- Banned
- #81
16Bore
WKR
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2014
- Messages
- 3,020
reality isn't for everyone.
reality isn't for everyone.
It always depends. If it's not your thing - move on and quit bashing and trolling for no good reason. This thread has proved there's plenty of people who prefer a lightweight rifle and can be plenty accurate at the distances they hunt at, and it's the best rig out there for them.
Along the lines of cost - If you don't want to spend a ton of $$ - go back and check out some of Luke's posts. I bet with a little work you could very easily have a sub 7lb scoped rifle that'll shoot 3/4 MOA for under $1K. I went with the Adirondack because it was the easiest, I like the good glass of the Swaro when I'm trying to count legal points on a deer right at first light, and I was under the gun for time when I bought it. Don't regret it one bit either...
Says the guy posting on make believe forums
Or the guy behind the curtain scared to have an opinion for fear of losing a sponsor.....
This thread was never about a budget, weight, or who's got better gear. It was about the 3 main requirements I laid out in the first post, and is the adirondack the ultimate rifle to fit the 3 requirements. Ultimate to me meant having no comprise. Is there a better choice for a rifle to meet my goals out there or not? That's what the discussion was...
Thanks to those that have provided insightful opinions. I am between buying a montana, trying it as is, then doing work to it if I want, or just going with the adirondack. Cost wise it looks to be about the same, maybe a little more to overhaul a montana, but you would have the ability to customize it as you see fit.
You opinion is humble?
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Luke, I aim to please.....
OP - In my humble opinion (better, Luke?) I feel that every rifle is a concession in one way or another. It's a matter of what you're willing to give to get what you want. Cash, chambering, weight, barrel length, yadda, yadda. My very humble opinion is that the Adirondack had little reward for the added expense, which was my first post. However, you defined what your criteria is, Adirondack suits your wants, so rock on.
Humbly yours,
16 Bore
p.s. Luke, did you or did you not get (or already have) a 308 Montana? I should be rocking one here shortly. I promise that thread will be epic.
This thread was never about a budget, weight, or who's got better gear. It was about the 3 main requirements I laid out in the first post, and is the adirondack the ultimate rifle to fit the 3 requirements. Ultimate to me meant having no comprise. Is there a better choice for a rifle to meet my goals out there or not? That's what the discussion was...
Thanks to those that have provided insightful opinions. I am between buying a montana, trying it as is, then doing work to it if I want, or just going with the adirondack. Cost wise it looks to be about the same, maybe a little more to overhaul a montana, but you would have the ability to customize it as you see fit.
If one was to want the ultimate lightweight rifle with specific uses in mind:
- Shooting inside of 500 yards
- Chambered in a light recoil round
- Specifically used on high country backpack early season mule deer, and sheep/goat hunts
- Shorter thus making it easier to pack around
Is the Kimber Adirondack the best choice out there?
In the short action, you are 4" shorter and 5oz lighter than the Montana.
.
Granted they were preproduction and early production rifles, however from what I've seen the Barret Fieldcrafts are going to be the Mountain rifle to beat.
Understanding that I've sho, used and killed animals with quite a few Kimbers, and have a 6.5Creed Mountain Ascent on the way and noting what I said above-
the Barret Fieldcrafts are-
-Much more consistently accurate than the Kimbers and not near as finicky
-All of the chamberings that they offer are twisted and throated correctly for good bullets as well as mag box fitted for same
- They're 5lbs with great stocks and actions
- 21in barrels that are again, twisted and throated correctly.
For all all of those reasons, no I personally do not think the Adirondack nor any other Kimber is the best choice for your criteria.
Haha nice!!! Yeah have had a Kimber 308 since 2010 my wife has had one since 2013 I believe. I hope you like it. They work for our needs anyways. I can just picture you gritty your teeth with a pained look on your face while you typed up that cordial reply
L
So about that example of me hiding behind a curtain not saying anything scared to lose forum sponsors...if you really aim to please.
I'm away from my photos until Sunday night, but I will a photo of my Mountain Ascent and Adirondack side by side, the Adirondack is scaled down action, stock and of course the shorter barrel, not just a short barrel version of her big sister. That is why I like mine so much, plus makes a great rifle for a Lady or youth.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk