Please take this as a question, and not to open a wrath of sh- - on this thread. With issues such as SAS said...."I identified them as Kimber Montana issues because EVERY Montana I've owned of late shared these common traits", as well as numerous documented other issues on these forums, I have to as why are the Kimber faithful so in love with these rifles? I'm just curious as to why people think they're so great if most every one requires tinkering and fiddling around with to get to perform? Thanks.
Honestly I've never got a new rifle of any manufacture that never had some of these issues. Sakos with bound magazines, bolt releases that don't release, and crappy injection moulded floppy stocks on a rifle that cost more than kimbers. New winchester that I bought last weekend that has really creepy trigger, bound magazine and a crown that is damaged, Remington's with terrible triggers, off centre chambers, out of alignment scope mounting holes. Savages that are so rough and clunky I don't even want to work on them. Kimber doesn't in any way have a monopoly on sloppy assembly or poor machining. Thing is with kimbers you get a rifle that you can work on, do a few judicious adjustments and have a real hummer rifle without having to resort to purchasing aftermarket stocks, triggers etc while ending up spending more to get the same end result in rifles that generally weigh at least a pound heavier.
