OK I really like it. I took my friend, B-I-L, his 3 boys, and my son (7 of us) out in the west desert for a day of blowing through $300+ of ammo. Our guns included a S&W 642 .38 +P special, S&W 686 7-shot .357, Ruger Blackhawk 12" .44 mag, S&W PC 460 12", Sterling Arms 380 Mark II (jamb-o-matic), S&W .22LR 6-shooter, Mag Research 45/.410, 12 ga pump, Browning 12 ga over/under, 30-06 bolt action, .54 cal muzzle loader, Winchester 62A .22LR pump, Ruger .22LR 10/20, and the new Kimber .45 ACP. The Kimber was the hit of the event. We blew threw 300 rounds with zero problems. Sure was strange that we saw no wild life in the area. Go figure.
Since this is my first real serious semi-auto I do have an observation. I'm pretty much a revolver guy. I don't know a ton about physics but it does interest me. If the .45 ACP round (or any other semi-auto) has to expend some of it's energy in recoiling the slide with it's spring resistance doesn't it seem logical that not as much energy is being transferred to the bullet? My S&W .357 revolver sure seems more powerful than the Kimber .45 ACP. Maybe it's not. I was shooting 158gr rounds from the .357 and 230gr rounds from the .45 ACP. All the energy in the .357 is transferred to the bullet except the normal recoil. In the semi-auto it has to "waste" energy recoiling the slide. The .357 weighs in at 43 oz and the .45 ACP at 31 oz. The .45 auto has almost twice the energy rating for the same round as the .357 and because it shot out of a lighter gun you would think it would have kicked harder - it didn't seem to.
Anyhow, I really like the Kimber and I'm glad I got it. As I become more comfortable with a semi-autos over a simplistic revolver I might even put it into active service. Shooting yesterday, golf today, and fishing tomorrow. What a great weekend! :thumbsup: