Posted: 8/29/2005 12:52:30 PM EDT
| . |
| Kimber really cheaped out on the Warrior. Knockoff grips, beavertail and sights. More MIM than you can shake a stick at. A TLE/RL frame instead of a Dawson rail. Apparently they could make more money building the Warrior instead of selling the much better Det 1 pistol. |
Precisely. IMO, The Kimber Warrior is good for it's frame, slide and barrel--everything else needs to be chucked. It is a decent starting point, but no more than that. This is assuming we are talking about a gun that is intended for some good, hard use. [email protected] |
I wouldn't even be interested in the barrel. Its a loose fit thing anyway. If I wanted a chrome moly barrel I would get a Kart. Did you see the Colt Commercial that Steve Bailey built and posted pics of on the first page at LTW? I bought it. 
|
And when I intercept it later this week I’m gonna’ break it in properly...  RE: Warrior vs. Det-1... Kimber is very good at marketing and I’m sure just calling the gun the “Warrior” will sell quite a few pistols... they'd probably sell more if the called it the “Tactical Warrior”.  But (and as others have alluded to) IMO the Warrior is a starting point and not a very good one at that. Like the “TLE”, the gun is marketed towards those who aspire to emulate those who actually do and is really nothing more special than a Series 1 Kimber "Custom" with a stupid rail and a lanyard loop. |
Hey, could you call Ted and have him put a Dawson rail on it before he ships it up? I kid! Hey, feel free to shoot it. If you can, I'd like to have a picture of what it can do from sandbags a 25 yards. If you get it and start doing Clint Smith impressions with it, I might not be happy! 
|
