Kimber Adirondack the ultimate high country rifle?

[Brendan]

Also - earlier people were asking about speed loss. Here are my results from the Adirondack .308 when I was breaking it in and sighting it in.

Nosler Trophy Grade Accubond 165 factory loads. Shot out of an 18" barrel. Chrono was a Shooting Chrony Beta Blue.

Threw away the highest and lowest and left myself with 10 readings.
ES = 91FPS
SD = 25.5 FPS
AVG = 2605 FPS
MEDIAN = 2596 FPS

(The low was 2554, The high was 2645)

The info on the box has these rated at 2800 fps - obviously out of a much longer barrel.

 

[luke moffat]

Just want to respond this. 84M Adirondack and 84M Mountain Ascent are identical stock and action sizes as far as I can tell. Pretty sure you're talking about a long action Mountain Ascent and short action Adirondack?

Thats my experience as well. Kimber uses the same exact stock on the 84M Montana, Ascent, and Adirondack. The 84L Montana and Ascent are exactly the same as well.

 

[AKMAN]

I didn't read all (edit) SIX pages of this thread, but I agree with others above.
A factory 25-06 with a 1-9? Yes please.
Never ceases to amaze me when a 6.5mm comes with a 1-9 and 7mm-08s with a 1-9.5... :/

 

[Weekender]

Man this is good stuff. Definitely tell it's still the off-season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KingOfTheRockies]

Here they are side by side.

You guys need to stop feeding the troll and just ignore him. That picture is awesome Stid2677. Looks like a bb gun next to that mountain ascent.

 

[robtattoo]

Sweet Christmas Jesus & all the baby pygmies, this thread went south SO FAST!!

 

[Stid2677]

Just want to respond this. 84M Adirondack and 84M Mountain Ascent are identical stock and action sizes as far as I can tell. Pretty sure you're talking about a long action Mountain Ascent and short action Adirondack?

Yes, you are correct.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[IdahoElk]

Ruger American 308 compact....$350, Leupold 6x36 $300, $40 rings=$700 and 6.75 pounds.

I bought this gun in .308 and with scope,sling weighs in at 6.85lbs.I've only shot out to 100yrds and it does fine.Wanted the Adirondack but couldn't afford it.

 

[JeffRaines]

I agree the rifle is generally the last place to save weight effeiciently. That said I am one of those guys that often leaves the trailhead with 50 pounds or more to start a hunt. But by the time I at 10 days of food (12-15 pounds), a packraft and associated gear (20 pounds), spotter and tripod (5-6 pounds), binos, 2 liters of water, and a rifle I am already over 50 pounds.

The shelter, pack and sleep system are the lightweight part of the equation. But if I can leave the trailhead with a 4.5-5 pound and I can afford to buy one why not. Again it's the least efficient place to cut weight. I could certainly do just as well with a 6.75 pound scoped Ruger American for around $650 all up including a scope over a $2000 scoped 4.5 pound scoped rifle but no have no illusions I could use that $1400 to buy a cuben fiber mid rather than my sil nylon and such. Weight savings on a rifle is much more about a challenge to see what can be done to lighten it up not about actually weight savings when looking at total pack weight.

Luke, that definitely wasn't a rib at you or anyone in a similar position... I'm more referring to the guy that wants the lightest rifle he can buy so he can start lightening up, but has a 8lb pack, 7lb tent, 6lb sleeping bag etc.

That's a hell of a lot of gear though! You use the packraft often I take it?

 

[BrentC]

I have an adirondack question I was on eurooptic and noticed the 2016 barrels are 1-10 vs older 1-12. What's the difference weight bullets you can shoot? Thanks
Edit: forgot to add that's for a 7-08

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[16Bore]

Higher twist, heavier bullet. 1:10 is still a bit on the low side for 7mm. I'd think the 150 ELDX would be pretty good

 

[16Bore]

Actually Kimbers site says 1:9 for 7-08

 

[Brightwhite]

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.

Thank you. I have not seen or heard of the Barrett, it's looks sweet! I ran a few google searches and they don't look like one will be easy to find. Any ideas on any good gun shops that sell online that might have them?

 

[Brightwhite]

Here they are side by side.

That Adirondack is sweet! Makes me want to buy the older forest patterned one that's on sale and do some work to it.

 

[stillar]

View attachment 48008View attachment 48009View attachment 48011

 

[peddler]

I have a 7MS in .257 Roberts with an old Nikon Monarch 3-9 X 40. I got it the first year the Custom Shop offered that model and a friend was the Remington rep at the time. Now I'm going to get some scales to weigh it. It's a dream to carry.

 

[NDGuy]

This is awesome to read some good stuff in here.

And here all I want to do is find my first "Mountain Rifle" in 6.5 CM pr 7mm-08 that is left handed

Slim pickins...

 

[Coyote71]

Adirondack

[i agree my Adirondack wears a 2-7x33 & it is small compact but does everything I could want from a mountain rifle QUOTE=oldlogger;630057]Just wondering why you guys see the need to put huge scopes on ultralight rifles seems to defeat the purpose to me, just my opinion.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

 

[Stid2677]

[i agree my Adirondack wears a 2-7x33 & it is small compact but does everything I could want from a mountain rifle QUOTE=oldlogger;630057]Just wondering why you guys see the need to put huge scopes on ultralight rifles seems to defeat the purpose to me, just my opinion.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[/QUOTE]

One day, when you get old and half blind you will understand. Less rifle, better glass, equals, same weight. The extra resolution helps when rams scatter and you need to reacquire with the scope. I have a couple Leupold 2x7x33s and while good, there are other options.