Shield .45 vs Kimber Ultra CDP II?

[Bad_Andy]

I have a 9 Shield and love it. Was thinking about a larger caliber carry weapon. Anybody have any experience with both of these? In California it will be harder to get a .45 Shield, and the Kimbers are readily available.

Obviously completely different platforms, love the feel and trigger of the Kimber, but thinking it would be better for consistency keeping same platform.

Help me decide.

 

[Fishinfool]

Well, not a Shield, but I did own a M&P .45 compact, and own a Kimber Ultra Carry ll.

Some thoughts - Weight was about even. The 1911 flatter, and carried a little better. The .45c was almost reliable. It did hang up 3 or 4 times in about 500 rounds, mostly 230 ball. The Kimber Ultra, in about 800 rounds, twice with my reloads that were a little too long OAL. Sights about equal. Sweet trigger on the Ultra, and my main complaint, rough and notchy on the .45c

The Ultra is far more accurate, but either are combat accurate. 7+1 capacity for the Ultra, not sure the new .45 Shield. Recoil in either was snappy but controllable, though I find my big hands keep position better with a 1911.

The main difference is going to be a completely different operating system. The 1911, being a SA pistol, carried cocked and locked, you are going to have to relearn muscle memory and manual of arms, as well as take into account that light, crisp trigger pull - excellent for the range, but a potential problem in social use without a lot of practice.

If you just want to replicate what you are used to, in a larger caliber, then the Shield is probably the way to go. If you are keen on learning a new system, and willing to put in the practice, you might enjoy the Ultra. By the way, some shorty 1911's have given rise to lack of reliability issues. I believe this has been addressed by Kimber dual captured recoil spring system, keeping the gun in proper "time", at least it has with mine, and several others friends own. If you can find a range that has both to try before you buy, that would be ideal. By the way, if you like lasers, the Crimson Trace Laser Grips are a nice option on the Ultra, and don't require a special holster - not sure what's available for the Shield.

Larry

 

[ultratec00]

I own a Sig Ultra that is very close to the Kimber. Shoots phenomenal, a favorite of mine, and often accompanies me when I travel. It's still a 1911 and requires some diligence. The Shield 45 is going to be taking its place for a couple reasons. Both are on par when it comes to shootability and accuracy. Mag availability is an issue with the shield right now, but that should be resolved over time. Biggest decision factor is value. If for some reason my Ultra gets confiscated, stolen, or lost, every bit of $1000 goes out the door. Something happens to the shield, cut that loss in half and go buy another.

I recall someone posting on another forum about being pulled over by LE on a traffic stop, individual was authorized to carry and notified the officer. Officer essentially took control of the individual's firearm, a 1911 worth well over $1000. Wasn't particularly familiar with the type of weapon, but managed to make it safe. Subsequently set the safe firearm on I believe the hood or may have been the trunk. Firearm slid/fell off the vehicle, hitting the pavement, and damaging the finish of the weapon. It is what it is, but makes one think about the firearm they carry..

 

[V0OBWxZS16]

I went from a Kimber Ultra to a Shield 9. Stick with the Shield 9. It's smaller, lighter, more controllable, higher capacity, more reliable, cheaper to shoot, and cheaper to replace.

 

[berudd]

Give that you can buy about 3 shields for the price of that Kimber, comparing them on features and quality is probably not a fair comparison. You expect them both to be reliable but I'd expect the Kimber to be smoother and more accurate. Like someone said though, accuracy in a subcompact defensive pistol is a relative term. Also, as mentioned above I'd it a big factor is, if you don't already have the skills required to use the Kimber as a defensive weapon, are you willing to spend the time to develop them? Can you get the Shield model without a safety in CA? If not, then that does narrow the gap a bit in operating complexity. If it is available, the Shield with no safety in much easier to bring into action if things get hairy. I'd also be a bit concerned about carrying a cocked and locked single action trigger as a civilian as a day to day carry gun. But, that could be due to my very limited experience with 1911s.

 

[Rastoff]

The Shield is not available in CA because it's not on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. There are two ways that; Private Party Transfer (PPT) or Parent to Child (PTC) transfer.

The PTC can only be done if you have a parent living out of state. They can buy one and then transfer it to you in CA later. This is a dangerous route because it could be considered a Straw Man purchase which is a federal crime.

The PPT is very unlikely for the Shield 45 since it can't be bought new. There are only three scenarios where it could happen:

• Someone buys one in another state and then moves here and decides to sell it as a PPT.
• Someone does a PTC transfer and then decides to sell it.
• A police officer buys one (they're exempt from the roster) and then decides to sell it via PPT. There is already one police officer in prison because of this so, this is unlikely too.

I'm a huge 1911 fan. However, the design is not optimal with a short barrel. The smallest 1911 I'll have is a 4.25" Commander. I have no trouble carrying that one.

If you can get a Shield 45, by all means carry that one. I believe it will be more reliable than a small 1911.

 

[b_san]

The Shield is not available in CA because it's not on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale. There are two ways that; Private Party Transfer (PPT) or Parent to Child (PTC) transfer.

The PTC can only be done if you have a parent living out of state. They can buy one and then transfer it to you in CA later. This is a dangerous route because it could be considered a Straw Man purchase which is a federal crime.

Actually no it's not the least bit dangerous or unusual. Purchasing a firearm as a gift with no intention of keeping it for yourself is completely 100% legal and is expressly listed as a legal purchase on the 4473 instructions. As long as the gift gun is purchased with the buyer's own funds it is legal, period. It would only become a straw purchase if the person receiving the "gift" were to have given the buyer the funds to pay for the firearm.

 

[Rastoff]

Anyone may take any chance they want. I'll continue to tell people to be careful with it.

 

[MetalMan]

My ca. 2000 Ultra Carry has been my favorite cold weather SD carry for a very long time now. Thousands of rounds through the tube and I cannot recall the last time I've experienced any sort of FTF/FTE with all manner of factory ammo.

I continue to trust this pistol implicitly.

 

[HKSmith]

Give that you can buy about 3 shields for the price of that Kimber, comparing them on features and quality is probably not a fair comparison. You expect them both to be reliable but I'd expect the Kimber to be smoother and more accurate. Like someone said though, accuracy in a subcompact defensive pistol is a relative term. Also, as mentioned above I'd it a big factor is, if you don't already have the skills required to use the Kimber as a defensive weapon, are you willing to spend the time to develop them? Can you get the Shield model without a safety in CA? If not, then that does narrow the gap a bit in operating complexity. If it is available, the Shield with no safety in much easier to bring into action if things get hairy. I'd also be a bit concerned about carrying a cocked and locked single action trigger as a civilian as a day to day carry gun. But, that could be due to my very limited experience with 1911s.

The Shield with the safety is no more complicated to use than the Shield without the safety. You simply don't use the safety - the trigger and action on the 2 models are identical. The Shield with the safety is not "cocked and locked" like a 1911. It's more like the lock on revolvers, which you don't have to use if you don't want to.

 

[LEO918]

Buy the Ultra.

 

[Goblin]

My choice would be the Shield. That's just based on my personal feeling of which is more reliable and safe to carry. The fact that you're already used to the platform is what I see to be the icing on the cake. I love 1911s, even though I only have four of them, but I personally like them for fun and prefer to carry other platforms for defense.

 

[Longhorn1986]

I own an Ultra TLE Stainless and have been very pleased with it. It shoots nice and is comfortable to carry. Admittedly, I do not have a Shield. The closest I have to compare is an old 3rd Gen. I alternate carry and am fine with either. The big question to me is whether or not you're okay with carrying a 1911 cocked & locked and will you remember to engage/disengage the safety when the adrenaline is pumping?

 

[Mulebuk Sam]

The big question to me is whether or not you're okay with carrying a 1911 cocked & locked and will you remember to engage/disengage the safety when the adrenaline is pumping?

Bingo !

I tired to like single action 1911 versions but I could never get pass that cocked and locked, even though every striker fired handgun is cocked and locked, the difference is psychological cause we don't see it. The problem with the 1911 style is you need that safety. The only safety I want on a defensive handgun is my finger and what is between the ears, there is enough other things to worry about if the need arises.

I never felt worried about carrying my Glock but yet I just could never get passed seeing that hammer cocked even though more people have probably shot themselves with a Glock


But do they ever carry nice, can't get any slimmer in an auto loader, they lay nice and flat against the body and of course no one can deny the classic look of them.

Oh well, I'm now thoroughly content with my revolver.
(and what a beast it is)

 

[berudd]

The Shield with the safety is no more complicated to use than the Shield without the safety. You simply don't use the safety - the trigger and action on the 2 models are identical. The Shield with the safety is not "cocked and locked" like a 1911. It's more like the lock on revolvers, which you don't have to use if you don't want to.

Well, that is all true of course. But, I grew up hunting where the gun was always on safe until you mounted it to fire. So, not engaging a safety when the gun has one if somewhat of a mental block for me. I know its no different than using the model without a safety but old habits die hard.

 

[berudd]

Bingo !

I tired to like single action 1911 versions but I could never get pass that cocked and locked, even though every striker fired handgun is cocked and locked, the difference is psychological cause we don't see it. The problem with the 1911 style is you need that safety. The only safety I want on a defensive handgun is my finger and what is between the ears, there is enough other things to worry about if the need arises.

I never felt worried about carrying my Glock but yet I just could never get passed seeing that hammer cocked even though more people have probably shot themselves with a Glock


But do they ever carry nice, can't get any slimmer in an auto loader, they lay nice and flat against the body and of course no one can deny the classic look of them.

Oh well, I'm now thoroughly content with my revolver.
(and what a beast it is)

You're correct that it is a mental thing to get comfortable with carrying a single action pistol cocked and locked. So, if one is not willing to put in the time to train and overcome that mental block its probably best to carry something else.

I would say though that a striker fired pistol is not really cocked and locked in the same sense that at 1911 is. While it is ready to fire by simply pulling the trigger, that trigger pull require significantly more effort than a 1911. There's also the safety build into the trigger of these guns so its much less likely that some other unintentional contact with the trigger will cause a discharge.

While many seem to be OK with carrying the safety equipped Shield with the safety disengaged I doubt you will find anyone that would recommend carrying the 1911 without the safety on.

 

[kthom]

Depends on which platform you like the most. They are both guns, but the operating system is very different. I cannot understand why folks who think nothing about owning and shooting and carrying a revolver have problems with the idea of a striker fired semi auto. I understand that this situation exists. I have owned both styles of operating systems, and I have many years of experience with revolvers. I am much more comfortable with those and with striker fired guns. I will say that for me personally, if I were to choose a 1911 style handgun, it would not be a Kimber. No offense meant to anyone who likes them. I think a person ought to carry whatever fits their hands best and whatever they can have great confidence in and shoot their best with. For me, that list includes S&W revolvers, M&P semi autos, and the Shield models without reservations.

 

[ultratec00]

I'd say its all mental considering there are no safeties on double action revolvers and they simply go bang by someone executing an overly long trigger cycle. Same for most striker fire weapons w/o a safety except the trigger cycle is typically less pronounced that a DA revolver.

My M&Ps have safeties and it's a natural transition between them and a 1911. Currently own three non-safety striker fire weapons and my thumb instinctively tries to depress a safety even though there is none. They have been retired, or on my "to trade" list. My primary pocket carry weapon is a Sig P938 riding in a Desantis pocket holster, cocked and locked, and never had a problem.

You're correct that it is a mental thing to get comfortable with carrying a single action pistol cocked and locked.

 

[vmumford]

I have a 9 Shield and love it. Was thinking about a larger caliber carry weapon. Anybody have any experience with both of these? In California it will be harder to get a .45 Shield, and the Kimbers are readily available.

Obviously completely different platforms, love the feel and trigger of the Kimber, but thinking it would be better for consistency keeping same platform.

Help me decide.

Ok, so there has been a lot said her and it makes one think which way to go. If the 1911 platform appeals to you, (like it does me), go with the Kimber. I have owned one for 4 years and have shot aal hand loads and factory loads and I personaly have not experienced a failure in loading or firing "EXCEPT" I sometimes ride the slide. This causes a FTF. One thing no one has mentioned here is a neat little system the was or is distributed by Cylender and Slide. Its called "Safety Fast Shooting System" I purchased this and installed it in my CDP and its a very cool system. It allows you to carry Cocked and Locked with the hammer down. After the draw, you pull the thumb safety down and the hammer snaps back to the fire position and you shoot it like a normal 1911. I urge you to look into it before making a decision here. I really like it and since your learning a new platform anyway, use it in conjunction with your training. Its fast and secure.

Safety Fast Shooting System

 

[Mulebuk Sam]

I cannot understand why folks who think nothing about owning and shooting and carrying a revolver have problems with the idea of a striker fired semi auto.

Approximately 5.5. pound pull out of the box when I had my Glock. (I didn't even look at that trigger the wrong way)

We have no safeties and we need none on a DA revolver, out of the box my Governor is close to double or more of a out of the box standard Glock. But the pull is smooth and consistent.

Took me a long time to psych myself up into carrying a Glock.
No fear now but I also got drilled in safe gun handling (NRA approved and sponsored thank you very much), ironically most people shoot themselves when they go to field strip and clean. I use to clear in a 15 gallon can full of sand in my closet.

The reason I'm back into revolvers is I simply don't trust semi-automatics. (that's another story)

 

[Rastoff]

I would say though that a striker fired pistol is not really cocked and locked in the same sense that at 1911 is. While it is ready to fire by simply pulling the trigger, that trigger pull require significantly more effort than a 1911. There's also the safety build into the trigger of these guns so its much less likely that some other unintentional contact with the trigger will cause a discharge.

You might say that, but the 1911 actually has more safety built into it.

That little thing built into the trigger is a drop safety, nothing more. It's only function is to prevent discharge in the event the gun is dropped on the rear of the slide. Anything that comes in contact with the trigger, and holds it back, will disable the "trigger safety" and fire the gun. Many, many examples of this with people reholstering and clothing getting inside the trigger guard and firing the gun.

• The 1911 has a grip safety that must be depressed.
• The 1911 trigger must be held back or the hammer will be stopped by the half cock.
• If the 1911 hammer falls unintentionally, the half cock will prevent it striking the firing pin.
• The 1911 thumb safety blocks hammer movement, sear movement and trigger movement.
• If it is a series 80 1911, it also has a firing pin block that works just like the striker block in a striker fired gun.

• The M&P striker block prevents the striker from going forward if the trigger is not held back or the gun is dropped on the muzzle.
• The M&P trigger safety only prevents trigger movement if the gun is dropped on the rear of the slide. It serves no other function.
• If the M&P is outfitted with a thumb safety, that only blocks trigger movement.

There is no way to chamber a round in an M&P (or Glock) and not have the gun cocked. With a 1911, the hammer could be lowered, but I don't recommend it.

So, by the above list of safeties, the 1911 is far safer. It is a moot point though. Both guns are safe and won't fire unless done intentionally. Both guns are carried cocked and locked. Both guns are super reliable. Both are just as effective against a bad guy.

Buy and carry the one you shoot best. Get quality training. Practice what you're taught; a lot.

 

[kthom]

I wouldn't say the 1911 is a safer gun. I would say that it requires more things to be done in order to fire it if all the safeties are used. For me, that's more things to get screwed up! And it's also more things that can go wrong. I own the 1911 platform, and it's like any other platform, if it's well maintained, well constructed, and well handled, it's as good to go as any other. But the 1911 requires training specific to the platform and careful attention to the drill. The fact that it has performed well for so many years is a testament to the fact that it has stood the test of time. I personally think the 1911 is perhaps more subject to Bubba making "improvements" to the basic platform without fully understanding that all those safeties MUST be in harmony with specifications and with each other and the rest of the mechanism to be reliable.

I like to keep things as simple as possible, with the smallest number of things that must be done to put any weapon platform into quick use. Since the striker fired guns are in fact as safe as any other platform for a knowledgeable user who practices safe gun handling religiously, they are, for me, my EDC of choice if I am not carrying my old favorite revolvers. And since my striker fired semi autos carry a few more rounds with the added benefit of being able to reload them a bit more quickly and more easily carry spare ammo, I find myself carrying one of them most of the time. Like my revolvers, the large and small ones of the same platform operate the same, so there is less to "remember" and do if I switch between them and my revolvers. Once loaded and holstered, both of these two platforms are put into action in the same fashion, draw, aim, and shoot! That is important to me!

What Rastoff said is GOSPEL!!!! "Buy and carry the one you shoot best. Get quality training. Practice what you're taught; a lot." You will travel a very long way and wait for a very long time before you get better advice than that!!!!

 

[berudd]

Rastoff, thanks for those insights. That is a lot of great info that I had never considered before, and some I simply didn't know. I doubt I'll ever carry a 1911 anyway but still, the info you gave is very useful.

 

[ditrina]

Owner of 3 ultras.. 1 Ultra CDP II, Ultra Raptor II and the new Ultra RCP II / LG.. Do I love 'em you bet


Ultra RCP II / LG

Ultra Raptor II

Ultra CDP II (sent back to kimber to be fully KimPro finished

 

[kannonvaggon]

I carried a gov't model 1911 " back in the day " .... and had a couple times where when I went to fire the weapon I had a problem with the lemon squeezer safety. I wasn't the only one. On those models ya had to be careful how your hand went on the grip or it just might not function.

We didn't like this, and went to taping down the squeezer safety, but still always carried with loaded and cocked. I'm surprised I never shot myself or anybody near me, but this seemed perfectly "normal" at the time.

Today, I carry a Shield with a thumb safety and feel very secure it will function reliably and safely. YMMV

 

[Backlighting]

If you don't have any objection to revolvers a Charter Arms Bulldog .44 Spl
may be worth considering.

 

[Lee's Landing Billy]

Our opinions are ,or should be, based on our own experiences. That being said I see every common platform available here on this range. They are being fired with everything you can buy over the counter and personal reloads. The 1911 platforms I see are not as reliable as the Shields. When the 1911 system is shortened below Commander length the failure rate multiplies at a great rate. Not so with the plastic guns. We all have to seek our own salvation [not original to me], but my life's experiences with 1,000s of guns being shot with 10s of 1,000s rounds of ammo make me lean to the new guns for reliability. I own and cherish over a dozen Colt 1911s. I treasure each of them, but I do not carry any of them.

 

[Bad_Andy]

Thank you all for the replies. I agree that I would have to do a lot of training to learn a new (to me) platform with the 1911. I would certainly do this before I ever trusted my life by carrying a system that I am not 100% confident and/or comfortable with.

Right now I will stick with my 9mm shield. I am in no hurry to upgrade to a larger caliber (I do have a full size .40, that I could carry should I desire too).

My short term plan is to maybe purchase a regular full size 1911 (Colt, SA, or Kimber) for a range gun and get comfortable with the platform. I know they are great guns (and who wouldn't want to own a Colt or SA)?. If I like it (why wouldn't I)? then maybe I will consider a compact 3" 1911.

Thank you all for your thoughts and opinions.

 

[tom turner]

Hi, I have both, and love both . . . though the Kimber Ultra CDP is at another magnitude of "finer" as a handgun.

I really enjoy my Shield 9, but the trigger still leaves a lot to be desired vs. that sweet, light single action pull of the Kimber.

Here are some targets fired from my Shield right after I bought it, and will various loads. ZERO MALFUNCTIONS, but the trigger made accuracy a challenge. And yes, I keep it loaded, cocked and locked in a holster. It is totally safe, including on the table getting its photo taken.

Just before last light I pulled out the Kimber, just to sell what it would do. I wish I hadn't done that. All five rounds, shot in one ragged hole at 10 meters, standing . . . as boringly usual, and that perfect, crisp trigger? Wow.

That all being said, I'm going to be looking for a companion Shield 45 soon. I surely would hate to lose that Kimber from the car on a trip or a LEO confiscation (temporarily of course).

Mine was purchased around early 2000, and is thus the original (non-Series II) version, and back when they REALLY did a serious "meltdown" on them. Sixteen years ago, it was $1,000 new. Like the Shield, my Kimber has never had a single malfunction in it's 16 years, except for lightly hand-loaded 200gr. LSWC, and only because the recoil was too light to work with that double recoil spring.

I absolutely trust my life to that awesome baby 1911 with any full-power self-defense round, but carry it with 230gn jacketed hollowpoints. Mine loves this weight and shoots 'em to point of aim. However, it has always shot slightly to the left since I got it. I've never felt I needed to drift the sight over that tiny amount, though I probably should go ahead and do it.

I absolutely agree with other experienced 1911-design shooters, the 1911 is a safer gun to carry cocked and locked vs. the striker-fired weapons to experienced 1911 owners.

BUT . . . the Shield has a lot of great attributes going to it these days.

 

[Bonephish]

Hi, I have both, and love both . . . though the Kimber Ultra CDP is at another magnitude of "finer" as a handgun.

I have both a .45 Shield and a .45 Kimber Pro Carry II (4".) The Kimber is the most accurate handgun I own, but the Shield will get the job done inside 20' and is a lot more comfortable to carry concealed.