Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Kimber Ascent

I don't think that any of the 308, 270, 280AI or 30-06 can be termed "fussy" especially with todays bullets.

Pick one and go with it. There really is no wrong answer.

Most sane people take another throwing a rock at them as disrespectful... actually.

My Old man used a model 54 in 30-06 for everything including Mt.Goat and Dall Sheep in Alaska.He hauled a M1 Garand around for 4 years in all kinds of terrain and weather and figured just about anything was light weight after that.In the late 40s there was not any specialized equipment for hunting Mountains and Cold weather hunts.He had his Army Down sleeping bag and that was as high tech as he was.So what I am saying is 4 oz don`t mean chit.

I can understand folks being concerned about the 4 oz business.

In and of itself 4 oz's doesn't mean much, but if you ignore 4 oz's, 4 times, you now have a pound; and you sit there looking at the rifle on a scale saying..."Where'd that extra weight come from!!!".

In short,it's the cumulative effect of 4oz here and 4 oz there that makes an 8 pound rifle , a 7 pound rifle....and so it goes.As you juggle, you can lose or gain weight anywhere from the action, or barrel,or stock , or scope and mounts.

Working with standard stuff like M70's and Rem 700's you have to pay more attention....but to me Kimbers are built right and balanced about perfectly as they come...I don't really care too much for a rifle that is very heavily weighted forward.They handle like railroad ties..

Lose some body weight. Cheaper and easier to do. If you lost only 4 ozs you wouldnt even notice. Lose a couple of lbs and it can be a game changer on the ascents/descents. My experience is only in the WV 4500 footers.

My last comment as this topic spirals downward is that while its fun to talk about rifle options, what is key is the total weight on your back, not just the rifle.

Brad, did you take the leash off before or after you shot him?
All kidding aside. Nice Bull!

Doesn't everyone tether a ranch animal before they shoot it?

I principle I agree. However, I always carry my rifle in my hands and the difference between carrying my Montana all day vs. a typical 7.5lb rifle is significant to me. Ounces add up in that case, just like they add up in the pack for back country hunts.

The "lose body weight" argument is a non sequitur. I really have no weight to lose, yet I'll ruthlessly pare weight away anywhere and everywhere I can.

BUT, there are intelligent ounces to lose and unintelligent ounces... the latter ounces are those lost to a performance detriment.

Primary examples:

Packs with compromised suspensions... this is the latest fad, and generally a pretty bad one. A decent suspension requires some weight. The added comfort of an extra pound+ of suspension doesn't translate directly to fatigue being heavier. In fact, and more to the point, the better suspension offsets its extra weight by less fatigue due to superior comfort and better ability to carry weight.

Rifles... The entire discussion on this thread is not about heavy or even midweight rifles... it's about LIGHTWEIGHT rifles (sub 6.75lb all-up). To me, the Kimber Montana 308 is right at the ragged edge of too light, and losing a few more ounces off an already incredibly light rifle could be viewed as a fools errand. At the end of the day a rifle has to settle-down for the shot. Further lightening an already light rifle, and that at a substantial price, decreases its performance in my view.

So, long way to say, not all ounces are created equal... in some areas, added ounces can even be advantageous.

Could be, his post wasn't directed at you.

I didn't take it as directed at me. I just used the sentence as a jumping off point to bring up a larger issue.

Good Post, Brad.

Thanks Billy. I believe it to be true, at least in my experience.

A few ounces in the center of the rifles mass are not even the same as a few ounces at the end of the barrel for the purpose of steadying for a shot. Just like a long stabilizer on a bow.

To a point, I don't disagree... but you sound like a rabbi dissecting the Torah... I'm talking in general terms. Ounces in the center mass of a rifle still DO help settle it down and do translate in recoil absorbing mass.

If you truly believed the above, you would have opted for a 7-08 over your 338 Fed, as the 7-08 has several ounces more barrel weight... or better yet, even a 223!

Blasphemy!!

(My Montana did start out life as a 7-08. It's better now!)

Old Grouse hunters have an often repeated line. "Legs kill more Grouse than any particular shotgun." I expect it also applies to mountain hunts for BG.

Spoken like a real Rabbi

Kidding aside, the 338 Fed is a great round, and I had no idea yours started as a 7-08!

im a big Kimber fan though i dont mountain hunt, knees cant handle that county though ild love too.....im a fan of the Kimber cause i like having the rifle off my shoulder and in my hands inthe broken country i hunt in the east end of the Breaks.....extra pound of weight in a pack and most of us wouldnt notice(hard core back pack hunters aside), extra pound on slung on the shoulder and we would all notice but for the most part wouldnt slow any of us down.....extra pound in the hand means a hell of alot and everyone notices....

but as Brad said take the weight off in the wrong place on the rifle and it does more harm than good....prolly why i love my Montana in 260 so much, has a lil more meat in the barrel than the 308 to put the balance just a bit farther forward....