Welcome to the New GunAndGame.com
Send Feedback - Back to the Old GunAndGame

Go Back   Gun and Game Forums > Firearms > General Firearms > General Handgun

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-24-2008, 08:35 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Joshua M. Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wabash IN
Posts: 381
Charles Daly Service

Here's what happened:

My stock safety broke around March 3rd, and I mailed it to Charles Daly. It was returned by the post office with a stamp which said that there was no box at the given address.

I wrote Michael and he gave me the proper address. It seems the address listed on the Charles Daly website is for package delivery by UPS.

I mailed it out again a couple days later. I screwed up and didn't put enough postage on the thing. I had marked it to be hand stamped and I guess that costs more. I was short 19 cents. I learned something new.

I was getting fed up with the postal service, but I tried one more time a week or so later.

Today I received the new safety. Turnaround time was one, or one and a half, weeks. If I figure six days in transit total, they only had the piece for one or two days before a new one was sent to me.

The only money spent was on stamps.

I'm impressed by their service. This is not the poor customer service I've read about people having from Charles Daly; it was the best I've received from any gun company, CDNN included. They had previously held the record.

Thought you might like to know, and I believe in giving credit where it's due.

Josh <><
__________________
Is it better to live by a corrupt society's standards rather than face persecution for not doing the same? This is the dilemma we now face. We must hold fast to our convictions as we confront this dilemma. Knowing one's self goes a long way in the crisis. - Me, Standup Philosopher
Joshua M. Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2008, 08:46 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
ander254's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 235
Images: 5
glad to hear its fixed and ready for the range now
ander254 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2008, 12:01 AM   #3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7
I am not familiar with Charles Daly 1911's. They look like quality pistols. How does yours shoot?
Teuthis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2008, 01:31 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Joshua M. Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wabash IN
Posts: 381
Mine shoots accurately. I have an older one that required a 6 o'clock hold until I filed down the rear sight.

Since mine was to be a carry piece, I changed the springs to Wilson (not necessary; just a personal preference,) did away with the extended mag release in favor of a standard one, and fitted an STI ambi safety, cutting down the left side a bit for better fit (I'm a lefty.)

A few other tweaks involve a Wilson mag in the gun and a couple Chip McCormick mags that I gutted and installed GI mag internals. Another personal preference.

In my opinion though, the only thing that really needs done to make these into good carry pieces is the replacement of the slide release and maybe the safety. It's of the Colt design and it's inherently weak, using an extended sear pin to retain the safety.

Keep in mind that STI uses Armscor (the actual manufacturer) barrels, slides and frames on their entry-level Spartan model. The only difference is that they fill the Spartan with their own internals, and I assume CD does the same.

The only real beef I have with the CD 1911 (at least those I have experience with) is that the springs feel like wet spaghetti.

Other than that, they're good for the price, in my opinion.

Josh <><
__________________
Is it better to live by a corrupt society's standards rather than face persecution for not doing the same? This is the dilemma we now face. We must hold fast to our convictions as we confront this dilemma. Knowing one's self goes a long way in the crisis. - Me, Standup Philosopher
Joshua M. Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:54 PM.


[Output: 52.32 Kb. compressed to 49.71 Kb. by saving 2.61 Kb. (4.98%)]