Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Sick Kimber Montana home from the 'smith

Well ladies and gentleman, I got my Kimber Montana back from the gunsmith middle of last week. With a hectic work schedule and all I just got to go out today and shoot it. I'm not going to post links to the other Kimber threads that I posted on, but mine was the one that shot extremely well except it had major feeding issues. It would not feed off the left hand side of the magazine at all. I called up my gunsmith buddy back in late Febuary and told him about the problem. We go way back and he's one of the people that helped mold me into a real rifleman, and not a "guy with a rifle." This was after the first trip out there to fix the two screws that broke off in the reciever ring. Kimber had the hole spacing wrong on either reciever or their base, AND the screws that broke off rockwelled at "Too damn hard for a base screw..." Looking back on it, this was my fault. I was an engine machinist for 4 years, I should have CHECKED the hole spacing BEFORE I assumed it was correct and proceeded to assemble a rifle. I used to see that problem daily...

Anyhow, I took the rifle out there for a once over, hoping it may be a problem with an easy fix. I loaded up some dummies with old military brass and 147 grain machine gun pulls so we could test the rifles function without any un-expected loud noises. Conrad (my gunsmith buddy) was decidedly unhappy with the rifles function (or lack thereof.) He gave me a grocery list of problems and fixes after much grumbling about Kimbers. I said he was just being picky and it was NOT one of his 6000 dollar custom jobs on a Mauser 98. He said, "A controlled round feed action has no excuse to not run right.... Besides, I know you like to bear hunt and if this rifle don't run right I'm not sure I could support your widow in the manner in which she's accustomed to."

Here's a pic of the master at work



Here's the rundown and actions taken on its issues.

Mag box. What was Kimber thinking... Mine was a thin gauge piece of crap that looked like it had been sat on. Dimensions were ALL WRONG to even have a shot at feeding 308 ammo. The fix. Conrad cut the mag box in half. First he milled away quite a bit of the sides of the box (about .015" deep) giving very minimal contact about .070" in front of the case head and .030" behind the shoulder. Two strips of metal were left about .050" wide. This was done in order to keep the cartridges from "scrubbing" on the mag box when they roll up. He also pressed the sides of the box straight. Then reshaped the feed lips... Then added metal to the front and back of the box in order to widen it out so that any three of the four cartridges could form "An equilateral triangle" These modifacations were done to keep the cartridges from tipping forward and backward in the magazine.

We hoped that this would do the trick.... But oh no... The rifle had other plans. So next, after saying "Rifles are like computers sometimes, garbage in equals garbage out. He measured up the rails on the reciever and grumbled about how Kimber didn't do that right either. More machine work... He took .010" out of the back end of the rails, and .030" out of the front end of the rails. Also, he used a ball end cutter (unsure of radius) to thin under the rails, and give them a contour.

So now the rifle was going to run like a champ, right??? Wrong... Still, no feeding off the left hand edge. Cases still wanted to exibit a "bolt over" failure to feed. The ejector was seen to be protruding an easy .125" PAST the back end of the mag box. When the bolt was closed, the ejector tips down and forces the back end of the case down (which wouldn't "roll up" with Kimbers mag spring.) It just so happened I had my Vangaurd SUB-MOA in the truck that day (also a 308.) He said, "I guess were done for today, unless you have another mag spring and follower to try in your pocket. I just told him I was going to water the grass before I spouted off a line of explaitives that would make any trucker proud. So I went outside to take a leak (Water the grass) and robbed the mag spring and follower out of my Weatherby. When I stepped back into the shop I told Conrad, "Look what I found in my boxers!!!" That guerilla ass mag spring would let the left hand cartridges "roll up" but not without getting a workout to run the action. In the process, we realized that Weatherby mag springs and followers put a bulk of their upwards pressure almost exactly between the case head and the shoulder. The Kimber spring, almost exactly between the tip of the bullet and the case head. So I ordered a spring and follower from Weatherby that following Monday. In the meantime, Conrad milled off the end of the ejector to be flush with the back end of the highly modified mag box.

New spring and follower, installed in the rifle and "softened up" Now it started to act like a rifle.... He then did some polish work around the feed lips and rails and worked over the extractor some. Then last week I got a phone call. He said "Danny, the only problem I see with this rifle now is that it says Kimber on it... Come get it, I'm sick of looking at it. This thing is uglier than a square boob." He likes his 6000 dollar Mauser 98's with deep rich blueing and hand cut checkering in fancy walnut stock blanks from Lee Helgelands stash, and I like stainless steel in synthetic stocks. This is a difference of opinion that we will never see eye to eye on... He told me "I could blindfold you and have you run the action empty, and with cartridges, and you couldn't tell me the difference." He was right... Now this Kimber is the slickest running rifle I've ever owned. It feeds 308 ammo like greased butter on snotty glass

In the meantime, I'd established that this rifle shot EXTREMELY well. It likes the same things that my other 308's do. So with load development done and out of the way. I decided to make my life a little less complicated and bought a Leupold FXII in 4x. There was a thread started about this as well in the optics forum.

Here is the two best groups of the day and what I call "Rifle Nirvannah" A Kimber 84, that SHOOTS and FEEDS, a Loopy fixed 4, and a Turner Saddlery M1903 sling. LH group is 200 yards, with a called flyer (marked ME.) RH group is 100 yards. 100 yard group was witnessed by "Smokewagon Frank" A peach of a retired guy thats always at the range with either a Shiloh Sharps in 45-70 or a Highwall in 45-110. 200 yard group was witnessed by Asshat John. A total putz that will give you his opinion whether you want it or not, and he thinks he's god because he can shoot really well off a bench (not a rifleman, a guy with a rifle...)



close up, 100 yard group... Shhhhh, don't tell my Kimber that decaff rifles with fixed fours can't shoot little groups



close up of 200 yard group. There's 4 there because I KNOW I screwed up the one on the left of the group




In summary.... This rifle is now worthy of keeping, and we will spend many happy days afield together. But SERIOUSLY, somebody at Kimber needs to PULL THEIR HEAD OUT OF THEIR ASS!!!!!!! [megivingKimberthefinger] A thousand dollar sporter is SUPPOSED to FEED right out of the box. You might expect to do a trigger job, or maybe even send it off to be accurized by a reputable smith. But to give your local gunsmith 250 bucks to straighten out [bleep] that they should be doing at the factory???? Come on! WTF???? Really??? Granted, I never expected it to shoot that well That's actually the biggest 3 round group its shot, and I know its because fixed 4's aren't really a benchrest scope. It took me 4 groups to figure out that I needed to be dividing that target into 4 equal slices of cheesecake instead of putting the crosshairs on the little diamond in the middle. The first 3 groups were 3/4 MOA with "flyers." The first three groups would be two touching and one out, I mean...

i'm glad my .325 Kimber feeds good! Yikes.

Hat's off to you for making it right, and may you have many happy days afield with your Kimber!

-jeff

Almost forgot. 100 yard group measures .426" CTC. 200 yard group measures 1.955" CTC less called flyer. Wind picked up by the time I shot the 200 yard group, no effort was made to "dope wind."

After accuracy testing was over, I proceeded to murder the clubs gongs all the way out to 462 yards using nothing but "kentucky elevation" The hardest gong to hit out there is a 3x6" steel plate at 280 yards. Holding top edge (sitting with the sling of course) produced hits with boring consistancy even with the wind at 12-15 MPH full value. Shooting field positions with low magnification scopes where you don't "see" your wobbles is as close to shooting irons as I can get. I think I shoot better with irons and 4-6x power on the scope than I do with 10x mil-dots. I feel like more magnification makes me lose my confidence because my brain is telling my trigger finger that this shot ain't goona happen.

Anybody else?

That's interesting, that last there. Well put.

I was shooting Kentucky holdover the other day... I can do WAAAY better with either a turret or reticle once it gets far enough that it matters. Pure holdover only gets ME out to 350-ish reliably.

True... I guess it only gets me 325-350ish now that I think about it. Usually I use the bottom "Pickett" of the duplex for 400-425ish shots. IMO, bullets should self destruct after 400 yards when shot at big game animals.

Using the pickett on the fixed 4 Loopy won't work for 400 yards though. I measured it out today on paper at 100 yards (those grid squares are good for something after all) and from the horizontal wire, to the pickett is 17". I'd have to check my math, but if your 308 is zeroed at 200 yards, that should be a good holdover for about.... 8 miles away.

I agree the occurrence of feeding problems shouldn't be as frequent as it seems. However, you made the choice to have your local guy do the work rather than return it to the factory. For the cost of shipping it to Kimber, you could have ended up at the same place. That's what I did and haven't had a feeding problem since getting it back. Not trying to be stand-offish, just pointing out that you made the choice to go a different route than having them fix it on their dime. Good hunting!

Nice work Dan. Hard to believe your rifle had all those probelms and got out Kimber's door!

Stories like this continue to stream in and reconfirm my belief that Kimbers lack consistent quality and are way over priced. I just don't get it: the guns are $1,000, they are ugly, they require a trip to the gunsmith upon opening the box (or a trip back to the manufacture)so they can shoot with acceptable consistency, yet people still rave about them. O.K., so they are light. So what?

Mine was a Kimber Montana 270 WSM. Never could get close to acceptable accuracy, despite a trip to my gunsmith and a trip back to Kimber. Was the worst $1,000+ I have ever spent on a firearm.

I think i would have dicked with the spring and follower first, before cutting and grinding on things.

+1

I believe kimbers fix to the well documented failure to feed from the left side is to relieve the feed rails on the action. I covertly marked all of my parts and photographed the action before it went back and it came back with everything the same, just minor grinding rails at the shoulder of the cartridge. Feeds just fine after that.

DanAdair, Were you using the same loads for both 100 and 200 yds? Seems to be about 4" drop, that's more than I would have expected from that load/bullet.
Glad you got it all better. Happy shooting.

Note to self, I will never buy a Kimber,That is just plain ridiculous that a customer would receive a rifle in that status! I have heard a ton of bad stories about Kimber,They should probably get their sh-t together before selling hard working guys problem rifles! Dan I know Conrad he's a good guy glad he could get things working for you!

DanAdair,
Dan, looks like you have a shooter now. One question. If you had it to do over, would you still go with the Kimber? Reason I ask is for the $$$ output there are rifles out there with guaranteed sub moa accuracy straight from the box. Sako comes to mind...
Regards
GeoW

I was in the local gunbutcher's shop this morning, (hiding from some Jehovah's Witnesses who've been terrorizing the neighborhood), and saw a Kimber in there, on the "for sale" rack, and it had one of those rubber thingys on it, "a barrel harmonizer" or something silly like that.
Since the smithy was hot all over them when they first came out, and now doesn't carry any at all, I deduced that this one had come back, and he'd taken it off the guy's hands as a goodwill gesture. Or something like that. In any event, it didn't inspire confidence to see a rubber doohickey on a good looking rifle, and stories like this don't inspire confidence either. I think I'll stick with that Model 70 I have, weighty or not, it's always fed like it oughta.

Well guys, I should clarify a few things. But I know there's another guy who would like to remain anonymous. We will call him Mr. Kimber.

I did purchase this rifle used at a local sporting goods store. After I purchased it, I learned the story on it. Turns out its previous owner worked with my brother. I found out that this gun had already been back to Kimber once. He recieved it back with the same problem. Failure to feed. Mr Kimber decided that he was fed up with the rifle, and traded it off on another Kimber in 338 Federal. He was 100% satisfied with that Montana. It ran and shot to his satisfaction. That's the reason it wound up at Conrads. I knew it had already been to Kimber once for that problem. If they couldn't get it right twice, what are the odds they'd get it right the third time??

Also, before Conrad did up the mag box and all the rest of the work. We did try tweaking the spring and follower. He also tried to use a spring and follower out of a Ruger short action. He pissed away a day trying to make that work. We were both convinced that the problem was more fundamental than that before he started the major rework. If I gave the entire play by play, I'd have typed 8 pages on what all went on with this rifle. After many little frustrations, Conrad and I agreed that the best plan of attack was to re-invent the wheel. Start at the box and work the way through the rifle until it works right.

Mr Kimber and I have been coyote hunting together with my brother on a few occasions. He says he's terribly sorry for sticking me with that rifle. The good news is, I paid the same amount of money for that gun that he got for it in trade on the other Montana. 900 bucks... If I would have done the research on the "Fire" I may not have bought that rifle in the first place. I surely wouldn't have bought it had I known the barrel on my Model 7 was on the back end of its service life. That would have paid for a Pac-Nor barrel in 260 and a Lone Wolf Summit stock. Before you guys think I got screwed on the Model 7, you have to understand that I lost track of the round count on that pipe. I forgot about a whole 1K of primers that got shot in that barrel (turns out 800 rounds is actually 1800 rounds) That rifle was a Conrad Gerega, Jeff Lawrence collaboration back in 2005. It used to shoot in the .2's and .3's. Now, well.... Lets just say it's still minute of whitetail.

338 Federal. I see you noticed thats a fairly subdued load. In the Montana, it ran 2622 AVG. I usually keep 5-600 rounds of that load on hand to shoot in ALL of my 308's. This includes the HK91's, which if you load too hot does very nasty things to your brass with the fluted chambers and all. I also will get an occasional case that causes sticky bolt lift in a couple other bolt guns if I increase the charge too much. 44.0 grains of Varget is in the ballpark in LC cases in most of my 308's In commercial brass, loaded just for the bolt guns (not the bottom feeders) I usually run a charge of 46 grains, which runs around 2700 FPS in a 22" barrel. I was out of 308 ammo other than the load I keep on hand to shoot in all my guns. I'm looking forward to trying some loads just worked up for the Kimber. Even though that load in LC brass has produced acceptable accuracy in a wide range of 308's it is by no means tailored to any one of them. I think I'll try 150 and 165 grain Accubonds in the Kimber, both with Varget, RL15, and IMR 4064. The irony of all this is, I've never worked up a 308 "hunting" load. The only two calibers I've shot more is .223 Remington, and 22 rimfire.

However, I have one very nice shooting and smooth running Kimber Montana now. Given it's tendancy to shoot groups like that (and not with particularly good reloads) and the fact that its green. I think I shall dub this fine sporting rifle "Clover." It shall stay in the gunsafe with Kermit T. Speerchucker, Springer The Old Farte, and Gramma my other three trusted slayers of critters.

I wouldn't buy a Kimber if they were the only rifle on the planet!I'm glad you like it but... powdr

Gross exaggerations and opinions...

I don't think they are ugly; that's a personal thing.

Mine feeds fine. Mine shoots fine. All is well; no problems whatsoever.

I don't consider it overpriced in the slightest, when you look at what you get.

They are really nice rifles- usually. I think Kimber's ratio of good 'uns and dogs is about like any other factory, but, they are held to a higher standard 'cause they cost a little more. Fair enough, but be realistic about the quality of the stock and the great trigger... do the math... and the reality is, if you buy a Kimber and get a good one, and I believe the odds are WAY in a person's favor that they will, you've got a heck of a rifle for just a couple hundred more than something in a crappy stock, with a crappy trigger, that ALSO might turn out to be a dog!

-jeff

Ever see or hear of a Sako "dog".
for what you pay for a Kimber, you have every right to expect it to function.