1911Forum
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > 1911 Manufacturers > Wilson Combat


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-12-2011, 12:04 PM
JiminCA JiminCA is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,734
The Wilson Essential




I had dinner with few gun guys last night and the topic of Wilsons came up. They know I'm a 1911 nut so I gave them the quick overview. Their basic reaction, although mostly unspoken, was that it was just too expensive for their understanding of and needs from a handgun. They look at me and think well, he's really into it - shoots matches, builds guns, so it makes sense for him. Now these aren't casual guys, serious black gun purchases and builds, really good hunting rifles, etc were all represented at the table. They all have good jobs and high disposable incomes. They all shoot enough to know a thing or two about guns. It's not like they don't respect that someone makes a really nice 1911, it just has too high an entry point for any of them to go for it.

Afterwards I got to thinking. I got into a nice used wilson CBQ about 10 years ago for $1350 delivered or something like that. I think a new CQB then was about $1800. A Baer PII was 1300-1400, I had a Baer Stinger I had bought for 1350 or so new about that time. Browns were similarly priced, I think a Class A custom was right about $2K then. Since then Wilsons have priced upwards disproportionately compared to Baer or Brown. You can get into a PII for under 2K, but of course the entry level CQB is now about a 2.5K proposition.

Wilson's entry level offering has been skewed upward by a number of things. There are good reasons why, and I don't hold Wilson's pricing or product positioning strategy against them. Responding to market pressure, they have moved to more bulletproof parts, probably have costs that rise faster than general inflation, and can charge what the market will bear. But.......at this point there isn't a very financially approachable entry point into their line.

I know Wilson has a big backlog and this suggestion probably won't go anywhere, but it would be nice to see an even more basic 1911 available along the lines of the 1996A2. Given that they had the 96 A2 for a while and the KZ, maybe this is a non starter. Still......

My oldest CQB has MIM parts (gasp!) and about 25,000 rounds through it. It gets the job done and I have no hesitation putting it in my holster for the day. In fact it shoots better in my hands than the all-bulletproof newer gun I have. Probably 25K rounds have really settled the gun it. I get it. But not everyone needs all bulletproof and in my mind all the hype about having the absolute best parts, etc., has pushed the offerings into the stratosphere. Wilson has responded to that market demand with the right tailored offerings but I wonder if there is a group of people going unserved.

So, that early CQB would be the inspiration for this entry level gun. Call it the Wilson Essential. Everything you need and nothing you don't.

No checkering, use the value line (MIM) parts, or course reliable and tuned and a good trigger. No options. Just the basic gun parked or black AT, in 45 ACP only. Basic Combat Pyramid sights with a trit dot up front only. Inexpensive grip panels. Might even want to use a plastic Colt type MSH (!!!). Basic and functional.

I bet done right you could hammer 4 or 500 bucks out of cost of a base line CQB or XTAC. Get it down close to $2000. Just under if you can.

So WCR, any chance Wilson might consider such a product? Might not be at the top of the list right now with orders coming out of Wilson's ears. But the "entry point" has gotten so high that some people must be turning away.

I think the 1911 market will cool a bit over the next couple of years and such an offering could become a staple for Wilson.

The obvious drawback to such an offering for Wilson is that it just takes a certain amount of time to build a gun right, and do sales and customer svc, regardless of bells and whistles. There would be a lot less margin in such a gun. So why offer it if you don't have to? Still, I think there's a gap in the offerings that such a gun would fill, and with an entry gun priced right, people will catch the fever and want to upgrade over time.

Thoughts?

Last edited by JiminCA; 11-12-2011 at 01:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-12-2011, 01:27 PM
shootumup shootumup is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: SoCal
Age: 41
Posts: 152
Some well thought out points.

I don't know if this is in the Wilson Combat business model. A basic web search for Wilson Combat gets you this; "Wilson Combat makers of the Finest Custom 1911 Handguns".

I have read quite a bit on this forum about how Wilson is adding Bulletproof parts to the basic level handguns (Protector,CQB,Classic). I think this is Wilsons way of getting better as a producer and adding 'value' for the customer.

I have to be honest, I have a Protector on order and really have had to struggle to make that happen. To me, even a basic entry level WC was worth it. It was worth it because I wanted the finest that I could afford.

Some people will never 'get it'. For them it doesn't make sence. I respect that. I really do!

For the rest of us. We pay the price, because we seek the finest. We are different. Wilson Combat is different. This we know. This is why I choose WC.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-12-2011, 01:32 PM
JimF4M1s's Avatar
JimF4M1s JimF4M1s is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Northern Calif
Age: 65
Posts: 2,709
Least expensive Wilson in .45 shown is:
X TAC parkerizer $2655, then
CQB $2755

Least expensive Brown
Kobra $2295
Special Forces $2295

Baer has $1700/$1800 pricing

NightHawk is about the same as Wilson

Looks like there are big differences in prices between the makers entry level pistols. There are also differences in their products. Most folks have a favorite maker. Also most folks have pistols from a few different makers. It's not always you get what you pay for. Sometimes it's pay for what you get, or want.

I don't see prices ever coming down. And all the makers have such a back log for their high dollar pistols, why design, test, advertise and build one that will return less profit. Until the buying market slows down, there is no incentive to do it. And I see no recession at this time in gun buyers.

But we can all drea about it.
__________________
Jim
Assault Craft Unit 1
Viet Nam
1968, 69, 70
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-12-2011, 01:45 PM
Dangerous Brian Dangerous Brian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,254
I like the idea, but I doubt a +/- $500 "saving" would be sufficient to tap into the "going without" crowd. No frills and billy basic ought to be a lot less than a standard entry level CQB.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-12-2011, 01:49 PM
PapaJoe1911's Avatar
PapaJoe1911 PapaJoe1911 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by shootumup View Post
...For the rest of us. We pay the price, because we seek the finest. We are different. Wilson Combat is different. This we know. This is why I choose WC.
Hit the nail on the head ! The OP'er makes some good points. However a Wilson is a Wilson and a mass produced mass-market gun is not...

I believe Wilson tried this sector of the market early on with the "Service Grade" pistols and decided building what they are building now is the part of the market segment they wanted to win and they have.

The backlog proves that and as long as companies such as Wilson as building high quality they will continue to see appreciable backlogs of orders (and I will continue to buy Wilsons).

In order to build a cheap gun you have to mass-produce it and put in mass produced parts. If I wanted that I would buy a Kimber although if you look at Kimber since they basically won the entry-level 1911 market the story is not a rosy one. That not Kimber-bashing as I own several but Kimber was out to win a market segment and they did. Wilson isn't going to compete in that segment any more that Kimber will compete in Wilson's...

I don't want a cheap 1911 from Wilson: I want a Wilson. Period.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-12-2011, 02:03 PM
WilsonCombatRep WilsonCombatRep is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,907
Jim,
Not likely. We can only produce a limited number of slides frames and barrels due to the intricacies of manufacturing and our committment to QC.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-12-2011, 02:37 PM
JimF4M1s's Avatar
JimF4M1s JimF4M1s is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Northern Calif
Age: 65
Posts: 2,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilsonCombatRep View Post
Jim,
Not likely. We can only produce a limited number of slides frames and barrels due to the intricacies of manufacturing and our committment to QC.
He's back!!!!
__________________
Jim
Assault Craft Unit 1
Viet Nam
1968, 69, 70
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-12-2011, 02:56 PM
Juicemt Juicemt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 586
I couldn't disagree more. Deviating from their target demographic and quality approach will only do damage to their name and cheapen their product in the eyes of their real market.

Leave the less expensive market to less expensive makers. If the Wilson owners (owners of the company, not people who own their product) really want a piece of it, they can spin off another brand name and approach it from that angle. Trying to build products for the entire market is a quick way to get pushed out by manufacturers who focus. Wilson has a good marketing strategy right now, and this suggestion would do it damage.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-12-2011, 06:45 PM
Bluetooth Bluetooth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,420
The idea sounds good, but why would I want to hire Wilson to build me a Kimber?
__________________
Jesus is Lord
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-12-2011, 06:51 PM
Highgear Highgear is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,789
I am a fan of Wilson Combat because of their unrelenting drive to become better. Better parts, better smithing, and better customer service. I don't tink they should ever take a step back.

It would be like Bentley making a car with no power windows, nor air conditioning and giving it a 4 cylinder motor with 100 hp. The Bentley essential class. It just does not work.
__________________
Veneratio Socius Mortuus CMXVIII Dum Spiro Pugno
Wilson Combat Firearms: CQB Elite Turnbull Blue / Case Hardened .45, CQB .45, Lightweight Protector Compact .45, CQB Tactical LE.45, CQB-C .45, Stealth .45, Sentinel .45, Colt Custom .45, High-Cap Championship Special .38 Super Race Gun, Spec Ops 9, Scattergun Tech. TR-870 12 ga., UT-15 .223 with W/C .22 Upper, OD ADP 9mm, WC .22 1911 conversion
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-12-2011, 07:14 PM
anchor44 anchor44 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Central Texas
Posts: 581
One thing that never ceases to amaze me is the fact that 10 months ago, I ordered a CQB Elite and got it in 12 weeks. Today it will be closer to nine months.

Nine months ago I ordered an Ed Brown Kobra and got it in 30 days. If I ordered it today, I would see it next summer or early fall.

I ordered a Les Baer last summer and got it in 2 weeks, today it would be about 24 weeks.

I ordered a Nighthawk last spring that was in stock and got it right away, but a build today is closer to six or eight months.

The prices have gone up on everything EXCEPT the Baers and the demand for all of them just keep getting stronger.
Last time there was a demand like this it was because of the upcoming election and subsequent win of a very anti-gun president.

I have no idea why in this economy wait times are so long.

It's interesting that I had a 3000 sq. ft. home built in slightly less than 4 months.
__________________
Life Member Disabled American Veterans, NRA, GOA, TSRA, Viet Nam Vet; Admiral, Texas Navy.
1911 Family: Wilson Combat CQB Compact 9mm, Wilson Combat CQB Elite, Les Baer PII 1.5", Les Baer Boss, Les Baer CIV, Ed Brown Kobra, Ed Brown Centennial Edition, Nighthawk Custom Talon, Dan Wesson CBOB, Dan Wesson CCO, Dan Wesson Guardian 9mm.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-12-2011, 07:34 PM
Juicemt Juicemt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highgear View Post
It would be like Bentley making a car with no power windows, nor air conditioning and giving it a 4 cylinder motor with 100 hp. The Bentley essential class. It just does not work.
Precisely. And as soon as the Bentley buyers saw a Bentley brand going for $ 30,000 - they wouldn't buy them anymore. Price is an important part of marketing a product, as is exclusivity.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-12-2011, 09:58 PM
JiminCA JiminCA is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,734
Interesting set of reactions here - some are kind of defensive. I'm certainly not suggesting a step back. I'm suggesting a base gun that has it where it counts and is a Wilson at heart (which is a far cry from a Kimber). The gun I have in mind is every bit as accurate and as reliable as a standard CQB. It would use the same slide/frame/barrel components that the current CQB uses, fitted to the same standard, but would trim cost by using non BP parts and no cosmetic enhancements. It just wouldn't have all the bells and whistles.

Ever shoot a Springfield Custom Carry (from the custom shop)? It is pretty much configured as I've discussed and costs $1800. I have one and it shoots like a house on fire. Every bit as tight and accurate as my Pros. Tighter than your average Wilson, but not silly tight like a Baer. Every bit as good a gun at its core as my Wilsons.

I have shot and owned a lot of guns and Wilson makes a great gun but all this gushing about the best and such is a bit over the top. They make a very good, maybe even the best semi-custom gun. But still, some of them need a little tweaking after Wilson ships them. That's reality.

I've owned Baer, Brown, Wilson, Rock River, SA custom, Nighthawk, and customs from Vickers, Garthwaite, and others. Some I still own and some I don't. Wilson is building better and better guns but quite frankly my MIM equipped CQB from 10 years ago is every bit as good as today's guns, in terms of accuracy, function, and longevity.

I don't know what shooting levels you guys are, and I'm not trying to pull rank, but I'm a Master IDPA shooter. Doesn't make me the end-all authority but I do know how to put hits on target quickly and accurately. And I'm here to tell you that you don't need serrations and all bulletproof anything to get that job done. Same goes for concealed carry/self defense. Now satisfaction of ownership is another thing, but what I'm thinking about here is a basic fighting gun that offers all the reliability and build quality of a Wilson.

Just to prove this concept to myself I shot an IDPA match once with my Vickers gun (S&A well, checkered, etc) and then shot the same course of fire with a lightly modded Kimber (no well, smooth frontstrap, heinie sights, cleaned up trigger). Guess what, I was two seconds faster with the Vickers gun on an 85 second course of fire. The mag well probably accounted for most of it. I have done this with other gun combinations over the years just for my amusement. The results repeat.

As I originally posted, I understand why Wilson might not think this is a great idea from a marketing or brand positioning standpoint, nor from a operating margin (profit) standpoint. But after many 10's of thousands of rounds downrange, and lots of match shooting I think I know what I really need to put hits on target. Of course "wants" are a whole 'nother thing .

I guess my tastes in guns are getting simpler as time goes by. For those of us who are thinking that way, I'd like to see such an offering. That's all.

Maybe a car example would help. Back in the early 90's Porsche made the RS/RS America version of the 911. It was an "option delete" car, with stuff taken off to make it more amenable to certain users (guys who wanted to race the car in SCCA or something on the weekends), and for homologation requirements in Europe. My thoughts are similar - delete the extras and take it down to the bare guts that count. Now on a car there are benefits to taking stuff off, on a gun less so. Still, maybe you can see my point and note that the RS did not hurt the Porche brand at all.

I realize this isn't going to happen. But it's interesting to think about.

Last edited by JiminCA; 11-12-2011 at 10:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-12-2011, 10:16 PM
4trailboss 4trailboss is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 131
I get that there are people who would always like to buy anything at a cheaper price. They should shop used. If you don't get it don't get it.

This isn't the "brand" for them. Whatever perceived attributes we all share about the Wilson products, we're willing and able to pay the freight for their fine products. I don't want too many more Wilson's being produced. I much prefer their emphasis on doing it our way (customizing) over pushing volume and entry level products. IMO that would be a great way to kill a great brand.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-12-2011, 10:22 PM
JiminCA JiminCA is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,734
Everyone gushes when Vickers or Yost or some other top drawer smith builds a "back to basics" gun that is something of a sleeper. It doesn't hurt their brand.

Why couldn't Wilson do the same thing?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-13-2011, 12:49 AM
lesm lesm is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 143
I think Wilson is doing exactly the right thing. Building only top tier guns with top quality, fit and finish inside and out. Used CQB's bring around 2K up because people know what they are getting. If Wilson made a cheaper line then we would have to answer questions like: is that one of their good ones or one of their cheaper ones with the parts that many would preceive to be inferior? I shoot a lot of sporting clays and in that arena no one questions the quality of a Krieghoff or a Perazzi because neither makes a B grade gun and no one is suggesting that they should do so. If one does not want to or can't afford to buy a Krieghoff they can buy a Browning for 1/4 the cost and still have fun and not feel ashamed.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-13-2011, 12:58 AM
JimF4M1s's Avatar
JimF4M1s JimF4M1s is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Northern Calif
Age: 65
Posts: 2,709
Quote:
Originally Posted by anchor44 View Post
It's interesting that I had a 3000 sq. ft. home built in slightly less than 4 months.
Anchor,

How many houses were in your tract? Or was it a one house special build on a chosen lot? How many people built your house? What if you were last in line in a tract of 2,000 homes? Would you see it in a year. I doubt it.

Now the back log I read somewhere here was 2,000 pistols at Wilson.

No flame on you, just making a silly comparison.
__________________
Jim
Assault Craft Unit 1
Viet Nam
1968, 69, 70

Last edited by JimF4M1s; 11-13-2011 at 12:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-13-2011, 01:37 AM
EricTheMarine EricTheMarine is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rancho Cordova, CA
Age: 26
Posts: 653
JiminCA,

I see your points, but sadly it makes more sense on paper then it would in real life. IMO the true cost of my CQB, which was 3k after discounts, is in the work the smiths spent on it. Yes the all BP is nice, but I dont see a big price difference from the change of MIM/Cast to BP.

The smiths are busy 24/7 down there. I was down there in OCT during the presentation of the custom supergrade WCR posted abit back. I got to see every employee, even with the mass amounts they have they still feel understaffed down there. They keep expanding, and improving thier product. A cheaper 1911 design will make it harder to keep up with the overhead while fitting it.

While I would love to be able to buy a wilson for cheaper(and who wouldnt) I dont want it at the cost of the quality dropping. Let the other companies do that, and for those who dont want to spend the $ on a Wilson well thats fine, one less order to backlog the rest of us who will spend it.

-Eric
__________________
1911s - SW1911PD, RIA GI, WC CQB-LR, Caspian "Punisher"
Others - S&W M&P45 x2, S&W M&P45c, S&W 24-6, S&W 19-4, S&W 629, S&W M&P 15, Winchester 94 100yr Ann., Kel-Tec SU16CA, Rossi 92 .357 x2, DPMS Panther 308, F.LLI Pietta 1851 Repro
Semper Fi
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-13-2011, 06:38 AM
Bluetooth Bluetooth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiminCA View Post
Everyone gushes when Vickers or Yost or some other top drawer smith builds a "back to basics" gun that is something of a sleeper. It doesn't hurt their brand.

Why couldn't Wilson do the same thing?
I would love to buy a Wilson "sleeper" (make mine a mil-spec). The problem is as WCR mentioned, the price would not be what you expected. Replace the BP parts with MIM and you save $200. Take $75 off for all black sights and $20 off for using molded grips. Any more savings and you have to cut costs (skip steps) on skilled labor. Remove the front strap checkering and I think it would cost more, as the frames come off the machining center with a raised pad ready for checkering.

PS I'm not saying that $2,755 for a base CQB is a comparable bargain, but that is what customers are paying.
__________________
Jesus is Lord

Last edited by Bluetooth; 11-13-2011 at 06:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-13-2011, 09:46 AM
BattlePack BattlePack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 47
Posts: 379
I'm with the OP on this one for my own selfish reasons, although I certainly understand WC's marketing and build strategy given the current market. I need a Wilson to round out my semi-custom stable of 1911s. I'm near the end of my gun buying days and have become a tightwad in the process. At this point, I've made the decision to not spend $2.5-$3K on the last piece of the puzzle. I would personally love a no-frills parked CQB in the vein of the old 1996A2. How about a limited run Gunsite-esqe type build?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-13-2011, 09:48 AM
Juicemt Juicemt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiminCA View Post
Interesting set of reactions here - some are kind of defensive.
I think you're being defensive, frankly.

Recognize that all the reasons you gave for why this gun is, from a shooting standpoint, a good idea do not matter. It needs to work with their business model. I'm not an insider, so I'm just speculating when I post - I do not see it being an intelligent new market addition under the Wilson Combat brand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BattlePack View Post
I'm with the OP on this one for my own selfish reasons, although I certainly understand WC's marketing and build strategy given the current market. I need a Wilson to round out my semi-custom stable of 1911s. I'm near the end of my gun buying days and have become a tightwad in the process. At this point, I've made the decision to not spend $2.5-$3K on the last piece of the puzzle. I would personally love a no-frills parked CQB in the vein of the old 1996A2. How about a limited run Gunsite-esqe type build?
So what you're saying is you want them to make a less expensive Wilson because you aren't will to pay for the ones they currently offer. Ask yourself why you want a Wilson in the first place. Quality and exclusivity. Exactly the things they give up if they do as the OP requests.

Lots of successful businesses damage themselves by losing sight of their target market. I hope Wilson doesn't do this. They could spin off another brand for exactly the market you're suggesting....but why? Why devote limited resources to a market with more competitors and less profit margin? It doesn't make any sense. They have already won. They are at the top of the semi custom market and command more margin than other builders, while maintaining 6+ months of backlog. Doing anything different right now would be downright silly.

Last edited by Juicemt; 11-13-2011 at 09:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-13-2011, 09:51 AM
tocohillsguy tocohillsguy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by JiminCA View Post
Interesting set of reactions here - some are kind of defensive. I'm certainly not suggesting a step back. I'm suggesting a base gun that has it where it counts and is a Wilson at heart (which is a far cry from a Kimber). The gun I have in mind is every bit as accurate and as reliable as a standard CQB. It would use the same slide/frame/barrel components that the current CQB uses, fitted to the same standard, but would trim cost by using non BP parts and no cosmetic enhancements. It just wouldn't have all the bells and whistles.

Ever shoot a Springfield Custom Carry (from the custom shop)? It is pretty much configured as I've discussed and costs $1800. I have one and it shoots like a house on fire. Every bit as tight and accurate as my Pros. Tighter than your average Wilson, but not silly tight like a Baer. Every bit as good a gun at its core as my Wilsons.

I have shot and owned a lot of guns and Wilson makes a great gun but all this gushing about the best and such is a bit over the top. They make a very good, maybe even the best semi-custom gun. But still, some of them need a little tweaking after Wilson ships them. That's reality.

I've owned Baer, Brown, Wilson, Rock River, SA custom, Nighthawk, and customs from Vickers, Garthwaite, and others. Some I still own and some I don't. Wilson is building better and better guns but quite frankly my MIM equipped CQB from 10 years ago is every bit as good as today's guns, in terms of accuracy, function, and longevity.

I don't know what shooting levels you guys are, and I'm not trying to pull rank, but I'm a Master IDPA shooter. Doesn't make me the end-all authority but I do know how to put hits on target quickly and accurately. And I'm here to tell you that you don't need serrations and all bulletproof anything to get that job done. Same goes for concealed carry/self defense. Now satisfaction of ownership is another thing, but what I'm thinking about here is a basic fighting gun that offers all the reliability and build quality of a Wilson.

Just to prove this concept to myself I shot an IDPA match once with my Vickers gun (S&A well, checkered, etc) and then shot the same course of fire with a lightly modded Kimber (no well, smooth frontstrap, heinie sights, cleaned up trigger). Guess what, I was two seconds faster with the Vickers gun on an 85 second course of fire. The mag well probably accounted for most of it. I have done this with other gun combinations over the years just for my amusement. The results repeat.

As I originally posted, I understand why Wilson might not think this is a great idea from a marketing or brand positioning standpoint, nor from a operating margin (profit) standpoint. But after many 10's of thousands of rounds downrange, and lots of match shooting I think I know what I really need to put hits on target. Of course "wants" are a whole 'nother thing .

I guess my tastes in guns are getting simpler as time goes by. For those of us who are thinking that way, I'd like to see such an offering. That's all.

Maybe a car example would help. Back in the early 90's Porsche made the RS/RS America version of the 911. It was an "option delete" car, with stuff taken off to make it more amenable to certain users (guys who wanted to race the car in SCCA or something on the weekends), and for homologation requirements in Europe. My thoughts are similar - delete the extras and take it down to the bare guts that count. Now on a car there are benefits to taking stuff off, on a gun less so. Still, maybe you can see my point and note that the RS did not hurt the Porche brand at all.

I realize this isn't going to happen. But it's interesting to think about.
I'm guessing you would have also shot the course of fire quite well with a Glock 21. Little doubt it's more the Indian than the arrow. Seems to me you sort of answer your own question. There is little reason for Wilson to serve the bare bones 1911 market, because there are many that already do.

That being said, I suspect Wilson considered going in your suggested direction with the X-Tac, but then shifted course, moved to more Bulletproof parts, and made it about the same price as the CQB. Now the only price difference is the finish. You can save $100 by avoiding the Armor-Tuff. However, my LGS only orders them with the Armor-Tuff. They tell me that's what everyone wants, which sort of tells me the public is disinclined to buy a stripped down Wilson.

Last edited by tocohillsguy; 11-13-2011 at 09:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-13-2011, 12:48 PM
PSD Operator PSD Operator is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 598
You don't have to pay high prices for Wilson quality...

I bought my first CQB on 11-Sept-01, just a coincidence with the date, and think I paid 1495.00. I still have it and it's got about 19-20K rounds through it, or something close to that, I quit counting cases ago, but don't think I would buy another new one at the prices they are going for now.

I would buy used for sure and without hesitation due to the fact that Wilson has always stood behind their products, making a used gun just as good as a new one. Here is my reasoning...
They stand behind their product over time, and with the exception of normal wear and tear parts, have repaired anything I've ever sent in for free. They can easily rebuild or refinish any old gun and bring it up to factory standards for minimal cost (relatively speaking) and you know they will work on it until it's functioning at it's optimum.

I've seen plenty of "old" Wilsons selling for 1-1.5K in the past year. So what if it's a 5-10 year old gun, for the above reasons, it can be made near new. If you take the time to shop, you can find these deals. There are always people out there who believe that their 10 year old CQB compact is worth $2,149.00 because "new ones are going for 2,700.00" and forget the fact that they only paid 1,500.00 when it was new. With the exception of these idiots, most people sell for less than they paid, and these guns are the ones to look for, but you have to be patient. You aren't going to find this deal the first hour you look, but hit several boards and user groups and you'll find what you want eventually.

If anyone out there is considering a Wilson but hesitant because of the cost, because of the above reasons, it's my belief that buying used will get you the same quality gun, and isn't that what really counts?

Though the backorder at Wilsons means they have more work than they can keep up with on a daily basis, in the future, with expansion, they might look into a buyback program or trade-up policy. They could refinish and sell used Wilsons, offering customers a way to get into a Wilson at less cost. This won't decrease the value of any of their existing guns, or require a decrease in the price of new ones, so it's not bad from a business perspective, and it will increase the customer base and make sure guns out there can find a new and appreciative home.
__________________
John
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-13-2011, 01:40 PM
WilsonCombatRep WilsonCombatRep is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,907
It is very interesting to hear the various feedback of folks looking from the outside in. Many of you know we have built "entry level" guns before.
The Millenium Protector, KZ-45, "Service Grade" models, et al. We have been doing this for a long time and the Wilson customer now is a little different than the Wilson customer of 10 or 15 years ago. In fact, 20 years ago we were the "entry level" custom gun for many shooters. Times have changed.

The reality is while those "entry" guns were all good guns, we have evolved as a company and our long term goals are different. We don't want to build a "really good" gun for the masses-we want to build really GREAT 1911's for the aficionados. There are lots of good $1500 1911's out there- but very few great ones. There are many reasons for this.

Some of what we have done in the past have been little more than marketing experiments to tap into various markets. We know our core customer a little better now. You guys wan't great products, great service, best in class components and a timely build. We are diligently working on improving all of these things on a daily basis so there is never a question in the marketplace about who is in the lead.

We want to buy more CNC equipment to enable us to build more machined parts so we are never out of mission critical things like safeties, slide stops or ignition parts to hold up gun orders. Sure, we could use more cast parts to fill the gap but sorry, we are in the business of moving forward and purposefully evolving the guns, not going backwards to reach a certain price point. We are always looking for backup vendors for some of the critical parts. Any idea what kind of reaction we get when a vendor sees a part like the BP Ambi safety? It is a very complex, crucial part and most of them aren't even remotely interested in producing them.

We currently have all the right people in place and are constantly improving our processes and aim to improve our service to an even higher level.

You all will see some major developments in 2012 from Wilson Combat. A few will really impress you I think. Some product oriented, some customer focused, some website related.

As usual, thanks for your feedback. If you want a $1500 or $2000 Wilson I would suggest Gunbroker or Gunsamerica. You may get lucky.

As of today we are insanely backordered on $3000-$5000 pistols. We have no interest in moving backwards. It would stall the evolution of the company and besides, our pistolsmiths are much happier building the nice stuff
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-13-2011, 03:57 PM
JimF4M1s's Avatar
JimF4M1s JimF4M1s is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Northern Calif
Age: 65
Posts: 2,709
Great response, thanks.
__________________
Jim
Assault Craft Unit 1
Viet Nam
1968, 69, 70
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:24 AM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2011 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved