Page 1 of 2
How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:00 pm
by x007x
Hello everyone, would you recommend a 1911 .45 subcompact? I'm debating on getting a compact or sub .45 1911. I've been looking at the Kimbers. How reliable are they, and does anyone know how a sub .45 1911 compares to a Glock 27?
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:16 pm
by Buzz47tx
Recommend the Kimbers highly.
I just got a Kimber Crimson Ultra Carry II for this past Christmas. I absolutely LOVE it! Lightweight, accurate and feels really good in the hand. Recoil is very manageble. I've put a little over 100 rounds through it so far with not even so much as a hiccup. Seems like a very reliable pistol.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:35 pm
by TxDrifter
My current carry is a Kimber Super Carry Ultra. I've also had a Crimson Carry Ultra and a stainless Ultra Carry. I love them. I have over about 700 this one and about 1k through the Stainless. The Crimson I sold because I didn't like the grips. I would definitely recommend them as they are very accurate and shoot very nice. I typically use only Wilson Combat mags in them. You might have a couple of FTFs in the first 50 rounds or so, but get it past the break in if you have that happen. It will only happen once or twice if at all.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:42 pm
by Pete92FS
with all the above. I've had a Kimber Ultra Crimson Carry II for almost three years now. It's had about 500 rounds through it with no problems and I've used Kimber mags in it and shot mostly WWB FMJ's through it. Lightweight and easy to carry. It's my EDC about 95% of the time. Would highly recommend one.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:01 pm
by The Annoyed Man
My own experience with a 3" Kimber was very positive, however there are other 1911 aficionados of this board who would rather chew on a lit dynamite stick than buy a Kimber. If I were you, I would also take a look at Springfield Armory 1911s, as they usually have a product comparable to any given Kimber product, they make very high quality pistols, and they are close enough in pricing for horseshoes or hand grenades. I eventually sold my Kimber and hung onto my Springfield, but only because if a man has to be reduced to one 1911, it should be a 5" model. If the Kimber had been a 5" model and the SA a 3" model, I would have kept the Kimber and sold the SA. I have moderate regrets about having sold my Kimber, but that sale made a couple of other things possible for me, so it's all good.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:41 pm
by Texas Dan Mosby
I bought a Springfield ultra compact many, many...many moons ago that runs great, and has never given me problems.
There used to be some timing issues, with the compact models, resulting in stoppages due to the fact that the shorter slides are more sensitive to load changes (round weight/type/powder load) and recoil spring weight selection. This problem has been thoroughly highlighted though, and largely addressed by both owners and manufacturers.
The only time I carry it, however, is when I'm riding, as I prefer a full size arm due to the fact that I find it easier to be accurate with at longer ranges. Granted, I may never NEED that extra range, but it's nice to have if I ever do.
Test fire a few and see how they fit your hand.
Luck.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:53 pm
by flechero
I have carried a Ultra CDP II on and off for almost 10 years.... it's been the best pistol purchase I have ever made. As mentioned, some people say that any shortened 1911 will have issues... I agree that a higher percentage might but you can read about plenty of 5" guns that have stopped running as well. There are no guarantees that any particular gun will or won't run, regardless of size, make and model.
Having said that- I am still considering a XDs as a next purchase... the high triggerguard undercut makes it extremely comfortable and also allows me to get the rest of my little finger on the grip. The reviews have been pretty great on them and they are said to be soft shooting for the size and weight. I think the lack of a beavertail will also aide in carry comfort, especially if you carry any extra weight in the mid section.
Not trying to sway you either way, but if I were you, I would look at the XDs as well in your quest to obtain a small .45acp.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:14 pm
by Andrew
I have a m1991a1 compact w/parkerized finish and rubber grips I bought 20 years ago. Had to upgrade the recoil springs to address the timing problem. Nary a problem since. 3" is very concealable and all steel construction helps with control. It's also been more reliable than my 80s vintage Commander.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:23 pm
by LTUME1978
The older Kimbers may be very good but my experience with the newer ones was not. I bought a Super Carry Pro about a year ago. It is the 4 inch model from the custom shop. Nothing but problems and Kimber finally bought is back after I had wasted 600 rounds of ammunition trying to get it to function (they said it needed more time to break in). There were other issues that more rounds would not have fixed (finish coming off on slide, plunger tube not staked, frame to slide fit very loose, etc.). I typically carry (and have been for 4 years) a S&W M&P 45 compact. It is very comfortable to carry in a Milt Sparks holster and has been completely reliable. I did end up getting a couple of Springfield 5 inch 45 1911s (Trophy Match and TRP). They have been completely reliable, very accurate and no problems at all with them. I can highly recommend the Springfields if you can find one (based on my experience). I carry the TRP occasionally but don't have a Milt Sparks for it yet so the M&P is what I carry most of the time. You may have a different experience with the Kimber, just wanted to share what I went through.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:38 pm
by gigag04
I don't recommend 3" 1911s espevially with standard ammo. The already slow .230 gr bullet prefers longer barrels to increase velocity. If you're dead set on one, use 185 gr or .200gr +P ammo.
The 3" 1911s operate on a slightly different mechanical platform (recoil/timing) and is not carry reliable IMO. When ran hard, there is an increased likelihood of failure. They can be finnicky with ammo and should be tuned by a pro before being trusted. They are fun and easy to shoot because of their single action design, but I can't endorse their use for a carry gun. A Bobbed commander is not much larger, and significantly more reliable.
I'm in the group that abhors Kimber and their products. Why go with a Mfgr with a hot/cold reputation. I don't know anyone that hates SA or even Colt.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:21 pm
by Andrew
gigag04 wrote:I don't recommend 3" 1911s espevially with standard ammo. The already slow .230 gr bullet prefers longer barrels to increase velocity. If you're dead set on one, use 185 gr or .200gr +P ammo.
The 3" 1911s operate on a slightly different mechanical platform (recoil/timing) and is not carry reliable IMO. When ran hard, there is an increased likelihood of failure. They can be finnicky with ammo and should be tuned by a pro before being trusted. They are fun and easy to shoot because of their single action design, but I can't endorse their use for a carry gun. A Bobbed commander is not much larger, and significantly more reliable.
I'm in the group that abhors Kimber and their products. Why go with a Mfgr with a hot/cold reputation. I don't know anyone that hates SA or even Colt.
Didn't you start a thread a couple o' years ago about sending back your Kimber? I guess the never got it fixed.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:08 pm
by x007x
flechero wrote:I have carried a Ultra CDP II on and off for almost 10 years.... it's been the best pistol purchase I have ever made. As mentioned, some people say that any shortened 1911 will have issues... I agree that a higher percentage might but you can read about plenty of 5" guns that have stopped running as well. There are no guarantees that any particular gun will or won't run, regardless of size, make and model.
Having said that- I am still considering a XDs as a next purchase... the high triggerguard undercut makes it extremely comfortable and also allows me to get the rest of my little finger on the grip. The reviews have been pretty great on them and they are said to be soft shooting for the size and weight. I think the lack of a beavertail will also aide in carry comfort, especially if you carry any extra weight in the mid section.
Not trying to sway you either way, but if I were you, I would look at the XDs as well in your quest to obtain a small .45acp.
I tried the XDs, but each fire was pinching my middle finger and would blister. I did get the Glock 27, because it felt the best. I actually just sold it, because its too much bounce in my big hands. I think I should just stick with a compact or full size. I do have a Glock 19 with upgraded parts and its a flawless gun to me. I won't sell that one for sure. Not just because its my first gun, but its reliable. I like how the M1911A1 looks. I need to go test it out and see how it feels. I did you a 1911 for ,y CHL test and it let great. I had my G19 for the test, but I didn't realize the clips I had we're not 4th gen, so I borrowed my instructors gun.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:28 pm
by x007x
Anyone own the SF range officer 1911?
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:57 pm
by The Annoyed Man
x007x wrote:Anyone own the SF range officer 1911?
You mean the S
A Range Officer? No. I do own a SA Loaded model. Nice gun.
Re: How is the .45 1911 Compact/subcompact?
Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 6:18 pm
by AEA
Here's my all steel SA Ultra Compact with custom carry cuts.