the markings. Is that the original finish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhscott Posted October 2, 2018 Author Share #15 Posted October 2, 2018 She is actually a Bubba save. When I got her she was coated in duracoat and it turns out was also nickeled under that. Friend of mine removed both modern finishes and parkerized in zinc. Had another barrel in it but came with the original Colt barrel. Replaced the springs and pins and I now have a factory matching but refinished Colt for just at $800 total invested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gap Posted October 2, 2018 Share #16 Posted October 2, 2018 Still, looks good. Probably a close match to the arsenal refinish that we will be seeing shortly from CMP 1911. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlok Posted October 21, 2018 Share #17 Posted October 21, 2018 Is the early wide hammer correct for a 43 Colt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacksmith Posted October 21, 2018 Share #18 Posted October 21, 2018 All Colts had wide spur hammers, and that one is not early. It is correct. The only appreciable hammer difference between the pre and post A1 Colts, was the length. Is the early wide hammer correct for a 43 Colt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlok Posted October 21, 2018 Share #19 Posted October 21, 2018 All Colts had wide spur hammers, and that one is not early. It is correct. The only appreciable hammer difference between the pre and post A1 Colts, was the length. Good to know! I stand corrected!! Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Posted October 22, 2018 Share #20 Posted October 22, 2018 Perfect candidate for sending to Turnbull. Ronnie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blacksmith Posted October 22, 2018 Share #21 Posted October 22, 2018 Hi Ronnie - Does Doug do more than bluing? I wasnt aware he did Parkerization. Perfect candidate for sending to Turnbull. Ronnie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now