Which would?

[DethWshBkr]

You buy?

I am working on a very large job - and afterwards, rewarding myself with a 1911 purchase. I have had my eye on a Covert II for about two years now. Last year, I bought a Crimson Carry Ultra, but sold it (and made money) for my '43 Garand that I bought.

Both would be 4" models - for carry and general shooting, so I like the midrange size.


I have always liked the looks of the Covert II, and I like the night sights, tac wedged. They thing looks better in person I think. Aggressive checkering on the frame too. The mag bumper is removable if desired.



Now, this thing is a thing of beauty. I had the Ultra. Nice touches with the laser grip - the slide stop is recessed and smooth to the frame. The rosewood grips are beautiful. BUT - the sights are non existent. There are no dots at all on the front or rear sight. You are relying solely on the laser. As a result - I would have to put a set of night sights on it, either standard, or tac wedge (I think standard would look better). Smooth frame on the front.




After sights, they both would be about the same price. The Covert perhaps about 150 more.

[den9]

my dad has an ultra covert, i love the finish on it, very nice gun from the custom shop.

[orionz06]

Random question, why a 4" model? For CC, the grip length is what will make it harder to conceal, and a 1911 hides very well, even in 5".

[Cole]

When asked to make decisions like these, I feel like I'm giving fashion advice.

"Does this skirt make me look fat?"

Both handguns you are looking at are pretty . . . prettier than needed in a self-defense tool. But their prettiness and bells/whistles are what allows their makers to capture more of your money.

Do you want/need laser sights? If so, go with Option B. If you don't, go with Option A.

[camper]

This is like being asked which breast I like better...the left or right.

Both are equally beautiful, and I'd love to get my hands on either one.

camper

[DethWshBkr]

When asked to make decisions like these, I feel like I'm giving fashion advice.

"Does this skirt make me look fat?"

Both handguns you are looking at are pretty . . . prettier than needed in a self-defense tool. But their prettiness and bells/whistles are what allows their makers to capture more of your money.

Do you want/need laser sights? If so, go with Option B. If you don't, go with Option A.

WHile I admit the asthetics are one reason I am drawn to them - I have held a number of others, and the Kimbers just seem to feel better to me. Springfields are my #2 choice, but the grips just do not feel as good with my hands.

They both have the laser grips, by the way.
Necessary? No. Something I want to rely on? Absolutely not. The time you would need them, they would fail. That is why I would put nights on the crimson - they have no dots - and in low to no light, the sights on that gun are absolutley worthless. I am surprised at Kimber for that.

I am not overly concerned about "keeping it pretty". It is a weapon, I know that. It gets beat up, I understand that. Doesn't mean I want it spray painted flat black with chips in it either. Pride in your equipment of any kind, either my truck, motorcycle, or firearms.

Random question, why a 4" model? For CC, the grip length is what will make it harder to conceal, and a 1911 hides very well, even in 5"

I had the Ultra, which is the 3" barrel, with the shorter grip. While OK, I had difficulty holding onto the extra short grip. I don't particularly want a long 5" barrel, so the 4" is what I have settled on. The grips seem identical on the 4 and 5. I currently carry my 4" XD9, and have no issues with it, grip or barrel length for carry.

[CHEMICAL]

Random question, why a 4" model? For CC, the grip length is what will make it harder to conceal, and a 1911 hides very well, even in 5".

Although you make a valid point, saying that the grip is the only thing that makes it difficult to conceal is a big misconception. For people that carry concealed IWB the length of the barrel also plays a big role in conceal-ability.

[fonz]

Covert. I like that tan and black color scheme more than the stainless and black.

[Cole]

Pride in equipment? IMO, people spend too much time, energy, and emotion in "merchandise". If having a tacticool-looking gun gives you that much more pride that you'll get to the range/training sessions/competitions/etc more often, then it's definitely money well spent.

I'm not knocking you personally. Hell, I don't know you and you probably shoot way better than me. My only point is that lots of folks fall into a commercial trap and focus too much on tool and not enough on craft.

[DethWshBkr]

My only point is that lots of folks fall into a commercial trap and focus too much on tool and not enough on craft.

Agreed.

That said - take a close look at that AR in my picture. There are ZERO upgrades to it. Stock iron sights on the removable handle. Stock everything. NOTHING aftermarket on it.

My MX bike - bone stock. Not a single upgrade in it.

Yet I'll take my AR against one of these souped up monsters with grips and special stocks, 15 scopes and a light. I'll also run against any rider with my bone stock KTM motocross bike against any aftermarketed bike with fancy decals all day long, and probably top 95% of them.

That fancy crap means nothing, and usually I find the guys with the decked out equipment can't use to the capacity of the stock parts (applies to anything, bicycles, motocross bikes, guns). I take pride and care in/of my tools of choice, but I'll use it as it's designed. When I get something, it is used, but not abused - and doesn't sit around just looking pretty trying to impress someone with it. (I have a major beef with bicycle riders and motocross riders that love to have the 'blingiest' equipment, the best upgrades, and the most powerful motor, yet, can't get out of their own way, so sorry, I know this is turning into an OT rant!)


I do have to admit though - the Kimber is alot of eye candy, but as I said - I'm doing a big job, and this is my treat.

I'm not taking offense to anything - I think we agree completely, actually.