Since this will be my first pistol (thus making the 1911 model an obvious choice) I've narrowed it down to these two. I know that there are many other fine gun makers, but Wilson has won my vote. This will be for defense and the range. Both of these guns have pros and cons in my eyes. I like the CQB's all metal frame, but the KZ is cheaper and does hold 11. Anybody who owns one or has shot one I would love some feedback.
CQB or KZ-45
- Thread starter STAGE 2
- Start date
). As a first pistol, go for one w/ the most versatility!CastleBravo
New member
Between the two, I'd pick the CQB. Some of the KZ-45 pistols have been buggy, and I just prefer a more traditional 1911.
For the price of a CQB, I would buy an Ed Brown Kobra or have an old Colt worked over by a good pistolsmith to my specs, but that's just personal preference.
For the price of a CQB, I would buy an Ed Brown Kobra or have an old Colt worked over by a good pistolsmith to my specs, but that's just personal preference.
Thanks for the replies. However I do want to clarify something. I know that there are less expensive pistols that are comparable but my choice will be out of these two. Basically the question is out of these two, which one would you want in a serious shtf situation... the xtra 2 rounds of the KZ or the simple setup of the CQB.
Stage 2,
The "setup" on both is the same. Yes I know the KZ has an external extractor but that does not change the administrative functioning or handling of the pistol. I do not agree that the setup of the CQB is any simpler or better then that of the KZ.
Both of mine had to go back to Wilson's for re-working when new, so both required extended break-in or reliability testing before carrying.
If I "had" to choose between these two only, I would choose the KZ and spend the difference I saved on professional instruction. The instruction would be much more usefull in a SHTF situation then the extra price required for the CQB. It is not the pistol that wins a gunfight, it is one's training and mindset!
Good shooting,
Dean
The "setup" on both is the same. Yes I know the KZ has an external extractor but that does not change the administrative functioning or handling of the pistol. I do not agree that the setup of the CQB is any simpler or better then that of the KZ.
Both of mine had to go back to Wilson's for re-working when new, so both required extended break-in or reliability testing before carrying.
If I "had" to choose between these two only, I would choose the KZ and spend the difference I saved on professional instruction. The instruction would be much more usefull in a SHTF situation then the extra price required for the CQB. It is not the pistol that wins a gunfight, it is one's training and mindset!
Good shooting,
Dean
Last edited:
I chose the KZ partly because of the price and the fact that I already have other 1911's. They may not be the equal of the CQB, but I guess I don't know what I'm missing. The key here may be that to some people the KZ is the best value Wilson has to offer, not necessarily the best choice overall. I would be interested in a commander size KZ. If you prefer the traditional feel of the 1911, I would choose the CQB.
Dean,
How different, if at all, does the KZ feel than a traditional 1911?
Lofland,
Yes this is the first pistol that I am going to purchase/own myself, however being the son of a LEO I have had plenty of shooting experience, ranging from standard range sessions to some pretty interesting tactical situations. All of this I've done with a wide variety of handguns.
A general point that I should make. Being on a college student's budget I really dont have the luxury of owning several firearms. I could very well go out and get a mil-spec springfield, but since this is gonna have to tie me over for several years, I want to go get something much nicer that would more easily be able to take on various roles more successfully. Also, I'm trying to avoid purchasing any pistols that my dad does own since they are available for me to shoot. This might shed some light on why I ignored HK or SIG or Glock yadda yadda yadda.
How different, if at all, does the KZ feel than a traditional 1911?
Lofland,
Yes this is the first pistol that I am going to purchase/own myself, however being the son of a LEO I have had plenty of shooting experience, ranging from standard range sessions to some pretty interesting tactical situations. All of this I've done with a wide variety of handguns.
A general point that I should make. Being on a college student's budget I really dont have the luxury of owning several firearms. I could very well go out and get a mil-spec springfield, but since this is gonna have to tie me over for several years, I want to go get something much nicer that would more easily be able to take on various roles more successfully. Also, I'm trying to avoid purchasing any pistols that my dad does own since they are available for me to shoot. This might shed some light on why I ignored HK or SIG or Glock yadda yadda yadda.
In my experience, a full size all steel 1911 .45 has less felt recoil than the following:
snub nose 5 shot .38 +P
all .357 mags
compact all steel 9mm
full size alloy 9mm
all .40 cals
all 10mms
all .41 mags
all .44 mags
So unless you are comparing it to a .22 LR, the full size all steel 1911 .45 is very pleasant to shoot with very little felt recoil. If you can't manage one of these, you need to be taught proper technique.