• Welcome to the new SAOCA website. Already a member? Simply click Log In/Sign Up up and to the right and use your same username and password from the old site. If you've forgotten your password, please send an email to membership@sunbeamalpine.org for assistance.

    If you're new here, click Log In/Sign Up and enter your information. We'll approve your account as quickly as possible, typically in about 24 hours. If it takes longer, you were probably caught in our spam/scam filter.

    Enjoy.

Kimber or Springfield?

Series3Scott

Co-Founder/Past President
Platinum Level Sponsor
I want a 1911 .45 and have narrowed it down to Kimber or Springfield. Anybody have any experience with either and have an opinion one way or another? Both feel great in the hand and both are great quality. Considered the 4" for conceal but decided to do it right with the standard 5".

Yes I considered H&K, Sig, and others in .40 and 9mm but just love the feel of a 1911 .45. I'm going to get the night sights and maybe a light rail too but have to pick a manufacturer first. Trying to stay under $1,200.
 

AndreaG

Donation Time
I don't have an opinion one way or the other....just wanted to say how jealous I am!

If I were in the market, I would also want a .45. I'm partial to Sigs though. I have a P239 in .40, but I would love a P220. The hubs has a .45 H & K, which is also very nice.

I can't believe the price jump! When I bought my Sig about eight years ago, it was around $550 - and that was WITH night sights installed. I was at a gun store the other day, and the same exact model was $800+. Sort of makes a new one a little cost prohibitive.

Good luck with whichever you choose!
 

Series6

Past President
Gold Level Sponsor
.45 Acp

Scott,

There are few things I can speak on with authority but after over 150,000 rounds of .45 shooting IPSC, USPSA, SOF 3 Gun, PPC and SWPL matches from 1979 thru 1990 I can discuss John Moses Browning's magnificent 1911. If you'd like to call me sometime PM me.

(PS-I also shot 9mm, 38SPL, 357, 45LC, 223, 308 and a bunch of 12 gauge 00 buck and slugs in Practical, Tactical, Police, Alternate Action, Steel Challenge, Cowboy Action Shooting and Bowling Pin matches.)

I bought a Kimber. The rest of my .45ACP's are Colts.
 

volvoguys

Diamond Level Sponsor
I've never sampled a Springfield but I can tell you for sure the Kimber is a great gun. My son has the 1911 .45 ACP and I believe is far better than the Colt. Wish I tried it before I bought the Glock.

Mark
 

jumpinjan

Bronze Level Sponsor
There was a great buy on Lithuanian police guns (9mm) for $300. I got one about 4 years ago now. Its not a .45, but at that price, so what?
Jan
 
L

Lee DeRamus saoca0404

Scott,
I also have shot a lot of competition with the 1911. I would have to do an imventory to see how many I have left, but it is in double digits. I started competitoin in 1964, and have put quite a few rounds through them. My choice would be the Kimber. I have one now, and several Colts. I also have built quite a few from parts. I have owned 2 Springfields, and while they are good, IMHO the Kimber is better. I have no idea how many rounds I have fired in pistol, high power rifle(M1 Garand) and small bore rifle (with the Louisiana National Guard) I also, like Nick, feel qualified to speak on this. While I have not done any competion shooting since 1989, when I was run over by a truck when riding my Harley, I still shoot a lot. I also would recommend the shorter 4 inch. My wife and I both have CCW permits, and both see no advantage over the longer 5 inch. The accuracy is the same, and the velocity is not much less. It is amazing how nicer that one inch less is for concealed carry.
Lee
 

Series6

Past President
Gold Level Sponsor
I had a Garand for a year and I couldn't hit a thing with it. A friend of mine offered to check it out for me and he was hitting a steel plate 300 yards away with no problem. He had one in Korea. I sold it to him and bought an HK91.
 
L

Lee DeRamus saoca0404

Now, Nick, thats comparing apples to oranges. I bought one of the first HK's to come into the country. They were originally 41's and 43's. The Gov later found out that the barrels were 1/4" too short, and they came out with the 91's and 93's. I mounted a Leatherwood ART scope on it, and took it to the range with a friend to sight it in. We sighted his Browning BAR 30-06 in first and was able to get 2 inch groups at 100 yards. He said "well thats not bad for a semi auto". I sighted my HK and shot less than 3/4" groups. I looked at him and said "well thats not bad for a semi auto". He was not happy!! Back in my youth, they didn't have all the types of matches that they have now. I still have a couple of Garands, and I have a fondness for them. But I wouldn't sell my HK, unless the new administration forces me to.
Lee
 

lgurley

Donation Time
If anyone has an ammo clip for a .303 Enfield please pm me.
I might even buy a whole rifle just to get the clip. My rifle was my Father's deer slayer and it filled the freezer during my youth. It has sentimental value. When my Mother gave it to me someone had lost the clip.
 

Series6

Past President
Gold Level Sponsor
Here we go...

The Garand is called "The Rifleman's Rifle" and it's well earned. It just felt like a brick to me. Jerry could out shoot me with my own Garand standing vs me prone. No matter if I stood up, went prone, used sandbags... I could never get what I considered a good group. :eek:

With my CAR, if it's under 300 meters I was fine, with the HK if it was under 600 I owned it. I'm thinking of building a Remington 700. After the second V6 is done. There are priorities, ya know...

Ok, back to 1911's.
 

chris

Donation Time
Over the years of my career I've carried a verity of weapons. Out of all of them I liked the Sig P220 best.

My second favorite is the Colt 1911. I love the way the 1911 fits my hand and believe it or not with the grip safety cocked and locked is relatively safe. I think the new Kimber is very similar to the 1911, but double action on the first pull, so you don't have to go cocked and locked. If it were my choice I'd go with the Kimber.

S&W 686 .357
S&W 36 .38
Glock 22 .40
Glock 23 .40
Sig P220 .45
Colt 1911 .45
 

lgurley

Donation Time
Did the Enfield use a clip like a Garand?[/QUOTE]

I appreciate the link. I am not sure what the Garand clip looks like. The Enfield was two cartridges wide and protruded about an inch and a half below the body of the rifle. I believe I remember that it held ten rounds.
 

Jim E

Donation Time
Funny what we all have in common. I have wanted a colt since I first shot one in the Navy, have not shot a bunch of rounds thru one but mercy I have carried one around for many many hours while on watch and for security alert team. I was always amazed when we went to the range and shot these guns. The pieces at the range had had LOTS of rounds thru them and you could tell the wear, shake'em and they rattled but I never had or saw one fail to fire. The guns we had on board were a different story they may have been issued to the ship when it was built in the 40s but they were like brand new just beuatiful!

Once while on watch at anchor off the coast of Oman [early 80s when iran was doing stupid stuff] came a cats whisker from having to cap a guy who was about to break a safe gaurd. Local guy in a fishing boat was about to jump on the ladder and come aboard.... an offence you die for being the order is no warning shots and shoot to kill. My only thoughts were can I hit this guy the bottom of the ladder was about 60 feet away from me. Then a nick from one of these could very well be a mortal hit. But then that is what these guns were made for close in stopping power.

I bet a vintage Colt like we had on board ship would be a heck of an investment over time and I am sure it would do what the modern units will when it came down to using it for what they are made to do, putting large nasty holes in people. I know I want one! at least the range would be a little further than my current home protection devie....
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2768.JPG
    IMG_2768.JPG
    54.1 KB · Views: 22

jumpinjan

Bronze Level Sponsor
Which begs the question: Does the helmet "capture" the sound and seemingly amplify it? Having never been in the military, I was just curious.
I think its standard safety practice to wear ear protection with or without a helmet on. My Mauser is as loud as a cherry bomb.
Jan
 

Nickodell

Donation Time
Did the Enfield use a clip like a Garand?

Not in the same way. The Garand charger remained in the rifle until the last round had been shot, at which point it was expelled. This was an unexpected tactical fault, as the Germans soon learned to listen for the distinctive "tinkle" of the falling charger, knowing that they had an opponent with an empty weapon. The Lee-Enfield rounds were loaded into the magazine using two 5-round chargers, but only the rounds themselves stayed in the weapon. In fact, you could cheat and load the ten rounds into the magazine and then place an eleventh round into the receiver. Until the Germans got wise to this, in a one-on-one duel they thought: "Aha, Tommy has fired off his ten rounds and must now reload. I'll get up for a clearer shot and ... "BANG! (Today it would be 007: "That's an Enfield. You've had your ten.")

Anyone who has shot an Enfield and a 1898 Mauser (or its knockoffs) will remark on the very easy, silk-smooth action of the Enfield bolt, compared with the relatively clumsy and slow Mauser. Unlike "conventional" rifles of the time, on its introduction in 1895 the Enfield had a cock-on-closing" bolt with locking lugs at the rear. The designer was Scotsman James Paris Lee, and the production rifle was fitted with the Enfield type rifling named after the British weapons design and production center.

Initially Lee's design was rejected, as it was thought rear-locking bolts were dangerous, but after intense testing, including with 50% over-filled cartridges, it was accepted. The bolt was so smooth that in the 1914-18 war a practised British rifleman could fire 12 aimed shots in one minute, including the necessary reloading of one charger for shots 11 and 12. In unaimed suppressing fire, they could lay down nearly three time that many so that, at the neginning of WWI, the Germans thought they were facing machine guns. The small British professional army soldier was taught to operate the bolt by using forefinger and thumb on the bolt handle, and middle finger on the trigger.

The Lee-Enfield was so good that it remained in service, in many marks and produced in many countries, for well over 50 years and through three wars, and was still being produced in Australia and India in 1955. However, this was in some ways a snare; while other countries increased the infantryman's firepower with self-loading rifles like the Garand, the British serviceman was using, essentially, the same shoulder weapon as his father and grandfather. (However, so was his German opposite number.)

Canada had its own rifle at the start of WWI, the Ross. It had many faults, among the chief of which was its strange straight-pull bolt and varying pitch rifling. As the name implies, you operated the bolt with a straight pull to the rear, rather like cocking a Browning 30-cal M/G. An internal spiral unlocked the lugs. The other oddity was the fact that the rifling changed in pitch as the bullet went down the barrel, the grooves getting slightly closer together. The benefits of this must have been perfectly obvious to the designer, but in fact it tended to shave metal off the bullet because the initial grooves made on leaving the receiver would no longer fit into the different-pitch rifling near the muzzle.

The Ross had another annoying fault: If you reassembled the bolt incorrectly it would propel itself rearwards (into your head) when fired, at approximately the same speed as the bullet leaving the muzzle. I had the chance to handle a Ross many years ago at the rifle club where I used to shoot in England, and remember the chilling wording of the instruction manual, which mandated the number of turns to be applied to the bolt head on reassembly: "If you assemble the bolt incorrectly it may blow back and kill or injure you."

The Canadians in WWI were so disgusted with their rifle that they generally threw them away and instead used Lee-Enfields that they picked up from dead British soldiers. However, as is so often the case, politics killed men; nobody in the Canadian high command or government would listen to the men at the front, so they kept issuing Rosses until finally changing to the Enfield in 1917. Reminds one of the initial problems with the M-16.

QUIZ TIME: Guess which rifle and sidearm Sergeant York used? (Clue: not as shown by Gary Cooper.)
 
L

Lee DeRamus saoca0404

Nick,
How right you are about the Ross. Several years ago, upon arriving at a range, I saw an ambulance leaving. Someone fired a Ross that was assembled incorrectly. We heard that he lost his right eye, and had quite a lot of damage. I didn't see him, but I did see the bench he had shot from. I will never forget it. The 1911 also can be assembled incorrectly causing it to fire the whole magazine on the first shot. I did see that happen. Jim you are right about the old 45's. Two of the ones I have are WW II production. I sort of hate to fire them because they are quite valuable now. I also fired them in the military and they were as you said. They would rattle!!! Being so loose they were extra reliable. Some of the really accurate 1911's only shoot one type load. I have one that was worked over By Clark years ago. I can only shoot handloads in it. The Garand uses what is correctly called a "clip". The Lee-Enfield and others use what is correctly called a "magazine".
 
Top