"Series 1" term given the official Kimber stamp of approval - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:20 PM
smitty316 smitty316 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 549
"Series 1" term given the official Kimber stamp of approval

What will we bicker over now? Kimber used the term "series 1" to describe a no-schwartz safety gun on page 15 of the 2020 catalogue. Now we can't snottily inform the unwashed masses that the correct term is "pre-series II". What's next, we won't be allowed to correct people who erroneously say "clip" instead of "magazine"? https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...-vs-magazines/
Attached Thumbnails
Screenshot_20200520-131207_1589995160264.png  
__________________
Beware the man with one gun, he's cranky because he can't afford more.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:50 PM
dakota1911 dakota1911 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Great American Desert
Posts: 23,040
I hope they put "Series I" on the slide. Now I have a Stainless Gold Match made in 2001 according to a phone call to Kimber which does not have the Swartz type mechanical firing pin safety. It has had a number of mods over the years. I got to field strip it and put about 200 rounds through it before I bought it from a friend. I think Kimber introduced the Series II in 2002 so I would consider mine a "pre Series II".



Since that picture I have put a new magwell on it and the FLGR got replaced with a tradition guide rod and plug.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-20-2020, 02:26 PM
Huevos Huevos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Idaho
Age: 64
Posts: 3,358
I've always been a Series I guy ever since they came out with the Series II models and always thought it was silly when someone said "there's no such thing as Series I". However, since Kimber has re-introduced more models without the Swartz safety i.e. Series I, I think the "Pre-Series II" moniker actually makes sense for the models before the introduction of the Series II models. That's my opinion anyway. YMMV...
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 05-20-2020, 02:42 PM
hub1home hub1home is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: GA
Posts: 1,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huevos View Post
I've always been a Series I guy ever since they came out with the Series II models and always thought it was silly when someone said "there's no such thing as Series I". However, since Kimber has re-introduced more models without the Swartz safety i.e. Series I, I think the "Pre-Series II" moniker actually makes sense for the models before the introduction of the Series II models. That's my opinion anyway. YMMV...

I agree. I have a "series I" Ultra Carry. I bought it in the 1990's.
__________________
NRA ENDOWMENT LIFE MEMBER
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:32 PM
Jim Watson Jim Watson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Florence, Alabama, USA
Posts: 21,418
Why don't they call the ones without firing pin obstructions "Series 70?"
Everybody else does.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:44 PM
Rick in Oregon Rick in Oregon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: High Desert of Central Oregon
Posts: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Watson View Post
Why don't they call the ones without firing pin obstructions "Series 70?"
Everybody else does.
Now there you go, thinking logically.

The Series 70 moniker may have connotations of Colt, so maybe in their corporate mind, it had to be something different. We all know what it means anyway, even if they try to disguise it by 'branding'.
__________________
NRA Life
Vietnam Veterans of America
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-20-2020, 07:26 PM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Age: 62
Posts: 11,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty316 View Post
What will we bicker over now? Kimber used the term "series 1" to describe a no-schwartz safety gun on page 15 of the 2020 catalogue. Now we can't snottily inform the unwashed masses that the correct term is "pre-series II". What's next, we won't be allowed to correct people who erroneously say "clip" instead of "magazine"? https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...-vs-magazines/
It's Swartz.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:38 PM
ProjectCamaro ProjectCamaro is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: WI
Age: 37
Posts: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
It's Swartz.
May the schwartz be with you.

Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-20-2020, 10:55 PM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 70,655
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1970 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-20-2020, 11:00 PM
smitty316 smitty316 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
It's Swartz.[IMG class=inlineimg]https://forums.1911forum.com/images/smilies/wink.gif[/IMG]
I hate it when my schwartz gets tangled...
Attached Thumbnails
tumblr_m19qa2qspb1qe7736o1_r1_500_1590033547592.gif  
__________________
Beware the man with one gun, he's cranky because he can't afford more.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-20-2020, 11:32 PM
smitty316 smitty316 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsk View Post
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
And I was afraid we were going to run out of things to bicker about... I should have known better than to doubt you guys 😉
__________________
Beware the man with one gun, he's cranky because he can't afford more.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-20-2020, 11:39 PM
AZ Husker's Avatar
AZ Husker AZ Husker is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 20,158
I was an early Kimber collector. They created the semi-custom world. And I had a bunch! But a few years later when the Series-II came out I tried one, the grip safety timing was off, sent it back, they said it was normal, and I moved up the ladder from Kimber. Now if you are talking 1996-2001 I'd agree it's a fine weapon. Of course then came the external extractor debacle.
__________________
Treat me good, I'll treat you better. Treat me bad, I'll treat you worse.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-21-2020, 12:52 PM
SC shooter SC shooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: In the pines
Age: 60
Posts: 1,366
I have a pre series II Ultra Carry made in July 1999 and it has been a very good gun.
I have wondered at times whether to call it pre series II or series I.
__________________
I am a proud to be a member of the NRA, GOA, FPC and The 2nd Amendment Foundation

Last edited by SC shooter; 05-21-2020 at 01:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-21-2020, 03:41 PM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Age: 62
Posts: 11,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsk View Post
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
Doesn't Kimber use the Swartz firing pin safety? I don't know, I always assumed they did.

I realize S&W has often been tagged with using the Swartz, when in fact they never did, but instead used the Mochak firing pin safety. https://patents.google.com/patent/US6374526B1/en
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-22-2020, 11:10 PM
smitty316 smitty316 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsk View Post
Technically it's not a Swartz safety either. That term originated with Colt, more specifically William A. Swartz, a Colt employee and the designer of this type of FP safety back in the mid 1930s.
Doesn't Kimber use the Swartz firing pin safety? I don't know, I always assumed they did.

I realize S&W has often been tagged with using the Swartz, when in fact they never did, but instead used the Mochak firing pin safety. https://patents.google.com/patent/US6374526B1/en
Kimber does use the swartz safety. They just don't own the licensing to call it that.
Attached Thumbnails
un-its-godzilla-t-looks-like-godzilla-but-due-to-15676551_1590207036891.png  
__________________
Beware the man with one gun, he's cranky because he can't afford more.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-23-2020, 09:59 AM
Huevos Huevos is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Idaho
Age: 64
Posts: 3,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty316 View Post
Kimber does use the swartz safety. They just don't own the licensing to call it that.
That meme is hilarious...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-23-2020, 10:49 AM
kwo51 kwo51 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,713
Have 2 Kimber's a cdp 11 with external extractor and an Ultra carry both late 1990's guns. Both are great guns .
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-23-2020, 06:26 PM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 70,655
I really miss the Kimber Classic Custom that I traded off many years ago. It was a Clackamas-marked gun and one of the first 3000 Kimber 1911s ever made. That thing was an absolute tack driver. What did I trade it for, you ask? One of the new Series IIs, an Eclipse. Although accurate, it had multiple reliability issues related to the FP safety, and I eventually sold it out of frustration. I'm assuming Kimber ironed out the bugs in later guns since they continue to make them, but having made the dumb move of letting go of one of my best-shooting 1911s just for a pretty-looking turd I was left with too bitter a taste in my mouth.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1970 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:24 PM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved