Kimber Custom Target II MIM'd parts
 

I just ordered a Kimber Custom Target II and I've heard that it's internal parts are of a lower quality than they used to be.

I intend to put 500 rounds through the gun as it is.

Then, I'll probably swap out the sear, the connector, the slide release, and the mainspring housing for some harder parts.

What do you guys think? :tempted:

Is this a waste of time and money?

If it ain't broke don't fix it?

Are there any other parts that you would swap?

If it ain't broke,.....don't fix it.

If you don't have any ammo or magazine related issues after 500 rounds, there's really nothing to do to it unless you want to customize/upgrade it. :dunno:

This. Been shooting my Kimber TLE II for five years. Round count has to be in the thousands by now (didn't keep track the first year I had the pistol.) Haven't fixed or replaced anything on it because nothing's needed fixin' or replacin'.

Why would you buy a pistol that you already feels needs be "fixed"?

Replace them when they break.

Thanks for the replies. Keep 'em comin'...

This is reassuring. I've heard enough people say this, that I was willing to try a Kimber.

This is probably good advice.

Always good advice.


I would have bought either a Range Officer or an STI, but neither one is California "approved." The Kimber has a match grade barrel, bushing, frame, and slide. I thought I'd see if it can outshoot my Springfield 1911.

That's more or less what I'm thinking.

Thanks gusy. I'm obviously using the forum as a sounding board. I've had my Springfield Armory OEM 1911 since 1987. It's been very reliable. Recently, I put a Wilson bombproof sear and connector into it (as well as a Bar-Sto barrel). My gunsmith tested the Rockwell hardness of the wilson parts at 58, and my old Springfield parts at 52. Meanwhile, there was a broken Kimber sear on his press that tested at 14 :wow:.
It got me to thinking.... since I have my old Springfield Sear and connector, why not buy a few more parts and put them in the Kimber.

Thanks for your input guys. I've decided to leave well enough alone.

Here's a few threads I dug up on the Internet.
My take aways:

1) A lot of the comments I read state that MIM parts are just fine.
2) It's about $300 worth of parts.
3) MIM part breakages are rare and typically occur during break in. If they make it through this period, they usually last as long as a tool steel part.
4) Kimber's MIM quality issues were a result of the policies of their CEO, (Cohen) who has moved on to SIG.


MIM parts have decent longevity
http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=241389

Springfield, Colt, and S&W use MIM parts in a number of their 1911s
http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/i.../t-146381.html

Wilson Combat uses them in some of the their guns. There is a quote in this thread where a representative states that tool steel parts are overkill.
http://www.defensivecarry.com/forum/...rts-1911s.html

But, if someone wants to replace the parts, here is a solid sounding recommendation:

Anyway, I handled the gun while I filled out the paperwork to start my 10 day waiting period. It's got a much tighter frame to slide fit than my Springfield and I'm looking forward to firing it.

Every time I see a thread about MIM parts it always makes me ask. Who actually had an issue with MIM parts breaking in their gun? I understand that it may not be the same quality as before but always wondered if anyone had a stoppage due to a MIM part breaking.

They happen, but are rare. Ive got ten years and 20k rnds into my TLE with no MIM problems. If I were going to change a part out for aesthetic reasons I would go with forged, but generally MIM problems will surface in very few shots therefore after the break in period If nothings broken then I dont worry with it.

If you are going to carry it.... I would switch out several parts and get rid of the Series II BS. Otherwise, leave it alone. I will say that you WILL get a distinct trigger if you get a C&S kit, one that is a step above stock.

FWIW about the Wilson using them on their guns. They were speaking of the 1996A2 which was a "entry" level gun they build a LOOOOOONG time ago. You don't see that stuff in their guns now.

My early Target model still has the original parts in it.
Come to think of it, they all do.

Good information:

http://www.cylinder-slide.com/index....how&ref=CS0104


http://www.cylinder-slide.com/dropins.shtml

The only reason they stopped using them is because people were calling up *****ing their $1800 pistol had MIM parts in it. Before Kimber came along nobody knew what MIM parts were.

Wonder how many people ***** about the MIM parts in their $50k car or truck?

A MIM part in the door of a Lexus just isn't the same as a MIM part of the ignition of a 1911.

There is realistic risk, then there is just fear and anal obsession. Significance and meaning gets lost in the debate.

I don't think the MIM parts controversy has proven itself in any clear direction-- thus my conclusion is that because there is no direction, then there is no significance.

Obviously, competitors will try to sell you products and services, preying on this over obsession. Like Lexus, Kimber is very aware of their standings in their market, and very unlikely to risk reputation on a part that will not hold up as intended.

I've installed $350k+ aircraft parts.

No one biOtches abou cast frames & slides. A properly made MIM
part is more structurally sound than a properly made cast part.

Not to mention "Polymer"...

GASP :wow: blasphemy

Having worked with and around firearms for a few decades, I have not seen any significant proof that MIM is any more likely to fail than bar stock. The hyper concern has been a great point of debate, but that seems to be about the worth of it.

I have a Kimber Custom II that has a few thousand rounds through it. I stripped it down completely at 500 rounds. Nothing out of the ordinary, all parts MIM or otherwise working and worn just fine. Again, stripped a few months ago and still nothing to report out of the ordinary. The only part I have HAD to change in the recoil spring and that was at the recommendation of Kimber, not because of a problem.

The range I worked at was a Kimber master dealer and we had a number of models for rent. I would say about 20 Kimber's of different specs available. We had a couple of issues that were related to the small pin for releasing the firing pin block. The "Death Grip" was required to make them actually fire. Our armorer fixed one (we wanted to see if he could do it), the other was covered by Kimber.

Show me some real data that shows the constant failure of MIM parts in Kimber, Colt or Springfield pistols compared to bar stock parts please.

This doesn't mean that all MIM is the same. I would wager the obvious that the aerospace industry has a significantly higher QC and overall testing than Kimber. Same thing goes for the medical community by my experience.

Besides, as much as Kimber charges for their guns today, they could stand to upgrade their parts. Especially since I just saw a Gold Combat RL II or whatever it is go for over $2000 on buds not too long ago.

Attrition....replace them if or when they break.
I've heard of folks getting 60K through their Kimbers before replacing anything.
I'm at just over 2K in my Cust II...not worrying.

Although I'm not really a fan of MIM parts, I would be willing to bet the ones in that Kimber will last a lot longer than you think.

There is good MIM and bad MIM. Yes, Kimber has had a few bad parts in the past but heck, what company hasn't?

I'll say what another poster said. If it ain't broke, then don't bother fussing with it.

:wavey:

How about ball joints? Are they important?

Kimber has always used low quality MIM parts. You would have been better off buy purchasing a 1911 that is quality to begin with. OBTW, there is nothing "custom" about your custom target II.