Kimber Stainless II vs Springfield Loaded

The two guns I’m comparing here are the Kimber Stainless II in 45 ACP and the Springfield Loaded in 45 ACP. I’m still a little new here so throughout this review, I’ll try to fill in some context. These guns have never been fired before this comparison.

When it comes to price, I have my limits on what I’ll spend. $500-$600 in plenty ok spending the cash on a decent gun. $700-$800 I really start to evaluate how much I really want that gun. $900-$1000, well, I’m waiting for a price drop. Over $1000, forget about it. That’s a unicorn pistol. Have I done it? Yes, but it’s rare. I dropped $1217 on this Springfield a month or two ago and I’m just getting around to shooting it.

Normally, this gun runs in the $850 range but due to the discontinuation, the price increased quite a bit, although, the California compliant version as evaluated is still available.


The Kimber Stainless II, well, the price was just right. $830 is right in that upper end and they are nice guns. I had already purchased the 10mm variant and with the ammo shortage here, I just wanted another 45. The 10mm was gritty but functioned well. The breakin is messy due to the bead blasted slide and rails, unnecessary friction on the only two surfaces that have to slide pretty freely. I’ll leave it at that. Extra oil is necessary to keep the metal byproduct of the two surfaces sanding each other down, flushed out of that area otherwise, the gun becomes unreliable after about 50 rounds. I expect the breakin on this 45 to be the same. A few drops of oil and work the slide back and forth a dozen times or so and it will return to normal function. The Mec Gar mags I had ordered for the 10mm didn’t work well. I did find some unbranded that appear to be the exact same mag that came with the 10mm and they work fine.

Comparatively speaking, these two firearms we are looking at are in the same class and make for a good apples to apples evaluation. Let there be no mistake, there is bias going into this comparison. I am a big supporter of Springfield polymer pistols. I think for the bracket of the market they serve, they are second to none. Kimber on the other hand, the reputation of Kimber has changed over the years from the once famous quality to really hit and miss. Some of that probably has to do with the volume of 1911s they put out. Not going to lie, I’ve seen a lot of stupid things come out of Kimber over the past few years that have really deterred me from buying one until recently.

After the experience with the 10mm, I can say that the Stainless II is built well. All stainless (including the main spring housing) full length guide rod and very good fitment. I decided that in that $800 price range, it’s a worthy gun to add to the collection. Now on to the actual comparison.

The magazine that came with the two are identical. Largely due, I’m guessing, to the Mec-Gar oem manufacturer. This made the comparison just that much easier.





The magazine on the left is from the Springfield, you can tell by the scratches on the mag that the inside of the magwell is not as finished inside. For this test, I also used two Mec-Gar branded 8rd magazines with polymer followers. These mags have worked very well in all of my 1911s thus far.


In addition, I used PPU factory 230gr ball range ammo. These are the first shots and I don’t feel that running HPs in them yet is exactly fair due to neither of them being broken in yet. Cheap factory range ammo at this point is fair enough.

The two guns have very different finishes. While both bare stainless, the Springfield has a matte finish with machined faces on the flats. A very appealing finish in my opinion. The machined flats lends to the sharp crisp edges on the serrations, there is no slippage happening there.



In addition, the safety is ambidextrous, the finish matches the slide flats but the slide release is matte. The matte areas on the Springfield are fairly abrasive. It’s not a smooth matte.

There is no checkering on the front strap so that rougher matte does help there. There is very aggressive checkering on the main spring housing. Take note that the MSH has a lock on it. That’s because this model is the California compliant version, which to my subjective measurement, equated to about a 30% increase in trigger pull weight. Something I’ll likely swap out later.



Onto the Kimber… The Stainless II has a matte finish over all. It is a much smoother matte that that on the Springfield, but it does evenly cover the entire gun.


Right hand only safety, albeit, not as generous as the one on the Springfield. Standard size slide release also sharing the same finish as the rest of the gun.

The front strap again, has no checkering but due to the smoother matte finish, provides a little less grips texture than the Springfield.


The main spring housing has the same aggressive checkering as the Springfield Loaded. Both models come standard with skeletonized hammers and triggers along with comfortable oversized beaver tail grip safeties.


The slide fitment goes to the Kimber. There is no play in the slide to frame fitment. The Springfield had a little bit of side to side play, but very little. Not enough to catch on my camera.

Continued below…