Opinions on the Kimber Stainless Raptor II (not the pro version) vs Eclipse?

That's interesting...so they have recently replaced this CEO who was not focused on quality? So you want a brand new Kimber, or one that is before Cohen's time - is that accurate? I assume they replaced him a little while ago, so quality would have improved with brand new guns?

And to 1970rocks - would you think there is truth to this - did you buy yours a while ago pre this CEO or would you disagree?
 
Financial stability/profitability have nothing in common with product quality. He's hated at Sig - he has a ZERO percent approval rating and 50% of Sig employees recommend working somewhere else.
 
He made Sig profitable...the easiest way to do that is to reduce expenses.

Reducing expenses for Ron Cohen means farming out small parts work to foreign contractors and reducing expensive QC processes.

He's been very good at reading the market and producing guns that people will buy. That is not the same thing as building guns with world-beating reliability.

He's dragged SIG's reputation down a long way amongst people who track the reliability standards of service pistols. His personal reputation is absolutely mud.
 
Well maybe I got it wrong. But if this is true.... "Financial stability/productivity have nothing in common with product quality."
Then how does SIG, and for that matter Kimber, keep selling record numbers of guns each year?
I can see american customers falling for inferior products for a couple years max! With the internet forums and reviews available in this information age, would they be able to continue as the profitable and productive companys they have shown to be since 2004?
I think not!
Sig and Kimber have produced guns people want to buy!
I'm guessing from SIG's financial position in 2004, that the world beating-reliable firearms they where manufacturing where not keeping them afloat!
 
Are you kidding? Do you know how little most gun owners shoot?

Most gun buyers don't know anything about guns. They shoot a few hundred rounds a year (often much less), tell their internet friends they shoot a thousand rounds a month, and look at their guns occasionally in the safe. If they have a gun that's shiny and impresses their other non-gun-knowledgeable buddies while they sit around somebody's garage drinking beer, they're ecstatic. That's true in both Canada and the US in my experience.

And no, SIG's reliability wasn't keeping them afloat, because Glock was building equally reliable guns, much cheaper. Plastic guns don't cost anything like what it costs to build an all-metal 226 - particularly when SIG was hiring 3rd party QC companies to thoroughly inspect and test every single gun.
 
i have a ruger sr1911 and a base model kimber (custom II).
and ive shot my dads kimber Pro Carry II.

so thats what i can base my opinion on.
but so far both those kimbers are 100% better fit and finish then any other 1911 ive seen or shot personally.

now dont get me wrong, the ruger is a nice shooting gun FOR THE PRICE.
out of the box it shoots fantastic.
but fit and finish it has nothing on the kimber.

im not the kinda guy that drops 2k on a hangun, but if i ever had a extra wad laying around id now consider picking up a grand raptor or such after having the one i have.
im very impressed with mine.

i believe ive either owned or shot most of the low and mid range 1911's that are on the market with the exception of the Remmy enhanced and for my money i would go with the kimber.
if i couldnt afford to kick out the money for a kimber id pick up the ruger sr1911 (or Remington)
 
Ok so a reasonable conclusion would be,
1) if you are only gonna shoot a couple hundred rounds a month (90% of gunowners)
2) want to tear out the bull at 25 yards
3) have a chit eatin grin every single time you open your safe
4) and want a shiny pistol to impress your non shooting buddies, get a kimber, Sig or whatever floats your boat!

But if you want to rock a case of .45 every month and have it go bang every time,
Go get yourself a G21!! or Two!! :rockOn:
 
1970rocks said:
Ok so a reasonable conclusion would be,
1) if you are only gonna shoot a couple hundred rounds a month (90% of gunowners)
2) want to tear out the bull at 25 yards
3) have a chit eatin grin every single time you open your safe
4) and want a shiny pistol to impress your non shooting buddies, get a kimber, Sig or whatever floats your boat!

But if you want to rock a case of .45 every month and have it go bang every time,
Go get yourself a G21!! or Two!! :rockOn:
Click to expand...

Or a S&W M&P in .45 if you want comfort and accuracy.
��
 
misanthropist said:
Are you kidding? Do you know how little most gun owners shoot?

Most gun buyers don't know anything about guns. They shoot a few hundred rounds a year (often much less), tell their internet friends they shoot a thousand rounds a month, and look at their guns occasionally in the safe. If they have a gun that's shiny and impresses their other non-gun-knowledgeable buddies while they sit around somebody's garage drinking beer, they're ecstatic. That's true in both Canada and the US in my experience.
Click to expand...

+1

I've given up trying to discuss 1911 pros and cons with almost everyone who doesn't shoot IPSC... The concepts of "reliability", "quality", and "function" have a completely different context for someone who shoots 10-20k rounds per year vs. someone who shoots 1-2k.

The context for the "reliability" of a handgun can't be found in 200 round static range sessions. Take a Manny Bragg course (for example) where you'll toss 1200 rounds downrange in one day - almost entirely under time pressure and you'll develop that context.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom