GLOCK/KIMBER, WHAT WOULD YOU DO???

jtduncan and Jeff: I am going to have to agree with you all on this one. Times are changing, and changing faster than I like. With all the hooplah over firearms today, why would a person that has a carry gun need to make modifications? There is no since in giving a lawyer more ammo than he needs. It is probably one of the first things that a lawyer would look for in that if the firearm had been modified. I could see putting a NY trigger on a Glock, or maybe some night sights, but not a 3 1/2 pound connector -- not for a carry gun anyhow. Stock out of the box for a carry gun would be the one for me. I chose a Glock 30. Sorry, I just like the bigger bullets. Sling Shot
 
Why all this crap about G27 vs. Kimber. At least use a Glock in the same caliber (i.e. the full-sized Glock-21 or the compact yet even more accurate G-30). I have both and will probably get a Kimber CDP in th next few years, because I want something different. Now if your talking accuracy, I have friend who can shoot 2" shot groups with his G-21 at 25 yards with the standard Weaver hold. Me, I'm a relative "newbie" to pistolcraft. The Glock-30 is even more accurate.
I'd say go for the G-30 with a blade-tech holster, spend the extra money on training, ammo and nightsights. Other than that the Glock's barrel should do just fine, straight from the factory.

Jon
 
Thank you, jtduncan.

I never implied that the Kimber needs modification. But to a non-gun jury (as jtduncan says), a Kimber will appear modified compared to, say, a milspec 1911. Would you bet your life that you could convince an ignorant (at best) jury that it's really no different?

Plus, I was offering a general warning against modifications, in response to funinsun saying he would modify a Glock for carry.

An out-of-the-box Glock could only be compared to another OOTBG, and, as I said, you will have headed off the issue before it even came up. I'd rather not deal with it at all, since being right doesn't mean you'll prevail.
 
Jeff said:
>>I never implied that the Kimber needs modification.<<

Well yes, in fact you did.

>> But to a non-gun jury (as jtduncan says), a Kimber will appear modified compared to, say, a milspec 1911<<

Umm...how will a nongun jury know what a milspec 1911 looks like?
 
Guess I should add I shot them both and the little glocks seem to twist in my hand-the kimber does not. Again just torn between simplicity and darn good accuracy from the Kimber-to me the Kimber shoots WAY more accurate, 25 yrds not a prob with the Kimber I PERSONALLY cannot hit anything @ 25 yrd with the little glocks, now thats just ME-so don't jump on my A$$!!!!

One side note Jeff, in your piont you say out of the box glock, but in my instance I said that if I got a glock I would be modding that thing out. So if legality is the piont(its not)an out of the box kimber would be the answer since it comes completly customed from the factory-I would not be adding anything to the Kimber afterwards.

Tnaks all for the input.
 
O.K. computer didn't refresh before I posted my last reply-the reason I am not comparing other glocks with the Kimber is cuz the 27 is what I was looking at getting that is all. I really like the G30, but right now looking for a weapon a little thinner. I really think G30 or G36 will be the next apple in my eye. Reffering to the legal issue, everybody is right-me getting a glock and modding it out would not be a good idea-probably why I am gonna try the kimber-but I do want to get a Glock in the future, but I probably won't be able to stop myself from getting some goodies for it, maybe just stick with new guide rod- barrel and sights-I cannot understand why if a person is trying to make a gun more accurate, so there is no stray fire that its wrong-but so goes the leagal B.S.

Again thanks to all.
 
funinsun, you are doing the right thing. The reason for picking a carry gun is how it shoots for you, not all this nonsense about possible civil lawsuits. They can't sue you if you're dead. And how about possible lawsuits from shooting poorly with a gun you chose for its "courtproofness" and accidentally missing the bad guy and hitting some innocent person downrange?
 
If you want a compact .45, then get a G30 or G36. I personally went with the G30. One hell of a gun. The kimber ain't bad either. But why not save yourself $400 if you can.

------------------
NRA Life Member
GSSF Member
 
funinsun: The Kimber is a nice looking auto. If you can shoot it more accurately than a Glock, then that is what you should buy. But what I think is missing here is on the accuracy issue. You can ask a lot of people that own Glocks, and they will tell you the same thing, the Glock trigger is a bear to figure. On the G30 that I have, I could not hit the broadside of a barn with it. I kept pulling shots to the left and low. I have finally gotten used to the trigger, but still am shooting low, and my aim is straight. It is the shooter, not the gun. If I had the cash, I would buy the Kimber. But all things considered, accuracy, reliability, price, the Glock wins going away. Sling Shot
 
This question has me thinking. Scary thought? I guess, if push came to shove and I had the money, I would go with the Kimber. I love both of these pistols. I own a Glock 27 with night sights with Pearce and A&G adapters and this little handgun can just about do it all. The truth is the Kimber is at my upper limits for the purchase of a handgun and if I had the money I would buy it. I would then save for the Glock. Regards, Richard.
 
I like Glocks, but do not fool yourself. They are not 1911s. After market parts are not going to make them better or more accurate.

Sounds like you want the Kimber...they are fine guns.
If you still want a Glock go for it and leave it stock. Keep the money for ammo. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top