It does look almost exactly like my Loaded from 1997.Nice.
IMO a renamed "loaded" without the front serrations.
It does look almost exactly like my Loaded from 1997.Nice.
IMO a renamed "loaded" without the front serrations.
i had mentioned in another thread some time ago, regarding the Emissary, that the Emissary may be a limited time run.…My Ronin remains my favorite. Garrison is a likely second place candidate, since the Emissary kinda disappointed when I got to handle one in person…
My thoughts exactly….Nice.
IMO a renamed "loaded" without the front serrations.
Yeah, agree…Emissary is a fine 1911 I’m sure but I don’t think it was as big a hit as they hoped, for various reasons. Not the least of which is the ~ $1200 price tag…i had mentioned in another thread some time ago, regarding the Emissary, that the Emissary may be a limited time run.
if so, then i am glad i got mine.
right now, with this introduction of this Garrison, is making me think, the Emissary will end sooner then i think.
While you're entitled to your opinion, the Novak rear sight is far, far from being useless.Looks like a nice 1911. I am particularly thankful for the absence of the forward cocking serrations.
However that useless Novak rear sight will be replaced as soon as I get one of these. Novak sights simply do not belong on combat handguns. I wish they would use the same rear sight they use on the Ronin for all of their combat pistols. Or at least offer a choice.
I remember when it was first introduced. I thought it was a bad idea then and I still do.While you're entitled to your opinion, the Novak rear sight is far, far from being useless. It's one of the most popular fixed rear sights' available.
I admit to a specific prejudice against the Novak rear sight.The only useless rear sight is no rear sight.
Fair enough.I admit to a specific prejudice against the Novak rear sight.
fordag: is there anything particular of a technical nature that you dislike?I admit to a specific prejudice against the Novak rear sight.
fordag: is there anything particular of a technical nature that you dislike?
Reason I ask is, I’m replacing sights on my Tisas Carry .45…. interested in any opinions for/against the Novak clone it has (stock).
It's one simple reason. The Novak rear sight does not work for one handed slide manipulation. It's a nice smooth ramp that slides right off of your belt or boot or whatever you might press the rear sight up against to rack the slide with only one hand.fordag: is there anything particular of a technical nature that you dislike?
Reason I ask is, I’m replacing sights on my Tisas Carry .45…. interested in any opinions for/against the Novak clone it has (stock).
Yes, that is true, but I find the rear sight to be the most reliable with a properly designed rear sight. It's very easy to miss with the ejection port. The ejection port also can require an awkward twisting of your hand.There are several methods of racking a 1911 with one hand, without using a rear sight.
One of which, that is closest to using a rear sight, is using the ejection port off a stiff belt, holster, or other surface.
The user needs to practice any of the "racking of the slide with one hand method(s)" alot in order for it to become second nature.Yes, that is true, but I find the rear sight to be the most reliable with a properly designed rear sight. It's very easy to miss with the ejection port.
SA has multiple 1911 pistols with front slide serrations. Also humidity does not render the rear slide serrations ineffective.Why is it impossible for SA to produce\sell a 1911 with front strap serrations? Not all of us live in cool low humidity environs. An ambi safety would also be nice. Sadly many ‘smiths in my area will not work on SAs so if I could find one, I would end up shipping it back for the front strap serrations and an ambi safety…just charge an extra $100 and save me the grief…is there any hope?