Kimber Question - Worth the money?

I have looked at many and was seriously interested in buying one, but the price is too much for the rifle you get. SIR (Cabelas) now has the Montana listed at $1600 which is a total joke. So much for Cabela's buying power passing along good deals to the Canadian consumer.
 
Beautiful rifles, but very expensive. I think if I had that kind of money, I'd be looking at one of the new model 70's and some good optics and mounts. Of course I don't think they build one in the .204. I've also heard Kimber rifles are hit and miss. One might shoot well while the other doesn't. At one point awhile back I was thinking of a Montana, but after looking at one, I didn't see $1500 there.
 
This doesn't exactly answer the question, but a thousand bucks won't buy you much in new rifles these days. A plain Remmie or Winchester sporter. If the kimber has features that you like, such as light weight or controlled feed, an extra $400 or so isn't that much by the time you finish outfitting any rifle with a good scope, rings, dies, etc.

Coming from someone who has had several lightweight rifles built, I think that if you want a lightweight rifle the Kimber is a hell of a deal. IF you get a good one. You still have to expect to bed it, tune the trigger and maybe recrown is, but those are things you may have to do with any new rifle.
 
Both of mine shot reasonably well for what they were. They didn't stick around because I have a horrible problem with not having the ability not to buy new rifles. spurly is punching some great groups with my old 300WSM Montana.
 
scott_r said:
X2

If you're in that kind of market a Cooper looks really nice, those test targets are scary accurate.
Ive heard a few guys comment on how dissapointed they were with Kimbers accuracy for the price they paid.

Cheers!!
Click to expand...

they are very nice, but Cooper doesn't make a 5 lb hunting rifle.

|Different equally cool niche.
 
I bought my Kimber because I wanted a heavy barrel 22/250 that didn't weigh any more than a standard hunting rifle, had the controlled feed and safety I prefer. It shoots like it has eyes.
 
RickF said:
This doesn't exactly answer the question, but a thousand bucks won't buy you much in new rifles these days. A plain Remmie or Winchester sporter. If the kimber has features that you like, such as light weight or controlled feed, an extra $400 or so isn't that much by the time you finish outfitting any rifle with a good scope, rings, dies, etc.

Coming from someone who has had several lightweight rifles built, I think that if you want a lightweight rifle the Kimber is a hell of a deal. IF you get a good one. You still have to expect to bed it, tune the trigger and maybe recrown is, but those are things you may have to do with any new rifle.
Click to expand...

What he said.
 
For the money I dunno.

I've personally seen 2 Kimbers that would get owned by rifles worth almost 1/4 of the new purchase price.

On the one a 7mm-08, it was re crowned, re bedded, and still only shoots 2" groups on a good day.

Go to some American websites and search up Kimber rifles. There seems to be more than a few flies in the pudding.
 
I've developed loads for three. My dad owns 1 classic in 7mm-08 and my brother two Montana's. One 8400 270 WSM and a 84 7mm-08. The Classic is one of the most consistently accurate and unfinicky rifles I've worked with and the other two shoot under an inch without much effort.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom