Originally posted by blacklab:
b.b., were you standing next to me? I'am serious. The Kimber WAS put down in front of me as an example of what a 1911A1 should be. I have nothing against Kimber but the one I saw looked like a bar of soap around the muzzle. Just don't care for them. I like Colts. Why are dealers so hot on the Kimbers?
Quite honestly, I think the $800 + dollars for the Colt WWII repro is not worth it, but obviously people are buying them. YMMV.
Dealers are hot on Kimbers because they sell, they are available in quantity, and their quality is very good for the money.
Kimber alone has almost put Colt out of business, caused Springfield to make "Loaded" guns, and redefined what you expect from a 1911.
10 Years ago, the quality from Colt, well really wasn't quality. Now currently, Colt has changed that issue, but the damage has been done.
After Colt's announcement about 18 months ago that they are pretty much dropping a majority of their product line, most people believed that they were going bankrupt again for the 3rd time in 25 years.
And, Colt hasn't done much to market that they are still around. Probably because they don't have the tooling, capacity, and/or desire to manufacture more than they are putting out now.
I have a Colt Defender because at the time, there was no comparative product. I bought it kicking and screaming. But, it has turned out to be quite a decent gun. But honestly, the edges were sharp, and the fit and finish are a little below what you can get on a Kimber. As in, my thumb safety is not as crisp, and it goes beyond the detent when I flip it off -- it has play. So, I would give the Colt a "B", and the Kimber an "A-".
Since I purchased it, Colt has moved to a less satisfying thumb safety, grip safety, staked front sight, and "post" type rear sights (instead of Novak-like). I think that is a bad move. What they offer as far as features would be considered "lower" than what the rest of the industry offers now.
Granted, if you are a Colt fan, then you certainly will not be dissapointed by what the company is putting out. But given that I would want to replace the sights, thumb and grip safety to get what the Kimber already has, I might as well just get the Kimber to begin with and pocket the difference that it would cost to add them to the Colt.
So, that being said, I understand why dealers are pushing Kimbers. But, you have asked for a Colt, and the dealer is being unethical by lying about them. In that, you should find yourself another dealer. I don't stand for that BS. I would have certainly put that jerk to task right then and there.
Its one thing to put a Kimber and a Colt side by side and ask the customer to decide what fits them best. However, its totally inexcusable to lie about something because you don't have it in stock and you want to make a sale.
[This message has been edited by Gun Nut (edited 11-13-2001).]