So I went to Gander Mountain to put another SR1911 on layaway and before deciding on the Ruger I was looking at the Kimber Stainless II. It was $300 more and the $680 I spent was about the most I wanted to spend right now.
I know I tend to be critical of Rugers, but I just really like the SR1911 and should not have sold mine. As cool as the 9mm RO is, it is kinda grown old. I did so because of the really bad finish on the barrel crown and rifling. The rest of the pistol was perfect.
OK so here is my question. The salesman said the metal in the Ruger was softer and lower quanlity than the Kimber. In general stainless is far softer than carbon steel by design. This is due to the trade offs of making it rust resistant. I have never heard that there stainless was softer as a whole. I am excluding past issues the SR striker pistols had with soft barrels. I believe this just to be a manufacturing defect, not an alloy issue. Has anyone actually done a Rockwell Hardness test on the slide and barrel of a SR1911?
I would like to see the specs for hardness vs a carbon steel Colt.
I know I tend to be critical of Rugers, but I just really like the SR1911 and should not have sold mine. As cool as the 9mm RO is, it is kinda grown old. I did so because of the really bad finish on the barrel crown and rifling. The rest of the pistol was perfect.
OK so here is my question. The salesman said the metal in the Ruger was softer and lower quanlity than the Kimber. In general stainless is far softer than carbon steel by design. This is due to the trade offs of making it rust resistant. I have never heard that there stainless was softer as a whole. I am excluding past issues the SR striker pistols had with soft barrels. I believe this just to be a manufacturing defect, not an alloy issue. Has anyone actually done a Rockwell Hardness test on the slide and barrel of a SR1911?
I would like to see the specs for hardness vs a carbon steel Colt.