1911Forum banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
610 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
What will we bicker over now? Kimber used the term "series 1" to describe a no-schwartz safety gun on page 15 of the 2020 catalogue. Now we can't snottily inform the unwashed masses that the correct term is "pre-series II". What's next, we won't be allowed to correct people who erroneously say "clip" instead of "magazine"? https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2014/3/6/clips-vs-magazines/
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,235 Posts
I hope they put "Series I" on the slide. Now I have a Stainless Gold Match made in 2001 according to a phone call to Kimber which does not have the Swartz type mechanical firing pin safety. It has had a number of mods over the years. I got to field strip it and put about 200 rounds through it before I bought it from a friend. I think Kimber introduced the Series II in 2002 so I would consider mine a "pre Series II".



Since that picture I have put a new magwell on it and the FLGR got replaced with a tradition guide rod and plug.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,422 Posts
I've always been a Series I guy ever since they came out with the Series II models and always thought it was silly when someone said "there's no such thing as Series I". However, since Kimber has re-introduced more models without the Swartz safety i.e. Series I, I think the "Pre-Series II" moniker actually makes sense for the models before the introduction of the Series II models. That's my opinion anyway. YMMV... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,419 Posts
I've always been a Series I guy ever since they came out with the Series II models and always thought it was silly when someone said "there's no such thing as Series I". However, since Kimber has re-introduced more models without the Swartz safety i.e. Series I, I think the "Pre-Series II" moniker actually makes sense for the models before the introduction of the Series II models. That's my opinion anyway. YMMV... :)

I agree. I have a "series I" Ultra Carry. I bought it in the 1990's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
308 Posts
Why don't they call the ones without firing pin obstructions "Series 70?"
Everybody else does.
Now there you go, thinking logically. ;)

The Series 70 moniker may have connotations of Colt, so maybe in their corporate mind, it had to be something different. We all know what it means anyway, even if they try to disguise it by 'branding'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,509 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
74,696 Posts
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
610 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
And I was afraid we were going to run out of things to bicker about... I should have known better than to doubt you guys 😉
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
20,434 Posts
I was an early Kimber collector. They created the semi-custom world. And I had a bunch! But a few years later when the Series-II came out I tried one, the grip safety timing was off, sent it back, they said it was normal, and I moved up the ladder from Kimber. Now if you are talking 1996-2001 I'd agree it's a fine weapon. Of course then came the external extractor debacle.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,603 Posts
I have a pre series II Ultra Carry made in July 1999 and it has been a very good gun.
I have wondered at times whether to call it pre series II or series I.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,509 Posts
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
Doesn't Kimber use the Swartz firing pin safety? I don't know, I always assumed they did.

I realize S&W has often been tagged with using the Swartz, when in fact they never did, but instead used the Mochak firing pin safety. https://patents.google.com/patent/US6374526B1/en
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
610 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
Doesn't Kimber use the Swartz firing pin safety? I don't know, I always assumed they did.

I realize S&W has often been tagged with using the Swartz, when in fact they never did, but instead used the Mochak firing pin safety. https://patents.google.com/patent/US6374526B1/en
Kimber does use the swartz safety. They just don't own the licensing to call it that.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,819 Posts
Have 2 Kimber's a cdp 11 with external extractor and an Ultra carry both late 1990's guns. Both are great guns .
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
74,696 Posts
I really miss the Kimber Classic Custom that I traded off many years ago. It was a Clackamas-marked gun and one of the first 3000 Kimber 1911s ever made. That thing was an absolute tack driver. What did I trade it for, you ask? One of the new Series IIs, an Eclipse. Although accurate, it had multiple reliability issues related to the FP safety, and I eventually sold it out of frustration. I'm assuming Kimber ironed out the bugs in later guns since they continue to make them, but having made the dumb move of letting go of one of my best-shooting 1911s just for a pretty-looking turd I was left with too bitter a taste in my mouth.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top