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

ive got a Montana in 260.....love it so much that i kinda lost interest in looking for most hunting rifles(still want a drilling or a cape gun though).....ive got bad knees and every pound i dont have to carry is a good thing.....seems to like to put the first two shots out of a cold bore into damn near the same hole and opens up to about an inch at 100 for 5 shots....wouldnt sell it for anything.....i put a Leupold 6x36 on it and it is still lighter than my daughters Rem 7 Youth before you put mounts and a scope on it.....

I'm a Model 70 guy through and through. But if I had to start over from scratch, I'd buy a Classic in 308 and not look back.


Okie John

I sure like my .325. From the choices you mention, FMP, I'd go 300 WSM.

A nice light scope in Talley LW's, a quick trigger adjustment, and you have a heckuva package.

Currently messing with a Swarovski scope on mine, but a Leup 2.5-8 sure didn't suck in '08:

If you get a Kimber that shoots great and feeds great, they are simply hard to beat. This is how I see the Kimber, you get a lightweight rifle with a kick azz non tupperware stock. The $1000 or so cost would easily be exceeded with most any other lightweight barrelled action combined with say a McMillan Edge. Thats the part that some guys dont understand, you cant compare a Sako A7 ot a Tikka T3 (both which weigh near the same weight as the Montana), simply because the stock on either would be considered junk compared to the Kimber stock. No to say that a guy cant be happy with an A7 or a T3, just that its not apples and apples.A couple of my favorite Kimber photos







From where the shot was made






Here is the Kimber posing with som Blacktails on Kodiak Island

Fantastic photos. Thanks for posting them.

I opened this thread thinking "here we go again", but it was nice to see civil discourse on the Kimbers...

As for me, I went the "one Classic, one Montana" route but in two different calibers: the Bob and also 7WSM. I guess I could have just stopped after the 7WSM but the Bob holds some type of fascination for me for some reason...

Anyway, after buying those, I'm set. But like a loonie I picked up a pre64 Bob, with no real need for it - anybody need one???

Good choice on the muzzle tape color, AlaskaCub <grin>...

your askin for it now

They're worth every penny. Even the ones that don't shoot sub moa.

Thanks for everyones help. I am leaning toward the .300wsm Montana.

Good choice. If I were you I would hit the Classifieds and pick up the one listed there if it's still available. Please, do it quick as my temptation is starting to get the best of me.

George

I'd say yes they are worth the money.

I went to order a Classic in 260. Dealer calls and says no more 260's. So I ordered a 257 Classic Select. While waiting I come across a Classic, slightly used, in 260. Then I decided the 257 CS is too pretty to take out in bad weather so now I also own a 257 Montana. So now I've got a 260 and two in 257. All shoot good, feed perfect, have great triggers, etc.
Out of the three of them I'm liking the Montana the best.

I guess I won the "Kimber Roulette" game.

Montana in .325 is my go to rifle, Steyr Mod. M is in retirement.
300 WSM would be a good choice.

I was a Montana fan until I played with the new Winchester Extreme Weather - I see one in my future!

Lots of folks say the Kimber stock is what makes the rifle. I guess I don't get it - if the A7 is guaranteed to shoot a five shot group MOA or less than clearly the stock on the A7 is not a problem. If the stocks on the Kimbers are so much better, and I am not sure why everyone seems to think they are, then why can't Kimber guarantee a five shot MOA group out of the box? I don't have anything against Kimber, I just don't see how there is an advantage to their stocks if the "cheaper" stocks are good enough to guarantee an accuracy level that Kimber doesn't.

Montana is a good rifle. Personally, give me a SS 700 with an Edge. I've got 1 Montana, and it'll probably be the only one I'll ever get.

They are well worth the coin$ now IMO, as it does seem like Kimber have ironed out all their bugs.
Now it's just a waiting game on a freshly made 84 . Going to be one sweet trim little rig.

The accuracy of the A7 (or the T3 or a Finnlight, for that matter) and how it relates to the stock isn't the issue. For many of us, the feel of the stock is the issue. The synthetic stocked Sakos shoot great, but feel like crap. I wouldn't want one without a stock replacement, and then they don't seem like such a good deal.

Frito,

To me it's just the opposite. I love the feel of the A7 stock. The rifle balances well and it just feels good to me. The Kimber stock on the other hand is the worst feeling stock I ever put to my shoulder. It just doesn't fit. The only Kimber I ever owned I sold without ever shooting it because it felt so crappy to me and I knew I could never love it. I bought it from someone off the fire used and so I didn't have a chance to feel it before I bought it. I showed it to my brother and he shouldered it and said "oh, that feels like chit".

I don't see anybody putting new synthetic stocks on their A7's and haven't heard a singe report of them not shooting well. Can't say that about Kimbers and of course you also have to worry about feeding issues with them as well. For half the price, I'd say the A7 is by far the better deal - at least you know it will shoot and even if you wanted to add a different stock to it you would still have less $ into the investment than a Kimber that may or may not shoot and may or may not feed properly.

You dont seem get it,rifles with quality stocks like the one on the Kimber,McMillans and others compared to the A7 or any other factory tupperware stock is not really a fair comparison. They are not the same creature, one is tupperware plastic (A7) and the others are fiberglass, or some composite fiber other than plastic. Its just a personal feel thing for guys that prefer to stock their rifles with quality stocks. My first Kimber was the deal breaker for me, I fell in love with the way that stock felt, how it didn't have the hollow plasticy noise to it when you bumped something, and the texture feel to it. I bought 5 McMillans after I bought my Kimber.All I had ever owned was tupperware plastic stocks. It is just preference thing, a good shooting gun is a good shooting gun, but having one that feels good, is made of quality materials and also shoots good, well thats the best of both worlds.