new mountian rifle

donp said:
Sounds like a good start. I used a Rem Sa for my 300 wsm. Ordered a new bolt from pacific tool and gauge, comes fluted and with the appropriate bolt face. Titanium firing pin and aluminum bolt shroud. Wyatt outddoors internal bottom metal (center-line feed for a BDL). Lone wolf composites stock, 10.5 oz. Taley ring and bases and a leupold M8 4x (8 oz). Barrel 30 cal, 1-10, 20" long turned absolutley as thin as we dared and then tear drop flutes through the chamber area. Action lightened as much as possible. Total weight 5.5 lbs.

I looked at the titaniums and what you got for the money didn't(in my eyes)make it worth the extra. Even with all the work it was still cheaper to buy the steel action and the weight difference was just a few ounces. The bolt from Dave Kiff was a stroke of genius, because later on if I want to change calibers i have a second bolt in 308 for whatever I want.

Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a heckuva rig, I'd like to see some pics of that one.

Does the Wyatt setup use the 308 feed rails? How long is that box? Does it use the factory trigger guard/floorplate? How many rounds does it hold?
How much metal removal was done on the reciever?
 
SuperCub said:
Seems counterproductive to go to all that cost for a lightweight rifle and top it with a heavy scope. :confused:

I'd go with a VXII in 2x7 or a VXIII in 2.5x8.


.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
My Mountain rifle is a bone stock 700 mountain LSS in 7/08 wearing a 2.5-8X36 VX III.

Buy a setup like mine, it will weigh an extra pound, so spend a couple extra hours a week at the gym to take care of it :)
 
Wrong Way said:
Buy a setup like mine, it will weigh an extra pound, so spend a couple extra hours a week at the gym to take care of it :)
Click to expand...

This is a typical statement from guys who don't hunt the high country much. Not trying to argue, just stating that my experience has taught me different.

Spend a week or two living only out of a pack, climbing up and down mountains 8000(+ or -) feet above sea level. Guys who do this on a regular basis know that every ounce counts including on a rifle, know matter how much time is spent in the gym.

I spend allot of my spare time and most of my hunting season doing just that and I know for a fact that every ounce makes a difference. My knees also agree with me :(.

From today:
IMGP0440.jpg


Last hunting season:
2007_1027Image0004.jpg
 
Rifles Inc. has several very lightweight rifles.

The Ti Strata is 4 1/2lbs
The Lightweight Strata is 5lbs
The Lightweight M70 is 5 3/4lbs

Web site is www. riflesinc.com

The price for a few oz shaved vs a Kimber 84M Montana is quite high. The Ti Strata is $3300 PLUS customer supplied action.
 
Gatehouse said:
You can get a Kimber Montana in WSM that weighs 6lb, 3 oz, or get one chambered ina 1 .308 based cartridge for 5lbs 4 oz.
Click to expand...


Actually, the 308 Montana sans bases weighs 5 lbs, zero ounces (thus sayeth my kitchen scale, supposedly accurate to the 0.01 ounce). Use Talley lightweight one-piece ring/bases (3oz), and a Leupold ultra-light scope (8.8oz), and you'd end up with a ready-to-hunt rifle just shy of 5.75 pounds, scope and all. You'd be hard pressed to beat that weight for anything resembling the $1500 it'd cost you to buy it all off-the shelf and ready to go hunting.


Though, all that said, if my Kimber is all I had to judge them by, the build quality is really down around the level of rifles that cost half as much - but for the cost to weight, it is the only rifle in it's class by almost 3/4 of a pound.
 
brotherjack said:
Though, all that said, if my Kimber is all I had to judge them by, the build quality is really down around the level of rifles that cost half as much - but for the cost to weight, it is the only rifle in it's class by almost 3/4 of a pound.
Click to expand...

The build quality on your Kimber is poor? Please elaborate!
 
1899 said:
The build quality on your Kimber is poor? Please elaborate!
Click to expand...

Barrel not free floated when I got it.

Magazine box took a lot of trial and error work with a pair of pliers before it would feed reliably (though it does feed fine now that I've finally got it worked it - so long as you work the bolt like you mean it).

Bolt locking lug doesn't touch on one side, causing erratic accuracy problems with full house loads or most factory ammo. (though it generally drives tacks with reduced pressure loads - I drive 168 grain Nosler BT's around 2,575 FPS with superb accuracy results.)


Admittedly, this was a gun I bought second-hand off EE, but all the faults above appear to be 'from the factory' issues, not any fault of the original owner.

All of the above had a solution or a work-around, so as it stands, it's a useful gun to me and I'm not selling it. But, yeah, I was pretty cheezed that a gun that costs almost as much as all the rest of my guns put together had ANY issues at all. (I was also a bit cheezed that the previous owner failed to mention any of the above as well - it had to be pretty obvious that it didn't feed straight and couldn't hit the broadside of a sheet of paper with full house loads).

I talked to Kimber, and they offered to look at it, but I would have to be responsible for all the cross-border foolishness, which was more money and hassle than I was willing to put into it.

Elaborate enough? :)
 
Wow. Thanks Brotherjack. That is the opposite of anything I have ever read regarding the new Kimbers. I heard the quality went haywire on the old ones (Kimber of Oregon). I was just mulling over whether I should get an 84M...
 
This is a typical statement from guys who don't hunt the high country much.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more Davey. Weight on your back doesn't equate to a couple extra pounds of fat. I know lots of guys 20 pounds overweight that could walk most people into the ground in the mountains but you put an extra 20 pounds in your pack and that's an entirely different story! One definitely doesn't equal the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom