I have a Classic from 1994 or so that shoots like a National Match. I bought a pair of Eclipses several years ago but sold them because they were so sharp they cut my hands on the range, but the ran well. I have a K6s 3 inch that is great, and had a 2 inch DCR that I sold.

I just recently purchased my first 1911, a Kimber Stainless LW RFO (red fiber optic front sight). While I have very limited experience data to draw from I can say this gun is solid - tight, everything is fitted right, trigger is great. I have only 200 rounds through it but it's been virtually trouble free aside from some very dirty Winchester rounds trying to gum up the works. The finish is flawless, and this gun was less than a Ruger SR1911 and it was brand new.
Yeah, it's not a Dan Wesson or a Nighthawk, and yeah it only came with one mag but it has everything I wanted in a 1911.
Just my .02 cents.
https://i.postimg.cc/wMJ0Sdrn/IMG-0852.jpg

I’ve tried several. Never been able to get through a magazine without a malfunction. Only seen one or two that would run. I really wanted to like them.

I had a Raptor II and a Warrior. Both were very accurate guns. Both were also very unreliable guns. I sent the Raptor back to Kimber and even after that it wasn’t able to get though a few mags without an issue. I sold them both and have never considered owning a Kimber 1911 since.

The half dozen or so I've owned (still have two) have been great; the magazines they come with have been VERY spotty. No problems with WC or CMC.

What exactly are you looking for? I have a Kimber Classic II, which has been flawless, even with generic USGI magazines. Even the Kimber manual states to use FMJ ammo only. I have put thousands of rounds through it, with seldom cleaning, and have never had an issue. I’ve owned it over a decade.

The 1911 is a century old design. Out of the box, it is extremely accurate. But the more you “fiddle” with them the more issues you will find. The tolerances, fit and finish are much more exact. Throw in making them into different calibers or shortened slides, adds to the equation. Then add modern ammo and bullet designs.

I’ve heard many stories about USGI 1911’s that rattled when you shook them, yet fired every time, and enough to score expert on qualifications. And they probably had over 500,000 rounds through them with basic maintenance and replacement parts.

I wanted a basic, no frills 1911, that wouldn’t tear a hole in my bank account. I am very pleased with mine, and often use it as a CCW weapon. It is a lot more comfortable than one would expect.

I have a 2000 vintage 3" 1911 that's been absolutely flawless. Back in 2012 and 2014, I brought a couple of their higher end Jam-O-Matics and regretted it ever since. Those 2 are now gone, and someone else's headache.

I'm a R/O at a local PBA range and I see a lot of guns. And even though I don't own any, If I needed to recommend a 1911 today, I'd quickly recommend the Springfield Range Officer line.

mesabi: I have had good luck with Kimbers however Kimber mags that come with their guns not so much. I have used them as a Barney mag in competition. For those unaware a "Barney Mag" is the one you use to load one round before you put a full mag in getting that extra round. I am confident they are good for that.

I have two, a 3 inch officer in 9mm and a 5 inch government in 10mm.

Other than poor blending of the safety on the 10mm which irritates my hand, both are reliable and accurate. The 9mm is my carry gun and handles hollow points just fine. I did change the slide stop on the 9mm to an EGW as there was the occasional failure to lock open. No issues since.

quote:

Originally posted by SigLaw:
Other than poor blending of the safety on the 10mm which irritates my hand, ...

Do you mean radiusing of the edges, perhaps? (Double-checks his Custom II...) I wouldn't say mine is "smooth," but neither would I call it "sharp." On mine I'd say it's about perfect for easily thumb-operating the safety on/off.

But my thumb is nowhere near the safety while shooting.

Or do you mean the grip safety? (Checks again...) The edges on mine are nicely-radiused.

The 1911 is an old design, to be sure; modern 1911's can fire modern ammunition all day long without an issue. While it's certainly true that hardball should be expected to feed, a 1911 that's set up correctly will run semi-wadcutters, hollowpoints, and most designs with or without a shoulder.

A weak point on the 1911 has always been the magazine. Specifically the feed lips. Get a good magazine, dont' drop it on the feed lips.

The extractor is the single most consistent failure point on the 1911, and reason that the 1911 concept relies on the "tuned extractor," which is more art than fact, and traditionally involves bending the damn thing with a thumb. Purists hate the concept, but that problem goes away with an external extractor of good design. Conversely, a poor design is as bad as a traditionally 1911 with a weak extractor. Bottom line for the internal extractor is that anything that relies on the longevity of a bent piece of metal (and bending it back from time to time) is a built-in failure, which is exactly what the internal extractor is on the 1911. That, and the fact that it's held in place with the firing pin stop, allowing it to rotate and change angle. No consistency.

Slide fit and play is overblown and misunderstood; everyone wants a tight slide when it's probably the least important of all. A correct barrel link, on the other hand, is critical, as is a correctly fit barrel and for those 1911's using a barrel bushing, proper fit at the bushing.

Everyone wants to judge the pistol by its trigger, and while the 1911's trigger is a reason many like the design, 1911's have become all about looks and show-and-tell skeletonized hammers, skeletonized triggers, aesthetic ball cuts, beveled recessed slide stop pins and a bewildering array of finishes and colors seem to delight buyers who are all about bling. And they'll pay for it, too.

Nothing against aesthetics, but the 1911 can be made to perform, and to perform well. It will require more maintenance to keep it running, even if you're satisfied with ball only, just to keep it extracting and feeding.

The custom makers who sell 5,000 dollar pistols turn out some beautiful craftsmanship; it is NOT necessary in order to have a functioning, well-operating 1911. They'll tell you differently, because they have a deeply vested interest. Follow the money. There are some great, expensive 1911's, but you don't need to spend that coin to get a good firearm, and one shouldn't be distracted by all the crap bling that seems to sell them these days.

You're not wrong to spend money on a 1911, but it also isn't necessary to get an accurate, dependable pistol. Conversely, to buy into the bottom end of the spectrum is also often a mistake.

First of all, it is made in the USA and as far as I know it is a USA owned company. That means something to me. They are not the only 1911 'made in America' 1911's I own.
I have only two Kimbers. Both are exceptional for the price point.
The first is a Custom Two from a few years ago. It may be the most accurate out of the box pistol, maybe with the exception of a couple of P model SIGs, that I own. It was a pawnshop find. Shoots everything I feed it.
The second was a recent bargain buy LW. Still in the break in period, but so far so good.
IMHO, a lot of people like to pick on them because
they are a mass manufacturer. Some of the bad experiences, and I believe there have been rashes of them over the years, I think are over for the most part.
Bottom line, when you are looking for one of the most tightly fit, good looking, accurate,trigger friendly, American made 1911s in the sub $1k range , it's easy to justify a Kimber.

Around the mid 90's (has it been that long??? Man I feel old ), when Clackamas Series I Classic Customs hit the market, it was a major leap forward in 1911's of the time. All for the princely sum of about $700, you were getting many 'custom' options off the shelf in a very well put together pistol. Think 'econo-Dan Wesson.' Most features we take for granted today...extended safeties, FCS, better dovetail sights, etc. were FAR less common before the original Series I Kimbers. Thanks to that turn of events, we got the Springfield 'Loaded' Line, similar 'upgraded' Colts, etc. as they scrambled to compete.

Then, like most things, as demand went WAY up, they had to screw with it...and you got all sorts of deviations...external extractors, Series II, etc etc. While there's probably many out there that run like a top, many that don't.

In 'off the shelf/factory' 1911 territory (sub $1K), Springfield is the top choice IMHO.

Boss

quote:

Originally posted by TheMan:
[I liked the looks and idea of the Solo, but I guess they never got it working well. Or maybe they did but the reputation was too hard to shake.

I also loved the looks and bought one. It would not feed reliably, so I traded it for a BHP.

Last year I got a good deal on an EVO TLE model, and it has been perfect after some teething issues during the first 100 rounds.

I also recently picked up a used K6 CDP from the classifieds here. I don't have many rounds through it, but it has performed well so far.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
Do you mean radiusing of the edges, perhaps?

This. The back of the safety extends a smidge too far into the grip where the web of my right hand is. Not too bad but enough to be annoying. I still enjoy shooting the gun though.

quote:

Originally posted by SigLaw:

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
Do you mean radiusing of the edges, perhaps?

This. The back of the safety extends a smidge too far into the grip where the web of my right hand is.

So you mean the grip safety? Hadn't noticed that on my Custom II, but I did run my finger around the edges and they're all nicely radiused on mine.

I believe the grip safety is supposed to stand slightly proud of the backstrap when fully-depressed, to ensure it really does get fully-depressed?

I betcha if you called Kimber they'd send you a new one.

My solo carry ran just fine but then I never shot it much.
As for Kimbers I have a bunch, everything from 380 micros up to Custom CDP and I have every Raptor except the Grand Raptor. They have all worked as intended but like my solo seldom shot. And maybe that’s the thing with Kimbers— if you are only going to have one or two and plan to do a lot of shooting maybe you should step up to a Dan Wesson or Les Baer or one of the custom shop springfields.

quote:

Originally posted by patw:
My father had a Stainless Gold Match II and it was a great pistol. My nephew has it now and loves it. I was able to shoot it years ago and it was accurate and functioned perfectly.

I hate to call a fellow member out, but the original poster asked for “recent production” info, not a gun that was made years back.

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...720002964#6720002964

I had a TLE2. It had significant issues with FTF. The extractor clocked badly. The firing pin retainer cracked. I spent a year tinkering with it to get it to about 90% reliable and then I had enough and got rid of it. Only 1911 I’ve ever owned that had issues that couldn’t be easily fixed.

Then again, that was my only Kimber. I’d be willing to give the brand another go if I ran across an attractive deal.

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:
The CEO of Sig is Ron Cohen. He was hired away from Kimber c. 2005.

For those who believe Kimber &/or Sig have declined in quality, many of them blame him.

Let me guess: cost cutting measures to beef up the bottom line?

It's amazing how so many executive level management totally suck yet they get hired again and again to fuck things up. Prime example: bob nardelli.