My first encounter with the M1911A1 was around 1960, a national match version my father had. While it was really too much pistol for a slight 12-year old, it was a fine pistol. Accurate and reliable. I have fired many .45s in the service, and many of them were real dogs. I think the reliability issues were mostly about accuracy, not functional reliabilty, because I've seen .45s buried in mud or sand, brushed off,, cocked and a whole magazine fired off without problem. But, in my experience on active duty most soldiers never learn to shoot the .45 with any accuracy. They're afraid of the recoil, and uncomfortable with the weight.
I'd love to try a Kimber.
I wish someone who finds the 1911 or its variants hard to shoot or to have too much recoil would explain it to me. I find it easier to shoot than anything but my Buckmark and the felt recoil is less than that of pocket pistols in .380 and .38 special. The GI sights suck but that is easily fixed and most variants come with much better anyway.
Maybe it is just me, but John M Browning's greatest design just drops into my grip like it had been thrown to me by the Lady of the Lake and it points like it grew at the end of my arm. Even the rattiest examples have sufficient combat accuracy and (with ball ammo) only a war hammer or a knobkerrie would be less likely to jam on you. It is even concealable with a little planning.