I have a Kimber Pro Carry II, and currently shop for another 1911. Don't mind a second Kimber though, if nothing out there is better within my price range (sub 1K). Anyway, I saw this Ruger SR1911 Commander series that looks quite attractive.
I'm a bit undecided as whether I should pick up another Kimber Pro (stainless) to make it a pair, one steel and one stainless, or pick up this Ruger.
Pro: The Ruger costs substantially less than the Kimber, and I still have a pair of 1911, one stainless and one steel.
Con: I don't have a pair of identical Kimber, which is somewhat my original goal.
The deciding factor would be if the Ruger shoots as well as the Kimber. So the question is how many of you in here have the Ruger and think it's worth the saving? Having a pair of identical Kimber is somewhat a bragging right. But at a premium of almost $300, I don't know if I want to take. On the other hand, if it turns out that the Ruger is inferior to the Kimber in every way, then $300 is a lot less to pay.
I'm a bit undecided as whether I should pick up another Kimber Pro (stainless) to make it a pair, one steel and one stainless, or pick up this Ruger.
Pro: The Ruger costs substantially less than the Kimber, and I still have a pair of 1911, one stainless and one steel.
Con: I don't have a pair of identical Kimber, which is somewhat my original goal.
The deciding factor would be if the Ruger shoots as well as the Kimber. So the question is how many of you in here have the Ruger and think it's worth the saving? Having a pair of identical Kimber is somewhat a bragging right. But at a premium of almost $300, I don't know if I want to take. On the other hand, if it turns out that the Ruger is inferior to the Kimber in every way, then $300 is a lot less to pay.






Comment