Page 2 of 2
Re: Are newer Kimbers really that bad???
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:33 pm
by Jim White
Darkker wrote:Mike,
Let me take a stab at what you have "heard".
There are alot of Kimber fans over here as well, some I have "worked on" due to the complaints.
In the .45 Auto Kimbers, it comes down to usually 2 things.
Most of the time, the person is limp-wristing the gun. Can happen with ANY gun. Basically the shooter is not properly holding the gun, and they "react" to the recoil before the slide can.
The other common issue is a combination of things: AMMO, CLEANLINESS, USE.
Kimbers come assembled with VERY tight tollerances. Until you shoot them, they can stove-pipe, or other maladies with lower than typical amounts of fouling in the action. This leads into the ammo. Folks around here love that cheap Commie-bloc crap. It is classically VERY dirty ammo. aggravates the first condition.
Cleanliness, Most of the folks I run into, don't really shoot pistols much(several years to get to 1,000 rounds). However the gun rides around in the jockey-box. A gun with Tight tollerances that is filthy.... You get the idea.
Agreed. Similarities with 1911 target guns, they have to be shot in and kept clean. For shooting, if you reload some powders are cleaner than others. In my target guns, I shoot Bullseye and Winchester WST, both are clean burning.
HTH
Re: Are newer Kimbers really that bad???
Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 8:39 am
by Ol` Joe
I agree, limp wristing is a problem.
So is the fact most are trying to start on a short 1911 platform with their stiff 20# springs or even double springs, and weird barrel geometries that amplify the need for a good grip, instead of longer full sized guns which are much more forgiving.
My 12/13yr old Custom Target has never bobbled, no matter what type of loads I run in it, and is more accurate then I can hold. I reload all my ammo and this gun has shot everything from little mouse fart 200gr LSWC, to full house near +P level 185/230gr JHP/RN loads (heavier spring used of course). My wifes nephew has a older (~2000?) Ultra Carry that is very demanding as to what it wants in ammo, as are most of the shorter 1911 guns I`ve seen. The short guns seem to need heavy bullets and stiff loads to function, the full size normally will shoot anything but may need a slightly stiffer spring to prevent beating the frame if fed a steady diet. His gun has a problem with 185gr bullets no matter the power level, but shoots 230gr loaded to normal or higher velocities just fine. The guys I see at the range with Full sized Kimbers all seem to be just as happy with them as owners of any other brand. Most never claim to have any problems with them as long as they are kept clean and oiled.
IMO Kimber has a good 1911 they just don`t seem to be able to modify them to the 3"/4" bbl`ed sizes that seem to be the bulk of their sales, and keep them as easy to shoot and less fussy about ammo as their full size.
Re: Are newer Kimbers really that bad???
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 7:38 am
by TONK
I have 3 Kimber 45acp caliber pistols, one is a target pistol with long slide in stainless steel, one is a Carry type pistol in black finish and the 3rd is a full size Kimber also. I have never had a malfuction with any of these Kimber 45's. However, when Kimber went to Bobbing a 1911 frame, then they began to have problems. I do believe they have solved their problem but still some of those pistols are out there and they just don't preform like they were meant too, even after being sent back to the factory. So if one is interested in purchasing a Kimber model, I would try to rent one at a shooting range first and ask around, also get the low down on the model from gun reports printed in gun magazines etc.