I been looking at a Kimber Crimson Carry II at my local shop. I reall want a compact .45 but $1,100 seems a lot. So is it worth paying almost double? I realize its all what you like but I guess ounce for ounce are they that much better.
Double of what? They aren't double the cost of similar 1911 from a different company.
I own three Kimbers, all Series I. My usual carry gun is a full size, stainless steel Kimber Custom. Personally, I wouldn't buy a Kimber II. They've had issues with their Swartz-style firing pin safety and their external extractor.
If you want a 1911, since you are in a free state, I would consider a Springfield Armory if you are on a budget. If you want a better gun, look at a Wilson or Ed Brown, but then you are talking serious money that will make a Kimber II look cheap. As a general rule, fullsize 1911s are usually more reliable than shorter ones.
While 1911s have some great advantages, they also have disadvantages. They have lovely triggers and their safeties, magazine releases, and slide stops are all properly sized and located. The relatively small grip circumference makes them fit many hands. A plethora of replacement sights are available to fit anyone's taste.
On the downside, 1911s are heavy (less so if you get an aluminum frame) and have a low capacity. The magazine well is narrow, slowing reloads compared to a double-stack. And they are the king of feedway stoppages.
So is the premium for a 1911 over say, a Glock, worth it? Lots of shooters answer that question by carrying 1911s, but many choose a Glock (or HK or SIG or...). Only you can say whether the premium is worth it to you.