Kimber: Good Or Bad?

>>33212703
Kimber is garbage. They used to be good, but now their shit tier internals with a shiny cover.

You're paying for the brand, not the quality. Literally the Apple product of guns.

>>33212703
>double action only
Fuck no snake.
As for their 1911s it's a mixed bag. Their metal finishes always looked really good to me though.

>>33212745
they are worse than apple but yes otherwise fair description

>>33212703
in the old days they were a custom shop that might have been worth the $$$. Sadly now they cut corners on their 1911's while advertising harder than Microsoft, but with sloppier QC.
no word on their wheelgat. we will need to wait and see what happens after they've been in the wild for a few months. don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see.

Kimbers are good guns. Most of the bad shit you read about them on the internet is just retards parroting bad and old information.

My first 1911 was a Kimbed Custom II. I have about 8,000 rounds through it, and it's been a great gun, much more so than my STI Tactical 5.0 was.

We sell more Kimber 1911's at my work than all other 1911's combined, and in 4 years I've sent one back for repair. Same time period I've sent about a dozen Rock Islands back.

>>33212703
Their revolver seems nice. It's a bit pricey but apparently very well made - no shitty MIM parts. Hope they eventually make some larger models.

>>33212703
sexy looking guns that are made of inferior metals, with shit QC, and rust like that nail in the fence that your grandpa built back in the early 1990's.

>>33213579
>kimber salesman vouching for kimber
Seems fair.

>>33213933
>no MIM parts
>Kimber
Bullshit.

>>33212703
I have shot an eclipse target 1911 a little and it seems to be a fine gun. I like my grandfather's colt commander more. Most of the kimber 1911s seem gaudy to me. However the k6s looks like a dope carry revolver, but that is it.

They're fine, but overpriced compared to what they used to charge a long time ago. And by 'long time,' I mean like 30 fucking years ago.

>>33214154
http://www.gunsholstersandgear.com/2016/01/18/kimber-k6s-revolver/

Kimber makes good weapons but they're not worth the sticker price. If you can ever get one on sale or some good discount it's a decent investment but I wouldn't pay sticker price. I'm a retail wage slave at a gun store so I get 50% off MSRP, already had an ultra and I'm thinking of getting a TLE 5" bbl since it's so cheap. If it sucks I can just sell it and buy a Glock 21 or 20.

>>33212752
>>double action only
>Fuck no snake.
no I will never be able to snipe that terrorist with my snubie

>>33213933
>he fell for the fuddlore about how MIM is bad

MIM is just an manufacturing process. In the same way that forgings can vary in quality based on who did the forging and how they did it (ie Krupp vs. generic Chinese company), the end result of MIM depends on who's making the part in question. The MIM parts in a USP are as rock-solid as the rest of the gun. The pot metal MIM parts in a Kimber 1911? Not so much.

>>33212703
> REEvolve
Sounds like the gun for me

>at gun show yesterday
>300 pound bearded fudd talking about 1911s to a potential customer
>"there's just no other way to put it, doesn't matter how much money you spend, there is not a single better 1911 than a kimber"
>die on the inside

>>33214151
My store sells Kimbers too, it isn't like we get a commission or anything. I don't know why they released the Solo, which is extremely sensitive to limp wristing and your only supposed to shoot at least 124gr ammo through it. They recently discontinued it though since the Micro 9 is doing so well.
After dealing with Kimber and SA on the phone, I can definitely say that SA has

>>33214302
Through the store or the manufacturer? I get a discount from SOME manufacturers (only ordered from one so far) we sell at my big box retail store, but not all. The store doesn't give me any discount on guns/ammo.

>>33215503
Going to say I liked dealing with SA better. One of the first times I called Kimber I was on hold for 20-30 minutes.

>>33215491
That's just sad, you should have spoken up and mentioned Wilson Combat and Dan Wesson.

I mean you're practically an accessory to fraud by letting that fudd convince him to buy his inflated and polished potmetal crapomatic.

File: 1488570161899m.jpg (44KB, 1024x762px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 1024x762px

>>33212745
This. I got to shoot some of their old (pre 2000 I think) custom shop 1911's, and they were really nice, but of late they have gone the way of Remington as far as quality is concerned.

>>33214204
Have you run those price against an an inflation calculator? Easy to see if anything is overpriced and quite entertaining.

https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

>>33212703
Overpriced and sketchy QC depending on when it was made.
Even people who disagree that's true have to admit it's the reputation among gun guys.
However, people who get most of their gun info from American Rifleman ads and paid content gun rag "articles" will be impressed by your disposable income.

It's probably time to just admit revolvers are obsolete

>>33217365
Nah, they can be good light carry guns such as 5 shot .38 snubs, as well as powerful hunting handguns.

The only good option for automatic pistols which you can hunt with is the Desert Eagle, which while actually pretty capable (and laser accurate), is expensive, and has a bit of a particulat learning curve and time investment. I suppose there's also the Coonan, but it's only in one caliber.

There really isn't an easy or readily available way to have .454 Casull or .475 Linnebaugh performance in a self-loading handgun, the closest you can get is .440 CorBon and that requires 100% handloading on your part, on top of a rare collectible pistol or a custom barrel for a .50AE one, and while it's a wonderful little demon, it can only just catch up to SOME .454 loads.

There's also cowboy action competition, for which you need a wheelgat, because fun.