Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Forbes rifle VS Kimber Montana?

Ok, just thinking out loud here.I wasn't interested in a light weight rifle untill I started hanging around with you guys.I was perfectly happy with my Sako and Winchester rifles.

I've really got an itch for a Kimber Montana but I'm a little worried about quality and accuracy.I can't afford a NULA but might possible be able to swing the Forbes rifle if it is around $1500.

Here are some questions-thoughts I have.I would appreciate any input.

1.Suppose I got a new Montana in 243 and it didn't shoot well.
It goes back,is fixed and I have what I want for the best price.

2.Kimber doesn't or won't fix it to my satisfaction.It has to be worked on by a good smith.Would I still be under or close to the price of a Forbes rifle? Would spending another $500 necessarly mean it would shoot well?

3.Is there going to be any guarantee of accuracy-satisfaction with the new Forbes rifle as there is with a NULA?

4.I don't know that I want a 270 (Forbes) in such a light weight rifle.I'm not too recoil shy but I see no need for my hunting to go over 243 or 260 if I could get a Montana in 260.

I am more interested in accuracy than cost between $1000 and $1500. One inch hundred yard groups would be acceptable but I would gladly spend another $500 for half inch.

In your opinion do you think I should take a chance on a Kimber or wait on the Forbes?

I have a Mel24 & 84L.
The kicker here is. The new Forbes will indeed have teething issues, make no mistake. It happens to all companies when starting out, regardless!
And since Kimber has ironed them all out(10 odd years working through them) from what I can see from the 3 Montana's I have owned(the first production 84M & 8400 Montana). The 84L is spot on. I dare say the new 2011 84M Montana's would be the same deal as the 84L.

Kimber! at this stage. But it will be a tussle in a couple of years....

Accuracy should be great in both. Get the rifle with the features that you most desire in the cartridge you prefer. My new montana 308 win shoots great, and I believe Kimbers are the best bang for the buck in rifles right now. You could buy and sell 3 kimbers trying to find a shooter for about the same price as the new forbes rifle if you had to. But Im bettin you wont have to.

Greenback

The 270Win will not kick that much with 130's.
I do not think the 30-06 kicks all that hard in a sub 6.4Lbs outfit. But I have come down from 375, 9.3, 338 & 300 magnums.....

You can find good used Montana's for around $900. The 25-06 in the classifieds is evidence that Kimber will make a gun right. They replaced the barrel and stock on that one and the groups with factory ammo were good. I'd suggest the Kimber route, but I know I will have to try out a Forbes rifle when they start showing up on the used market.

Your accuracy requirements are fine, but consider this; how much do benchrest rifles weigh? The answer is, as much as they legally can, and there is a reason for that. I know you can get a 6lb all up rifle shooting an inch or .75". Mine does with a few different loads. But to expect a 6lb rifle to shoot .5" or better on a consistent basis is going to be hard. Light rifles simply move more when you shoot them. Will it mean anything when hunting if a rifle shoots .5 vs. one that shoots an honest 1.0 every time? If you want a rifle to rest on a bipod at the edge of a clearing, get a heavier rifle. If you are carrying the rifle and shooting from field positions at typical hunting ranges then a .5 shooter won't kill anything a 1.0" shooter won't.

As for the Montana, I am lucky as it was a rifle that was a 7mm-08 in its previous life but apparently did not shoot well. It returned from Kimber as a 338 Fed and will now shoot many loads in the .6" to 1.0" range shooting off a rickety old desk in the woods resting on some cheap bags. I don't really think you are taking much of a chance that it either won't shoot well initially or that Kimber won't get it shooting well. I suspect the Forbes will be a wonderful rifle, but I know the Kimber is.

prm
I completly agree with you concerning a heavier rifle's accuracy and field requirements in an ultralight hunting rifle.The thing is that I once shot competition and I "need" a rifle to be accurate or I don't have much confidence with it.

Not really a good comparison since I shot this at only 50 yards but this is with my lightest and most accurate rifle, An Anschutz 1416.Here is a group I cut out and I think it shows even a light sporter rifle can be shot very well.It's 5 shots at 50 yards and no,I can't do it every time or I would take it to the olympics.

First off, good shooting. I completely agree a rifle needs to be accurate. I used to shoot international 3-position in college. But that was with a .22. If my rifle doesn't shoot little groups, it's down the road. So far, with bedding, fiddling with loads, etc. they all have been made to shoot acceptably when factoring in my skills, rest, scope, etc.. I guess I should have clarified, in that getting a 6lb 338 Fed to hold still is a challenge. It is rather lively. An easier recoiling cartridge will make things much easier with the light rifle. I don't think there is a wrong answer amongst your two alternatives.

Is a .2" 3-shot 100-yard group good enough for you in an ultralight?? The potential is there with a Kimber Montana. Here's mine:

For me. 1.5-2" groups(3) at 100Y. Any less is a bonus

Nice shootin!

Most are easy to get to shooting into 1" at 100. That's what I expect.....but I ain't that picky, either.

The last 2 Montana's were. 1-1.5" shooters with 3 at 100Y, with factory ammo. 150gn Partition Golds in the 308Win. 225gn Federal Fusions in the 338WM.

I should mention. Of the 4 or 5 308Win's I've had. The 84M was the only rifle ever to shoot Winchester factory 150 PG's into 1.5" or less. Other rifles just did not like this Ol favorite.....ammo

I handload, but I have two Montanas, one in .257 Roberts and the other in .300 WSM.

The scoped 257 weighs in at just over 6# and the scoped 300 weighs in at just over seven. Both are less than 1" MOA and currently my 2 favorite rifles.

Personally, I would not hesitate to buy a Forbes Rifle, but I will wait for a short action in either 260 or 7-08.

donsm70

Just thought I would add that my 308 will put 3 of the 4 types of factory ammo that i have tried into an inch at 100 yds. This is with a 6x36 wide duplex and me on the trigger. I am definitely the weakest link in this equation.

You have to give Mel credit for starting the lightweight rifle trend, and I hope this venture is more successful than the earlier Colt Light Rifle attempt at mass-production. Without Mel's inspiration, the Kimber Montana might not exist.

I have been very satisfied with the (maybe 15) different Kimber 84/8400 rifles I have owned. I have owned both Montana versions, and Classic/Classic Select. As of now, I currently have 5 84Ls in my safe (2 Montana, 3 Classic select) and I will add one of the 35 Whelen versions as soon as it is available.

Of the Kimbers I worked up loads for, all of them were at or near the 1" mark (I sold a few still unfired).

I think the Kimber is an incredible bargain (a new one can be had for $1000 if you shop a little).

Being a light rifle fan, I will probably buy a Forbes rifle at some point (I will wait for some positive reports, and a chamberring that really peaks my interest).

But I really wish the Forbes Rifle was stainless. Being a wood/blue fan, it is hard enough to convince myself to buy a stainless/synthetic rifle. A blued/synthetic rifle is just a really tough sell for me.

Lightweight rifle or not, any purchase is not a sure thing. The worst rifles I ever owned were a couple of Winchesters and Remingtons. Some of the most accurate rifles I've ever owned carried the same names.

All of my Kimber Montanas are accurate and very fun to carry around the elk mountains.

I'll say "neither".


Build from scratch on a Remington 700 action.

Either one will work. You gotta wait for the Forbes to come out and see how well it feels in your mitts. Let that be the deciding factor.