I have a kimber Montana in 7mm08 that consistently shoots 2-3" groups. My question is, should I accurize or sell. I probably haven't experimented enough with loads but I have tried 6 or 7 different loads and a box of federal balistic tips. I really like the feel of this rifle, more than any other I own. If I sell it I'll be buying another one and hoping it's more accurate. But if the second one is not accurate enough I'll be sending it for accurizing as well. So bottom line- what should I do. Send it to Hill Country for accurizing or sell it and hope for the best with the next purchase???

don't they only charge for the bedding if it doesn't meet the guarantee ?? if so, might be worth the $$ to try it rather than end up in the same spot with another unit.

They discount the service by 100 bucks if it doesnt shoot <1". But you'll still be paying around $300 I think.

If it were me I would either work on it myself or have somebody else do it. (hill country seems to well spoken of, though I have no experince myself)

I am sure that many here could give advice but I would check the crown carefully and then the bedding. After that I would try to alter the pressure on the barrel, try free float or more upward pressure. Most of these you could try or fix for very little cost.

just my two cents.

With so many companies today guaranteeing the accuracy of their rifles - don't you'all just love the Kimber guarantee that seems to be "You pays your money and you take your chances"?

What a company.

HCR will for a nominal fee go over your rifle to determine what is causing the problem. Could be as simple as the crown.

I recommend calling them up and speaking with Matt. He's straight up and honest and will square you away.

just sell it an buy a tikka, similar in weight and comes with an MOA accuracy guarantee, I find it amazing after all the threads that anyone who frequents this forum would put hard earned money into a kimber

Except for the weight, CRF and winchester type safety and the classic lines the Tikka is just like a Kimber.

Call Matt and talk with him. He's a straight shooter (and a fine gunsmith).

Simple really.... because the Montana hands down is a MUCH better rifle. You actually get a lot of rifle for the $$. Nothing else on the factory market comes close.

Accuracy woes.... well, folks simply need to understand that the Montana receiver has thin walls, and factor in the pencil thin barrel.... the bedding needs to be just right.

I'd gamble on another Montana. If it didn't shoot well out of the box, for less than four bills Hill Country Rifles could square it away. Even with the extra $$ spent, it's still a lot of rifle for the money.

Bolt shroud prone to cracking,liberal use of plastic parts, detachable clip, hard to load from the breech, only one action length, plunger ejector and a hook style extractor, synthetic stock flimsy and exhibits too much flex....

Nope.... none of the Tikka's I previously owned resembled a Kimber Montana!

pillpeddler,

I had HC Rifles accurize one a few years ago when their price was reasonable. They have became way too expensive for what they do.

No, I would not buy another rifle yet, but have some good gunsmith ( practically all are less expensive) Bed the action, check out headspace, recrown, and lap the inside of scope rings. Then you would have accomplished what HCR would have done, with the exception of shooting it with another scope.

But you can shoot it with another scope yourself. In fact that may be the first thing to try!
The second thing I would try is taking something like multi sheets of paper and temporarily putting it between the barrel and forearm, to simulate pressure as if bedding the whole barrel, then test firing it that way.
I had a featherweight M70 that needed it's barrel fully bedded.

I am not saying HCR is not first rate, just too popular, therefore too expensive.

I forgot to mention, you may want to test it with a couple of more good factory loadings. Not trying to be critical of handloading, but there could be a mistake in anyones hand loads and without shooting some good factory loads you may never know.

Try either the Fusions or the Federal TSX ... both shoot real well in my 7-08.

If you are interested in selling it, please send me a PM with the price and pertinent info. I'd take a gamble on it.....
Marty

last time I was at my smiths he actually brought up the subject of a kimber that he looked at, he said the guy just stopped by and wanted the smiths opinion of the gun. he said it was one of the worst factory rifles he had ever seen, the bore wasn't even cut in the middle of the barrel, the crown sucked, the bedding was off, the barrel was bearing hard into one side of the forearm. I am sure there where more issues that I can't remember. yeah the kimber is a beautiful gun, its got a lot of likeable features, however whats a montana cost these days $1000? another 400 to accurize and fix the problems the factory should have for the 1k you paid for it, for that much money just build a custom, with a kreiger barrel and stock of your choice

Tough call. I have put over 400 rounds through rifles before even coming close to admitting they weren't gonna shoot. Being a reloader, I have never owned a rifle I could not get to shoot one hole groups. That count would be roughly 50 rifles total.

Given the options you mentioned, I would go with HCR. I don't know them outside of looking at their stuff at the SCI Show in Houston. I did speak with the big tall guy and he was very personable.

Based upon the discussions I have read here concerning Kimbers, either you get a good one or you don't. That seems to be about a 50/50 split in my estimation. I would work with the gun. It sounds like you like it. If you spend your money and HCR couldn't help you then I'd say you gave it a reasonable effort. However, based upon your input here, I don't think you have tried hard enough yet.

How about a new stock, receiver, trigger group and barrel? Ones that don't say Kimber on them. Try that and I think you might solve your problems.
Seriously, I would call Kimber and see it they will stand behind their product. I couldn't imagine that 3" groups would meet their quality standards for a $900-1000 rifle. If that does meet their standard, I believe I would be shopping for a different rifle. For a grand, you could probably put together a rifle with the features you want and sub moa acuracy with many different loads.
I hope you get it shooting better, keep us posted.

I would have Hill Country accurize it, if is still doesn't shoot have a great barrel put on it and you've got a phenomenal rifle.

Give Kimber credit - over at Kimber they are smart enough NOT to offer an accuracy guarantee with the rifles they make.

Think about that.

There are reasons for everything in this world.

I'm of the opinion that a few not as good as they should be Kimbers have been blown way out of proportion here on the internet.
Light rifles are not just harder to shoot good groups with, they are much harder. They are very sensitive to how consistantly they are held, for instance.
I've got a couple of full custom rifles that shoot that poorly with certain powder and bullet combinations. Light rifles are quite capable of shooting well. But they do not shoot nearly as many loads really well as the heavier models.
By all means have it checked out by a competent gunsmith. And try and different scope after that. If any part of the rifle isn't up to basic industry standards, I'll bet real money that Kimber will make it right.
The Kimbers I've looked at were beautifully and well made. A cut above the Remington/Winchester/Rugers that I've seen and owned. E

Well said E.

But I do feel for the guys that spend the grand and get a bad one.

Bill

Reloder28 has it right. Keep on trying loads. Bet you're not there yet. It'll happen.
As far as the 50/50 comment---I'm either married to Cindy Crawford or I'm not. Does that make my odds 50/50?

Having been down this road with a bad rifle before, I can tell you...it is easier to just sell it to someone that wants the challenge, and move on.

The small loss you take on the sale, still won't be as much as Hill will charge you to try and fix it, or the hours of aggravation it will cause you if you dick with it yourself.

What did Kimber say? Call them.

Do you handload for it? Have you tried another scope on it?

Shoot it with just the front quard screw tight. Shoot it hand held. Break the corner on its crown.

I have been building and shooting rifles for quite a few years and have probably been lucky in the fullest sense of the word in that I have NEVER had a rifle that would not shoot a decent group. By that I mean at the least into 1 1/2" for three shots, which is to me all the hunting accuracy I require. Most of my rifles shoot well under 1" consistently. If I experience a problem I immediately full length glassbed the rifle and I mean FULL length. That's barrel AND action. In almost all the problems I have ever encountered this has cured the problem. On some occaisons I HAVE had to experiment with bullet weights but have found this to be the minority of cases as also different powders. I am kinda fixed in my ways as I use predominately Nosler Partitions and IMR4350 for most everything I shoot that has a book load with that combination.I have found this powder and bullet combination to give me uniformly good results for more years that I care to enumerate.I have gotten to where I routinely use a torque screwdriver to tighten mount and stock screws and do pay attention to the crown. I find the crown fairly easy to check simply by looking at the carbon on a clean muzzle after a shot. If it is uniform and looks correct it probably is. Any good gunsmith should be able to look thru the barrel and check the concentric rings and see any really discernable bend. As I say I am probably just lucky as I don't seem to have the problems a lot of the people on these forums have. I can honestly say I have never gotten rid of a gun because it would not shoot respectably.

Have HC accurize it. Trust me, it will become your favorite rifle very fast. My Kimber shot well when I got it. Then the groups started opening up a bit. I sent it to HC and now it shoots everything I feed it sub MOA. Most groups in the 3/4 inch range. The only problem I have with Kimbers are they should just sell them for $1400 in the first place and fix the accuracy issues on some of there guns. Thats in the same price range as a Sako and its still a better gun IMO. Besides, if it doesn't need much, HC won't charge for the full accurizing job. Send it to HC, trust me, you will be very, very happy.

now that I can agree with if the kimber would shoot like a sako it would be more gun if they where both the same price. as for light rifles not being easy to shoot well I can partially agree with that however everyone seems to have good luck shooting their sub 6.5# tikkas. mine is hard to shoot .5" groups with, however shooting MOA or less is very easy, if I am on top of my game I can shoot 4 different bullets and 2 different powders into .5 groups with my little tikka, truely accurate rifles in my experience shoot more than just one load accurately

Here' my latest thought on the issue. Even if I spend the full amount on accurizing the kimber (assuming it will shoot sub moa), I'll have about 13-1400 in it. A new accurized remington action with factory barrel and custom stock from hill country runs 1700+. And It still won't feel like the montana in my hands and certainly won't be as light.

Don't you just love it when you have to send a $1000 rifle to
Hill Country to make it shoot right.

You'll be out $300.00 to $400.00, at least that is what two close friends of mine have had to pay HC to get their rilfe's to shoot and one of the rifle's is still a hit and miss. He's talking of selling his for a big loss.

I say sell it, if it can't shoot on it's own merit dump it.
Take the $$$ add another 400 and build your own.

What model, caliber and price?

Montana, 7mm08, 875 shipped to ffl (if I decide to sell). Never been hunted with and is in "as new in box" condition. I have several other rifles in the safe so this one has only had limited range work.

Here is my post from above which you have not answered yet. I have four Kimbers and I have got them to shoot.

"What did Kimber say? Call them.

Do you handload for it? Have you tried another scope on it?

Shoot it with just the front quard screw tight. Shoot it hand held. Break the corner on its crown."

If it shoots well with the rear guard screw loosened then it may need some bedding work. Search here on how to break the corner on a crown. I did that on three of the four Kimbers.

Since you have other rifles take the time to shoot this one and to try various changes.

I have two rifles down at Hill Country Rifles right now. I want them to shoot, and realise that it will cost some money. However, these rifles are keepers, so I had no thoughts of selling them.

Having had a Montana 7/08 that was a bad shooter, I will tell you to sell it and don't look back. The factory is of no help. The friend who bought mine sent it to them twice and it ended up shooting worse. Tried just about every bullet/powder combo, rebedded, polished the crown, tried various tensions set with an inchpound torque wrench. My gunsmith looked at the rifle,good looking light rifle and then just laughted. So I sold it, added money that I would have spent for corrections and had one built to my desires that really shoots. Don't put good money behind bad, sell it.Rick.

Smiling.

Or you could do what Mrs. Barsness did - keep the action and throw everything else away. Well, some people have had trouble cycling rounds, so try that first...

Really, though, if you plan to have a Kimber, whether or not this one works, it depends what you can get for the one you have. I'd say if you can get $875, then sell it and try again; if you need a $300 bath to move it out, then rethink. It's a numbers game, and while Kimber's numbers aren't reassuring, there's a better than even chance your next one will be good. (I couldn't sell mine for much - every time someone asked "How does it shoot?" I'd tell them, and they decided to keep looking.)

I wouldn't bother with working with the Kimber factory, personally. "Send it in," is their answer (how could it not be?), so you'll be stuck with shipping, and at least in my experience, nothing much improves when you do get it back. You don't like it? "Send it back in," they'll say. BTDT.

You like the feel of the stock? Send the rifle to someone to have it rebarreled and rebedded and just skip the forensics.

It is not hard to bed a rifle and lap a crown...or at least look at it real close with a magnifying glass to see if it is ok...most I look at probably are, but every once in a while you will find one that is a little off. I guess if you've never done it before there is that mystery factor...but it's very easy to do and worthwhile learning...

I like to eliminate any possible fundamental problems right out of the starting gate, so I normally don't even bother to shoot a rifle until I have bedded it, checked the crown and stroked the bore a couple of dozen times with JB, and made sure all the action bolts and scope screws are tight and even...call me old fashioned but there is a big difference in a rifle that is properly set up, barrel properly cleaned and ready to go and one that isn't.

When a rifle is right, that mostly eliminates problem areas in advance...and I haven't had to re-barrel one yet.

On another note...

A dozen or so years ago I jusst happened to be picking up a new rifle while on my way to the range. I generally don't shoot factory loads, but I just had a few bullets on hand and I had loaded up everything I had into less than a box the night before. I wanted to wring this new rifle out, so I grabbed a box of factory ammo to make up the difference.

At the range...I opened up the box of factory loads, fired a few sighters getting on paper, then fired a group for POA testing...hmmmm...not so good 6"...I never saw a group like that before...it's hard to do any sight adjustment with that, so concentrating this time I tried again...6 1/2".

I figured I had better check things out...so I tightened the mount and rings up...checked the action bolts...everything looked ok so I fired another group... better this time...5 1/2"...for an old style Ruger barrel you don't really expect too much, but this rifle must have a serious defect...a crown is a likely culprit.

I figured I was in for some major work on this one, but as that was it for the box of factory loads, I loaded up 3 of mine and touched them off...walking up to the target I could see the group was a little higher and to the right, but a nice little round 3/8" cloverleaf...all touching...what the???...a fluke...maybe...the next group...7/8"...

So even when a rifle is good-to-go out of the box, ammo, bullet weight, brand, etc... can obviously make a big difference...and to think that I had actually had some doubts about my cheek weld and getting some new glasses...

I always make sure every round I load is as right as I can make it... just a habit...

A slim barrel is a lot less forgiving, and finding a load that hits the barrel timing just right to shoot little groups takes more time...ocw is your friend here.

I still get a kick out of the gun mags that do all this accuracy testing of new rifles with factory ammo, and whatever that is supposed to prove...but there may be one brand or bullet weight that your barrel likes...you may have to try several factory types before you find it, and it may be just that one.

Good luck.

TC

What does Hill actually do? Bed your rifle, maybe recrown?

In my opinion, bedding a crowning are things that can make a good gun shoot great, but that is assuming you have a damaged crown, or a stressed receiver.

In my opinion, when a gun is a complete turd, it is a bad barrel, or barrel alignment. How is Hill going to fix that, without truing, and screwing on a Krieger?

I'd go with what Jaywalker said if you want to keep the rifle.I won't buy another one because of their service department but I have a friend that really likes his Kimbers even though he's had a few that won't shoot.He just has them rebarreled and so far everyone has shot well with a new barrel.For what it would cost to mess around with it, I'd just make sure it feeds well and if so, put a good barrel on it.

You infer that a new barrel is the first thing to do with a rifle that does not shoot well. That is wrong in my view.

I and others have gone over the steps for improving the accuracy of a rifle and I suggest that you go back and read them.

Just ask HC how many rifles they have had sent to them and ask them how many they couldn't get to shoot. That is the big question. If HC couldn't get a gun to shoot with their accurizing, then absolutly change the barrel. But, according to Matt, and according to what Ive seen. That is rarely the case. He told me he has seen very, very few Kimbers that they couldn't get to shoot. What I have heard is that with a good bedding job and a recrown, 99% of bad shooting Kimbers can be made to shoot extremely well (mine included). And that is what HC told me they do to most of the Kimbers. Occasionally they have to fix the pillars, but no new barrels are required. What cracks me up is when guys send their Kimbers back to Kimber to get them fixed. Ya, I know thats they way it supposed to work, but in reality, thats not the way it does. I will buy a new Kimber again, and if it doesn't shoot, It won't go to the factory, it will go straight to HC and get fixed the way it shoult have come from the factory. I will be into the gun for about $1400 with guranteed MOA, and its still well worth the price.....

I feel sure most people would look at the obvious first, crown and bedding. If that checks out then I'd get the barrel if I really wanted to keep that rifle.The barrel on mine was rough as a sewer pipe, so if I'd have kept mine the barrel replacement was the obvious choice.My buddy who replaced barrels took the obvious steps first.The reason I'd do this first is because you're going to pay Hill Country a few bucks and you might be out of pocket because you might need to buy a barrel anyway.Checking the crown and bedding first is not a costly proposition!Of course the fact that so many say they have bad crowns is a shame,it wouldn't cost Kmber much to make sure they did a good crown job on their $1000 rifles!!!

I didn't infer it, I implied it - you inferred it. For a Kimber, with its history of glitches - yes. Spending $400+ to simply end up with a factory barrel seems - misguided. Why spend the months and dollars when for a little more, a world-class barrel can be screwed onto it? There are only so many hunting seasons in a man's life - why waste them tracking down errors that should never have come out of the factory in the first place?

Friends don't let friends buy Kimbers.

About as spot on as any post I've read relating to Kimbers - most guys can't shoot such a light gun. Regardless what a few others say, at $1k they make Remington, Winchester and Rugers seem like not such a good deal in my opinion - Kimbers are that good.

I sent it back to kimber a while back. They recrowned it and sent it back with a target shot at 50 yrds that had about a 1.25-1.5" group (two close and one a bit out of the group) and said that it met all specs. So I can attest to Kimber's lack of response in terms of doing any significant work on the gun. They did however slick up the action of a 300 wsm I sent them back a couple of years ago. That one shoots great and they tweeked the action appropriately.

If I decided to rebarrel, what kind would you recommend and how much would it cost for the barrel and labor to put it on right? Also, could you get one in the Montana contour so I didn't have to cut on the stock?

Pac-Nor SS barrel and they will do the work for under $600 out the door. They can dupe the BC.

I had HCR rebarrel my Montana. They used a Benchmark barrel and if memory serves me correctly it was close to 7 bills total.

Lilja SS barrel would be high on my list if I were to go down that path again.

All of those are good. I have a hankering for a cut-rifled barrel and have been thinking about asking Dan Pederson (www.cutrifle.com) to do one for me.

Damn, I've been exposed. Somehow you were able to determine, without knowing me or seeing my rifle, that I can't shoot. Very perceptive - and I'd like to thank you for the wake-up. It will no doubt change my life for the better. I'd better deny it in a classic way...

Interesting point of view. How do you know it to be true?

what scope are you using on it? What distance is the parralex in the scope set for? If you can see your crosshairs move on the target when you set your head down differently this could be part of the problem. The other is like Emericus said, light rifles are more difficult to shoot well than heavy ones, some technique is involved, then with a pencil barrel how long are you waiting between shots?

I have nothing against Kimber...had a couple myself. There is just something wrong with buying a new rifle and having it need work right out of the box. Be-it a rifle or a pair of crocks,you should not have to fix a new purchase on your dime.
Maybe the key is to buy it from Cabelas as they have a great return policy. No doubt Kimber can make a fine product but I'd certainly expect them to fix it if something "truly" is wrong.

Most guys - doesn't necessarily mean you, perhaps I should have been more clear. I do believe that many people do struggle with bench technique with Kimbers.

Didn't mean to offend you . . .

I had a couple of problems with Kimbers years ago, but of late, have been lucky. It is frustrating to spend $1K and have a problem. It boils down to pride in what you are building, be it a rifle, car or a house. Some of the pride has left the American workers' focus with no accountability. It will be interesting to read what the new Winchester Model 70's review will be once the "presses" are running.
While the Kimber problem gets a lot of coverage here, I am sure there are plenty of other brands that don't perform either. But you don't read a lot about them because they cost less.
Just my 2 cents.

I'm using a 10year old Leupy 3-9-40 Vari X II that I've used for years successfully on a 30.06. I haven't lapped the rings or anything like that. I've also tried using a "lead slead" type product, shot with just a front rest, heald firm, heald light, heald down on top of the scope. I know I'm not the best technician when it comes to shooting ultra light rifles but I really don't think it's shooter error causing the opened up groups.

Have you called Kimber? They may be willing to accommodate you if your gun shoots 2+" groups. It's worth a call.

Have you tried a different scope?

I have a M700 Mountain Rifle in 7-08 that SHOOTS.

I want a Montana in 7mm-08. I would be selling my M700 to get the Kimber.

Threads like this one scare the crap out of me when I think of selling a shooter to buy a pig in a poke!

BUT, my take is that most rifles are a pig in a poke. What someone mentioned about a miscut crown, a bore not centered in the barrel, the stock bearing hard against the barrel... that all happened to me with a Remington rifle. And yet, I consider the M700 to be a fundamentally "sound" platform even though that rifle took so much work.

To the OP: I cast my vote with the guys saying that you should have a local smith look it over first, then send it off to HC if necessary. Bedding and cutting crowns is not rocket science. There's a guy within 25 miles of you that would do that, competantly, for $125 I bet.

For my Kimber 84M in 7mm-08 to shoot really well I had to move the front rest back to just in front of the floor plate, I use a bag on the back and instead of the traditional left hand back under the stock I work to hold it down on the front rest.

It shoots under an inch with the 120 TSX and usually a 1/2 inch with the Sierra 168 gr MK. Others are all about an inch but any rifle I can get two good bullets and others that are adequate I'm pretty happy with.

Many of us that are very satisfied with our Kimbers have given up trying to defend them against, what I feel, is a vocal minority of people that clearly have rifles with issues. Having built my first custom last year and had I to do it again, I would have bought another Kimber and rebarreled it. Now that the Montana is going to come out in .257 I would have simply bought one vice the custom route.

IIRC that scopes parallax setting is 150 yards. Set the rifle up on the lead sled aimed at a target 100 yards away center the crosshairs on the bullseye, then move your eye up and down to see if the crosshairs move on the target. To get better groups for me, I raise my head until the scope goes black, then lower until you can see thru it, then adjust poa, hold steady, pull trigger, wait 30 minutes, repeat.

I had a lead sled once for 5 days as well....rifles shot different off of them for me.

I have never understood the facination with Kimber. Every time I have an opportunity I pick one up and put it to the shoulder. Too light for me. It makes no sense unless you are climbing a lot. Heck I can carry a full size 12 gauge autoloader in the mountains of N.C. for spring gobblers all day long so weight is not an issue for me at least not right now. I know they are supposed to be great guns but they are too light and too expensive!

For what it's worth, I bought a $1400 Weatherby Ultralight in 257 earlier this year. It would not shoot. After burning lots of ammunition and barrel life, and losing what little hair I had, I called Hill Country and they said that in all likelihood they could cure it for $450. I was ready to do it, but then decided to take a chance with a local gunsmith. I looked over his should as he took the action and barrel out of the stock, and was shocked at the shoddy bedding job. The barrel touched the stock in multiple places, but none consistently. You could see points of contact at various places.

My gunsmith rebedded the action and free floated the barrel for under $200. The gun now shoots under an 1" at 100 yards with factory ammo.

I saved several hundred dollars, not to mention shipping costs, and several weeks. If I had it to do over again, the first thing I should have done was get the gun rebedded.

I like the weight of Kimbers, what bothered me is the stock design. I felt like the comb was too high, and I was looking down on the barrel, not inline with the barrel. Never tried one with a scope, so it might be fine, but it bugged me in the store.

Also, I have read a lot of posts on where light guns have to ride the bags...they make no sense. If the barrel is floated, it should make no difference where the gun sits on the bags. I have a mtn rifle, with a floated channel, and it shoots fine regardless.

Do you guys really want a finicky gun to use as a hunting rig? If you have to worry about where/how you hold it, how you look through the scope, what ammo it can shoot, it is not a good hunting rig.

They're made in America by Americans! grin

haha.... the mountains of NC...er... Hills of NC have are not even in the same league as the hills... er... mountains, out west. I hunt in Ga and WA state. Heck, I could pack a 50cal Barret around in GA, but out west. Well thats a totally differenct ball game. If you only hunt in NC, then you wouldn't understand. Heck, I don't even take a back pack with me in GA. But when I'm home in WA state I take one loaded up just in case I have to spend a couple unplanned nights in the mountains. East and West coast hunting is very different for the most part. And those things you call mountains in NC, we call bumps out west..

I have had bad experiences with HCR both with my own rifle and customer guns.

NC has mountains over 6000' a bit more than a bump although not the Rockies....

I spend more time in the Adironacks these days but my rememberences of NC and northern GA were there were some hills there that had 3000 feet of gain. I walked up 27 14ers and plenty of passes in the west and 3k of up is still 3k of up. I was mostly peak bagging but some hunting. In fact I find some of the footing in the east to be tougher, Wet leaves over rock is at least bad as the steep scree that I hated out west. Now one thing that the west has (or more correctly doesn't have)is air!!

How's that turkey gun with 130gr TTSX's?

Since they have no sights that's the way the stock is. It places MY eye right in line with the scope. What do you want to look at?



I don't think the floating has a darn thing to do with it. I believe it is a matter of bracing it. If I don't move it back where I can apply pressure to it I end up with an awful lot of muzzle flip. It's also right where my hand goes when shooting off-hand with it.



It's a fine line between finicky and perfect. I have a safe full of guns that all have their own quirks. For the money my Kimber is a great rifle, made in America, with a three position safety, a stock that fits me, accurate with the loads I shoot and it's light because I'm not getting younger nor are the hills getting less steep.

Marty ya got me! I keep trying to get them to grow on me because they are American guns. I know they are great but I just can't warm up to them. I guess that is why I am a Ruger, Winchester, Marlin, NEF, Mossberg guy.
Hey Jetjocky steep is steep and you better log a lot of hours on a stairmaster to keep up with me on our so call bumps!! You better eat your Wheaties too!

Probably about as good as that Kimber!!!

Docatcher,

The Montana and Talley LW low's work together like they were made for each other; the LOW Talleys are a little high, but the comb of the stock is perfect for that.

As to finicky... I can ring my 600-yard gong (elk vitals- sized) with my Montana from a bipod, from a sandbag WITH the fore-end held, from a sandbag WITHOUT the fore-end held, and I could drop a Partition into the chamber and ding it with just one more click of elevation.

It's not finicky.

Now to shoot the smallest possible 100-yard groups with the thing I have found that holding the fore-end works best, but for practical hunting scenarios, it's not real relevant even out to as far as 600 yards, which is a LOOOONG poke and further than I'd shoot at game anyway...

I say, Hill Country.

Im 50/50 with Kimber, .308 was sub moa out of the box, .260 was not. The .260 went to kimber and got the same answers pillpeddler got, 2" is fine.

I did a recrown, rebbed and on HCRs recommendation discovered the magazine well was not floating (missed it the first time and also missed by Kimber). Took it out so nothing was binding the bedding job and it shot much better. It wend to HCR fro a check up and they charged $40 for an inspection and another $40 to recrown, came back 3/4 moa with almost everything. I sold it because I had no confidence in it but I had buyers remorse before I even finished packaged it up to go to its new home.

It would SURELY be a 50/50 deal.

You make $50 & she'll spend $50 !

Sorry... The hills of N GA and NC are nothing like the mountains out the west. My wifes family is from the Blue Ridge mountains in Virgina. They call them mountains and I just laugh. Its fun to climb up them in the fall. A nice little climb, but nothing like the west. Its one thing to have 1 or 2 hills that reach 6000ft. It another all together to start at 4000 or 6000 ft and then climb from there. Ive never been above tree line on the east coast. As a matter of fact, Im pretty sure there is no mountains above tree line on the east coast. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bash east coast hunters. I love white tail hunting in GA. Its just that the west is WAY bigger and way higher then anything the east offers. Besides, how often do you actually stock a deer on the east coast? Friggen leaves make it almost impossible. Its 90% tree stand hunting. I like tree stand hunting, but lets face it, your waiting for the deer to come to you. In the west, tree stand are all but non-existant. You have to actually learn how to stalk and hunt a deer or elk.. Its totally different hunting for the most part... BTW.. Ive never heard of, or seen a food plot out west. Unless you count farmers fields as food plots... Did I mention I love my HC accurized Kimber... Even over my pre-64 model 70 270...... Ya I know... I hope they have deer in hell...

Where I live hunting by tracking deer is pretty common. Its a traditional way of hunting whitetail where the country is large and the deer populations are thin. My grandfather called it "running them down" There is a vermont family well known for the technigue, the Benoits. Its a hard way of hunting but very rewarding.

As for the size of hills 3k of elevation gain is pretty much 3k of gain, except for some air density. Although colorado used to make me slow down a bit, I didn't think it was really much of an issue till about 13K and doesn't start to kick in hard till after 18K and if there is much hunting above 13K in the conus I sure don't know about it.

I made a good run at climbing all the 14ers before life took my time away and even did a number of the easier ones in the winter and I can pretty safely say they are no more difficult that most peaks in Whites or even the NYS High peeks.

It isn't just the mountains that make hunting out west tough, it is the gear you have to carry. I think my pack weighs about 30 pounds, not including gun. When you are miles from your rig, on the backside of a mountain, you have to be prepared. Not to mention carrying a spotter, and tripod. I use a modified frame pack. I want to make sure the first quarter comes out with me, no wasted trips.

Well stated! I'd cut my losses and start over. I've tossed around the idea of a Kimber for a while. But, I'll be giving my money to another company more deserving. One with customer service. What good is a product with no one to stand behind it? Especially with a price like that. Money is to hard to come by for a gamble.

Care to elaborate. I'd be interested in your exprerience.

Two stand out in my mind. They built a .280AI for me that was incorrectly headspaced and did not want to fix it so I had it corrected elsewhere. Against my advice a customer wanted one of his rifles by Mountain Riflery (John Bolliger) "accurized" by HCR. The straddle floorplate somehow managed to break and required welding and refinishing to fix. Thankfully, I had insured the rifle for it's full value.
I know lots of people who are happy with their work but I will not do business with them if I can help it.

If you buy another factory Kimber,you could end up in the same position...or everything could be fine.Rebarreling, or rebedding, recrowning, etc is money better spent.

I have frequently been dissapointed in factory rifles; I have RARELY been let down by good custom barrels and custom work.The Kimber has some nice features and if I wanted one badly, I would plan on spending some extra bucks on it;you should end up with a better rifle.

sell it an buy a Weatherby MarkV ultralight in .270 Winchester! Get a real cartridge instead of that puny 7-08! (smile)

I have had excellent results just holding the Kimber in my hands to shoot it. I do this from the bench by resting the back of my left forearm or wrist on the bag.

pillpeddler,

Give this rifle some more time. Check the screw tensions and bring a driver to the range.

Here DJpaintless says he shoots these light rifles well by holding the forearm down on the bag. He gets very small groups but I would say that just holding the rifle the way you would shoot it at game yet making yourself steady from a bench duplicates real field use. Try that.

Get back to us on how it does.

i dont know why anyone would spend that kind of money on a kimber and then have to spend more to get it to shoot well.

this is 2008. a new car is built better than they were 20-30-60 years ago. why shuold you pay new price when you can get a weatherby or tikka that will shoot fine right out of the box for a lot less money?

So what options are out there if my want/need is a five pound rifle before adding anything to it? Please enlighten me on what options are out there to put together or buy off-the-shelf to get me to five pounds. Please include prices as well. Thanks.

Whttl in mt, that is exaclty my dilema.

Remington Mtn rifle, with a Ti, Bansner, Brown Pounder, or Edge stock, will get you close. Mine with a Ti, is 5lbs 12oz before scope. I really don't know how to get it any lighter, and it feels like a BB gun as is.

annie: The answer is easy;first,it's not uncommon to find a factory rifle that needs tweaking. If you expect an over the counter rifle to really perform all the time, it just won't happen.Second, the Kimber has some nice features that just need some tweaking to bring out the full potential.

The stocks are very nice,handsome,and well shaped; good trigger, M70 type safety.The rifle is light, nice handling, etc.Besides even with the cost of a new barrel, it's still cheaper than ordering a full custom. I for one would rather spend the money gussing up a Kimber than buying a Tikka or Weatherby,which, notwithstanding their virtues, I really don't care for.

I'd lean towards tweaking or rebarreling. I'd lean towards rebarreling since you could get a better quality barrel of a contour of your choice and know it will shoot. I prefer a slightly thicker barrel contour. All this for only a few hundred more than all the tweaking. If you want to try and save money I'd tweak first, but definitly rebed the rifle.

For some reasons the 7-08 seem to be the ones with all the problems. The 308 seem to shoot fine out of the box.

I have been shooting Kimber 84M's and 8400's since they came out. I have been to the plant more than once etc.

The first common sense thing to do with a Kimber or any other rifle for that matter thats not shooting well is to look it over yourself.

Making sure that everything is tight, change the scope and loads, check and touch up the bedding if necessary and break the corner on the crown before spending. It makes sense to me as I have proven it works

mliang: Ditto that on the rebarrel. remove all doubt.

an extra few ounces that a tikka has will not kill anyone or likely be even noticed, a tikka with factory rings will be about the same weight as a kimber with steel bases and rings. cut a pound off your gear or gut. would be easier, use the extra grand you save between the more expensive gun combined with the gunsmithing of the kimber, and you will be able to pay for an extra hunt with no out of pocket. unless you hunt extreme mountainous conditions and alaska you don't need a 5# rifle anyways. I hunt the wasatch range I don't have any trouble touting a 9+# rifle, most of the time if you are hunting mountain areas with rough terrain you need to be able to pull of a long shot, I will take my heavier rifle every time

If you can find one the original remington Ti are there. Close in weight and I bought mine for $1050 which is about where the kimber seems to go for around here. While both are ~1000 dollar 5 lb rifles. The kimber has a nicer stock and is CRF with a 3 position safety. I own the remington, but wish I had the Kimber

Question on the rebarrel, If you get a barrel with a slightly larger contour, can that montana barrel channel stock be modified. I'd hate to ruin that stock trying to rebarrel. Also, when rebarreling do they true the action, lap the lugs etc to make sure the action is not the problem. I'd hate to rebarrel with a good barrel and still have the action be causing problems. And lastly, who would you recommend do such work for a reasonable price???

I've bought a lot of rifles in the last 2 yrs. or so and all shoot with accuracy that more than meets my expectations. Having said that any Kimber that would not shoot would be down the road. I can't see sinking more money into an already expensive rifle!!!

I'd put my money towards a Weatherby Ultralite 7mm-08 at 5 3/4 lbs. An extra few ounces should not be noticable and even if they are, at least you have the confidence of knowing a company will back their product and give you an accuracy guarantee.

I just don't like the feel of those weatherby stocks. But thanks for the input. It certainly would be an option.

Shoot Redneck on here a PM. He'll get you fixed up...

Are you letting the barrel cool between shots? How close are the 1st and 2nd shots? And the 3rd opens the group up by how much?

From a shooter/hunter who has owned several Weatherby Mk V's including an Ultralight, while I like mine, I don't think they are the end-all in rifles simply because they sport an "out of the box" accuracy guarantee. From a reloaders' viewpoint, a 1.5" guarantee is nothing more than a cheap hubcap on a new car.

1.5"'s means nothing to a shooter who exacts minute-of-marble accuracy from their rifles. While I would not expect a Kimber to shoot 1 hole groups out of the box, I certainly would expect far more from it than the negative reports I read on this forum. I suspect that most of those reports may originate from Kimber owners who think the name Kimber holds some inherent magic that places it above other commercial offerings.

If you only have big money ONCE in your life to spend on a GOOD rifle, do your homework. Buy the features you desire in a rifle and if that includes a Kimber, get it. But DO NOT place undue expectations on the barrel. Most custom barrel installations cost > $600. Factor that into the cost of a commercial rifle and you'll soon realize what you're getting for your money.

While maybe not as experienced as others in reloading, I've been in in for quite a few years. A 1.5" guarantee is more like a powertrain warranty to me. Barrel/action and fit-up are pretty important to make this happen. If you do nothing to this gun straight from the factory you are guaranteed a 1.5" inch 3 shot group at 100 yards with factory ammo. If this is hold true, it has never been the case, in my experience, to where it could not be improved upon with reloading. I enjoy tinkering with loads as well as my rifles. The minute of marble accuracy you speak of is obtainable with most any rifle, but when I am confident that the out-of-the-box performance is there, I'm more likely to pay for a higher priced gun. Not one Sako or Weatherby has let me down yet. The simple fact is, when buying a gun, I figure what I'm going to use it for, figure which scope it needs to suit my purpose, and have that total in my head. I shouldn't have to allow an extra 300-500 dollars to "accurize" or rebarrel. Just my thoughts.

Care to elaborate??? Is he a good smith or what??

as i read somewhere else - there is a tremendous difference between match "grade" barrel and a "match" barrel. i have one kimber, and guess i got lucky based upon what i read here and on other sites. my local gunsmith also tells me it is a crap shoot with kimbers and their accuracy. but hey! isn't that the case with all factory assembled rifles? i would not send a kimber off to hill country or any other specialty shop. if free floating, trigger work, or handloads didn't cure the accuracy problems, i'd send it down the road. ymmv.............

pillpeddler:
My concerted opinion is to sell that POS & get a Cooper Mod. 22 in 7-08. I've got a Kimber Montana in .270 WSM. Nuthin' but accuracy problems. Sent it to HCR & spent the bucks on that too. It's better than it was and will, upon ocassion, do about 1" but I don't have the confidence in it I think I should. This is the 2nd year I won't be taking it on my sheep hunt - it'll be the trusty ol' pre-64 mod. 70 .270 Win. When you spend $1100 for a rifle, you're just throwing good money after bad trying to fix it up. It's all too sad these days but that seems to be the norm for business.
Between the cost of the rifle and the added expense that HCR will charge, you'd just about be able to pay for a new Cooper. I think if they made a .270 WSM, I'd dump my POS & get one too. Just my thoughts but it's your money if'n ya wanna throw good money after bad. JMHO. Bear in Fairbanks

A very light rifle just plain isn't a "match" rifle. It's a hunting tool.

My Kimber has shot many sub-MOA groups, but if we were both slapping Franklins on the table and I had to pin my money to a number, I'd say that I can hold 1.5 MOA or better with it.

That said, it's lethal on my steel gongs out to 600 yards soooo... what's the problem?

I like accuracy as much as the next guy but for my Montana, I wanted what the package has to offer and good, solid hunting accuracy. I bet over 90% of the Kimbers that leave the factory deliver THAT.

Seriously, some of you guys are in denial. Kimbers may be nice handling little rifles, but the blind allegiance and excuses are puzzling. Some act like there is some magical trick to shooting a lightweight rifle accurately, that is BS. Stop making excuses, and call it what it is.

Remington 700 mtn rifle (7-08), weighs 5 lbs, 12oz, sans scope. This is a typical group, and I just lay it on the bags and pull the trigger. Not comp standards, but pretty dang good for a rifle that is supposedly tough to shoot because it is a lightweight:

I don't have to make excuses for my Kimber. I've got a collection of 1/2" groups too. Most of them with 4 or 5 shots though. :p

My Remington 700 Mountain Rifle OTOH has never once yielded a group under 1". Matter of fact with factory ammo the worst group the Kimber ever laid down is smaller than the best group the Remington has ever shot. They are both 30-06 caliber. They are both more than accurate enough for most of my hunting.

You put down your money and you take your chances no matter what you buy.

Will

I am not saying that some Kimbers won't shoot 1/2" groups. What I am saying is, people seem more apt to try and polish a turd, than to send them down the road when it comes to Kimber. People spend $1000 on a rifle, and think it is ok to ship them back and forth to the company, just in hopes that it will shoot half as good as a $289 Stevens.

Kimber needs to get their schit together, there are way too many crappy ones leaving their factory these days. What good is a hunting rifle that you need to let cool 2 days between shots, or only shoot when it is hightide and a full moon?

Some will say they have a bad rap for no reason, but I am just an average consumer, and I considered them when I bought my mtn rifle. I had cash in hand, but bought something different because of the feedback.

I think that the people that have some kind of problem tend to try and make them work because they are light, well balanced, have crf, a 3 position safety, and a stock design that handles recoil very well, all in an action thats built to match the cartridge size. The wood stock ones can also be purty.

I need to make some better pics.......

dogcatcher223,

I've had two M700 Mountain Rifles, a 30-06 and a 7mm-08. My 7-08 shoots about like your target there; which is to say, it shoots well.

My 30-06 was a 2+ MOA rifle that with TWEAKED handloads would shoot 1.5 MOA... and I mean, obsessively tweaked handloads.

My Kimber will shoot just over an inch in "free recoil" (just letting it come up off the sandbags). If I hold the foreend, it has produced many many groups right in the .5 to .7" range.

What's my point here.. uh... oh yeah: Those M700 Mountain Rifles can be turds too. I had one! And they aren't cheap these days either. And their barrels get hot and move around the POI pretty quick too.

In the end, the Montana especially is just a hard-core HUNTING rifle, and the vast majority of them are wonderful HUNTING rifles. If a guy wants to routinely print tiny groups, then he can up the odds of that with rifles that are NOT what the Kimber is. In that case, he's sacrificing huntability for bench accuracy. I've done that with numerous guns, but for the Kimber I wanted a world-class, lightweight HUNTING rifle. And that's exactly what I got!

Here's a thought- if we really want to get nerdy about this comparing of accuracy thing, we need to compare the new Kimber Sonora, their heavy-barrel long range rifle.

Link to Kimber Sonora info

If THAT doesn't shoot sub-MOA, then I think there's a reason to complain.