Just in case you haven't heard, Ruger released their 1911 the other day. Surprise, surprise, another gun maker introducing a 1911 in 2011.
Now that being said, I would probably buy a Ruger 1911, they have a very good reputation as far as their guns are concerned, however that's usually after a recall or two.
The gun looks clean and crisp and in stainless which I generally prefer. the gun features everything you would expect in a mid-grade 1911, but at a $799 MSRP, figure average retail to be around $650-$700 and I think it will be one great seller.
The plunger tube is integral to the frame which is a nice touch, but the frame is CNC machined from a casting. Some people are anti cast frames, I really don't have an opinion on the matter. What does concern me is that somewhere I read that they (Ruger) has claimed to "improve" the extractor....many others have tried this, such as Kimber (failed miserably), Sig and Smith and Wesson (mixed results) and Para with their PXT (mixed results), and maybe one or two others that I'm looking over. While most of the above were ventures into the external extractor, Ruger has stuck with the internal extractor.
Given Ruger's previous recalls on the SR9, LCP, and one other "P" Series Pistol and the news that they are mucking with the extractor, I'll be letting someone else guinea pig this one.
It comes with one seven and one eight round magazine, no word yet on if they are made in house or are of the Checkmate, Metalform, Mecgar variety or something else. Will definitely be watching these. If they perform well, they very well could replace Springfield Loadeds as my "go-to" recommendation for a decently priced and equipped 1911.