[Will Fennell]

Folks,
My buddy Anthony Lombardo and I had a mega range session today, and while we have several things to report regarding quite a few pistols, I thought I would start with the most desturbing item first....

I recently found a NIB KIMBER stainless compact, Series 1 gun at my local dealer, that had been "lost on a back self" in the store room. I snatched it up, with thoughts of sending it to a good gunsmith for biulding into a "basic" custom carrygun. Well, I wanted to shoot it today to decide whether I wanted to replace the barrel or not.

Good news, I got 1" groups @ 20 yards with S&B hardball, although they were 3" low and 1.5" left, like most KIMBERS I've shot with factory sites.

Bad news, after less than 100 rounds of ball ammo, the hammer began to fall to half cock, with what appears to be a sear that has rolled its edge and given way......damn a MIM sear!

Now I was planing to replace the hammer and sear[with tool steel parts] as part of the "customization" process, but you would think that the gun would function better and longer than 100 rounds!

Moral of the story, if you are going to carry a KIMBER, think about replacing atleast the sear......sears are cheap, spend the $$ and do it right

:rolleyes:

[WonderNine]

Or you could get a Hi-Power :D

Sorry....

[10-Ring]

That really sucks! To have part failure from a brand name product :rolleyes: At least the 1" groups show the potential of what the gun will be like after some real TLC ;)

[WonderNine]

Oh well, I hope it works out for you. While you're at it, replace the MIM extractor as well.

[AZ Husker]

Plus the thumb safety & slide stop.

[CWL]

My NIB Kimber went full auto by the second mag (coulda been third).

Scary but pretty cool now that I look back at this.

[1911Tuner]

...replace the hammer and disconnector too. Contact Dane Burns
for his matched set. You can find him over on Pistolsmith.com

Before you install the parts, use a blue felt-tip marker to color the
sear's engagement angle. Install the parts and boost the hammer
lightly a few times. Strip it back down and check to see that both
hammer hooks are bearing on the sear. If the blue has been taken
off both sides, you're golden. If one side is unmarked, have it
corrected.

Be sure to tell him what the gun is to be used for so that he can
set the hammer hooks accordingly. Personally, I don't like to
see a carry/duty pistol with hammer hooks shorter than .021
and I'm happier with .023, but that's just me. I also like about
5 pounds on the trigger, and 6 doesn't bother me as long as it
breaks clean.

Luck to ya!

Tuner

[Rob96]

If you will be replacing your MIM parts, ditch the grip safety as well. Have read of a few instances where they split in half.

[denfoote]

...and my cheapo, used 1911 clone is still humming along after 250 rounds!!!

Gee, I'm glad I didn't buy that Kimber!! :rolleyes:

Sorry, I couldn't resist!!! :evil:

[Rob96]

My brother has a Pro CDP II that was a reliable single shot, until it made a trip back to the custom shot. Also had a thumb safety that wouldn't stay positively on or off. I have handled and shot two different Kimbers, and I am not impressed with them. I'll stick with my Colt.:D

[Will Fennell]

Guys,
I was planning to replace all the parts ya'll mentioned, and more, when I bought the pistol. Here's a list....

New..

Hammer[WILSON]
Sear[WILSON]
firing pin stop[BROWN]
thumb safety[KINGS]
grip safety[STI]
mainspring housing{LES BAER]
trigger[HEINIE]
mag release[BROWN]
barrel[WILSON]
barrel link[WILSON]
new pins throughout[WILSON]
extractor[WILSON]
slide stop [WILSON]
Sights[HEINIE]


I basically bought the gun for its stainless frame and slide to build a custom pistol on, but I knew that going in. I WAS surprised, however, how quickly the MIM sear went bad.

Again, on a positive note, the grouped well, and fed fine.

Sooooo, it will be off in UPS to Jim Garthwaite for its "makeover" very soon!

[Tamara]

If you were going to replace all that stuff anyway, couldn't you have just added frame, [CASPIAN] and slide, [CASPIAN] to the list, eliminated the Kimber, and come out cheaper? :D

[Rob96]

I'd go along with Tamara's suggestion also.:D

[Old Fuff]

Gee .........

I feel left out. My Colts, which pre-date the Series 70's have parts made out of machined, heat-treated, steel forgings. You guys have all of this new interesting stuff.

I think if I wanted a "custom carry gun" I'd get a name brand frame and slide (Caspian comes to mind as well as several others) buy the lockwork and barrel from known quality makers, and have someone I trusted put the puzzle together.

Or I'd simply find an older Colt. I could probably buy one for less then the above would cost, even with a few simple additions, like sights.

But of course that wouldn't be cool ......

[Will Fennell]

Folks,
I hear ya, but I wanted a stainless gun, and I wanted a commander'ish[4 " is fine] slide and a officers frame[I don't believe CASPIAN makes those parts]. My goal is a all stainless[or as many parts as possible] gun, with the above mentioned deminsons to match an existing carbon steel slide, alloy frame gun I already have[WILSON STEALTH].

KIMBER does make excellent forged frames and slides.....this one had a great slide to frame fit. I got a pretty good deal on this one....especially considering its a series 1 gun[I wouldn't have considered a series 2].

Tamara, on a custom full size gun that is underway now with Richard Heinie, your plan is exactly what I followed......Caspian slide and Wilson frame.

One of the neat things about having a custom pistol built, is you can get it EXACTLY the way you want......as long as you are willing to pay , .....and wait:uhoh:

[Skunkabilly]

My KZ45 fell to half cock...I sent it to Wilson who declared it OK. I sold it to my friend and the thing went burst fire on him. :banghead:

[mete]

Personally I'd like certain parts to be made from wrought material or at least investment cast. However if the part in question has failed as you have described it is not the fault of just MIM but of a poorly made part. MIM parts can be made of different alloys and can be heat treated or case hardened. So to me it's a problem of poor choice of alloy or heat treatment or just poor QC. In any case shame on Kimber.

[BigG]

Or I'd simply find an older Colt. Geez, that'd never work. Sounds too much like sense. :banghead:

[Old Fuff]

As I suggested ....

"I'd get a name brand frame and slide (Caspian comes to mind as well as several others) buy the lockwork and barrel from known quality makers, and have someone I trusted put the puzzle together."

Stainless steel is all the rage these days, but it is usually softer and more prone to wear then high-carbon steel that's properly heat treated. Also parts that are machined out of forgings or bar-stock have a finer grain structure then most MIM equivalents. Of course carbon steel parts are more prone to rust - unless they are electroless plated or otherwise coated with a finish that is more rust resistant then the stainless alloys usually used in guns.

I wouldn't care to have a Government Model style pistol that had stainless lockwork - especially the extractor (which is a type of flat spring) nor ejector (that could be battered by ejecting cases). And because of wear factors I wouldn't use stainless sears, hammers, and disconectors. Same could be said about the slide stop. The previous observation by another member about the importance of heat treating is entirely correct, and this was one of the strong points in earlier Colts.

I am not sure, but I believe that Caspian did make an Officer's ACP style frame that could be matched with a Commander length slide. If not, others do - and you are right on the ball about this configuration making a lot of sense.

The problem with extensively rebuilding an existing gun is that you lose the investment in the original parts that are replaced. For that reason I would get a copy of Brownells' catalog (www.brownells.com), look at the extensive amount of quality after-market parts, get what I wanted and have a pistol put together exactly the way I wanted. Too many people look at cosmetics and "cool looks" and overlook the things that are important. These days I don't fully trust anything "out of the box." Custom building, or rebuilding older guns is looking better and better ....

[Drakejake]

Another suggestion: replace all the Kimber parts, including slide and frame, with a Ruger P-90. Sell the Kimber and use the extra money to buy a Kel-Tec. Spend the remaining money on ammunition.

Drakejake

[Sean Smith]

Another suggestion: replace all the Kimber parts, including slide and frame, with a Ruger P-90. Sell the Kimber and use the extra money to buy a Kel-Tec. Spend the remaining money on ammunition.

Here is a suggestion: stay somewhere near the topic. This thread isn't titled "Ugly Guns With Crappy Triggers." :D

[1911Tuner]

Old FLuff....Sounds like we mighta gone to the same school.

Cheers!

Tuner CGP

[Drakejake]

Sean Smith, since sublety seems to be wasted on you, I will restate my comment in terms you may be able to understand.

If you buy a new pistol that breaks immediately, and you think you have to replace many of the smaller parts in order to improve the pistol, perhaps it would be easier and cheaper to buy another pistol.

Drakejake

[Monkeyleg]

My '89 Harley had the stator on the alternator come loose when it was just a few months old. I could have sold it and bought a Honda, but I really wanted the Harley. So, I had the dealer fix it.

If you like the pistol, send it back to Kimber. My experience with them has been extremely good, even with pistols that are long out of warranty.

[Tamara]

Stainless steel is all the rage these days, but it is usually softer and more prone to wear then high-carbon steel that's properly heat treated.

Er, it's my experience that stainless is harder (and commensurately more brittle) than carbon steel, on average, but I may be wrong. Anyhow, before you start telling Mr. Fennell about the qualities of various steels, though, you may want to check where his home page link goes to... ;)

[1911Tuner]

The thing about stainless is that it tends to gall, and different grades
exhibit different properties in that. I always hated working with most
grades of stainless steel because it clogged the flutes of an end mill
so quickly that it made it a tad tricky to hold a close tolerance and a
decent finish. It also dulls tooling much more quickly than carbon steel. This property, along with the "gummy" quality when cutting it leads many to believe that it's softer than it really is. As a general rule of thumb,
stainless autopistols fare better with a lube that is of a little higher
viscosity than one for carbon.

Cheers!

Tuner

[Glock_PhD]

Wow you guuys are killin me here. I was looking at real nice kimber this weekend since I was considering jumping into something a little different but I don' think it is gonna be a kimber. If I buy a gun I want it to be fairly complete, I don't have the cash to replace all that stuff.

[Ky Larry]

There must be something wrong with my Kimber Custom Defender II. It's like the Energizer bunny. It keeps going, and going, and going ...........

[CWL]

Ya know, I have often lamented the quality of my Kimber (three times back to smith for a laundry list of problems), but I do have to admit that it has always been an dead-accurate pistol with any ammo load. Never heard other complaints about accuracy, usually quality of assembly or parts.

If I could only get it to not slamfire, reliably work the mag-release, have the thumb-safety stay engaged...

[Tamara]

There must be something wrong with my Kimber Custom Defender II. It's like the Energizer bunny. It keeps going, and going, and going ...........

It's okay, my Clackamas Classic Custom has the same problem. ;)

[WonderNine]

Or I'd simply find an older Colt.


Geez, that'd never work. Sounds too much like sense. :banghead:

Now there's something wrong with the new Colts again? Gee, the new Series 70's are ONLY like $900 :rolleyes:

So now the old Colts are better again? I thought they had those problems with the weak barrel locking lugs and hollowpoints....

[Tamara]

If I have to explain... ;)

[Old Fuff]

Tamara:

I'll stand by my statements concerning stainless vs. high-carbon steel alloys so far as those alloys used in guns. I was fortunate during the approximately 50 years I was associated with the business to meet a lot of people, one of whom was the late Bill Ruger Sr. We had several discussions about the merits of different steels.

When S&W introduced the first all-stainless handgun (the model 60 in 1965) it had a stainless alloy hammer and trigger. But this was changed to using the regular parts with a flash-chrome plate to match the cosmetics. Reason? Excessive wear. Even so, stainless guns took the market by storm, and like it or not (and many in the industry didn't) everyone had too go along or lose a lot of business. Stainless alloys have a high chrome content, which in some ways is good (corrosion resistance being one example) but not so good in other respects. Stainless is sometimes hard to machine and while “tough” it isn’t necessarily “hard.”

[Spark]

Will, you sure Lombardo didn't "improve" your pistol when you weren't looking? His "work" that he did to mine had it go back to Kit's boy *again* recently....

[Will Fennell]

Old Fluff,
I know where you a re coming from regarding '60's and 70's era stainless steel technology. Early stainless S&W revolvers and Colt auto pistols left much to be desired. They were certainly "different" and shooters and 'smiths's didn't like working on them. Yup, there were certainly galling issues. I remember constantly lubing the rails on an early series 80 COLT constantly with lithium based grease to keep it from feeling like it had sand in the slide rails.

But all stainless steels aren't the same...trust me on this.

The stainless steels used by the knife industry in the mid 60's, and the heat treatment of said steel......well it plain sucked. Serieously BAD. Anyone who wanted a knife to perform, wanted carbon steel.

Well...high carbon stainless steels[and the heat treatment of the steel] ahs come along way....now, some of the toughest, hardest steels used int he knife industry is stainless. We[in the knife industry] have stainless steels that regulary temper down to a working hardness of 61-62Rc. Some go even higher. We have learned ALOT about the heat treatment of these steels also.

WILSON and KIMBER both use the same forgings for their slides and frames. I have friends who have MANY THOUSANDS of rounds through stainless WILSONs. I have friends who have stainless KIMBERS, and they aren't seeing any galling issues either.

I'm not worried about the forged, stainless parts in this KIMBER......and its got a GREAT slide to frame fit to boot!

I do have a problem withthe cast and MIM stainless or carbon parts inthis KIMBER, .....but as I said, I planed to replace them anyway.

Old Fluff, I live in South Carolina.....and I spend alot of time outdoors...some of which is around salt water @ the coast. I carry everyday, almost always a 1911. Average temp for where I live in the month of August is 94 degrees, and I believe the average humidity is in the mid 80% range[it was 93% a couple of days ago]. Its really hot and humid, and I sweat like a pig while I'm outdoors. I've rusted through hardchrome, electroless nickel, and teflon-nickel combo. When you rust through a coating, you have a mess.....you really need to strip the coating, refinish, and start over. Its costly and time consuming.

Yup, I've rusted stainless handguns too:uhoh: , but they are much less trouble to deal with when that happens. If you are in a hurry....a pot scrubber will take care of it.....if you have time, have your smith bead blast your blaster. No big deal.

I've got plenty of "good ol' carbon steel 1911's"........this isn't my first, second, or 22nd 1911 rodeo.......I want a stainless compact graced by the talent and experince of Jim Garthwaite, OK?

[Old Fuff]

Sure. To each his own. If you are satisfied with stainless (and obviously you are) that's what you should get. You are correct in saying that improvements have been made in stainless alloys and heat treating - the trick is to be sure that's what you get in the parts you buy. Be that as it may, your choice of a pistolsmith is excellent. I hope in the end you're gun works out.

Seems like an awful expensive way to get a frame and slide though ......

[WonderNine]

Seems like an awful expensive way to get a frame and slide though ......

Agreed :scrutiny:

But I don't think he was expecting his gun to fall apart in 100 rounds either. I think he probably wanted to shoot it for awhile, let it break in and then sick the mastergunsmith on it.

And there's always buyer's lust. You gotta have that new shiny gun at the low price....

[WonderNine]

If I have to explain...

Please do, because I still don't fully understand this war between old Colt's vs. 1991A1 Colts vs. new Colts.

Maybe I'm asking for the history of the world here....

[1911Tuner]

Please do, because I still don't fully understand this war between old Colt's vs. 1991A1 Colts vs. new Colts.

Howdy Wondernine,

That debate will go on and on, and the point about the Old Colts
is a valid one. Mostly, it has to do with the people who are on the
assembly line...and that line has changed over the years.

In the beginning, each worker was trained in the assembly, fitting,
function checking, and fine-tuning of his or her particular part or
group of parts, and was responsible for the outcome...or the gun would be returned to that station for correction.

Along came WW2, and the need for production in large numbers.
The engineers redesigned some of the tolerances within the pistol
so that each stage of assembly was accomplished with a select-fit,
drop-in part or group of parts. If a part(s) didn't fall into spec, the
assembler simply tried another one until one was found that would work.
Then, for that oddball, there was the bin of oversized/undersized production parts...and the subassembly was sent on to the next station.

The pistols arrived at their destinations, and any malfunction issues were
turned over to the unit armorer for final correction. This process was great
for mass-production, but it encouraged sloppiness because it relieved
each assembler of much of the personal responsibility involved. At that
point in the history of Colt, it wasn't as much of an issue as it is today, because many of the "old school" assemblers were still doing their thing,
and pride in workmanship was still evident.

Along comes the "Age of the Common man", and it seemed that personal
responsibility was no longer in vogue. Inflation, profit margins, and
financial problems drove Colt to cut costs as much as possible. The
unskilled worker was hired, received cursory training, and put on the
line at little more than minimum wage. Quality of fit and function
depended largely on the determination of each assembler to do the
job well, and the weak link was the Monday morning hangover or the
Friday afternoon burnout/I wanna go home syndrome.

Finally, here comes Colt's Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and they were fighting to
stay solvent. Enter another need for higher profit margins and we
saw the first castings...later to become investment castings, and finally
MIM for many parts that weren't made by Colt any more, but rather
contracted out to vendors whose only association with Colt was that
they made parts for them, along with clone manufacturers. Again,
the vendor's quality control entered the picture, with the same two
weak links that Colt had.

If a Colt, or any other company's 1911 pistol was built today with the
same care, skill, and materials as the early pistols...and even the WW2
GI pistols...the cost would be in the 1800-2,000 dollar range...or
very close to the cost of a custom pistol. Not many Joe Average
shooters could afford one, or justify the price even if he could.

So, it's largely a crapshoot, with some manufacturers having a greater
number of functionally reliable pistols coming off the final assembly stage,
and the main issues these days seem to be in the area of small parts
failure. Extractor, thumb safety, slide stop...and to a little lesser degree,
hammer/sear/disconnector. The latter category comes under tighter
quality control because it must. A failure in the trigger group could
result in a tragedy and a ruinous lawsuit.

Bottom line is that the makers of 1911 pistols know that they're essentially
building a toy. There have been no military contracts since the mid-40's,
and no law enforcement agency issues them in large numbers. The ones
that do issue the pistol are small enough for the guns to be individually
tended to by armorers. In short, since there are no lives depending on
the pistols except in isolated instances, there's no real need for a
pistol of the quality of the old ones. They simply aren't going to war.
If one breaks, the most it will cost someone is a stage in a match.

Hope I was able to clear it up and keep it interesting..albeit a bit
long.

Tuner

[UnSafe]

Hope I'm not straying off topic with this, but until recently, I've been away from the gunboards for several years. I remember posters lamenting the rate of MIM part breakage, but never thought much about it. I bought an early Kimber (Oregon) Custom Classic (ser# 33xx), along with 4 other friends in a group purchase back in '96. All of the guns ran fine for many thousand rounds, including many "Extended lunch" range shooting sessions (Had a RL550 clamped to a table in our office, got to love it!). To date, my pistol has over 14K rounds through it with the only replacement parts being springs. Of the 4 other pistols and owners, I keep in contact with 3, and they've had similar success, though 1 had his rebuilt into a race gun in '99. I pulled mine apart last year and closely inspected the internals, and found no visible damage. The sear looked nicer than I expected (Way better than the old, issue guns I shot on a regular basis). So, are MIM parts really that bad? I realize that the report of a few guns' successes or failures are anecdotal at best, but I wonder if MIM (As executed/ contracted by Kimber) is really any worse than other forms of internal part machining. Does Kimber still use MIM?

[Old Fuff]

MIM (Metal Injected Molded) parts are not necessarily bad, but like in investment castings the quality of the finished part depends on the material used, how the part is made, and in some cases, how it is heat-treated.

MIM is coming into the firearms industry for one reason. It is a less expensive way to make some parts, and to the manufacturer cost is (usually) everything. Gun companies tend to be run by number-crunchers, not "gun people." Is this bad? Well it depends on the real quality of the parts in question. Right now we really don't know because MIM parts haven't been around long enough to say.

That said, I don't know a lot of people who want to stake their necks on stuff that doesn't have a track record. We know what to expect from parts machined from forgings or bar-stock. MIM is up in the air. But then again, machined parts are only as good as the maker who made them.

The bottom line is that buyers want "old-time/hand-fitted/forged steel/quality" but not have to pay for it. If the manufacturer is going to stay in business that won't happen. Something has to give. Over time MIM technology will evolve and improve. But from my perspective, I'll let someone else find out first.

[BigG]

I'm no metallurgist, but I've had a least a good handful of Colt Governments and Goldcups and Deltas in stainless steel. All Series 80 to my recollection. Absolutely no probs with galling etc and no evidence of sand on the slide rails etc. Many gobs of ammo have gone down range from these weapons and they still look like new. I have gotten many favorable comments on them so I think the problem with stainless steel, at least vis a vis Colts is overstated. JMHO

[BigG]

old Colt

I will go on record that the Series 80 Colts for the most part are a tremendous value in the 1911A1 type marketplace. The Colts have had their troubles at different times, but I've owned a few dozen I personally picked out and have had no issues, other than hammer bite, due to the nature of the design etc. with them. They are a solid pistol for the money and the new production Colts appear to be finished even better, so I recommend them.

Now, if you get an old Colt (pre WWII) you will get a very nice piece of machinery but you will still have the ergonomic issues like hammer bite. If you modify the pistol, you will have a lesser valued piece because the collector's item is the real McCoy, as manufactured. JMHO

[WonderNine]

Am I the only person in the world who doesn't EVER get hammer bite?

[1911Tuner]

Howdy Unsafe,

MIM and investment castings can be very good, as Ruger proved
over 20 years ago with the castings. The problem is to be able to
control the process closely enough to insure that there are no
voids in the metal. A void equals a weak spot, and without an
X-ray or magnaflux, there's no way to tell if there;s an internal
void. External flaws are culled out during the inspection process.

There is probably a target weight for MIM small parts to aid in
identifying a flawed part, but as with anything else, there is a
tolerance that can let a gfew bad ones slip through the cracks.
Those are the ones that break early on. When you're dealing
with an extractor's weight, a tiny hole isn't likely to make enough
difference to trigger the QC alarm for an out-of spec part. It
will make a difference when it comes under stress, however.

Yes, Kimber uses MIM extensively...probably moreso than any other
1911 clone. As far as I know, the hammer, sear, disconnector,
slide stop, thumb and grip safety, and the firing pin stop, and barrel
bushing are all MIM in a Kimber. Also, possibly the plunger tube and
hammer strut, though I'm not sure about the strut, as I haven't had
a Kimber Series 2 mainspring housing apart yet.

The good news is that an upgrade to steel small parts isn't all
that expensive, even if you pay to have it done, and the basic
Kimber is still there.

Cheers all!
Tuner

[1911Tuner]

Howdy Wondernine,

I don't get hammer bite. Most of us don't...not since the longer
grip safety tang came along in the 1911-A1. What happens is that
the grip safety tang blisters the skin on the web of my hand, and
when the slin comes off, it can get a mite sore and bloody. The
fix is to spread it out over a wider area with a beavertail. The
ultimate cure is an upswept grip safety, but some don't care for the
look, feel, and handling charactistics of the gun with one of those,
me included. For the record, I can't see anything about the upswept
safeties that even remotely resembles a beaver. It looks more like a
duck's tail to me, but your impression may differ.:D

Don't worry, be happy...
Tuner

[WonderNine]

I don't shoot 1911's, I shoot Hi-Powers. All the Hi-Powers I've had, had spur hammers. I've just never run into the hammer bite problem ever. I can see the grip safety causing blisters, that's part of the reason why I don't like them. I wish SOMEBODY would come out with a 1911 without a grip safety.

I have run into the problem of blisters. I used to ride the safety with my thumb on my MKIII Hi-Power, but I don't do that anymore because of the blisters I would get and I've found it's just a bad shooting technique from an accuracy standpoint. It happened after about 100 rounds of riding the safety where I would get a blister that would last a week.

[Ky Larry]

Good point about cost, Tuner. I read somewhere that they don't build 'em like they used to because ,if they did, we coulndn't afford them. This is true in most things, such as cars,houses, appliances, etc.

[1911Tuner]

Somebody did many years ago. Llama...but we don't want to go there.
The solution to the grip safety issue is to disable it with a short length
of guitar string...the high "E" string will work nicely. Slip the MSH
down a bit...slide the string across the tabs on the safety, and push the
MSH back in place. Ba-da-BING ! Pinned grip safety that doesn't
require drilling the frame. The tang will still blister your hand though...

[Tamara]

MIM is coming into the firearms industry for one reason. It is a less expensive way to make some parts, and to the manufacturer cost is (usually) everything.

From the other side of the counter, I can tell you that cost is durn near everything to the average customer, too. ;)

If 1911 A is cheaper than 1911 B, and looks the same, Joe Customer will go for 1911 A 99.9% of the time, even if it's made out of cast dirt instead of milled steel.

"I don't get it, you're just trying to rip me off by getting me to buy the more expensive gun! They both have Novak-looking sights and ambi safeties, so what's the difference?"

I had a customer tell me not too long back that only a sucker would buy a Springfield Pro instead of a TRP, since they were the same gun, plus the TRP had front cocking serrations, too!

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

No grip safety = Ballestra Molina

And a better safety, too, for $249.

[mete]

Grip safeties can be locked out without drilling the frame, you just need to insert a small " U" shaped piece of metal at the bottom of the grip safety. If you are getting blisters that implies to me that the gun is moving in your hand. That's not good for accuracy or your hand . You should try rubber grips or better checker the front and back straps. The checkering should be flat top , not brought to sharp points.

[Old Fuff]

Tamara:

I know. I was in-and-out of retailing for many years, starting in the 1960's. Of course price is important to customers, and the rest of us as well. I fully understand the situation from you're side of the counter because I've been there.

Also as a staff menber of a Firearms Industry Trade Association I sat in on many discussions with manufacturers, distributors and dealers concerning the economic issues within the trade.

What your customer wants is a Government Model pistol "like they used to build" at a price that fits his pocketbook. Reality says that no maker located in the United States can produce a "like they used to make" gun that isn't expensive. Sometimes I think, a knowledgeable dealer has to explain the facts of life to some customers. One has four possible options:

1. Buy the top-quality pistol and pay the price.

2. Pay what you want to spend, but understand that the pistol contains some manufacturing short-cuts and alternative materials and technology, that may effect performance.

3. Buy a "modern" gun, such as a Glock, that is designed to take advantage of current manufacturing technology and still be a satisfactory product from a performance point of view.

4. Make a lucky find, and buy a good, used "older/like they used to make" gun for an affordable price.

Anything else is wishful thinking.

[Sarge]

From the book of John Moses Browning, verses 13 to18:

13 and in the end times the people ignored the law, and built 1911s that were not sanctified by (J)Moses(B); and they worshipped the pagan guns of Springfield, Kimber, Smith, and Wesson.

14 The pagan guns were an abomination before (J)Moses(B), with their front serrations, and grip safties named after the unclean portions of unclean animals.

15 Their false safties fell out, their guide rods bent, and the people's holsters were abraded without cause.

16 So the pagan guns were jammed and broken, and their false extractors fell out like the teeth of a rotting carcass.

17 And because these pagan guns were not sanctified by (J)Moses(B), his anger was kindled against them. His parts would not fit them.

18 So there was wailing and gnashing of the teeth, and much confusion throughout the land.

[1911Tuner]

Fuff...One more alternative is to build one. Works for me!

Cheers!
Tuner

[1911Tuner]

Sarge! TESTIFY!

The 1911 has been around for so long...and so many have tried to
"improve" it...and so so many have been tryin' to outsmart ol'
John Moses for so long, that they actually think they have.

Tuner's Law #1:

Whenever something is changed, three other things must be
changed to compensate for the "improvement". There endeth
the lesson.

Cheers!
Tuner

[Dobe]

I like that. Thats funny, as I continue to shoot and enjoy and keep buying my 1911's with "extras"......I am the heathen that you all fear, and I am in the same age bracket as most of you.

DOBE

[BigG]

Sarge, that is a hoot and completely true to boot. No Horsey, no sanctification. :p

[Old Fuff]

Hi ‘Tuner …..

Build one ….. Yes I sometimes do that, and they function like a well-behaved pistol is supposed to. But I usually don’t recommend this on a forum to someone else because I have no idea what skills and knowledge they may have - - and I have seen some awful homebuilt guns along with some very nice ones.

Present company is exempted from the above noted caution …..

Dobe ...

Adding aftermarket accessories doesn’t necessary degrade a pistol or effect its reliability. But everything depends on what the part(s) are and how they are installed. There is something to be said about the KISS principal in connection with defensive sidearms. Playtoys are another matter.

I have observed that on both the much-lamented TFL and now THR that many if not most of the posts regarding malfunctioning 1911-style guns usually involve the much-modified models.

[Dobe]

Old Fuff,

I can agree, and your post was well phrased. Yet what once was modified has now become common place. In other words, these 1911's that are being sold by solid manufactures are much, much more than "play toys".

I have nothing against simplicity. As a matter of fact, I know many that would stake their and their families personal protection on a good single-action revolver. That is between them and their's. The enhancements that I have purchased (from factory) are appreciated by me. I do like them. And, I suppose as long as I am having this cake and eating it too (reliability), then I am content.

Thanks Friend
Dobe

[Old Fuff]

Dobe:

I know some folks that carry single actions that I’d never want to have a serious dispute with ……

Jeff Cooper (who I know) once told me that there were some modifications that should always be done if the pistol didn’t come with them, and some that should **never** be done, and some optional ones that wouldn’t hurt and would allow the owner to modify a personal weapon to better address individual needs.

Yes, today’s gunmakers do load on the gadgets, just like carmakers do. Both call them “accessories.” Some are well thought out, while others are intended to simply make the seller more money. Over the years I have known many lawmen that carried the Government Model by professional choice, and most were notable for the lack of do-dads attached. Those that were “accessorized” were limited to a very few changes.

The key to this is RELIABILITY. If your guns are unquestionably dependable then whatever may have been done in ways beyond the basic design is moot.

Unfortunately I think too many of today’s makers are more tuned to attracting the unwary buyer by “duding-up the piece” then paying attention to important basics. That’s why we see so many “my gun jams all the time” posts.

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

O.F.

I understand what you're saying about accessorizing, in principle, but I don't see the application.

The greatest majority of "doodads" are parts for the fire control, safety and magwell of the 1911. None of those should have any even indirect bearing on how the gun feeds. How does a beavertail, ambi safety or magwell chute cause a gun to jam?

[BigG]

SPE, if I may, I think the OF is saying that loading on the doodads becomes more important to some makers than making a good, reliable product prior to doodifying(c). Sorta putting the cart before the Horse, if you will.

George:o

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Fair enough.


The funny thing here is that it really doesn't cost a manufacturer any more to make a beavertail than an A1 grip safety. Most of the doodads aren't really an extra expense to make. So it isn't really that the maker is choosing doodad over quality - it's more like they're choosing doodads and hoping you won't notice the crummy quality.

Personally, I think a basic 1911 would be assisted if stamped parts could somehow be used in more places. Stampings seem to be very consistent and hard, but don't tend to crack. Just a thought.

[Old Fuff]

S.P. Expert:

My reference was to **reliability** which entails more then feeding/ejection problems. A magazine chute if struck a hard blow from the side can wedge the magazine. Chutes are fine on game-guns (not met as a dig) but I wouldn’t have one on a weapon. If I considered it to be important I'd get a frame (such as Caspian makes, or at least used too) where the chute is an intregal part of the frame.

I’m not so concerned about the other options you mentioned, although ambi-safeties that have a key-and-grooved shaft can go bad if the shaft or key breaks.

The greater problem is that manufacturers are tending to use lesser quality parts in an attempt to attract buyers who want the “cool looks” they see on a cover of some news stand “gun-bull” magazine while holding down the gun’s cost to make the price attractive. Then they pay less attention to basic fitting to save money. From the manufacturer’s point of view they only have to fix the ones that come back. The rest are money in the bank. The greater emphasis on gadgets vs. fitting obviously effects reliability in all aspects.

If my budget was limited (and most buyers budgets are) I’d much rather have a “basic” gun that had been properly assembled with attention paid to important adjustments (example - the extractor) then a bunch of accessories. The alternative is good assembly work using quality parts and accessories. But that costs more money then most buyers can, or will pay. Of course there are exceptions.

[BigG]

it's more like they're choosing doodads and hoping you won't notice the crummy quality.

SPE: We are speaking the same language. :)

[Old Fuff]

S.P. Expert:

Just noticed your remark about stampings ....

Several manufacturers have designed up-dated Government Model designs with entirely different internals along the lines you may be thinking of. But none of them has been produced because market studies showed that potential customers insisted on the original Browning/Colt, not a "cheaper" edition. Colt faced the same problem with their Single Action Army. Buyers insisted the company couldn't change "their gun." S&W changed to MIM lockwork and now they are catching all kinds of flack. Gun-folks simply can't or won't stand change.

[BigG]

My personal observations on the Kimber phenom.

When the Kimbers first came into the gun shoppes, there was ONE model, a plain black 5" clone of the 1911A1/Colt Government Model priced at ~ $349 - around the same as a contemporary 1991 Colt. Obviously nicer than the comparable 1991, even a little nicer than the much more expensive Colt Government Model (~$699 IIRC). Fit and finish was extremely well done for a basic model pistol. AFAIK, Kimber had made its name selling nice semi custom rifles prior to the 1911 type pistol.

I admit I was a snob. Whenever I went into the gun store, with the price of a Colt Government/Gold Cup/Delta in hand, that's what I walked out with. Fellow gunshop denizens raved about the plain Jane Kimber and some derided me for buying Colt which had seen their glory days sometime in the past. I never bought the $349 Kimber that was selling like hot cakes.

Fast forward a few years or five. The gunshops now had thousands of Kimbers although no two were alike as far as I could see. Fancy sounding names adorned the slide, doodads abounded, and some were given radical dehorning treatment straight from the factory. Oh yeah, the price had also risen to about $900 or a large for most models. No more plain Jane $349 models that I could see.

The rumors of parts failures and quality control problems also starting buzzing around at that time.

The one thing I will say is my Colts may be plainer in appearance than some doodified pistols, but they are regularly shot and have never let me down in reliable, accurate shooting. They are almost as boring to shoot as a SIG or Glock in terms of self loading perfection.

Thanks for reading!
:)

[1911Tuner]

Old Fluff nailed it. In addition to feed/extract/eject/bang every time,
not having small parts break is a big plus...and not having to worry
about it makes for more confidence in the weapon.

I have several 1911 pistols that are older than I am...and a couple
are in their 80's that are still tickin' along with the original...or
at least era correct... grip and thumb safeties, slide stops, extractors,
firing pin stops and mag catches. Even the firing pins are likely original or correct. Most of them have been rebuilt by me at least once, and retain the parts that were with the guns when I bought them. Any that were
missing were replaced with GI parts, or the best aftermarket parts
available.

These small parts that pop like matchsticks and extractors that lose
tension while you wait are unacceptable. I would pay more for a
pistol with good small parts. If you shoot the gun a lot, you're eventually
going to have to replace them anyway. If you carry the gun for serious
purpose, you'll replace them for peace of mind if for no other reason.
It should at least be a factory optional upgrade-at-extra-cost for those
of us who are buying a tool instead of a toy.

Colt? Ya'll hearin' this?

Tuner

[Dobe]

It should at least be a factory optional upgrade-at-extra-cost for those
Tuner,
All of these companies are in competetion with each other. You and I and others may have been raised in a time when craftmanship mattered. Well, I have good and bad news for you. It still matters, but labor is through the roof, and you have to pay for it.

So, you can still get what you want, you just have to go to some of the semi-customs to get it. I don't have a problem with that. You just said that some would be willing to pay the difference. That route is and always has been available. Craftsmanship in some arenas has been replaced by engineering design and technology. Unfortunately, this is what it takes for the average Joe to purchase a firearm.

But for those who want and can afford more, it is there and always has been. Me, I am happy with my MIM parts. If I want more, I know where to get it.;)

Have a good one,

Dobe

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Thinking more about my stamped parts comment, I've come to the conclusion that the problem with the 1911 is that everyone wants a perfect example of a post Victorian bit of tool work, but want it at the prices commensurate with modern production.

That's already been noted, but I was thinking that one could build a gun, using modern techniques: stamped parts, CNC production, mechanisms that work better with the current material, and make a gun that looks like a 1911 on the outside but functions like a Sig. No questionable retrofit pin safeties, no variable barrel lockup depth. It may end up with a ramped barrel and a kidney cut-out like a CZ, and the internal extractor might have a spring, but it would run; every time.

You keep the handling and durability of the original but add the precision and intelligent cost savings of a modern gun. Kind of like the SW 945, but even closer to the 1911.


I know, no one would go for it.

[Old Fuff]

>> I know, no one would go for it. <<

True, at least that's what market surveys say. But they were asking probable Government Model (or clone) buyers. Maybe other might. But so far no manufacturer has been willing to risk the money for tooling it up.

The next thing I expect is to see more Colt-clones coming in from overseas where the labor costs are lower, both from the point of view of making parts, and then making guns.

If these guns are well made (something that hasn't happened so far) from quality materials and function reliably, and don't cost an arm and a leg they'll sell like hotcakes so long as Colt parts interchange. Buyers will want the option of using popular after-market magazines and accessories.

[1911Tuner]

It wouldn't be all that bad, Dobe. With my discount at Brownell's, here's
what a small parts upgrade would cost me: (All prices are approximate)

Wilson Bulletproof Slide stop............35 dollars
EGW firing pin stop..........................10 dollars
Cylinder&Slide Extractor...................22 dollars
Nowlin S-7 Sear................................15 dollars
Ed Brown Hardcore Thumb Safety.....25 Dollars
MGW steel Barrel Bushing..................10 Dollars

If a hammer is needed, add 40 bucks...Colt Hammers are steel.
Disconnectors are 15 or so, and grip safeties and mainspring Housings
are really optional, as they rarely break unless something is wrong elsewhere. A pin set is 10 dollars. Colt, Springfield, or Kimber would
get a huge price break on these parts ordered by the truckload, so the
cost of a small parts upgrade might cost an extra 150-200 dollars.
I'd be willing to give 600-700 dollars for a no-frills Colt that had those
upgrades, and spend the time/money tweaking the feed/bang/extract/eject/bang issue. Even if a pistolsmith had to be
contracted for a basic reliability package, you'd only be up another
75 bucks.

Works for me! Colt?

Cheers!
Tuner

[Dobe]

Sounds like you need to contact Colt's custom shop, and place the order. I think of course you do understand the problem with out of sync assembly line orders. Logistics, logistics, which answers your question why. You see, even with the materials cost, and labor there is the off-line work that cost more than one would expect. It is kinda like stocking two thousand gallons of blue and two thousand gallons of red paint. It cost more than four thousand gallons of just red or just blue. Logistics and cost efficiency is bear, isn't it?

This is where the small shop has the advantage. The small shop may not even run a true assembly line. They can therefore afford to turn-on-a-dime. But, I am of the type that believes that all should have what they wish ........ as long as they are willing to pay.


But just for the sake of discussion, why do you think neither Kimber nor Colt nor SA offer this upgrade?

Good shooting,

Dobe

[Sarge]

Here's what I want- a GI format 1911, in either full or Commander length. It's gonna cost me 500-600 bucks, but it better work. I ain't talking two boxes of shells, either. Thousands of rounds of ball, equivalent reloads, or hardball-profile JHP's. No jams. Not one.

Impossible? Not by a long shot. I bought a new 1991-A1 Commander in 98, and it did just that. As a matter of preference I put a set of wood grips and a steel MSH in it. It lived on a steady diet of Universal Clays and 230 RNL loaded in mongrel brass; 230 Hydra Shok carried for duty, and shot up occasinally to make room for new ammo. If the barrel was nice and clean it would plant 5 of those Hydra Shoks in 3.5 inches at 50 yards from the sandbags. It was the stock Colt barrel that came in the gun.

I had a 70 Series GM that was just as good as the '91, as well as an old AMU-built Ithaca that was every bit the gun that my best Colts were. About 6500 trouble-free rounds into my ownership of the Ithaca it needed a new extractor. Heaven only knows how many thousand it digested before that. It got a GI replacement and is still running strong 8 years later.

Reliability has nothing to do with fad parts, big custom names or gaudy billboards down the side of a gun. The design is reliable already. Proper execution of that design is all that's required, using materials up to the original specs that were established nearly 100 years ago.

Manufacturing technology and metallurgy have improved astronomically. Ammunition and components are better than ever. In this day and age you should be able to do just what I described in the first paragraph, for well within the price I described. You shoudn't have to pay abybody else a damn dime to make it run, either.

The marketers will sell what they can get away with. We are letting them get away with selling us fad gadgets at a premium price, instead of real quality at a fair price. I don't look for that to change in the near future- but when it DOES change, it will be because WE required it of the people who make the guns for us to spend our hard-earned money on.

It's up to us what we get.

[Dobe]

Here is the real problem Tuner. Big business does not want any higher skilled personnel than is absolutely necessary. From a business perspective, an ideal assembly line should be set up where the average person off the street can be trained within 30 days and then occasionally monitored. At that point, he/she is turned loose and allowed to insert a trigger, or buff down a slide. The further an organization deviates from the skill of the average labor force, the higher is their labor cost. Not only that, but an organization must deal with replacement due to sickness, death, vacation, termination.

Even if there were enough business to allow one or two people full time work, it would still be considered out-of-sync or off-lline work. Now these two employees must perform the task of many assembly line workers, because those two individuals are no longer on a line. This means of course that their skill level must be higher, which means higher wages, difficulty in replacing said employees, etc.

Gets complicated doesn't it? And all you wanted was some forged parts.

Good Shooting,

Dobe

[BigG]

Proper execution of that design is all that's required, using materials up to the original specs

That's the whole point, it mostly ain't. The bling bling I can do without. The basic gun I buy is a genuwine Horse pistol. If I want it gussied up, I'll take care of it. The gaudy stuff is generally bought by guys new in the game who need what's on the gunzines latest cover photo.

[1911Tuner]

Dobe...Good points, and if I do understand logistics headaches. I was
a Marine Rifleman in Vietnam and worked in the manufacturing industry
for years. I'm a toolmaker by trade. I'm also a pistolsmith.

Ordnance-spec 1911's are, and have been for years...assembled
with select-fit, drop-in parts...no high level of skill required. It
all started with the high demand for guns just before the outset of
WW2, when the engineers determined that the 1911 could function
with looser tolerances than the hand-assembled and fitted pistols
prior to that era.

As it stands today, all or most of the parts that I mentioned aren't
made in-house by Colt. (or Kimber, or Springfield Armory) They are
contracted out to different suppliers, and are provided by the lowest
bidder. Colt hasn't even made its own magazines in nearly 20 years.
They are provided by Metalform.

I maintain that if a low-cost, MIM or investment cast small part made in
a different location can be made within spec, so can a high-grade steel
part. If a spring steel extractor,say...cost Joe Average 25 bucks a copy
ordered one at a time, that cost could be on the order of 15 dollars
when a contract for 10,000 extractors is bartered for.

I recently underwent a project with my ex-wife's oldest son. He came to
me to ask about building a Commander, and I countered with an offer
to build two...One for me and one for him. I built one while he watched,
and he built his while I guided. Both were built on Essex slides and
frames, mainly for the sake of economy, since he's on a fairly tight
budget. Both pistols are no-frill on the outside, all business on the
inside. Both guns required some hand-fitting in certain areas, but
most of the time was spent on cutting the 5-inch Springfield barrels
down and reshaping the lower barrel lugs to work in the short slides.
Basic prep on the trigger group, with a little attention to detail on
the sears and hammer hooks produced two very nice pistols that
hit the ground running, and will shoot tighter than all but a Distinguished
Expert can appreciate without a sandbag rest. Both pistols required
about 15 hours, total time involved. If we had been able to have
access to a large number of ordnance-spec parts to select-fit, that
could have been cut down to 5 hours, including the time spent
on the lathe for the barrel redesign, and hand-shaping the lower lugs
with files. Time was also spent fitting the King's trigger to his frame.
I used a stock Colt trigger for mine...A drop-in.

The total cost was less than 600 bucks a copy...and remember that all
parts were purchased as a one-item order from Brownell's. Mass-production would have brought that figure down to a little over
half that. Add machined steel slides and frames, and the cost would
have been back up to about 500 dollars...again assuming mass-production.
A 250-300 dollar profit margin per unit would be acceptable from a bean-counter's standpoint, albeit maybe a little lower than a gun assembled with
Molded in Pressed Beer Cans small parts. Colt already uses machined
barstock slide stops, thumb safeties, hammers, and they have recently
returned to steel barstock extractors, so the cost wouldn't be off the
scale to add the sear, barrel bushing, grip safety, hammer strut, and firing pin stop. Retail price on such a pistol would be in the 750-800 dollar
range, and it would be fully the equal of an "Old Colt".

It's doable. Colt...If you build it, they will come.

Cheers!
Tuner

[Tamara]

The gaudy stuff is generally bought by guys new in the game who need what's on the gunzines latest cover photo.

Yeah, maybe after another 18 years I'll get over my silly infatuation for flat mainspring housings, beavertails, extended safeties, long triggers, modern sights, et cetera.

After all, by then I may realize that classic looks are more important than shootability or ergonomics. ;) :p

[Dobe]

Tuner,
I wish you were right. I like and appreciate craftsmanship and forged parts. I have a collection of hand-forged knives that...well that's another story. I long for the days of the craftsmanship of the Pre-64 Winchesters. But, things change.

I respectfully dissagree with your cost analysis, not on the individual cost of each part. I realize that you have made 1911's yourself. It is the assembly-line concept and the off-line labor personnel that will add to cost. Marlin is an interesting comparison. Marlin (unless recently changed) will not perform any custom work. Custom to Marlin means anything out of the ordinary. Marlin will not even make you a lever action without sights. Now, how much more time does it take to "not" cut a dove-tail and drill a hole? You would think that my request would save them money.

It wouldn't because it brings into play a non-standard into a standardized assembly-line system. It would actually cost them money to do so. They could hire a gunsmith to take care of the custom work, but they would still pay him/her when he is not busy with custom work, and they must replace him when he leaves (its that skilled-labor thing again). I am saying this based upon your request for all forged parts as a request from Colt. This of course means that Colt would have to make these handguns off-line, at least until demand grew. At that point, there would be two lines. Now that becomes expensive.

The best way, in my humble opinion for Colt or any manufacturer to economically sustain this endeavor would be for them to use nothing but forged parts. Perhaps advertise the quality difference, and draw in business. But, with the economic woes that Colt has experience, I don't see them experimenting with the market.

Anyway, it is nice to dream, and I hope you get what you want. For the price you quoted, I would gladly drop a 1911 of mine off to you in two weeks. That is the next time I will be in North Carolina. Perhaps we can drink a cup of coffee, and even shoot a few rounds.

Good Shooting,

Dobe

[1911Tuner]

Dobe...If there's anything I hate, it's a man who busts my bubble with
reasoned argument and logic.:D

I'd still bet that Colt could use all steel parts in their production
lines with a modest cost increase...They've already got half the parts named...Why not go all the way? Colt? COLT??? Think of the
ad slogan! "The return to the Colt that your Grandpa Owned.
All Steel Construction." If you build it, they will come.

Next time you're headed for North Carolina, and ya get near
Winston-Salem, look me up. I'm ready to drink coffee, tell tall tales,
tweak a pistol, or burn up a thousand rounds at the drop of a hat.

Shoot straight, and watch your six!
Tuner

[Dobe]

You're the man Tuner. I won't be in Winston for another two months as I just finished a logistics project in that area. I will be in Raleigh though. Perhaps, I will send you a PM in about 2 months.

I must admit that you had me excited about a quality gun with forged parts. It would be great. And of course, if I had your talents, I would do it all myself. Take care

Good Shooting

Dobe

[BigG]

Tamara :rolleyes: you know I am talking about models that emphasize the bling bling while neglecting making a reliable piece to begin with. Why do you only address me to argue? Sorry if I rub you the wrong way! :o

[1911Tuner]

Ahhhhh, Dobe. It ain't exactly rocket science. Unless you get into
weldin' up frame rails and barrel lugs and such, all it takes is new,
good quality parts and a little attention to prep work and detail.
My step-son pulled off his first time build without a hitch, and when he
approached me, he didn't even know how to field-strip a 1911.

If you'd like to give it a go, I'll get a parts list together, and when you
can make a road trip, I'll sit down and walk you through it. If you
go with a 5-inch pistol, there won't be any barrel modification needed,
and you can have a very good slide/frame fit...tight barrel lockup,
and good steel small parts.

Tamara! Now, I happen to like flat mainspring housings and long triggers.
The old Colts had those things 75 years ago. The upswept, ducktail
safety is a comfort, for sure. High-viz fixed sights are also a welcome
addition for my old eyes. The things that are available for the pistol
to make it better suit individual tastes are a good thing. I think that
the point Big G was trying to make is that while these things can be
very nice, they aren't critical in order to have a functional and reliable gun.
I have always gotten along well with pretty much the classic design,
with flat housing and long, smooth trigger, but whatever anyone wants to add or subtract to make the pistol better fit the hand and the individual
taste is perfectly acceptable...as long as the gun is mechanically reliable.
For pure aesthetic appeal, I like the old GI pistols...but beauty is, after
all, in the eye of the beholder...and I've seen some beautifully done
customs, too.

Cheers all!

Tuner

[45auto]

Tuner,

Colt should/could have tried what you want with their new series 70 at $900-1000.

That would have provided some additional justification for the high price, other than the better polishing job and no series 80 stuff.
Colt would have to "market" the quality inside the gun to sell more than just hundreds in a year, and marketing just isn't in their nature.

The jury is still out on MIM for me. I wonder whether Kimber's execution is the problem as oppossed to the process- don't know!

But, I'd still rather have all forged, barstock, etc steel. ;)

[Skunkabilly]

Where did Will go? Will, so what did you end up doing?

[Tamara]

Why do you only address me to argue?

I thought I was only addressing you to tease! :o

Seriously, this lack of facial expressions and tone-of-voice can be rough on a smart alec like me. Mea maxima culpa. :uhoh:

[1911Tuner]

Bill! Qua tu efficio bellum cum Tamara? Quid ni pace et concordia?

Ave et Salve,

Tuner:D :D :D :D :D :D

[Dobe]

And they told me 4 years of Latin in college would go to waste.

By they way Tuner. Hmmmmmm:rolleyes: Check out that verb. Unless you are quoting one of the classicals (they sometimes got it wrong too) I really think that verb should be infinitive:D ..."efficere".

[BigG]

:uhoh: Shucks, Tamara (scuffing shoes). No offense taken! :D

[1911Tuner]

You may be right Dobe...It's been a while since I copulated the verbs..
:D :D :D :D Mea Latine horribile est!

sic...suum cuique

Keep yer powder dry!
Tuner

BTW...Latin is never a waste. Wish I had taken it.:rolleyes:

[Keith]

I've got two very early Kimbers that each have well over 10k rounds through them - probably more like 20 or 25k rounds.
And I've had no problems at all; I mean none, zip, nada!

I researched it at the time and though it's been a few years, I'm pretty darned sure that the mim parts (at that time) were limited to things like thumb and grip safety and other parts that didn't take a battering.
When I read that parts like the hammer and sear, etc, are now being made of mim it really gives me pause...

I'm not so sure I'd buy a Kimber today... it's not like they are passing the savings along to the consumer!

Keith

[Rob96]

Quoting Keith:
I'm not so sure I'd buy a Kimber today... it's not like they are passing the savings along to the consumer!

Thats for sure.:scrutiny:

[Will Fennell]

Skunk and friends,
I haven't forgotten ya'll! I got busy back in Sept. with some shooting championships, and or course the dreaded four letter word, WORK, and didn't get the KIMBER sent off to Mr Garthwaite until Oct. He emailed me over the weekend to let me know he is almost finished. He has to regulate the HEINIE sites[and then reblue the sites]. Then it should be on the way to me.

A full report will follow;)

Guys[and Gals], as I re-read this thread, we seem to have wandered[not a bad thing] from my report of a new gun failure, to the virtues of custom pistol work, on to old world craftmanship v. Economics.

I bought this pistol with the intentions of sending it to Garthwaite for custom work, so the part failure wasn't really a concern. The main reason I mentioned it, was so that folks that buy KIMBERS for box stock carryguns would think about checking their blasters' inner workings, and consider replacing a few small, inexpensive parts. I am more than ever convinced that ALL 1911's should be seriously "broken in" before they are trusted as defensive pistols. I strongly believe that while KIMBERS are great base pistols, they could certainly use a new sear and extractor.....and probally a new hammer. As it turned out, I had quite a few of the parts needed "instock" and access to the rest, so I replaced quite a few more than that:D But hey, its my custom pistol. We should see soon how it turned out.

[Skunkabilly]

So you still carrying that Vertec then?

Sorry about your Kimber :(

Keep us updated.

[Will Fennell]

Skunky,
Nope, no mousegun 9mm's for daily carry. I usually have WILSON COMBAT STEALTH[of course in .45acp], carried IWB, for my daily travels. Its built on a Springfield Lightweight Compact, and the first frame[factory Springfield] cracked in 3[!] places after a few years of 'duty'[I like to shoot my carryguns ALOT]. WILSON, bless their souls, replaced the frame with one of thier alloy frames, and it seems to be holding up fine.

One of the reasons I bought this KIMBER to build, is that not only will I have a totally stainless compact, it will have a steel frame, which I will feel better about pouring more practice rounds through. So, again, don't "feel sorry" about my KIMBER. Remember, when I bought it, I was already planning to throw away most all of the gun except the frame and slide. I only mentioned the sear failure to warn others of potential problems.

Skunk, maybe you need to send a 1911 to Jim Garthwaite for a quick "laying on of the hands".......he could take a Colt or a Springfield and make your dream gun come true, in couple of months;)

[Skunkabilly]

It's Ernest Langdon or nothin'. :neener:

And he told me he doesn't work on 1911s. :o

[7.62FullMetalJacket]

Always the paragon of nuance

[Blackhawk]

This is one of the "Great Threads" that show up every once in a while. Well done posters! :D

[dsk]

Yeah, maybe after another 18 years I'll get over my silly infatuation for flat mainspring housings, beavertails, extended safeties, long triggers, modern sights, et cetera.

After all, by then I may realize that classic looks are more important than shootability or ergonomics.

For a number of years I had the same infatuation with flat mainspring housings, beavertails, extended safeties, long triggers, modern sights, et cetera. Then later I felt a nostalgic return to original mil-spec guns, and for some odd reason I discovered I shot those just as well, all other things being equal. Once you have a good trigger and sights, everything else is just fluff. A beavertail might make the pistol feel more comfy in the hand, but the difference in speed or accuracy is negligible over a stock GI unit.

This of course only means I prefer stock guns, and advise new shooters to try the basic configuration before thinking they need all the fancy stuff right off the bat. OTOH, if you've been shooting awhile and have a definite preference for flat mainspring housings, beavertails, extended safeties, long triggers, modern sights, et cetera by all means go for it!

[Will Fennell]

I'm tracking the FEDEX package inbound to me now....I should have it tomorrow. Mr Garthwaite has included a detailed report on all services provided, and I'll post this along with the range report and pics. I believe that I'll start a new thread, and link it to this one, since I'll be discussing basically a NEW pistol, not a KIMBER with a problem;)

[Will Fennell]

The gun that started this long and insightful thread, is back from from Dr. Garthwaite! Jim Garthwaite has preformed his custom magic to a basic KIMBER STAINLESS COMPACT, and turned it into a totally custom pistol built to my specifications. I knew when I got it that we would be replacing the sear and hammer, but the more I thought about it, the more I changed the gun, again just to have it built to MY specifications.

I could have left the perfectly good factory sites on the gun, but I wanted Heinie's with a gold bead front....

I could have used the perfectly serviceable extended thumb safety, but I wanted a KINGS extended, blended just so.....

The factory barrel shot well, but I wanted better.....a handfit and lapped WILSON barrel fit the bill.

Ect,

Ect,

I'll have a chance to shoot it this weekend, and a photographer buddy is going to shoot some "glamour" shots for me, but here are a couple of my crappy pics until I have the full report:cool:

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=604377

[George Hill]

:scrutiny:
You know... I like it.

[Will Fennell]

Another Crappy Pic....this time, the top of the slide....

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=604440

[Will Fennell]

details.....
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=604443

[Will Fennell]

anther view, showing the test target included.....Garthwaite can SHOOT! 20 yards, standing, 5 rounds of Hydroshoks looks just over an inch to me!

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=604449

[Skunkabilly]

Kinda purdy :cool:

[Gewehr98]

Well. at least the frames and slides:

http://mauser98.com/acpleft.jpg

Glad your Kimber came out the way you wanted, Will.

[Tamara]

Y'know, Will, suddenly I'm all about Greider's slide stops. Stick one o' them things in a nineteen-buhleven and it's like a seal of approval to my gullible self. Shweet gun you got there. :cool:

[Bladeandbarrel]

hey there expert, thats a Wilson bulletproof.

The Grieder is a nice part too, but the pad is different.

[Tamara]

hey there expert, thats a Wilson bulletproof.

The Grieder is a nice part too, but the pad is different.

I am given to understand that Wilson don't mill their own slidestops. ;)

[Bladeandbarrel]

I am given to understand that Wilson don't mill their own slidestops

You are correct, but Grieder does not make the BP stop.
Wilson has a local contractor that does.

[Tamara]

You are correct, but Grieder does not make the BP stop.

Ah. Greider was a guess from a good 'smith based on the specs. You gotta admit that the number of Mfr's doing milled tool steel slide stops in the nanoinch tolerance range was, up 'til now, between zero and one. ;)

[Will Fennell]

Tam,
It was the recent availiblity of WILSON's Stainless Bullet Proof parts that started me thinking about this project. I have really wanted a stainless carrygun for awhile now, but I like to carry this size 1911. The standard Kimber's weren't up to my specs. Problem was that there hasn't been much of a selection of premium stainless aftermarket parts out there to "upgrade" with.

When WILSON announced that they were going to make Bullet Proof[ ie. parts machined from barstock] STAINLESS slidestop and extractors, this project became viable for me.

This gun is shooting GREAT.....I've got over 200 rounds through it so far for a "break in period"[Garthwaite put 200 rounds through it before he shipped it to me]. No failures of any sort so far. I haven't done any serious accuracy work so far, but it certainly shoots to point of aim[it should, that is one thing that Garthwaite stresses]. The one chance I've had to shoot for a group was Sunday morning on the rifle range, after checking scope on a new .308 SAKO, I emptied the Garthwaite gun's mag full of carry ammo at the 50 yard line. Now, 50 yard groups with a 4" slide 1911 is not something I concern myself with frequently, but it is an indication of the "shootablitly" of the pistol.

Off sandbags, I fired the entire 7 round mag. 5 rounds went into a barely over 4" group! The other 2 rounds.... flyers.....well they were out there:rolleyes: somewhere!

[Will Fennell]

I just wanted to update that the KIMBER STAINLESS GARTHWAITE GUN is running great.......and SKUNK was looking for the pics:p

[riverdog]

Nice pistol. Jim Garthwaite seems to have done a nice job, I'm sure you'll be happy with it.

[Kestrel]

That gun looks really good, Will. What trigger do you have in it?

Steve

[Will Fennell]

The trigger is from Heinie.....the hammer and sear from Wilson. Yup, Jim did a great job, in a timely manner! I highly recommend Garthwaite!

[happyguy]

I think Tuner has the right idea. And it wouldn't require two assembly lines either. You make a run of one model with the el cheapo parts and then make a run of the higher grade guns on the same line. If I'm not mistaken that's they way they already do it anyway.

Regards,
Happyguy:D

[Skunkabilly]

She's preeeeeeeeeetty :cool: