Over the years I have been on a continual quest for coming up with the "perfect" rifle for me. Its a journey, not a destination, but here is my current stop. It is a Kimber hunter in 6.5 creedmoor. As pictured, there is a Swaro Z3 3.5-10 scope with a 4a reticle. Rifle immediately went to a gunsmith to be cut to 16" and be threaded. Silencerco Scythe is mounted in picture. 6# 9oz. Should be firing factory 147 ELD-M's at around 2500fps. It has performed well on multiple pigs now. Furthest shot around 250 yards. Penetrated to resting just under the hide after going through both shoulder on a 75 pound or so boar.

So why am I here and where is left to go? Well the right answer to what is the "perfect rifle" is "it depends". It depends on what you want to do with it. I hunt a ranch here in Texas. Most shooting events begin with me riding in a buggy or a truck. The ability to deploy the rifle quickly is important. So I want it to be short to stick out a window or exit to get on foot. That is why the barrel is cut short to maintain a handy length while also wearing a suppressor. I also like to go for walks around the ranch looking for game. So it is not uncommon for me to walk 4-7 miles over the course of an evening. A light rifle with a good balance is important for those purposes.

The Kimber 84m is an action no longer than is needed for the Creedmoor rounds. The action itself is slimmed down to be lightweight. The stock from factory isn't my favorite but it is functional until I identify a better option. Balance and handling is phenomenal even with the suppressor. Below is a picture of the piece of barrel removed and the scythe with ocl mount and Hansohn brothers titanium end cap.






Less than 3 ounces gained by adding the suppressor vs leaving the barrel at factory length. Rifle still balances well and it is comfortable to shoot without hearing protection. Allows me to shoot faster vs having to put on ears to shoot. Also makes a light rifle well mannered when shooting.

I do not love the feeding's smoothness at this time, but it feeds reliably. The detachable magazine allows me to have a round chambered and three down. Magazine holds three but can chamber around, drop magazine and go plus 1. For myself, I rarely use more than 4 rounds before running out of shooting opportunities on pigs, but three is often times not enough. The factory bolt handle is too short. The chris84's titanium tactical bolt handle's added length helps significantly with all aspects of bolt manipulation. chris84 has agreed to make a longer version of his ascent style handle that I think will work with this rifle phenomenally. I look forward to getting some of those in. The bolt can bind a bit in factory form. The longer handle aids in pushing through that. I have also been talking with a smith about more significant changes to aid in that. Perhaps going so far as to add something akin to a pre-64 anti-bind lug. I will also likely go to an aftermarket stock of some variety with an internal magazine that holds at least four down.

The Kimber being CRF matters significantly to me. When I am hunting, I will usually be shooting at sounders of multiple pigs. I am manipulating the bolt as fast as I can. My rifles are usually dirty and dusty from riding and walking around a ranch in Texas. Mausers, Winchesters and so far the Kimbers do not fail to feed and more importantly do not fail to extract and eject. The faster and harder I work the bolt, the more extraction and ejection force I apply guaranteeing that empty case gets out of the way. I cannot say that about other action types I have used. I have had more failures caused by failures to fully extract and eject than by failures to feed. I also appreciate as a reloader being able to ease a spent case out with a crf action.

Kimber packs the most features for the money into a rifle that will work based on what I have found so far. However, I wish they would offer a broader caliber selection and would sell their rifles from their factory with a 16" threaded barrel. If the ATF continues to process form 4's at their current speeds, I believe suppressor use will continue to grow more ubiquitous. As people grow more familiar with suppressor use, I think the market will grow less tolerant of 20+ inch barrels. This is especially true when the current trends of smaller bore+higher section density bullets are proven more and more effective on game. I have found myself moving away from a 7mm bore diameter minimum. A smaller bore allows you to maintain enough velocity from a short barrel while still maintain a high enough section density for bullet performance. I have found the heavy ELD-M bullets from 6mm - 30 caliber to be nearly equally effective on pigs at least. I would have disagreed even a year ago that 6mm or 6.5mm were just as good. I haven't had the opportunity to test 223 bores as well yet, but I suspect I will find them to be sufficient at 77 - 88 grains.

I believe Kimber lengthening the factory bolt handle and adding 16" threaded barrel options to their Hunter line would go a long ways towards what they are making now being better. My wishlist would be for them to add a 223 or Arc cartridge scaled action with 223, 22 arc, and 6 arc options with 16" threaded barrels. No one is really making a stainless mini-action and selling it here in the US. Just look at the Howa stainless thread on this forum to see there is interest. I think that interest grows from here with the massive numbers of suppressors going out into shooter's hands right now.

I have 4 BGR’s. They sure feel good in my hands. I wish I’d discovered them years ago, even though some have issues. Mine shoot well.

The good news is if you want a ridiculously short barrel you can take the longer barrel and do just that to it.

I would say I am obviously aware of that fact based on photos of me doing just that above, but please define ridiculously short for me?

This rifle launches a 6.5mm 147 grain bullet at 2500 fps. This bullet will expand down to around 1800 fps. It doesn't drop below 1800 fps until after 600 yards. Not many need more initial velocity to shoot further. The muzzle blast is non-existent due to the suppressor. What factor makes 16" ridiculously short?

It would have been nice to be able to pick it up from the factory ready to go as I have it now. My argument here is, with suppressors becoming more and more common, why would it not make sense for a factory rifle to be offered to pick up that segment of the market?

I've not put a Montucky together,since yesterday and only had it out to 1300yds(147's at 2680fps). Hint.



Kimber is doing favors,by not getting cute and painting themselves into multiple corners. Montucky Morning today,like most others and had atmospherics to really stretch legs(OEM Ascent Kreed/147's,Custom 7" Lilja Speedmire/88's,Custom PN 9" Mouser/180's). Hint.



Let the niche,niche. Hint.

Just sayin'................

That's a good way to put it and I've been down that path. Had a Kimber and thought I was there, but decided it was too light to be an all-around rifle. I think they are great rifles that fill a specific role. I have some Winchester 70's and a Rem 700 with some modifications and sitting in McMillan Edge stocks, but they just don't get used as much anymore.

I'm 66 and a lot more of my hunting days are behind me than in front of me. I've settled on Tikka. Pick your favorite cartridge, 6.5CM, 7-08 or 308 and call it good. I have the 6.5 and 308. I had the 308 barrel cut to 19" and it does everything I need a rifle to do at minimal cost. Mine are blue and cost me under $600 each.

I knew it was gonna be a CM before even reading your post.

Hell the CM cartridge can be shot from a slingshot…..and remain deadly out to 1K yards! 😜. memtb

Way too short a barrel, hung a schitcan on it, and too big a scope.

“Let the niche, niche”. I hear you on that. I will grant you my use profile turns the dial up a bit more than most hunters with how often I carry a rifle and how hard I push them. However, I would say that my use comes closer to the common hunter and shooter than someone who shoots as long range as you do. However, I do strongly value your knowledge and opinion on lower velocity bullet performance as you have a lot that is relevant due to your shooting and hunting at longer ranges.

I would say there are more hunters who are shooting inside of, and most well inside of, 600 yards. So which shooter is more niche for NEEDING more velocity for the bullet to perform. The 6.5 creed isn’t really ideal for this concept. It’s just one of only two calibers Kimber offers right now. The 6mm creed or the 22 creed probably work better. The 6mm creed 108 ELD-m out of a 16” is going to be nearly 2700 fps.

The market as it exists may favor longer barrels, however I think the benefits of suppressors are so hard to deny, as they get more exposure as they are easier to obtain now than ever, a rifle optimized for their use is going to be the more attractive choice. At least for a significant segment. The primary downside will be for those looking to shoot truly long range. That segment is one that is prone to modifications to rifle to eke out ever more niche needs for performance.

I look forward to this. We are all slaves to the perspectives we have from our own experiences.

Again I will ask. Why is the barrel too short? How much more velocity do you need? That’s all that is gained by a longer barrel?

If you don’t like a suppressor, have you ever shot a rifle with one?

Too big of a scope? Well that’s fairly subjective. Do you mean by physical size or magnification? If magnification, I rarely have issues with maintaining targets in my field of view and I like to get close. Perhaps you need to try rifles that point more naturally for you if that’s an issue. If weight, I’m not aware of many with better optical quality for the size. If you know of some, point me to them. I hunt until well after sunset. Brightness is very important for my uses.

I require GOOD Riggin',simply because I'm hard on schit. I have no centerfire barrels shorter than 14"(XP-100) or longer than 30" and I'd be VERY fhuqking surprised if there was a contour that I've not bought,got or shot. Hint.

"Distance" is convenient excuse for Drooling Window Lickers. The ilk are easily discerned,due the schit base/rings/glass they embrace. Hint.

My toolbox isn't factored by Joe Average's "abilities",as few barometers of evaluation are fhuqking lower. I prefer static wares,because Murphy understands/heeds same. Hint.

Mechanics are of far greater concern to me,than contrived Emotions. Hint.

Just sayin'.................

^^^

Don’t sweat those that don’t run suppressors or much less carry them in the brush, in and out of vehicles, box blinds, Treestands, etc.

First, I’ve got an Adirondack in 6.5 in a Montana stock, that’s around 6# with sling, scope, suppressor, and ammo. There are days I’d cut that 18” factory tube to 16”. It’s likely one of the best shooting/hunting setups I have. Heck, I even had a 70 classic stainless in 270 chopped to 18” and threaded. It’s a much heavier setup, but shoots/hunts like a dream and is extremely quiet and easy to shoot well. I’ve got other, noodle barrel rifles, but they sit much more now. Next 308 or 7-08 I set up will be 16-17”, for sure. Anything longer is too long.

Not to slight The Haybale & Crockett Barbed Wire Fence Automated Feeder Gang,let alone their "version" of Topography,Vegetation or Atmospherics,that's as fhuqking farrrrr from fhuqking REALITY,as one could possibly get. Hint.

Pardon my shooting everything thus far cited,along with a schit load that has not. Hint.

Just sayin'..............

Ur the only dude I can think of that throws rifles in tha bushes 🤷‍♂️🤣🤣

The less one "knows","sees" and "does",then the lesser the "requirements"...as you obliviously quantify. Hint.

Fortunately for you,Emoji's are free,so even YOU can "afford" to "contribute". Hint.

Just sayin'............

As for a scope, to 250 yards half the magnification is way enough, and more versatile.

outkast arms will put it in a good stock if your looking

I've come around to "can's" over the last few years, and the Kimber platform is ideal for their application. Start out with a quite light rifle, cut the barrel, and screw on a can. Put a relatively heavy dialing scope on top and you're still well under 8lbs all-up weight.

Nice job, thanks for sharing. It's where I'm headed with tinnitus ringing in my ears as I type this...

You threading 7/16 with a 5/8 adapter?

I think an important point that may have been missed here is that there’s a segment of the market, not insignificant in size, that:

1) wants to hunt with a suppressor
2) wants a well balanced light rifle
3) wants a rifle with a reasonable OAL with suppressor
4) wants this in a CRF factory rifle

I don’t think it’s asking too much of manufacturers(well, primarily Kimber, with their Hunter line) to offer this. Just doing a 16” and threaded fixes this, even in the currently chambered cartridges. That said, I’d sure love to see the cartridges offered to expand with .22creed, 7mm08 and 358 win.

Well, that’s why the scope has a dial and a range of magnification. I like to have magnification to take a closer look at things sometimes. I usually keep it set around 5-6. But I rarely have binoculars, so often my scope is used for scanning at a distance.

I just bought an Adirondack in 300 blackout off here that a 2-7 Kahles is going on.

Kimber would DESTROY the Market,if they went Montucky 223(again)(2.500" COAL),22 ARC,22 Kreed',6 ARC and 6 Kreed'...all twisted 7" and 22" long. Hint.

Just sayin'...............

Always wanted a kimber 308

I like the looks of those stocks and they seem like quality, but most of my shooting is standing or kneeling. I’m different from most in that regard. I like a stock with a bit more drop. My ideal is going to be something close to a British express style made of carbon fiber.


I think close to 7 1/4 is doable following this pattern with a bigger scope. The picture is with steel handle. The titanium saves near an ounce.


1/2” threading with the OCL mount. 7/16 may have been better and then used the silencerco titanium 7/16.

I agree with you there. I would gladly accept them never offering a 16” threaded barrel if they had all those available. I can have a smith cut and thread (would just be nice not to have to).

I know you like the 88 gr ELD-M’s in the 22’s. What can you do with the 22 arc? Will it handle the 88 like the 6mm can do the 108’s?

Funny, Brad - I've got a touch of the tinnitus ringing away as I was reading your post! I've been thinking about cans since VT started allowing them for hunting last year.

Keechi_kid, Glad you're on one of those all too brief plateaus in the bi-polar cycle of your Rifle Loonyism. Enjoy it! It won't last...

Only you can decide what is perfect for you.

I shoot a goodly herd of 224 Grendel/ARC's,in both Turnbolts and Krunchentickers,as I do 243 Grendel/ARC's in same. Hint.

The .224" 88 has a .545 BC,the .243" 108 wears a .536 BC. The 40gr shift in mass,connects dots and makes the 88 plum fhuqking AMAZING. Hint.

To hang with a .224" 88,you need to go .243" 112gr .620 BC MB's. The 243 Grendel and 6 ARC arrange same,assuming 7.5" RPM or better(Howie). Hint.

As Utility goes,the 88's are without peer. Hint.

Just sayin'.........

I could see myself ending up with something very much like this. Much prefer the Montana stock to the Hunter stock, though.


Okie John

This!

I've been wanting a small stainless action like stick just spelled out for a while. I did snag 1 stainless mini grendel and it shoots well but I'm not sure the action itself is actually stainless it appears to be coated.

Someone needs to make a small body stainless mini action consistent enough for shouldered prefits. I'm thinking I'd like maybe a flat bottom with integral lug like a howa mini. A 3 lug 60 degree bolt similar to my cz 600 lux, the 2.5- 2.6" mag box room, compatible with rem 700 triggers, a flat ejection angle so you can mount a scope low and not bounce cases off the windage turrets. Stainless action body but a 1 piece 4140 dlc coated bolt. There were a few other ideas a few months back when some of us were posting about it.

It'd probably easier not to build the feed rails into the action but let them be part of the mag box so they could be tuned or have different mag boxes for different rounds. I need to get a Jefferson bdl box to see how he does it for the minis but I always miss them when he gets more made up.

I don't think it needs to have a bunch of extra cuts to lighten it to keep the cost down. There's a big cnc shop in Idaho Falls that does a lot of production for a bunch of different industries. They had several 4 and 5 axis machines all running making airsoft gun parts last time I was in there. I didn't count but there were at least 20 machines each the size of a small suv all cranking stuff out in just 1 of their rooms.

They said most of the cost is the prototype and set up costs but that once the design is dialed in if designed for efficient machining they could be cranked out fairly quickly and substantial cheaper than I might guess. They said over the last few years the precision and speed of their newer machines have increased dramatically.

Unfortunately whenever I mention the idea to anyone in the gun industry they don't think that such an action would sell. Legacy guys recently told me they only brought in a few stainless minis from their sister company this 1 time because there's no demand for stainless rifles in the US. They said they sell way more blued guns than they do stainless. I said maybe thats because you don't make any stainless ones. Defiance told me that they don't need a smaller action because the anti was already available and it's light enough. I told them it could be shorter with a shorter smaller footprint for a smaller round. The others like kelbly and zermat I've spoke with have basically said there's enough Remington clones already and the only real market is with the competition shooters who want sturdy actions etc etc.

I really think the time is right for a good stainless mini action especially with the 6mm and 22 arc out now. I guess we'll just have to wait long enough and pound the industry with requests for long enough that one morning one of them will finally wake up and go hey, I just had a great idea.

Bb

Tell us you've never tried a setup like this without telling us you've never tried a setup like it.


Keechi_Kid - very nice setup you've got there. While it might not quite perfection in your eyes, it looks pretty solid from here.

I’m wondering just how much of the bolt action buying market is gonna prop up that entire market by buying 22-6mm (perceived as mainly paper or varmint territory), high BC/LR optimized, lightweight 22” sporter, un-threaded, >$1k bolt actions? Wonder how much of that market is for the same lightweight hunting rifles in generally accepted medium game chambering from 6.5-308, and handier barrel lengths for hunting use and/or suppressor use? Wonder how many load, shoot past 300, or care about how long of a 223 bullet they can fit in a magazine box? Is there a niche for a stainless, mini action, with good twist and mag box? Sure. I’d likely fit in there somewhere, for a specific use. I figure it’s TINY, vs the rest of that market right now.

I get that the majority still don’t own suppressors….yet. Those that don’t have their reasons. There’s also a portion that can’t get approved, even though they can own firearms under NICS. I’m not pushing my wants/bias/use on anyone else, just speaking to possible market from my turkey lounger.

A tiny stainless CRF will sell. Kimber could shorten theirs and I’d be satisfied! The new hotness is small cartridges, I don’t care what anyone says. One of my favorite rifles now is my howa mini in 6ARC, in a Pendleton carbon stock, bottom metal and Timney trigger. With the Razor 1.5-8x scope, it’s 6.5lb, and this 20” barrel(wish it was 16”) is no lightweight, but it’s such a joy to carry. People are catching on to this, it’s desirable, I’ve had the rifle less time than my friends as they all want to try it out, then make their own afterwards.

Why Howa? They’re the only ones making it easy for us today without a gunsmith and 6month wait. The market is wide open and ready for a short Kimber.

This mf'er is beyond retarded. Don't listen to a single thing he spews.

Every single time he posts he reinforces how stupid he is. If you look up "fudd-tard" in the dictionary, it's him.

Bullets do the killing, not the cartridge brass. Certainly not the name stamped on the end of the cartridge. This new class of smaller cartridges shooting high sectional density and high bc bullets are very capable of killing. They can do it with less recoil, noise and cost. I think rifle manufacturers would be wise to look at building some rifles optimized for those rounds.

I think Kimber is well positioned to do that. Just using the 84M with an ARC bolt face and a 223 bolt face would get them there ahead of nearly every other manufacturer. However, if they could scale the action down while maintaining the ability to feed these rounds loaded to proper length, that would be huge. I think it’s clear the market is growing for a rifle like this if you follow all the trends in the industry. It all points to something like this.

I rather like the ability on 84M's,to choose my COAL for things like 223AI,6x45 and 6BR...mainly because I do. No need to alter anything,just simply reintroduce the 223 and add ARC's. Hint.

Just sayin'.................

This would be a great starting point.

Cool rifle Keechi..

I’d stand in line for a 22 or 6 ARC Montana myself.

I'd take some Stainless 82's as well,especially in a Montucky stock for a dupe/dupe. Hint..............

I truly like the Kimbers and, if I was starting out again, I would have the Montana, in 308, for a primary rifle. I think I would go with a scope in the 2.5-8 range, but I could live with a good fixed 4. I like the slim midsection and the balance. The trigger is good. I've been carrying rifles pushing nine pounds+ for more than sixty years and the lighter, slimmer, rifle sure feels good! Why 308? For the hunting I do, it works fine. I have a ton of brass and bullets, and I confine my long range shooting to inanimate targets.
Brad, I don't even notice the ringing in my ears unless someone mentions it. Thanks a lot! GD

Absolutely! What others blabber on endlessly about may or may not hold shucks. As for me, I’ve handled a few Kimbers and none of them raised any desire to own one. According to the ‘Fire and other blogs, there have been quite a few issues. I don’t see that completely going away moving the factory to Lower Alabama.

Kimber just needs to get some Montanas out into the market place. You can't find one around here.

Brokedick Joe Average,isn't very fhuqking bright,as you eloquently attest obliviously. Hint.

Last "bad" Montucky I scored,replete with schit mounting system and Reupold glass. Hint.












Just sayin'...................

It has been my impression that the average hunter isn't going to go to the effort or spend the money to get a suppressor. Maybe if they were an over the counter unregulated accessory with a cost in sync with the materials and effort necessary to manufacture them, but not in the current situation.

I have no use for a suppressor. I hunt on private land where the noise from an occasional gun shot isn't going to cause anyone to call the LEOs. If I'm hunting or shooting I wear Axil GS Extreme electronic ear buds to protect whatever is left of my hearing

I have 4 Kimber Hunters in 22 CM, 243, 6.5 CM, and 308, enough to cover the spectrum of whatever I'm likely to shoot in the lower 48.

I hear you the bar for suppressor ownership has been onerous, but if you are following recent events, the timeline is significantly shorter. I have seen approvals personally in under 48 hours. A long wait now is a week or two. I think suppressors will be getting much more common.

Also, suppressors are getting better and cheaper. I’ve had suppressors for 20 years now on AR’s. I had no interest in them on a bolt until recently. With titanium suppressor like the scythe and TBAC ultras and now the diligent defense S TI you can have hearing safe rifles without much more added weight than the barrel you remove. The diligent defense can be had for not much more than a decent scope costs. There was a time the “average hunter” used open sights.

I hear you on your current setup works, but once you try a suppressor it’s a game changer. I recently had a very experienced and knowledgeable friend out hunting. He works in the industry so I won’t use his name, but he was there for the first shots out of this rifle. He builds very nice rifles not traditionally associated with suppressor use. After his first shot with one, he was on the phone ready to order one. There was a time no one used scopes. Now a few people don’t, but most rifles use optics. I believe suppressor use will be similar.

Wasn’t there a group buy organized on here once upon a time for a fast twist 260 from Kimber? How was that accomplished? I bet we could put together some numbers for a 1:7 22 arc order.

I certainly don't recall anything like that,as COAL is too trite to eek the RPM increase...thus the 264 Kreed' from inception. Hint.

Kimber PPC'd in the past(PRE-Montucky/PRE-84M) and though rather unlikely,I'd obviously be in on Montucky ARC's. A 7" RPM 223 is THE easy button,but NONE of the Manufacturers actually fhuqking shoot. Hint.

Just sayin'...............

If you live in a very liberal state like I do, suppressors are illegal to own. Doesn’t matter how cheap or easy to obtain or wonderful they are. And if I could own one I’m not sure I would, given the expense.

I think I was mis remembering. Google tells me it was a Montana rifle co group buy, not a Kimber Montana as I was remembering.

MRC has been a fhuqking EPIC Schit Show from inception and in multiple hands. Hint.

My latest Montucky(Ascent) is mind blowing fhuqking AMAZING,in how well it shoots 147's. It doesn't even make sense,how exceptional it is. Hint.

Need to rebarrel a 243Win OEM Montucky to 7" RPM Speedmire,if I can get it's ammo whistled through and get it in the mail in the next couple days. Hint.

Just sayin'..................

Not having hearing protection,has DISTINCTLY saved my Life three times. Hint.

I've oft wondered,about the number of pards killed,how that affected their final outcome. Had (5) killed one Winter,in obviously separate incidents,none of which were paper cuts. Hint.

Case in point..."that's the schit that will kill ya".Hint.






Just sayin'..............

Maybe so, but I can't envision a scenario in which I'd do the paperwork to set up a trust to own any Class III item. Different folks, different strokes as the old Yamaha ad read.

I protect my own hearing and expect others to do the same on the range. I mostly hunt alone on private ground, 640 that I lease and 4,300 that my wife and I own, so noise is not something I need to be bother about.

I find it makes shooting more pleasant for myself than even muffs do. Not as much pressure in your face. Muzzle blast also bothers me more than physical recoil does. However, it does also lessen recoil like a muzzle brake but without the extra blast obviously.

I dont worry about the noise for other people, but it definitely does not disturb other game in the area as much as unsuppressed muzzle blast will. Keeps the deer at home and gives me a better chance of hitting another sounder of pigs in the same trip.

If I was shooting pigs on a regular basis, there aren't any (yet) in Nebraska, I'd probably go for a short barrel AR with a suppressor, since the objective is to kill as many pigs as possible or as many as you want to haul off and bury.

Not sure if I read this right, but I had a smith turn the knurling off the screw collar on the muzzle. The smith had to make his own mandrel because Kimber chose to use a non-standard threading. It's called screw the customer.

x2 but a 16" barrel and can sure isn't it for me.

AR’s work well. I just prefer the challenge of running a bolt gun hard. That’s why I focus so much on feeding/extraction/ejection.

I’ve seen it stated several times in this thread that suppressor hunting isn’t for them. I understand the opposition to further government intrusion by filling out information for the ATF to get what is essentialy a muffler. It’s crazy, I agree with you. But I think there’s actually a majority of people that simply haven’t ever done it.

You don’t know what you don’t know.

There’s the other, minimally more educated response from those that have used a can on a hunting rifle, and forgo frequent use because hanging a heavy can on the wrong end of a 24” barrel sucks. It does. It kills the balance point, speed and carriability of a rifle vs simply having your 22-24” barrel naked.

Then there’s Keechi_kid’s rifle. I’ve handled it. I’ve shot it. It’s a completely different thing from what 99% of suppressor experiences have been before. It’s worth the effort and expense, plain and simple. It’s like nothing out there that hasn’t enjoyed such a careful and targeted parts selection process. It balances like it should. It carries like it should, it shoots like a nice hunting rifle should shoot and it’s fast to bear and swing.

Another point I’d like to make is this: millions of people already own suppressors and hundreds more are new owners daily. It’s becoming very common. The point of “the average hunter doesn’t need this” was made. Well I know the average hunter, and so do you. 1 or 2 center fire rifles, a Rimfire or 2, a shotgun and maybe an AR are all they’ve got. Am I right? You know these people, they’re your coworkers and neighbors. They’re not gonna have 50 rifles. You know who will though? People who own suppressors. People that have taken the time and effort to go through the process, people that probably know and have utilized a couple gunsmiths services. Now why oh why would a gun company not cater to that guy and instead put out more of the same rifle configuration the market, and our gun safes are already saturated with? Let’s evolve, let’s make something amazing, let’s market to the guy that will probably buy more than one rifle a year. This rifle is a perfect example of what that should be, and so is catering to the newer smaller cartridges with appropriately sized actions.

If you haven’t had the pleasure of trying something similar in the field, treat yourself. It’s a real eye opener.

^^^^I know a LOT of fellow shooters who continually purchase firearms. You know what they are NOT looking for in any new hunting rifle they WILL be buying soon? Anything with a non-threaded barrel over 20”, period. As you say: you don’t know what you don’t know. If you don’t have or want suppressors, you can have all the opinions you like….but that’s all they’ll ever be: opinions. At least go try some and various firearms with suppressors, so you have an informed opinion and basis for your stance. As it usually is, the arguments against suppressors make most who actually use them roll their eyes at the instant realization that; the person making THAT point doesn’t realize how uninformed they are to begin with. I get that there are some who need to validate themselves around here and maybe they truly can’t own suppressors, so the validation means they need to bash those that do, just so they can see over the snail turds they shade in….but that’s not most who haven’t taken to suppressors. Most just think they don’t need them in their justifications….much like some folks didn’t ‘need’ cellphones or computers or whatever. They don’t ‘need’ them. They sure would want them, if they had any idea of how much better they could make the things they already do.

The cost isn't an issue for me, I just lack interest in a product that I think is way over-priced and something that I don't see any practical use for me in my situation. If I lived where hogs were a problem, I'd probably own a suppressed AR fitted with a thermal sight to kill them and a tractor with a backhoe to bury them, but I don't live in that scenario, so I don't have a use or need for those things.

Firearms manufactures have marketing people who, at least in theory, research the market to determine what potential customers want to see in their product lines and react accordingly. Sometimes they take a Field of Dreams approach, build it and they will come, but they are usually more conservative. Winchester's WSSM line of cartridges looks like a build it and they will come marketing decision that didn't work out well for anyone. Not many people bought rifles chambered for the WSSM cartridges and 20 years later the factory ammo is almost impossible to find and way overpriced when people who own rifles chambered for the WSSM cartridges do find it. If there is a large enough market demand for a short barrel suppressor ready bolt action rifle, somebody will build it to fill that void and meet that demand. The Ruger American Ranch is a short barrel suppressor ready rifle that has been on the market for several years, but I don't see many of them at the range or in stores. A lot of rifles made today come with treaded barrels, Ruger American Predators and Ranchers as well as some of the Mossberg Patriots and some of the Kimbers, etc., so there must be a sustainable market demand for suppressor ready rifles.

I am probably among a small minority of gun owners, in that I am a tinker and few of my non-collectable firearms remain in their as cataloged configuration. Most of the gun owners who I know, probably 95% or more, don't go to the effort or expense to modify their firearms to better fit them and their perceived needs. I know that the few people who I invite into my gun room look at and possibly handle my accumulation of stuff and then go home and shoot whatever they hunt with whatever they have. Like I've said many times, different folks, different strokes.

Sorry Bill

Aside, you described above my go-to rifle and all the reasons I like it!

These work well on Kimber's. Inexpensive too.

https://hughesprecision.com/product-category/thread-protectors/?filters=firearm-specific-protector%5Bkimber%5D

I get you don’t ’see any practical purpose’, and think of hogs and night hunting as a singular purpose to ‘need’ one, etc..but those very statements indicate you don’t have any first-hand understanding of what they do….aside from maybe ditching your ear muffs or worrying about noise if you have neighbors. Those things are merely side benefits that some suppressor owners never even consider…..not why they buy them to begin with. I also have suppressors that cost less than used VX-3s.

I understand how you feel. If you aren’t interested in suppressors, you just aren’t. I do believe your mind may change if you try one.

However, I disagree with you on there already being rifles like this available. Most of the suppressor ready rifles available have major shortcomings. The Rugers are cheap and feel cheap. A lot of others are built with barrels that are too heavy or too long. A rifle needs to be put together with the suppressor in mind. People like rifles with barrels that are 20”-24” long for the most part. Adding a suppressor doesn’t negate the fact anything over 24” feels really long in most situations.

Most manufacturers are treating suppressor ready rifles as if the only people who want to shoot a rifle with a suppressor are among the shooters with a less sophisticated palate. My true argument is that a market exists and is growing for a manufacturer to cater to someone who likes and appreciates a quality rifle with good handling characteristics AND a suppressor. I think Kimber has the product that is closest and easiest to bring this to market. I have handled Ruger Americans. I helped my brother put one together for his kids (kids overwhelmingly prefer suppressed rifles by the way) for Christmas this year. Even with the timney trigger, it’s never going to feel nice.

https://hansohnbrothers.com/shop/di...ber/diligent-defense-enticer-s-ti-black/

This is a can that I think most people would find works really well on a rifle with a shorter barrel. All reviews say it suppresses well. It’s a titanium constructed can so it’s relatively lightweight. It’s slightly longer and slightly heavier, by about and inch and an ounce, than the can I chose. But on the other side it’s cheaper. At right around $700, I think it’s in the ballpark of a good scope.

On a 20”+ rifle, I think it would feel unwieldy. On something closer to what I’m advocating, I think the overwhelming majority would find it makes for a comfortable to shoot and nice handling rifle.

Keechi, you own the new to market Silencerco Scythe - it's the can I plan on acquiring once it's been around for a bit. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it? How quiet do you find it, and how well does it limit recoil?

As to your 16" Kimber idea, a lot of us would rather go a touch longer (17-18") so, given that, I think the mfg's smartly understand that not everyone will want a barrel as short as 16". Really, as you know, it's not that big a deal to have a smith cut and thread a barrel.

Anyway, I like your setup a lot. Some really solid thinking there.

Not SS & stock is a little short for me, but cheaper, lighter & ready to go out of the box than a Kimber..
pg. 11:
https://www.legacysports.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/2024-LSI-Catalog.pdf

I don’t have any criticism of the scythe as I have it set up. I removed the brake that comes on it. So it could have a bit more recoil management than my set up. I am using the hanohn brothers flat cap. I also picked up the silencerco version of the titanium flat cap. The Hansohn version is a little lighter. I wanted as short and light as possible though.

As for sound suppression, I have no qualms about shooting it without muffs. I tend to be a bit sensitive to muzzle blast too. I had friends shoot it and hear it ears uncovered as a I shot. Off to the side, it sounds similar to hitting 1/4” plate steel with a hammer with moderate force. Behind the rifle it’s more of pneumatic type noise. Not unpleasant at all. I shot a 6 arc just this afternoon with a hybrid 46 on it. The scythe on the 6.5 creed is more comfortable despite being a smaller and lighter can.

Recoil reduction is noticeable. I started this project somewhat by accident, and the story of that will be informative for recoil reduction. My brother had picked up a Kimber hunter in 6.5 creed that had been cut to 19” but not threaded. He was planning on it being a rifle for one of his kids. When he shot it however, he decided it wouldn’t work as a kid rifle.

The reason for that was the rifle moved too much when shot. He tried to explain it to me, but basically said it didn’t kick as in hurt, it just came back too fast and moved too much. So I ended up trading him out of it. It didn’t take me long to fall in love with the handling characteristics of the rifle. The length was great for quick movement and deploying out of tight spaces. I culled a few doe and shot some hogs with it. I did not like the scope that was on it. It had came with an SWFA ultra light. The eyebox was small and it made it hard to shoot rapidly because of how much the gun would move being light. I was also hunting with a friend at that time who was using a suppressor. I didn’t like us both needing ears because my rifle wasn’t suppressed.

So I decided to use that rifle as a donor action for another project and picked up a second hunter. I had it shipped straight to smith. I decided on 16” because my calculations on Gordon’s reloading tool told me I would enough velocity for bullet performance based on my testing with a 6.5 swede with the 147’s. I looked at the 19” rifle and figured I could deal with 2-3” more on the rifle for the gains of the suppressor.

So, recoil reduction. It is significant. The rifle was never painful to shoot, but the rifle wasn’t very easy to shoot. It would move a lot in your hands. That is no longer true. It stays much more steady like a much heavier rifle.

Before you decide on a longer barrel, I would again urge someone to consider how much velocity do they actually need. Only reason for more barrel is more velocity. If 16” is fast enough for the bullet you use to perform at the ranges you actually shoot, I wouldn’t add more just because previous experience tells you a short barrel is uncomfortable. The suppressor solves all those issues other than velocity. Velocity is a factor where enough is enough.

Before I respond, are we talking about the Howa?

Yep.

The Howa is a fun rifle, but it’s not as good of a start as the Kimber. This is a 20” barreled action mini 1500 in 6 arc. The action was placed in a Pendleton carbon fiber stock with the Pendleton bottom metal. Scope is a Vortex 2-8


Rifle with Hybrid 46

Rifle without Hybrid 46


As you can see here, the rifle itself is heavier than the Kimber with supressor. Kimber also has a bigger scope. I will say this. The Howa is a friends rifle. It shoots really well. When he first brought it to me to test, I told him I didn’t like his idea (the idea I’m advocating for now) and wasn’t going to like the rifle. However, I absolutely fell in love with the concept (obviously). The Howa shoots very accurately. That Pendleton stock feels very nice. Trigger isn’t very good though. I feel like I’m fighting with it every time I shoot it. The safety feels cheap and breakable. Nowhere near as nice as the potential for the safety on the Kimber. The Kimber could use some cleanup on its detents as well. The bolt handle is too short on the howa without as easy an option for lengthening it. That hurts the feeding. The action feels coarser and feeding is rougher.

Also, do not discount the lack of stainless being an option. I would have bought one of the howas when Brownells got that run of stainless, but I had already latched on to the Kimber as the next step in this rifles concept. Also, I didn’t care for the 7.62x39 ( I don’t like the .310 bullet options. Case capacity is good though) or the 6.5 Grendel for this rifle concept. I have to take steps to take care of this howa I don’t have to take with the Kimber. I don’t abuse my rifles, but they get used. Before a typical hunt for me even starts, a rifle is probably going to be covered in talcum powder consistency dust. Having a rifle that has to be oiled to not rust compounds this. The threads yesterday when I mounted the suppressor had rust. I had to brush them and oil them. A non-stainless bore is much harder to care for in Texas dirt and humidity. Especially if you factor in taking a rifle out of air conditioning into humid air.

Also, cost. The barreled actions are $400–$550 for the stainless. I bought my Kimber from buds for $775. By the time you buy stocks and a bottom metal that isn’t trash for the howa, you have paid enough to buy the Kimber and cut and thread your barrel. The howa can be nice too, but legacy has so far failed to acknowledge they need to bring in a stainless barreled action and offer it with a better magazine system. There’s a thread here on this forum discussing the stainless howas and their deficiencies.

I like the howa. I like the potential they represent and the fact they are close to the concept I’m advocating for. However, I have had both in hand today even, and will tell you the Kimber is better for me. Your uses may be different than mine.

Open the link to the LSI catalog I provided and go to page 11..
The rifle shown is a Howa Super Lite w/ 16.25" threaded barrel and weighs 4lbs 3ozs..
It is not a "Mini" nor is it a standard sized 1500.
Chambered for .243, 6.5 Creed, .708, & .308
BTW I agree with you on wanting SS as I live in the Central Interior of B.C. and condensation is a bitch in the fall/winter.
The last Kimber I bought was probably around 2008 (.223 M84) new in the box was around $1425.00 w/tax & shipping.
The 6.5 G Mini Carbon Stocker I bought last spring cost $1600.00.
I haven't seen a new Kimber up here for sale on line since covid.
I install rubber ball slip-on bolt knobs from our Tikka importer for $8.00 cdn$..
Cheap & work great!
The Amazon knobs suck in comparison.

5 killed one winter. Thanks. I'll bet they were all taller than you and forgot to duck

I have fired rifles with suppressors and I just don't see that they add anything of value that is worth owning for me. What other people, particularly other people's children, choose to buy or do is of little interest to me. My kids have all been shooting multiple firearms without suppressors since they were preteens and seem to have come through the experience without any noticeable damage to their hearing or their self-worth.

Manufactures generally try to build products that they can sell for a profit and in a volume that is in sync with their production capacity. If you believe that Kimber would be able to sell a lot of units and make a profit selling rifles with the same or similar specs to the one that you've put together for yourself, you should share your thoughts and blueprint with them.

Among my accumulation of rifles are 14 Ruger Americans. Does my ownership of the Rugers indicate that I have an unsophisticated palate?

How many more ways are you going to tell us that you don't care for the OP suppressed rifle?

I’m glad to hear that no one has had severe hearing damage. You’ve already indicated though that your hunting opportunities are limited. It is a certainty that every shot fired without hearing protection results in damage, and that damage is cumulative.

As for sharing it with Kimber, I certainly hope there is some opportunity for these thoughts to reach them.

There is no judgment on my part against someone for liking Ruger Americans. I find them lacking in certain areas regarding their feel and function, but they are certainly an accurate firearm that I would expect to function. Also, owning them alone doesn’t indicate you’re unsophisticated in what you like. You may have 14 more rifles built by Echols, Simmillion and Penrod for all I know. A man can enjoy a nice prime ribeye and a McDonald’s hamburger.

Basically yes. A rifle configured like that Howa from Kimber. With a preference for them trying to chamber it in 6mm arc or 22 arc. Edited this because I went back and looked again because I was intrigued. Yeah. The 16” 6.5 and 7-08 would be nice to play with. The 243 is too slow a twist.

My issue with the bolt handles isn’t the size of the bolt knob as much as the length. I can see where the larger know would help, but I want the longer handle for more leverage in manipulating the bolt as well as being easier to grab. The Howa and Kimber both are deficient. The Kimber is easy to unscrew and replace though.

Never had a problem working Kimber OR Howa bolts. But I palm them, don't 'grab' them...

All a matter of reference I guess. I didn’t think much about bolt handles until I had felt some on nicer custom rifles. The first two that really made me conscious of it were a Simillion 270 built on a Winchester classic action and a Richardson and Roberts action which is a copy of the pre-64 with square bridges and the bolt handle set out a little more and longer than is typical. That bolt being out farther and longer gives you a lot more leverage to push through an action that’s sticky from whatever life has thrown at it. Especially true when you’re palming it. I especially like it when the handle has some checkering on it. Makes the engagement much more positive.

If you really believe in your Kimber project you should pursue it. You'll never know unless/until you follow through and reach out to Kimber. Who knows, it could be your legacy, your once in a lifetime opportunity knocks moment. Good luck if you decide to move forward with your Kimber project, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

That’s kinda the point of this thread, isn’t it? Hell I’d love to be part of a group buy. Who else?

$75 gets you the shorter barrel length you want. It’s a pretty easy process.

All I’d need them to do is offer the Montana with full bottom metal!

People collect Legos, baseball cards, stamps, miniature cars - some collect fungus and spores. Each individual has their own jam and it should only matter to the individual.

NO! Leave Kimber alone. Buy yourself one of the NewUltralightWilsonfuckedemup rifles if you want to add weight and a failure-point where it doesn't belong.

Agreed

I would be interested in a “proper rifle” designed for a suppressor. I don’t own a suppressor, yet, but it’s only because I perceived the paperwork hassle as more onerous than it probably is… but, my first ever new rifle is going to have a suppressor when I get it (starting with a .22 LR for plinking). After that, I'll be looking for a handy, scout-type rifle with a suppressor.

I like traditional, old-fashioned walnut stock and deeply-blued steel bolt action rifles. I think the OP is on to something suggesting that there is a market for higher end rifles that are built and designed to be suppressed. Not everyone wants a purely functional rifle. Not everyone’s ideal of beauty is the same. I carried tactical rifles throughout my military career. They have a definite use and appeal. But I don’t want to hunt with one.

If I could get a new bolt action, that looked, felt, handled, and shot like a 1950’s FN, BRNO, Winchester, etc., chambered for a readily available modern cartridge, for under $1000 (then add cost of scope, suppressor, ammunition, dies, etc.), I would be interested in it. But expecting a rifle manufacturer to offer an affordable rifle with a nice walnut (or even maple) stock seems a tall order these days. And just ordering the plastic stocked one and getting a new stock takes it right out of the price I am willing to pay for a new rifle. I priced out a Boyd’s stock to replace the plastic one on Tikka T1x I was considering purchasing and it would have been almost as expensive as the rest of the rifle.

Maybe my tastes are considered expensive, but the factory offerings from 70 years ago, even from the cheaper brands, look and feel better designed than all the new options I checked out at my LGS this weekend. Is it really impossible to make an affordable J.C. Higgins M50 or M51 equivalent today? But designed to take advantage of modern cartridges and ballistics?

I’ve got a custom .270 Winchester built on a K98 action sometime in the early 1970s. It’s very accurate and reliable, but probably my least favorite rifle (accuracy and reliability are basic characteristics of any acceptable rifle. There’s nothing wrong with it, it’s just the least favorite in my gun safe.). Because it has basically no collector’s value, that might be a good candidate to use as the basis to build the rifle I describe above.

CZ 600 Lux would be awful close to what you're looking for. Classic lines, blued (matte, not deep/shiny), walnut stock, walnut bolt-knob for a little panache, Bbl-length short enough to add a suppressor without it becoming a pole-vault and threaded for same from the get-go.

The street-price is just at or a little under your $1K ceiling.

In my police career I’ve used suppressors a lot on AR’s I’ve also hunted and shot a pard’s suppressed 220 Swift. I don’t see any benefit for my needs. That said I don’t have any problem with them and they should be unregulated.

First, I will say that I know Kimber only by reputation. I like their 1911s, but I never have checked out their rifles before. But one thing jumped off the page at me after reading this thread and looking at the Kimber website. The website is bad. This is not unique to Kimber, all the new gun manufacturer's websites which I have viewed recently are pretty terrible.

https://www.kimberamerica.com/montana

I cannot even look at a 360 degree view of the rifle on the Kimber website (or, if I can, the interface does not make that readily clear). The options are akin to the Model T's "you can have it in any color you want, as long as it's black." The options are not comparable side-by-side. Are they actually trying to sell rifles?

Compare them with any PC manufacturer's website and look at how much customization you can have when you order a new PC. Compare it with most automobile manufacturer's websites. I can go on the Ford website and select a ton of options if I wanted a new truck, then have it delivered right to my local dealer. Why can't I do the same with a rifle? It cannot be that much harder to stick on an 18-inch threaded barrel and a walnut stock on a rifle than it is include a 26" monitor and the latest graphics card or to throw in full leather seats.

It should not be that hard to make a basic model to sell to stores (the same as PC manufacturers make basic models to sell in stores or the truck on the lot down at the local dealership), but have the option to build and design your custom rifle on the website. And to see the changes in price, weight, length, balance point, etc. as you do that. If you want to add full bottom metal to a Montana, that should be an option. If you want it all stainless, that should be an option. If you want it with a shorter barrel and threaded, that should be an option. Is there some reason you cannot do this with a rifle?

Why does this matter? Because otherwise there is no way I am dropping the kind of money they want on a new rifle. This weekend, I went to a few gun stores around a major Virginia town to try to look at a CZ 457 and a Tikka T1x. Not exactly uncommon rifles these days. Nor are they expensive. Yet none of the stores - even the ones that are dealers for those brands - had more than one rifle of each kind in stock. They cannot afford to carry any real inventory. So, if I cannot handle the rifle myself before I purchase it, then why on earth wouldn't I at least be able to customize it from the website?

And I really don't understand the mentality that "Kimber shouldn't do this." If they are already offering a lightweight mountain rifle with a 26" threaded barrel in .308, why couldn't they offer the customer the option of an 18.5" threaded barrel in .308?

Yes, I know. I don't want to derail the thread, so I will start a new one if I want to discuss that particular topic further.

Cooper's Custom Shop will be your huckleberry when/if they ever get back up and running. But, it'll be about 3x over your $1K budget.

IIRC Palmetto State is working on a customizable modular bolt-action but I doubt Wood/Blued will be an option.

Sauer 404 is very customizable but about 5x over your $1K ceiling. Same for Blaser.

It's not like the Kimber rifles which are the topic of this thread are exactly cheap. For that price point on a basic rifle, I would want to be able to adjust at least some of the most basic features and get what I am willing to pay for.

The OP has some very solid ideas about what he wants in a perfect hunting rifle. A number of other people have quibbled with his choices. Everyone's idea of the "perfect rifle" is different. With the variety of options out there in the aftermarket and the way rifles are made these days, it's absurd that customizable factory rifles are not a normal option. It's as if rifles are still being made on an older business model, unlike cars, computers, houses, etc. Unless I am buying a used item, I should expect to have some choice these days. Even if I want a basic Ford F150, I can pick the color out of a dizzying array of colors.

Again, the issue is not what I want per se. The fact that the OP has different ideas than I do is the point. If Kimber wants to sell more rifles, then offering more options (within some basic limitations), seems to be a reasonable business decision. Not just more set configurations, but a true, "start with this action, select your caliber, cartridge, stock, etc." And the rifle should not cost more with a 20" threaded barrel vs 18" vs 26". Unless, of course, some of those lengths are truly niche and therefore an extra cost is justified by needing to offer it. But it makes sense that if I want to get the rifle with a walnut stock, I should pay a premium. Telling a customer, "if you want a rifle with a walnut stock, go find another brand," seems a bit silly with the way rifles are made today.

It's a crowded marketplace. I used to assume that companies were intelligent. That their marketing departments were data driven. That they were making rational decisions with what they offered. But I don't think that is always the case. There are too many half-baked ideas that get released and flop for that to be the case. When selling $2000 rifles, it makes a lot more sense to sell each consumer the rifle they want - within reason - than to count on an everyman consumer walking into the LGS and choosing your rifle versus any other brand and going away satisfied (and therefore becoming a potential repeat customer). If a company could see through its sales department that people are being offered a range of cartridge choices, but everyone and their dog is ordering the 6.5 CM, that should tell them something.

A while back, I was considering purchasing a new-built house. I was leafing through the catalogue and playing on the builder's website to see my options. One option was a fireplace. I tried to select it and it said, "no longer available." I called the builder to ask why. His answer was "less than 10% of buyers chose that option, so it wasn't worth it to us to keep that option available." I told him that while I might be in the minority, a fireplace was really important to me and I was willing to pay for it. He still wasn't interested in adding it. That annoyed me, but his position was supported by actual data. It helped cost him a sale (and I am glad, in hindsight, that it did, since I am very happy where I now live). To him, keeping the materials and workforce on hand to offer a fireplace that 90% of people didn't want just didn't make business sense with the way houses are built today. But rifles are not built like houses. And offering a wider range of options, rather than trying to force feed the customer, gives the company real consumer preference data.

One of the problems for manufacturers would be that people aren't always rational in what they want when it comes to rifles. People get wedded to an idea because it has worked in the past and don't take the time or don't have the opportunity to try something different. Rifles are expensive. It can be tough to get a different version of something just to see if it works. Not everyone has the opportunity to put a rifle in a situation that challenges their current status quo. I spend as much time as I can out doing my version of hunting. I spend the rest of it thinking about what I want to do and what rifle and bullet I want to try the next time I go. I am blessed to live on a ranch large enough I can practice my unique style of hunting. What I do is closer to an African plains game safari than what is normally though of with Texas style box blind hunting. I push my rifles harder because of that.

All that to say, its easy to hold to an idea if its never challenged. People want what they want until they learn differently. I did not want a rifle like I posted up here until the paradigms I believed were challenged. A year ago I would have told you my Winchester classic stainless featherweight in 30-06 with 22" barrel pushing a 208 grain ELD-M was the ultimate. Its in a Mcmillan featherweight stock and it is comfortable to tote. It kills like a lightning bolt. However, it kicks like mule being that light and pushing heavy bullets that hard. I have to carry ear muffs with me. The recoil jars you off target and it takes longer to get back on. The rifle has a lot of positive qualities. I still love the rifle and carry it some.

However, playing with the Howa pictured earlier in the thread, experimenting with a 6.5 swede I have, and stumbling up on the other Kimber Hunter in 6.5 creed I had challenged things that I previously held to be true. Prior suppressors I had told me a suppressor was either ineffective as a muffler or too long and heavy to place on a bolt rifle without messing up its handling characteristics. New suppressors have come out that gave options for light, short AND effective. All these things changed the factors in my calculations. Thus, a new project that I am happy with and is encouraging me to continue down this path.

Basically, new information has told me I can have an even smaller, lighter rifle, that shoots less heavy recoiling rounds that still kill quickly and effectively, just more efficiently while also wearing a suppressor that lets me leave the muffs in the truck and not get a sweaty head and a headache. I believe everyone's perfect rifle depends on the hunting they are doing. However, I would invite everyone to take the opportunity to try a rifle configured similar to what I have done here. I doubt at the ranges most hunters shoot, they will find this configuration lacking in killing power. At least, until you get beyond 500-600 yards, your rifle will not fail to kill because of a lack of velocity if you are choosing the right bullets and matching them to the quarry.

Enough animals have died to .243s and .30-30s that anyone suggesting the OP's rifle lacks killing power at normal hunting ranges needs to have his head examined. The limitation holding back most modern weapons is what is behind the rifle, not in it or on it. My unit captured an Afghan sniper who was reliably pinging .303 rounds into my Marines' chest and back plates at 800 yards with an Enfield rifle that looked like it had been dragged from England to Afghanistan and stored under a rock pile for almost a century, using ammo that I probably would have thrown away if someone gave it to me. We captured him when he crawled right into the hide my snipers were using for overwatch. Tell that dude that he needs a high BCE bullet going 3000 FPS and he would laugh at you, at least until he cut your balls off and fed them to you.

Growing up as a kid, I was frequently exposed to reloading conversations that could all be summed up as "faster is always better." If your bullet wasn't going "Mach 3 with its hair on fire," it wasn't going fast enough. And rifle companies and component manufacturers catered to that. People around the literal campfire would argue that the .30-06 was obsolete because it wasn't a X magnum.

The current discussions of BCE have taken on much of the flavor of the old "faster is always better" debates. Even back then, people knew that bullets with a high BCE were better at long distances. I remember when I first got my .25-06 being super impressed with the .435 BCE of my favored 120-grain bullets. It was the best affordable option I had available 25 years ago. A simple Sierra spitzer boat tail accounted for many, many deer, even if I never really stretched the rifle's capabilities. But if I chased the new hotness, I would be trying out 135-grain bullets to get marginally more performance that I will almost certainly never need. Because apparently anything less than .6 BCE is utter trash.

Back then, my father taught me that it usually wasn't worth it to try to get the extra 50 FPS and certainly not at the expense of accuracy. That our goal was to tune the round to match the rifle's harmonics. All things being equal, at our hunting ranges, the bullet going 2700 or 2800 FPS made zero difference. That the most important thing was to minimize as many controllable factors as possible from the equation, but never to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The only people who really benefit from the "must have maximum in all categories" mindset are the people who sell rifles and components.

I remember watching an interview with a seal about them. He said if he didn’t require it for flash suppression he wouldn’t use one.

How about a Snickers candy bar? Damn.

Despite the BEST efforts of Blue Haired Cat Ladies telling Bedtime Stories,bullet always have and always will matter more than headstamps. Read that again. Now one more time. Hint.

I rather like .620 BC's at 2820fps in my 21" Dasher,with 3fps SD and 32grs of powder. Perhaps that's due to all the Bob's,Better Bob's,25-284's,25-06's,25-06 AI's and 257 Wby's I've had/have? Hint.

Just sayin'...............

I’ll tell you, in a gas driven AR they really foul the action. You spend a lot more time cleaning than usual.

You can. You hire a gunsmith. Other option, you order a rifle from a manufacturer that specializes in customization. Just be prepared to pay 3x-5x+ what your $1K ceiling is.

The 18” Fieldcrafts are perfect for me

My idea of perfect. Handles like a rapier!

WBY MK V Backcountry Titanium 2.0
6.5 RPM
Maven RS2 2x10x38



Always under .75" at 100. 127 LRX at 3150 plus FPS. Will do for just about everything

I feel you. I hate schitcans. Never gonna happen for me.

The "perfect" hunting rifle........

What's the old bromide.........

Opinions are like noses, everyone has one, many of them smell.

Not perfect, but mine.



Kimber Hunter, 280 AI, crowned/threaded @17", Dead Air Nomad 30 can

I own/have owned a bunch of different brands/calibers/styles.



Bolt actions......




Merkel B4 Bergstutzen, 223 Rem./30-06



Lyman Sharps, 45-70



Savage BA Stealth , 308 Win

AR-15, 223 Rem.



Browning M71, 348 Win.
Browning B-78, 300 H&H
Browning 63, 218 Bee




Browning BAR, 7mag.



H Burgsmuller & Sohn S x S double, 405 Winchester

Not one of them is/was perfect for any/every application.

JMHO.

GWB

Very nice collection of rifles there. I like the Hunter in 280ai. I had a Montana in 280ai once upon a time. I wish I had kept it, but at the time I was somewhat frustrated with the lack of quick expansion on lighter pigs from 160 grain partitions (I know, too heavily constructed of a bullet. Would use 180 ELD-M's now) and chasing what I perceived as expensive brass. You should take a look at some of the lighter titanium cans out now. My buddy has the nomad and I have shot with it. The Scythe is much lighter and performs better to my ear. Despite my request to Kimber being to make rifles geared to smaller cartridges, the 280ai would be nice for them to offer in the Hunter again. I really don't like being limited to choosing between the 6.5 and 308.

If it's a kimber. Their QC needs to be more consistent

That may be true. I’ve read that for years and never had an issue with their handguns or long guns.

Either way, they have the market cornered currently on new production lightweight (under 6 lbs) , stainless, hunting rifles in the $1500 +/- ballpark. You can get a used one for $1200.

Just picked this one up yesterday and got it sighted in this afternoon. About to take it out and see what I can kill. Going to use the Barnes 110 TAC-TX. Adirondack 300 blackout with a Kahles 2-7 and circle plex reticle.

Not going to say there aren’t QC issues possible, but I wonder how often they get a bad reputation on the internet simply because rifles that light are hard to shoot well.

You’re not. Buy a used Kimber and rebarrel to whatever you want.
FWIW, I had a couple Kimbers put together similar to yours, about 8-10 years ago. Very effective prescription for a suppressed hunting rifle.

It is definitely a nice recipe. Even nicer with the suppressor options available now.

However, a rebarrel can’t get you everywhere I’d like to go. A .473 bolt face will not allow for an ARC build. It would also be nice to not have to send it to a gunsmith but just buy it as I think its effectiveness justifies it being a factory option. I could also have Stuart Satterlee machine me a custom mini-Mauser out of titanium to have exactly what I want, same as he is doing for me now with a 300 H&H, but that is also significantly more money and years of waiting.

The 6mm creedmoor I want could be done with a rebarrel though. The action I have at a gunsmith could end up as that. I’m still undecided.

No pigs this evening, but the blackout was blooded.

My 6BR Montucky is one of my favorite rifles of ALL time. Hint…………..

Is the feeding hard to get worked out for the BR cartridges on the Kimbers? I was concerned that would be difficult. I was considering a 30 BR before I found the 300 blackout. Also was thinking a 6mm GT with the 109 grain ELD-M’s could be an option for that other action.

The Gay Tiger will be fine,in issued guise. Hint.

For a Montucky BR I prefer a Reverse Bryant. Shim the fore of the mag and keep caseheads riding high in relation to boltface,in the stern. Hint.

I like aluminum and shape it as a pre-feedramp funnel. Hint.

Tough to post pictures from the tarmac. Hint……….

Help for the slow kid please;
This interests me. Are you shimming the front of the box so that the CRF Extractor can catch the rim better while further back (that momentary pause between bolt going back then forward)? ...compared to Mike's pushfeed Rem box modification that needs to hold onto the BR case as long as possible as it's fed?

For me... the Kimber roulette is a real thing.
Bought my boy the Hunter in 6.5
Had to send it back in and have the chamber repolished as it would scratch/ gouge the brass. It's also a Very tight chamber to where I Had to get small base dies. My tikkas shoot better and are less finicky.
To each his own.

I’m a Winchester CRF guy, but the thing I like about these Kimbers is that you can actually have CRF in a tremendously lighter rifle. Just look at the bolts back to back, it’s shocking how much smaller and lighter they are, a lot less material. Yes, the Winchester classic or pre64 is a smoother action, but maybe there’s some hope for that in the future. That said my next rifle will most likely be one of these Kimbers, QC be danmed, there’s always gunsmiths happy to help. Still trying to decide if I wanna copy OP’s rifle or play with another cartridge. Either way it’ll be closer to what I wanna see.

6creedmore is very interesting, and has a lot of great attributes especially with kids (16” 6creed will probably best the velocity of my 6arc 20”), but I keep having intrusive thoughts about a 358 16” and a YHM R9 suppressor. I need to sit and think on this for a few months maybe.

That's absolutely not my experience.

Just shot my Kimber in .257 Roberts. Its accuracy has greatly been improved once I found a problem with the stock touching the barrel and fixed it. Went from 3" gun to under an inch for most loads tested. As far as smoothness of the action goes it is very smooth, but I don't think it is better than my pre64s. They are like butter. I would have to have both out at the same time to confirm that.

The Winchesters benefit from the anti-bind features on the bolt. Takes some of the potential play out of working the bolt. I am interested to see if there is a way to modify a Kimber to add that feature.

Good to see the BO is settling into its new home. Waiting for pig pics. My boy wants to see one killed with it.

Bb

We’ve had more than 10 inches of rain over the last few days that’s slowing me down, but I will try to get some on the ground soon. Will post them up here when accomplished.

+1

Love my p-64's and love my Kimbers, like picking between my daughters, but wow that statement made me jump in my seat

I have the opposite experience to Brad. Thought it’s with probably smaller numbers for Kimber (a couple of Montanas) and atypical Winchester’s (match rifles with hundreds of thousands of cycles).

Not all Winchester’s have the Anti Bind feature. I believe they started in the later production post rifles.
The pre-64’s didn’t have it (didn’t need it with the claw extractor running the length of the bolt).

These are on a pre-64. They engage the rear bridge opposite the bolt handle to keep the bolt in line as you apply force to the handle driving it home. This is what I’m referring to. I have been discussing adding something like this to a Kimber.

Hey look a 3k dollar piece of shìt lol

Ps crf is dumb and pointless

We are speaking of different anti-bind features.
The one I’m referring to is the longitudinal slot cut into the lug (right side iirc) that rode on a corresponding rib alongside the raceway. I’ll try to get a pic up.

I also find the Kimbers as smooth as Win. M 70s. I also don't need to carry a 9# rifle anymore.

Kimber montana SS in 280AI, Leupold Varix III 2.5-8 in silver.

Just compared my Kimber to my pre 64. The Kimber is smoother until you lock the bolt down than it is harder. The pre64 won't slide back and forth like the Kimber (depending on the angle of the barrel), but it goes into battery easier.

Which is often said about CCW, 4wd, etc


Maybe…..until it isn’t.

This isn't 1940. Crf is pointless.

Interesting point. I forgot how the calendar affects reliable feeding, extraction and ejection. However, this thread isn’t really a discussion debating the merits of CRF alone. This thread is a discussion of a rifle concept. Primarily a rifle designed to be lightweight and compact while incorporating a suppressor and maintaining reliability under harsh use.

Your first post was to denigrate a rifle that seems to be exhibit some positive qualities without really expressing any specific criticisms. Perhaps you can expound further on why that rifle isn’t worthy of further consideration.

Oh boy.

The lowered, noisy Honda civic crowd just found the thread.

LOL….CRF is definitely not pointless, but your first sentence is.

Because Weatherby, and especially that model, sucks.

You want a lightweight rifle that works? Buy a tikka, cut/thread, and go shoot. Or fiddle-fùck with garbage (kimber)...your choice.

My big game rifles in order.

1. CZ 550 in 500 Jeffery. Action as solid as a bank vault, smooth too. Shoots sub MOA even with me shooting. Has Wayne's (AHR) CZ #1 upgrade (single stage match trigger, 3 pos M70 type safety, straighten and fill bolt) Nothing to improve on.



2. 1968 BDL in 270 Win (bottom in picture) My only rifle for almost 30 years. Have taken many elk, 9 bears dozens of deer etc. Still shoots nickel sized groups with 150g Partitions at 3000 fps

3. Top in picture. Rem XCR II in 375 Weatherby Mag, weighs 7 1/2 lbs with scope. Mods include Sako extractor, heavier firing pin and spring, bolt welded on. Shoots 375 H&H factory or 375 Weatherby. TriNyte coated.

Evidently.... Nothing wrong with that combo. Light and accurate. Killed truckloads of game with my Bees and everyone of them is sub moa.

Lol of course they are...

Of course.....

If Kimber would just make a Hunter in 223 (1/7, 2.5" OAL of course) and/or 6 ARC, that would just about make the perfect rifle.

That answer seems to satisfy nearly everyone is this thread. Or if they don’t wanna do another bolt size, maybe 6 GT or 6 creed.

Changes from the original post. I swapped the bolt handle to a titanium handle. I removed the gel from the stock and sprayed a foam in it.

Just for entertainment, what does that mean to you?

This

460 Bee


338 RPM Bee


270 Bee


30-378 Bee


257 Bee

6.5x300 Bee



240 Bee



300 Bee



338-378 Bee



378 Bee





well you get the idea (I hope) ....... This is what MOA means to me. Some sub Half MOA.