Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Montana tinkering....

Hey SAS, what in/lbs are you tightening the action screws to.
Also, is there away to increase the magazine length for more coal

Thanks for your time
Eric

I go 45 on both....but I've been known to go tighter too. Some guys go tighter, but that's where I stay. The action is pillar bedded and should be good to go once a true bedding job has been completed.

If your mag box is binding, the tighter you go the worse things get.

308 magazine or 223 magazine?

For clarity, these are simple things you should check out on every rifle you purchase. I identified them as Kimber Montana issues because EVERY Montana I've owned of late shared these common traits.

With the 20th in route, I consider it more than just a consequence.

Thanks Darrek. Good stuff. Maybe Kimber has listened to you. I just checked my 84L montana and the mag box was not binding. However the front screw on the talley lightweight did make contact. A simple file pass or two and it no longer hits the barrel threads.

thanks again

Please take this as a question, and not to open a wrath of sh- - on this thread. With issues such as SAS said...."I identified them as Kimber Montana issues because EVERY Montana I've owned of late shared these common traits", as well as numerous documented other issues on these forums, I have to as why are the Kimber faithful so in love with these rifles? I'm just curious as to why people think they're so great if most every one requires tinkering and fiddling around with to get to perform? Thanks.

for me its cause they are light enough to make them real nice to pack in the hand as much as possible when hunting broken country or thick timber.....an extra pound in the pack and no one is gonna notice...an extra pound on the shoulder(slung) and everyone will notice but wont bother most....however that extra pound in the hand does make a hell of a difference for bout anyone and if yah dont think so im guessing your rifle stays on your shoulder most of the time.....

plus with my chit knees i am limited to how much total i can carry and a lil bit off the rifle can be traded for water and keep me out longer as i get dehydrated easier than most...

JG --

The tinkering I suggested really doesn't take much work. A few minutes and all is good.

I consider the Kimber ergo's to be the best of the best. I love the weight and the CRF action. The trigger is as good as any after market hunting trigger I've encountered. Stainless, ADL, nice factory stock --- great value for $1100.

How much lighter is it than a T3 Lite? I've had 4 knee surgeries btw, and I carry my stuff across sand and sandhills. You'd guess wrong in my case about keeping it strung on my shoulder (if that was directed at me). You're starting to sound like safariman....every post you make lately sounds like you whining about your health or physical condition.

SAS, makes perfect sense.

i dont have a T3 Lite....do know my Montana in 260 with steel bases, scope, sling and 4 in the mag weights less than my wifes Remington Seven Youth in 7-08 with no scope, bases, rings, sling and an empty magazine.....plus the Montana has a more normal barren contour and length

JGR,

As already pointed out once or twice, the tweaks advocated doesn't just apply to Kimber. It's an excellent check list one should go through for every bolt action rifle no matter the manufacturer.

Everything that has been posted is not that difficult, and doesn't take a trained gunsmith to sort out. Nor does it involve a tremendous amount of time or money.

People don't seem to realize that what you're actually getting for the dollar is a bargain. Where else would one obtain a scaled down stainless steel CRF 3-posi safety rifle that tips the scale at just a little over 5lbs, and already comes equipped with a McMillan comparable synthetic stock for 900-1300 dollars and points and handles like a dream in the hunting fields???

Even IF I were be so unlucky as to acquire a Kimber that doesn't shoot because of a POS barrel (I've rebarreled two, and not because of a POS standard barrel), I'd still not bat an eye. Even if I had to screw on an aftermarket tube, it's still worth the price of admission IMHO.

I've been fortunate to own, handle, and hunt with a lot of different rifles over the years. When it comes to a factory mass produced off the shelf rifle, Kimber as a total package is far and away head and shoulders above the rest IME.

Obviously, for some folks YMMV.

I'd swing along with what Fosteology said. The Kimbers are pretty unique in terms of the features wrapped in a package for the money. Over the years I have seen precious few factory rifles that did not benefit from some judicious tweaking...certainly some needed nothing at all, but many benefit from the kind of treatment guys have discussed on here.

I have never carried a Kimber in the field except for the Varmint models but that isn't because I wouldn't. I have owned and shot 6-8 of them.

When you finish the same kind of tweaks you do on most any factory rifle you have something light weight and easy to carry , "normal" barrel length for the intended cartridge, a well proportioned and designed stock (wood or synthetic),and enough accuracy for any rational use.

Even in a custom or semi-custom rifle to get the same weight reductions and features, you have to shell out substantially more dough and I am not sure you end up any better off.

I think a Montana in 7/08 and 7mm WSM are about as good as a guy can get in their respective power categories, and in a factory rifle for the money. No flies on the 84L in long action chamberings either.

You summed it up pretty well Darrik.


I used to be one of those guys that never owned/shot a Kimber and always wondered why guys were willing to play 'Kimber Roulette'. Or have to 'fiddle with them' to get 'em to shoot.

Negative reports from 6-8 years ago were fairly common. I bought a couple (new)Sako's instead of Kimbers just because I wanted a really 'accurate' rifle. Hell I didn't even reload at the time!


For the last 10 months the only rifle I ever want use/bring along is that 243 Kimber. I just love the way it handles and carries. Great stock, great trigger, nice action, it's a rifle that can actually get used and basically last forever.





JG, the .243 with one of Pat's MT slings and 4 cartridges weighs 6 lb 11 oz..

Should be around 6.5lbs with just the rifle and scope.


A .308 would be even lighter with it's skinnier barrel. Too light for me but that is subjective. The 243 and 257 models have plenty of barrel, handle great, not whippy at all. I would love to get an 84L in 270.

Honestly I've never got a new rifle of any manufacture that never had some of these issues. Sakos with bound magazines, bolt releases that don't release, and crappy injection moulded floppy stocks on a rifle that cost more than kimbers. New winchester that I bought last weekend that has really creepy trigger, bound magazine and a crown that is damaged, Remington's with terrible triggers, off centre chambers, out of alignment scope mounting holes. Savages that are so rough and clunky I don't even want to work on them. Kimber doesn't in any way have a monopoly on sloppy assembly or poor machining. Thing is with kimbers you get a rifle that you can work on, do a few judicious adjustments and have a real hummer rifle without having to resort to purchasing aftermarket stocks, triggers etc while ending up spending more to get the same end result in rifles that generally weigh at least a pound heavier.

These "tweaks" are just standard checks on any bolt action rifle. They are not Kimber specific. For example, I've experienced all of those he has mentioned on Remington Model Sevens that I dearly love.

What SAS has done for us is collate the most common "tweaks" he sees on Kimbers into one post so that they are easy to find.

im much the same....the Montana just fits me and im far more likely to grab it than any other of my big game rifles even if im just road hunting for yotes and not planning on packing it anywhere.....it was just a flat out well thought out design....nice and trim and light and unlike most production light rifles isnt horribly muzzle light/arse heavy.....my wife loves her rem seven youth but its heavier than my 84M, though lighter than most production guns and horribly muzzle light to me.....

JG . . . I didn't see that anybody directly answered your question about weight, so I'll try.

According to Kimber, the 84M weighs 5lbs. 2oz. in 7-08 or 308, 5lbs. 4oz. in 243 and 257, and 5lbs. 6oz. in 204 and 223.

The Tikka technical specification says the T3 Lite is 6lbs. 3oz. in standard calibers.

So the short answer is, about a pound lighter.


You can see the specs here:

http://www.tikka.fi/pdf/specs/LiteStainless.pdf

http://www.kimberamerica.com/rifles/model-84m/montana




.

7-08 that I had Ackleyerized....the only thing I wish, is that I could play around with bullet seating depth more.
Other then that I love this rifle

Eric

'Raider,

Your sheer and utter cluelessness,remains magnificent in it's magnitude.

Congratulations?!?

The only thing you shoot is your mouth and Imagination and I find it curious that you are always in such a hurry to reiterate same.

Wow +P.










'123,

You've no box moves,but had great opportunity at the punch-out,to setback and throat as per whim in accords to OEM confines.

Hint.

65 in/lbs is spec fwiw.

My buddy and I just went through these steps on his new Kimber Mt 7-08 to fix his rifle. Once scope rings arrives, we'll see how it shoots. I have rather high expectations.

Pretty funny though that Kimber on the phone admitted to shipping out all their recent rifles with too big of an action screw, that bottomed out. Well done Kimber. (grin)

I'm in the market for a 7-08 MT if anybody knows of one.