I didn't think we could make it through this thread without them.CounterMeasure said:
But what you can't seem to accept is that "many of us" is a very small percentage of Kimber owners.
I didn't think we could make it through this thread without them.CounterMeasure said:I wondered how long it would be before those pictures showed up in this thread too.![]()
But what you can't seem to accept is that "many of us" is a very small percentage of Kimber owners.Sorry (not really ) for reposting the stoppage photos but there's no question this is a real problem for many of us.
Pat Couteaux said:Boy, some of you guys are so sensitive...:scratch:
If that's true then why did Kimber decide to replace the slides with internal extractor models? If Kimber is in to production on External extractors and it was just a small percentage then why didn't they simply a) make the gun work, b) replace the slide with another external extractor that did work, or c) offer a refund and take the gun back. By taking the path they did I think it's pretty clear that there's a problem and not just a bunch of internet badmouthing by "a very small percentage of Kimber owners". Admittedly, I don't own any Series II Kimbers (and never will) which also means my Kimbers all have internal extractors, but I've heard enough complaints on this and other forums that I have no doubt that the problem exists no matter how much damage control rhetoric I hear from Kimber dealers. Like I've said before, if you think this is fantasy, here's a simple test you can try at home. Do a search on this or any other 1911 forum for Kimber Series II or External Extractor problems, then do a search on Kimber Series I (or pre Series II or Original Series or whatever you want to call it) problems. See which search requires the most memory.Kruzr said:But what you can't seem to accept is that "many of us" is a very small percentage of Kimber owners.
Well yes and no. Kimber is going to want to exploit the external extractor market (read: U.S. DoD). Beginning before the Great War, the U.S. Cavalry examiners noted the internal extractor's tendancy to occasionally fail when the slide is released over a chambered round. This was duly noted as a "design flaw". The Great Mr. Browning took note and subsequently worked some external extractor solutions on subsequent weapons. (None of which were directly purchased by the U.S. Military in large numbers). This "design flaw" has been passed down through the ages by DoD via historical record update procedure (read: "not"). The USMC, when it wrote recent requirements for 45ACP 1911 type systems asked that external extractors need not apply. This is probably a good idea. It is true that the majority of Kimber subscribers who own external extractor systems by Kimber have had few or no problems with them. The problem for any organisation (including Kimber) is that a substantial minority do have problems. The best solution after attempting satisfaction is to provide that individual with their preferred method of extraction (internal ex. slide). This solves the weeping, tearing of sackcloth and gnashing of teeth, while hopefully gaining a happy customer and repeat buyer. Failing that, at least eliminating their publishing negative external extractor propoganda. (Not allways successfully).Huevos said:If that's true then why did Kimber decide to replace the slides with internal extractor models? [Why not] offer a refund and take the gun back. By taking the path they did I think it's pretty clear that there's a problem.
First off, if you do a serach on Series II it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with external extractors. Kimber made Series II guns for almost 3 years before they came out with the external extractor.Huevos said:If that's true then why did Kimber decide to replace the slides with internal extractor models? If Kimber is in to production on External extractors and it was just a small percentage then why didn't they simply a) make the gun work, b) replace the slide with another external extractor that did work, or c) offer a refund and take the gun back. By taking the path they did I think it's pretty clear that there's a problem and not just a bunch of internet badmouthing by "a very small percentage of Kimber owners". Admittedly, I don't own any Series II Kimbers (and never will) which also means my Kimbers all have internal extractors, but I've heard enough complaints on this and other forums that I have no doubt that the problem exists no matter how much damage control rhetoric I hear from Kimber dealers. Like I've said before, if you think this is fantasy, here's a simple test you can try at home. Do a search on this or any other 1911 forum for Kimber Series II or External Extractor problems, then do a search on Kimber Series I (or pre Series II or Original Series or whatever you want to call it) problems. See which search requires the most memory.
Then just do a search on External Extractors like I said in my post. The reason I mentioned Series II is that a lot of people get the two issues confused (like Pat here).Kruzr said:First off, if you do a serach on Series II it has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with external extractors.
Sounds like you've put a lot of time and effort into this already. Maybe you could be more specific with your results.Kruzr said:You also have to look and see that almost all the problems you read about, are with the Ultras and some Pro size guns. If you count the posts about the problems and exclude the people who keep posting the same complaint and pictures in every thread about extractors, you'll see they certainly don't make up much more than a small percentage.
Well, at least we agree on that...Kruzr said:Manufacturers change their methods for economic reasons. The externals ended up costing Kimber more (IMO).
You mean, like one that extracts the spent shell. I guess that would be my preferred as well....stillwater said:The best solution after attempting satisfaction is to provide that individual with their preferred method of extraction (internal ex. slide).
Consumers are such babies aren't they....stillwater said:This solves the weeping, tearing of sackcloth and gnashing of teeth, while hopefully gaining a happy customer and repeat buyer. Failing that, at least eliminating their publishing negative external extractor propoganda. (Not allways successfully).![]()
Which catagory You are in is irrevelent..dont take it personal...I said I dismiss Most...not everyone.Black wallnut said:.
MikeMcF you said "Chuck I believe....But most of the others I dismiss." :scratch:
I wonder which category you place me in. Funny thing is you do not know me and I'll wager my kimber with problems that you also do not know most of these other posters that have reported problems. Perhaps you are assuming way too much.
Actually, I hear there will be a new loaded chamber indicator that I'm sure will be hated by 1911 afficionados.Ralph said:Now all they have to do is get rid of that "schwartz saftey system"(or whatever thay call it) That's something else that was never really nessessary, needed, or wanted...
Kruzr said:Whether they are great or the cause of all problems, the external extractors are on their way out. We got two new Kimbers in last week. One was a plain Custom II with an internal. The other was a Stainless TLE and it had the external.
If I had to guess by what I see, I'd say Kimber will use up their stock of external extractor slides and then they will be gone........except on the Team Match and the other high dollar one.
+1 with enthusiasm!Ralph said:Now all they have to do is get rid of that "schwartz saftey system"(or whatever thay call it) That's something else that was never really nessessary, needed, or wanted...
Dropping a round in the chamber and dropping the slide was the recommended method of loading the M1911 for quite some time. No time to check my books as to when it went out of favor with the Army, but it lasted a long time.Beginning before the Great War, the U.S. Cavalry examiners noted the internal extractor's tendancy to occasionally fail when the slide is released over a chambered round.