I have been comparing these guns for about 3 years now, along with a few others. Today I decided on the Kimber Limited Target. I would have went with a Les Baer but I cant shoot it any better than the others. So I saved myself about $1,000 the next best was the Kimber.
Buying a comparable (to the Kimber) Springfield will save you a few dollars and you will be unlikely to tell the difference. If you do need to have any gunsmithing done, the saved money will likely cover the cost. Kimbers are not perfect out of the box any more so than Springfield and they often need a tuning up by someone who knows what they are doing. I have a Springfield Ultra Compact and it has been one of the most accurate centerfire handguns I've owned (including revolvers). I don't think it is a fluke as a friend has a Springfield Tactical or Operator (full sized gun with light rail and a bunch of other doodads) which is similar to one of the Kimber models but a couple hundred dollars less. He's got a couple thousand rounds through his with nary a glitch. Kimbers have much the same results but as with any 1911 brand, there are those that need a bit of tuning to get them to feed or shoot right, Kimbers not excepted. When Kimber was a much smaller operation they had fewer problems but then again they were a nearly custom made shop. With the increased production of today, they are not able to give as much individual attention to each gun and a few more problem children slip through. I wouldn't pass up a Kimber if it were given to me but if spending my own money, I'd go with the Springfield first and either save a few sheckels or at least have the means of paying for whatever fixes are needed if Springfield does not cover it under warranty.