Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Kimber 84 / 84m / 84L: forged / milled or cast action?

Are the Kimber 84 series ( M, L) actions forged / milled or cast?

Probably neither.

Most likely machined from bar stock.

+1

Yes, machined from round bar stock, either 4340 CrMo or 416R stainless. The bolt raceways used to be broached but a switch to wire EDM was a big improvement since all receiver raceways should be nominal, whereas with broaching the parts start out at one end of the tolerance range (bigger) and move to the other end of the range (smaller) as the broach is sharpened resulting in some sloppy bolt/receiver fits. The broaches can only be sharpened twice before they're scrap. Most if not all receiver manufacturing was moved back to Yonkers in 2019. A couple of vendors were making the receivers for a few years but none had wire EDM so were broaching.

Yonkers....sad

The parts coming off the new horizontal process in Yonkers in combination with wire EDM were the best receivers that Kimber had ever made up to that point. Eventually those processes might move to AL assuming Kimber continues to make rifles.

Possible Hi-Jack Warning:

MCMXI,

(Not to exclude anyone else’s opinions, just that MCMXI is uniquely “in the know” re: Kimber)

What is your opinion of the Mountain Ascent & similar 84’s in regards to “bang for the buck, value”?

I have a Hunter that I’m extremely pleased with for the $800-ish cost & am wondering whether the $1,850-ish price point is still reasonable in your opinion for the added machining & carbon fiber stock.

For the record, the Montana, Mountain Ascent, Adirondack and Talkeetna stocks are NOT carbon fiber stocks. They're fiberglass stocks with less than 0.1% carbon fiber and they have no Kevlar in them either. The Open Country/Open Range stocks made by AG Composites are mostly carbon fiber in that they're made using a prepreg carbon fiber mat that's blown into a mold (with a bladder) and filled with low density materials including foam, chopped fiberglass, resin etc. The Costa Rica stocks have been plagued with problems over the years such as cracking, warping, voids, delaminations, sling swivel inserts coming loose, etc. Now that Costa Rica is shut down the problem is finding a replacement US made stock for under $250.

There's no doubt that the Hunter is the best "bang for the buck" in the rifle lineup simply because it performs as well as or better than the MT/MA/AD models and the margins (profits) suck! Kimber is making $50 on a good day on every Hunter sold so if you like buying a decent product for close to cost that has a lot of good features such as a Bergara or Criterion barrel, 3-position safety, CRF, good trigger, detachable magazine etc., you can't go far wrong with the Hunter. Kimber has to add "fluff" in order to make any money on Hunters e.g. dipped stock, Kimpro paint, muzzle brake etc., and even then the margins still suck. Typically 84M/84L Montana or Mountain Ascents won't be any more precise or accurate than a Hunter, often times will be less so and often won't feed rounds as well due to the left/right magazine configuration in combination with very little case head presentation to the bolt face. There's a small group at Kimber trying to get away from CRF in favor of push feed rifles with the belief that they would be much cheaper to make and would increase profits. CRF might be on the way out at Kimber, or the Hunter rifle at least.

Since the Hunter has the same barreled action, bolt and trigger as a Montana which only costs about $75 more to build, the question is whether or not the extra $300 to $400 for the Montana with it's threaded muzzle and $110 fiberglas stock is worth it. This is where Kimber makes money on the Montana. The common belief is that the Montana stock is a $400 to $500 stock which it might be if it were made in the US, but in Costa Rica it's a $110 stock and this really helps the margins. If AG Composites offered Kimber stocks for $300 I would say that the Montana wouldn't be worth the extra cost, but since they don't, if you want a nice stock you have to pay a premium, and the Costa Rica stock is a nice fiberglass stock. The Mountain Ascent is definitely not worth the extra cost over a Montana but that's because the fluted barrel, bolt, bolt handle and extractor are there for one reason only ... profit.

Your honesty and knowledge is refreshing. Thank you for taking the time to enlighten. Your presence here is much appreciated.

Yes! That’s for sure.

I’d love a knock around Hunter 223 myself.

Thanks. I have no agenda here other than to be helpful if possible and as some know I own quite a few Kimber rifles, mostly customized, but they're still Kimbers. I like many things about Kimber rifles but there are some things that I would change. There were many things I wanted to do, many ideas on this forum that I wanted to incorporate into the lineup but there was no interest at Kimber. One project I kept trying to push was a .35 Whelen, and the Hunter .223 Rem with a Wylde chamber and 1:7 twist but no luck I'm afraid.

I pushed hard to get the Proof barreled rifles in the lineup and had to convince a couple of people in AL that the trigger was safe. One person in particular managed to convince the higher ups that a .30 cal Proof barrel isn't safe so that's why only 6.5 Creedmoor is being offered. That same person was convinced that the Kimber trigger wasn't jar-off safe simply because of ego. He'd designed a rifle for S&W/TC that failed the jar-off test so he needed to have Kimber fail to make him feel better. We tested it following the procedures outlined in ANSI/SAAMI and TOP documents. The test was performed with a Proof barreled rifle, the bolt cocked, safety off, the trigger set to the lowest advertised pull weight, the sear engagement at the minimum spec, and a heavy scope mounted. The test requires that the rifle is dropped from 12" onto a rubber mat of a specific durometer measurement and the test is peformed in six orientations including muzzle down, muzzle up, barrel horizontal right side, barrel horizontal left side, barrel horizontal trigger down, barrel horizontal trigger up. The rifle passed without issue so I suggested going to 24" and it passed all tests again. I then suggested going to 36" or three times the requirement and once again the rifle passed all tests. He was not a happy camper!

That was a good read.

Hard to imagine so many folks making rifles That are clueless about their workings.

We’re very thankful for your work and contributions MCMXI!
Only thing holding me back on the Hunter is the detachable mag. I love my Montanas and wood Kimbers. It would be a real shame for Kimber to stop making such fine rifles. If they go push feed they will likely not make any more profits from me.

Thanks tons MCMXI, I appreciate your input immensely!

I do understand folks who are suspicious of detachable magazines but to me this is an additional selling point for the Hunter, not a negative. I have 3 mags, a few hundred rounds through all fairly evenly so far & no troubles. Just make sure they’re gen 2 or 3 construction as described by MCMXI in another thread. Look past the tilted follower at the front of the floor plate for a numeral 1 or 2. No marking at all is a gen 1 which seem to be the problematic ones. Never had a 1st gen personally.

I am a big fan of Kimber rifles. Got a bunch of Montanas. Light weight and CRF are the two main reasons why I've got so many. Count me out if they go pushfeed.

Can you let them know I won't be adding anymore to my safe when that happens? I know my 1 vote will count significantly. (they can do all they want with the synthetic stocks, just leave us Luddites alone with our wood stock, CRF, classic chamberings, etc)

I wanted to add my appreciation of your input and information. This thread was a good one, learned several new things about my Kimbers.

I just wish a Montana stock could be bought.
Is there a Costa Rican black market?

Is Kimber likely to do a run of Classic Selects this summer? I need a .270 and hopefully if they make it a .243

I’d like a hunter in 280ai.