Are Kimbers good to go, or trash?

[zackmars]

they sort by caliber groups as well. 100 year old colts are not being sent back to colt today for warranty/QC issues.

Quite a few of those 100 year old colt's have suffered through the militaries idea of maintenance, and have been through multiple wars.

Colt is extremely far from perfect, but even the sloppiest UAW botch job I've seen doesn't come close to the worst kimber I've seen

 

[Havok1]

Quite a few of those 100 year old colt's have suffered through the militaries idea of maintenance, and have been through multiple wars.

Colt is extremely far from perfect, but even the sloppiest UAW botch job I've seen doesn't come close to the worst kimber I've seen

That’s still anecdotal and doesn’t mean that kimber as a whole is a bad manufacturer. I’ve seen guns leave the manufacturer missing parts. I’ve even seen one gun from another manufacturer field strip itself while being shot. Neither of those are indications that everyone should stay away from the manufacturers all together.

If we are going to look at all of the Colt 1911s that have ever been made to compare to kimber then maybe we should also include pre Ron Cohen Kimbers in the comparison as well.

 

[oldag]

Kimber quality was okay until the great gun control scare some years back. All the manufacturers greatly ramped up their production trying to meet the suddenly skyrocketing demand. Kimber stumbled pretty badly during that ramp up.

It seems that they recovered a while after production leveled off.

 

[zackmars]

That’s still anecdotal and doesn’t mean that kimber as a whole is a bad manufacturer. I’ve seen guns leave the manufacturer missing parts. I’ve even seen one gun from another manufacturer field strip itself while being shot. Neither of those are indications that everyone should stay away from the manufacturers all together.

If we are going to look at all of the Colt 1911s that have ever been made to compare to kimber then maybe we should also include pre Ron Cohen Kimbers in the comparison as well.

Sure, feel free, but it's been a long time since ron de-railed kimber, all those years of pumping out anything that they could scribble a SN into.

Kimber gave us the modern 1911, but its a market with limited room for growth. Only so many adjustable sights, so much checkering, or so many magwells you can stick on a 1911 before it becomes just another 1911

 

[Sasquatch]

I voted Glock Boys Unite, because that was the only reasonable choice since you limited to three.

I've owned a Kimber. It had no malfunctions that were not bad ammo or shooter error - like failing to fully seat a magazine. I fed it good ammo, only used known reliable magazines. It was also an older gun, not a newer production gun.

I've also had friends who have had Kimbers that had issues and required smithing to run right.

I haven't owned a Colt, but I've owned a number of 1911 pattern guns. The most reliable I've ever had was a really old alloy frame Para Ordnance. Of all the 1911's I've ever owned, its really the only one that I miss and would want back, or want a duplicate of.

IF I ever get another 1911 .45 - my list of manufacturers I'd be looking at would be very small, and Kimber would not be among them. For that matter neither would Smith & Wesson, Sig, Springfield, or Ruger's. Dan Wesson, Ed Brown, or Wilson Combat are the production guns that tickle my taint when it comes to 1911's. I'd probably turn tricks behind a Murphy gas station to afford a Staccato P before getting another .45 single stack. I'm a 9mm whore, and as much as I like the .45AARP and its big, slow bullet (which reminds me a lot of myself some days) 9s shoot flatter and *cheaper*

You could also add Nighthawk to the above list, but I might bitch out and get it in 30 Thuper Carry to accent my fishnets and heels for those gas station tricks

 

[oldag]

Every mass manufacturer will probably put out a bad gun every now and then. And if you get that one, it can sour you on the brand.

Bought a Springfield TRP1911. Failed miserably out of the box. POI off a foot. FTE's non-stop. Sent it back to Springfield. Turns out that two wrong parts had been installed. They fixed it and it worked. But I did sell it after confirming it functioned properly. This specific type issue made me seriously doubt their QC and I will not purchase another Springfield. I also know they did not test fire the gun, or it would never have left the factory.

Perhaps that is a bit of an overreaction, granted. But there are plenty of other gunmakers out there.

 

[CaliGunner]

30 Thuper Carry to accent my fishnets and heels for those gas station tricks View attachment 346300

Calling @Darkpriest667 to the front desk....

 

[oldag]

I voted Glock Boys Unite, because that was the only reasonable choice since you limited to three.

I've owned a Kimber. It had no malfunctions that were not bad ammo or shooter error - like failing to fully seat a magazine. I fed it good ammo, only used known reliable magazines. It was also an older gun, not a newer production gun.

I've also had friends who have had Kimbers that had issues and required smithing to run right.

I haven't owned a Colt, but I've owned a number of 1911 pattern guns. The most reliable I've ever had was a really old alloy frame Para Ordnance. Of all the 1911's I've ever owned, its really the only one that I miss and would want back, or want a duplicate of.

IF I ever get another 1911 .45 - my list of manufacturers I'd be looking at would be very small, and Kimber would not be among them. For that matter neither would Smith & Wesson, Sig, Springfield, or Ruger's. Dan Wesson, Ed Brown, or Wilson Combat are the production guns that tickle my taint when it comes to 1911's. I'd probably turn tricks behind a Murphy gas station to afford a Staccato P before getting another .45 single stack. I'm a 9mm whore, and as much as I like the .45AARP and its big, slow bullet (which reminds me a lot of myself some days) 9s shoot flatter and *cheaper*

You could also add Nighthawk to the above list, but I might bitch out and get it in 30 Thuper Carry to accent my fishnets and heels for those gas station tricks View attachment 346300

Guncrafter is by far my favorite. Best craftsmanship I have ever seen in a gun. I have not had the opportunity to examine a WC in detail.

At its price point, Sig makes an excellent 1911.

I will not pay for Ed Brown or Nighthawk. Had one of each and the craftsmanship did not match the price (not that they were bad guns).

 

[V-Tach]

Kimber makes pretty guns................About the only good thing I will say about them.....


I've seen broken hammers, slide locks that fall out during shooting, out of spec firing pins, FTF, FTE ....

No have never owned one......just repaired them when they broke on our range............

all anecdotal.....but true........

 

[Havok1]

Sure, feel free, but it's been a long time since ron de-railed kimber, all those years of pumping out anything that they could scribble a SN into.

Kimber gave us the modern 1911, but its a market with limited room for growth. Only so many adjustable sights, so much checkering, or so many magwells you can stick on a 1911 before it becomes just another 1911

And there is the problem. You want to bring up old 1911s when it fits your argument but discount them when it doesn’t.

The bottom line here is that many of the negative opinions about kimber are based on what people have read on the internet that they don’t know to be true. People talking about their poor QC have no way of ranking the quality of their QC or anyone else’s. The people who have owned their guns are mostly happy with them. I know they have had their issues, and I know that there are better manufacturers out there. But their guns work just fine.

 

[madwildcat]

I can honestly say currently own a couple of Kimbers along with a couple of other 1911s. One or two had no real issues after being "fully broken in" with "recommended" ammo. I would agree with some of the other comments about them being really good at looking good or offering a variety of options. Some work out of the box, others need breaking in, some smithing. Despite what some of the obvious Kimber haters here have said, I don't think their QC has been any worse than most of the other big names, at least in my experience. I have horror stories from a Colt and a Wilson Combat that were worse than any issues with Kimbers I have personally seen.

I have owned a variety of 1911s over the years, and to this day the one I would trust my life to without question is a Rock Island Armory Tactical I got years ago. Eats anything I put into it, and I can't remember it ever having a malfunction that wasn't user induced. Its the closest thing to "Glock reliability" I have. Is it the prettiest? No, but it does the job when needed. I don't carry a gun for it to be pretty, I carry it to protect my family, friends and myself.

That being said, some of those Kimbers do look real pretty on the wall and they are the ones friends generally want to shoot first at the range

 

[V-Tach]

Fan Boi's gonna Fan Boi............

lol....and yes, I'm a Colt Fan Boi............

 

[zackmars]

And there is the problem. You want to bring up old 1911s when it fits your argument but discount them when it doesn’t.

The bottom line here is that many of the negative opinions about kimber are based on what people have read on the internet that they don’t know to be true. People talking about their poor QC have no way of ranking the quality of their QC or anyone else’s. The people who have owned their guns are mostly happy with them. I know they have had their issues, and I know that there are better manufacturers out there. But their guns work just fine.

Huh? I said "sure, fine". I don't care if you bring them up or not.

Im not discounting anything, just pointing out one company has built the gun for over 100 years, and the other had a short run from when they got big, till cohen ran it to the ground, and they've never really recovered.

And yes, a consumer who pays attention can tell when a companies QC ain't up to par. It might not be up to your scientific standards, but it's enough to put off a more informed buyer.

Thats why we look at gun reviews. Thats why we have forums and youtube videos.

If you want to wait for daddy kimber to come and tell you what their QC rejection rate is, you are going to wait a VERY long time

 

[London]

I had to replace the plastic mainspring housing on one after a friend's girlfriend threw it at him. For what they charge that's an absurd cheap-out on a part.

 

[Havok1]

Huh? I said "sure, fine". I don't care if you bring them up or not.

Im not discounting anything, just pointing out one company has built the gun for over 100 years, and the other had a short run from when they got big, till cohen ran it to the ground, and they've never really recovered.

And yes, a consumer who pays attention can tell when a companies QC ain't up to par. It might not be up to your scientific standards, but it's enough to put off a more informed buyer.

Thats why we look at gun reviews. Thats why we have forums and youtube videos.

If you want to wait for daddy kimber to come and tell you what their QC rejection rate is, you are going to wait a VERY long time

You said “sure, fine” followed by “but”. Either they all matter or they don’t.

“Consumers who pay attention” have no idea what percentage of Kimbers guns are sent back for repair. The majority of Kimbers problems are a fantasy made up on the internet. They may perceive something a certain way, but that doesn’t mean the perception is accurate. This is why when the questions about reliability are posed only to people who have owned the guns, the experience is overwhelmingly positive.

 

[zackmars]

You said “sure, fine” followed by “but”. Either they all matter or they don’t.

“Consumers who pay attention” have no idea what percentage of Kimbers guns are sent back for repair. The majority of Kimbers problems are a fantasy made up on the internet. They may perceive something a certain way, but that doesn’t mean the perception is accurate. This is why when the questions about reliability are posed only to people who have owned the guns, the experience is overwhelmingly positive.

Points/counterpoints. Arguing my point is hardly "dismissing" yours. Thats how this works.

"Fantasy on the internet". Prove it. Fantasy usually has a positive connotation, but I've seen a LOT of kimbers that were nightmares, not fantasy, in real life, too.

 

[deemus]

You boys get a room....

 

[Havok1]

Points/counterpoints. Arguing my point is hardly "dismissing" yours. Thats how this works.

"Fantasy on the internet". Prove it. Fantasy usually has a positive connotation, but I've seen a LOT of kimbers that were nightmares, not fantasy, in real life, too.

yes, it’s internet fantasy, as shown by some of the posts in this thread.

You’ve been unable to show that whatever number of Kimbers you have worked on is evidence of the manufacturer having more problems than any others. It’s purely anecdotal without more information that you don’t have. if a mechanic told you that Geos are better cars than chevys because he works on more chevys than geos, what would you think of his opinion?

 

[Moonpie]

My experience with Kimber is mixed.
Had some that worked fine. Some didn’t.
Today I wouldn’t buy Kimber.

 

[zackmars]

yes, it’s internet fantasy, as shown by some of the posts in this thread.

You’ve been unable to show that whatever number of Kimbers you have worked on is evidence of the manufacturer having more problems than any others. It’s purely anecdotal without more information that you don’t have. if a mechanic told you that Geos are better cars than chevys because he works on more chevys than geos, what would you think of his opinion?

I've already said my experience was anecdotal.

I don't keep track of guns that work. I know i see lots of kimbers, colts, especially .38 supers. I also see lots of SAI 1911's

I just know that half the time i see a 1911 go down, chances are its a kimber. Or its a ruger that decided to break the bushing in half and send part of it downrange.

Do you work in the firearms industry?