Not counting "race guns" built for "target shooting."  I want your opinion on what's the best top of the line "combat" gun between the two companies.

I know that the target shooting models all have very tight tolerances, which is exactly what I don't want.  I want a reliable "combat" gun that can take some dirt/abuse.

So, between the two and their "top of the line" combat models, which one would you put your life on in you could only choose one?

Thanks in advance.

They both have excellent reputations, but the Sringfield has a two piece barrel (whatever that means), so it seems to be less accurate. At least thats the gun rags take on this.

I owned a Springfield Mil-Spec and currently own a Kimber Custom Classic,(seriesI) The mil spec DID have a one peice bbl,(they had just changed to that before I bought mine)However, It did not shoot well,I had to file the front sight down because it was shooting 8" LOW at 15 yds, It also kept cracking grips (went through 2 sets) the factory did replace them, and out of the box it had some nasty razor sharp burrs on the slide,I deburred it myself,The mil spec was at that time, built using frames and slides made in Brazil, and assembled here,in the U.S. I now understand that the entire pistol is now being built in Brazil,The mil Spec did function reliably, just was'nt real accurate, was also fairly tight, and had a decent trigger pull for an out of the box pistol,The Kimber on the other hand was fit up much better, No burrs, excellent trigger pull and much,much, more accurate, mine has adj rear sights but same model can be had with fixed rear sights,Only problems I've had with ammo is when I was fooling around with some of my reloads looking for a light target load,(with both pistols) Both pistols function perfectly with factory ammo and heavier loaded reloads, Kimber gets their slide and frame forgings from Smith & Wessons's foundry, (Les Baer also uses Kimber frames and slides as a base for his pistols)I'm not gonna tell you Kimber is the best thing since sliced bread, But, I do feel Kimbers are better built and more accurate,if possible go look at both side by side, maybe shoot both,see which fits you're hands better,has better trigger pull(to you, anyway) you're going to be the one shooting it so, it should feel comfortable in you're hands, as far as tight tolerances go, Les Baer pistols are some of the tightest out there, very,very, tight, yet, they seem to hold up to dirt /abuse very well,unless you're going into combat where you're going to expose the pistol to mud,sand, dirt etc, I think that's a non-issue, after all, if you're planning on carrying it, you'll take care of it, you should anyway, you're life may depend on it....

KIMBER!

But this may end up like a ArmaLite/Bushmaster, which is better thread.

I sell both, but my preference is Kimber. Springfield does have nice weapons as well. So you really couldn't go wrong with either.

I like the 70s Series Pistols.  Kimbers are great!  I have exactly what Ralph has.  I prefer the 70s series as I said before.  If you can't find a 70s Series Kimber, Springfield is still good to go.


Go to 1911forum.com if you have more questions.

Max

Between the two?........I like STI the most.....

Since you specified "top of the line", I'll have to go with Springfield. Overall, I prefer Kimber (own one), but the TRP from Springfield is one sweet gun. If money is no problem, check out the Springfield "Bureau model", which is the one used by the FBI HRT. Guaranteed to shoot 1.25" groups at 25 yds with 230gr Golden Sabers, while mantaining whatever reliability is necessary for SWAT operators. That one goes for about $2500 or so, IIRC...

Quoted: Since you specified "top of the line", I'll have to go with Springfield. Overall, I prefer Kimber (own one), but the TRP from Springfield is one sweet gun. If money is no problem, check out the Springfield "Bureau model", which is the one used by the FBI HRT. Guaranteed to shoot 1.25" groups at 25 yds with 230gr Golden Sabers, while mantaining whatever reliability is necessary for SWAT operators. That one goes for about $2500 or so, IIRC...

As I understand it the FBI wanted to buy a combat pistol then offered all bids open to the pistol manufactors!   Colt was just too high,S%W out of the area also, But Springfield was just right on their price !

 Although I think Springfield makes a good (for the price) gun its not the top of the line!  But
Then they didn't have any quotes from Remmington Rand either!

 Bob  

kimber

I have the Kimber Super Match and could not imagine having a finer out of the box firearm.

Everybody knows that Kimber gets thier frames from Smith and Wesson, right? I have a Springfield Professional, and I'm tickeled pink with it. It shoots BETTER than my friends Kimber, and is a better looking gun IMO. SA pistols have come a long way in the past few years. Don't knock 'em.

They're both good guns.

I am a bit partial to Springfield though.

I've had a mil-spec, which i've had worked on, for sometime now. Its has a Brazialian frame and was finished in the U.S., it had no fit or finish problems.

The newer Springfields are really nice, I plan to get a Trophy Match later. I compared it to the equilalent Kimber (the store has both brands in stock) and it was a nice gun. The fit, finish and features were better and it was about $100-200 less.

One day though i'd like to get a Kimber too, can't have too many 1911's!

I like kimbers but dont own one yet.

Im looking to get the ultra carry model.

oz

Quoted: Everybody knows that Kimber gets thier frames from Smith and Wesson, right?

That is simply not true.  Do a search at www.1911forum.com and you will find out that Kimber makes their own forgings and frames..

I looked at the Springfield but it just felt horrible in the hand to me, the Kimber fits like a glove.  I now have two Kimbers and they are both great.  That said, I would have no problem with a Springfield either, they are both good guns.  I just like the way the Kimber feels better.