Yet another "Which 1911" question, or Springfield or Kimber- which and why

C

chaim

New member
This question is both for me and a buddy. This question is really more about how I should advise my buddy, but I am starting to hear the call myself as well.

My buddy will be buying his first 1911, probably sometime this month. He wants something mid level. He can't afford $1000+, it will be his only gun so no inexpensive brands like Charles Daly (we both love my CD but since this will be his only gun he wants to go higher end than that). He is only planning on looking at Springfields and Kimbers. He's asked me for advice. I see pros and cons with both. It seems to me that the Kimber MIGHT barely beat out the Springfield on quality (at least the Series I Kimbers) but the Springfield beats the Kimber by a slim margin on price. I have no idea what to suggest.

Also, I am thinking about adding another 1911 in the next few months. I like both Kimber and Springfield too and can't decide which I'd prefer. Like I said above, both have their pros and cons and they pretty much seem to balance out. I already have a Charles Daly and I'll probably get another soon, but the draw of an intermediate level 1911 is pulling me. Like my buddy I don't want to go anywhere near the $1000 mark and I'm thinking along the lines of the Springfield "Loaded" or Kimber Custom models.

For me I'll probably need to buy at least one more (probably two) CZs before I buy, but probably by the summer I'll be ready.

I almost thought the dilemma was solved when we (my buddy and I) saw a Kimber in .40cal in the display at the range/store we usually go to. Beautiful stainless gun, if I had the $850 or so I would have bought it. My buddy, being more cautious, would have bought it (he had the $) but only if he could shoot it, or one like it first. Of course this store/range doesn't allow you to test guns and no one has rental .40cal 1911s. I told him to buy it and if he didn't like it I'd buy it from him, at full price, in a couple months. Since he really wants a .45 he wouldn't have liked it, I would have got to use it from time to time, I would have had several months to save the money (and buy a CZ or two first) and then I'd have had a beautiful .40cal Kimber 1911 and he'd get a Kimber or Springfield 1911 in .45. He thought about it but decided it was too risky (what's to risk?) :( . Oh well.

Any feedback on the pros (and cons, but emphasize the pros) of each gun in comparison to the other would be appreciated. Those of you who faced the same dilemma, what did you decide? What led you to that choice? Are these guns, as I suspect, so close that one should just go with your gut (I like the looks of X better, the feel of Y, the...) to make the final decision?
 
Springfield guns are good, and the Loaded model has all the bells and whistles you would want, all for less than $600. BUT, it has sharp edges all over it, and the trigger on mine was terrible out of the box. I don't mind tinkering so much, so I got some gunsmith's files from Brownell's, some sandpaper and a bottle of Birchwood-Casey Super Blue and went to work on it. I also dx'ed the full-length guide rod, put nicer grips on it and put an arched mainspring housing on it. It is much better now, but it looks like crap. Kinda wish I had tried a Kimber. Hindsight is 20/20.
 
In addition to the sharp edges and corners, the contour of the Springfield's dust cover and front strap are much boxier than a typical 1911. When mine went to the 'smith to have the edges beveled he also recontoured said DC and FS making the pistol more conventional. After that, the next 1911 I bought was a Colt -- OTD for less than $600.
 
Go with the Springfield loaded models and save your money.

The newer models 2002 have been changed to a more "colt" like front strap, so having it re-countoured isn't necessary. Mine fits colt holsters just fine.

I just got the PX9608L model and am really happy with it. Check my posts for more information on this gun purchase. If you can't get a definative answer here, then head over to 1911forum and search for my posts concerning the same topic.

I tossed between the two before making my purchase, and narrowed it down to the Kimber Custom Classic II and the SA loaded, the SA won, but not by much, and I can now say I am glad it did.

SA has a lifetime warranty, if it breaks, send it back on their dollar and get it fixed...Kimber doesn't offer anything more than a 1 year warranty, that's a good enough selling point for me!
 
There is another option if you have access to a good gunsmith that you TRUST. Get an Argentinean Sistema, it is an old style Colt 1911A1 made on Colt equipment sold to Argentina. Every report I've heard about them has been excellent. These are basically identical to the infamous pre-war Colt 1911s, even made on the same machines. You can get one from www.jldenter.com for $299. Then you shoot it for a few months, putting a thousand rounds through it, see what it eats and what it chokes on. Then you huddle up with your gunsmith and discuss what you like/dislike. You will probably get an extended beavertail, a combat hammer, some feed ramp work to help with hollowpoints, open the ejection port a little, tune the trigger some, and swap out the sights. You should be able to get a nice semi-custom that is made for YOU at the same price as an assembly line gun from Kimber or Springfield. I love my Kimber, but it has not been adjusted to me quite as well as my Colt S70 (I like arched mainspring housings and trijicon sights). Warning, this is a DIY or gunsmithing approach, and if you are not completely comfortable with your own skills or that of your gunsmith, spend the extra money for a gun you like UP FRONT. LAter.
 
I was also torn between Kimber and Springfield, leaning heavily towards Kimber, when TFL'er Mike Irwin and I encountered a Springfield Champion LW at a show in Virginia - the trigger is the sweetest out of the box I've encountered in my limited experience. The looks/feel/trigger - and price - were too good, so the Springfield went home with us.

I will not - in fact, can not - say anything ill of Kimbers. But a year later, I'm still ecstatic with the Springfield Armory product. And I picked it up for about $250 less than I could touch a Kimber. That's not to say I've ruled out a Kimber in future. ;)

As they say, YMMV.
 
The new Springfields don't have sharp edges. Their QC went up and the quality of product they're putting out now is superior to the Kimber. Here's why -

Forged frame that is CNC milled just like the Kimber. Springfield uses carbon steel in their frame, Kimber uses stainless.

Springfield uses a deep, beautiful blue on their standard "Loaded" model. Kimber uses a cheap matte oxide that wears considerably faster. You have to pay an extra $100 to get Kimber's "Royal Blue" (and a carbon steel frame) and it doesn't even look as good.

Both guns are just as tight, triggers equal with a slight edge to Kimber.

Springfield uses Novak sights, a Wilson'esque beavertail, and a metal main spring housing. Kimber uses Chip McMormick MCM parts that have suspect durability and in some user's eyes (mine) just plain suck. Many will disagree with that, so I suggest you handle both side by side. I find the choice of parts Springfield uses to be of better quality and give the gun a more comfortable fit in my hand, which is kind of the point of "customizing" your 1911. In my hands Kimber's choices of parts work against this.

Springfield's grips are a beautiful Cocobolo wood, Kimber uses dildo rubber (they're stiff though :))

Kimber's logo suggests the shooter is of the homosexual persuasion.

I'll catch hell for this post. But it's because I'm right. Now do the right thing and go buy that Springfield !
 
About those Sistema Colt guns from Argentina, even assuming that one can be found in really nice shape, the steel is rather soft, and the parts are old. Something may break or malfunction sooner than on a new gun like the present Colt or the Springfield. Most of the Argentine guns were made in the '30's and '40's; their genuine Colts, made in Hartford, are even older. Steels and heat treatment weren't as advanced then. Some gunsmiths won't accurize one, because the softer steel supposedly won't hold tolereances as well as newer guns; they wear sooner.

Lone Star
 
I got a Springfield...

'cause it was traded in unfired. Stainless, Cocobolo grips. Combat hammer, extended beavertail (I liked that 'cause I've seen people bit before).

Trigger pull was 8 1/2#. Our 1911 guru changed out some little doo-hickey in the back of the grip and "adjusted" the sear spring, and in less than 10 minutes I had a crisp 3# pull. You want someone EXPERIENCED to do this. Done incorrectly they can go full auto. His words "Sounds cool, but trust me, it's not". As it's emptying the mag, it's also climbing toward the ceiling and then over the top towards your head. If you have ANY trigger work done, start with 2 rounds ONLY.

The black Novak sights are OK for outside, but impossible to pick up on a black silhouette. I'm getting Wilson Combat night sights.

Just about everybody that shoots it shoots well
 
YET ANOTHER KIMBER IN MY HANDS

Suggest Kimber as offering highest satisfaction. Better finish, more accurate.
Nice.

My 1911 is Caspian, of course.
 
Kimber all the way.

I have had both and the Kimber is far better, I'm on my third. Dont get me wrong the SA is a good 1911, But I think you'll be happy with the gun from Yonkers!
 
Slightly side question here ---

What is so special about the Kimber/Springfield .45's when
compared to say a USP .45 or Sig 220? It it just a big "1911"
following or is there something technically superior to these guns compared to a HK or say Sig?

From the surface - I can't see it?

thanks
-d
 
Own both Kimbers and SA's............

..........and both shoot well. Much more satisfied with Kimber. Simple as that. Good shooting:)
 
Slightly side question here ---

What is so special about the Kimber/Springfield .45's when
compared to say a USP .45 or Sig 220? It it just a big "1911"
following or is there something technically superior to these guns compared to a HK or say Sig?

From the surface - I can't see it?
Click to expand...

The way I see it the 1911 generally has more character and is classier than the more modern designs. For me that is enough. For others the fact that there are more customization options and gunsmiths (just about smith should know 1911s) is a big plus- you can make the gun exactly what you want.

Also, 1911s are good designs. Yes, some need minor modifications for general purpose use (most are great out of the box for target use) but those mods are cheap (even free- you can polish the feedramp yourself) but most are highly reliable after that minor work is done. Originally they were designed for military hardball so sometimes you need those mods before you can use hollowpoints, though not always. Many (some by design like some of the Kimbers and Springfields, some by luck like my Charles Daly) are reliable enough with just about any ammo for self defense use without mods.

A big plus is for CCW. It is one of the few full sized guns that most people can comfortably carry. While long, and relatively heavy they are very narrow and can be carried with less printing than most others. Also, in the slightly smaller versions (4" barrel, regular grip; 4" barrel, reduced grip; 3" barrel, reduced grip) and the lighter versions (some are alloy) they are just about perfect for most people for carry.

If you don't like the 1911 that is fine, we all have different tastes. Also, liking the 1911 doesn't mean that you can't like the others. I'm sure many of the 1911 fans like and may even own the HK or SIG and some others you haven't mentioned. Personally, I am a big fan of the Ruger P90 and I'll probably buy one in the next couple years and one of my next 2 or 3 guns is the CZ 97.
 
New spin:

Buy a new Colt Government (if you can find one) in SS and have Teddy Jacobson turn it into a ultra-reliable piece.

Peter Gunn
 
Slightly side question here ---

What is so special about the Kimber/Springfield .45's when
compared to say a USP .45 or Sig 220? It it just a big "1911"
following or is there something technically superior to these guns compared to a HK or say Sig?

From the surface - I can't see it?
Click to expand...

For years I had been captivated with German Engineering as far as semiauto's were concerned. That is until the time I was offered a chance to shoot a 1911 at my local range. After firing just one mag full of rounds I was hooked and I haven't looked back. The trigger on a 1911 is the best there is! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top