[txgolfer45]

Which would you get and why? I'm trying to decide between the two.

Thanks,
Scott

[Bacchus]

I generally like Kimber products. I got the chance to handle S&W's 1911 about a week ago and it looked great. How much for the S&W?

[txgolfer45]

I've seen the SW1911 priced between $675 and $750 plus tax locally.

Scott

[Lone_Gunman]

The roll marks on the S&W are ugly ugly UGLY.

How could you sleep at night if you bought a gun with rollmarks like that?

[txgolfer45]

What's a rollmark????:D

[Doc]

buy BOTH!

there are at least 2 threads on both guns here
do a search and they'll come up

two different guns. both reliable, both worth buying.

I had an interesting discussion with a gunguy lastnight. He submitted that ALL Kimbers were bad as her had had a bad experience with an ultra CDP. He was not swayed by my "it's a mechanical device" argument, nor my "the design is easier in full size" argument, nor my "if your life depends on it, it's really worth the extra $200-500 to buy a TRUE custom gun like a Wilson or Les Baer or Robar" argument.

so, once again, people will believe that which they WILL to believe; and most people (not here at THR) want to express their opinion to have it heard and NOT to explore the possibliity of having it modified...:fire:

So since I own the two guns you mention my considered opinion is that both are worthwhile. My TLE shoot high and per Kimber it can have it's too tall front sight replaced for free (I just need to get around to sending it in). I think it's a great gun, especially for the price and the fact that it is a 'base model' not a high end custom shop gun. I have not shot my S&W 1911 yet, so I cant tell you any down side in function. It will be a collector even if it doesn't shoot well, but if so I will get rid of mine, since I am not a collector, rather a shooter.



What's a rollmark????

Who cares!:neener:

Just like boats ("a fast boat IS a pretty boat)
a 'fast' gun which , IS a pretty gun

here 'fast' is: accurate, utterly reliable and fun to shoot

[Lone_Gunman]

Many people on this board dont understand the difference between cosmetic beauty and functionality.

An ugly rollmark is an ugly rollmark, regardless of what the pistol may or may not be able to do.

[shooter.45]

I have the Kimber TLE and love it shoots great. Very accurate cant say much for the S&W I just handled the smith and was not too impressed it was a little loose in the frame to slide fit. And besides you get more options with the Kimber, Front strap checkering, night sites. Love that gun,


:D

[txgolfer45]

Pricewise, they are only about $35 apart. Looks like I will go with the Kimber. Gun shows next two weekends!

Scott

[Aahzz]

An ugly rollmark is an ugly rollmark, regardless of what the pistol may or may not be able to do

Ah, but ugly, much like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. I adore my SW1911, and don't mind the rollmark in the least. In fact, I quite like it - it's large, but I dig the S&W logo anyway, and don'y mind the "SW1911".

How could you sleep at night if you bought a gun with rollmarks like that?

I sleep quite well at night, particularly with this pistol at my bedside - it's also become my carry gun. It's been naught but accurate and reliable since I got it :) .

[SouthpawShootr]

I bought my TLE just as the S&W was coming out. After shooting the TLE, I'm confident I would do the same again. My dealer is selling both for essentially the same price. The Smith has the virtue of being stainless steel slide and frame. I don't really care for the practice of highlighting the safeties by contrasting the color. Also, I like the Kimber night sights better than the Novak units. I can forgive the rather loud S&W rollmark as long as the gun functions ok.

[Lone_Gunman]

Ugly rollmarks are like ugly women... they are fine as long as they belong to someone else.

[JimC]

I bought a Kimber Custom TLE II a couple of months ago. I bought it because it was, outward appearances, the "best bang" for the buck out there.

Well, I was under the impression that Kimber had resolved the too high front sight blade [.180] issue and all current models had the correct height [.150]. Not!

My first trip to the range I found that mine, like many others, shot 4-5" low at 10 yds. and as low as 11" at 50 yds. with two different types of 230 gr. ball ammo. The initial groups were very acceptable and still are.

I called Kimber CS right from the range. They were quite aware of what I was speaking about and without hesitation advised me to just ship the slide back and they would replace the front sight with the correct height.

BTW, the sending back of the slide at your expense even though the problem was a Kimber error and they are aware of it. Turn around time was about a week which was a plus for Kimber but it shouldn't have been required in the first place.

Not that I'm pushing the SW1911 but with their lifetime warranty, I've read that they pay for shipping both ways.

The second issue that I have and it's my own fault, is the number of MIM parts used in the pistol. This is obviously the way they keep the price of this pistols with it's features, down to a reasonable limit.

The flat part of my disconnector that rides on the trigger bow is so poorly cast that only about 1/3 of it contacts the rear of the bow.

The trigger they used in my pistol was so rough on the sides of the bow that it would not drop out of the pistol with just gravity, it had to be pulled out. I had to stone and polish it in order to get it to slide freely.

I'm quite aware that the SW1911 also has MIM parts and that's one reason I didn't consider it. Also, I don't care for the roll mark and the contrasting black [MIM] parts on the pistol.

Ugly rollmarks are like ugly women... they are fine as long as they belong to someone else.

Well put... :D

The third issue with the Kimber has to do with the "black oxide" finish they use on them. I've only had my pistol to the range twice firing about 625 rounds thru it. The finish on the frame is already starting to wear thin in spots! :eek: I guess I would also pay to ship it back to have it re-finished. :mad:

The last point has to do with what the TLE II is made of. It seems that even Kimber can't tell you even if you supply them with the serial number. Their web site listing has the construction as "steel" but, you may get an all steel pistol, you may get a steel slide and stainless steel frame [which I have] or...you may get one that is apparently the current issue, all stainless steel.

I guess they've used up all the odd parts that they had lying around and have at last, for now, settled on SS for the entire pistol...maybe.

If I had it to do all over again, I probably wouldn't buy the Kimber. I do know that this was my first and last Kimber pistol.

[JimC]

And BTW...you get a plastic POS MSH for a suggested MSRP of $900+ for the Custon TLE II.

I immediately replaced mine with a Colt steel flat one. 30 + years old but a little cold blue and it looked great. ;)

[SouthpawShootr]

Just about everybody uses plastic for the mainspring housing now. S&W apparently uses aluminum, though. I've never had nor have I heard of a failure associated with a plastic mainspring housing, so it's a non-issue for me.

[JoeHatley]

I just made that decision a few weeks ago. Paid $660 for this one:

http://elwood.pionet.net/~hatley/sw1911_l_ud.jpg

http://elwood.pionet.net/~hatley/sw1911_r_ud.jpg

Barrel/slide/frame fit are just short of perfect. Trigger pull was a bit heavy, took about 2 minutes to improve. Quality gun, make with quality parts.

I think I made the right choice.

Good Luck...

Joe

[txgolfer45]

JoeHatley,

Very nice!!! ugh, decisions, decisions!!! lol Sounds like I can't go wrong with either one.

Scott