|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,291 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,291 Likes: 2 |
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 Sorry Bill  Aside, you described above my go-to rifle and all the reasons I like it!
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 33,778 Likes: 9
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 33,778 Likes: 9 |
You threading 7/16 with a 5/8 adapter? 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. These work well on Kimber's. Inexpensive too. https://hughesprecision.com/product-category/thread-protectors/?filters=firearm-specific-protector%5Bkimber%5D
Conduct is the best proof of character.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,644 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,644 Likes: 2 |
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. 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. 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. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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. 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. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,291 Likes: 2
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,291 Likes: 2 |
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.
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
Before I respond, are we talking about the Howa?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,643
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,643 |
It's a great life if you don't weaken..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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 ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/ZU9F8sK.jpeg) Rifle with Hybrid 46 ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/hGxdfIN.jpeg) Rifle without Hybrid 46 ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/bePo7y6.jpeg) 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,643
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,643 |
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.
It's a great life if you don't weaken..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,141
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,141 |
5 killed one winter. Thanks. I'll bet they were all taller than you and forgot to duck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,229
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,229 |
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. 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. 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. 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?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,643
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,643 |
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. 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. 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. 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?
It's a great life if you don't weaken..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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. 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. 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. 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? 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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. 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.
Last edited by Keechi_Kid; 04/28/24.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,950 Likes: 21
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,950 Likes: 21 |
Never had a problem working Kimber OR Howa bolts. But I palm them, don't 'grab' them...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 500 Likes: 2 |
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,229
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,229 |
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. 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. 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. 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? 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. 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.
|
|
|
|
|
588 members (17CalFan, 1beaver_shooter, 16gage, 10gaugemag, 160user, 10ring1, 56 invisible),
2,927
guests, and
1,301
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,550
Posts18,510,262
Members74,002
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
