Which Kimber should I buy?

Re the Hunter model stock, isn't it just a cheap tupperware stock most people poo-poo on any other rifle?
Take the gel pack out, and what does it sound like?
 
boxhitch said:
Re the Hunter model stock, isn't it just a cheap tupperware stock most people poo-poo on any other rifle?
Take the gel pack out, and what does it sound like?
Click to expand...

The Kimber hunter stocks are the most rigid and the lightest I have ever seen due to the honeycomb design.Sounds like plastic but who cares ,fiberglass sounds like fiberglass and so on .
 
Go with the hunter(I own both). The hunter doesn’t disappoint in the two areas they differ. The stock and magazine. The hunter magazine feeds even the sharp shoulder ackley rounds perfectly. Being that it is a double stack single feed mag it puts every cartridge in the same place for the bolt to pick up. Compared to the Montana mag that is a double stack double feed. Which I have run into feeding issues with on my 280ai montana (my hunter is a AI wildcat as well). The plastic stock is well made and durable on the hunter. It does a very good job of balancing stiffness, durability and cost. While the Montana’s fibreglass stock puts stiffness above durability and cost. With weight between the stocks being similar enough to not be a factor.

Also where are you finding a new rifles for this price? New my hunter was $1100 plus tax 3 years ago. A quick search shows Montana’s at 2500
 
Anyone know where to get magazine boxes and follower/spring for kimbers? You could do some nice builds on the action with Boyd’s stocks, potentially less than a classic.
 
You figure? That would be a great solution if so.

I thought hunters were boring when they came out and then wised up to boring rifles being cool in time for the only ones locally available to be in 280 AI.
 
boxhitch said:
Re the Hunter model stock, isn't it just a cheap tupperware stock most people poo-poo on any other rifle?
Take the gel pack out, and what does it sound like?
Click to expand...

They’re relatively cheap to produce but they are nothing like any other “cheap tupperware” stock. As GE Flach mentioned, the fore stock is stiffened by a honey comb design without adding much weight and is also pillar bedded. The mag design is top notch as mentioned and has a great release that can be used with gloves on.

After removing the rubber I usually add in another ounce of spray foam. This doesn’t have quite the same effect as the rubber but it quiets it down a decent amount. That being said the rubber stops about 2-3” from the recoil pad from factory and is hollow in between. After the rubber is removed the stock and mag is a hair lighter and a lot more hardy than the fiberglass montana stock.
 
conor_90 said:
You figure? That would be a great solution if so.

I thought hunters were boring when they came out and then wised up to boring rifles being cool in time for the only ones locally available to be in 280 AI.
Click to expand...

It worked when I put a hunter in 7mm-08 into a Adirondack stock. Took apart the hunter mag and the dropped the guts into the blind Adirondack magazine cutout. The feed rails are already machined into the action. The only additional thing I did was put some thin aluminum in the mag cutout to stop the brass cases rubbing on the carbon fibre. Send me a pm. I’ll email you a picture, cannot figure out how to upload them
 
Last edited:
Why did you replace your followers?

If one keeps replacing things with Remington parts they’re going to lose the advantage of a lightweight when you are carrying around a hammer in case of extractor failure.
 
I like the old machined metal followers purely from an aesthetic standpoint. The factory ones work fine. Even Remington isn’t using machined steel followers anymore. Come to think of it; they aren’t using anything anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom