The new-ish Kimber Hunter seems to get no love from anyone.
I wonder why that is?
Sure, you don't get the ultra cool Costa Rican stock the Montana's get.
One of the most frequent objections is the integrally molded trigger guard.
Any injection molded stock is not going to be as strong or as light/rigid as a laid up stock, I get that.

The reason I'm asking is my local gun store that normally doesn't have the best prices on stuff, has Hunters for sale for $699.
Their Ruger M77's are priced at $910.
Remington 700's $880+
Winchester M70's $930+
Tikka's $700+

Can someone tell me why a Kimber Hunter isn't a better deal than the big 4?

I get that some people don't want to chance the mysterious Kimber Roulette, but my experiences with 4 Kimbers, a 2005 vintage 300 WSM Montana, 2005 300 WSM Classic, 2014 270 Classic Select and a 2104 7-08 Montana, I haven't seen any that I thought were "bad".
The worst of the bunch accuracy wise was the 300 WSM Classic.
Never could get better than 1 1/4"@100yds.
The rest will all do 1" or better with most loads, and the 7-08 will shoot just about anything under 1".

I don't love the stock, I would buy one though to drop into a lighter-than-Montana custom stock for a featherweight project gun. check out this post on another forum from a guy who is also on this forum (can't remember his handle) who dropped his in an MPI microlight stock:

http://www.rokslide.com/uberlight-kimber-rifle-build/

As for the comparison to the other 4, for the money, Tikka's have a better reputation for accuracy (I wouldn't know) but Ruger guys love theirs, but I have seen alot of them not shoot, and the last one I had wouldn't feed. the Remington you couldn't pay me $800 to own. and the Winchesters are good guns, but I haven't handled any of the new production rifles, just the FN ones. I'm a kimber fanboy, but I'd try to work their price down on a montana before buying a hunter as a complete rifle.

If I had money and time for another project Id take the hunter for the barreled action knowing I was going to drop another grand into it for a different stock.

For a beater/ loaner rifle, I'd probably get the Tikka or a Ruger American Rifle, or one of the Winchester XPR's CDNN had them for $199 last week... but I have too many guns already...

I purchased a Hunter and have a love hate relationship with it. I love how light it is and svelte it feels but hate that I can't get it to shoot better than 2 inches. A few months after I purchased the same caliber in a Tikka super light and it shoots great although slightly heavier and the stock seems a bit thicker and over all length is a little longer. If I had to do it all over I probably would have just purchased the Tikka. But since I still kind of love the Hunter I have her up on blocks right now to bed the recoil lug. Hoping this helps a little.

As far as the stock I don't care about the trigger guard. Sure it is different but not bad.

Oh yeah and there was a post on the same forum mentioned above about the Hunter stock being filled with a gel type silicone material. Guy removed about 5 oz of it from the butt so almost in the same ball park as a Montana.

If those were your only choices in the world,then I would say the Kimber might be the best choice. There's a whole world full of choices outside that local shop though. I've recently seen wood stocked Kimbers less than $750 and Tikkas for less than $500. You might even find a used Montana $750-$800.

It's not that I think the Kimber Hunter is a horrible rifle.I just think they took away most of the attraction and value for me when they took away they Kevlar stock. Now it's not lighter than other similar priced rifles with an even better reputation for accuracy,like the Tikka Superlight at Sportsman's Warehouse priced at $649. Personally,I think that's a better choice if you can find a Sportsman's Warehouse close to between here and there.

You buy a Kimber because you really want or need a super light rifle. Even the Montana is a bargain for a 5 lb rifle. The Hunter is a bargain if you want or need a 5.3 lb rifle. You are paying a premium in either one for weight reduction. No one ever claimed they were the best built, or accurate.

I have a Montana in 308. It is accurate enough, but I shoot my standard weight rifles a little better. That ain't on the rifle, it is fine, that is simply me. I'd seriously consider the Hunter if I needed another super light rifle. It is only about 5 oz heavier, but several hundred cheaper.

Most of the other rifles on your list are all standard weight rifles about 2 lbs or more heavier and do not belong in the same conversation as Kimber. The Tikka is still a standard size rifle,that splits the difference in weight. About 1 lb lighter than the others,and about 1 lb heavier than Kimber. And that ain't a bad place to be. Tikka is probably the most rifle for the money unless you really need that one pound less weight.

I agree with your reasoning but the Tikka Superlight may be closer in weight than you think. I didn't take a lot of time looking for exact ounces but a quick search says 5.2 lbs for the Tikka Superlight in standard calibers and 5.5 lbs for the Kimber hunter. It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has both and an accurate scale ,factory weight statements being what they are.

JMR40 makes some good points.

I bought a Kimber Hunter for Mrs. Tide back in the summer. It is of course, chambered for the 6.5 Creedmoor. So far, I happened to have a recipe for Sierra 120 grain ProHunters that shoots lights out. It also seems to like the Hornady Precision Hunter with the 143 ELD-X. It shoots under an inch with the inexpensive Winchester 125 grain Whitetail XP. She shot one deer with the Winchester load this fall, and I took one with the ELD-X load. Both worked just fine.

The rifle is light. Just a joy to carry in the woods. The recoil is extremely comfortable, especially considering the weight of the rifle. If I thought I could buy another one, just like it, but chambered for 7mm/08, and it would shoot like the Creedmoor does, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. I know my luck though. I'm just happy with the way this one worked out.

Well, I got one of the Superlight Tikka's too. Mine is a 260 and it shoots very good too. I don't have a scale to put them both on, but the Tikka is a fuzz heavier than the Kimber. Also, the Kimber has much slimmer proportions. Both are very comfortable in the hand, and both shoot better than average.

Buy a Tikka

People compare the Hunter to the Montana. The Montana has become a benchmark among lightweight factory rifles like the Model 70 FWT was 40 years ago, and when you look at what you actually get in a Montana, it's an outstanding deal. You may have to fiddle with it to make it shoot exceptional groups, but it's easy to carry and it will flatten big animals with ease all day long. The farther the Hunter moves from that standard, the more people are going to slag it.

Your LGS is charging unrealistic prices. Gunwatcher.com, gunsinternational.com, and gunbroker.com can provide a more realistic view of the market.


Okie John

Those aren't the only choices, in fact this shop sells a number of other brands.
Those were just examples that were in the price range, that a typical hunter person around here would be likely to be shopping for.

The reason I'm asking, is that friends and acquaintances always ask my advice about which brand/model/caliber should they buy for their uses.
Price is either the first or second on the list.
I've been satisfied with the Kimbers I own, and was surprised the Hunter model was less than the older, more popular brands.
Given the fact the Hunter is a Montana in ugly clothes, it seems a darn good deal.

My scale which is calibrated.

Kimber Hunter 7-08 5.48 pounds
Tikka Super Light T3x 7-08 5.97 pounds

So ball park the difference at 8 oz.

I got a Kimber hunter this past fall in 257 Roberts. I cut the barrel to 20 inches and put a small scope on it. The total package weight is 6 pounds 4 oz. I have other rifles with molded stocks but this one is much stiffer. I have resorted to carbon fiber shafts and other tricks to stiffen the forearm on others but it was not needed in this Kimber. As long as i do my part, it shoots factory and hand loads into about an inch for three shots. In my opinion it is a great tree stand gun and very easy to carry. I may not be like most people but I sometimes wonder why I bought the other Kimbers, Rugers Sakos etc. Is it less gun? Maybe. It does what I want and costs less and weighs less doing it. Nothing wrong with mine.

My son just bought a Hunter and I like it more than I expected. Don't need one, but might buy one some day just for the heck of it and the light weight. Tikkas are fine, but don't appeal to my sense of style.

His Hunter shoots fine, but like most lightweights, is tricky off the bench.

Appreciate that.

CHeap plastic stock, built in trigger guard, detachable magazine.

I absolutely love my Montana and my Mountain Ascent, Ive also had a few other kimbers over the years and never got one that wouldnt shoot, I never even bothered to do the montana tinkering thing with them, I just cont see the need to buy a low end kimber, it would fill no role for me. If I wanted a rifle in that price range, Id get a Tikka, if I just needed a cheap rifle as a loaner, Id get a ruger american.

I'd take a Tikka over that thing all day long.....

CHeap plastic stock, built in trigger guard.

Only Tikka I've owned was a 595 in 30awesome6. If I had the choices you mentioned, Tikka or Rem 700 with a new trigger, new stock, new barrel, bolt worked over........ If I was self loathing I'd buy the Ruger American then pay some Thai hooker to beat me in the balls for an hour.

A guy like you Jack, I’d have figured there’d be people lined up around the block to do it for free.

I think I'll look around for a 700 ADL Stainless Youth model. Cheap stock, yeah. But the rifle as a whole looks about as good as anything else wearing tupperware. Handy dimensions and not too heavy.

That hurts.... Trystan's gone for 3 days and you start being mean to me😁

I bought a youth model 700 sps and stuck it in an edge I bought on here for $450 added a timney for $100 and my son has a dandy little 7-08 for under a grand. I bought two stainless 700's in .243 last year at dicks for $399 ea. Hard to beat a stainless 700 for that price.

Who’s Trystan?

Just so there’s no confusion, that was a rhetorical question.

Right. A stainless youth ADL seems to be non-existant.
I don't love a 24" tube, but I got a hacksaw and a bunch of files. A regular stainless ADL with 2 or 3 inches lopped off could be just the ticket.
Aftermarket parts abound.

There was a dandy 20" 7-08 that just slipped through the classifieds...

I guess I was a day late. Ha!

I'll start looking more seriously in a few weeks when I get a bit more spare time.

You're on the right track in my opinion.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...millan-700-sa-campfire-camo#Post12516786

I like the Hunter, but like the Montana better.

Rifles, like cars, have to fit the needs of the individual user.

The Kimber Hunter is a lot tool for the money......
Stainless steel, slender light weight plastic stock, removable magazine, three position safety, excellent adjustable trigger. In all, a very nice go anywhere package.

Mine is a 6.5 CM. I needed this rifle about as bad as I needed a three legged house cat. But - I was sold right away on its features, light weight and egos. It fits me to a tee.
I tossed a well seasoned Leopold 2.5x8 on deck and bought a couple of different factory loads for it.

Hornaday Whitetail 129’s and Federal Fusion 140’s.
The rifle puts three in a row at an inch or less, day in and out.
The plain Jane stock took a quick coat of web spray paint and looks pretty sharp.

That stock is a perfect blank canvas for custom painting.
It s the perfect rig for tossing on the quad, the back of a side by side or my pickup.
The loaded magazine slips into a pocket.

The trigger guard...? Seriously? It’s an F’n trigger guard guys....... mine took a shot of web paint. Done.
I’ve had it for two seasons now. A WY antelope, two blacktail bucks (129’s) and four Roosevelt cow elk ( 140’s) have fallen to it now. My hunting companion used it for two of those cows. I kicked a big blacktail 4 pt out of a willow patch and shot him 3 times. All the rest took a single bullet apiece.

If it doesn’t work for you, don’t buy it....move on, nothing to see here.
The Tika is a fine rifle, too.
My pal accidentally ejected the magazine from his, broke it and instantly became the proud owner of a single shot....

BT53

Feeds like schitt with a full (3 rounds) magazine.

This........Hb

Bought a 308 when they first came out. Have no problem with it. The color will be changed once it gets some miles on it. May even bed it.

Like previous posts mention, the problem with the Hunter is that the Montana is only a few bills more if one shops around a bit. That makes the Montana a much better value.

For those that compare the tikka to these Kimbers, it's like comparing a hot blonde, to a fat chick. They can accomplish the same result(most of the time)but the blonde is worth the extra bit of money. Only fools will argue otherwise.

I was iffy on the trigger guard until I saw one. Ain't real pretty, but it looks very sturdy and unlikely to break. The mag is unobtrusive and works well, and isn't likely to fall out by accident. Everything else is pretty much Montana. $300 IS a big deal to some folks, and can go towards a better scope for others.

How's the Kimber worth "more" than a Tikka?

Because the quality of a tikka is comparable to a savage axis, not a Kimber.

I don't know if I would say that about the Tikkas.
They seem to be well put together, and nobody disses them because they are inaccurate.
As a matter of fact, pretty much everyone that has one says it's the most accurate factory rifle they own.

This inquiry was mostly for experiences of those who own them and how satisfied they are with them.
It's for recommendations for folks that aren't rifle looneys that are looking for a lightweight hunting rifle that could really use the difference in Montana to Hunter price to put a better scope on it.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Well, yeah.
Folks ask me if I'll sell one of my Montanas, I tell them they need to buy their own.
Most of these folks have no idea how to go about buying a used Montana off the internet, so they buy new.

My hunting would not change one bit if all I had was a hunter. I have an itch for a 308 and the hunter might get the nod .

Not a chance.

Nope. Not even a little chance.

Still can't figure out why they didn't do a blind mag and aluminum TG, it's not like they didn't have the parts laying around.

Why don`t you give this one a spin!
https://www.cdnnsports.com/savage-16-fcss-weather-warrior-300wsm.html?___SID=U#.Wk1Fqt9KvIU

If you say so...
The sad thing is, most savage axis will outshoot most tikkas, at almost half the price. Sure, tikkas shoot decent, but it's basically a Walmart shoppers dream gun.

I get the cost issue, but around here the cost of fuel for most hunters in a season, dwarfs any price difference between any of the guns mentioned.

I think that the Hunter is a good value for what it is particularly considering that it's a technically more difficult rifle to make compared to many other bolt actions and has a quality action, barrel, bolt and trigger coupled with a stainless steel magazine tube and one of the best magazine releases in the industry. Tikka has an advantage over Kimber with factory ammunition given the heavier barrel and increased rigidity of the receiver, but for the handloader that advantage goes away completely so it comes down to aesthetics, weight, function and cost. I'd rather own, carry, shoot and hunt with a rifle that has character and shoots well and so that's why I own four Kimber rifles and why I bought my gf an 84M Montana last year that shoots factory Hornady 150gr SST into sub .75 moa 5-shot groups. I've shot and handled Tikka rifles and I can't fault anyone for choosing them but they do nothing for me that a Kimber won't do as well or better and with way more style. It's not that I don't like Tikka rifles, it's just that I don't need them. If Kimbers didn't work so well for me I would probably look more closely at Tikka.

The first 84M Hunter rifles shipped with magazines that were tight with three in the box, but for close to a year now the magazines have more internal height so that's no longer an issue. The 84L magazines have never been a problem.

Most Savage Axis will outshoot most Tikkas?

Boy am I glad I didn't make that claim!


I was back at the store buying a set of Burris Signature rings in 30mm for my American Predator 6.5 Shootmoor.
My new SWFA 3-9 MQ has found it's mate.
They had 7 Tikkas, a couple of T3's and the rest T3x. All of them have great triggers. Feel good.
Maybe I'll buy one, who knows it might be better than a Savage Axis.

What is wrong with it?

It’s a #£%¥*&$ Kimber.

That was easy.

IME, yes. Like stated above, tikkas are more for the non-reloading crowd. They shoot well with factory ammo, much better than Kimbers. As soon as you start developing loads though, the Kimbers and savages shine. The tikkas I shot and developed loads for still shot about 3/4-1MOA.

If I had to use a Savage Axis I'd stay home with the wife and bake Christmas cookies during deer season.
Life's to short to shoot [bleep] rifles, accurate or otherwise.

Maybe that's a reflection of your reloading skills?

Funny stuff. Exactly how many Tikka’s have you loaded for? Savage? Kimber?

2 tikkas, 5 axis, 12 SA Montanas....

I really don't care what the haters say, if one wants a tikka, more power to them. Just don't make up [bleep] trying to justify that they are a high quality rifle.

Zero of my buddies that are into reloading, own tikkas. They laugh when they hear this same [bleep] spewed from local tikka owners.




So I was just accidentally good at reloading for the other rifles, just not the tikkas? Thinking before posting would do you some good.

You must be drunk. An axis is just as quality as a tikka.

I must have ruffled some feathers of the tikkatard crowd...

I realize you sell tikkas, and your bias is evident. Cash always beats reality, awesome.

Why bother handloading for a $249 rifle? Load workup could wind up costing more than your initial nvestment

I was guessing you were a dick, but that comment proves it.

You also realize I sell Kimber, Savage and about every other brand under the sun. I’m assuming you know the Kimber Montana is my favorite rifle platform of all time. I’ve only owned 30 or so. I’m also a Tikka, Ruger, Winchester, Barrett, and Remington (just speaking of bolt guns) fan. I also like a few Savage platforms.

I’ve handloaded for all and I’ve been through triple digits in rifles. Even though the Kimber is my favorite, they won’t hang with a Tikka out of the box....handloads or factory ammo. You may find a load or two that really shine out of a factory Kimber, but they won’t perform as well as the Tikka “across the board”.

Actually, Savage barrels are rough and the throats aren’t cut to perfection, but that’s another conversation. Some still shoot well though. I’d take a new production Ruger barrel over a Savage barrel any day of the week.

And I know Savage and Tikka throats are both long. The Savage throats just aren’t as forgiving with bullets having different ogives.

My experience may be limited compared to some, but it’s a pretty darn big sample size that lead me to those conclusions.

Kiss my axis.....

Dubs on a Chevette....

They just don't really trip my trigger, so to speak. For that money I'd buy a Tikka SL (which I own) or find a gently used Howa Alpine.

I can understand buying an Axis if you just want something to shoot. But I just don't love the way they look. And I hear you got to clean the barrel quite often.

I've thought about it a few times, and it looks fun enough on the youtube videos. But then I take a look at the rifle again and I start backtracking.
The Tikkas aint beauty queens. But they're a much better looking rifle than the Axis. And I hate to say it, but I'm shallow that way when it comes to picking out guns.

I mean I'm a guy who would rather have this 380

than this .40

just because I think it looks better.
And I'd probably pay two or three times the price for it and be happy that I did.

But I don't know if I have good taste or not, because I think this looks good

And it's a kids gun? I think it weighs about 6 pounds without scope.
https://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/gen-x-deer-rig/

I just read 4 pages of banter, but no one really answered the question I was hoping to see answered......

I've read countless threads about Kimber Roulette, and I was hoping to see something on here that clarified why Kimbers are plagued with inconsistent accuracy (ie..... as compared to other, traditionally accurate brands (Kimber, Savage)).

My dad bought a Hunter in .308, and reports poor accuracy from it. I havent had a chance to shoot it to see how bad it is thus far. I guess it's worth noting that his OLD elk rifle was a Tikka .270 that is quite accurate.

has anyone identified a common thread in the Kimber inaccuracy issue? ie poor bedding, poor muzzle, crappy barrel ID?

This forum is like catnip for militant window lickers... I love the idea that there is a town full of Salvage Axis aficionados out there looking down their noses at Tikka shooters for foolishly spending over $199.99 on a rifle when they could have had the unquestionably superior Axis instead.

As for the OP's question, I'm not sure why the Hunter isn't more popular. I have a hunter stock for my Montana, and honestly the rifle shot better in the
Hunter stock than the Montana stock until I bedded the Montana... Then they shot about the same. I will say that I don't really have any problem with the hunters stock, it's stiff, and for the price the integral trigger guard doesn't really bother me. I'm probably going to go with a Tikka (my fifth) for my next rifle, mostly because the Tikka barrels have more meat, and this rifle will be a dedicated light-ish suppressed hunting rig. If I the Kimber barrels had enough diameter that I could get a 5/8" or even 9/16 thread without going super short, they'd be in the running.

If the Kimber Hunter isn't selling well, I'd think it's because it has a cheap rifle look at a nice rifle price.

The guys wanting a cheap, entry level gun will buy a Ruger American for half the price.

The guys wanting a quality rifle don't mind spending a bit more to attain the Montana stock. Alternately they're looking for really great accuracy and will go a different route.

RAR's are the best of the cheap IMO. Got nothing against Montana's but if I'm going Tupperware / DBM and $700 it ain't going to be a Faux-tana. Can't take a $300 rifle seriously either. The way I see it, the only loss in Tupperware is how they handle recoil. Shot an 8lb M70 in Tupperware side by side with a Montana in 270 with the same ammo and difference was clear. Accuracy wise, the M70 spanked it 6 ways to Sunday.

Hard to justify a $500 stock anymore. Then again, it's hard for me to justify most of this schit anymore....

I think it's just the idiot behind the gun. All 12 of my Montana's that varied from 2005 to 2015 year of manufacture shot at least an inch or better with handloads. Some of the older ones were more picky with what they shot well though. Also, if you don't hold the forearm down when shooting, there is no hope for good groups.

As for factory loads in a Montana, they suck. Expect 1.5" or bigger groups.

I can agree that the Montana's can't hang with a tikka with factory ammo, but a few of mine would blow the tikkas out of the water with handloads. A 1MOA rifle isn't all that accurate in this day and age, even though some here ooh and ahh over them.

Anyway, like I said, I don't care if people buy tikkas, savages or any of the cheap recycled milk jug stocked guns. It's just sad that they have to come here and slam better value guns, to justify their purchase.

I have two Tikka Stainless Ultralights,the the T3 model with the fluted barrels,a 30-06 and a 270. They are great rifles that will shoot moa or better with their prefered factory ammo.

I have a Kimber Hunter in 6.5 Creedmoor that will do the same thing. I bought some Kimbers with issues in the early years of production,but the last two that I bought have been fine rifles in every respect.

I would be surprised if a guy got a bad rifle today from either company.

Tikka's don't benefit from handloading, but Fauxtanas do....

qwk - Pretty strong comment to make an assumption about a person behind a gun. Also pretty nice regurgitation of SAS's comments above about factory load accuracy in Kimbers. Again pretty interesting that of the 12 Montanas you've owned over the last 10 years none were of the caliber you recently learned about. You should do more reading and little less spewing about...your inexperience is leaking out of you. For any in the know can see that the majority of your comments are a reflection of yourself.

Tell us, just how hard should one hold down that forearm on said lightweight rifle...is it until the barrel is full length bedded?

Your Tikka comments let us all know you either:

1. Have never set behind one
2. Never have owned one
3. Quality Control of you reloading is non-existent

I'm betting it's all three.

Educate us about how Sako barrels, smooth actions, and crisp triggers compare to the entry level "Walmart" offerings you mention.

Where is Stick when you need him...hahahaha

Quite the opposite. The Kimber Hunter 84M and 84L rifles are selling very well and there are a number of new Hunter variations coming out this year with dipped stocks, Kimpro over stainless and even one with a muzzle brake. If I were considering a new hunting rifle I'd buy a Hunter with a dipped stock, black Kimpro over stainless and no muzzle threads and think about switching out the stock for an MPI after a season or two since I like CF stocks and don't see any advantage having a detachable magazine given where and how I hunt. Currently, the Hunter stock has more barrel channel clearance than the Montana and will bed in a little after 15 to 20 rounds so it's a good idea to loosen and torque the action screws after the first box of ammo. Kimber barrels have been outstanding for the last 3-1/2 years and are now among the best factory production barrels in the industry.

I've made some improvements to my Kimber rifles and my gf's Kimber in part because I like to tinker. They all shot very well before and better after. I've not had to touch the magazine well on any since they've all been free floating from the factory and haven't needed to bed any of them to get consistent 5-shot sub moa performance. I find the idea of bedding the recoil lug to be interesting but they all shoot so well that the reward might not be worth the risk. I've added spring stops and inletted the barrel channel a little but that's about it. I even converted a 300 WSM Montana to .308 Win which turned out very well.



Perhaps he was paraphrasing me since I made that point earlier in the thread.

Sounds like a loose screw on the trigger to me...

Let me count the kimbers I have owned...

.223
.308 x3
257 Roberts
6.5 creedmoor
338 federal————this one had chunks missing out of the stock and blue green algae in the action/chamber/barrel when it got to me
300 WSM
30-06———-gonna rebore to 35 Whelen, this one was super screwed up when it got to me.

Most them bought used, several at too good to be true prices cause the previous owner couldn’t shoot them.

All have gone better than 1” groups (5 shots as fast as I can run the bolt, I have no use for benchrest techniques/timing on hunting rifles) with factory fodder. Some factory ammo was worse, but with a gun that light and a tube that thin, you have to expect it to not like something...

I have a press and dies for most of these rifles, when I find a reason to reload for them I will. In the meantime Barnes VOR-tx ammo with TTSX bullets is my go-to on most of these guns.

This thread is about the Hunter but my gf's 84M Montana .308 Win (Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40mm RZ600) with the older 1:12 twist seems to like Hornady Superperformance 150gr SST. I shot this group in early November when it was 30F outside. Her rifle does even better with handloads.

Handloading 101:

Shoot several groups with factory CorLokts (Load A)
Measure
Work up your Deer killing ammo (Load B)
Shoot more groups

If load B isn't at least 1/2 the size of load A, throw your schit away...

Wtf are you talking about? Are you still bitter about being too f-n stupid or shady to take detailed pics of your top dollar gun?

Can you please explain to me how my shat loading technique yields consistent 1/4 inch groups with other rifles? Luck?
Holding the forearm consistently is what you are after. The pencil barrels are whippy. Common sense.

BTW, I wouldn't ever own a tikka, because learned long ago that you get what you pay for. Milk jug stocks aren't my cup of tea.

You can't fix stupid....

But I thought Kimber Hunters were your glass of milk? Or are you just sucking hind tit?

Years ago a friend of mine picked up a Kimber Longmaster in 308 Winchester. While at the store he picked up a several boxes of 150 grain CorLokt factory loads. On a Saturday soon thereafter we went to the range and shot a couple of boxes. I took the empties home and the next time we went to the range he shot my handloads against the remaining factory stuff. My stuff shot 300 yard groups half the size of those made by the factory ammo. So I didn't throw my shit away.

Where exactly did I state this? Comprehension failure on your part?

Look closer, that ain't hind tit he's sucking....

So all s-talking aside, to get back on topic, I want to know what the thought reasoning is behind choosing a tikka over a hunter.

Assuming they both shot the same groups, were available in the same twist and caliber, and were the same price, could you guys state some legitimate reasons why you would choose one over the other?

so what'd you do to get them shooting better?

On paper they're the same rig. In fact, I might be hard pressed to NOT want the Kimber as I like the flush mag better. BUT....the reality is Tikkas don't phuqq around when it comes to accuracy with anything that fits in the chamber. Kimbers just don't.

Having a rifle that exhibits "accuracy with anything that fits in the chamber" isn't the most important criteria to some. Out of interest, how many loads, factory or otherwise, do you need a rifle to shoot well in order to be happy with it? I prefer the way that Kimbers feel, look, carry, function and shoot (recoil) compared to Tikkas. I'll happily give up the ability to shoot "anything that fits in the chamber" for the perceived benefits listed above, confident in the knowledge that every Kimber I own will shoot my handloads into small 5-shot groups and at least one factory offering into sub moa 5-shot groups.

My advice to anyone struggling with the Kimber Hunter vs. Tikka T3x decision is to handle both and choose based on how each rifle feels and functions since how they shoot will be the same for the handloader and virtually the same for at least a couple of factory loads.

Handloading is along the lines of watching paint dry for me.

I would shoot a lot less if I only shot factory ammunition. Not because of the cost, just the lack of interest. I'm completely the opposite when it comes to alcohol ... I have no interest in making my own.

“” My advice to anyone struggling with the Kimber Hunter vs. Tikka T3x decision is to handle both and choose based on how each rifle feels and functions since how they shoot will be the same for the handloader and virtually the same for at least a couple of factory loads.
[/quote]

This ^

As soon as the Hunter is offered in .223, I’m going to pick one up 🍻

Tikka vs Kimber...? Depends on how steep or gnarly the trail is. Or how much time you want to spend just shooting groups.
Tikka seems to have struck a nice balance with one rifle. Kimbers are more extreme in their purpose.

Oh boy, dipped stocks, fancy metal finishes, and muzzle brakes!

Those changes may appeal to the fashion conscious "hunters" who feel the need to wear hundreds of dollars worth of matching cool guy camouflage, and want their rifle to match so they get more likes from their Instagram followers. Such changes will not fix the Ruger American-esqe look and feel of the rifle (aka cheap), and I doubt those changes will help the price. But hey, if the Kuiu clad, motivational quote sharing, flat-brim cap wearing dude-bros are buying the rifles, then whatever works.

LMAO.
Thanks, goat.

LMAO.

How's the view from on top of that pedestal?

quack -

So all s-talking aside you answered your own question a few posts earlier...you get what you pay for and the Tupperware stocked barreled action on the fauxtucky doesn't exude the same level of accuracy the Tupperware stocked barreled action on the Tikka provides regardless of fodder fed. The fauxtucky is just that, a cheapened version of what a wanna be Kimber Montucky dreamer really wants (be honest it gets Kimber in the entry level gun game...kinda). The Tikka is a Tikka and not the Kimber version of a Ruger American. For the same money and a couple of ounces at best one will not have to suffer any tinkering with Tikka.

Bring on the s-talking...

As for your reference to me being bitter and too f-n stupid...It is this type of rhetoric that I reviewed you spewing in many of your previous posts that triggered me to remove my offer to sell you the .260 Montana you were looking for. If your memory escapes you I'll be happy to post our messages here for all the public to see. You didn't decline to buy...

One can only assume your shat loading techniques producing 1/4" groups be luck...

You are a walking contradiction, a few post ago you said you've owned 2 of the Uber accurate Tupperware laden Tikkas but just above you stated you wouldn't "EVER" own one...which is it?

You can't fix stupid...couldn't have said it better myself

assuming they both shot the same groups...THEY DON'T!

Before any stones are cast duck, I own at least one of every flavor rifle I referenced above with the exception of a fauxtucky...If I want a Kimber I buy the real McCoy...just saying.

Goat speaks the truth...

thanks, needed the laugh!

'Goat for Prez....

Preach on. The Roksliders will love them....

Fixt.....

I think there is a thread on them over there now

Dammit, Goat you were sooooo close to perfection. All it needed was a Starbucks reference.

Go reread my posts. Where exactly did I state I owned anything? So now you have to own a gun to load for /shoot?

Like wise with the hunter, I have never shot one, so I don't go on and on about how they shoot.

As for the PM's, go ahead and post away. Be sure to also post the pics taken with your 1999 camera, and the excuses that came with that. The bottom line is you make an assumption for everything you read. If you weren't somewhat shady, you would have posted clear pics of the damage you spoke of with the gun. It's what good sellers do. That's why I didn't buy the one off of gunbroker, used guns with grainy pics almost always equal hiding something. Like I said, I'm not desperate to buy one, and it's not a life or death issue.

For the record, all I run now are Montana's and Coopers. I own a few other makes that are older, nothing great. I have never owned a savage or tikka. It's just a cheap gun that doesn't interest me. Life is too short to settle to save a few hundred bucks.

Roksliders don't drink Starbucks, they like tacticool coffee and it doesn't appear that they know how to make it because there was a thread on that too. I got banned for hurting some gals feelings.

Yeah, dude-bros gotta drink coffee from that d-bag Black Rifle Coffee Company.

Sorry guys to bog down this thread with this banter but being called shady is unacceptable...

quack :

Your WTB thread:
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/12501594

PM discussion:

qwk: 260 montana
Could you send me a few pics of that 260 montana? My email is [email protected]. Thanks

Gansettx: 260 montana
Pics sent

qwk: 260 montana
The pics are too grainy to show gun condition.

Gansettx: 260 montana
Resent, let me know if those are better. Maybe attachment compressed them to much, but honestly there isn’t anything to see. It’s a fired Kimber Montana looks like all of the others, no chips or gouges in the stock and no dings or nicks in the stainless.

qwk: 260 montana
No difference. The thing of it is, I don't mind paying what equates to a $1200 used Montana in a discontinued caliber that I want, as long as it's in excellent shape. The term excellent varies so much, I like to go by detailed pics. In no way am I desperate to get one, because I can re barrel an $800 Roberts's or 308 Montana with a lilja barrel for about $1300 total, including gun. That's why I'm not super gung ho about a $1200 used one.

Gansettx: 260 montana
I see that you had the same problem with the Dealer's sent pictures of the Gunbroker listing. I just took the pics with my Iphone 7+ and it takes awesome photos so I'm at a loss for why you can't see them clearly. You may want to check the resolution of the device you are viewing them on. Those pics aside I have given you full disclosure on condition in my email correspondence with you.

I have a feeling from what you said above that you are not going to be happy with what you find considering the needle you are looking for. These rifles have been out of production for quite a few years and anyone that has one they haven't used is probably not planning to part with it. Your best bet is to do just what you said although I think you valuation of cost is suspect:

Lilja barrel : $355 Stainless benchrest and sporter contour from 1″ or 1.250″ dia. steel
Chamber, Crown, Fit barrel : $275

so $800 + tranfer fees plus labor to remove barrel plus above costs plus shipping brings your real cost to closer to $1550.00 than $1300, and you didn't clean up the action at all.

I'm retracting my offer forsale as I'm no more desperate in selling my Kimber 84m .260 Montana than you are desperate in getting one.

Regards,

Now anyone who wants to deal with this name calling dirtbag beware...check his previous thread discussions and you'll likely come to the same conclusions I have...

Carry on

Pure gold right there!

I'll tell ya what...My Tikka T3 Lite SS in .223 Rem isn't all that accurate with factory or hand loads. And it ain't all that light either. My RAR compact .223 will out shoot it all day long. Factory or Reloads. Is the Tikka a better built rifle? Probably, but they're not God's gift either.

LMAO.

Pretty much what I do, except throw my schit away.

Whether you like camo dipped stocks or not doesn't change the fact that this is a "for profit" industry. It's the fiscal responsibility of sales managers and product managers to increase the company's revenue both for the owners of the company and for the sake of the employees of the company. Kimber employs 600 or so American workers and helps numerous US based vendors to employ hundreds if not thousands more. 2017 was a tough year in the firearms industry and I don't know where you and others on this forum stand, but I like jobs staying in this country and am pleased if a US company increases revenue without causing consumers to suffer. If dipped Hunter stocks and Kimpro painted barreled actions lead to increased sales and improved job security for Kimber employees then it's a good thing regardless of whether I like Krptek, Realtree or Open Country patterns.

As for your comments about camo wearing hunters, if someone wants to support Under Armour, Sitka, First Lite, Kuiu or whomever, all US based companies, then so be it. Those companies do a tremendous amount for hunters and conservation but if you want to wear a 50 year old wool shirt and pants that you got for $10 from a thrift store and feel superior in your choice then go for it.

Blasphemy, unless you're trying to shoot 75's out of a 1:10 Tikka.

US company's making schit in China Don't forget. But who cares.

True, but at least the Hunter stock, recoil pad and magazine are all made in the US, and the dipped ones are dipped here too. That's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

True.

But they just don't shoot like a Tikka, at least that I've seen. No matter.

I persuaded a coworker to buy an 84L Hunter in .30-06 Sprg about 6 months ago since he was looking for a "do it all" hunting rifle for up here. His dad offered to buy a scope so I recommended a Zeiss HD5 2-10x42mm and Talley rings. I installed the scope for him and he let me shoot the first two groups. I had some boxes of Federal Premium Vital-Shok Trophy Copper 165gr and 180gr ammunition laying around so that's what we used. After bore sighting I shot one group using the 165gr ammo followed by a second group using the 180gr ammo with no scope adjustment. He's not a reloader so he went out and bought a box of the 165gr TC since it shot well. He even managed to shoot and kill a whitetail buck on public land before the season ended. He's pleased with his rifle and I might even work up a handload for him this year if he's interested. Based on how it shoots two Federal loads I doubt it'll be hard to work up a .5 moa load for him using a Barnes TTSX, Nosler AB or similar.

I have no doubt that he would be equally happy with a Tikka T3x that would probably shoot more factory loads better than the Hunter, but the Hunter is close to 1/2 lb lighter and certainly shoots well enough that he's not looking to change.

Federal Premium Vital-Shok Trophy Copper 165gr




Federal Premium Vital-Shok Trophy Copper 180gr

What does a "half moa load" mean in this context?

This is often a contentious issue but for me it means a load that under ideal conditions and from a cold/clean bore will put 5 shots into .5 moa or better at 100 yards 50% of the time using a front rest and rear bag. That same load under those same condittions will put 5 shots into 1 moa or better 100% of the time. The assumption being that the load would shoot sub .5 moa 100% of the time if the human error factor could be removed e.g. test barrel, universal receiver and test tunnel.

PFFFTT!

Thanks for not posting the entire thing you worthless POS. You must be related to Safariman....

Doesn't seem shady to me? Where are all the $800 donors that have excellent condition stocks and actions? You want a gun in excellent condition, but you'll rebarrel a beat up donor and be happy?
Full of [bleep]

79 posts and she's done....

Probably because he picked and chose what benefitted him. Duh.
There are Montana's to be had for cheap especially on the local classifieds. Obviously they don't last here long.

Not a montana but look how cheap these 308 go for here.
http://www.zidaho.com/category/314/Rifles/listings/65998/Kimber-Adirondack-308.html

Last 308 montana I bought I paid $650 for, almost new. Three weeks later, another one popped up for $650, but it was across the river in another state. He wanted to see a Washington DL, so no go for me.

I have 7 Montana's right now, but they shoot so well it's kind of hard to put a new spout on.

You must be a California f-tard, because some of the s h i t you post is down right retard.

You had me at 79....so long bitch.

Ha!

Apparently pointing out that the new Hunters are sold with a bunch of useless fluff somehow got associated with being a hit on American companies made products. Far from the truth, as I quite like Kimbers. I’d rather see the money spent on useless fluff (such as coating a stainless barreled action) go to something more useful - like a stock redesign (or even a simple metal trigger guard), or giving that money back to the consumer in the form of reduced prices to make the Hunter more in line with the price of its competition.



You just defined a 1 MOA rifle.

Or could it be that I described a 1 moa shooter with a 1/2 moa rifle/load.

Hopefully you and your boyfriend stay in California where you belong. You queers have ruined this once great country...

What? I can't read your post. It's too "grainy"...

Wipe 16bore's j i z z out from your eyes, apparently he is just as bad a shot with his pants down...

Post another WTB ad for another gun that you don't really want to buy and waste everybody's time.
Brag about $650 Montana's then post a link to a $1200 Adirondack to "back up" your bullshit.
Dumbfuck liars like you do more damage to this country than the queers.

This thread is a giggle. Bunch of boys arguing about the merits of different rifles anyone of which will kill any big game in the common 300 yard and under envelope.

Unless you are a true walking hunter who travels 20 miles a day, 8 ounces in a rifle means nothing. Most of us do nothing like that or have horses/atvs to get us close to the kill.

Amazing how our fathers and grandfathers lugged around those M 70s, 03/Mauser sporters, 99s, Winchester levers etc that weighed far more, wearing heavy wool clothes, big leather boots, toting real food and metal canteens managed to ever kill any big game at all !

Buy a Compass in 300 WinMag, put a $600-1000 scope on it, shoot Barnes VOR-TX ammo in it and, if you can shoot, you'll bring home the bacon, just like dad with his 721 300 H&H wearing a 6X Zeiss and shooting Peters Inner-Belted 180 gr SPs did.

You tell 'em sevenbyseven Larry Root!

I said 79, not 69.

This post is a classic example of your liberal stupidity. The Adirondack was $1100, which by the way was a steal. Care to find me one for that price in any caliber but 300 blk?

Why lie about the price, and then say liars like me ruin this country???? How f u c k I n g stupid can you be?

Would you pay new gun price for a beat up gun???

BTW, It took me a while to find that $650 listing I was talking about, but here it is. Just cause you and the fore mentioned crooks lie and cheat, doesn't mean that everybody does....



http://www.armslist.com/posts/6787073/vancouver-washington-rifles-for-sale--kimber-84m-montana-308

At least they’re not arguing about coffee.

How do you know gansettsx gun was beat up? I thought it was too "grainy" to see? Same as the GunBroker gun. "Too grainy to see".
And you said Montana's come up for $650 all the time, but now it "took you awhile to find THE ad"

How about doing something useful with your time like posting naked pics of your mom?

And posting scam ads off the most notorious scam site doesn't count you dumbfuck.

Probably because he said it had hunting damage. He conveniently didn't include a pic of it, grainy or not. When I asked he said it was no longer for sale. If that's not a red flag, I don't know what is. Like I said he copied and pasted what suited him best. You fell for it hook line and sinker.

If he didn't have his name/business name/phone number plastered all over the email, I would have posted it long ago. Even though he is shady, I'm not going to jeopardize his livelihood.

You really need to read what I write, because you just can't keep from making s h I t up. Where did I write that Montana's come up for sale all the time at $650? Nowhere...

If you paid any attention(which you don't) he mentions cash buyer with transfer fee.

How in the f u c k is he going to scam you with a legal transfer at a gunshop????

Think first before you post.

So....qwk or quack or ?
Who's sockpuppet are you?
Joined in Nov. 2017 and you know enough about Safariman to throw shade on someone by relating them to him?
Methinks you aren't who you present yourself to be.

Bye bye sockpuppet!

Most of them I’ve scoped and shot, talley lightweights and leupold vx3’s, vortex razor HD LH, and Zeus’s Duralyt scopes are pretty common in my safe. I’m starting to grow the nightforce SHV collection too.

The 30-06 has a bubba-d second set of holes in the receiver, I put on a nightforce one piece base to cover up the junk holes and shot it. The donor shot well enough that I haven’t sent it off for rebooting yet, it will happen eventually...

The .338 federal took a lot of cleaning then I chopped the barrel to 17”, JB weld patched the stock and painted it.

The .223 I just chopped the barrel on for kicks, to about 16.5” I swapped the stocks with the .308 adirondack, and bedded it. Need to shoot it to see how it’s shooting now

The .308 Adirondack is gonna get the .223’s stock, bedded and repainted, just for fun

quack -

You should never go full retard...remember a bit earlier when I mentioned that everything you say is a reflection of ones self. Those Meat-gazer comments are classic denial about past events that have been burned into your retina...LAFFIN' in my best Stick impression.

Again since you are incapable of simple comprehension (we understand that to happen when the family tree doesn't branch...its okay little buddy we won't judge) I said I'd post our PM's and that is just what I did when called out...now for further clarification of the disclosure I called out in the PM's here is the 2 sentence email that accompanied the "grainy" pics:

For the sake of full disclosure, there is light scuffing on the underside of the barrel maybe from bumping brush being sling carried through the woods. It also has the expected bolt scuffing from being worked but none of this is anything unexpected from a lightly hunted rifle.

There is the "DAMAGE" comment you've been raving about for all to see, real shady there sending you all my contact info isn't it...

[/quote]Thanks for not posting the entire thing you worthless POS. You must be related to Safariman....
[/quote]

Thanks for recognizing the above m_stevenson...this comment is the real red flag

...Slams the mic & walks out...

bye bye qwk

MJDUCT,

thanks for helping the thread get back on track. it desperately needed to.

it sounds like the rifles were mostly capable of shooting well already. you just

1. put better scopes on some?
2. cleaned others
3. and swapped/bedded the stock on others

shortening the pipes seems to be a common thread, which should reduce barrel "whip" a bit on the skinny barrels. could improve accuracy, at the cost of some velocity, of course.

I wouldn't want to give up any velocity on an elk gun, unless I had plenty to spare.

again, thanks for getting the thread focused on the Kimber rifle.

I don't know where in the hell some of you learned to read, but wherever it was it didn't work. My join date is not Nov. of 2017. And acting like join date/ post count means anything is about as childish as the grade you should have finished in order to have learned how to read.

Ouch, naked pics of Mom ? That's tasteless.

Not to worry as now the censor-in-chief has shown up to further pirate the thread with his childish vendetta.

Thanks for not posting the entire thing you worthless POS. You must be related to Safariman....
[/quote]

Thanks for recognizing the above m_stevenson...this comment is the real red flag

...Slams the mic & walks out...

bye bye qwk

[/quote]The only thing you are doing is slamming yourself by posting bits and pieces of the conversation in order to paint yourself as a saint.

Please f u c k I n g explain to everybody why when asked about a close up pic of the damage, you took the gun off the market? That's not a red flag to you?

Also, do honest people post bits and pieces of what transpired? Or do they post everything's at once like i asked of you to in the beginning? You've been outed as a dishonest d o u s h b a g, and now you are pissed. Keep posting away any credibility you have left.

And please stop f u c k I n g acting like you were doing me a favor for offering to sell it at that price. These guns must not be as rare as you and some others portray them to be, because I've got a couple of offers to sell now, and one I'm pretty sure I'm buying....

Well excuse me for mistyping the year of your join date.
Unless you've scoured the forum to readup on the schitthead known as Safariman, you wouldn't know about him enough to
use him as a reference.

As for your ad hominem attack about my schooling or intelligence? Go fuqck yourself jackass.

Your difficulties in dealing with people make for "entertainment" I'll gladly miss.

Truth hurts??? Reality is a b I t c h....

OK, let me know when you get a dose of reality. It ought to shock you to your toes.

Just got to page 4 of this thread. Couldn't go any further before commenting... Funny Chit. Who is the qwk cat? LOL.

I would never assume these two guns shoot the same groups. And that is precisely why I would choose any given Tikka over any given Hunter for out-of-the-box accuracy, reliability, and easier to load for.

Yes, I own both, shot many versions of each. The Tikka is super easy to get small groups with. Basically pick up some decent factory fodder and proceed to shoot those small groups. I love my Kimbers (especially the Montana), but IME they often require tweaking, especially the Hunters I've played. Common to have feeding issues with a full mag and can be difficult to find a load for.

Tikkas? They feed, the trigger is hard to beat from the factory and, they friggin' shoot- just about anything...

Banter is fun, but classifieds are serious business if you like buying and selling goodies. And post count seems to always work itself out. There are guys here that get things shipped on an "I'll take it"......

QWK needs to send me any links he finds to excellent condition $650.00 Montana's.
I'll take any you can link me to, that are willing to ship to my FFL.

Who's Safariman?

Speaking of childish, how's things with Karen, Larry?

You can’t cherry pick the best 50% of the groups and claim those are on the gun, then blame the larger groups on shooter error.

prairie_goat, please explain "how any of this works" so that I can modify my previous statement to comply with currently accepted nomenclature.

gwk WTF are you smoking?

Please see previous post regarding the subject.

Don't smoke, sorry.

Reality check 101:

Can one order a tikka at Walmart? Absolutely(Walmart used to have them on their gunracks)
Can one order a Kimber at Walmart? No

I don't know why some of you are so butt hurt about the fact that the tikka is a cheap gun made overseas.

You can "order" guns through Walmart? Have you done/have knowledge of someone else doing that?

I've never done it, but know a few who have.

Re: So what, exactly, is wrong with the Kimber Hunter? We ever decide on that?

It's only good for guys that don't have to spend a lot of money on gas during hunting season.