Nighthawk... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Nighthawk...


Quack
07-26-2011, 21:41
uses Kimber (MIM) ambi thumb safeties. :shocked:

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=323583

up1911fan
07-26-2011, 21:58
Awesome. That's what I wan on a $2500 plus gun.

Hokie1911
07-26-2011, 22:01
Do they use Kimber MIM slides too? :dunno:

samuse
07-26-2011, 22:04
They also use Chip McCormick grip safeties. More MIM.

That thread is funny. All those silly people think that just because a 1911 cost $3,000.oo it should be high quality and have a good warranty. There's a sucker born every minute...

skdmrklcy
07-26-2011, 22:09
Doesn't Springfield use MIM on the Professional as well?

I think it is a little surprising on any gun over 2k...

So what is MIM free that one can buy?

Quack
07-26-2011, 22:12
Doesn't Springfield use MIM on the Professional as well? yep, all of the guns have some MIM

I think it is a little surprising on any gun over 2k...

So what is MIM free that one can buy?

Wilson is MIM free.

glock2740
07-26-2011, 22:31
Do they use Kimber MIM slides too? :dunno:
Yep. And frames too.
























:rofl:

glock2740
07-26-2011, 22:33
Wilson is MIM free.
I ordered my last Wilson with ALL MIM parts. Including the slide, frame and barrel. Sights were all steel though. :whistling:


:rofl:

thecableguy
07-26-2011, 22:39
Did J.C. change his name?:dunno:

:rofl:

Cobra64
07-26-2011, 22:43
Do they use Kimber MIM slides too? :dunno:

Yup, and a Mimber barrel too. :)

Z28ricer
07-26-2011, 23:48
Oh noes, they're all gonna fall apart now.

:upeyes:

bac1023
07-27-2011, 03:17
My Predator has a Kimber ambi safety.


http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/068.jpg

http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/024.jpg










However, my Enforcer does not. It was bought at a later date than the Predator. :dunno:


http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/050.jpg

faawrenchbndr
07-27-2011, 04:09
Wow,....Fusion is looking better everyday,........eh, never mind.

CDW4ME
07-27-2011, 05:50
The MIM in Kimbers turned me off; I did not have any parts break, but saw plenty of threads on 1911 forum where the thumb safety (especially ambi) broke. I sold 3 Kimbers that were a year old or less. I did not know about the MIM parts when I bought them, education is expensive.

I can't imagine paying nearly 3,000 or whatever for a Nighthawk and have a Kimber MIM safety on it.

I've done my research this time.

At $1,000 and under Colt is very hard to beat; they have about 4 MIM small parts.

Stepping up:

Dan Wesson Valor has all tool steel small parts and is a comparative bargain; if you took a $1,000 pistol and replaced the MIM with steel it would easily cost as much or more than the Valor. The Valor was my 1st "high end" 1911 acquisition. This has to be the most "bang for buck" for the quality of components (Ed Brown thumb safety). I've been carrying it in a Blade-Tech UCH.

Les Baer no MIM here. I just got my Baer Ultimate Tactical Carry (UTC). I have not shot it yet. The lock up is so tight. I enjoy just looking at it. :drool:
All Les Baer models are made from the same quality components, the difference is model specific features like sights, or ambi safety.

Last. What's going to be the last one? Wilson CQB or Ed Brown.
No MIM in either.

I like it that the Ed Brown pistols (Special Forces, Kobra, Executive) are all made from the same parts, only the finishing touches are different, like scallops or cut checkering. The Wilson CQB doesn't have the same "bullet proof" thumb safety (plus another part) as the CQB Elite. I did not like the philsophy of using "better" parts in one model than another. Ed Brown is next and last in my "high end" 1911 collection.

Quack
07-27-2011, 05:58
While not MIM, Brown, Baer and DW use some cast parts

MD357
07-27-2011, 08:42
NH is really going downhill from what I've seen lately. Not impressed. For $2900 there should be no MIM on the gun. Don't care if it's "good enough" for some folks, it's a cost cutting measure and there's not excuse for that on a $3000 hand built firearm.

bac1023
07-27-2011, 08:50
NH is really going downhill from what I've seen lately. Not impressed. For $2900 there should be no MIM on the gun. Don't care if it's "good enough" for some folks, it's a cost cutting measure and there's not excuse for that on a $3000 hand built firearm.

I love both of my NHs, but do agree with this. Springfield shouldn't use MIM on their high end stuff either.

up1911fan
07-27-2011, 09:29
Agreed.

Z28ricer
07-27-2011, 11:45
BMW engines surviving with MIM parts, manual trans shift forks,

http://www.pim-international.com/aboutpim/mature

Spacecraft ?

http://www.pim-international.com/aboutpim/intro_aero

Some of you make too much of an issue out of nothing, welcome to technology.

Sometimes, I know its rare, but things progress, manufacturing methods get better, new alloys are created, and then what you keep repeating becomes outdated.

Give it time, they'll just print pistols with closer tolerances than your wilsons and nighthawks.

:rofl:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZboxMsSz5Aw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7h09dTVkdw&feature=related

MD357
07-27-2011, 12:04
BMW engines surviving with MIM parts, manual trans shift forks,

http://www.pim-international.com/aboutpim/mature

Spacecraft ?

http://www.pim-international.com/aboutpim/intro_aero

Some of you make too much of an issue out of nothing, welcome to technology.

Sometimes, I know its rare, but things progress, manufacturing methods get better, new alloys are created, and then what you keep repeating becomes outdated.

Give it time, they'll just print pistols with closer tolerances than your wilsons and nighthawks.

:rofl:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZboxMsSz5Aw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7h09dTVkdw&feature=related


Actually, one just has to use half of their brain and realize that sectors such as the Aerospace have significant higher quality control standards and testing than let say..... Kimber.....

It's not a matter of embracing technology. It's a matter of understanding what should be painfully obvious in a apples to oranges comparison.

knedrgr
07-27-2011, 12:10
Actually, one just has to use half of their brain and realize that sectors such as the Aerospace have significant higher quality control standards and testing than let say..... Kimber.....

It's not a matter of embracing technology. It's a matter of understanding what should be painfully obvious in a apples to oranges comparison.

Exactly. Aerospace engineers actually work in a Six-Sigma process and have way smaller standard of deviation. I doubt anyone at Kimber knows what Sig-Sigma is. And it's not a Greek fraternity...

knedrgr
07-27-2011, 12:11
I have that same Kimber ambi safety on my Mil-Spec and it's OK. It flexes more than any of my other ambi safeties.

Z28ricer
07-27-2011, 12:18
Exactly. Aerospace engineers actually work in a Six-Sigma process and have way smaller standard of deviation. I doubt anyone at Kimber knows what Sig-Sigma is. And it's not a Greek fraternity...

I doubt anyone at Kimber is anywhere near the parts when they're made...

Parts that have been problematic in the past and manufactured by one source could have easily been changed to a different supplier which produces better parts, has better QC, or even the alloy changed along the way without anyone knowing.

Hokie1911
07-27-2011, 16:27
NH is really going downhill from what I've seen lately. Not impressed. For $2900 there should be no MIM on the gun. Don't care if it's "good enough" for some folks, it's a cost cutting measure and there's not excuse for that on a $3000 hand built firearm.

Agreed. :thumbsup:

GJ1981
07-27-2011, 16:32
NH isn't the only company going downhill, IMO.

MD357
07-27-2011, 23:03
NH isn't the only company going downhill, IMO.

Oh gee, who could you mean? Haven't heard about it 92839283100 times or anything. :cool:

Z28ricer
07-27-2011, 23:47
Oh gee, who could you mean? Haven't heard about it 92839283100 times or anything. :cool:

Hey now, if you spent that kind of money, and got a poorly fitted grip safety like that, you probably wouldnt be too happy either.

GJ1981
07-28-2011, 05:25
Oh gee, who could you mean? Haven't heard about it 92839283100 times or anything. :cool:

I actually mean companies in general, but yes, everyone knows who I'm referring to here.

Funny thing, I remember the endless hate toward Fusion, that continues to this day, but I mention CONTINUING issues with one company and I'm a hater. I guess having part failures, with high quality parts too, before as pistol even makes 4,000 rounds is acceptable nowadays...in fact, it didn't make 1,200 rounds before being returned.

Gotcha ya, but if you can't stand it, use the ignore feature...it really helps until people quote the posts in general.

Rinspeed
07-28-2011, 05:51
Funny thing, I remember the endless hate toward Fusion, that continues to this day, but I mention CONTINUING issues with one company and I'm a hater.




I actually think you've been far more reserved in your criticism than I would be. :dunno:

MD357
07-28-2011, 07:48
I actually mean companies in general, but yes, everyone knows who I'm referring to here.

Funny thing, I remember the endless hate toward Fusion, that continues to this day, but I mention CONTINUING issues with one company and I'm a hater. I guess having part failures, with high quality parts too, before as pistol even makes 4,000 rounds is acceptable nowadays...in fact, it didn't make 1,200 rounds before being returned.

Gotcha ya, but if you can't stand it, use the ignore feature...it really helps until people quote the posts in general.

Use the ignore feature? and miss all the melodrama? Settle down man, I was just messin with ya... hence the smiley.

The Fusion comparison is quite reaching but YMMV. :whistling:

GJ1981
07-28-2011, 10:27
Use the ignore feature? and miss all the melodrama? Settle down man, I was just messin with ya... hence the smiley.

The Fusion comparison is quite reaching but YMMV. :whistling:

No worries, it's almost impossible to sense sarcasm or ones real meaning online.

I'm not comparing them to Fusion from a quality standpoint, just that some Fusion owners expressed their issues just like I have. Some owners were more vocal than others is all.

I actually think you've been far more reserved in your criticism than I would be. :dunno:

Yes I have been, how I don't know.

At this point, what's happening behind the scenes will stay there. IF someone were to ask opinions about having work done on their pistol, I will definitely gibe my opinion, though it will probably be through a PM going forward.

GJ1981
07-28-2011, 10:32
.....

lawdog734
07-28-2011, 14:19
I think you have earned the right to state your opinion publicly without anyone giving you a hard time.

HAIL CAESAR
07-28-2011, 17:01
I actually mean companies in general, but yes, everyone knows who I'm referring to here.

Funny thing, I remember the endless hate toward Fusion, that continues to this day, but I mention CONTINUING issues with one company and I'm a hater. I guess having part failures, with high quality parts too, before as pistol even makes 4,000 rounds is acceptable nowadays...in fact, it didn't make 1,200 rounds before being returned.
.

You are definitely batting 0% with the Springer. And truthfully I can't blame you for being smoking mad. And truthfully I think you are being rather good about it for all the troubles although you have a right to be really pissed off.

Some people have had good issues with a company while others have gotten the shaft. It happens and doesn't negate your experience, nor theirs. It just stinks that it happens at all.

Hokie1911
07-28-2011, 17:06
I think you have earned the right to state your opinion publicly without anyone giving you a hard time.

Isn't that the whole point of this here interwebz gun forum thing? :supergrin:

HAIL CAESAR
07-28-2011, 17:23
Isn't that the whole point of this here interwebz gun forum thing? :supergrin:

No, no, no!!!! You can only talk about the good things, especially if you don't even have one!!



:rofl:

Hokie1911
07-28-2011, 17:25
No, no, no!!!! You can only talk about the good things, especially if you don't even have one!!

:rofl:

Wait a minute....I thought I logged into GT and not TOS. :whistling:

GJ1981
07-28-2011, 17:31
Oh my, TOS :shocked:

I think if I would have spoken out about my issues over there (not that the threads wouldn't have been deleted and my account being banned) BUT if, LW would have had a 3 a.m. raid conducted on my house for speaking against his brand of choice :rofl:

philipk
07-28-2011, 17:51
Actually, one just has to use half of their brain and realize that sectors such as the Aerospace have significant higher quality control standards and testing than let say..... Kimber.....

It's not a matter of embracing technology. It's a matter of understanding what should be painfully obvious in a apples to oranges comparison.

It is about embracing technology.

People are condemning MIM as being inferior to a forging.

A wise poster mentions that the aerospace industry uses MIM so it isn't an inferior product.

Your response is about quality control. While accurate, it is you comparing apples to oranges.

Quality control isn't just an issue with MIM or Cast parts, it is also an issue with forged parts.

There are many BAD forged parts. In fact QC is harder with forgings.

Back in the 1970's a close friend's father was plant manager of the Ashtabula Bow Socket forging factory. They forged forks, cranks, stems, and other bicycle parts for EF Schwinn. Their quality was amazing and the Schwinn "one piece crank" was the envy of the industry.

Then came the 1980's and Schwinn was in trouble. They pressured Bow Socket to cut cost. My friend's father retired rather than make an inferior product. The company lasted a few more years with horrible quality control. They made a POOR forging.

A poorly made forging is always inferior to a well made MIM!

Bottom line, it doesn't matter if it is MIM, Cast, or Forged. It matters if it is the right technology for the task with the proper quality control.

Quack
07-28-2011, 18:03
Booo!!! Logic is killing the fun of those that suffer from MIMphobia. :animlol:

Z28ricer
07-28-2011, 18:05
Booo!!! Logic is killing the fun of those that suffer from MIMphobia. :animlol:

Logic, man I hate that crap.

Sure seems to get dangerous around here.

bac1023
07-28-2011, 18:11
Booo!!! Logic is killing the fun of those that suffer from MIMphobia. :animlol:

:rofl::rofl:

GeorgiaRedfish
07-28-2011, 18:46
For me I wouldn't worry if it was casting done by a manufacturer I trust, the problem with this is Kimber is a manufacturer I do not trust. Might just be me.

awpk03s
07-28-2011, 19:19
I already posted in the original thread on TOS, but for what it's worth - I have 3 of the ambi safeties in question here. All of them have been perfect for me.

Previously I have had several Ed Brown ambi safeties as well as a Springfield that have "walked" loose with use. I feel strongly that the ambi design retained by the hammer pin (Kimber, Kings, Wilson BULLETPROOF) is superior.

With that said, would I rather my ambi safeties in my Nighthawks were forged or bar stock steel opposed to MIM? Sure. Do I expect no MIM on a $3k gun? Sure. But would I trade my current MIM ambi safeties (hammer pin retention) for a bar stock Ed Brown or Springer or any other run of the mill Swenson type ambi safety? No, I would not. So does it bother me that these parts are in my gun? In the end - No.

The only other safety out there today I would rather have in my guns is a Wilson Bulletproof ambi, also retained by hammer pin, but bar stock steel. If my current ambi safeties ever fail, I will try one of those new fangled Wilson ones. Until then, I'm not concerned.

MD357
07-28-2011, 22:23
A wise poster mentions that the aerospace industry uses MIM so it isn't an inferior product.

Your response is about quality control. While accurate, it is you comparing apples to oranges.

I think you're lost in the conversation. What I'm saying is that Aerospace MIM isn't the same what Kimber uses. Therefore his example is apples to oranges. Pretty simple. :wavey: Namely if Kimber used the same standards as let's say.... Boeing.... then I doubt we'd see so many part failures with MIM relative to forged. Hint: Not all MIM is the same.

Quality control isn't just an issue with MIM or Cast parts, it is also an issue with forged parts

Right, QC is always a variable with man-made machines.

Then came the 1980's and Schwinn was in trouble. They pressured Bow Socket to cut cost. My friend's father retired rather than make an inferior product. The company lasted a few more years with horrible quality control. They made a POOR forging.

A poorly made forging is always inferior to a well made MIM!

Bottom line, it doesn't matter if it is MIM, Cast, or Forged. It matters if it is the right technology for the task with the proper quality control.

I don't think any of this is in dispute.

Now logic should tell us and the peanut gallery that we should look at reality instead of anecdotes and what is coulda, shoulda, woulda in other industries. So let's talk about 1911s. What do the best builders use? Why? Guys that run high round counts use forged parts almost unanimously in their guns. Why is that? Now this isn't to say a forged part will never break, everything breaks or definately has the posibility. What's important is how often and when. All things being equal forged parts last longer in 1911s. Most will never realize it, hence all the apologies for MIM, but if you can find a majority of industry builders and shooters saying otherwise, I'm all ears.

Nakanokalronin
07-28-2011, 22:29
Doesn't Springfield use MIM on the Professional as well?

I think it is a little surprising on any gun over 2k...

So what is MIM free that one can buy?

DW Valor which includes no cast parts either.

Quack
07-28-2011, 22:48
DW Valor which includes no cast parts either.

The brown grip safety is cast

http://edbrown.com/FAQ.htm#aau

Do Ed Brown handguns have any MIM (metal injection molded)
parts?
No, we use no MIM parts in Ed Brown firearms. While the current thinking is
that MIM parts are "good enough" for firearm applications, this thinking
doesn't fit with our philosophy at all. All Ed Brown parts are made from either
forgings, bar stock steel, or quality investment castings.

Z28ricer
07-28-2011, 22:51
I think you're lost in the conversation. What I'm saying is that Aerospace MIM isn't the same what Kimber uses. Therefore his example is apples to oranges. Pretty simple. :wavey: Namely if Kimber used the same standards as let's say.... Boeing.... then I doubt we'd see so many part failures with MIM relative to forged. Hint: Not all MIM is the same.



Right, QC is always a variable with man-made machines.



I don't think any of this is in dispute.

Now logic should tell us and the peanut gallery that we should look at reality instead of anecdotes and what is coulda, shoulda, woulda in other industries. So let's talk about 1911s. What do the best builders use? Why? Guys that run high round counts use forged parts almost unanimously in their guns. Why is that? Now this isn't to say a forged part will never break, everything breaks or definately has the posibility. What's important is how often and when. All things being equal forged parts last longer in 1911s. Most will never realize it, hence all the apologies for MIM, but if you can find a majority of industry builders and shooters saying otherwise, I'm all ears.

Weird, best builder being discussed, uses a MIM part.

As he already stated, QC is the issue at hand, not foolish people putting down a part for its method of manufacture.

MD357
07-28-2011, 23:11
Weird, best builder being discussed, uses a MIM part.


And catching flack for it? Why is that? What do the vast majority of said builders "peers" use? Would you say a majority of $2K + builders use MIM? Again.... why is that?


As he already stated, QC is the issue at hand, not foolish people putting down a part for its method of manufacture.

As I already stated, all things being equal forged will be stronger in the 1911 world. Should someone translate some of the latest and greatest MIM production methods to Kimber, Springfield, etc then that possibly might change issues. Till then....

Z28ricer
07-28-2011, 23:17
And catching flack for it? Why is that? What do the vast majority of said builders "peers" use? Would you say a majority of $2K + builders use MIM? Again.... why is that?




As I already stated, all things being equal forged will be stronger in the 1911 world. Should someone translate some of the latest and greatest MIM production methods to Kimber, Springfield, etc then that possibly might change issues. Till then....

Weird, catching flack from some sillies on the interwebs who just repeat what their buddies say on the interwebs.

Can you even show me a forged 1911 small part ?

MD357
07-28-2011, 23:37
Weird, catching flack from some sillies on the interwebs who just repeat what their buddies say on the interwebs.

Can you even show me a forged 1911 small part ?

:rofl:Now that's a pathetic attempt at trolling.

Cmon junior..... just be a man and admit you got in over your head with a superficial example. You'll feel better deep down inside.
:wavey:

Z28ricer
07-28-2011, 23:38
:rofl:Now that's a pathetic attempt at trolling.

Cmon junior..... just be a man and admit you got in over your head with a superficial example. You'll feel better deep down inside.
:wavey:


Yeah, I didnt think you'd show me an example of a FORGED 1911 small part.

Good job on talking out your well....

Z28ricer
07-28-2011, 23:59
Im still waiting for proof of those forged small parts btw....

philipk
07-29-2011, 05:52
And catching flack for it? Why is that? What do the vast majority of said builders "peers" use? Would you say a majority of $2K + builders use MIM? Again.... why is that?


Marketing!!!!!


I wanted a high end 1911 and looked at all the major competitors. I had a tough time deciding and then picked an Ed Brown. I was ready to place the order and backed away for the following reasons. (My undergrad degree is in marketing.)

First, let me say that I did not question that all these guns are high quality products. I questioned which ones are really worth the extra money over Springfield, Kimber, etc.

1. $2400 would be a major expense to me.

2. I looked again at all the manufacturers' web sites and noticed the slick marketing including Ed Brown's foolish MIM statement. So how much is hype and how much is reality? I concluded that marketing was now the major force with all these companies.

3. I realized that these are not really custom guns but semi-custom. It isn't like the old days when Ed Brown or Bill Wilson made them themselves.

4. Going to the forums, I read that the buyers of high end guns had as many complaints as the buyers from Springfield, Kimber, Colt, etc.

5. Bottom line was that the difference wasn't necessarily the product but the output numbers of the manufacturer.

6. Since I wasn't in the position to buy more that one premium 1911, I decided to stick with my standard production Colt.

Nakanokalronin
07-29-2011, 06:02
The brown grip safety is castNot too bad since all it does is sit behind the trigger bow when not depressed. Funny how Ed Brown boasts about no MIM in their guns but they obviously use castings.

CDW4ME
07-29-2011, 06:09
Booo!!! Logic is killing the fun of those that suffer from MIMphobia. :animlol:

My MIMphobia :cool: (I'm liking the new term you provided :supergrin: ) is based on acutal problems:

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ighlight=broke (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=321606&highlight=broke)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ighlight=broke (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=324557&highlight=broke)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=325317&highlight=broken)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=322883&highlight=broken)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=314876&highlight=broken)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=301646&highlight=broken)

All of those are very recent and all but one include pictures. :puking:

philipk
07-29-2011, 06:10
Not too bad since all it does is site behind the trigger bow when not depressed. Funny how Ed Brown boasts about no MIM in their guns but they obviously use castings.

Exactly!!

Most metallurgists would argue that with everything else being equal, the MIM is superior to a casting.

Again it is all about marketing.

philipk
07-29-2011, 06:12
My MIMphobia :cool: (I'm liking the new term you provided :supergrin: ) is based on acutal problems:

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ighlight=broke (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=321606&highlight=broke)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ighlight=broke (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=324557&highlight=broke)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=325317&highlight=broken)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=322883&highlight=broken)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=314876&highlight=broken)

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthre...ghlight=broken (http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=301646&highlight=broken)

All of those are very recent and all but one include pictures. :puking:


And you can find many problems with 1980's era Colts complete with pictures so should we conclude that forging and casting are also bad processes?

Quack
07-29-2011, 06:24
The extractor that broke is cast.

Next you have to consider the volume of units sold vs. the number of failures.

bac1023
07-29-2011, 06:26
DW Valor which includes no cast parts either.

The Brown grip safety they use is certainly cast. Nearly all grip safeties are.

Rinspeed
07-29-2011, 06:56
Grip safety failures are almost nonexistent and the part geometry doesn't lend itself well to MIM. There is no reason to use bar stock for GSs other than marketing. :whistling:

bac1023
07-29-2011, 07:17
Grip safety failures are almost nonexistent and the part geometry doesn't lend itself well to MIM. There is no reason to use bar stock for GSs other than marketing. :whistling:

I pretty much agree, Jeff.

I'm sure there are others, but the only two forged grip safeties I'm familiar with are Wilson's "bullet Proof" model and the Pistol Dynamic's model.

knedrgr
07-29-2011, 07:24
I pretty much agree, Jeff.

I'm sure there are others, but the only two forged grip safeties I'm familiar with are Wilson's "bullet Proof" model and the Pistol Dynamic's model.

Add EGW's new BTGS to the forged list.

CDW4ME
07-29-2011, 07:41
And you can find many problems with 1980's era Colts complete with pictures so should we conclude that forging and casting are also bad processes?

I don't own any 1980's Colts.
I had (past tense) some enhanced Colts from the 1990's.

I've got a Lightweight Commander, but it's only about a year old.

Yea, anything can fail but I see it happening more with MIM.
Yea, more pistols made with MIM would be a factor.

I satisfied my OCD inclination to minimize my exposure to MIM, now I'm happy.

If you are satisfied with "good enough" MIM parts, you can be happy for less $

Rinspeed
07-29-2011, 07:44
Add EGW's new BTGS to the forged list.




I believe SVI has one now as well.

MD357
07-29-2011, 08:01
I can't believe junior waited up for me. :embarassed:

Marketing!!!!!


Only to those that don't know any better and that have limited experience. Again, many may never know the difference due to only pulling their 1911s out of the safe a few time a year. The more you shoot the more you break stuff, just like with anything else. As you admit yourself, all of you've done is look some stuff up on the internet and deduct that this is all marketing. As one gains experience with higher round counts they realize that forged parts have a much lower failure rate in vital areas than MIM. To dismiss this as simple marketing is showing an amount of ignorance of the industry, or rather shows a superficial review of it.

And you can find many problems with 1980's era Colts complete with pictures so should we conclude that forging and casting are also bad processes?

Can you show multiple examples of small forged part failures of Colts in the 80s? I'm just curious because I've only seen that they had significant problems with their slide and frame tolerances, cosmetic issues, etc. Also, to be clear, nobody is saying that MIM processes are "bad" as a whole. Many are saying it shouldn't be on a $2K+ gun because it's a cost cutting measure and doesn't have the standards set forth by other industries. As this makes sense because it would no longer be cost effective if Kimber, SA, etc did imply those standards.

bac1023
07-29-2011, 08:36
I believe SVI has one now as well.


Very true, Jeff. I just checked it out. It seems they have a few different variations. When I bought mine, the grip safety was one of the very few things they didn't build in-house. Now that's changed.

http://sviguns.com/1101.php?indx=9

Infinity is an awesome company, as far as I'm concerned.

knedrgr
07-29-2011, 08:54
Also, to be clear, nobody is saying that MIM processes are "bad" as a whole. Many are saying it shouldn't be on a $2K+ gun because it's a cost cutting measure and doesn't have the standards set forth by other industries. As this makes sense because it would no longer be cost effective if Kimber, SA, etc did imply those standards.

Agree 100%.

To further add to your point, I was able to build my HD project w/o any MIM parts. The whole pistol is a mix of forged, tool steel or cast parts. I'm pretty sure the only cast part might be the Wilson trigger shoe. And the whole thing came in below $1200. Those parts were mostly retail pricing, so we're not taking into account the whole sale price or bulk pricing that a semi-house or full-time smiff would be able to get. That didn't take into account for my own labor. And I don't know what a semi-custom house would charge for labor.

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 10:00
I can't believe junior waited up for me. :embarassed:



Only to those that don't know any better and that have limited experience. Again, many may never know the difference due to only pulling their 1911s out of the safe a few time a year. The more you shoot the more you break stuff, just like with anything else. As you admit yourself, all of you've done is look some stuff up on the internet and deduct that this is all marketing. As one gains experience with higher round counts they realize that forged parts have a much lower failure rate in vital areas than MIM. To dismiss this as simple marketing is showing an amount of ignorance of the industry, or rather shows a superficial review of it.



Can you show multiple examples of small forged part failures of Colts in the 80s? I'm just curious because I've only seen that they had significant problems with their slide and frame tolerances, cosmetic issues, etc. Also, to be clear, nobody is saying that MIM processes are "bad" as a whole. Many are saying it shouldn't be on a $2K+ gun because it's a cost cutting measure and doesn't have the standards set forth by other industries. As this makes sense because it would no longer be cost effective if Kimber, SA, etc did imply those standards.




I'm still waiting for that proof of FORGED small parts.

I'm still also waiting for you to actually recognize, and admit the issue with the examples you want to blame, being with poor QC and cutting cost on manufacture of the individual pieces, and not due to the production method in the first place.

But i'm sure i'll be waiting for a while on both accounts, since you havent figured it out by now, it'll probably be some time.

AWMP
07-29-2011, 11:05
I always try and go to the source just to verify so I emailed Larry Lyles of Nighthawk. Below is his response.

"Please feel free to have any of those stating that to email or call me, We do not use any MIM, zero MIM in our guns.
Thank you
Larry"







uses Kimber (MIM) ambi thumb safeties. :shocked:

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=323583

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 11:09
I always try and go to the source just to verify so I emailed Larry Lyles of Nighthawk. Below is his response.

"Please feel free to have any of those stating that to email or call me, We do not use any MIM, zero MIM in our guns.
Thank you
Larry"

Plenty of people have verified they've got the Kimber Ambi's in their guns, its likely they made that statement because they make them standard with a barstock single sided safety, if a customer specifies an optional ambi safety, they apparently get the Kimber piece.


Wilson has used it too, but rather than arguing with the idiots who keep making such a big deal about it, they just changed.

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?p=3331528

Frank Robbins Wilson Combat

One other thing I forgot to address. MIM parts. A company 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 and very exact. They are much less prone to wear and breakage than a factory Colt, Spfg. etc. part. This is why we use them in our CQB's, etc.

Although not quite as hard as our tool steel parts, they will last a very long time. This is why we can still quarante our total gun, including the MIM parts, for life.

The tool steel parts are actually overkill. The MIM parts last for life (I know of one gun that has over 100,000 rounds 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 .

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 11:12
Again, all of us guys here, including Bill Wilson use the very same MIM parts in our guns. And we shoot a bunch! Once installed and fit, no one can tell the difference in the feel of the trigger pull with either type of parts.
Ok, I'm done with my book. Hope this helps too. Just didn't want you all to believe everything you read from self appointed experts.

Frank Robbins Wilson Combat"




No more mim !

No more mim !


Oh goodness :rofl:

Rinspeed
07-29-2011, 11:13
I always try and go to the source just to verify so I emailed Larry Lyles of Nighthawk. Below is his response.

"Please feel free to have any of those stating that to email or call me, We do not use any MIM, zero MIM in our guns.
Thank you
Larry"




What did you expect him to tell you. :dunno: You should reply to his e-mail and ask him who makes the ambi they are using. I bet he doesn't tell you.

GJ1981
07-29-2011, 11:17
Gonna pull my chair up for this one :popcorn:

bac1023
07-29-2011, 11:19
I can tell you for certain that my Predator II uses a Kimber ambi safety.

My Enforcer uses another ambi. I'm not sure which, but it isn't Kimber.

Maybe Nighthawk used Kimber ambis for a while, but stopped. I'm really not sure, but my Predator was ordered about a year before my Enforcer.

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 11:20
I still want to see a raw thumb safety, fps, or slide stop, forging.

I'm having a hard time believing the ones that are claimed to be "forged" arent billet.

GJ1981
07-29-2011, 11:23
Maybe Nighthawk used Kimber ambis for a while, but stopped.

NH seems to change part suppliers more than any other builder, so I wouldn't be surprised.

bac1023
07-29-2011, 11:26
NH seems to change part suppliers more than any other builder, so I wouldn't be surprised.

Yeah, my two have different grip safeties as well. :dunno:

They were only ordered a year apart.

awpk03s
07-29-2011, 11:37
Ask NH about the ambi, they will say "it is a Kimber design but its our part". Push the issue and say you want a steel non MIM part, and they will sell you a Swenson type ambi.

I've done this, it is definitely a Kimber part. And as with my earlier post... I don't really care.

Quack
07-29-2011, 11:58
Gonna pull my chair up for this one :popcorn:

Why do you think I started this thread? :animlol:

GJ1981
07-29-2011, 12:02
Yeah, my two have different grip safeties as well. :dunno:

They were only ordered a year apart.

I've seen at least 4 different types of grip safeties used: STI, CMC, S&A, and another that I had no clue on.

I received my Enforcer last Dec/Jan and it appears they are using a different non-ambi thumb safety too, at least from a few I've seen.

It appears to be beefed up at the rear, not sure who makes it...if not NH :dunno:.
http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f74/karlglen101/NH/DSC_0722.jpg
http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f74/karlglen101/NH/DSC_0725.jpg

Compared to mine, crazy, so many changes.

<a href="http://s319.photobucket.com/albums/mm441/gj1981/Nighthawk%20Enforcer/?action=view&amp;current=DSC00320.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/mm441/gj1981/Nighthawk%20Enforcer/DSC00320.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

bac1023
07-29-2011, 12:28
You're right. Heck, even the front serrations are different. :headscratch:

GJ1981
07-29-2011, 12:38
Heck, even the front serrations are different. :headscratch:

That's probably just because the one is a "Recon" frame vs my regular, unless I'm missing something.

The hammer is different too, but maybe someone wanted different parts :dunno:
http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f74/karlglen101/NH/DSC_0730.jpg

bac1023
07-29-2011, 12:43
That's probably just because the one is a "Recon" frame vs my regular, unless I'm missing something.



No you're right. I missed that. :embarassed:

MD357
07-29-2011, 13:51
I'm still waiting for that proof of FORGED small parts.

Junior, you can wait all you like. Check out an older Colt or pre-commercial example and we'll go from there. Get back to me when you're up to current eras. :cool:




I'm still also waiting for you to actually recognize, and admit the issue with the examples you want to blame, being with poor QC and cutting cost on manufacture of the individual pieces, and not due to the production method in the first place.


Which is pretty much what I have said all along, starting with my initial response to you and explained it further in post #45. Lemme know if I can clarify anything I said for you.

Also from your own link..... WCR's response.

Nothing is "better" for a 1911 than forged or barstock parts when properly processed and machined-all things being equal MIM/Barstock may be "as good" in certain circumstances but never better and often worse. A "bulletproof" part wich denotes 100% machined from billet, barstock or forging is as good as we or anyone else can make a part for the 1911 pistol.

Castings and MIM were developed purely to save money in fabrication since you conserve material and bypass a lot of initial machining.

Yes, there is also a stigma against MIM parts.

Much of what we know about MIM is because we have over a decade of servicing guns built with the parts now.

Just to clarify what Wilson has to say about MIM. :cool:

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 14:13
Junior, you can wait all you like. Check out an older Colt or pre-commercial example and we'll go from there. Get back to me when you're up to current eras. :cool:

Which is pretty much what I have said all along, starting with my initial response to you and explained it further in post #45. Lemme know if I can clarify anything I said for you.

Also from your own link..... WCR's response.

Just to clarify what Wilson has to say about MIM. :cool:

Good they said it wasnt, and isnt designed to make a part stronger, its designed to produce parts cheaper that do the job properly.

I suppose if you're so dense that you have to quote that, and ignore them flat out stating they dont get all retarded like you would, about a MIM part in their own personal defense weapon, you're just a lost cause.

As far as the forged small parts, let me know when you can show me a raw forging of one.

GeorgiaRedfish
07-29-2011, 14:19
Good they said it wasnt, and isnt designed to make a part stronger, its designed to produce parts cheaper that do the job properly.

I suppose if you're so dense that you have to quote that, and ignore them flat out stating they dont get all retarded like you would, about a MIM part in their own personal defense weapon, you're just a lost cause.

As far as the forged small parts, let me know when you can show me a raw forging of one.
Why have simple conversations with people with differing points and views, been turning into arguments with juvenile name calling in this sub-forum lately? Jesus can we please all act like adults?:dunno:

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 14:30
Why have simple conversations with people with differing points and views, been turning into arguments with juvenile name calling in this sub-forum lately? Jesus can we please all act like adults?:dunno:

....

People with different views ?

When you've got one of the top shops, flat out stating they use the manufacturing process in question, for parts used in their own weapons.

And then you've got some silly still repeating wahh bad stuff wahhh bad stuff.

What do you expect ?

He's sitting there trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole, its only going to take so long before someone calls a retard, a retard.

MD357
07-29-2011, 14:35
As far as the forged small parts, let me know when you can show me a raw forging of one.


Tell you what junior, you keep waiting up at night pounding the table, demanding proof (on the internet) for your red herring and I'll keep drinking beer and we'll both be happy.


I suppose if you're so dense that you have to quote that, and ignore them flat out stating they dont get all retarded like you would, about a MIM part in their own personal defense weapon, you're just a lost cause.

Now I must've hit a nerve here. Don't ya hate it when you think you're all edumacated and your link done backfires on ya? :wavey: Don't wait up.

MD357
07-29-2011, 14:39
....

People with different views ?

When you've got one of the top shops, flat out stating they use the manufacturing process in question, for parts used in their own weapons.

And then you've got some silly still repeating wahh bad stuff wahhh bad stuff.

What do you expect ?




Actually, if one reads what Wilson has said, they no longer use MIM. Haven't for awhile, and never have in a $2K+ gun. Which was the whole premise of the argument. Just as the link was refering to their 1996 A2 guns. Hint: They were value line guns.

They also said in plain english, as many have said that it's an inferior process. <----- Oh noes!!!

He's sitting there trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole, its only going to take so long before someone calls a retard, a retard

My E-feelings will never recover.

BlayGlock
07-29-2011, 15:08
My E-feelings will never recover.

I lol'ed.

Personally I do not have a problem with MIM done right.

Z28ricer
07-29-2011, 15:10
Apparently your reading comprehension isnt that great, or you only read the part that you decided would somehow benefit your arguement, and decided to quote it, leaving out the facts.

You've also somehow decided to believe that I was somehow trying to prove that a MIM part was technically, stronger, more durable, or something else I havent stated.

Lets look at the FACTS from exactly what they stated:

MIM parts are extremely dense and very exact. They are much less prone to wear and breakage than a factory Colt, Spfg. etc. part. This is why we use them in our CQB's, etc.



The tool steel parts are actually overkill. The MIM parts last for life (I know of one gun that has over 100,000 rounds 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 .



Well damn, a top shop flat out stating they're just fine, and that people like you, foolishly repeat the same stuff over and over, because you had no idea what caused the failures you're blaming.

The saying is true, GIGO.

And then they go further to flat out state:

We use the tool steel parts in our full custom guns. (These are the ones that cost from $2800.00 up) Our full custom guns, Stealth, Tactical Elite, Super Grade and Tactical Super Grade, are not for everyone because of price. They are intended for someone that can afford the very best we can do.

They actually won't last any longer, shoot any straighter or be more dependable than our CQB's, Protectors and Classics, but we spend many extra hours in fitting and prepping them for a perfect cosmetic handgun as well as a great shooter. And because of this, we use the tool steel parts that take longer to fit.


Well look at that, just as they stated, the mim parts can be made with precise tolerances, those i'm sure work great for production use, and not what you needed to impress your buddys with how close the gaps are on your pistol.

And specifically stating just that, they use the barstock, billet, parts for them being oversized and allowing a closer fitup. On those guns which people are dead set on visible aspects being a high focal point.

And then the final nail in the coffin, again if you cant see whats right in front of you, i'm sorry mr. horse, you're going to die of dehydration...

Again, all of us guys here, including Bill Wilson use the very same MIM parts in our guns. And we shoot a bunch! Once installed and fit, no one can tell the difference in the feel of the trigger pull with either type of parts.
Ok, I'm done with my book. Hope this helps too. Just didn't want you all to believe everything you read from self appointed experts.

Frank Robbins Wilson Combat

Flat out stated that one of the higher up shops, apparently which contains people with logic, and some sort of sense, using parts manufactured in the process which is repeatedly knocked. In their own personal carry weapons no less.

And they STILL sell parts that are MIM manufactured.