New CQB - new frame changes - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-22-2018, 08:30 AM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
New CQB - new frame changes

I ordered this CQB in February and opted for 25LPI checkering instead of the usual 30LPI.

This frame is a little different than my aluminum CQB, X-Tac, and Compact.

This one has a thinner frontstrap and magwell is beveled into the MSH. I would imagine it slicks up a reload a tiny bit, but if you ever want to change the MSH it will add some work.

The checkering is not quite even from top to bottom or side to side but it’s pretty close. I really like the other frames better as they had just a little more meat on the frontstrap. This one is about like an Ed Brown. Not quite as thin as most Colts.

This pistol is a typical Wilson in that it was slick right out of the box. It ran 100% on ball and 147gr HST, which is it’s primary function in life. No break-in or goofy tricks. Just lube, load, and go to work.







For reference, the front of the steel baseplate is flush with the front of the grip on my other Wilsons and Dan Wesson.








Last edited by samuse; 07-22-2018 at 08:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-22-2018, 10:11 AM
aaronsappl aaronsappl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ms
Age: 58
Posts: 875
Nice CQB, I like the thinner front strap better. I enclosed a pic of my last WC, the front strap is really beefy. Yours is more like my other WC and EB. I seem to like the look better. The Vickers is still a great 1911, very smooth and accurate. One of my favorites.

I am waiting on a build now, hope I get that frame.

I really like the all black look of yours. Interesting to see how well the AT holds up on the barrel hood.

Enjoy shooting the new WC.
Attached Thumbnails
WC Vickers 2.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-22-2018, 10:16 AM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
The one on that Vickers is the thickest one they had last year. Too thick, like a Baer.

I’ve had a barrel finished in black from Alchemy, it’s pretty close to Armor Tuff and it shows wear where the slide touches the hood and on the bushing end but I don’t mind.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 07-22-2018, 01:55 PM
aaronsappl aaronsappl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ms
Age: 58
Posts: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuse View Post
The one on that Vickers is the thickest one they had last year. Too thick, like a Baer.

Iíve had a ba
rrel finished in black from Alchemy, itís pretty close to Armor Tuff and it shows wear where the slide touches the hood and on the bushing end but I donít mind.
I am waiting on a CQB finished by Baron. I hope the frame is closer to yours than my Vicker's. I might be sick if its thick like the Vicker's.

Beautiful 1911 you have there. The wear on the hood and bushing will just show that you use it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-22-2018, 02:14 PM
Bradd D Bradd D is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St Cloud, FL USA
Posts: 1,644
They're building me a couple of CQBs right now. One of them is a rebuild of a gun that had a frame like aaronsappl's. They tried thinning it a bit, but it didn't work out so they're building me a new gun. It'll be interesting to see if my guns come with this new frame.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-22-2018, 02:27 PM
aaronsappl aaronsappl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ms
Age: 58
Posts: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradd D View Post
They're building me a couple of CQBs right now. One of them is a rebuild of a gun that had a frame like aaronsappl's. They tried thinning it a bit, but it didn't work out so they're building me a new gun. It'll be interesting to see if my guns come with this new frame.
Bradd, I wonder why the different changes in frames. When i purchased the Vickers, I thought it was the Vickers grips so I ordered a different set from WC without change. Not complaining about WC, but I would have thought since they make there own frames, they would all look alike.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-22-2018, 02:42 PM
L84CABO L84CABO is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Orcas Island, WA & San Diego
Posts: 3,663
Are we sure this is a new frame and not just the difference between a 45 frame and a 9mm frame? They're most certainly not the same size...at least they aren't on my 45 and 9mm CQB's but these are a few years old so I don't know how it compares to what they're building today.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-22-2018, 02:46 PM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
The only thing that bothers me is that the checkering is not straight. It’s closer to the grip at the top and the whole right side is closer to the grip than the left.

It’s not the grips, these aren’t the ones that came on it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-22-2018, 02:48 PM
Bradd D Bradd D is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St Cloud, FL USA
Posts: 1,644
These are the threads about my frame. When I got it back from Wilson it looked great at first. It was late when it arrived and I didn't have time to look it over very well. Once I did, though, it turned out the frontstrap was angled relative to the grips and the checkering was 25 LPI instead of 30 LPI. The MSH was still 30 LPI. Apparently, they do 25 LPI standard now (which I actually prefer). I contacted Wilson again and they had me send it in. After evaluating it, they told me they were going to build me a new gun.

https://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=949642

https://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=961410

One thing I will say is that the service given by Wilson is like no other company I've dealt with. It is absolutely top shelf. Whether it be resolving my concerns with this frame, ordering a new build, or getting sights put on a few of my Glock slides, they go above and beyond.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-22-2018, 02:51 PM
Bradd D Bradd D is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St Cloud, FL USA
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuse View Post
The only thing that bothers me is that the checkering is not straight. Itís closer to the grip at the top and the whole right side is closer to the grip than the left.

Itís not the grips, these arenít the ones that came on it.
Like this?

Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-22-2018, 04:12 PM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by L84CABO View Post
Are we sure this is a new frame and not just the difference between a 45 frame and a 9mm frame? They're most certainly not the same size...at least they aren't on my 45 and 9mm CQB's but these are a few years old so I don't know how it compares to what they're building today.
All of mine are 9mm. Same frame as a 45, just cut for a ramped barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-22-2018, 04:18 PM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradd D View Post
Like this?






Exactly like that. I know itís not a Supergrade, and it doesnít affect anything, but it is annoying considering I have 1911s that cost half what this one did and theyíre straight.

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-24-2018, 11:45 AM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
I’ve talked to a couple of people at Wilson about the differences I’m seeing between checkering, beveling, and trigger feel between pistols that spec’d out exactly the same.

They said they it was probably new gunsmiths that do things however they want.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-25-2018, 07:12 AM
iron texan iron texan is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 12
Thanks for posting, this is the best looking undercut and front strap I have seen on a new Wilson in years. Hopefully a sign of what is to come. The super thick front straps had me all but writing off Wilson
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-25-2018, 07:30 PM
RickRope RickRope is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 777
After spending that kind of money I would not have been happy with that answer. I couldn’t live with the hacked checkering.


Quote:
Originally Posted by samuse View Post
I’ve talked to a couple of people at Wilson about the differences I’m seeing between checkering, beveling, and trigger feel between pistols that spec’d out exactly the same.

They said they it was probably new gunsmiths that do things however they want.

Last edited by RickRope; 07-25-2018 at 07:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-26-2018, 02:13 PM
RickRope RickRope is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 777
After looking at it a little more, I think your frame was cut for a magwell then they removed it after realizing the mistake or it’s a recycled frame.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-26-2018, 02:50 PM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
That’s what it looks like to me too. Looks like it was one of the thick frontstrap frames with a magwell that was recycled. Scrap pile build.

I don’t dislike it, but it annoying that it not what I expected it to be.

Last edited by samuse; 07-26-2018 at 02:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-26-2018, 03:19 PM
crc crc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 931
What caught my eye was the s/n being earlier than the current ones. From what I remember, didn't the 14*** s/n range have the thicker front straps?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-26-2018, 03:34 PM
Bradd D Bradd D is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St Cloud, FL USA
Posts: 1,644
My thick frontstrap frame was WC16.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-28-2018, 05:46 PM
CBerger02 CBerger02 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 193
Does the aluminum frame you have have a thick front strap like the Vickers Elite a few posts up?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-28-2018, 07:50 PM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
Nope.

Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-29-2018, 01:06 PM
crc crc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 931
Which one do you like better? Both look great!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-29-2018, 03:14 PM
CBerger02 CBerger02 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 193
Is the length of the grip from front strap to MSH different? Or is it the placement of the grip screw holes that is moving where the grips sit in relation to the front strap?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-29-2018, 03:43 PM
Bradd D Bradd D is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St Cloud, FL USA
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBerger02 View Post
Is the length of the grip from front strap to MSH different? Or is it the placement of the grip screw holes that is moving where the grips sit in relation to the front strap?
The frame is thicker front to back. Here is what mine looked like before going back to Wilson.

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-29-2018, 04:49 PM
samuse samuse is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: South Texas
Posts: 4,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by crc View Post
Which one do you like better? Both look great!
I like the aluminum one best. The frontstrap is just a little thicker than a Colt, but not ugly thick like a Baer. It fills my hand just right and I think they look perfect when the flat between the hrip and frontstrap is the same size as between the grip and MSH.

My aluminum CQB and X-Tac are like that.
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 11:00 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 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved