Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Custom Rifles & Wildcats Kimber of Oregon

I apologize for getting off subject. If I were to buy another K of O 89, I would definitely want to see how it fed and if possible shoot it. Mine have great wood to metal fit and I like them IF you can get a good one.

It's a shame the Kimber have the quality issues they do.They look so good I am thinking of buying just to look at.

Dogzapper,

What don't you like about the 89's design?

thanks...jim

Hi, Who supp;ies Cooper barrels?

My. My. My.

Not looking to take anyone to task here, but I find the
posts on this subject....interesting?

The man asks a question about a Kimber model 89 and
gets a full scale book about ALL the Kimbers from Oregon?

I have but one Kimber. I have a standard round top smooth
barrelled 89 in .270 Winchester. It feeds flawlessly, the
safety is perfectly timed, and it shoots 1" groups all day long.

I'll be glad to address the "design". First of all the action has a
model 70 footprint. It uses the flat breeching of the mauser
and retains the mauser bolt stop and ejecter setup. The
safety is better than anything found on any model 70 inasmuch as it has the full gas sheild just like the military
1898.

It has no third locking lug, but then neither does the model 70 or the model 700. All three rely on the bolt handle resting in
a notch in the action for this service. No Kimber I am aware
of has lost it's bolt handle. The same of course cannot be
said of the model 700 where the problem is almost chronic.

Now if you prefer the cone breech system, so be it, but that is
one of the many reasons I consider the model 70 a POS.
Neither do I like the crappy bolt stop and their lack of proper
gas sheilding. Speaking of "epoxy", ever notice that crap
used by Winchester? Picky, picky!

The only thing which could be called into question about the
design of the 89 is the fact it is "cast". It's funny how some
guys can bemoan this fact on the BGR 89 but speak volumes
about the quality of the Ruger 77. Ruger, by the way, has had
its barrel/accuracy problems too. This is a matter of quality
and not design.

I will wholeheartedly agree that a one-piece bottom metal
is always better than a three piece. But why stop at the
poor ole Kimber? Any other large maker supplying the one
piece?

So there you go. The nice small ring on the Winchester 70
is the best looking in my opinion. The military mauser style flange on the gas sheild is the best design ever made on any
rifle, and jeeze, it has the model 70 three postion lever too!
The BGR also kept the Winchester trigger design which I have
set at three pounds.

The model 89 BGR has the best design features of the model
70 and the 1898 mauser. I would suggest that any so-called
flaw in the design can be found on most modern actions.

I don't know anything at all about the other Oregon Kimbers,
but I suspect that any generalized bashing in light of the poor
quality control of the now defuct (thank God) model 70 and
the Remington 700 is simply SOUR GRAPES. Timing on the Kimber three position safety indeed. Quite a few posts about
the poor timing on the post 64 classics here!

In fact I'll go out on a limb and say that if Remington does
not improve their quality control, Savage and Ruger will be
the top two! Damn, and Ruger has cast actions too!

MRC? Too damned heavy for anything but magnums?
Hell, we could eliminate the opinionated bickering if we
just all bought 1898 mausers since no one has ever improved the design!

One thing I've noticed aout our resident "experts", self-appointed and otherwise, they are blatantly inconsistant!
Failed magazine catch on the 416 indeed! Most of the
really knowledgeable PHs recommend this piece be immobile
anyway. Mauser magazine covers are routinely silver
brazed into an immobile postion! So let's not pretend this
is not a common problem for all big bore rifles intended for
dangerous game!

Keep your model 70s and model 700s. I'll take the Kimber
89 any day! As for the quality control flaws, I'l just fix them.
After all, you guys do this to your 70s and 700s regularly!

Barrels? OK. I prefer Pac-Nor and Krieger. There's a lot
of room for personal opinion here too? Right?

I worked for the maker of the Mod. 89 BGR prototypes, Jim Wisner, from the time that they were designed by Jim until they went out the door.

A little about Jim. He has been a member of the American Custom Gunmakers Guild for many years, and has also been on the ethics commitee.

The actions were designed and built by Jim, only a few screws and springs were purchased, as were the sight inserts.

They were machined from billet stock, from scratch, on conventional lathes and mills.

The barrel blanks were also purchased.

The barreled actions were PROTOTYPES, proof of concept, if you will.

Some of the final design details were not finalized at the time that they were delivered to Greg.

For instance, the ribs final contour, height, and type of rear sight were still to be decided.

It was the same with the front sight, type of ramp,radiused/straight,checkered, hood/no hood, type of dovetail, etc.

This was the reason that the quarter rib and front sight were not permanently attached at that time.

Ask yourself why a gunmaker of Jim's standing, who has made many, many custom rifles with quarter ribs in the past would only use one screw on the rib.

It was there so other rib styles could be tried, and the one screw was there to merely locate and temporarily hold it in position.

As to the second screw breaking into the chamber, I'll bet that it was not done in Jim's shop, if it had, Jim would have fitted a new barrel, no question.

The failure of the magazine latch surprises me. Jim has made many pieces of bottom metal, and has had no problems that I can recall. I'm sure that he would have liked to know of the problem.

I never saw the prototype actions again until Darwin Hensley brought the .505 Gibbs back to the shop after it had been engraved, blued, and the stock work completed.

I asked him what it was worth, and he replied: Around $50.000 or so."

I don't know where they came up with the $50,000 figure, I do know that Jim got nowhere neear that, IIRC, he got somewhere around $2,000 for each of the barreled actions.

Bottom line, I think that Greg was so anxious to get his hands on the PROTOTYPES that some balls were dropped along the line.

Jut a perspective from one who was there when they were made from raw chunks of steel.

didn't kimber also sporterize some swede mausers?? how where they, good info, its seldom you get the inside story like this

Great read, but are you that guy or someone you wrote about or is this a story you came by in your travels? I'm plagued by a sudden and unexplainable interest in Kimber of Oregon in general and the history of the 82G specifically.

I'm always on the lookout for someone connected to Kimber who might have stories to tell or insights about the 82G.

"dogzapper" is the handle for Steve Timm. And he is who he says he is and has done what he says he's done.

He rarely posts here anymore but if you can catch him, he's beyond a wealth of information.

Welcome to the fire.


Travis

DogZapper:

I read you reply with interest and hope you can offer some advice. I have a Kimber of ORegon Model 82 Super America, SN24. It is one beautiful rifle, and shoots pretty well. However it has always been a pain with respect to ejection. The part that kicks the empty casing free from the extractor spring (I will call it ejector tab but don't know correct name)was apparently not hardened correctly. Consequently, the metal projection on this part that rubs against the rim of the casing has worn, and the gun usually extracts the casing and then leaves it laying on top of the next round in the magazine. I corrected the problem once by putting a shim under the ejector tab in order to raise the ejection projection upward. This worked for awhile, but unfortunately only for a short time before the projection wore again. It's hard to imagine that what appears to be a steel part is being worn by a brass cartrige case, but that is what is going on.
Do you have any leads on a replacement for this part? Do you know the original manufacturer? Any place I can find a drawing of the part? Appreciate any help you can offer.

This is a test reply to my own post.

I have the Kimber of Oregon Model 82 Left Hand and it shoots bug holes with the CCI Mini-Mag HP. I have read a lot of neg info on some of there center fire rifles. Shooting it will be the only way to get the right answer to your question. Some where bad some where great.

Guess I'm lucky, I got one of the good ones, a Model 89 BGR Super America in 270 WIN. Beautiful wood and an honest 1 MOA shooter with 130 gr. Nosler BT's. Also feeds and functions flawlessly. Had mine for 18 years.

I have an 82 left hand custom classic that shoots well but the head space is off and I get miss fires quit often. Sucks I love the rifle and even had it fully restored.

I gave my wife a Kimber of Oregon 223 single shot about 5 years ago and it is just a tack driver with any bullet I ever tried in it.

Saturday I bought myself a used Kimber of NY, 223 Pro Varmint.

First loads with some Nosler SHOTS bullets went well over an inch. I'm thinking I got one of the bad ones. I ran back to the house and grabbed some 40 gr BT's loaded with 25 grains of 2015 that I shoot in a Dakota model 10. First group goes a hair over.5. I moved it up 1/2 inch and the next 5 were in just under.5. Don't you love it when you stumble on a load like that.

I ran 49 dogs straight on its first outing Sunday. It is my 4th Kimber and only one had trouble, that was resolved by the factory on the first try.

Well I fixed mine it was a bad firing pin spring. Thank god I love the Kimber 82CC and it shoots awesome. Great balance,trigger and awesome wood. I lucked out and got a good one.