Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns S&W 1911 vs Kimber 1911

This is neither here nor there, but somewhat related to the hijack at least; if anyone has data showing total 1911 sales in the US over say the last thirty years I would love to see it. Broken down by maufacturer and compared to other autos in general would be nice too while I'm asking.

Saying that Kimber was responsible for the 1911's popularity is silly. There were millions in service before Kimber even started making .22 rifles, let alone 1911's.

Colt had union/corporate problems in the '80's and quality was hit & miss

By the 1990's Kimber had reorganized & recapitalized after going bankrupt in Oregon.

With new equipment they figured out that they could fit a gun tight, and coached their sales people to shake the gun in front of prospective buyers. Colts of the day rattled, and many new 1911 afficianados (me included) thought oh Kimber must be better. Kimber also was able to sell at good prices with the modern equipment, and the use of MIM for small intricate parts, like safeties and extractors.

Colt rebounded, the 1911 continued to be popular, and other folks got in the game, like Wilson, Baer, Ed Brown Sig, S&W, etc.

Of the production makers, I think Colt currently has the best batting average, but S&W is very close, and would get my nod for the OP's question. Kimber is not close, I've seen too many fail, and seen too many reports of failures. I have one in 10mm, and it's a fun pistol, but not reliable enough for defense.

"In the late 1980s, the company began to struggle after a private stock offering fell short of covering the costs of developing the M89 Big Game Rifle. In 1989, Kimber of Oregon was sold to Oregon timber baron Bruce Engel, who founded WTD Industries, Inc. Engel had difficulty running Kimber and soon the company sought bankruptcy protection. However, Kimber of Oregon's assets were liquidated.

In 1990, several Kimber employees, including Dan Cooper, left to found Cooper Firearms of Montana.[2]

In the mid-1990s, Greg Warne tried to revive Kimber, but much of Kimber of Oregon's original tooling had ended up in a junkyard north of Portland. Greg soon found a financial backer in Les Edelman, who owned Nationwide Sports Distributors. The two purchased the original tooling and partnered to found Kimber of America. The company grew quickly, but Edelman forced Warne out after acquiring a majority interest in the company.

I am with DLA on this one. Lots of 1911's sold over the years, but there were NUMEROUS gunsmiths who were charging boo koo bucks to make them what they SHOULD have been anyway. Kimber made a ready to rock 1911 that outshot the Colt by a wide margin for a reasonable price. Other companies followed suit. Sure there were Randall's (I had one, OK gun) and others but the advent of the fully equipped, tight fitting frame/slide, good sights and trigger, beavertail grip 45 1911's began with Kimber and started the trend that we all now benefit from.

I had to hand polish a few parts on my last one to get it to run 100%, but such was a small price to pay, IMO, for the wonderful gun it was when I had it.

FWIW, Kimber is FAR from the only pistol manufacturer to suggest a break in period of firing before its guns are considered reliable. Kahr arms, Kel Tec, come to mind.

Mark, you're a good guy and very knowledgeable, so I want to be clear my sharp reply above was prompted by dla's Obama remark and blatant errors, and was not directed at you. You deserve a thoughtful and polite reply.

When Kimber got into 1911's, they had a well deserved reputation as a quality builder of rifles. After their reorganization, they took up 1911's. Wilson Combat had started making complete guns in 1996, and Les Baer was at it about the same time. Colt was about broke and bled to death by Colt Industries, the holding company. Springfield was making 1911's by then as well, and IIRC, they tended to be tighter than Colts, too.

Kimber was and is very good at "perceived quality" issues - fit and finish, USA Made, styling, and handling qualities - taking lessons from other makers of that day. They were very well positioned in the market, and grabbed a lot of market share right off the bat. I think if you got a 1st or 2nd year Kimber, it was probably a heck of a bargain. By the time I bought my first one, the prices had risen, in some cases more than Colts, and the quality was, IMO, not so hot anymore. They clearly had a successful business in those days, but I am not sure you can call it a trend they started.

We definitely are lucky today that there is so much competition in 1911's, which helps keep quality up and prices down.

FWIW, Kimber is FAR from the only pistol manufacturer to suggest a break in period of firing before its guns are considered reliable. Kahr arms, Kel Tec, come to mind.

Malfunctioning

Proper functioning is directly related to maintanence and care, and to the ammunition you use. Some of the common types of malfunctions which may occur are as follows:

Misfire:............(skipping details)

Failure to feed.........(skipping details)

Failure to eject or extract........(skipping details)

........If any of the above problems are not solved by cleaning or by use of other brands of ammunition, stop firing, unload and return the pistol to our service department.

Problem with your bizaro history lesson is that you make it sound like Wilson and Baer started up after Kimber.

At least you got part right: Colt was shipping crap. Kimber shipped a better quality pistol with the features people wanted. Regarding prices, you compared a Cadillac to a Yugo with your personal experience of a Stainless GM versus a vanilla S80 Colt.

As far as prices today - yes they are shocking. But thanks to Obama's spending fueled inflation they will continue to rise. By the way, just glancing at a couple dealers, Colt Govt Model XSE blue goes for $250 more than a Kimber Classic Custom (equivalent features). I counted 98 different versions of Kimbers.

So, as you noted, it was Kimber that really started the 1911 revival, which is what I've been saying from the beginning.

They are (page 14 of the 2012 catalog http://www.coltsmfg.com/Catalog/ColtPistols.aspx), minus the collet bushing. Demand was so high they brought it back. Not unlike Coke bringing back the original after the new Coke flopped.

The revival of Colt's quality control has been as epic as their previous decline was.

The Kimbers are great unless their a II version.

...Uhhh. Minus the collet bushing it's not a 70 series Colt. So they didnt really bring it back because it brought nothing of value to the table it's just another 1911. My guess is, people really wanted something that wasn't an 80 series Colt. So you and Colt proved me right. Neither of you had to go to all that trouble

O

Out of curiosity, what makes the II version take a back seat to the pre-II version?

I have a CDP II and believe it is by far the best handgun I have ever owned. And i have owned quite a few Colts, both 70 and eighty series plus a few pre-70 series. Plus several SA's.

...good catch OC---the Series 70 technically means w/collet bushing. Unfortunately Colt has accepted the colloquial use that currently is used for anything without a fps and now THEY use the moniker. Not sure how you define "value" - but Colt obviously saw some or wouldn't have gone to the expense to re-tool to make the guns sans fps. This year they're coming out with a full size Wiley Clapp Govt Model to match the Wiley Clapp Commander---both are non-fps guns, so they obviously see some "value" - you may not, but I suppose it depends upon what you're comparing their guns to.

Whether you were proven right or not is of course dependent upon your viewpoint----a little chest beating is good at times.

...I suspect it actually costs less to make a Series 70. Not only do you lose the parts to have the FP block, but you avoid the drilled hole in the slide, and the lever cut in the frame.

...The Wiley Clapp guns are awfully appealing, may have to add one

...The collet bushing is something I'd actually like to work with. Theoretically, it should get rid of all slop in the barrel, but they did have cracking and breakage problems. I'm not so sure that a little attention to detail wouldn't fix the problem, and keep the benefit.