boonerbuck said:
Over the Sako you say? Sako comes in 5 action lengths. No other company comes close to this kind of precision fit the the calibre.
This is a Sako vrs. Kimber thread. Surprised you over looked that detail.
I have not overlooked that detail and Sako is not exempt from this practice. Sako at one time had three action configurations, these were truely different actions since they each sported different bolt diameters, action diameters, and floorplate assemblies. This is no longer the case since Sako was not going to develope a whole new action configuration to suit the WSM family they chose to use the magnum action and only shortened it to the proper length they are the same as the #V action only shorter, they are just as bulky as the #V and in my opinion a far cry from what Kimber did, since they developed and built an action around the cartridge and not adapt an action length to the cartridge. Sako was not the only company that adapted an action to the cartridge all the other companies did the same thing including Winchester who designed the WSM. This is not said to take anything away from Sako they are fine rifles but they are heavy, if you compare a blue/walnut 300WSM Sako to the 8400 Kimber it is almost a full pound heavier, that's alot of extra weight to haul around in my books especially if you walk alot like I do, it adds up by the end of the day. The overwhelming support for lighter hunting rifles suggests in no uncertain terms that this is what hunters demand of their rifles and the companies scramble to supply what the market demands. It isn't always apparent how these weight reductions can be achieved but in fact there are only three components to any rifle that can be lightened.
1. Action
2. Barrel
3. Stock
Since the first item cannot usually be lightened without compromising integrity or doing alot of development the easiest thing to do is to shorten for the desired cartridge length or at times replace steel components with alloys or synthetics/plastics.
The barrel is also limited by its structural integrity and has limitation to its contour if a safe rifle is to be maintained, some even flute their barrels to further reduce theis weight without reducing its diameter, fluting is not beneficial to accuracy so this is to be avoided especially in the lighter contours.
By far the largest expense is the stock, the development of a LIGHT STRONG stock is what keeps companies like McMillan thriving and separates them from the tupperware stock manufacturers. Development in synthetics and space age fibers is very expansive and this usually relegates the firearm manufacturers to make the biggest compromises on the stock!
I am not a spokesman for Kimber or any other manufacturer just giving my opinion on this topic (actually I like Winchesters myself). Kimber has taken a big chance in getting back into the longarm bussiness with a new rifle and they followed no one in designing a new from the ground up rifle based on public demand on what features they wanted. The established and reliable features of the mauser ectractor, M70 safety were adapted into their design and with the help of Melvin Forbes (ULA) also designed a synthetic stock to feature on their montana model, a very lightweight rifle and all done without using plastics or alloys or barrel fluting, it's quite a feat especially for a CRF action.
IMO
bigbull
