Why DW didn’t do this with the DWXc is beyond me. Handled one this morning. I really liked it.
https://youtu.be/zCYdZkmfJGI
Printable View
Why DW didn’t do this with the DWXc is beyond me. Handled one this morning. I really liked it.
https://youtu.be/zCYdZkmfJGI
This may cost me some money was alresy considering this or a platypusQuote:
Originally Posted by Lon
I vote you buy one of these and report back. Take one for the P-F team!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by G19Fan
Hmmm...tempting. anyone making aiwb holster for theseQuote:
Originally Posted by Lon
Oooh. I really like that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Lon
Anyone not making optic ready guns in 2023 is behind the curve.
Optics ready, but no option for a weapon light.
I like a lot of what I see here, and am tempted by it.
I would prefer a functioning grip safety on a 1911 style gun. The light rail is less important to me, but I am surprised not to see it.
Making the trigger guard fit standard 1911 holsters would also be helpful.
Feel that optic is almost a necessity not well optional for carryQuote:
Originally Posted by MountainRaven
……Are Kimber’s good now?
Haven’t seen one in a LGS in years
Kimbers are… well… depends on what you consider “good”. I bought a recent one in 10mm and I’m very happy with it but will need to re-time the firing pin safety that I really wish wasn’t there. Time will tell on barrel bump and general wear/function but overall I really like it. Very minimal shooting with it (34 rounds) but that along with 10-8 feed tests and some extractor live-fire tests in those 34 rounds are very promising.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navin Johnson
Unfortunately it’s a couple thousand miles away right now and it’ll be six weeks until I see it again… and a bit longer until I can do some more shooting with it. Plus I want to work on it before I shout it more.
I don’t know about this double stack model other than the release info, but I like the idea and it’s on the radar. I like the lack of grip safety, and a WML option would be nice for those that want it, but for CCW I like the non-light option.
There are two subtle things the Humble Marksman said in the video about this pistol that has not been brought up in any conversation I've seen to date. First, the barrel does not have any top locking lugs. Second, it uses a 17 pound recoil spring. This almost makes this a blow back pistol rather than a locked breach pistol which then gives me pause of wear and tare over the long haul versus other traditional locked breach 1911 designs.
It doesn't have no locking lugs, it doesn't have traditional 1911 locking lugs. It looks like the chamber locks into the ejection port like most modern guns. It still has the 1911 link too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry40sw
So it's more a hybrid system like the Ruger P-series.
Is it possible that the barrel locks up with the ejection port?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry40sw
17 pounds does not strike me as unreasonable for a lightweight 9mm.
We can only hope it is built with the strength akin to the Ruger P-Series.Quote:
Originally Posted by MandoWookie
The Humble Marksman did not go in depth in design features other than to say it did not have locking lugs. Without having one to go hands on with or talk to the folks at Kimber, even if they were inclined to go into detail about the design, we are left guessing as to why.Quote:
Quote Originally Posted by Tackleberry40sw View Post
There are two subtle things the Humble Marksman said in the video about this pistol that has not been brought up in any conversation I've seen to date. First, the barrel does not have any top locking lugs. Second, it uses a 17 pound recoil spring. This almost makes this a blow back pistol rather than a locked breach pistol which then gives me pause of wear and tare over the long haul versus other traditional locked breach 1911 designs.
Is it possible that the barrel locks up with the ejection port?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry40sw
Go to 6:05 in the video. It has a circumferential locking shoulder at the front of the chamber.
The reason why is simple, same reason as Ruger and every other design that uses it. It's easier and cheaper to do than the individually cut multiple lugs, and doesn't have any practical downside.
Thank you for pointing this out. I am sure they used machining techniques to shorten and streamline manufacturing processes to keep the cost lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by MandoWookie
I also noticed the bottom of the barrel isn’t akin to a 1911 or 2011 barrel. Wonder if that could also be part of the lockup?
Attachment 108608
May be missing something as I am more familiar with polymer guns, but the G17 I'd a 17 lb springQuote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry40sw
I’m like Bill, but with a stronger opinion - homey don’t do light triggered guns like in the 1911 universe without a grip safety. This falls into my personal “nope, which is really too bad” category as a EDC X9 and BHP.
If it’s not purely a gamer gun, it’s capability as a threat management tool needs to be considered.
I don't see how the lack of grip safety affects it negatively for threat management. I know plenty of guys who carried 1911s thst pinned the grip safetyQuote:
Originally Posted by HeavyDuty
I preface this with I am no expert. I did not stay in a HolidayInn last night either. Yes, Glocks and other striker fired pistols do run recoil springs in the 17 pound range. From what I have seen, Governement Models and Commanders normally run recoil springs in 11-13 pound range. Everyones mileage may vary.Quote:
Originally Posted by G19Fan
Those guns are 1911s chambered in 9mm, and it has to have 9mm pushing a 45 size slide and possibly barrel( I know older Colt 1911s used smaller diameter barrels) reliably.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry40sw
As we can see from the video, the Kimber is 1911esque, but not a 1911.
Another thing that may play into it is how much resistance does having to recock the hammer have. I know that was another thing brought up in 9mm 1911s.
My preference for grip safeties on 1911’s comes from having accidentally wiped off the thumb safety twice while carrying one. A well-designed grip safety should not cause any problems with deactivating when the gun is grasped.
This makes a ton of senseQuote:
Originally Posted by BillSWPA
It’s outside my own personal level of comfort.Quote:
Originally Posted by G19Fan
I have 1911s with triggers that are in the same weight range as P365s and P320s and VP nines and GPT’s. So I am not sure in today’s world why a grip safety let alone a thumb safety on a 1911 is necessary?Quote:
Originally Posted by G19Fan
Yes, that is sarcastic. My 365 has a TS. For some reason it’s OK for a polymer gun with a 4 pound trigger to not have a safety but by God a 1911 without two safeties is blasphemy.
This makes sense. I am primarily striker fired no safety (in fact all we own except a lcr 22) but depending on 1911 trigger weight I can see why this gets squirrellyQuote:
Originally Posted by HeavyDuty
I could never come up with an explanation that I myself could believe about any grip safety benefits on a series 80 1911. This Kimber looks like a series 80 thing so for me personally the absent grip safety is not a big deal.
Ineffective checkering and absence of adapter plates are bigger concerns.
I've owned a couple Kimbers in the last couple of years -- full size 1911s without the firing pin safety -- and they were totally fine. Don't remember them ever having a malfunction of any kind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navin Johnson
My concern with a 1911 or similar gun is not just the trigger pull weight. The length of the trigger pull is also quite short.
My LGS has a pair in, one blued, one stainless. Showed them to me as I was on the run, heading back to the class I was teaching after my lunch break, but I snapped a quick pic for this thread. I only handled them for a second, and I’m pretty 1911-ignorant anyway, so nothing really jumped out except that the one I handled (the stainless one) looked like it had been test-fired pretty heavily based on the carbon in the chamber and on the feed ramp especially.
Attachment 108677
Had me there in the first half.Quote:
Originally Posted by Navin Johnson
I agree with everything you say tho...
Doesn't look like it, well away from the locking surface and the link's movement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lon
There is probably some shape in the frame where the integral feed ramp sets down when unlocked.
I want to get a look at one and see if it has the same handling as the EDC X9 or a Bobtail; the heavily rounded butt makes them come up to a low point in my 1911A1 hand.
They started showing up at the store here and I got to handle them.
Pro:
The round butt does not make it NPA low in my 1911 hands like Bobtail or EDCX9.
Con:
The coarse grip frame checkering does not give a lot of traction.
It somehow FEELS heavier than its catalog weight or similar size guns.
The trigger was typical production line 1911 and would benefit from a refit.
Observed:
It seemed strange to punch the magazine catch and this tiny little 9mm clip slide out.
Sorry, guys, this is a dedicated 9mm design, so you ain't getting a 10mm.
My application for a 4" gun is way less than it was last year, the series of matches where that was the definition of "concealable" has been discontinued, leaving only the Honolulu Hideable Handgun Hoedown where a 4" barrel is maximum and an Aloha shirt is the designated concealment garment. (I shot a revolver last time to the great edification of the crowd, some of whom had apparently not seen a speedloader in use.)
I also got a second look at an Echelon. Its trigger was markedly better than the one SA provided for the grand opening demonstration shoot. That is good but it means you should look at the individual gun you are contemplating buying.
I had been shooting my trusty Plastic M&P before looking at those. I showed it to the staffer and asked him and myself "Now just why am I looking at new guns?"
Well, Kimber smartened up. Hopefully DW does the same thing with the DWX Compact.
Attachment 113964
But for the trigger I could almost squint and tell myself that is a Sig Legion P229SAO.