Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Handled a kimber hunter

A local shop has a kimber hunter 308 on the shelf for $719. My initial thoughts are that I'm impressed. For a Tupperware stock it felt good and had a pretty stiff forend. The detachable mag seemed well executed for a detachable. However, it did look like the feed lips were part of the mag and not the rails of the action. I don't know that you could drop a hunter barreled action into a montana stock and have it work due to the feeding off the rails verses mag box but I'm not sure.

I still think the stock on the montana is worth the extra cash but if a guy has to stay in the $700 range I think the hunter may set the bar in that bracket. I was looking for a tikka T3 stainless in 6.5 swede but for the money I think I'd rather have a hunter in 6.5 creedmoor.

Has anyone else handled a hunter? What's your thoughts?

I'm still wishing I would have picked up a few more 2015 montanas when they were clearing out at $999. The montana stock and action are worth the $999 and then you can spend another $500-$600 to have it rebarreled to the cartridge and twist you want. I'm leaning hard towards rebarreling one of my 8400 montanas to 6.5 saum on an 8 twist Rock with a .298" neck .081" freebore reamer. Anyone have suck s reamer they'd rent?

Bb

I wasn't a fan. I didn't like the trigger guard that's molded into the stock and I thought the plastic detachable magazine was cheap but I didn't study it but a moment or two at the gun counter.

I think the one I looked at was $800 or more so I was comparing it to a $600 Tikka and for the money I'd either spend a little more for the Montana or a little less for the Tikka. Just my .02, different strokes for different folks

I'll take a little more time next time I check it out but at the MSRP of $885 I didn't feel it offered $250 or more in quality over the Tikkas which are tack drivers and I'd rather spend a little more for the Montana

To really be something, I think the Hunter is going to have to be down in the $600s range, to compete with a Tikka head-to-head.

To say the price difference between the 2 rifles is more than $100-125 is not comparing apples to apples. $720 and $620 are the best retail prices I've seen for the Hunter and T3x.

How are the dimensions of the stock compared to the montana? Is it as slim or chunkier?

You can buy Tikka T3's for under $500 at Whittakers right now

Here is a picture of that molded trigger guard on the Kimber hunter.

Not stainless.

Doesn't matter. You can't just compare the higher end Tikka to the bottom end Kimber. Tikkas at all price points just shoot.

Blued rifles shoot just as well as the stainless rifles. That's my point, at the price point Kimber is trying to tap into I feel there are too many other options that'll shoot just as well or better for significantly less money. The stock on the Kimber Montana makes it worth it to me, the stock on the Hunter was a letdown.

I'm a fan of Kimber rifles and own two Montanas and I was really excited to see the new Hunter model hit the racks. I just wasn't as impressed as I hoped to be.

Time will tell and maybe I'm wrong. There will always be those guys that didn't have the coin for the Montana that'll buy it over a Tikka just to say they have a Kimber

I haven't seen a Hunter yet, so I have no opinion either way on comparisons, but a rifle is a package, not just simply how well it shoots at a give price point. Otherwise people would buy nothing but Stevens. Ergos, feed/function, materials, etc all play a part, and if we're comparing rifles and their price points, they should share similar materials and construction. If the hunter is SS, then that adds value, and a Tikka needs to be SS as well to be comparable.

Well said!

I'm going to bring this back to the top....

I should have a Hunter in 6.5 Creed by the end of the week.

I really like the ergonomics of the whole rig - the detachable mag will work well for me and quad/truck usage.

This will be my drag it through the brush and icky weather rifle for deer, antelope and an occasional elk.

It'll wear a Leupold 2.5x8 with M1 ele, for sights.

I'm betting these will sell used for -$600 in a couple years because Kimber will tweak them next year to clean up the bottom of the mag box to color match and blend with the existing contour. Then they will put in an aluminum trigger guard.

I like the stocks color and the barreled action. Heck, I can even live with the injection molded stock but the magazine needs to look better and a molded in trigger guard for +$700 is wrong

Time will tell

I've been wanting a Kimber in 6.5 or .260 and thought the Hunter was a good bet. Looked one over a couple weeks ago and decided that I preferred the feel (balance, grip size) of my Montana stocks better. So I'll wait on the Kimber in 6.5. But the Hunter wasn't bad. Given a choice between a Hunter at say 6 bills, vs the Montana at twice that much I'd definitely give the Hunter a whirl.

Fondled a Creedmoor tonight and think it's fine all around. Although I'd prefer a standard metal setup, can't imagine that trigger guard breaking. The stock is slim and stiff. Would like it more at $650 than the $799 they were asking...

I also recently handled one of the new Kimber Hunters and it was a let-down, a rifle in this price range should never have a molded in trigger guard....it just aint right, it made the overall rifle reek of cheapness, all i could see was that ugly molded in trigger guard, the magazine didnt bother me at all, i actually like it better than any blind magazine rifle....If Kimber builds the Hunter rifle with an aluminum trigger guard I would consider one........Hb

I've handled a 6.5 a few times, 650-700.00 I might be tempted but HATE the molded trigger guard as well.

Think the one I've handled was around 800

Here you go

I get the strangest feeling that Fotis doesn't like Kimbers........

Still like to handle that Avatar!