Kimber solo... Good choice? Bad choice?

[vent51177]

Range Report on my Kimber Solo:

I took my Solo to the range today for the first time in over a year. The only issues I've had up to this point are due to me not assembling the Gun right when I first got it (gotta catch a tiny spring with the slide stop) and with the 8 round mags.

I took 3 6 round mags and started with the recommended premium hollow points.... No problems.

Next I fed it 124 grain hollow point, but not so premium training ammo. Again, no misfeeds.

I then loaded all 3 mags with 115 winchester white box and it ran through just fine.

I turned it up a notch and tried to make it fail... I loaded crappy steel ammo, and 85 grain frangible ammo and it passed all of my tests with flying colors.

I noticed that both the mag and slide spring are not near as tight as when I first bought it. (2012) It is very tiny and the tolerances are super tight. It seems to have broken in just fine over time.

As far as I'm concerned It's good to go and staying in my carry rotation.

 

[george burns]

I would just sit and cycle the gun "empty", while watching TV. It sounds like half the problem is with grip, and the other half is with tight tolerances. If you just cycle the slide a thousand times, it should fix any mechanical problems other than a defect or limp wristing.
Having read the same thing over and over again about these little guns, these two things are the only two fixes that they should require.
If after this, an experienced person, who has fired hundreds of auto pistols, still gets the same problems, then it's the gun. I never had a gun fail to fire because of limp wristing . It would make sense though, that a female with less upper body strength, may find this pistol, not for her.

 

[Ibmikey]

I have a couple of Kimbers and love them, particularly the Micro that is a super neat concealable pistol. I also have at least one of most other manufacturers and have come to the conclusion on OP's original question: Shoot the Kimber they are nice pistols.

 

[wbbh]

My experience has been that the gun is very sensitive to limp wristing. I know nobody wants to admit that could be their problem and it's easier to blame the gun. But I have witnessed countless incidents of letting other people shoot my Solo and they will get failures frequently. I can take the gun back and run mag after mag without a problem. The gun has a snappy recoil and you really have to be firm when shooting the gun or you'll get failures...at least that's been my experience.

Limp wristing or allowing the gun to rise up to absorb recoil rather than holding it down. It's like trying to pull in a tug of war while standing on slippery mud, no mater how strong your are, you're not going to be effective without effective footing. Allowing the pistol to rise up absorbs the force needed to operate the slide. This is especially true in a small pistol.

Less like limp wristing it's more like the technique of allowing a large magnum pistol to move up and back to absorb recoil while maintaining a tight grip to prevent losing the pistol.

 

[Tirod]

Interestingly enough, the Rohrbaugh only recommended one - 1 - specifically named ammunition at the time I considered it.

Other pocket guns go so far as to recommend a number of break in rounds, too, and the one I purchased is often downgraded for it - yet the posters don't question that pocket guns in general need to be proofed for the "standard" 500 rounds to be considered reliable.

The point is that makers tune the guns to a specific self defense load, and in my limited experience, pistol or self loading rifle, the larger the range of ammo they can function on, the harsher the recoil or more problematic other issues become with longevity. Self loading actions are NOT like revolvers which can and do shoot "anything." Self loaders operate off of the gas pressure and recoil inherent in a delayed locking action required to get the bullet out of the barrel, release the peak pressure, and then cycle to reload. If the peak pressures vary much from the tuned specification, then cycling will vary, too.

It's not rocket science, if you fill your tank with cheap gas with low octane the EFI dials back the timing and you get less power. Do that with a performance tuned small compact pistol and you will get unreliable cycling. It's a gas pressure/recoil sensitive situation with no "EFI" to change the tuning - unlike gas operated shotguns with variable compensating gas action. THOSE get tested by gun writers with soft light bird loads alternating with magnums and the results aren't usually very bad. Do that with a self loading action tuned with just the mass of the slide, recoil spring, and shape of the Browning link and you discover it CANNOT compensate for light and heavy loads. Neither do AR15's - it's common to hear reports of malfunctions running on cheap low powered ammo, or battering of guns that shoot milspec because the maker did tune it for the cheap stuff. No compensating gas valves.

That's why for the most part the shooting public sets itself up for failure pumping "low test" fuel into their high performance compact auto's and then getting dismal results.

Another factor is grip - larger hands with just two finger grips are a handicap. Interestingly, the issue seems to be rare among those shooting with smaller hands that fit the smaller grips where the third finger does engage the grip without the finger extension. In the past it seemed to be a much rarer occurrence but todays population demographics point out there is a bias to larger, heavier builds and it's becoming more known today than ten years ago. It's also necessary to point out the trend in smaller guns during the same time period - we are likely seeing an overlap now where smaller guns and larger hands are becoming more common, hence the number of cases being noted.

Point being if someone's hands are really big, then a small gun isn't indicated as the better choice.

Shoot the RECOMMENDED ammo and also enough of it with the best grip to be attained and then decide if factory service is needed. As pointed out in the thread, sending it back for someone else to fire and discover it works for them doesn't really solve anything. it has to work for the owner, and if nothing you do will fix it, then the factory might not be able to unless you are there to shoot it with them looking over your shoulder to see what is happening and why. Sending the gun back is only sending HALF the operating system to be inspected. It might only need a finger extension mag to clear up.

 

[Warp]

Interestingly enough, the Rohrbaugh only recommended one - 1 - specifically named ammunition at the time I considered it.

Other pocket guns go so far as to recommend a number of break in rounds, too, and the one I purchased is often downgraded for it - yet the posters don't question that pocket guns in general need to be proofed for the "standard" 500 rounds to be considered reliable.

A required break-in before running reliably is completely different from proving your specific gun, ammo, magazines, hands combination.

The break-in implies the gun may not run properly until complete. Proving simply means making sure you didn't get a lemon.

Not sure how those two get confused so often.

 

[Great Scot]

Had one...

It was a beautiful gun, well designed and built. A little difficult to field strip and recoil with 124 grain bullets was stout. Magazine quality was a little questionable. I traded it and moved to the slightly bigger Shield in 9mm. Love that gun. Decided that if I'm going really small for a ccw, I'll stick with my Smith 442. Hope this helps.

 

[tarosean]

It really seems like the perfect little CCW gun... Would really like one if it wasnt for the trepidation over its maker..

 

[larryh1108]

Interestingly enough, the Rohrbaugh only recommended one - 1 - specifically named ammunition at the time I considered it.

Other pocket guns go so far as to recommend a number of break in rounds, too, and the one I purchased is often downgraded for it - yet the posters don't question that pocket guns in general need to be proofed for the "standard" 500 rounds to be considered reliable.

The point is that makers tune the guns to a specific self defense load, and in my limited experience, pistol or self loading rifle, the larger the range of ammo they can function on, the harsher the recoil or more problematic other issues become with longevity. Self loading actions are NOT like revolvers which can and do shoot "anything." Self loaders operate off of the gas pressure and recoil inherent in a delayed locking action required to get the bullet out of the barrel, release the peak pressure, and then cycle to reload. If the peak pressures vary much from the tuned specification, then cycling will vary, too.

It's not rocket science, if you fill your tank with cheap gas with low octane the EFI dials back the timing and you get less power. Do that with a performance tuned small compact pistol and you will get unreliable cycling. It's a gas pressure/recoil sensitive situation with no "EFI" to change the tuning - unlike gas operated shotguns with variable compensating gas action. THOSE get tested by gun writers with soft light bird loads alternating with magnums and the results aren't usually very bad. Do that with a self loading action tuned with just the mass of the slide, recoil spring, and shape of the Browning link and you discover it CANNOT compensate for light and heavy loads. Neither do AR15's - it's common to hear reports of malfunctions running on cheap low powered ammo, or battering of guns that shoot milspec because the maker did tune it for the cheap stuff. No compensating gas valves.

That's why for the most part the shooting public sets itself up for failure pumping "low test" fuel into their high performance compact auto's and then getting dismal results.

Another factor is grip - larger hands with just two finger grips are a handicap. Interestingly, the issue seems to be rare among those shooting with smaller hands that fit the smaller grips where the third finger does engage the grip without the finger extension. In the past it seemed to be a much rarer occurrence but todays population demographics point out there is a bias to larger, heavier builds and it's becoming more known today than ten years ago. It's also necessary to point out the trend in smaller guns during the same time period - we are likely seeing an overlap now where smaller guns and larger hands are becoming more common, hence the number of cases being noted.

Point being if someone's hands are really big, then a small gun isn't indicated as the better choice.

Shoot the RECOMMENDED ammo and also enough of it with the best grip to be attained and then decide if factory service is needed. As pointed out in the thread, sending it back for someone else to fire and discover it works for them doesn't really solve anything. it has to work for the owner, and if nothing you do will fix it, then the factory might not be able to unless you are there to shoot it with them looking over your shoulder to see what is happening and why. Sending the gun back is only sending HALF the operating system to be inspected. It might only need a finger extension mag to clear up.

Very informative and well written.

 

[beag_nut]

Very informative and well written.

Even though it's inaccurate. My LC9s Pro shoots anything, and without a break-in period. And its recoil is LESS than my BIL's Kimber.

 

[larryh1108]

I didn't realize that the LC9s listed a preferred ammo and/or recommends a break in period. That being said, every gun is different no matter who makes it. There is no rule that applies to all guns.

 

[beag_nut]

I didn't realize that the LC9s listed a preferred ammo and/or recommends a break in period. That being said, every gun is different no matter who makes it. There is no rule that applies to all guns.

The LC9s DOES NOT list preferred ammo or break-in period. Don't know where you got that idea.

 

[larryh1108]

Thanks, you proved my point.

 

[NormH3]

I always liked the look of the Solo and at one time was on my list of things to acquire. Then I started reading about issues people were having.

 

[beag_nut]

My BIL has one, always used the Kimber-specified loads, seldom shoots it, and has already had to return it to the mother ship for feed problems.
Whereas, my LC9sPro eats anything, has had about 700 rounds through it, and still functions flawlessly with any ammo.