[UdontnoME]

a friend of mine and I bought the first two Kimbers to come into our home state. The early Classics came with the diamond checkered wood grips. This was an early limited time offer when they first came out. My gun works great, the slide feels like it is on ball bearings and I have only shot less than 500 rounds from it in all this time. Did Kimber do a better job of finish work on these to get their name out than they do now? Mine does not seem to have the roughness on the MIM parts that a lot of people complain about.

_________________
DEATH TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER !!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: UdontnoME on 2001-09-09 20:50 ]</font>

 

[Stephen A. Camp]

Hello. I've owned one for 5 or 6 years and had no problems whatsoever.

Best.

 

[Dane Burns]

NO and I have worked on dozens of both. I believ the guns have been improved since the original Oregon guns. Yonkers does a good job for the amount they product IMO.

 

[h4444]

I've had my Classic Custom for about a year and a half or so and with the exception of a failed disconnector, mine has been great. The trigger on the gun is pretty darn close to those of my friends that have spent a lot more on customs.....

The fit and function is great. After I broke in the gun, it just eats everything. I shot it in a match today and used a new load and bullet and never had a problem. I'm eagerly awaiting the results,,,,

 

[Monty Grubbs]

I am very happy with my Kimbers. I have a stainless target and a compact. They both run like scalded apes! Every once in a blue moon the little compact will jam on a poor reload! So, after about 500 rounds I quit shooting reloads. Takes up time I could be shooting.

Nowadays, I think I am actually shooting my Compact better. Probably because I use it much more often.

I did get a chance a while back to wring out one of the original Oregon Kimbers. Full size, black oxide finish. It ran great. I really could not tell much difference between then and now.

Hey I'm happy. My Kimbers put 'em where I point 'em!

 

[proximo]

I've had a Custom Classic since late 1997 and comparing it to more recent models I think it is better in one sense... in 1997 they were shipping these with high thumb safeties (i.e. the edge of the thumb safety was beveled to make a high thumb hold comfortable). To tell you the truth, not only are the recent safeties not "high thumb", they almost look unfinished in comparison. Lots of sharp edges that make them uncomfortable to use in any other than a "low thumb" position.

 

[Dane Burns]

i.e. the edge of the thumb safety was beveled to make a high thumb hold comfortable.

The reason they changed the thumb safety MIM mold is the safeties were breaking at the pin because they had taken off too much metal to blend the saftey.

The new safety can be blended with little fuss and no loss of stregth. The old one is a problem waiting to happen.

 

[JiminCA]

I think I can add some useful data.

I have a custom classic with the Oregon rollmark and a brand new series II custom classic.

The new one is built better. The barrel is fitted better, the slide to frame fit is better, and the "snick-snick" factor of the thumb safety is better. It's just a bit tighter and better fitted all around.

With that said both had problems. The oregon gun had a bad slide (extractor hole in the wrong place) and the new one had a disconnector problem (hanging up and locking up the gun).

Both had comperable triggers. The new one was more accurate.

I had a bunch of work done on the Oregon gun (including replacing the slide). The new one is box stock except for my polishing job on the disconnector to smooth it up. That polish job cost me - oh - an hour of my time. Fixing the old gun cost a lot more!

Across the board the new gun is better. Just one data point but at least it is a direct comparison.

The disturbing part of your post is that you've only put 500 rounds through it. Get out and enjoy that thing!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JiminCA on 2001-09-10 14:53 ]</font>