imported post
BODY {font-family: Arial;font-size: 11pt;color: 323c50;margin-left: 25 px;margin-top: 25 px;background-position: top left;background-repeat: repeat;}Every 1911 petty much gives you what you pay for. No, a Kimber is not a Les Baer, but it costs more than half the price of a Les Baer. I'm not sure why you traded in your Les Baer for a Dan Wesson CBOB, it would seem a step down.
I agree that a Dan Wesson CBOB is a great gun. From what I've read they are well made, reliable, and excellent shooters.
It seems a lot of Kimber problems stem from not adequately following the break in period. I've had two prior Kimbers, and currently own two. In over 5,000 rounds (lost count: it could be 10,000+) I've never had a FTF or any other malfunction with any Kimbers, shooting every type of ammo, including "garbage".
Kimbers are beautiful guns, accurate, reliable, and my Kimbers have shot any ammo given them. People with whom I shoot similarly have no problems, including type II models. They cost a lot, but you get what you pay for: excellent fit and finish, accuracy, reliability, etc. Are they as good as Les Baer's or Wilson's? No, but they cost more than half as much.
Can you buy a $500 1911 that shoots reliable 1-1.5 inch groups at 30+ yards, shoots any kind of ammo fed it, has a butter smooth trigger pull with an accurate, reliably reproducible break point, excellent fit and finish, great ergonomics, great looks, and performs flawlessly after thousands of rounds? No, I don't think that you can. I've tried many other guns costing hundreds less, and their triggers are not as good, their fit and finish are lacking, and they are no where near as accurate over a wide range of ammo. Is it worth it? That's up to the individual to decide, but certainly Kimber's are worth their pricing when compared to less expensive guns and more expensive guns. They occupy that niche where you are beginning to get match grade feel to the triggers, match grade accuracy, etc. Kimber's are clearly a step above guns costing hundreds less, and clearly a step below those costing hundreds more. All you have to do is shoot one for an extended time, and then go back to the one you thought was "the same" to figure that out.
I am really sick of reading all these "urban legends" about Kimbers malfunctioning, or having "poor quality control" or whatever. Show me a double blind test of multiple manufactures that demonstrates Kimber doesn't have the quality control expected of a gun it's price, or data that indicates a high malfunction rate or FTF in a blind scientific test, and I'll be happy to accept that. But random stories of Kimbers having quality control problems or having failures do not mean anything scientifically. If you looked I'm sure you could find horror stories about every manufacturer. Simply stating "I know ____ who bought a Kimber and had all kinds of problems" means absoulutely zero. You could find a similar candidite for every manufacturer.
It seems Kimber always gets singled out for "costing too much" when nothing is ever said about Les Baer, Wilson Combat, etc which cost twice as much or more. Why, I don't know. I do know that for the extra money Kimber costs over less costly guns is money that goes into excellent accuracy/trigger/reliability/etc and a beautifully fit and finish on the gun. Having shot a wide variety of 1911's I find it hard to believe that anyone would shoot a Kimber for any length of time, go back and shoot another brand costing hundreds less, and not have that person choose the Kimber in a second no questions asked.
It all comes down to personal choice, what one can afford, the personal feel of a pistol, prior history, etc. That is why there are so many manufactures to appeal to every taste. I just don't get putting any gun down; each one occupies a special place in someone's heart.
radwjw
BODY {font-family: Arial;font-size: 11pt;color: 323c50;margin-left: 25 px;margin-top: 25 px;background-position: top left;background-repeat: repeat;}Every 1911 petty much gives you what you pay for. No, a Kimber is not a Les Baer, but it costs more than half the price of a Les Baer. I'm not sure why you traded in your Les Baer for a Dan Wesson CBOB, it would seem a step down.
I agree that a Dan Wesson CBOB is a great gun. From what I've read they are well made, reliable, and excellent shooters.
It seems a lot of Kimber problems stem from not adequately following the break in period. I've had two prior Kimbers, and currently own two. In over 5,000 rounds (lost count: it could be 10,000+) I've never had a FTF or any other malfunction with any Kimbers, shooting every type of ammo, including "garbage".
Kimbers are beautiful guns, accurate, reliable, and my Kimbers have shot any ammo given them. People with whom I shoot similarly have no problems, including type II models. They cost a lot, but you get what you pay for: excellent fit and finish, accuracy, reliability, etc. Are they as good as Les Baer's or Wilson's? No, but they cost more than half as much.
Can you buy a $500 1911 that shoots reliable 1-1.5 inch groups at 30+ yards, shoots any kind of ammo fed it, has a butter smooth trigger pull with an accurate, reliably reproducible break point, excellent fit and finish, great ergonomics, great looks, and performs flawlessly after thousands of rounds? No, I don't think that you can. I've tried many other guns costing hundreds less, and their triggers are not as good, their fit and finish are lacking, and they are no where near as accurate over a wide range of ammo. Is it worth it? That's up to the individual to decide, but certainly Kimber's are worth their pricing when compared to less expensive guns and more expensive guns. They occupy that niche where you are beginning to get match grade feel to the triggers, match grade accuracy, etc. Kimber's are clearly a step above guns costing hundreds less, and clearly a step below those costing hundreds more. All you have to do is shoot one for an extended time, and then go back to the one you thought was "the same" to figure that out.
I am really sick of reading all these "urban legends" about Kimbers malfunctioning, or having "poor quality control" or whatever. Show me a double blind test of multiple manufactures that demonstrates Kimber doesn't have the quality control expected of a gun it's price, or data that indicates a high malfunction rate or FTF in a blind scientific test, and I'll be happy to accept that. But random stories of Kimbers having quality control problems or having failures do not mean anything scientifically. If you looked I'm sure you could find horror stories about every manufacturer. Simply stating "I know ____ who bought a Kimber and had all kinds of problems" means absoulutely zero. You could find a similar candidite for every manufacturer.
It seems Kimber always gets singled out for "costing too much" when nothing is ever said about Les Baer, Wilson Combat, etc which cost twice as much or more. Why, I don't know. I do know that for the extra money Kimber costs over less costly guns is money that goes into excellent accuracy/trigger/reliability/etc and a beautifully fit and finish on the gun. Having shot a wide variety of 1911's I find it hard to believe that anyone would shoot a Kimber for any length of time, go back and shoot another brand costing hundreds less, and not have that person choose the Kimber in a second no questions asked.
It all comes down to personal choice, what one can afford, the personal feel of a pistol, prior history, etc. That is why there are so many manufactures to appeal to every taste. I just don't get putting any gun down; each one occupies a special place in someone's heart.
radwjw
