Dilemma!!!!

Sig - Used em at my last command, loved em

 

bump...

 

Sig bump

 

haha...

 

In all honesty, never shot the 1911, my buddy has one though. I've held it, ran it through it's actions, just no rounds. It's decent but too skinny feeling for me. I like the sig because it seems like it had more "heft" to it. I also like the decocking lever on the sig instead of the grip safety; another reason I liked the sig too. Your finger is the safety, just how it should be. Plus the Sig looks bad ass all tac'ed out

 

This is a dilemma! Sig and Kimber are the two brands I like most and I have a few of each.

It really depends on how much you're going to shoot and what you're going to do with your new gun.

Unless you're going to be dedicated about working out the kinks in your 1911 I would recommend against it as you may end up disappointed. Kimbers have a break in period and most of them have a few feeding/extracting issues in that time. You might even need to polish the feed ramp or find that you need to use certain brands of ammo or play with different weight springs. They can be a little finicky with hollow points and you'll need to test out your gun thoroughly before you carry it. If that doesn't scare you off, the 1911 offers a slim frame, a crisp single action trigger, and IMO ergonomics that haven't been bested in the 100 years since it was introduced. The low bore axis makes recoil very controllable.

If you're looking for something rock solid and dependable that you're going to shoot a whole damn lot, go for the Sig. All of mine have eaten everything I've fed them right out of the box, break-in period be damned. If you have bigger paws the Sig might fit you better. Expect a little more muzzle flip out of the .40, in part because of the higher bore axis. If you go with the Sig do yourself a favor and get the SRT trigger option.

I wouldn't hang so much on 40 vs. 45 or the ammo capacity for the carry gun. No one wants to get hit with either and if 8rds isn't enough to hit something you're either too far away to justify its use or you have no business carrying a gun!

 

i do see what u mean as far as "heft" your right it does have more to it... and that tac'ed thing keeps getting to me...the kimber dosent come with a rail and the sig does... is it me or does the kimber sem like more of a collector gun...??? or am I trippen' haha....

1911s have more problems..?? i thought the only reason y they have been around for so long and havet been changed is because the fact that its been built so well that it didnt need to be changed... please correct me if i am wrong... lol

 

and is the kimber more for something to keep in a case..??? or can u put A LOT of rounds through...???

 

Some kimbers have a tactical rail. I've shot a few kimbers and I like them. I think the next hand gun I buy will be a Kimber. I really like the desert warrior.

 

yea but the one i really like dosent come with a rail... lol... but the sig does... i still am gonna sleep on in it.. haha...

 

yeah either one is fine, both go bang and things fall down.

 

that sums it all up lol... haha...

 

If you get a rail on the 1911 the holster choices will be a bit more limited. The Sig rail is pretty much standard now.

The 1911 is a reliable gun once its broken in. I've had several thousand rounds through my Compact CDP II. It runs great and I trust it for my carry pistol. The classic 1911 is a reliable pistol, but it is a little different from the modern target varieties that you're looking at. The basic design is the same but the modern pistols are built to tighter tolerances and have some design changes (firing pin safety, barrel/frame feed ramps, guide rods, barrel bushings, etc). The tradeoff is that you usually have a few failures during break in and a small number of pistols need some special attention. Like just about any gun, they get better as you shoot them.

The only truly bad experience with a 1911 I've had is with a Springfield Microcompact. I learned a little too late that the 3" 1911 is problematic, and its the reason I bought a Compact to replace it. I had the least problems (almost none) out of my 5" models.

 

right on... the other thing is the amount of rounds though.... if go through a lot of shells it seems that i should go with a sig...??? rather than a kimber...??? Am i right...?? or am i Wrong...?? from doing more and more research the sig can take more of a Punishment...?? It also is the onl thing that took place of the 1911 like in the Secret Service, military, Homeland Security..??

 

Realistically, how many rounds are you talking about shooting each year? I ask becuase the average shooter won't wear out a pistol and if they can pay for the ammo to do that then replacement parts/pistol shouldn't be much of a concern.

Remember that the agencies you listed use their pistols on the job as well as for training. Others go through a rotation and are used constantly for training. These pistols can go through shoot many thousands of rounds a year. Both the Kimber and Sig have been thoroughly tested and adopted by govt agencies. I personally don't think that the longevity of one over the other should really be a concern.

 

for me at least i wanna say a few thousand a year dosent seem like much lol...right on man.... ay I really appreciate all your help bud u have cleared up A LOT of questions... all in all what u think...Kimber or SIG..?? lol for a first hand gun of course.... haha... i might have failed to mention that...

 

Anytime! I didn't know this was your first gun - thats exciting! Your sig picture threw me off I never could recommend a 1911 as a first gun when new shooters asked me at the shop. The single action trigger and manual safety are features that take some practice to use safely. The break-in period can be frustrating for new shooters as well. I recommended a 9mm for new shooters looking for something more than just a target pistol. Ammo is cheaper so they can shoot more and the recoil isn't distracting. People with bigger frames and/or long gun experience might be comfortable starting with a larger caliber though.

Between the Kimber and the Sig, a traditional double/single action Sig would be my suggestion for a first handgun. The decocker is a great feature and it will let you safely work on trigger control by working solely on double action shots. They are pretty much trouble free - something you definitely want as a new shooter. The setup on the Sig is about as traditional as it gets and once you've got some rounds with it you'll easily be able to transition to a 1911 or other pistol.

One more plus for the Sig is that many can be converted to shoot other calibers. I'm not sure what the conversion capabilities are for the new pistols but for the classic models if you have a .40 P229 or P226 you could get a conversion barrel to shoot 9mm or .357Sig. You didn't really even need new magazines. The .40 mags feed 9mm just fine in my experience. You couldn't convert a 9mm to a .40 or .357Sig though because the 9mm breechface was too narrow. Also, there are .22LR conversion kits available for Sigs, making for some really cheap shooting. These are new slides and barrels that fit onto your current frame. This is a great way to work on trigger control since you're using the same frame and trigger that you are when you shoot your standard caliber.

 

Breaking in barrels is a myth in my opinion. I've never broken in a barrel in my life. In fact no serious shooter that I know personally has either. Every one of my pistols and rifles shoot as well as any others.

 

x2

 

Agreed - barrel break-ins aren't necessary, but breaking in a gun as a whole is often needed. Springs loosen up, moving parts get polished, etc. Manually cycling can speed this up without using up ammo.