Posted: 3/12/2008 12:49:11 PM EDT
| Has anyone held, shoot or personaly seen the new kimber SIS line? If so what do you think? |
|
I don't know what it is, but EVERY goddamn gun rag I pick up has one of them on the cover. They're just Kimbers with gimmicky cocking serrations. I don't see what the big deal is. The writers are fawning over them like they're these innovative, super-lethal SWAT guns. They're not. They're Kimbers. That would make them the OPPOSITE of the above. |
| To me, the SIS is more than "just another Kimber" because it is NOT a series II design, which I will never own again. It does not use any type of fps, it has an internal extractor, checkering, night sights, long solid trigger, "speedbump" beavertail, and GI guide rod. All things that people have been asking for in a Kimber for years. Yes, the SIS serrations are a bit tacky and only there for the hype. But if you hand a gun to somone, I bet they won't realize they are the letters S I S until you point it out. Bottom line, I've been a Kimber "hater" for years since losing a lot of money on two junk series II guns, and I'm getting ready to get one of these this weekend. YMMV. |
I've handled a couple of them and had the opportunity to compare them to other Kimbers, and the machining, finish and general quality are identical. In other words, standard Kimber. I wasn't impressed. In fact the example I examined had poor frame-to-slide fit, machining marks on the frame, and a less-than-desirable beavertail installation. |
| I read the article in G&A this month. Even being a kimber guy, I wasnt that impressed with the specs. I hate to facilitate a myth but I think a previous poster hit it on the head in saying that it looks like a Kimber Warrior with new grips, 20 lpi stipling and the "sis" serrations on the slide. |
Care to tell us all then WHAT would make them so extra-special, please?????  I guess if "SIS" on the slide gives someone a woody, then they have it available for purchase................ 
|
| I always get a laugh out of reading this forum. So many guys bash a gun with expert opinions gained from reading about it online or maybe even after having held one in a gun store! Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, I just wish people would quit spouting their opinion as fact. I would post some news after I shoot my new SIS, but from the sound of it, it will probably blow up in my hand and I won't be able to type. Or maybe it is so ugly it will make me blind when I see it in person and I won't be able to type. Come on guys, how about posting some first hand experiences and facts for a change, not the same old "it's a Kimber, it has to be crap" BS. |
I have no problem with judging a gun based on its construction and workmanship. The examples I held at the gun show were poor at best. Kimber's reputation is not entirely undeserved. I can't trust the gun magazines for a fair deal, because they wouldn't print anything negative about a company that buys ad space from them. Kimber almost always has at least two full-page, full color ads in the major rags, so they're guaranteed a glowing review. |
|
Nothing to get excited about IMO. The gun won't do anything the Warrior isn't already doing, except for the rear "cocking surface" sight. Supposedly it has a new hammer design, but what this really brings to the table I can't imagine. I like the solid trigger and I think the gun wouldn't look bad at all if you could mill off the SIS serrations and put CT Brian - style serrations in the milled-out pockets. |
Believe me, companies are ALWAYS worried about their sales. Personally I won't ever consider a Kimber 1911 again, and I know I'm not alone. That's what they should be worried about. |
You mean like the Marine Corps? Perpetuating your dislike of a gun manufacturer is one thing but calling all who own Kimbers "rookie" is a little bit immature isnt it? |
The Kimber-haters come out at night! I've got a dreaded series II, and I like it. Smooth, nice little piece. Funny how the forum warriors are susceptable to mob mentality.. I'd like to have one of the SIS RL guns - but if I knew I were going to a fight I'd be fumbling for my Glock, so the kimber vs. springer vs. custom debate is not real important to me. Nevertheless, after playing with a few SIS, I think they're quite nice! I think, for the most part, the only guys who take the time to spam a forum with kimber-related posts are those who have had a bad experience (or don't have anything else to do and enjoy the "have you heard" thrill). For every one of those, there are probably ten guys out shooting their prized Kimbers! Mine compares well with my Springer Loaded, TRP, and Pro. They are all good quality machines, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy any of them.
|
|
Picked one up last night, a Ultra SIS 3". Fit and finish are great, have not had it out to put rounds down range. Will post the results when I do. I am currently carrying an older classic stainless Kimber for duty. Have had zero issues with my duty pistol, other than a bad mag. The mag was a wilson 47D that had finally worn out after 10+ years. |
Best os luck with your new pistol! Can you confirm that it uses the Series I internals? No Schwarz safety system? Thanks! |
Not as immature to say where *I* have badmouthed Kimber, nor where I called their owners "rookies". Care to give an example, sir? If comprehension is sometimes difficult for you, please let me know & I will gladly do so...................... My point to Mr. Mays was that there are plenty of new 1911 buyers out there who may buy a Kimber w/o knowing or even hearing of any problems they may or do have. Not everyone researches their gun purchases as much as an arfcom member, I assure you. You want to own a Kimber, have at it. You're happy with yours, more power to you. I myself looked at their 10mm 1911 model & almost bought it were it not for the $1,000 price tag on it. 
|
Can you decode this for me? I don't understand Tennesseeze but from the best of my reccolection, when you start a paragraph in the first person you end it the same way. In any case, when I look up (7) posts you make an inference to the "fact" that "rookie" buyers keep Kimber in business. Is that posted there or am I hallucinating? Maybe I interpret in a different way than you intend it but as I said, I don't speak Tennesseeze. Feel free to "enlighten" me. |
Translation, AKA cutting the inflammatory crap slinging... Kimber, ALONG WITH MANY OTHER COMPANIES, is one such manufacturer with a certain amount of clout that through word of mouth and through past/current advertising can make a pistol ranging from mediocre to absolute shit and they will continue to sell many many crap pistols to the unwary who know the name or read the ad. This is not necessarily a factual assessment of what Kimber makes currently, but if they did in fact decide to cut all corners and make absolute shit pistols for maximum profits, it would be years and years before the mismanagement would threaten the company's sales. Seemed simple enough for me to understand
|
|
Sorry, but that statement is far from absurd. It happens all the time where a company earns a great reputation (which Kimber did in the past) and then let's their overall quality, or their QC, or the position as a market leader slip (speaking in generalities here, it could be automobiles or soft drinks or clothing or firearms). The company falls into the old trap of "resting on their reputation". It will eventually catch up with them, but that can in fact take years. Sometimes many years. And as far as I recall, personal attacks are unwelcome. ETA, maybe I got lucky. I bought a Desert Warrior a couple years back, and it's been great. Sure wouldn't care to go through all the trouble I've been reading about from a Kimber. |
  Hello Kkramer, and welcome to Arfcom and the shooting world in general. It is clear such a welcome is in order because the only way somebody can be THAT oblivious about the statement in discussion is if he were new here and had nothing to rely upon other than his understanding of how capitalism works (and even then I am restraining the urge to blow your absurd theory out of the water by mentioning products made by the UAW). Name brand loyalty and ignorance can keep 75% of these companies afloat for years, and it has already done so. Ever hear of Colt? They should have been extinct based on this very concept given their price/performance of the 1980s combined with the stagnation of their marketing innovativeness from the 1980s-1990s, particulary after Kimber came onto the scene in the 1990s and offered a quality 1911 with features at a bargain price. Ever hear of Para Ordnance? Lots of people had to try that modified widebody 1911, and that first Para with its reliabilty and accuracy made a believer out of many (including myself). Then the customer selects a Para manufactured in the last 5 years. Many have found then and there the true crappiness of Para workmanship. Badly executed MIM, Improper heat treatment causing peening at the slides, casting voids, etc. It would be one thing if they were selling their line for $550 and people take the bad with the "bargain", but most of their pistols cost as much as the high-level production pieces. Thus Para is one company that by your assertions, should have shut its doors for customer dissatisfaction by 2006. Nevertheless, they continue to sell pistols, DESPITE their quality/price. Go look up how much a Para model X costs. Now go look on the EE here. Notice a disgusting difference in price? It's because you can't sell a Para unless you are pointing it at the buyer's chest with the safety off. Those who know will not buy one (unless the deal is way too good to pass up). Yet they continue to churn them out. You need to get an education. |
)
