Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Night Force Scope For A Kimber Montana

To the OP, buy a NF and don't look back. You won't regret it....

Smoke, you fail to grasp my point was made towards Larry from AK, who doesn't mountain hunt, but shoots deer and bears from logging roads. He's the queen of the "do-nothing of AK club," never mountain hunting. Were I an AK resident Id have a raft of mountain hunting and trophies under my belt. He has none.

I fail to see the point of the MT for that sort of "hunting."

But to each his own.

I'm obviously the least macho, poorest shooting guy on this thread which is why I like a lightweight on a backpack hunt, and get as close to make the kill as possible. Gumping up a svelte rifle with a Bubba Hubble isn't my idea of how to make a lightweight rifle more packable/shootable.

On the flats I'll always take more barrel/forward weight. I don't really care how heavy a rig for that applications is, within reason of course. And of course, the same rig is perfectly at home in the mountains, I just don't happen to want to carry it there. Again, at my age, I'm not especially keen on backpacking a heavy rifle, being particularly feminine and un-manly, what with my vagina and all.

But we only have ourselves to please...

BTW Stick, pleaaaaazzze post all the photos of the mountain backpack hunts/sheep, goats you've taken in AK.

Oh wait, that's right, you have none. You hunt logging roads in coastal AK.

I'd advise investing the money you waste on excess rifle chit toward some interior flying. That way you could actually buy an OTC sheep or goat tag and actually use it.

Ironically, what I do for a living (general contractor) has allowed me to live in work in some of the finest mountain settings in Montana and Wyoming... and I do take advantage of it. Doesn't seem you do so at all.

Sorry about that Larry...

I used to think I needed a flyweight rifle for mountain hunting. Then I realized my daypack alone weighs 25+ lbs. My tikka with a McMillan gel, and 3.5-15 nsx comes in right at 9 lbs. I don't consider that heavy. I wait all year for a week of hunting. Not going to throw the dice on a dog crap leupold. Of course I'm shooting the other 51 weeks a year, so a leupold wouldn't make it until hunting season regardless.

Since this has devolved a bit, wondering if anyone has run Leupold 6x33, 4x33 or 2.5Xs to go Uber Lite on 84 MTs?

Right now planning on a 6x36 LRD w S1 turret zeroed at 250 w a fast 150-165 load.

But curious if any have enjoyed even lighter optics..

No, I think you failed to grasp mine, which was: you can use a beefier scope, on a lightweight rifle, in the mountains.

Contrary to conventional wisdom.

Of course you can, and to each his own... it's just not my way, as I find it counter-productive to put a heavy 1000 yard scope on a lightweight 500 yard rifle.

That's funny, with that rifle, 1000 yard hits are not difficult, nor are pd's at 600.

I'm talking about on game, in the mountains, under ACTUAL field conditions. For that, a Kimber MT is not a 1000 yard rifle.

Not punching steel on the back forty... totally different.

Brad, You don't shoot year round with the same gun?

You shoot big game at 1000 yards?

I'm going to have to agree with Brad as far as the 84M's go. They are best in their purest form and have a feel that I've found in no other rifle.

On the other hand, my 8400's follow SamO and smokepole's logic. They get equipped with SWFA's.

Brad,

I enjoy your constant Whining and Excuse List of "all" that you'd "do",were you not forced to suffer being you and had a way out from your Broke Dick Turd Polishing Nothingness. Cite the last month,in which you schlepped a Montucky anywhere,but down a hallway. Congratulations?!?

Your Imagination and Pretend,cast from the couch of a Window Licking Do NOTHING Dumbfhuqk's "perspective"...is simply hilarious! Must be a REAL Nail Biter for you,trying to find a parking spot for your Soccer Mom Bitch Mobile,when you go to "work" and polish pavement.

Pardon me,while cook a leetle Chrome,make another pot of coffee and set the stage for Round Two this AM. Be sure to cite "all" the things you almost "did",as you pen yet another Vagina Monologue and Dream vividly of what'd be like to actually go Outdoors. At least Imagination and Pretend are free,so you can "afford" to "contribute".

Bless your heart.

Laughing!...............















'deep,

I've never seen a 8400,let alone any of the glass you try to cite.



Will park the 1141-S GL3 for a spell,as it's gonna RAIN tonight and it'll be crazy good in the AM. Need to re-gun Lucifer,as I yarded it all apart for paint and actually punched the 1-8" Bart's bore,as a curiosity. Have me a "hunch" that 105 Holler Hornies at 3300fps,will prolly do nice thangs,as it always do.

Will shoot around more than a bit and glass for Booners this PM. The 18" 270 Montucky will get the pitch,as I've always wonderd how a 105 A-Max would do on Critters.

Laughing!.....................










Oopsie...got to laughing soooooooooooo fhuqking hard,I nearly forgot. You STUPID Fhuqks will wanna fire up the credit card,get a co-signer and/or make payments on a Sig LRF.

They's almost as "bulky" as a 10rd ASC Krunchenticker mag. Almost.



Might could be handy for a 1-8" 22.25" Bull Barreled Six Twat-Six.



Or one of them there Anchultzeses.



Laughing!....................

I don't know if it's already been mentioned, but the best balance between optical quality and weight is probably gonna be a Swarovski Z3. You pick your model the little 36mm is super light.

My Montana is an 8400 (7 WSM) and I've run several scopes on it. The Leup 2.5-8 is nice and light albeit with restricted mounting options... may not matter for most. I had a Swaro 3-10x42 AV on it and that was a nice fit. A Z3 would be the same thing basically.

The rifle is getting a trial run with a slightly heavier scope now, a 3-9x40 Conquest. I do notice that it's slightly top-heavy now in one-handed carry. No biggie, but it's there.

I'll spare y'all the details of my Evil Plan going forward with the rifle (which is a very important rifle for me) but in a nutshell, it includes a "heavy" scope if the Conquest doesn't pass muster. A number of things play into that, not the least of which is how well I can shoot the rifle. It's been a tough one to reel back in post-injury. I'm not shooting it particularly well right now. Anyway, candidates for the "heavy" scope include several in the 18-20 oz range, to include the 3-9 SS, the 3-10 NF, etc.

I packed the Kimber (solo, unsupported) into here several years ago. Steep enough? On this trip it wore the Swaro AV. The altitude at this pic is over 9k.



Killed a small mulie, my first, at 520 yards with the combo.

I pulled the same tag last fall and opted to pack in a much heavier rifle this time. Same spot. I noticed the extra weight, though I did trim weight from my gear in other areas (tent, water filter being two biggies).

I think Brad's point that a Montana has range limitations due to being so light is worthy of debate. If that is true for a given person then there's really no point in putting a heavy "dialing" scope on the rifle. If it isn't true, then it makes all the sense in the world to maximize the capability of the sighting device on the rifle. Just how it seems to me.

Jeff, as you know, the 8400 MT is a different animal than the 84M/L MT's. I've had a few, 300's and one 270 WSM. Friend Dober had a 7mm WSM. While the WSM's have some torque, in many ways they're easier to shoot, being around a lb heavier than the 84M/L, and with a fuller stock.

A bigger scope seems right at home on the 8400 MT. Mine always wore 3-9X40's.

Furthest I ever took a BG animal was 548 lasered yards with the 8400 300 WSM, running a 180. Was a bedded antelope buck. I laid prone over my daypack and anchored him with one shot. The 3-9 wore dots.

Still, I always felt the 8400's should have had a no.2 contour, rather than their no.1... weight forward helps shooting. Strapping an anvil on top of a light, thin contoured rifle seems a poor solution to making them more shootable. Balance certainly suffers.

Brad, I agree that the 8400 is a bit different beast. I've only handled 84M's and the 84L's... not hunted them.

The reason I personally would "strap an anvil" onto my 8400 is pure and simple: to increase its capability. The 7 WSM chambering has serious legs to it. Obviously a lot factors into how well a rifle + shooter combo can utilize those legs.... the mechanical accuracy has to be there, and the shooter has to have their [bleep] wired pretty tight to really utilize that reach in a light platform.

Since this stuff costs MONEY and my college daughters and house build at 95% complete (oy, those last 5%..... grin) are bleeding me PALE...... I am personally trying to be a nazi about "keeping it real".... what I mean by that is, I will gladly stick a $1000 "anvil" on that rifle IF I can show myself that as a package, rifle + shooter, we "deserve" it. If not, then any that I mentioned- 2.5-8 Leup, 3-10 Swaro, 3-9 Conquest, etc, all give solid 500-yard reach.

Larry commented negatively on the Leup 2.5-8. I've owned 6-8 of them and have had, and still do have, several that track and RTZ just fine within the above parameters- as a solid 500 yard rifle that will hit vitals. As many here posting know, things get exponentially more squirrely as you up the range and precision begins to rule the day. In an optic, that kind of precision resides in Nightforce, SWFA, the high end Bushnell's, etc. All are considerably heavier than lightweight hunting scopes. All have increased utility. The nut of it is- can the rifle/shooter combo UTILIZE that added precision in such a light rifle? You want to have your mind blown, trot up to the optics forum and look in the Litz/tracking thread at the tall target tests EHG put up pics of, shot with various "heavy" scopes on a .308 Montana. There ARE people for whom a Montana is not just a 500 yard rifle. Don't know about the OP's skills, or intentions, in this regard.

This rig was sweet with the 19oz scope on top.... And it felt a lot better knowing my scope wouldn't take a dump on me... But I see where Brad is coming from at the same time; some hunts call for the absolute lightest rifle a guy can put together. If I were to spend some money and create the ideal tall mountain hunting rifle, it'd probably mirror the one EHG posted above.



Tanner

Tanner what is that?