Kimber K6S: High Priced Pimp Gun?

[Lefty Red]

I doubt the frame is MIM. From what I have read done properly MIM parts are equal to their forged counterparts. Done poorly they will have the same results as other metal parts done poorly.

The problem is who the vendor is who supplies the parts. I believe S&W do all of their manufacturing, including MIM parts. From what I have heard, if true, Kimber outsources some of their parts.

As far as the K6, I am not wild about snub nose revolvers since both the wife, and I open carry. The ones we do have sit in the safe. Plus Kimber does not have a SA/DA option which is a must for me on a revolver. I did buy a model 64 DAO, but all I have to do is change the hammer to get SA. I kept trying to get a police trade in SA/DA but they were always gone before I could get a order, I had to settle for the DAO. If I was going to spend money for a new revolver it would probably be the model 66, or the model 10.

Colt should bring back the Police Positive, with a option for DAO. They did bring back the Cobra for snubby lovers.

Yes, no MIM parts on the K6S.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Texas by God]

I will be the bad guy here. I think it and the LCR are UGLY. Would I carry one? Of course!

[NavyVet1959]

Call me old fashioned, but a revolver without a hammer just doesn't look *right* to me. And that includes the ones from S&W, regardless of how long they've been around.

But then again, I don't like semi-autos without hammers either...

[308Jeff]

At first I was thinking, "Wow, a Kimber that works"? Then I saw it was a revolver, so I guess they couldn't really mess that up.

Nice pistol.

[Lefty Red]

I will be the bad guy here. I think it and the LCR are UGLY. Would I carry one? Of course!

LOL, yo sound like my Buddy from High School! He did nothing but complain and put it down. Then went down and ordered one! Said it was the easiest shooting 357 revolver he ever shot. I have to agree.

And with all the griping I do about the LRC's grip selection, I still think they are a very good snubbie. I personally can't get it to work in a pocket, but would readily carry it on my hip. The replacement front sight makes it really one of the best <$450 snubs out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lefty Red]

Call me old fashioned, but a revolver without a hammer just doesn't look *right* to me. And that includes the ones from S&W, regardless of how long they've been around.

But then again, I don't like semi-autos without hammers either...

No it doesn't! Looks odd for sure, as does the SW 442/642. But the way it shoots, the K6S, makes up for it.

And I'm with you on the semis too! Hi Powers are my newest obsession.

Lefty


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Petrol & Powder]

I'm a bit old school as well but I cannot tolerate exposed hammers on snubnose revolvers.

A snubnose revolver is a self-defense tool, often carried concealed, sometimes even fired from concealment and never needs to be fired in single action. I don't want the "option" of single action on a snubnose revolver and prefer (read that as require) the advantage of a snag-resistant profile.

DAO revolvers do look a bit weird but I don't care what my parachute looks like, I just want it to work !

[Lefty Red]

I'm a bit old school as well but I cannot tolerate exposed hammers on snubnose revolvers.

A snubnose revolver is a self-defense tool, often carried concealed, sometimes even fired from concealment and never needs to be fired in single action. I don't want the "option" of single action on a snubnose revolver and prefer (read that as require) the advantage of a snag-resistant profile.

DAO revolvers do look a bit weird but I don't care what my parachute looks like, I just want it to work !

Understand! The need for SA shot with a snubbie is probably beyond the realm of reality in a real world need for self defense.

Lefty


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FergusonTO35]

I would have to respectfully disagree. I think a single action option can be very useful even in a self defense scenario. You may have heard, just today a psycho tried to stab people at Transylvania University one county over from me. In my mind, if an assailant is attacking someone else and you have the luxury of a good two hand hold and a split second to aim, why not cock the hammer and make the most accurate shot possible? My 637 is very accurate single action, I do practice in both modes. Another thing: what if the assailant has four legs instead of two? For example, a small animal that is not acting right and needs to be dealt with before it gets too close.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

t ...

[Petrol & Powder]

I would have to respectfully disagree. I think a single action option can be very useful even in a self defense scenario. You may have heard, just today a psycho tried to stab people at Transylvania University one county over from me. In my mind, if an assailant is attacking someone else and you have the luxury of a good two hand hold and a split second to aim, why not cock the hammer and make the most accurate shot possible? My 637 is very accurate single action, I do practice in both modes. Another thing: what if the assailant has four legs instead of two? For example, a small animal that is not acting right and needs to be dealt with before it gets too close.

This is not a topic that I'm going to get into long discussions over but I'll nibble at the bait.......

Whenever the hammer spur with SA capability vs. no hammer spur / DAO debate comes up; the pro hammer spur people ALWAYS characterize the SA option as a capability they don't wish to GIVE UP. I must emphasize that they always speak of the SA capability as something they want to retain. They even go so far as to use the words, "I don't want to lose the ability to shoot the gun in single action".

To support this point of view they will give hypothetical examples in which the SA capability appears to be desirable. Here are some of those examples that are frequently offered in support of taking a shot in single action:

1. I may need to take a shot in self-defense from a long distance.

2. I may need to make a precise shot because there are friendlies close to the attacker.

3. I may need to use this snubnose revolver for some task other than self-defense.

OK- let's look at those justifications.

1. I may need to take a long shot in self-defense. This might happen but experience shows that most deadly force encounters occur at very short ranges (less than 7 yards for a vast majority and less than 3 yards for more than half of those). Even if your threat was 30 + yards away - you would still use the tools at your disposal, including double action fire. Your best bet in that situation would probably be to take cover if available or just escape the threat, if possible. If you had no other option, DA fire would work just as well as SA fire. Escaping the threat would be a better option at that point. We can play these far -fetched hypotheticals till the cows come home but they only become increasingly silly. At some point, it fails to be self-defense and YOU become the aggressor.

2. Friendlies near the target - This one is the most insane. If you can't make the shot DA (under stress) without invoking a tragedy; what makes you think that SA fire (under stress) would be any better? If someone is holding your wife at gunpoint and you decide to intervene with a firearm (and you actually like your wife ........ ), what makes you CERTAIN that SA fire would allow you to pull that shot off without danger to the hostage ???? (assuming that's your goal ). I cannot fathom a situation in which I would accept taking a shot in SA that I wouldn't also take in DA.

3. I may need to use the gun for tasks other than self-defense - fair enough but there's no longer the urgency to employ a firearm. Either take the time to get closer if you must OR go get a better long distance firearm. If there's no rush, I can make a DA shot at considerable distance or I can choose to not take the shot at all.


NOW, here are the arguments in favor of hammerless, snubnose revolvers as self-defense tools:

The exposed hammer ONLY serves as a hindrance during the draw, particularly from a pocket or deep concealment. A DAO hammerless or bobbed hammer snubnose is practically "snag-proof". This is its strongest trait as a self-defense tool.

The gun is a last ditch, self-defense tool that will be employed at short ranges and must be employed very quickly.

Under extreme stress, fine motor skills degrade and DAO operation becomes a more certain method of operation. It is also a safer mode of operation under extreme stress. An accidental discharge is less likely and there will never be a need to de-cock a DAO revolver because it cannot be placed into SA mode.

In close quarters combat the hammer can be blocked by the adversary and that renders the gun inoperable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Traditional DA/SA revolvers with hammer spurs are fine when we are talking about full sized revolvers used for multiple tasks. However, the snubnosed revolver is almost exclusively a close quarters combat tool and [IMO] there's no place for a hammer on such a tool.

This is simply my opinion and I respect FergusonTO35's differing point of view.

[FergusonTO35]

10-4, you make some very good points. How 'bout we all just agree that snubbies are very useful tools, regardless of what configuration you prefer?

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

...

[Petrol & Powder]

10-4, you make some very good points. How 'bout we all just agree that snubbies are very useful tools, regardless of what configuration you prefer?

Absolutely - they are very useful tools.

[charlie b]

Hammer vs no hammer. Get what you like!

I like hammers, but, it's because I like to plink with them every now and then. And never pocket carry.

I still like the look of the Kimber. If I were to carry a revolver again I'd go try one.

[NavyVet1959]

In close quarters combat the hammer can be blocked by the adversary and that renders the gun inoperable.

But if you are in that close of quarters, the double-action revolver could be blocked by someone holding the cylinder preventing it from rotating. I would say that it would be easier to intentionally hold the cylinder than to intentionally put part of your hand between the hammer and the rest of the gun, just for the simple matter of it being a larger target to be focused at in a stressful situation.

My personal experience though was not to think of whether the person had the gun in SA or DA pointed towards me, but rather to just grab the barrel and move it away from me. I figured that as long as the barrel was not pointing towards me, even if it did fire, it would not hit me. Seemed like a good idea at the time and 5 out of 6 shots did NOT hit me. The key to this "technique" is to not lose control of the barrel. When the assailant trips and falls while trying to back away, you tend to lose control of the barrel. Oh well... It was successful 5 out of 6 shots...

[Lefty Red]

Think options are good, some use them some don't. I think the hammer bs no hammer has really gotten down to nit picking.

I don't care either which way. I carry an exposed hammer and without. Current snubbie on my hip, the K6s is DAO. Current pocket snubbie is a Charter Arms Undercover, with a hammer. I was taught to place thumb on hammer while drawing, to avoid hang ups. So pocket carry does not bother me either way.

What we have gotten away from is that the K6s is strong as a tank and sexy as Hell!

Do I see a POSSIBILITY of a SA aimed shot in a citizen involved shooting? No! Not one! Well, outside of a very fantastic situation. Sorry, I'm getting me loved ones and getting out of there. I'm not a LEO, if I was I would be carrying a hi cap and more "battlefield" friendly weapon. I'm a Dad that is taking his son out for pizza and my main objective of his safety. Not to be a hero and engage an active shooter or stop a terrorist attack.

In my AO, the most probable way I'm getting into a citizen involved shooting is via trying to be robbed or I am in a robbery of a store. If it's me getting robbed, it's because I looked the part of a victim, I was unaware or distracted or wasn't paying attention to my surroundings. If they have the jump on me and have a gun out, they are getting my wallet. I'm not risking getting shot over my stupidity and their desperation. My safety of my son comes first.
If it's a robbery if the local pizza place, then as long as they aren't separating us or acting like hostages are going to be taken, they got my wallet. I can cancel my credit and debit cards rather quickly. I don't heal from knife or bullet wounds or beatings like I use to.

Sorry, my Ninja days are over. Days of disarming assailants and bad guys are mostly behind me. I find I can either avoid or walk away easier than getting into fights. My five shot snubbie has protected me more than my G19 with three times the firepower. Why? Because I carry it, all the time.

Another picture of the sexy K6s!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Petrol & Powder]

But if you are in that close of quarters, the double-action revolver could be blocked by someone holding the cylinder preventing it from rotating. I would say that it would be easier to intentionally hold the cylinder than to intentionally put part of your hand between the hammer and the rest of the gun, just for the simple matter of it being a larger target to be focused at in a stressful situation.

My personal experience though was not to think of whether the person had the gun in SA or DA pointed towards me, but rather to just grab the barrel and move it away from me. I figured that as long as the barrel was not pointing towards me, even if it did fire, it would not hit me. Seemed like a good idea at the time and 5 out of 6 shots did NOT hit me. The key to this "technique" is to not lose control of the barrel. When the assailant trips and falls while trying to back away, you tend to lose control of the barrel. Oh well... It was successful 5 out of 6 shots...

You can "what if" this stuff to death and it quickly becomes silly.

Grabbing the cylinder will prevent the gun from firing IF you stop it before it indexes, otherwise you're going to be really disappointed when that internal hammer falls off that sear.

Of all the traits that make me like a DAO snubnose, that is only ONE of them.

[NavyVet1959]

You can "what if" this stuff to death and it quickly becomes silly.

Grabbing the cylinder will prevent the gun from firing IF you stop it before it indexes, otherwise you're going to be really disappointed when that internal hammer falls off that sear.

Of all the traits that make me like a DAO snubnose, that is only ONE of them.

On the other hand, IF you can keep the barrel pointed away from you, if it does fire, you don't get hit.

Notice I said "IF"...

I only managed it 5 out of 6 times. In *baseball*, that would be a *spectacular* batting average. When defending yourself against someone with a gun ... well ... not so great... It seems that the penalty for striking out can be pretty severe.

[Walkingwolf]

On the other hand, IF you can keep the barrel pointed away from you, if it does fire, you don't get hit.

Notice I said "IF"...

I only managed it 5 out of 6 times. In *baseball*, that would be a *spectacular* batting average. When defending yourself against someone with a gun ... well ... not so great... It seems that the penalty for striking out can be pretty severe.

You survived 1 shot, might not have 6. I have been stabbed a couple times on the arm, and hand by pinning the knife holder against a wall. Would have been much worse if I just let him stab, and swing with it.

I personally like to have options, and most trainers train to move the firearm away from the body as trying to disable it. It would be an incrediably lucky grab that a person got a part of their hand between the hammer, frame. I wonder what those odds are, not that I would bet my life on.