Suppressors Kimber fell apart...(rant)

[Victor Co Heather]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder if that'd still be considered legal in USPSA single stack. </div></div>

Because of slide lightening?

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M.45</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wonder if that'd still be considered legal in USPSA single stack. </div></div>

Because of slide lightening?
</div></div>

Yeah, that's what I was thinking.

 

[Omega1911]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

[quote
I wouldn't trade my Series I Kimbers for any Brazil-made Springfield.

Kimber might suck now, but their guns were absolutely unmatched at their price point in the 90s.

Here are mine. The parkerized one was made in 2000 and has had at least 12,000 flawless rounds through it. The stainless one I just got last year, but I believe it was made around 1997. [/quote]


Thank you Jesus for not strikin' me blind.;>) Yeppers , that upper piece is circa 1997, have the same one myself. She's a thumper......

Thanks for the picts......

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shoot4fun</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have a Kimber with Clacamus(?) stamp on the frame. </div></div>


Clackamas OR


Kimber isn't a bad gun. The internals are garbage, one could make the case that their MIM parts source is worse than all of the other mass produced 1911 vendors (which use MIM as well).

I personally wouldn't be shy about buying a Kimber series 2 at all. Frame, slide, barrel and fit are generally fine. I would want to buy it used at a good deal and plan on sending it out to some one like Evolution Gun Works http://www.egw-guns.com/, yard out the ignition parts, FP stop, slide stop, barrel link, and MSH - replace these with quality parts and have them give it a once over - done. A quality carry gun.

Like Eddie said - they ain't all bad. More importantly, even the 'bad' ones can be fixed. Buying used - how many folks do you really know with more than 10k on a pistol? A good quality 1911 should go more than 100k.


Good luck

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

There is nothing wrong with MIM. That is simply internet myth. Nearly every industry, including aerospace, uses MIM parts. Get over it. The MIM squad on the internet makes a baseless claim.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TenX</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Thank you Jesus for not strikin' me blind.;>) Yeppers , that upper piece is circa 1997, have the same one myself. She's a thumper......
Thanks for the picts......
</div></div>

How do you know how old it is? Is there any real way to tell?

Both of mine are stamped Yonkers, NY, so I know they're not old enough to be Oregon guns.

 

[Mo_Zam_Beek]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is nothing wrong with MIM. That is simply internet myth. Nearly every industry, including aerospace, uses MIM parts. Get over it. The MIM squad on the internet makes a baseless claim. </div></div>


OK. I will. I will just have forget about the numerous MIM parts I have seen in mass produced 1911s that break and render the pistol as useful as a rock.

MIM can be well produced and reliable. Large gun companies make 1911 parts out of MIM b/c it is cheap and they don't hand fit parts.

I'll pass.


Good luck

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

What makes you think that a machined bar stock part requires more fitting than an MIM part or a cast part?

The MIM hatred is nothing more than ignorance about production processes, not a consequence of poor manufacturing or companies being "cheap."

 

[EddieNFL]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There is nothing wrong with MIM.</div></div>

I agree, provided the process is rigidly controlled. Small defects almost always result in breaks. Usually, these happen rather quickly. I think I mentioned above, I have one Kimber I ran for more than 10K without problem before I swapped the parts. I have never had a MIM failure, but have witnessed them first hand.

MIM is stronger than cast, but not as strong as machined. Lots of folks carry MIM without issue, but I prefer not to as long as something better is available. We each have to make that decision for ourselves.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The MIM hatred is nothing more than ignorance about production processes, not a consequence of poor manufacturing or companies being "cheap."</div></div>

Cheap may be the wrong word (inexpensive, maybe), but MIM is definetly used to cut cost. If a maker could use machined without increasing overhead, I doubt MIM wouldn exist.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Let's digest this:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I agree, provided the process is rigidly controlled. Small defects almost always result in breaks. Usually, these happen rather quickly. I think I mentioned above, I have one Kimber I ran for more than 10K without problem before I swapped the parts. <span style="font-style: italic">I have never had a MIM failure</span>, but have witnessed them first hand.</div></div>

Key point. MIM is so bad that you have never personally had a failure of an MIM part, despite shooting more ammo through your pistol than most will in a lifetime.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
MIM is stronger than cast, but not as strong as machined. Lots of folks carry MIM without issue, but I prefer not to as long as something better is available. We each have to make that decision for ourselves.
</div></div>

Ahh, so you're the crusader of "no compromise." I hope you'd never carry one of those dreaded "plastic" guns.

Perhaps all of this is some kind of nostalgia for things past. I know I love my M1 Garand because it's certainly a relic of a time when labor was cheap and capital investment to reduce the costs of parts was far less important.


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Cheap may be the wrong word (inexpensive, maybe), but MIM is definetly used to cut cost. If a maker could use machined without increasing overhead, I doubt MIM wouldn exist. </div></div>

Perhaps this is semantics (to you), but raw materials expense is not "overhead."

If firms could use machined parts without increasing costs, MIM probably wouldn't exist at all, for anything (not just guns). Being resistant to innovation probably wouldn't keep them in business for long. That is why the companies that use high-dollar bar stock parts to manufacture their pistols are priced at a level that few people are either willing or able to spend.

My MIMbers have an awful lot of miles on them to declare MIM insufficient for the task. I, like you, value a quality piece, but I'd much rather have a properly fitted and reliable pistol than go on a crusade against a metal production process that is used to make the parts. There is far more to a quality pistol than the methods used to make its parts.

I do find it interesting that the crusade against MIM is limited to Kimbers on the internet. I'm also willing to bet that more than a few firearms in your safe have a high number of properly produced and reliable MIM parts.

 

[EddieNFL]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Key point. MIM is so bad that you have never personally had a failure of an MIM part, despite shooting more ammo through your pistol than most will in a lifetime.</div></div>

Don't recall using the word "bad." Simply stated the fact that MIM isn't as strong as machined. Much like engine pistons. Any car guy worth his toolbox will tell you forged pistons are stronger than cast. That said, few drivers will ever experience a piston failure.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ahh, so you're the crusader of "no compromise." I hope you'd never carry one of those dreaded "plastic" guns.</div></div>

I'm of the opinion you should not compromise if you don't have to. Tried a plastic gun; not for me. Works great for the wife.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps all of this is some kind of nostalgia for things past.</div></div>

Definitely some truth in that statement. I picked up my first 1911 in '74 or '75. Haven't been without one since, so I'm very comfortable with the platform.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps this is semantics (to you), but raw materials expense is not "overhead."</div></div>

Okay, costs?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Being resistant to innovation probably wouldn't keep them in business for long.</div></div>

If a manufacturer could use a superior part for the same cost, why change?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is why the companies that use high-dollar bar stock parts to manufacture their pistols are priced at a level that few people are either willing or able to spend.</div></div>

Buy the best you can afford; be it a RIA or a Henie. You're the only one that has to be satisfied.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I do find it interesting that the crusade against MIM is limited to Kimbers on the internet.</div></div>

I've heard of MIM failures in other brands, but I suspect the Kimber name comes up more often because they sell more. ???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm also willing to bet that more than a few firearms in your safe have a high number of properly produced and reliable MIM parts.</div></div>

A few. After about 10K I swapped all the MIM parts out of my Eclipse, carried it for a while and reinstalled the MIM when I switched to one of my Wilsons. Have 35K plus on the original parts. My other Kimber (Ultra Raptor) is carried on a limited basis. Changed out the MIM when it was new.

Bottom line is I don't think of MIM as "bad," but there are better parts available. It is what it is and allows makers to offer firearms at lower prices. Nothing wrong with that. I've owned a few Chevys, but I prefer a Lexus.

My witnessing MIM failures no more condemns the process than your lack of failures confirms it. Just proves no one gets them all right...or all wrong.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Much like engine pistons. Any car guy worth his toolbox will tell you forged pistons are stronger than cast. That said, few drivers will ever experience a piston failure.</div></div>

GREAT analogy. Forged pistons also have to run looser than cast, which commonly results in piston slap, AND are more expensive to boot. The solution is often to use hypereutectic pistons, which are CAST...and combine additional strength without the tradeoffs of forged. To claim that forged is anywhere and always better, once again, stems from ignorance, not some objective standard. But don't take my word for it, just ask the millions of GM owners who bought trucks since 1999 with forged pistons, or google "GM piston slap" if you think forged is always better than cast.

The point should be clear that just because something costs more or appears better, it may not be.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Perhaps all of this is some kind of nostalgia for things past.</div></div>

Definitely some truth in that statement. I picked up my first 1911 in '74 or '75. Haven't been without one since, so I'm very comfortable with the platform.</div></div>

I love my 1911s, too. I tried everything else, finally got a 1911 and sold everything else.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Okay, costs?</div></div>

Costs are relevant to the production of anything. Simply saying that it'd be more expensive to NOT use MIM is just stating a fact. So what? Everyone uses MIM because it saves money and it works. If you have $3000 +/- to spend on a pistol and want all bar stock parts, go for it. I won't stop you. I wish I had that kind of money, personally...but even if I did, I'd probably rather have 2-3 very nice guns instead of 1 pristine one.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If a manufacturer could use a superior part for the same cost, why change?</div></div>

But they can't, and that is why they are using MIM.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Buy the best you can afford; be it a RIA or a Henie. You're the only one that has to be satisfied.</div></div>

Sound advice, but there's no sense in demonizing the other options out there.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I do find it interesting that the crusade against MIM is limited to Kimbers on the internet.</div></div>

I've heard of MIM failures in other brands, but I suspect the Kimber name comes up more often because they sell more. ???
</div></div>

Doubt it. I see 10 Springers for every Kimber I see at USPSA matches. I suspect it's because Kimber had a bad run of parts at some point which has since been corrected, but the reputation continues.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
My witnessing MIM failures no more condemns the process than your lack of failures confirms it. Just proves no one gets them all right...or all wrong.</div></div>

There is no evidence that MIM isn't well suited to the task it plays in firearms. In a perfect world, we'd all have the strongest and best of everything. I personally think that there are much more important things to concern oneself with when shopping for a pistol than how the company makes its thumb safety. I'd much rather have a good solid frame with good slide to frame fit and a good barrel with tight lockup than a sloppy gun that was out of spec but had machined fire control components.

I think the search for a good starting point starts with a solid frame, slide, and barrel. The rest is details. Your preferences obviously vary.

 

[EddieNFL]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

You're reading too much into this. In the forged vs cast analogly I referenced strength, nothing else. I haven't experienced any piston slap in a 1911.

I think I've made it very clear I don't think MIM is bad, just stronger parts are available. I even spoke about a pretty successful run with MIM parts. You seem to take it as a personal insult. No debating with emotion.

Also, not "everyone" uses MIM.

Out.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You seem to take it as a personal insult. No debating with emotion.

Also, not "everyone" uses MIM.

Out. </div></div>

There's no emotions here, just a distaste towards ignorance.

I also encourage you to name a production 1911 that doesn't contain any MIM parts.

 

[M4guru]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EddieNFL</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have at least had a confirmation from a cranky Kimber rep. but I wasn't happy with the conversation. They sounded like it was my fault and I was to be thankful if they fixed it.</div></div>

Was his name Dennis?

Kimber's primary problem seems to be quality control...complete lack of.
</div></div>

4 years ago I talked to Dennis about a gun that was rusty when I cracked the box from the factory. He told me I could send it in but that he would just buff the rust off and that I should oil it more.

I also have beat a couple dozen apart when the Schwartz Safety in the Series II guns would lock up. Luckily I was able to remove these parts for the owners and make their guns reliable. Colt owned the patent on the Schwartz Safety for a long time and could never make it work right...that's what cops call a "clue".

I talk everyone I can out of Kimbers.

 

[rdinak]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

All of my Kimbers are of the early generation, pre-Series II. They run 100% and are extremely accurate. I don't mind paying a premium for the older guns and think they were in a different quality class. I have owned Colt's, Springfield's and Kimbers. For the dollar spent, the early Kimbers have been some of the best value found in the last 25 years of shooting 1911's. YMMV

 

[Outsydlooknin75]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rdinga</div><div class="ubbcode-body">All of my Kimbers are of the early generation, pre-Series II. They run 100% and are extremely accurate. I don't mind paying a premium for the older guns and think they were in a different quality class. I have owned Colt's, Springfield's and Kimbers. For the dollar spent, the early Kimbers have been some of the best value found in the last 25 years of shooting 1911's. YMMV </div></div>

I have to agree the comment about the early Kimbers. I wish I would have bought every early one I could have found back in the day. Back then they were quality and a good price .... because no one knew who they were.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I agree and that's why I posted a pic of my pair of Kimbers. I actually bought a second one just because I'd hate to be without.

There is nothing on the market today for $1000 that can rival a Series I Kimber. I have been shooting mine in single stack for four years, and it needed nothing but the addition of a mag well.

 

[Victor Co Heather]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I agree there's nothing wrong with MIM either... especially for weekend guns. The MIM debate has raged on every board out there and won't be solved here either. It probably has been exaggerated because all our experiences are limited to the gear we own/use.

 

[Sgt. 0811]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

OK, well an update on my gun...

First, I get a call from the same cranky service rep... still cranky btw... She said the gun never arived at Kimber, so I call the gun store and they show it as sent and signed for, so I call a different but yet still cranky service rep. They can't find the gun.

Gun store calls me 10 minutes later and tells me it just came in. Awesome huh. So Kimber appearantly recieved it, fixed it and shipped it without knowing.

I ran 500 fmjs through it (to get it dirty) then 20 rounds of Corbon 165, 20 rounds of Federal Hydras, 20 rounds of gold saber and 20 rounds of winchester JHP. The gun runs like a champ now.
I don't know if I'll keep it or not. I must say the thing is a serious tack driver for it's size but after my experiance with Kimber it left a bad taste in my mouth. No matter what I'll never buy another Kimber... that's for sure.
There are just too many good 1911s out there right now to get hung up on them.

 

[Outsydlooknin75]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

But did you run 500 rounds of daily carry ammo thru it to see if there would be any probs with it?

I never use plain ball ammo to conduct my 500 round carry test.

 

[ToddM]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

The old kimbers 1911's were great and still more than worth the prices they fetch. The new ones are very hit and miss and even the better one's I've seen were not that good.

The second worst problem with kimber is their pathetic customer service and attitude. I say second because if they built a product worth a crap most would never need to deal with them. I've had to deal with them twice, once with a Covert II that was getting serious half moon dents from HP's in the feed ramp to which I was told dents in the feed ramp didn't effect function or reliability in their opinion and there's nothing they would do about it. They added that their alloy frames were not designed to fire high amounts of HP ammo.....of course their marketing says their alloy frames are as strong and durable as their steel frames. They must be using the new playdoh steel if that's the case.

 

[TheNorsk]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Myself and 5 other friends all bought Kimbers in the time period of 2001-2002....There were issues with EVERY gun and needless to say not a single one of us still owns one.
I rate it as the biggest disappointment in a firearms purchase I have made to date.
BTW: My gun had the full auto issue as well.

 

[Victor Co Heather]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sgt. 0811</div><div class="ubbcode-body">OK, well an update on my gun...

First, I get a call from the same cranky service rep... still cranky btw... She said the gun never arived at Kimber, so I call the gun store and they show it as sent and signed for, so I call a different but yet still cranky service rep. They can't find the gun.

Gun store calls me 10 minutes later and tells me it just came in. Awesome huh. So Kimber appearantly recieved it, fixed it and shipped it without knowing.

I ran 500 fmjs through it (to get it dirty) then 20 rounds of Corbon 165, 20 rounds of Federal Hydras, 20 rounds of gold saber and 20 rounds of winchester JHP. The gun runs like a champ now.
I don't know if I'll keep it or not. I must say the thing is a serious tack driver for it's size but after my experiance with Kimber it left a bad taste in my mouth. No matter what I'll never buy another Kimber... that's for sure.
There are just too many good 1911s out there right now to get hung up on them. </div></div>

Glad to hear they got it back to you and it's running right.

 

[SuperXJeff]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

What the hell happened to Kimber? Just making too many guns perhaps? When I bought my Ultra carry stainless in 1999 it cost 650 dollars. It ran any and all ammo I put through it and I could hit a silver dollar every shot at 25 yards. This is sad to hear. I guess I won't buy another unless it is used and an older model.Jeff

 

[ToddM]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Well they went through a lot of changes. They started in 79' as a father/son company in OR and mostly built their rep with .22's early on. In the 80's they had financial trouble and an attempt to go public to raise funds failed, so kimber was sold to a big timber guy in OR in 89' In 90' several employees left to form Cooper arms. The new owner put kimber in full bankruptcy. In the Mid 90's the original founding Son found a financial backer from NY and purchased all the old tooling etc. This financial backer also owned Jerico precision in NY, a tooling company that was tanking due to defense spending cuts.

The founding Son was then fired and it was decided to move the operation from OR to NY (this is when quality and service tanked at kimber) in around 1998 or so. Interesting the CFO at that time who fired the son, was later convicted of embezzling $10 million from the two companies in 2004.

In reality the kimber that they built their reputation on ceased to exist after about 1999-2000. What's really unfortunate is that when compete changes like this occur that companies are not forced to change their name. Because I think if "kimber" of today would have had to start over in 2000 with a new name, instead of using the reputation the old kimber built, they would not have the reputation with the masses they do today, not even close.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Well no 1911s were ever made by the Oregon compnay, so I have two guns that say you're wrong. The early Kimber 1911s were the best guns $1000 could buy.

 

[ToddM]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Somewhat true,

The kimbers that have Clackamas marked on the frames were produced in NY, but they (at least some) were sent to OR for final fitting and finish, at least in the early days.

From that point it's hard to pinpoint exactly when things changed at kimber. I would guess it would have been about the time they shut down all operations in OR, however that's a hard date to pin down at least from my research. I'd put it somewhere in the 2000-2001 range, also keep in mind that just because you bought it after that date does not mean it was not old stock or produced prior to things taking a turn for the worse with kimber. Since both of your kimbers are 2000 or earlier that's easily possible.

I completely agree though that the early kimbers were the best guns $1000 could buy at the time, the current kimbers however have not deserved to wear the name and reputation those early guns earned for quite a few years now.

 

[JesseBB]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I shoot a lot of sporting clays out here in Northern California. One of my shooting partners bought a new SXS 20 gage shotgun from Kimber several years ago. The area between the barrels was full of rust and each time he fired the gun the rusty powder would come back in the action. It was gone for months before it was repaired. Their quality control needs help.

 

[bigwheeler]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I have a 97' kimber that was flawless in six thousand rounds in feeding and
accuracy. But at about 4 thousand rounds the rear sight (a mim part) fell in half.
Mim parts are not as strong as forged or billet and certainly contain flaws that lead
to failures as any cast part may. As far as the pistons mentioned, cast pistons are
not in the same league as forged and will fail every time in a high rpm motor, just
as cast rods will always fail, as cast cranks. Forged or billet are about always used
unless budget concerns are present.
At six thousand or so rounds a new set of springs were installed in the gun and
mags and it has continued to run without a failure. But from what I have read over
the years I would not consider a modern production 1911. A Les Baer or Wilson
would be in my radar.

 

[jml403]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

This has been a really interesting read. I just can't figure out production 1911's, I'm the exact opposite and have had nothing but problems and multiple send backs with my Springfield's (mostly a TRP). I kick myself in the ass everyday because I gave my father my CustomII that has never had 1 single failure! You'd think a 100 year old design would be easy to produce by now. When it comes to 1911's I will only be purchasing true customs in the future.

 

[EddieNFL]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You'd think a 100 year old design would be easy to produce by now.</div></div>

It is. Problems arise when bean-counters cut corners and/or quality control is over looked.

 

[ToddM]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Yep,

A lot of things have changed since 100 years ago. The original 1911 was designed to be almost 100% hand fit, tolerances were much looser, and all parts were probably made by one/two suppliers or in house so consistency was probably much better. I'd also bet they were test fired more than most guns are today. Another way companies have cut costs is they tell you do to X rounds of "break in" so basically you are test firing it for them. Many 1911's these days leave the factory with less than a box of ammo run through them, usually all FMJ.

Even when the military was using them, they were all built from a single blue print, they used a single mag design and still required frequent armory work, and again tolerances were very loose. Not to mention they only used FMJ ammo.

Now days you have the fact that many companies are trying to do as little hand fitting as possible, and most are outsourcing to several vendors even for the same part in cases. Coupled with the fact there are hundreds of suppliers and dozens of tolerances ranges for every part between them, dozens of slightly different magazines, ammo that varies significantly in overall length and some with huge hollow points (ala gold dots).

And probably the biggest factor as of late, is that customers want the absolute tightest fitting gun they can get at the cheapest price. The tighter the more customers like it, they spew if it's so tight you can barely cycle it by hand when new, and yet that's why it won't run right 90% of the time. Making a gun that tight and run 100% is very hard, it requires a lot of hand fitting and skill that most guns don't get anymore aside from higher end makers.

I liken it to a car analogy. Lets say Ferrari make their doors, trunk, hood, etc. seams so tight and close you couldn't even see them, but everything still worked fine and smooth. So customers loved this so honda, ford, chevy start doing it, making seems just as tight, but due to poor fitting and parts those areas had problems working, doors would barely open, hoods would get stuck etc. This is the same problems with 1911's now, companies have sacrificed reliability and function to make them as tight as they possibly can because that's all customers care about anymore.

 

[kbar04]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

The early Kimber 1911s were decent. The A and B model .22 rifles were outstanding. I bought a number of the .22s in the late 80s early 90s and still have one of them. The company itself...was a disorganized goat orgy even in its high times. They produced rifles they never catalogued and catalogued rifles they never produced. I have a bunch of correspondence from the original Oregon company. They made a great product then but were terrible business-wise. I do know a few former employees, Dan Cooper being one.

As far as the 1911, I put some of the fault on the aformentioned MIM parts. I still have two Colts I purchased in the 1970s and Ive never had any trouble with them as far as parts breakage(OK, my 1918 vintage pistol needed a sear spring once). They didnt have all the toys and geegaws the new guns have but they worked and didnt break....

 

[gei]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I have a Kimber SIS 5" and it feeds 200 gr H&G great, over 300 rounds and it has never jammed. I like it better then a custom 1911 I have.

 

[Sgt. 0811]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

Well, I've ran a total of 1000 rounds threw the Tactical Ultra II and so far it's been perfect since it came home from Yonkers.

The gun has re-gained my trust and I do like it but after this ordeal I have made up my mind and I will never spend money on a Kimber product again.

My final .02 on this ordeal.

 

[joshgoodwin]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

ive got a custom tle\rl 2 that has been used and treated worse than a glock the thing will shoot anything every time u pull the trigger i love mine !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!i keep reading that some kimbes become full auto whish mine would lol

 

[M4guru]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I've worked on an unusually high number of defective Kimbers over the years. Usually the problem rests with the Schwartz safety, but sometimes smaller problems can pop up. A common thread with the Kimbers is all of them seem to be very prone to rusting and finish issues. We got them at a shop I used to work at rusty from Kimber direct, and their CS was terrible for both unsatisfied customers as well as a Master Dealer.

There's nothing in a Kimber that can't be fixed (or thrown away in the case of the safety) but for the money I think they get guns out the door based on looks, not function. Series 1 Kimbers or original Clackmas guns seem to be of extremely high quality, but later Yonkers SII guns I wouldn't mess with personally.

 

[EddieNFL]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think they get guns out the door based on looks, not function. </div></div>

...or the bottom line.

 

[spr1]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I can't believe Kimber continues to get so much ink in the gun rags. Advertising dollars at work. I had a wacko .45 purchased in the late 90's, as did a friend who never did get his to run through a box of ammo. I had a .22 rifle that was fouled with Loctite from the factory such that it would not come apart. The nice customer service people in NY accused me of doing it. Oh by the way, they do, or did, use Loctite in the factory assembly process... hmmm. And, it would never feed. I will never own another Kimber.

 

[StrikeHold]

Re: Kimber fell apart...(rant)

I had a slide stop on a Tactical Pro II break in half on me. First time I ever had a handgun part break on me.

Called them about it.. The guy was pretty much an asshole on the phone about it. But they fixed it quickly, and it has run like a champ ever since (3k+ rounds).

For what its worth...