Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles A Tale Of Two 308's... 84 MT vs. 70 EW

There are a couple threads about the Kimber MT and Winchester EW. I have one of each in 308. They're absolutely two different rifles.

The EW is a phenomenal all-around rifle. The MT is a phenomenal backpack/highcountry rifle.

The EW settles-down infinitely better for shooting. It's absolutely a better rig for day-in, day-out hunting, and certainly a much better platform for LR shooting.

The MT excels as a "pack" rifle... that's its raison d'etre (ultimate purpose), packing up some hideous landscape with a lot of other weight in tow.

Would I sit in a tree-stand with a Kimebr MT? Nope. I would always prefer the Win M70 EW. Ditto out on the flat, wide-open.

The Kimber 84M/L MT really comes into its own as a backpack/highcountry rifle... a place where a rifle is carried more than shot. The MT can be made to "settle down", but the difference is like a dory vs. supertanker on the sea. I'd rather be in the supertanker in a storm. But I'd rather pull a dory onto the beach than a supertanker!

Some visuals:



Winchester M70 EW 308 Win, McMillan Compact Hunter's Edge, PT&G Aluminum Bottom Metal, Graphite Follower, Talley X-Low Lwt's, 3.5-10x40 CDS, Uncle Mike's Mountain Sling, 4 qty. 165gr. rds:





Kimber 84M MT 308 Win, Talley Low Lwt's, 2.5-8x36 CDS, Uncle Mike's Mountain Sling, 4 qty. 165gr. rds:

Nice write up Brad and while I agree on some of your points, my .308 Montana shot really well out to 600 (far as I shot it) and would regularly hang up MOA or better sized clusters at 500 yards (155 Scenars and IMR 4064).

Both really nice setups...

Tanner

I always say there is nothing comparable to a Kimber Montana.

But nobody ever seems to know what that means.




Travis

Both are nice. A little more weight really helps on the pack, IMO.

Like the old preacher said; "It's better felt than telt."

Good post and nice rifles.

I could easily take either of those and be happy for any type of hunting I do.

For me, a Montana is just as good as an "all-rounder" as any. And I do quite a bit of 'stand' hunting.

While they're not quite as comfortable from the bench, or really any target shooting scenario, my groups at 528 yards (my field don't go to 600) with my 7WSM Montana were just as good as any of my heavier rifles.

Great write up...both very nice guns

Agreed, both rifles are excellent. I just prefer a Model 70 Classic G Series with McMillan Edge. Putting together another 100rds this evening for a trip to the petting zoo with GW after Christmas. I've got another lightweight 308 in a Sauer 202. It weighs about the same as the Kimber Montana, it to loves the mountains.

Shooting lighter rifles accurately is a skill that takes some practice. When I got into them I found I struggled with guns under 7lbs. With much practice however the gap has narrowed to the point that the difference in accuracy is no longer substantial in hunting scenarios

I think a rifle as light as the Kimber forces you to be a better shot... you have to pay attention to all the fundamentals more carefully, every shot.

Sako, that's my 308 SS FW... I sold it to Scot, he sold it to you.

That's a great rifle!

How much weight savings did you get from adding the Mcmillian HE stock and the PTG bottom metal? I'm presuming weight was a primary factor in the swap, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks!

Brad,

I agree with your opinion at the start of this thread. Good groups at the range don't help much when you're out of breath and trying to get the crosshairs steadied up at 300 yards on an animal that only stops moving for a few seconds. I much prefer heavier rifles for all around hunting conditions and my kimbers are left to the days when carrying absolutely trumps shooting.

I have a lighter .308, and it is absolutely true that you really have to focus on solid fundamentals. It is very easy for the groups to really open up. Shooting light rifles is definitely a skill set.

Finally, someone besides me who likes silver/stainless bases and rings on a stainless rifle...nice!

Those little Kimbers are like wands. I mean, they knock me out every time I handle one in the shop, but WOW are they light. I'd have to run one a while to know if it was perhaps even too light for me. My short action M700 MR in an ultralight 'glass stock sometimes feels a little unsubstantial when shooting, and the Kimber is lighter still. I absolutely agree, a really light rifle will amplify and inconsistencies in your technique. A really light trigger helps a lot.

My 8400 series (WSM) "perch belly" Montana is a more substantial-feeling rifle. And, going from .325 to 7mm in bore size made a noticeable improvement in how it "hangs" from offhand. Heavier up front.

Jeff O

The 84m kimbers are in fact too light for some applications.

The problem is they are so addictive to carry that I wind up with mine in my hands more than I should.

My buddy has a .308 MT..... he had a "mad minute" this year involving filling both deer tags in very short order, and commented on this stuff. I think he said it came up FAST but was hard to settle. He's hunted scores of rifles...

My 7-08 MR is in that ballpark. It's in a blind stock, and I put a PT&G aluminum trigger guard on it, and a Gre-Tan shroud. Talleys and a 2.5-8. It's light.

On the flip side, I lugged my new heavy 7 WSM on my backpack hunt this fall. It was awesome to have when it was time to shoot, but it suuuucked the rest of the time.

The Edge stock is going to save 7-8 oz over the factory stock. In this case the PT&G bottom metal is only going to save 1-2 oz. The older Classics came with 2 piece steel bottom metal and you'll save 5-6 oz on those. The EW comes with 1 piece bottom metal with aluminum floor plate and steel trigger guard so it is not that heavy.

Why the hell did I sell that rifle!? Hahahah oh well at least I have Brad's 7mm-08. I hate this board.