1951 Commander!

[EchoBravoKilo]

Today I picked up a 1951 Commander. It's been used, and a little scratched with some blue wearing in spots, but it's got great character. I haven't been to range yet, but function checking shows it's really tight, slide is really awesome when racked, and trigger is smooth as glass. It has had the sights changed, but it looks like they can be reverted - slide looks OK on top. Range trip this weekend - range report will follow.

Oh yeah, and it's a 9mm! Very cool. Since this thread is worthless, etc., here are a few pics (from a really lousy photographer)...

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0803.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0805.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0819.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0824.jpg

[BreakerDave]

It has had the sights changed, but it looks like they can be reverted

The sights were what caught my attention. That set seemed out of place on a Commander. I'm glad to hear that you can change to something a little more appropriate.

I look forward to reading the range report.

[EchoBravoKilo]

They look out of place, but look like they were done well. Guy I got it from raved about them...but I'm thinking originals (I have a line on a set) or Yost-Bonitz retros...

[Hunter]

Great looking Colt Commander and I see it's character. Very cool.

[JustinTime]

They look out of place, but look like they were done well. Guy I got it from raved about them...but I'm thinking originals (I have a line on a set) or Yost-Bonitz retros...

I'm thinking of switching from my originals to a set of yost bonitz retros.

[JustinTime]

Oh yeah good looking commander. I like the allow commanders. ;)

[JustinTime]

I keep thinking of things to say and ask.

Wasn't 1951 the first year for the commander?

[ErnieStu]

What's the serial number on this gun?
It's yours and of course you should use and outfit it in the way you choose, but I suggest at least considering restoring it towards a period correct condition. Those early commanders are dear, especially a 1951 in 9mm. Target sights on any commander is a bit odd, but did it have to be THAT gun?!?...seems a shame from today's perspective. I wonder what the gun's story is.

[EchoBravoKilo]

What's the serial number on this gun?
It's yours and of course you should use and outfit it in the way you choose, but I suggest at least considering restoring it towards a period correct condition. Those early commanders are dear, especially a 1951 in 9mm. Target sights on any commander is a bit odd, but did it have to be THAT gun?!?...seems a shame from today's perspective. I wonder what the gun's story is.

Iagree - weird and just plain not right. I think the retros would allow for good function (my eyes aren't good enough for the original sights) and still let me restore to look original. I think there's real value to me in not going over the top - keep it clean and simple.

Per Proofhouse, first commanders were 1949 - all 65 of them. 1950 goes to SN# 6000. This is a '51 - I called Colt. Serial # is 11xxx-LW.

Thanks for all the good thoughts, folks.

E

[elijdub]

Very cool Commander! I love the 9mm's! I think a set of retro's would be awesome on it.

[ErnieStu]

Per Proofhouse, first commanders were 1949 - all 65 of them. 1950 goes to SN# 6000. This is a '51 - I called Colt. Serial # is 11xxx-LW.
Be careful -- the 9mm commanders came a bit later than the first 45s and yours could be among the first in that chambering. I don't have my copy of Clawson handy, but I seem to recall that the 9mm guns were first manufactured in 1950 or 1951. I'll check this weekend sometime, but I'm sure others here have that info handy.

[EchoBravoKilo]

Be careful -- the 9mm commanders came a bit later than the first 45s and yours could be among the first in that chambering. I don't have my copy of Clawson handy, but I seem to recall that the 9mm guns were first manufactured in 1950 or 1951. I'll check this weekend sometime, but I'm sure others here have that info handy.

Thanks - I appreciate that. I thought the original Commanders were spec'd for 9mm and didn't think that '51 could be first year. But of course I forgot we're talking production of commercially available models. If '51 were first year for 9mm, I'd definitely not mess with the pistol.

E

[larry starling]

Congrats on a very interesting find! I have one that I bought Nib and it's a great pistol...... ;)

[jeff1124]

Nice Commander EBK!! :D

[EchoBravoKilo]

I have one that I bought Nib and it's a great pistol...... ;)

How does it shoot? This is my first 9mm - I'm really looking forward to the range trip.

[LOBO]

Very nice Colt! Congrats!!!

Chris

[dakota1911]

Nice gun. I am always on the lookout for old Commanders.

[Sidtek]

Good find. Serial # indicates lightweight frame. I have a "low mileage" '68 vintage 9mm LW but have hesitated shooting it much as I've heard rumors of rapid frame wear on these models. Would you say your pistol has been shot much? how does the frame appear to have held up?
Regards,

[EchoBravoKilo]

I have a "low mileage" '68 vintage 9mm LW but have hesitated shooting it much as I've heard rumors of rapid frame wear on these models. Would you say your pistol has been shot much? how does the frame appear to have held up?
Regards,

It appears to have been used - at least carried quite a bit. Also appears to have been shot more than a little and is still in outstanding shape. This pistol is incredibly tight. I understand the "wearing out" of LW frames may be over stated, particularly with 9mm. Now, I'm not planning to use hot loads, but I will shoot it - it's way too cool of a gun to be a safe queen.

[EchoBravoKilo]

Took the pistol to the range today. Spent a lot of time cleaning mag and pistol. Changed mag spring. Recoil spring looked very new - and appears to be a cut down Government spring - 24 coils and a telltale clip mark at the end...

Anyway, the last guy must not have cleaned this pistol for years. This pistol is extremely tight, and with a whole bunch of old carbon (think a really old set of valves off a big block v-8) it was even tighter. Got it cleaned up some and lubed, then off to the range.

Did I mention it was tight? Holy cow. I'm pretty much a rank amateur, but the R.O. got nine rounds into a space the size of a quarter, off hand at about 10 yards. Trigger measured just under 5 lbs. but is so smooth I was guessing much less until we measured. I kept hearing the same thing from lots of folks - "you got a deal!" I agree.

I hate the sights, at least aesthetically. They work well but look totally wrong. Anyone know of a good front sight to go with the Yost retro rear? I'm looking for something that "fits" the retro nature of the pistol, but something I can see, which rules out the original...

[BreakerDave]

I hate the sights, at least aesthetically. They work well but look totally wrong. Anyone know of a good front sight to go with the Yost retro rear? I'm looking for something that "fits" the retro nature of the pistol, but something I can see, which rules out the original...

I'm glad the pistol worked out so well for you... As for sights, I'd go with the King's Hardball Sights. They may not be as retro as you want, but they are basic. I found the three dot model very user friendly.

http://www.kingsgunworks.com/sights.html

[EchoBravoKilo]

I'm glad the pistol worked out so well for you... As for sights, I'd go with the King's Hardball Sights. They may not be as retro as you want, but they are basic. I found the three dot model very user friendly.

http://www.kingsgunworks.com/sights.html

Thanks! That may be the ticket.

EBK

[EchoBravoKilo]

I cleaned her up a bit and added some nice wood stocks...

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0840.jpg

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0837.jpg

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0855.jpg

http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p258/EchoBravoKilo/1951%20Commander%209mm/IMGP0863.jpg

Photography is still weak, but the pistol is strong.

[Sidtek]

Looks Good! If mine had a nice patina like that I'd be much more inclined to shoot it. Have Fun!

[EchoBravoKilo]

Sent it to have sights changed (and a little minor tweakage) to something more normal, but still functional for an old guy. Pics and range report upon its return (although it could be a while).

[steve bliek]

Nice example of COLT craftsmanship. I too hate those sights since I'm a bit of a purest. However, I can't help but wonder if this modification resulted in a fantastic improvement on the range score card. It will be very interesting to read your 2nd range report after the sights are changed.

[EchoBravoKilo]

Nice example of COLT craftsmanship. I too hate those sights since I'm a bit of a purest. However, I can't help but wonder if this modification resulted in a fantastic improvement on the range score card. It will be very interesting to read your 2nd range report after the sights are changed.

Good point. The Bomars really were good, except the all black front sight wasn't great indoors for my old eyes. I sent it to Don Williams at the Action Works - we had several conversations about something that would give similar picture, and hopefully results. We'll see. I'll definitely post a report upon its return.

[clughog]

Cleaned up really nice! Congratulations! I do like the wood stocks better, too.

[michael t]

I ve got a 51 Commander in 9 and they are great guns. Mine is #62XX and I enjoy shooting it. Bought for carry but decided to old and to good of shape for that . So bought a LTW Commander in 45.