Both?

Ben

This is a question that I've been pondering myself.
Here's my take.  If I want a Historical Piece, or one that was like my issued gun - I'll take the Springfield GI Milspec.  Otherwise, I'd take the R1.
Prices are similar and one really has no distinct advantage over the other in many aspects... however the R1's dovetailed sights allow the upgrade to Tritium as needed.
I'm a big fan of Springfield and will continue to be so - but the R1's value is that it's about as solid of a Basic 1911 as you can get.  So instead of buying Taurus or any of the numbers of brands of grass hut made guns - you have a good option.

I am going to pick up a used GI soon.  It's IDENTICAL to the one I used last when attached to the 19th SF.  The wood grips just need to be worn smoother is all.  I'll use that as more of a Field Gun and I have a G-Code REAC rig that is perfect for it.  
If I was to buy an R1 - I'd put a beavertail on it, bobbed hammer, and upgrade the sights.

Remember that Remington Firearms of today is not the same company as Remington-Rand, the company that made 1911's during WWII.  Remington at one time made firearms and typewrites.  At some point in the 1880's there was a split out of which came two seperate companies; Remington Typewriter Company and Remington Arms Company. 

Remington Typewriter Company eventually merged with Rand Kardex to become Remington-Rand.  In addition to 1911's for the war effort, they also made business machines and early computers before and after WWII.  At some point they were bought out by Sperry (50's?).  In the late 70's the division was sold off by Sperry and became Remington Products.  They made electric shavers.

Rayovac now owns Remington Products.

Remington Arms Company oversaw the gov't owned Denver Ordnance Ammunition Plant and Lake City Arsenal during WWII.  They did make weapons, but were not a player in WWII 1911 manufacturing.  Those players were Colt, Ithaca, Remington-Rand, Union Switch & Signal and Singer (and Singer only made 500 pistols).

They did make 1911's for WWI however (about 21,000).


I'd want 'em both.  But if I was forced to choose, I'd pick the Springfield.  Although I wouldn't be happy about having to choose.


-T.

Springfield.

 I own a S.A. Mil-Spec and love it. It was pretty good out of the box*, and after the break in period it just got better. No complaints here. But if I were to purchase today, I might go with the Remington. Why? Well, it's American made and this:

Prices are similar and one really has no distinct advantage over the other in many aspects... however the R1's dovetailed sights allow the upgrade to Tritium as needed.

* I'm still trying to find out if the NM series Mil-Spec myth is true or not.

Edit: Regarding the NM serial number myth, I'm not referencing the rumor that it's "National Match". Just that it may have been assembled in America, not Brazil.

Springfield doesn't have the Colt Series 80 style firing pin block, and that's enough for me to pick the Springfield over the Remington right there.  Springfield does have the ILS Mainspring housing, but that's a drop in fix.

...the R1, which like the Springfield has a lot of history...

In addition to what T said, keep in mind Springfield Armory Incorporated also has no history tying back to any wars.

Regarding the NM serial number myth, I'm not referencing the rumor that it's "National Match". Just that it may have been assembled in America, not Brazil.

Don't all Springfield frames come from Brazil, arriving in the US in various states of completion?

A technical aside:
I used to have a Springer GI Milspec.  It wasn't a 100 percent reproduction though because Springfield had tweaked all of their 1911's to pass the California Drop Test ( hack, hack, spit.  Excuse me I've been sick).   They had the ILS safety system.  The pistol had a titanium firing pin that duplicated the size of the 1911 .38 super firing pin.  It also had an extra strength hammer spring an  a lock that involved a special cup where the hammer strut rested.   Like a lot of other Springer owners I went to Brownell's and got a  $10 trigger job. Deleted the trigger lock parts and put in a standard hammer spring and cup, a steel 1911 .38 Super firing pin and a higher than standard firing pin spring.  I'm just not that fond of titanium in the lock train.

I wonder what the R1 uses for firing pin safety?  A 1980's Colt system or perhaps the Kimber?

My bad on not noticing the post about the Remington having the 80's firing pin block. 
 The 80's firing pin block is more difficult to work with if you are doing trigger jobs.  There are more gunsmiths out there now that know how to tweak them and a larger data base and drop in stuff now.    IMHO the difference in trigger pull will be a variable from pistol to pistol.  I know Springfield does good customer service, at least they did when I dealt with them about 5 years ago.  I've never dealt with Remington so I don't know how they are.  I haven't heard any complaints though.

Are they really making more US frames for their bottom tier guns?

*I don't mean that in a bad way, but the .45 GI and the Mil-Spec have the lowest SA price points respectively, AFAIK.

I'd like a stainless Mil-spec myself. 

Update on my S.A. Mil-Spec and the "NM". Gave them a call and they stated the slide and frame were produced by Imbel in Brazil. Everything else is American and was put together here in the states. My version has zero "Made in Brazil laser etchings" and has the one piece barrel. It just an awesome pistol.
If I had the funds, a Remington R1 is on my list. But a scout rifle is first when I can do it.

So?


-T.

You might not have an issue with it, and I do not, but some people consider that a deal-breaker.

Oh, and, you forgot to welcome him to the forum.  . ... come to think about it, no one has. 

Scprescott, welcome to WTA!

Kaso

Other than that I'm waiting for someone to make a steel framed .38 Super Commander.

Dude... are you sure that we are not brothers?


Jim