The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old September 13, 2012, 06:35 PM   #26
igousigloo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 22, 2011
Location: central Ohio
Posts: 134
Under normal firing I can see no way for you to peen the firing pin hole in the slide. You might wear it a little larger or if using hardened primers, peen the firing pin. However the firing pin stop or the firing pin at the back I can see being peened.
igousigloo is offline  
Old September 13, 2012, 07:11 PM   #27
1911Tuner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Location: NC Piedmont/Foothills
Posts: 605
Quote:
Under normal firing I can see no way for you to peen the firing pin hole in the slide. You
Easy explanation.

Assuming .45 Auto, when the powder ignites, some 20,000 pounds per square inch of pressure slams into the base of the bullet, and at the same instant, 20,000 pounds per square inch of pressure slams into the breechface through the case. Shoot it enough, and the breechface will deform.
__________________
If your front porch collapses and kills more than three dogs...You just might be a redneck
1911Tuner is offline  
Old September 13, 2012, 07:26 PM   #28
1911Tuner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Location: NC Piedmont/Foothills
Posts: 605
Kimber

Quote:
I held off as long as I could... but, it always seems that the longer a Kimber thread goes, the more outlandish the remarks.
True that.

The explanation is simple. Kimber built a few pistols with soft slides.

The old unhardened, pre-1936 USGI slides got beat up in the breechface area pretty badly within about 8-10k, causing the firing pins to hang up. The hardened steel inserts cured it.

Modern slide of proper hardness will last a lot longer...but they'll still peen if they see a lot of shooting.
__________________
If your front porch collapses and kills more than three dogs...You just might be a redneck
1911Tuner is offline  
Old September 13, 2012, 07:35 PM   #29
tomrkba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2011
Posts: 602
I had a very bad experience with Kimber. The gun was almost incidental in the experience. They had several opportunities to fix the problems with the gun, but decided to lie to me about their work. Companies with such poor customer service (it sounded great at first) deserve to go out of business. There is no excuse for it.

Hilton Yam has several articles on his website about what is needed to turn a 1911 into a duty gun. Departments would have far fewer problems if they would follow those guidelines.
tomrkba is offline  
Old September 13, 2012, 07:43 PM   #30
TacticalDefense1911
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Some people aren't smart enough to own a 1911, sadly that is a fact and they should stick to something like a Glock or M&P.
On the flip side, lots of people understand the short-falls of the 1911 platform and understand the merits of modern polymer guns. Every platform has pros and cons. 1911's are maintenance heavy which can be an issue for a police department, especially those on tight budgets. They are also expensive in relation to typical service type polymer guns which means that having back-up guns is somewhat problematic. Almost every part necessitates hand fitting in comparison to polymer guns where drop-in parts are the norm.

Breaking ambi safeties is nothing new. They are an inherently weak design so I don't see that as a Kimber issue. Any production gun can, and will have issues that need to be taken care of. Even many higher end 1911's could benefit from some tweaking out of the box. Kimber makes an okay gun; I don't like the Schwartz safety and that is my biggest issue with them. Also, the "break-in" period says nothing more to me then "we don't fit our guns very well at the factory so you will have some metal on metal contact in the first 500 rounds to fix what we should have done at the factory". While I don't have a problem with MIM, I find it funny that they charge high-end production gun money (Dan Wesson type money) for a gun full of less expensive MIM parts that is not fit even close to the same level. They are not fit so tight they need a "break-in" period. Personally, there are better guns available for the same money so my money goes elsewhere.
TacticalDefense1911 is offline  
Old September 13, 2012, 07:55 PM   #31
Mystro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2004
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 1,141
Funny, my Kimber Grand Raptor 2 will print a 2" group at 50 yards and feeds anything I give it. Its probably the most accurate 1911 I have owned. A absolute bargain for what it cost. It's actually more accurate than some of my IPSC Limited race guns I paid 2k above the cost of the Colt 1911 to have modded by a very well known gunsmith years ago. I would bet my and my families life on it. It doesn't know it's not a custom 1911, it just performs like one.
Mystro is offline  
Old September 14, 2012, 04:59 PM   #32
Coltman 77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,244
Quote:
I held off as long as I could... but, it always seems that the longer a Kimber thread goes, the more outlandish the remarks. The only way to make it through such posts is to remember that these are opinions. And, many of those are based on no firsthand knowledge of the firearm manufacturer in question.

I posted sourced verified facts about Kimber products not "outlandish remarks" or opinions.

In case you missed it, here it is again: Sometimes the truth hurts, sorry if it bursts your Kimber bubble but sometimes we all have to man up and face the truth.

Quote:
This reminds me of a recent incident with Kimber 1911's poor quality in NC.

" Little more than a year after buying 150 collector-grade handguns, officials at the N.C. Division of Alcohol Law Enforcement say the $1,055 pistols were so unreliable they had to get rid of them.

ALE Director John Ledford said the Kimber pistols repeatedly suffered such problems as rounds jamming during training exercises, broken sights and the weapon's safety button sometimes falling off. He made a deal with a local firearms dealer to swap the pricey pistols for less expensive handguns without spending any additional money.

"Failure of a weapon during training is problematic enough, but if any of these types of failures occurred during a life-and-death situation the result could be loss of life to a sworn member of the division or an innocent civilian," Ledford wrote in a November memo to justify the new weapons. "During violent encounters with armed suspects, reliability and speed are paramount."


Link: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/...nreliable.html
__________________
"A man can be destroyed but not defeated".
Ernest Hemingway

Protect our 2nd Amendment Rights -- Join the NRA
Coltman 77 is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 03:10 AM   #33
mete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2004
Location: NY State
Posts: 5,282
Complaints of guns and other things have to be considered related to time.When guns started to be made with MIM parts they thought every part would work fine if MIM. That's dumb idea .It was a new technology at that time. That has improved.To think everything could be MIM is crazy .Obviously the various gun companies didn't have many smart gunsmiths or engineers.

I'm surprised that no one has mentions Kimber's attempt to change to external extractor .That didn't work, I don't know why.

One problem common to 1911 type pistols is the short barrel Once you get barrels shorter than Commander length you have more chance of getting an unreliable gun. But people want the shorties.

So put things into perspective .Was a problem fixed ? Was new technology used .Almost every gun maker has had it's problems .Even S&W had very bad times , new ownership, union problems ,difficulty in finding skilled people ,Gov't forcing them to hire unskilled labor [the 'wonderful ' "affirmative action" ]
__________________
And Watson , bring your revolver !
mete is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 07:17 AM   #34
Mystro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2004
Location: Central Pa.
Posts: 1,141
"One problem common to 1911 type pistols is the short barrel Once you get barrels shorter than Commander length you have more chance of getting an unreliable gun. But people want the shorties."

This is a absolute truth. No matter who makes the gun, there always is more trouble the farther away you get from the original 1911 size. I went through this with a Colt Officer. It was maddening. I won't carry any micro 1911 as a CCW. I will say I know a number of plainclothes detectives that choose to carry a officer size 1911. I wouldn't feel comfortable but they seem too.
Mystro is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 03:59 PM   #35
Coltman 77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 3, 2009
Location: NC
Posts: 1,244
Rinspeed:

Quote:
If I remember right most of those 1911s were 3" barrel pistols. Only a dipsheet pencil pusher would approve a 3" 1911 for anything less than recreational shooting. That is a fact.
It doesn't matter whether the barrels were 3, 4.25 or 5 inches. The point is the Kimber pistols failed miserably. That's a fact.
__________________
"A man can be destroyed but not defeated".
Ernest Hemingway

Protect our 2nd Amendment Rights -- Join the NRA
Coltman 77 is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 04:51 PM   #36
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,214
1STSFODD,

Trigger on the Kimber is light and crisp (but not as light as my DW CBOB), and the duck tail grip safety works very well (it came that way.)

The gun, being original 1911 design, does not have a firing pin lock nor does the grip safety have anything to do with such a lock. It only prevents the trigger from moving back.

Deaf
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 06:32 PM   #37
Rinspeed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2000
Posts: 1,108
Quote:
It doesn't matter whether the barrels were 3, 4.25 or 5 inches. The point is the Kimber pistols failed miserably. That's a fact.


It's quite obvious you don't get it but that's ok, keep preaching the hate.
Rinspeed is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 06:46 PM   #38
Chuckusaret
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 708
My question, why do they need a $1100 sidearm to begin with. I just got a Kimber Solo CDP with laser($1300) and IMHO it isn't any better than my XD40 SC with laser. It might look better but is no more accurate and reliability is yet to be determined, I only have about a hundred rounds thru it.
Chuckusaret is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 07:21 PM   #39
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
Ads vs high quality...

Kimber spending a lot of $ on ads or PR/marketing does NOT directly mean all their 1911a1 series pistols will be high quality.
At one point, in the mid 2000s, Kimber America did sell more 1911 type single action models than any other major factory(ParaUSA, Colt, S-A, Taurus, S&W, etc). Their QC and customer satisfaction seems to have gone down in the last 5 years or so.

Another point about ads; in the 1980s(before the web or digital media), Smith & Wesson ran a print ad crowing about Ruger's use of thick steel parts in it's DA revolvers. Mainly saying the L frame 686/586 revolvers used better steel/fabrication.
S&W used a thick hamburger shaped like a GP100. It was a wierd ad that really made no sense. Wouldnt you want a double action revolver to be designed(thick) to safely handle magnum rounds? I know I would.

Clyde
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 08:19 PM   #40
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
The point of that ad was that the L frame was somewhat less bulky, due to superior steel. IE, the Ruger was bulkier, but not stronger.
MLeake is offline  
Old September 15, 2012, 08:33 PM   #41
Rinspeed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 1, 2000
Posts: 1,108
Quote:
Another point about ads; in the 1980s(before the web or digital media), Smith & Wesson ran a print ad crowing about Ruger's use of thick steel parts in it's DA revolvers. Mainly saying the L frame 686/586 revolvers used better steel/fabrication.




Never seen it.











Rinspeed is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 12:29 PM   #42
Deaf Smith
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 31, 2000
Location: Texican!
Posts: 3,214
Quote:
My question, why do they need a $1100 sidearm to begin with.
Why do we need Ferraris? Why do we need Corvettes? Why do we need 1500 CC motorcycles?

Cause some people want to spent a grand or a gun or a thousand grand on a car, that is why.

I've got a few pistols worth over a grand, and a few rifles that come close. You've seen my Kimber, here is my early DW CBOB. And a few of my S&W N frames are close to that grand line now.



Sure I pack a Glock and S&W 642, but I to like those real well fitted guns to. And if you can afford to pack much $$ guns, well go ahead. I don't think it will raise your SD quotient any, but it might raise you smug quotient.

Deaf
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CBOB02.jpg (70.2 KB, 88 views)
__________________
"The government has confiscated all of our rights and is selling them back to us in the form of permits."
Deaf Smith is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 02:00 PM   #43
1911Tuner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Location: NC Piedmont/Foothills
Posts: 605
re:

Quote:
The point of that ad was that the L frame was somewhat less bulky, due to superior steel. IE, the Ruger was bulkier, but not stronger.
Although they're nearly brothers from another mother, the GP-100 frame is a bit stronger than the Smith L-Frame. Thicker in the top strap in order for a casting to equal the strength of steel...but the Smith has a removable side plate while the Ruger doesn't, and is thus more rigid.

Going in, I like Ruger's single-action revolvers a lot. Their double-actions...not so much...but they are stronger than equivalent-sized Smiths and Colts. Just a mechanical reality.

And back on topic..

Kimber is subject to the same laws governing any mass-produced gun. There have been good ones and bad ones. I'm not a Kimber fan boy either by the way.
__________________
If your front porch collapses and kills more than three dogs...You just might be a redneck
1911Tuner is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 03:02 PM   #44
Chuckusaret
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 5, 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 708
Quote:
Why do we need Ferraris? Why do we need Corvettes? Why do we need 1500 CC motorcycles?

Cause some people want to spent a grand or a gun or a thousand grand on a car, that is why.
You did not read, and if you did, did not comprehend what the OP stated.................
He talked about law enforcement sidearms, Kimbers, and it is not their money, it is the taxpayers money and with our county, state and federal budget shortfalls, I do believe a much cheaper, just as accurate and reliable weapon is available. Kimber's reliablty is nothing to brag about, I own two.
Chuckusaret is offline  
Old September 16, 2012, 07:08 PM   #45
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,052
Well, we've drifted pretty far off topic, and members are sniping at each other. Those who have seen their posts deleted need to give some serious consideration toward being more civil in the future.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11434 seconds with 8 queries