Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Kimber Montana- Worth the money?

Kimbers are definitely worth it, but you pick your own caliber. For me in West Texas, it is a 257 Roberts for everything from prairie dogs to coyotes to whitetail. First 3-shot group with mine was less than 1/4" and I've never punched paper with it after that. But it has killed many animals without a single hitch.

And how does the weight compare to the Sako A7? That was my other choice, before seeing all these new kimbers.

FMP

Call me cheap and optimistic, but a $750.00 Montana in any flavor wouldn't scare me away if I were in the market.

Touche! grins

the Montana 84M is 5 pounds and some ounces in 308. The stock is better on the Kimber than the Sako. I have 3 Kimbers, two wood guns in 300WSM and 257 and one 308 in Montana. They all shoot as good as I can. I now really like the 257Roberts for WT deer. I am now thinking of a Montana in .223.

Are they worth the money?

I'd like to have one so I could find out.

Dober about has me convinced they are good rifles, but I kinda knew they were all along.

JM

John you are a scholar and a gentleman...I am still laughing!

jimmy,

I am the most hated man here with the exception of Jeff O. So let's make sure he sticks around.

In Mississippi, that merely means he passed third grade and can count to ten... if he uses his toes.

if you are in Kentucky, you can count to ten using one foot. LMAO.

They do have some excellent banjo players though...

I'd think long and hard about the A7. Lots less roulette going on with them it seems. They are very smooth and come up to the shoulder well.

It's worse. I'm in California. We can only count to ten in rare moments of lucidity.

I think dober posted once a Montana in 300 wsm is a touch heavier then an a7 300wsm.

I am looking for the lightest handiest rifle out for around a grand.

For 750 bones I'd buy it and if it gave me issues I'd rebarrel it with a 4 weight Schneider cut to 23".

Dober

I have a good shooting 84M Montana in 7-08. There is not another mass produced rifle on the planet I would trade it for. Not one.

Is it worth the money? For me it is, but I didn't really ~spend~ a dime on mine. I had the infamous coffee can savings account going and in the 3 years it took me to decide on the cartridge I had the $1200 price saved up. :p

For a young guy starting out I'd say buy two Kimbers: one nice weather classic and one bad weather montana. Choose both in all around cartridges and make one in 84M and the other in 84L. Top them with good glass and then never spend another dime on rifles. Ever.

Will

don't they use polygonal rifling? I have heard of them but know nothing about them.

I think they are.

I bought one in .308 last fall. It does not shoot as well as some I hear about but it's more than ok. I've shot the hell out of it seeking accuracy. It's good at 200 I haven't had a calm day to try it at 300 yet. I don't believe, with the load it likes for accuracy, it has the velocity remaining at 400 yards to expand my bullet reliably.

I've never shot a moose, but if I were serious about a moose and really thinking 300 yards was possible, I'd skip the .308 family, 84M, and go to the 8400M in a WSM.

If I were to go buy a Kimber montana 8400 in a WSM as a general purpose hunting rifle, I would go with the .325 WSM, not the .300.

Boy, at the same time, I know a couple people who have had Kimbers that did not shoot worth a crap and Kimber didn't want to stand behind their product too badly, so while a good idea they are a little bit of a gamble. I can't suggest anything better, though. I've had real problems with Remington lately, Ruger before that .. long runs of good guns, then all of the sudden it seems like the whole brand goes sour.

Tom

Will -

That's good advice I think. If I went home and found my safe empty, I'd grab an 84M in ... not sure if it'd be .257 Roberts or 7mm-08 ... and an 8400M in probably .325. Done.

I wonder, if I post my address and hours when I'm not home, whether someone would help me get that insurance claim started? (No, I wouldn't really do that. But I'd think about it.)

Tom

Its the light weight and good shooting Kimber 84M Montana's that have won my heart. I have them both in 243 and 308 and I go to them for varmints or game more than the heavier guns now.

I used to say that the 84L should have come out first however I don't want a 24" barrel all that much.

Monday I shot the 243 Montana at the range to check its zero. It put two shots into an inch at 200 yds right on. No adjustments needed and staying sighted in with a cold fouled barrel is most important. Its the first shot that counts and a 1" group at 200 yds is outstanding.

I have other guns including 270 WSM Montana. If the ranges were really long I might carry it but the 84M's have won me over. Thats what I would get first.

You already have heavier guns and so do I. The 84M Montana is a landmark rifle.

Maybe one of the .338 fed would be the ticket!

..or a .308.

Tough choice..