kimber, H&K - what's the big deal?

[Nutty4Guns]

Any questions?

Trade for a laptop?

 

[G1GRANDEUR]

Any questions?

no?

but nice.

 

[packman]

I carried $500 weapons for a long while and I like them. they were reliable and more than accurate for self defense. I often wondered why people paid $1000 and up for a handgun. then I spent some time on the range with one. to me it answered the questions. I saved my pennies and got what I liked.

 

[captqc]

Any questions?

Any questions? Yea, just one...will you adopt me??? Gary

 

[gaijinsamurai]

My Kimber. It really wasn't that expensive, and it is a quality pistol. I added a few extras, like the Ed Brown trigger.

I have to say that the H&K USP pistols have been for me, the most comfortable and ergonamic pistols I have ever fired. Someday I will own one or two.

 

[gaijinsamurai]

I believe a lot of that is the USA Century Arms builds that were so inferior to original CETME and HK quality, and gave black eye (falsely) to the platform

My H&K clone is a Century, and I have to say that I'm a bit wary due to it. I replaced the rollers with H&K factory ones, and have acquired other spare innards should there be a problem, but so far, it has been good.
The G3 platform is lighter and quicker to shoulder and obtain a sight picture than my FALs, and accuracy is acceptable. I still have not found a semi-auto .308/7.62NATO rifle that I'm 100% happy with, but I would feel fine carrying this rifle into combat. I just hope the Century Arms reputation for hit/miss quality doesn't give me bad luck.....

 

[evltwn]

Well, Classic, hope you got the insults out of your system...with all due respect, of course...to address Addicted's questions more fully, your choice and mine, and everyone elses depend on personal preference, intended use and of course the amount of money one is able to commit to a firearm. In the renowned late Col. Cooper's opinion, the ONLY pistol worth having was an as issued 1911 in .45 ACP. While he was a widely respected and educated man, he too had his opinion, and it is no more or less valid than yours or mine.


One excellent resource I have discovered is Gun Tests magazine. They accept no advertising, hence are not influenced by manufacturers touting their "latest and greatest."

More to your point is the Feb. Shooting Times mag, with their 1911 shootout comparison. 7- .45's evaluated, prices ranging from $449 to $874. the next price point hovers between $900 and $1300 for Kimbers, Colts and Sigs, and then there are the Ed Browns and Les Baers.

The quantifiable difference between high and low end? They all shoot, all function pretty flawlessly, and as far as looks go, well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I agree with others who have stated that a Ford Focus and a BMW 650 will both get you to Walmart for more ammo...its up to you which strikes your fancy.

Hope this answers your question. As to your thoughts on my Kimber, well, I've already covered that.

Classic, I see you are fairly new to the site. A suggestion would be, to bring facts to the discussion, not invective. Conveyed with the greatest respect, naturally.

 

[soberups]

I think the OP's question could be rephrased as...."at what point in the price continuum of handguns does the actual increase in quality drop off and the law of diminishing returns set in?"

Lets compare 3 used handguns; a $100 Jennings, a $500 Glock and a $1000 H&K. In my humble opinion, the $500 Glock is the best value of the three choices. The Jennings is by far the cheapest, but is so poorly made and unreliable as to be essentially worthless as a functional firearm and a complete waste of the $100 spent on it. The H&K is by far the most expensive...and is certainly the best in terms of pure quality....but is it truly "twice" as good a functioning pistol as the Glock? Probably not, so for many people the $500 premium over the Glock is also wasted money. Both the Jennings and the HK occupy opposite ends of the price/quality continuum, with the Glock resting comforably in the optimum middle.

 

[Addicted]

Lots of good responses. Again, no offense to anyones taste in their choice of pistol. Like I said before, was just curious. The above comment (for me) hit the nail on the head.

 

[gaijinsamurai]

I think the OP's question could be rephrased as...."at what point in the price continuum of handguns does the actual increase in quality drop off and the law of diminishing returns set in?"

Lets compare 3 used handguns; a $100 Jennings, a $500 Glock and a $1000 H&K. In my humble opinion, the $500 Glock is the best value of the three choices. The Jennings is by far the cheapest, but is so poorly made and unreliable as to be essentially worthless as a functional firearm and a complete waste of the $100 spent on it. The H&K is by far the most expensive...and is certainly the best in terms of pure quality....but is it truly "twice" as good a functioning pistol as the Glock? Probably not, so for many people the $500 premium over the Glock is also wasted money. Both the Jennings and the HK occupy opposite ends of the price/quality continuum, with the Glock resting comforably in the optimum middle.

The time I came really close to buying an H&K was just after my graduation from the Police Academy, when I intended on buying one as a "graduation present" to myself. I held it, looked at the $1100 price tag, and said to myself , "is it really twice as good as my Glock?", and handed it back to the salesman with no regrets. I really didn't think about a USP again, until I fired a friend's two summers ago. A couple of weeks ago, I tried out another friend's H&K, and now I want one all over again-not because I need one, but just because I appreciate how well made they are.

 

[tacticalgunner]

I think the OP's question could be rephrased as...."at what point in the price continuum of handguns does the actual increase in quality drop off and the law of diminishing returns set in?"

Lets compare 3 used handguns; a $100 Jennings, a $500 Glock and a $1000 H&K. In my humble opinion, the $500 Glock is the best value of the three choices. The Jennings is by far the cheapest, but is so poorly made and unreliable as to be essentially worthless as a functional firearm and a complete waste of the $100 spent on it. The H&K is by far the most expensive...and is certainly the best in terms of pure quality....but is it truly "twice" as good a functioning pistol as the Glock? Probably not, so for many people the $500 premium over the Glock is also wasted money. Both the Jennings and the HK occupy opposite ends of the price/quality continuum, with the Glock resting comforably in the optimum middle.

Sediments of a Glock owner lol, just kidding, I own a Glock 17 Gen 4, I bought one just to have one, not really cause I feel its the finest, but rather to be well versed. I have my favorites and what i feel is awesome, and i guess that is what you will have to figure out, the differance lies in what you feel to be comfortable. A Hi-Point or Jennings to some maybe what they love, for others, an HK. A lot is what you grew up on or trained on. A lot of service members go back to what they know, older vets live by an actual Colt 1911, others, an M9. HK makes an ugly but very smooth firearm, do i think my USP is any better than anything in my safe, no. But thats my opinion, I bought it honestly blindly, listening to magazines and forums. Most will say "you get what you pay for". I don't think i did. 100 plus rounds and no hiccups, but I can say that about my Glock, S&W M&P, and my Beretta 92F. My Sig has had the most issues, but they are so little, I don't have a bad opinion of Sig. Fit/feel/and mostly how well you shoot something with accuracy is my way of determining the best for the value. Buying a gun is like buying a motorcycle, you don't know how it operates unless you have a trusting friend to let you try one out, or you sign the papers and take it out.

 

[Classic]

Well, Classic, hope you got the insults out of your system...with all due respect, of course...to address Addicted's questions more fully, your choice and mine, and everyone elses depend on personal preference, intended use and of course the amount of money one is able to commit to a firearm. In the renowned late Col. Cooper's opinion, the ONLY pistol worth having was an as issued 1911 in .45 ACP. While he was a widely respected and educated man, he too had his opinion, and it is no more or less valid than yours or mine.


One excellent resource I have discovered is Gun Tests magazine. They accept no advertising, hence are not influenced by manufacturers touting their "latest and greatest."

More to your point is the Feb. Shooting Times mag, with their 1911 shootout comparison. 7- .45's evaluated, prices ranging from $449 to $874. the next price point hovers between $900 and $1300 for Kimbers, Colts and Sigs, and then there are the Ed Browns and Les Baers.

The quantifiable difference between high and low end? They all shoot, all function pretty flawlessly, and as far as looks go, well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I agree with others who have stated that a Ford Focus and a BMW 650 will both get you to Walmart for more ammo...its up to you which strikes your fancy.

Hope this answers your question. As to your thoughts on my Kimber, well, I've already covered that.

Classic, I see you are fairly new to the site. A suggestion would be, to bring facts to the discussion, not invective. Conveyed with the greatest respect, naturally.

Hmmm lets re-read your original comment to the OP. Oh and let re-read another members interpretation to your remarks...

Sounds like the OP has already made up his mind and is sitting back waiting to defend our choices. Kimber over here, by the way. Of course you are free to purchase (or not) the weapon of your choice. I have many guns in my safe, among them XDm. A good carry pistol, but I also shelled out for my Kimber. Does my choice make sense to you? With all due respect, I really don't care.

Hmmm I'm thinking the next remark is directed toward... Just because you say "With all due respect" doesn't make your post any less offensive.



The OP was just wondering and looking for the communities input, not the "bubblegum" from evltwn..................

Rant over...
The HK is the best plastic gun on the market but you're going to pay Sig money for it... Kimbers look cool but they are called MIMbers for a reason. You gotta replace almost everything to get the MIM parts out of them - Frame, Slide, Barrel, Bushing, trigger and springs aren't MIM...
By the time you replace all the other parts (some should be installed by a qualified smith) you quickly find yourself nearing Les Baer money which has NO MIM parts.

I felt your wording talked down to the original poster and from other remarks I'm not the only one. I gave my input "with respect". I did not talk down to the OP ("He's already made up his mind" - if that's the case then why did he ask for input?)
Yes, you have 3 times the posts I do but I don't disrespect "any" question. if I chose to respond it's with a genuine response/belief but I won't and don't talk down to people for asking a question. In all due respect, of course!

 

[evltwn]

On the subject of Kimbers and MIM parts correctly mentioned by Classic, I ran across an interview with Frank Robbins with Wilson Combat, quoted in Defensive Carry.com

"A company I that I will not name gave the MIM parts a bad name because they had a bad batch of MIM parts. This was many years ago. Since then remarkable things have happened.

MIM parts are extremely dense anf very exact. They are much less prone to wear and breakage than a factor Colt, Spfg, etc. part, This is why we use them in our CQB's. etc." (I believe they no longer use them.)"Although not quite as hard as our tool steel parts, they will last a very long time. The tool steel parts are actually overkill. The MIM parts will last for life (I know of one gun that has over 100,000 round thru it and the trigger pull feels the same as it did when new) therefore I guess you could say the tool steel parts lasts for a lifetime and 1/2" Attributed to Frank Robbins

Thought y'all might find this interesting. It certainly opened up my mind.

 

[deen_ad]

I guess you get what you pay for. I have two Kimbers, both 3" barrel models. One cost a little less than $1,000 (came with a CT laser for that price), the other was just under $1,600 ( I added the CT laser later for an add'l $400). The higher priced one just feels better when shooting it.

 

[evltwn]

I agree with you Deen...love my Kimber Pro Carry II...also am rather fond of my XDm, my revolvers, yada yada. My thing isn't so much vanity; rather, since I carry everyday, I need to know it will go bang when needed. That's worth the extra bucks, imho.

 

[Asp]

Kimbers? I have never fired one.
As for 1911s? I like them, but I have problems with them. For one, I would need to practice with shooting one with two hands. Beyond that I am not really a fan of a all steel frame. It's nice, but seems to get dirtier.

I can only speak from a USP background on HKs.
I have owned a few, and I will buy (eventually) something in the far future, but it'll a rifle. USPs have worked flawless for me, with some exceptions.

I had a jam with one USP.
I was practicing drills. Draw, shoot twice, and hoping for body shots that would "put down" the cardboard enemy. My weapon on the second or soon to be third shot, I can't recall, jammed. It was a double-feed jam. I almost had a heart attack. I couldn't imagine that my factory, unmolested USP's super-badass-mall-HSLD-operator-model jammed on me. I did not finish the drill. I stood a stop wondering how it could have happened. It even surprised someone I was shooting with, whose disdain for HK's Ferrari* appeal has been often apparent.

Believe this problem arose from excessive lubrication.

Beyond that jam. I have nicked the slide release a few times, causing the slide to remain shut on the last round. This could be fixed with better training, or women's hands.

On the other hand - no pun intended, - I had reloaded ammunition (lead), wad-cutters and rounded-nose, that did not cycle well in the USP. The man I received this ammunition from said it would cycle through his 1911 without problems. Even with the problem ammunition given back, it did cycle properly through his USP.

The day I used this 100 round box of ammunition, I believe I practiced more failure-to-load, failure-to-seat, failure-to-fail-reason drills than on any other day in my shooting life-time (so far). It was an educational experience.

The 1911 I owned and the USPs - plural - have always been in .45 AUTO. I like .45 AUTO, but the problem with the HK USP series is that magazines are disgustingly expensive. If I had to compare them on cost.

The ergonomics of striker-fire pistols suit me much better, including those without safeties or levers that get in the way, see the 1911 or USP series. I won't go anymore than that, because this discussion is about KIMBERS (1911 platforms) and HK platforms (pistols).

In short, I think if your body can adjust to the learning curve of a USP or a 1911, go ahead. Otherwise, stay away from both.

*HK is treated by some firearm fans as basically a Ferrari. Yes HK firearms are nice, but firearms are firearms. A car that gets you from A to B safely and effectively is what matters. So we can conclude a firearm that performs safely, soundly, and within our sphere of operations (target shooting, self-defense, etc) is held to the same standard.

I don't believe HKs are worth the price unless you factor in the "ruggedness" of an HK, and I'm speaking strictly of the USP series. I mention more below.

What I like about the USP: huge everything. If you thought buying that Ford F-350 stroke your ego below the waist was great you'll see quickly that the USP is right up in the same alley. The USP's slide alone when compared in size with either a 1911, Glock, or anything else I can think of, is noticeably big. Everything is big, magazines, capacity, and so on. Customization is limited, nor do I care about it much. The HK USP series has a de-cocker, not on all models, but is noisy as hell. These are rugged factors, which means to me, that a taken care of USP will last a long time. But many pistols might as well be regarded in the same fashion.

There are other rugged pistols, that are neither Kimber or HK. Those pistols can be inexpensive. If you can trust your pistol to work when you need it, then it's rugged enough. With factory ammunition and proper maintenance all of my pistols have functioned correctly, except when I have not.

I hope this helps.

 

[richardlpalmer]

Actually the original "OP" (myself) has never owned either is not on the attack. I am simply curious what it is about the two makers that people are willing to fork out several hundred extra dollars for. Maybe I am missing out. No need to become defensive just a curious gun lover. As I browsed the handgun ads I always wondered why someone would fork out so much money when there are cheaper quality choices.

I thought the second reply was a good answer.

There have been a few good analogies in this thread that most likely resolved this for you. But just to hear myself talk...

A gun is a tool, something that gets used. How the person uses it will dictate what kind of tool they want and how much they'll pay for it. A professional auto mechanic will spend money on tools that a typical car owner would find silly. The average car owner isn't going to wrench on cars enough to justify the differences in quality/cost of upper end tools. Of course, some will buy them anyway because they appreciate that quality.

I saw a great video about why Glocks aren't the best gun. It was a bit tongue in cheek, but the upshot was that it was basically the Honda of guns. Great at a lot of things, not a master of any. I could appreciate that. If someone asked you what the "best" truck was, what would your answer be? As soon as you give an answer there could be another question that invalidates your answer.

What's the "best" car? There is no correct answer. Best for a large family? Best for long trips? Fastest? Quickest? Most comfortable? Highest fuel economy? Most reliable? Lowest cost of ownership? Highest resale value? There are a TON of "best" cars.

What's the "best" gun? There is no correct answer. Lightest? Easiest to carry? Best recoil? Most accurate? Highest capacity? Lowest capacity? Most durable? Again, there are a TON of "best" guns.

I think what you'll see with people that will pay for higher priced guns is that they typically have owned/shot many different kinds and have found things they like and don't like -- that specifically pertain to them. My first car was a 1974 POS bubblegumbox and I loved it! But my next car was an improvement over it. So was the next. And the next. And the next. And when I'm in the market for another car I already have things in mind that I'd like to see -- and my choice could be completely different than yours or anyone else's.

As others have mentioned, why get the BMW, Jaguar or Land Rover when there are other vehicles that do a similar job? Or the Rolex, Tag Heuer, Cartier or Bulgari when a Swatch will get the job done?

With the exception of deceiving marketing (where craftsmanship is just lied about), there are engineering, material & manufacturing differences in higher priced firearms. Where parts are sourced, where manufacturing is done & by whom, manufacturing tolerances, etc. And then there's simply being a "fan" of a particular brand for whatever reason.

 

[Ligito]

Any questions?

I have a question.
Who do you get to carry it for you? Looks heavy.

 

[Ligito]

Years ago, I bought a S&W Shorty Forty from S&W's performance center.
It was a custom gun, with hand fitted parts.
It was fairly expensive but I liked it.

I understand that when HK discontinues a model, they stop making repair parts for it, leaving HK owners in the lurch.

There are several HK models that I would like to have.

 

[Addicted]

Richardlpalmer, I appreciate your response. But to answer one of your questions.......a full size Dodge Ram diesel is the best all around vehicle!

All other subsequent answers are blaphemess and dont deserve a rebuttal on my part!