In your opinion

[Dale53]

I was a serious IPSC shooter in the 60's and 70's. The Colt's were not sufficiently accurate without a complete rebuild. I had several. I was fortunate in having a retired Marine Advanced Marksmanship Gunsmith that lived near me. He did a complete accuracy job on my Colt's, then they were good units.

However, out of the box the modern Kimber is all over the Colt's. I wouldn't take five seconds to take a Kimber over the Colt any day of the week.

FWIW
Dale53

[smithnframe]

You would know?

Yep!

[Lloyd Smale]

had a couple II's one target one fixed sighted. Had a gold cup trophy and a national match also had a kimber gold match. Best one hands down was the kimber gold match. Would i spend 500 over the price of a kimber II for a gold cup national match. In a second. You surely will get it back if you ever sell it and there great guns. Now if you asked me if my gold cup trophy was worth more then the kimber II target id say no.

[22cf45]

I've never Ransom Rested either that would shoot a 10 shot group under 3" right out of the box. 25 yard groups mean nothing to me so I've never tried that distance out for an accuracy measurement. However, I shoot Bullseye and my wants and needs probably aren't worth anything to you. I would grab a Springfield Range Officer and save money.
Phil

[Texas by God]

Gold cup hands down! Anyone who get “bit” by a 1911 isn’t holding it correctly!

If that was so, the beavertail grip safety or Commander hammer would never have been invented. A pre- A1 1911 with its wide hammer spur bites anyone with a medium to large hand.

Sent from my SM-A716U using Tapatalk

[Norske]

I have a Kimber stainless Target II, and once owned a Colt National Match (pre-Gold Cup). Kimber may still sell a "bullseye" gun, but at $2500, it's no bargain. For $500 more, you can buy a Les Baer (no, I don't own one but wish I did). The $2500 Kimber may shoot well, but my Commander-sized Eclipse is more accurate than my ST II. Les's pistols will shoot well.

[Kraschenbirn]

Is as Colt Gold Cup National Match worth the additional $500 over the price of a Kimber Target ll?

To me it might depend a lot on how well you shoot. A number of years back, I was shooting a Series 70 Gold Cup - lightly 'tuned up' by Jimmy Clark Jr. - in an NRA Bullseye league while a good buddy shot a Series 80 in the same matches. Poor guy just couldn't get it to come together and became convinced (from reading too many gun rags?) that his whole problem was that darn Colt. I tried to tell him he needed to practice more and offered to coach him...heck, I even offered to let him use my GC (or my 'Stock Class' IPSC gun) for a match or two to see if that might make a significant difference but couldn't convince him. Anyway, one day he drove over to Iowa (we're only a couple hours away) and came back with an upper-tier Les Baer 1911 (this was before Les ceased selling direct). Bottom line was, after break-in and a few hundred rounds of practice he managed to raise his average scores about TWO points...mainly, IMO, because the Baer had better sights than his Series 80. I dunno what he actually paid for that gun but when I'd talked to Les at the S&W Masters Tournament the year before, he'd quoted me a "competitor's price" of a little over $1600 for one built the way I wanted. Was that Baer worth his investment? Maybe, it was for him but wouldn't have been for me...I'd already worked my way to NRA Expert with that GC and accepted that 'Master' was probably a bit beyond my skill level. Two others I know have Kimbers and seem quite satisfied with them and the one I tried...a 'Stainless Target' model...felt, to me, like any other 1911 except I noticed the trigger wasn't anywhere near as good as my GC...but I've owned that gun well over 40 years and, after thousands and thousands of rounds, all of its innards have been replaced with bits from Clark or McCormick or Wilson.

[wv109323]

The 70 series Gold Cup is not Bullseye accurate. To get top performance a match barrel will need to be installed, slide to frame tighten and the trigger may be acceptable. 70 series Colts had bar stock parts if that turns your crank. The hand fit National Match and early Gold Cups were accurate. They came with a test target. I personally don't like the Ellison sights of the Gold Cup.
I have no personal experience with a Kimber but I know several people that own them are surprised by their out of the box accuracy.
For a shooter I would not pay extra for a 70 series Gold Cup over a Kimber.

[samari46]

Had a 70 series GC and didn't impress me with it's accuracy. Rear sight came off and replaced the busted pin with a section of drill shank. Sold that one. Next 45 I bought was a Springfield armory with Kart barrel, nice trigger, good sights and couple extra goodies. Outside of a couple hundred jacketed loads and some file work on the sharp edges on the target type rear sight to take off the sharp edges all I've shot in it were hard cast 230 grain round nosed bullets. Once I found the right load combination never bothered to change. Made major for steel plate matches though. My other 45 is a WWII 1943 Ithaca 1911A1 it too likes my hard ball load and gets shot once in awhile. Got that one from a good friend at work and since he's passed on and WWII vet, I shoot it in his memory. Frank

[bobthenailer]

other than good looks the colt GC is not a good BE gun for the experinced BE shooter, the trigger is wide and made from steel ,you want lighter triggers, the eliason rear sight is fragile not nearly as good as Bo Mar's , the factory barrel only costs a few dollars more than a regular 70 's barrel and the collet style barrel bushing has been known to brake the fingers off + there still loose in the frame.
so since you have to replace just about everything you might as well start out with a less expensive gun