A new thread to document Kimber K6S Combat with 4” barrel. Please add info to share / learn.
My combat has:
Recessed cylinders with a relief cut for moon clips from factory
Chamber diameters are 0.381” (New Starline 38 Special brass is 0.377”, my 1937 Colt Officers chambers measure 0.379”)
Three cylinder throats measure 0.359” and three measure 0.360” (I plan to make them all the same)
Cylinder forward gap measures 0.001” and cylinder back gap measures 0.003” for 0.002” end shake (1937 Colt 0.006” shake)
The trigger is pretty good right out of the box. Double action trigger pull feels about the same as my Colt mentioned, my S&W J frame and one of my S&W N frame. Not as good as a S&W that has had trigger work, of which I have one N frame with trigger work performed by S&W Performance Center about 20 years ago. Single action trigger pull has just a touch of creep before the break which is similar to my J frame but not quite on par with most S&W or my Colt example.
I like Colt Diamondbacks, I don’t have one and I’m not willing to pay $1500 for one. Dimension wise, this Kimber is slightly smaller and lighter than a Diamondback.
Currently at 25 yards from a rest 5 shot groups measure 3.5” with two different hand loads. The groups should shrink after I equalize the throats. From the factory with 158 grain jacketed bullet at about 1150 fps, this Kimber’s point of impact was at the bullseye when the front sight dot covered the Bullseye. I’m an “aim small, miss small” shooter, so I filed 0.025” off the front sight. Now I can place the 1” bullseye on top of the front sight. Interestingly, my 158 grain cast bullet load at 940 fps has the same point of impact from this Kimber at 25 yards. Both speeds mentioned, 1150 and 940 are from this 4” Kimber.
Inside the barrel, right at the barrel to frame joint is a ring with slightly larger internal diameter than the rest of the bore. You can feel it with a tight fitting jag on a cleaning rod. In the photo, you can see the dark forcing cone with taper into the lands, and then the “ring” on the land. The ring is a complete circle in the bore, but is easily seen on the land. If the ring was an issue I think it would promote leading with cast bullets, and the gun is not leading, even with in my opinion, oversized throats. I searched to see how the barrel is attached to the frame but couldn’t find any info. If the barrel is threaded, I don’t know what caused the ring. If the barrel has an interference press fit to the frame, then I know what caused the ring. This larger diameter ring is opposite to some of the early non-pinned S&W barrels that had pinched bores.
All in all, I really like this Kimber. It’s not perfect, but it serves me like a Diamondback would have with a little extra. Plus, it’s a fine complement to the first Kimber I bought in the 1990’s that’s had a bajillion rounds though it (3rd slide return spring) and has been a joy to own, carry and compete with.
View attachment 944020
View attachment 944021
My combat has:
Recessed cylinders with a relief cut for moon clips from factory
Chamber diameters are 0.381” (New Starline 38 Special brass is 0.377”, my 1937 Colt Officers chambers measure 0.379”)
Three cylinder throats measure 0.359” and three measure 0.360” (I plan to make them all the same)
Cylinder forward gap measures 0.001” and cylinder back gap measures 0.003” for 0.002” end shake (1937 Colt 0.006” shake)
The trigger is pretty good right out of the box. Double action trigger pull feels about the same as my Colt mentioned, my S&W J frame and one of my S&W N frame. Not as good as a S&W that has had trigger work, of which I have one N frame with trigger work performed by S&W Performance Center about 20 years ago. Single action trigger pull has just a touch of creep before the break which is similar to my J frame but not quite on par with most S&W or my Colt example.
I like Colt Diamondbacks, I don’t have one and I’m not willing to pay $1500 for one. Dimension wise, this Kimber is slightly smaller and lighter than a Diamondback.
Currently at 25 yards from a rest 5 shot groups measure 3.5” with two different hand loads. The groups should shrink after I equalize the throats. From the factory with 158 grain jacketed bullet at about 1150 fps, this Kimber’s point of impact was at the bullseye when the front sight dot covered the Bullseye. I’m an “aim small, miss small” shooter, so I filed 0.025” off the front sight. Now I can place the 1” bullseye on top of the front sight. Interestingly, my 158 grain cast bullet load at 940 fps has the same point of impact from this Kimber at 25 yards. Both speeds mentioned, 1150 and 940 are from this 4” Kimber.
Inside the barrel, right at the barrel to frame joint is a ring with slightly larger internal diameter than the rest of the bore. You can feel it with a tight fitting jag on a cleaning rod. In the photo, you can see the dark forcing cone with taper into the lands, and then the “ring” on the land. The ring is a complete circle in the bore, but is easily seen on the land. If the ring was an issue I think it would promote leading with cast bullets, and the gun is not leading, even with in my opinion, oversized throats. I searched to see how the barrel is attached to the frame but couldn’t find any info. If the barrel is threaded, I don’t know what caused the ring. If the barrel has an interference press fit to the frame, then I know what caused the ring. This larger diameter ring is opposite to some of the early non-pinned S&W barrels that had pinched bores.
All in all, I really like this Kimber. It’s not perfect, but it serves me like a Diamondback would have with a little extra. Plus, it’s a fine complement to the first Kimber I bought in the 1990’s that’s had a bajillion rounds though it (3rd slide return spring) and has been a joy to own, carry and compete with.
View attachment 944020
View attachment 944021
