Springfield and Kimber Differences?

B

brianidaho

New member
I'm considering a compact 1911, probably a Springfield Champion or Kimber Compact, in stainless. I see lots of posts about "whats better", that generate as much heat as light. I understand the Kimber is somewhat dehorned, and the SA has more sharp edges. I believe I read that there are more plastic and metal injection molded parts in the Kimber, can anyone let me know what these are and what I should consider replacing. Any other differences?

My general impression from other posts is that the Kimber tends to be better fitted, finished and more accurate, while the Springfield has better customer service and is less prone to breakage. I'm sure there are exceptions, please let me know if this is generally true. IMHO, I like the appearance of the SA better, the wide serrations and the "script" logo of the Kimber I don't care for.

Thanks.

Bri
 
I think either are fine guns and will please you.

That said, I took the Kimber Stainless Compact (steel-framed version) and have had no regrets after a year of ownership. No breakages. No problems. Total reliability. I think the fit and finish is better than the Springfield and while it may be prettier and easier on clothing because of smoother edges, I think you'll be happy with either at the range or if, God forbid, you should have to use it to defend yourself.

As I said I don't have lot of experience with Kimber Customer Service. I have around 1000 rounds through the gun without problems. However, the little take-down tool didn't come with it and it came with the wrong manual. When I called Kimber to request those things, I also asked for the price of the hex-grip screws because mine was old stock and had slotted screws. In a matter of days I had the requested tool and proper manual and they threw in a set of hex screws at no cost. Hey, that's more than good enough customer service for me. Nobody else is giving me free stuff I want but didn't order. As far as I'm concerned Kimber gets a bad rap on reliability and customer service. I'm a very satisfied customer.
 
If it matters to you the Springfield is mostly made in Brazil and assembled in the US. Since I consider New York near as foreign I made my choice based on the trigger and the far superiour fit and finish of the Kimber. The flowery Kimber emblem kind of grows on you. If you ever have to use it defensefly your sending a message. This big fat bullet is really going to hurt you, but have a nice day.
 
For my part, it is a little like the Ford/Chevy argument. The Kimber was a year ago the best value in the market. Since then, Kimber has had several price increases which have somewhat tilted the advantage to SA. A SA loaded is the best value on the market compared to the comparable Kimber. I do not really care where a pistol is made as long as offers value and quality and both makes qualify there. The SA has a blocky feel due to the edge on the front strap. This is rounded on the Kimber and Colt. MIM parts are about 96% as strong. I have yet to have anything to break on my Ultra Elite with about 5000 rounds through it.
 
I bought a Springfield because I got a great deal, but that being said I think I still would have bought the springfield. I do not notice any sharp edges on mine whatsoever. I carry mine in a Galco Royal Guard holster IWB sometimes against my bare skin and it is totally comfortable. It is also the most accurate gun i've ever shot, though the Charles Daly 1911 is a very close second. If price is not a factor i'd say either, but if price is a big issue as mine was then go for the springfield. I don't think you can go wrong with either.

Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top