A friend with "connections" said he heard from the rep that Kimber is thinking of a 35 Whelen. Just throwing it out there.
Maybe others here can support or discount the rumor. Just don't flame the messenger.

Page 49 - Classic Seclect - 35 Whelen.

It's already there! They chambered it in the 84L Classic Select this year.

There was a thread here more than a month ago about the very subject... nothing in the Montana though.

As a pure business decision, I don't think Kimber should chamber for the Whelen. The demand just isn't there. Everybody loves the Whelen until they are presented with the opportunity to buy one. I remember seeing NIB Rem 700 CDLs in .35 Whelen going for $450 on Gunbroker about a year after Remington starting making them again.

There are few factory ammo options for those that don't reload. And most reloaders/enthusiasts agree that modern bullets have increased the effectiveness of other, smaller cartridges, making the Whelen a less than ideal solution for many hunting applications. People with limited funds have the Whelen too far down on their list of "My Next Rifle."

That said...I own a Whelen and love it! Just for kicks and giggles, I'll post a pic of it. It's a Rem 700 CDL and now sits in a factory synthetic stock that I painted:

No offense intended but IMHO people who want a 35 Whelen don't generally want a Remington M700, Whelen fans are more nostolgic and want Mausers, Springfields, M70's etc., not M700s and the Kimber fits this bill to a tee. They want blued steel and walnut stocks, not stainless and plastic.

Kimber is making a M84L in the 280AI, I would be surprised if they don't sell more Whelens than 280AI's. I know I haven't been interested in a new bolt gun for years as they are all pretty boring but I will be getting one of these M84L'
s in 35 Whelen.

I'll chime in with exception #1 to your rule.

No offense taken. I hope Kimber sells a ton of them, but I still don't see it happening.

You and I just have different tastes/perspectives--I totally want a Montana .280AI! Each to his own...

deleted.

Is this an ok Whelen?

I had a 35 Whelen in a 7600 which use to eat a diet of 250's. The Kimber will be a nice rifle, no doubt, but the 30-06 with 180TTSX's or 220gr Woodleighs it where it ends for me these days.
The 06 is perrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrfect........;)

I guess its already "in production". Page 49 of my newly acquired catalog has it listed as a Classic Select model along with a 7 Rem. Mag..
There you go people!

The catalog listed the Ruger Compact Magnums at one time also.

Yep. 2008 I believe. They had ads in magazines too. I'm assuming it never happened....

Nope. I remember wanting a Ruger Ultra light in 7mm-08 when they first introduced the original tang UL....I think 20 years later they actually made the 7mm-08 available...still choked over that! Ended up with a nice one in 243 though.

forgot to say: Ruger was advertising they had the 7mm-08, but never did of course.

I understand about not flaming the messanger, so I'm saying this politely...why do you hate me? A Kimber 35 Whelen will have to come home with me, and is going to cause me no end of trouble with the wife.

Seriously...thats fantastic news...I gotta have one!

Steelhead,

That is not an acceptable Whelen. It needs to be sent to me immediately for proper disposal!

What a beauty!!!

It's a Remington 700, like the one poster said that no one wanted...

It seems Kimber is dipping a toe into the "exotic" cartridge market. I suppose its a minimum of setup with the basic design already configured. Sort of a Ruger/Lipsy clone. Good for them.

I didn't say that no one wanted one built on a M700 just that the majority, IMHO, want one built on a more classic action. Kind of like guys who want a .338 Lapua do not want a walnut stock.

Wish they had gone the 338/06 route rather than the Whelen maybe next year.

That new Kimber is a darn tempting rifle though I agree a Whelen fits a classic Mauser well.



But my old tweaked Ruger RS gets most of the action.







I will never be Whelenless.

Maybe Kimber will revive Remington's idea of the "Classic" and manufacture a different given chambering each year.

Since you've already called for the 2013 Kimber Klassic to be a 338-06, I hereby designate 2014's edition to be a .25-284.

And, since I have the floor, the 2015 Kimber Klassic will be a 7mm-08!

Since you can already get a 7-08, and I thought I read on a thread that a .284 based cartridge won't fit in an 84M action, how about a 7 WSM 8400 (again) and a .260 (also, again) or Creedmoor, that's work too, in an 84M?

I've got an old Rem 700 BDL in 35 Whelen stuffed in an equally old mountain rifle stock. It's the perfect elk rig. But I will be first in line for that caliber in a Kimber Montana.

I tried finding the Whelen on their website but cannot find it. Am using my phone so maybe just not looking in the right spot. Anyone know if these can be ordered now?

It's in the 2012 catalog...

now that they have 358 barrels, there is no reason for them not to chamber the 84M in 358 Win!!! I'll be first in line!!!

I'd probably slum an 84L Classic Select in 9.3x62mm if Kimber built it...

Brad do they list the barrel twist in their whelen? With an accurate 308 Montana a whelen would be more interesting to me than the 30 06.

It's listed at 1-14"

If they made the 35 Whelen in 84L (which I think they'd have to do due to action length not 84M right?) Montana I likely would have to bite the bullet on it.

I doubt a Montana will ever be forthcoming... larger bbl. diameter, hence an entirely new stock mold...

What kills me about Kimber is that they are doing some of these harder to sell calibers when they cant get half the standard calibers to function or perform correctly. Just my opinion.

I see that the 35 Whelen is listed (pg. 46) under the 84L Classic Select.
I don't know if the barrel contour is larger but it would be easier to alter a walnut stock than a kevlar stock.

I see Tim Sundles [Buffalo Bore] has a new load out for 35 Whelen.

Apparently it is a larger, no. 2+ type contour.

The fiberglass mold would have to be re-designed, not altered, whereas cutting away wood is much simpler as you rightly point out.

No doubt that's the thinking offering it only in wood.

That's not my experience.

What do you base your opinion on?

I base it on 2- Kimber .260's that I couldnt get to shoot and 1 that just wouldn't function without sending it back and having some work done to it. Upon getting it back it still wouldn't shoot with a lot of other Ruger's, Remingtons, or Win. that I have. Are they still producing the 7mm-08 ?

Interesting... my 260 shot lights out, but only with 125's and lighter, and only with H4831sc.

7-08 is listed in the current catalog.

I know they had issues with it and was dropped at one time.

Would depend on the type of mold they have, but I've seen 3 part molds that could be 'relatively' easy to convert.

The two side pieces would stay the same, and a new top could be made for a larger barrel channel. The top piece molds the action inlet and barrel channel. Bansner used this type at one time...no idea if that is current or not.

If they built a 35 Whelen MT I'd be an owner ASAP.

I ain't man enough to want to try that one!

It probably wouldn't be a favorite range gun. Put a hurt on some animals though.

Wouldn't be hard to like...kinda wish they had spent the R&D money on one of those rather than the Ascent.

+1

With its heavier no.2-3 barrel it'd go over 7lbs all-up weight. Should be no big deal.

If, they did that, put GOOD irons on it and it held 4+1, functioned like a P-64 Mod. 70 and shot like one, as well, I would jump at the chance to own and use one and a mate to it in .25-06.

However, I have met several Kimber buyers here in Vancouver, who had issues with the rifles that they purchased and given the border issues with warrantee work, I am inclined to pass on buying a Kimber.

Maybe, someday, our respective governments will change this to allow Canadians and Americans to deal in sporting guns across the border easily and simply....and, our taxes will be wisely spent, as well................

Bullschitt!

Not sure how current you are, but I would suspect any problem Kimber could be returned to Korth Group and they would take care of it for you...they have been the distributor for a few years now.

Yeah, I know, have met Terry and some of his staff and just spoke with them last month concerning a Caprivi .416 that caught my interest. I subsequently was shown the rifle at one of the Vancouver gunshops where they shipped it and, frankly, with dozens of highend rifles in my three gunsafes, I was not impressed for $3895.00 retail.

I had three Dakotas here last month as well and all of them were FAR superior in fit and finish to this Kimber and so far, I have yet to see a Kimber that I wanted to own. I had a couple of the Oregon rifles, had some 'smithing done on them and they were nice enough, but, I would hesitate to buy another based on what I have seen with my rifles and those of friends.

Korth told me how slow it is to get them and I am not one to buy a rifle that I will then have to return for adjustments as I prefer to spend the coin "up front" and get a rifle that works as I want mine to. YMMV, just what I have seen, so far.

No comparison between a Dakota and a Kimber IMO...

Wow. Not sure of pricing in your neck of the woods, or if the 416 version extracts a big premium, but the 375H&H Caprivis I have seen tend to be $2500-2600.

Maybe it would look better at 2/3 the price of a Dakota.

But for me, an 84L in 35 Whelen at about $1100 is a no-brainer.

Yes, Terry told me the same thing. I guess the point was that you wouldn't need to send it across the border by yourself should a problem occur. Recently, I've had to send a NIB Ruger in for recall work, and of course there was the huge TC Venture recall...both were fixed in Canada. Kimber isn't the only one that has problems.

But regardless, be honest, what new gun are you buying in the Kimber price range (we were talking 84L Montana here) that is free from defects? Also, what is available with the same features and weight? Very little is the answer to the first question. Nothing is the answer to the last.

And yes, I agree, I've had/have a Dakota, Brno 21/22's, Md 70 pre 64's and they are wonderful...but the Dakota is 3-4x as much and the other 2 haven't been made for close to 50 years....and still, they really aren't in the same niche as the Kimber. I did have a sour 84M Classic in 7mm-08, but I'm willing to risk another one...seems a lot of people on here have had good luck with theirs....all the crap couldn't have been sent to Canada.

WhelenAway, the price is Canadian retail and we always pay more for US-made guns than you do in the States.

I am just trying to make the point here that, from what I have seen with a few dozen Kimbers, I am not confident in buying one for MY uses. I have no desire to influence anyone else as to what they should/should not purchase.

dj, at this time, I would choose a FN-made Model 70 over anything commonly available new in BC's gunstores. I am not trying to compare the classic rifles you refer to or the costly, but, basically sound Dakotas with the Kimbers, merely commenting on what I feel about buying a .35 Whelen-a rifle that one might choose for hunting in Grizzly country more than, for instance, a 7-08, given the issues so many seem to have with them.

I dunno, it all really comes down to what the individual feels comfortable with and considers a good value and appropriate for his hunting. To me, the weight issue is important, but, I would prefer a .35 Whelen in a Mod. 70 Fwt. at 7.5 lbs. all up in a synthetic handle over a Montana in the same chambering, just my level of comfort.

That said, I am a hardcore Mod 70 guy and I have always found them a reliable and worthwhile rifle, so, I am a "bit" biased.....

A rebarrel cures about anything that cain't be cured by less invasive procedures.

So, approach the Kimber from the perspective that you want one; you want that light action and damn nice stock and trigger. It'll likely shoot fine. If not, dab bed... crown... at this point you've almost certainly got a shooter.

And if THAT fails, $400-$600 puts a very fine barrel on there. And that's fun too.

Kimbers are worthy build platforms...

Yes, the bottom line is I want the action and bottom metal. Not even a second thought if the trigger was crap. Hopefully every thing else is in good order, because for the price up here, you'd be a bit daft to want to rebuild one. I'm more interested in the 84M Classic versions anyway, as I love walnut/blue and light weight...sadly, that combination isn't available in much other than the Kimber.

If I wanted to build something, like Kutenay, I'd be starting with a pre64 featherweight or a Brno 21 and going from there. Lucky for us, they seem to be a bit cheaper up here. But I have a Pound'r on my 270 Featherweight already, so I'm good there.

Kutenay: No issue with how you'd run your 35 Whelen (or 9.3), in fact I'd be very happy with a pre64 .35W...but just for the novelty of plunking a moose or two. After resigning myself to bear-spray for field work, and not being ate after all these years, I figure even my 243 will be an improvement should I ever have to poke a grizzly.

Well, during my 20+ years of active forestry employment and most of that was alone for extended periods in some of BC's most remote areas without breaks, there was no bearspray. I have tried it on fighting male Rottweilers, found it useless in that scenario and just do not trust it in the mountains of BC-AB, given the swirling winds, etc. YMMV and I do not debate bearspray as it is one of those kinds of topics that just gets everyone riled to no good end.

So, my preference has always been for a CRF rifle that I am so familiar with that I can operate it in pitch dark and this is one consideration where the Kimbers are concerned. I has one on order from an Albertan shop in 2006, when I turned 60 and my wife insisted I buy it....I married "smart" too..... and after I examined the first few Montanas to come into Vancouver, I decided that they were not for me.

I dunno, by the time you have a good smith cut the excess weight off a Classic short Mod. 70, install custom alloy bottom metal and then get a good barrel and so on, customizing a Montana is going to cost serious coin. I wish that we could buy the actions and stocks and they had a Mod. 70 type bottom metal option, don't care for blind mags in BC weather and then, send it all to Kolenbrander and get back a pretty fine working .35Whelen, but, that is still 5Gs, at least.

You very likely won't need a barrel, especially within a Whelen's parameters of use. The Montana stock is excellent. The trigger is superb. The action is already engineered to be extremely light.

All in all, a pretty good gamble. IMHO.

I agree, seems most whelens are very accurate, at least the two Remingtons I was around are (were) and those I have seen on here. I would think the Kimber would be in that ballpark too.

So Jeff, you're saying a no.1 contour that goes .560 at the muzzle will work well for a 35 Whelen?

Or are you recommending opening the barrel channel (tearing into the mono-coupe stock construction and rebuilding it) to inlet for a heavier contour?

257heaven,

Whats BS about it ? I had issues and if you go back a bunch of people here on the thread had similar issues with Kimber. It was my opinion and you are entitled to yours, but mine is based on experience like I said. Thats the problem with this board ! If you have an opinion or an experience there is always one azzhole that wants to jump in and say it wasn't true. I read a bunch of different forums and this forum gets bad press because of people like yourself. Yeah , this board is looked at like the communist board of forums. I laugh sometimes at the know it alls.

Here are some specs from the Kimber Catalog. The Classic Select 35 Whelen has a muzzle diameter of .64" as compared to .56" for all other cartridges from .223 to .338WM. So does that make it a #2 or #3 contour? Someone here can answer that. For a 24" barrel the Whelen is listed at 6# 2oz., similar to the 30-06/280AI/270Win.. The WSM's go to 6# 10oz with a 24" barrel. The 7mmRemMag, 300WM and 338WM weigh in at 7# 4oz, all with 26" barrels.

So the bottom line is that the Whelen weighs as much as a 30-06 - 6# 2oz. realizing that some variation will occur with wood densities.

So what would the recoil be in comparison between a 180gr. 30-06 (2750fps) and a 225gr in the Whelen (2500fps)? I'll go calculate it.

Ok back again. Using 7#'s as my rifle weight, the 30-06 load is 23.7 ft/lbs and the Whelen is 27.7 ft/lbs.. Just for comparison, a 150gr at 2800fps in a 270Win./7# rifle is 18.8 ft/lbs..
So fwiw, we knew it would be more, but that much noticeable?
Yeah, probably. But too much? Only you can decide. I can only surmise that the recoil of these larger bores is more of a big push than a sharper jab of the 300 style magnums.

It also comes down to if you can accept a wood stocked rifle with the conditions you hunt in. Again only you can decide.

I believe that most folks find that 2700 ft/sec with .225 gr bullets is standard fair with their Whelens.

My current Whelen with mounts and scope weights 7lbs -14ozs. Frankly, I really don�t enjoy extended range sessions with this rifle , so I am pretty sure this new Kimber would not be a great deal of fun for me either. CP.

Chris, the Kimber soaks up recoil in a remarkable way... at least for my build.

Its geometry is the key... I find I can shoot lighter rifles chambered for the same round more enjoyably with the Kimber stock than, say, a McMillan Featherweight or Hunter's Edge stocked M70 (both have more drop in the comb).

Personally I'd be all over a Montana 35 Whelen... would come in over 7lb's "all-up" weight.

For me, 250's at 2,600 - 2,650 is what the Whelen is all about.

Good Morning Brad.
I totally agree that stock geometry, fill and recoil pad can check an enormous amount of felt recoil. And-you have to be in the top quartile of Kimber shooters on the Fire, so I believe you.

From what I am reading here on the Fire, I also believe that Kimber has made some significant strides in QC with the introduction of the 84L. So much so, that I am now ready to try a Kimber in an 84L 06 Montana this year. CP.

Someone will assuredly have one "pretty soon" and we will hear all about it.

Any buddy heard/seen any of these yet? I wanna call Kimber and ask whats up with them!

Been a while since I had a Whelen, perhaps it's time. I have good luck with the few Kimbers I have owned.

That is definitely one way to look at it. And, that's exactly what I did with a .308 Kimber Classic that wouldn't shoot. A $500 Broughton 5C cured that problem and now I have a great rifle that I use a lot, a real keeper.

DF

Screw the .35 Whelen! What Kimber needs to kick out is a 1/8" Montana .22-250!

Good things are coming from Kimber (rifles) in the next few years. I'm fortunate to have some recent inside info that I won't detail and can assure you guys that they've taken steps (and will continue to) to significantly improve their rifle line. Small things in 2013, but more and more thereafter is the plan.

Lemme just say that, if things go as desired, I'll own a whooooole bunch of sweet-shooting Kimber rifles in highly interesting calibers by the end of the first Romney/Ryan term in 2016.

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!

With the newer available bullets, I'd take the .338-06 any day and every day.

Still not sure I'd play Kimber Roulette with either, though.

And, if Kimber is promising to deliver them by 2016, we'll have to wait until, say, 2018 to actually see them.

Now, about the Whelen?

Waders

Just wanted to comment on the great camo job! I have painted a few that I thought turned out nice but yours is more like ART!

Would pop a nut if they did a 350 mag on the Montana....

W

9.3

LOL..... Whatever they do, I hope they do them on Montana's. I know they are set on a barrel channel size, but if they find a light contour that would work for several different 338/358 type calibers they could produce them with only a single change to the stock.

I'd love to see a .358 Win on the 84M and a Whelen on the 84L. I think a 350 mag would have to go on the 8400(?).

......with a 20" barrel.

You aren't the only one to suggest such a critter.