The New G4!

[ckgdrums]

What do you guys think? Front slide serrations on the new G4 Government sized pistols. Yes or no?

I say no front serrations.

[cliff731]

I would say no to both the front cocking serrations and the bull barrel...

Ditto the same as DuckRyder has "voted"...

No front slide serrations... No bull barrel, please!

[Geezer59]

Ditto the same as DuckRyder has "voted"...
No front slide serrations... No bull barrel, please!

I'll double-ditto your ditto - no and no, please!

[Stonyman65]

keep it classic!
No front serration and NO bull barrel. I hate those things...

[d90king]

I am sorry but I feel this must be done. ...................................wait for it.........................

[JTQ]

No front serrations.

[vashooter]

Bull barrel YES ,with the options of going to a match grade barrel and bushing later........NO to front cocking serrations, a waste of machining time if you ask me. Floyd

[steel609]

For those that are interested, Here's the latest images -

[Hawkmoon]

What do you guys think? Front slide serrations on the new G4 Government sized pistols. Yes or no?

Is it too late to vote "NO!"?

Front serrations are an abomination.

Those who have a need for them can always have them cut in, but those (like me) who loathe them cannot remove them. Quite candidly, for me front serrations are a deal-breaker. I won't buy a 1911 with front serrations.

Also, Mr. Kassner, I found this on the forum at your company's web site:

One key feature that we think you will appreciate is that our Government sized model will be fitted with a bull barrel. Most 1911 manufacturers use a standard barrel contour with a bushing in their Government sized guns as an accommodation to the traditionalists who think that any barrel other than one that uses a bushing is just not a "real" 1911. Doing this also gives consumers the ability to add after-market barrels and bushings from specialty makers without having to purchase a costly new slide. These same makers then go on to build their Commander, Officer and Micro sized models with bull barrels, departing from the "traditionalist" approach once they leave the realm of the 5" barrel build.

We think that this approach does a disservice to the average shooter, as the bull barrel is inherently more accurate out-of-the-box than barrels using a bushing. Yet they continue to build Government sized pistols with bushings.

BAD MOVE!

Lose the bull barrel. And remember, most true 4-1/4" Commander-size 1911s (maybe all of them) still use the bushing. You start seeing the bull/cone barrel at 4" and shorter, primarily because the geometry of the link-down with a shorter barrel runs the muzzle through too great of an angular rotation for the straight barrel and bushing to handle. Even though the original Colt Officers ACP used a modified bushing setup, it also used a cone barrel.

Speaking strictly for myself, a bull barrel in a Government or Commander size pistol is also a deal-breaker. I believe you are making a serious error in trying to cater to some hypothetical "average" shooter, because "average" shooters don't buy 1911s. They're afraid of them. They don't think they're safe. "Average" shooters buy Glocks. Anyone who buys a 1911, of any flavor, is already at least 75% a traditionalist. Gotta be a traditionalist to be buying a 100-year old design instead of the latest Tupperware wunder-nine. Traditionalists don't want bull barrels. And we don't accept that a bull barrel is inherently more accurate. If you get a standard 1911 with a sloppy muzzle, it's an easy matter to call up EGW and order a match bushing. What happens with a sloppy bull barrel? Call up Caspian and order a match slide, to the tune of $250 or $300? Or, as you suggest on your forum, "just" buy a match barrel and bushing. Have you priced Bar-Sto or Scheuman barrels recently?

As the hooch maids used to say in Vietnam, "Not gonna happen, GI."

Is the hi-ride grip under the trigger guard a deal breaker for many people do you think? We may be too far along in the process of the initial 1,000 guns to do anything about that now. Perhaps later...

Yes, it's another deal-breaker -- but not the way you meant. I know sentiment seemed heavily in favor of the "high ride" cut on your forum, but we don't all like that. It's the same argument as the front serrations. Anyone who wants the front strap cut higher can fire up the dreaded Dremel. If the gun is manufactured with a high cut, we can't add the missing metal back. Build your frames to correct GI dimensions and let the customizers do what they wish.

Nor will they be available for sale at all in MA, or with anything more than a 10 round magazine in IL, NY, NJ, or CT.

Huh?

Connecticut doesn't have a magazine capacity limit. Contact me through my forum e-mail address if you need clarification.

[Charles Daly]

Hawkmoon, thanks for your comments. I'd like to bring you up to date on where we are in the spec department.

The two photos above are the most recent "photoshop" configurations that we are leaning towards.

No front serrations.
No bull barrel, we will use a bushing and a FLGR.
No hi-ride grip machining behind trigger guard. (My post actually says that but it doesn't read well. I was suggesting that if we had to have hi-ride than we could consider it at a later date.)
No "Charles Daly" billboard on the side of the slide. Markings will be very close to what you see in the above two pics.

So you can see from the above, seeking input from the public has swayed my way of thinking. I understand some attributes better now. Comments such as yours have been invaluable to me in this process. Much like

I understand about CT. To clarify, these new G4 pistols will not be for sale in CA or MA. All other states are ok.

Thanks again for your feedback. I am leaving Saturday for a visit to the factory and will report on my progress next week.

Sincerely,