Petition to Kimber?

Status
Not open for further replies.
My fathers series I kimber was a great firearm.... unfortunately my series II kimber is a... great firearm. I love mine and could care less about others disliking of them. Mine has proven itself to me, for what I use it for. My S&W 442 with lock has also been good, although there was a slight issue with something not being loctited that should have been, nothing has gone wrong with that damn ugly useless internal lock though.
 
Could someone please elaborate on HexHeads comments? I'd like to know about the potential downfalls of this system. I have yet to have any problems and i do believe I've reassembled in such a fashion. Info is greatly appreciated.
 
Safeties don't bother me too much, but a lack of safeties does.

For those of us who don't know, what's the difference between the Series 1 and 2?

Kimber makes a gorgeous gun, but what gets me about them is that too many of them just aren't reliable out of the box. I've also seen them jam on the range. If you pay that much for a gun, it ought to be flawless out of the box. I talk to people with Berettas, Sigs and S&Ws who just clean them and go to town -- bang, bang, bang! No jams. Glocks, too. I have a S&W 645 that came out of the box flawless. Still is. And it's cheaper than a Kimber.

Another 1911 that seems to jam is the little Colt .45 (the sawed off ones). Beauties they are, but I wouldn't trust one out of the box.

BTW, ten points to the person who can identify the film where this came from! (And if you can't, shame on you!)

GIwithPistol.gif

This S&W 645 is massive, but it sure does the job. I don't even care that it has a magazine safety!

SW645_5b.gif
 
thank God for Kimbers. What in the world would we talk and complain about if we did not have them.
 
Confederate said:
Safeties don't bother me too much, but a lack of safeties does.

For those of us who don't know, what's the difference between the Series 1 and 2?

Kimber makes a gorgeous gun, but what gets me about them is that too many of them just aren't reliable out of the box. I've also seen them jam on the range. If you pay that much for a gun, it ought to be flawless out of the box. I talk to people with Berettas, Sigs and S&Ws who just clean them and go to town -- bang, bang, bang! No jams. Glocks, too. I have a S&W 645 that came out of the box flawless. Still is. And it's cheaper than a Kimber.

Another 1911 that seems to jam is the little Colt .45 (the sawed off ones). Beauties they are, but I wouldn't trust one out of the box.

BTW, ten points to the person who can identify the film where this came from! (And if you can't, shame on you!)

GIwithPistol.gif

This S&W 645 is massive, but it sure does the job. I don't even care that it has a magazine safety!

SW645_5b.gif
Click to expand...
Historically, 1911's are notoriously unreliable from the box, particularly the custom & semi-custom efforts.
These days there seems to be significant improvement in that you can shoot them into excellent working order on your own, even up to feeding JHP's, without the need of the attentions of a gunsmith to polish and throat them.
 
mljdeckard said:
Stardust, that assertion is outdated 20 years. There isn't a single production 1911 on the market now that won't feed JHPs.

I owned a Colt. I don't remember anything so special about it.
Click to expand...
"Historically" mean anything to you? Colt 1911's are the definitive 1911's, period! You might shoot a Kimber, but investors collect Colt's!
 
I really like my Kimber Stainless II. Picked it up for a song from someone who was a disgruntled Kimber owner. One of the better purchases I've made.
 
Kimber makes a gorgeous gun, but what gets me about them is that too many of them just aren't reliable out of the box. I've also seen them jam on the range. If you pay that much for a gun, it ought to be flawless out of the box.
Click to expand...
In the Kimber manual that comes with your gun it states a 4-500 round break in period, again if you don't like that fact don't buy a Kimber so you can gripe about it's design later.
"Historically" mean anything to you? Colt 1911's are the definitive 1911's, period! You might shoot a Kimber, but investors collect Colt's!
Click to expand...
If it wasn't a WWII issued firearm I could give a rats behind about the history and even then I would rather have a Remington Rand. What history does a 1973 Colt have or a 1991A1?
 
"Historically, 1911's are notoriously unreliable from the box, particularly the custom & semi-custom efforts."


No disrespect but that is the most inaccurate thing I have read in a long time. The platform is 100 years old and has been in consistent use in every major American conflict in that 100 years. It is easily one of the most prolific and popular handgun platforms in history. Hardly the facts about a platform that "are notoriously unreliable from the box"

The 1911 is one of if not the most combat proven handgun in history. Simple fact that seems to really piss some folks off none the less.

Also for the record I have no issues with the Series II Kimbers.
 
I have a Kimber Series II. Much has been written about how users need to be careful not to depress the grip safety when putting the slide back on, but it is more complicated than that. If, like I have seen many 1911 users do, you hold the slide upside-down when reattaching the lower to stop the guide rod from falling out of place, the Schwartz piece does the same as it does if you have the grip safety depressed. Honestly, I have a ding on the back of the slide from when I first bought the gun from exactly this, and I am lucky I don't have a broken part from it. I saw nothing in the manual to address it.

FWIW, My Kimber now runs like a clock, without a single malfunction in thousands of rounds. However, out of the box, and well after the break in period it had a tendency to not feed the last round in a mag. The problem got worse and worse. It went back to Kimber, who did fix it, but yet another Kimber not working out of the box. This is my favorite gun, and most reliable now, but I wish it didn't have the Schwartz. I get a feeling one day that little flap of metal is gonna break, or the system is going to get gummed up and I won't see it because it is hidden under the rear sight.
 
Ruggles said:
"Historically, 1911's are notoriously unreliable from the box, particularly the custom & semi-custom efforts."


No disrespect but that is the most inaccurate thing I have read in a long time. The platform is 100 years old and has been in consistent use in every major American conflict in that 100 years. It is easily one of the most prolific and popular handgun platforms in history. Hardly the facts about a platform that "are notoriously unreliable from the box"

The 1911 is one of if not the most combat proven handgun in history. Simple fact that seems to really piss some folks off none the less.

Also for the record I have no issues with the Series II Kimbers.
Click to expand...
No disrespect intended, but you're dead wrong, way dead wrong!
 
The Real Mags said:
In the Kimber manual that comes with your gun it states a 4-500 round break in period, again if you don't like that fact don't buy a Kimber so you can gripe about it's design later.
If it wasn't a WWII issued firearm I could give a rats behind about the history and even then I would rather have a Remington Rand. What history does a 1973 Colt have or a 1991A1?
Click to expand...
A rampant Colt etched into their slides....
 
Kimber are beautiful guns. I have 2 and my carry is a Kimber pro carry. But after the 2 I stopped buying Kimbers. (As I understand guns better). My last 1911 is a series 70 colt repro and my next one is a Glock 17 4th generation. I don't plan to buy Kimbers or if i will do it again i will not spend money on kimbers. If they offer me a series one with non MIM items and keep the prices to what they are now then maybe. My cheaper ultra reliable, more beautiful blued 70 colt series repro shoots about the same as my ultra tight kimbers. While colts have better metals. (and better history to boot)
 
I do not like external extractors. They are ugly. How about Just buy a nice Colt 1911 (like that of RoigerTC1) and be done with it?

I'm pretty sure S&W are good also. I have a 686. But external extractors???
 
I do not like external extractors. They are ugly. How about Just buy a nice Colt 1911 (like that of RoigerTC1) and be done with it?

I'm pretty sure S&W are good also. I have a 686. But external extractors???
Click to expand...
S&W 1911s have external extractors, current production Kimbers do not, older Kimber do. Please get your facts straight before bashing a Mimber. Thanx.
 
There are SO many manufacturers of 1911's out there. If you don't want the safety, pick up a different 1911. Colts are around the same price as many Kimbers. S&W is also around the same price. Paras, Springfields, etc.

Have you ever used a Kimber with the new safety? I have a newer Custom II with the safety and internal extractor. It has never failed me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top