Kimber Montana vs. Hunter in 6.5 Creedmoor

[idahomarine]

Everyone:

I am new to the forum and would like a little guidance from everyone re: the advantages of the Kimber Montana over the Hunter. I am looking for a good lightweight mule deer gun and settled on the 6.5 Creedmoor as the caliber and after handling several rifles, I’m leaning strongly towards the Kimber. I read that the Hunter has some feeding and magazine seating issues that the Montana won’t have with the blind magazine. The Montana also has a threaded muzzle in case I add a break (how much does that help with a 6 lb. 6.5 Creedmoor?). My question for everyone is this: Is the Montana worth the extra $400? I don’t want to spend the money, but I’m okay with ‘buy once, cry once’ for my go-to hunting rifle.

 

[Lawnboi]

IMO yes it is worth it. I have a hunter and I hate the stock. Have shot an ascent quite a bit and much prefer the stock. It's stiffer, not as cheap feeling.

Once excess funds become avaliable, I plan on looking into a Montana stock to dump he hunter action in, or I'll be trading in the gun

 

[slvrslngr]

I've got a Montana. Bought it used. Looked at the Hunter, several times. Hated the stock. Bought a used Montana.

A brake on a Creed will likely be unnecessary. Some new shooters can handle a 300WM with no issues, others can't deal with a 223, you'll have to figure that out for yourself.

 

[Stid2677]

I own several Kimbers, all mine are more accurate with the brakes installed, including my Adirondack in 6.5CM. The brake helps tame muzzle flip on these light rifles.

 

[Muttly]

There's that old saying, it,s easier to avoid a flinch than to cure a flinch. Everybody has different triggers, for lack of a better term, whether the actual recoil, the noise,or both. I,m not a huge fan of gettin kicked by a gun, but one or two shots and I mostly settle in just pay attention to sight picture, etc... As long as I,'ve doubled up on ear protection, plugs and muffs..
Conversely, if my ears are bugging me, somebody popping off a .22 next to me, can have a hard time to concentrate, get a little flinch just from the noise.

If it was me, get the Montana, run the brake at the range, pull it for hunting..

 

[alwayslookingwest]

I have and love several Kimber Rifles and I would honestly say if you're interested in a "higher end" gun such as a Kimber get the Montana, as others have mentioned the stock alone is worth the price of admission (price out comparable Kevlar/ Fiberglass stock). I'd also like to comment on the caliber as within the past month I absolutely labored over a similar decision for a Mountain Ascent or Subalpine. I built spreadsheets and compared everything I could and while the 6.5 is indeed awesome, I actually settled on a 280 AI for its MUCH greater long distance performance as well as it's harder hitting close range. My thought was the ultimate mountain rifle for my future Western hunts. 280AI is and was a reloader's cartridge however you can fire regular 280 loads as well as buy your ammo directly from Nosler and several others. About the brake being useful... I say it depends on your particular needs, to me a high end ultra light mountain rifle is meant to be carried a lot and rarely shot so to me verifying it's accuracy once or twice a year and than hunting with it I'm not at all concerned with recoil reduction. If you plan on shooting it a lot, than sure perhaps that may make a difference to you. I would say shoot it and if it's accurate enough for your tastes in a controlled environment than run it as is. If you need more accuracy work on that rather than worry about recoil. I have learned to train at 100+ yards with a 22lr so as not to develop bad trigger habits and shoot most off my big stuff of a Sled. Hope this helps and honestly you'll love either one, but to me "buy once, cry once" always wins out, you never ever regret buying the best. Good luck.

ALW

 

[huntsman22]

I have learned to train at 100+ yards with a 22lr so as not to develop bad trigger habits and shoot most off my big stuff of a Sled.

Do you pack the sled when hunting?

 

[Boreal]

I've got the Montana in 6.5 CM and improved the accuracy with the brake. I had to take the stock down a little bit to free float the barrel and I took a little off the blind box to float that too. More because I like tinkering than any major accuracy issues. I've now got a rifle that puts .5" groups at 100, and I get 1.5" at 200. I have no doubts out to at least 400. I like the rifle enough that I ordered a MA in 280AI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AlaskaEd]

Montana for sure. The plastic hunter stock is fine if that's all you can afford, but the carbon/Kevlar Montana stock is one of the best rifle stocks made today.

 

[idahomarine]

I looked at the 280 AI, but I'm most likely going to land with the 6.5 CM this time around. One of the main reasons is commonality of ammo with the people I hunt with. Thanks everyone for the information. I think this is one of those questions where I know the answer, but $1,200 rates asking.

 

[Lip_Ripper Guy]

As mentioned, the upgrade to the Montana is money well spent.

I picked up a 6.5CM last year when Whittaker was running a sale, for $1153, which included 100 brass casings. I dialed in a load which grouped at 4/10" at 100 yards.

Fast forward to this year, I couldn't get the gun to shoot worth a darn with those same loads. I essentially started over, and nothing was working, and I was looking at 1.5-2" groups no matter what I tried. It turns out the screws holding the action to the stock were loose, but not loose enough that I could see or feel any movement. I tightened those up, and immediately went out and shot a sub .25" group. All is right in the world again!

 

[Jason Snyder]

I can't speak to the Montana because I haven't used one, but I'm plenty happy with my Kimber Hunter.

 

[Jjensen]

I vote Tikka...

 

[GKPrice]

As mentioned, the upgrade to the Montana is money well spent.

I picked up a 6.5CM last year when Whittaker was running a sale, for $1153, which included 100 brass casings. I dialed in a load which grouped at 4/10" at 100 yards.

Fast forward to this year, I couldn't get the gun to shoot worth a darn with those same loads. I essentially started over, and nothing was working, and I was looking at 1.5-2" groups no matter what I tried. It turns out the screws holding the action to the stock were loose, but not loose enough that I could see or feel any movement. I tightened those up, and immediately went out and shot a sub .25" group. All is right in the world again!

for some years now I use a Rigid "T" handle plumbers torque wrench (60 in lbs) and find an adapter to fit whatever rifle I'm thinking of, there are lots to be had - I loosen the action screws then retighten them to 60 in lbs with that wrench (which I always have with me on hunts) so I can check torque anytime, as many times as I wish - It's not about "how tight", it's about consistent tightness at all times - 60 in lbs is plenty tight enough IME - a dab of BLUE loktite doesn't hurt any thing either

 

[GKPrice]

back to the thread topic ......

Saturday I bit my lip and bought a Kimber MA 6.5 Creedmor - I torqued action screws, quick cleaned the bore and headed for the range with some tried n true 140 Accubond handloads, after 4 shots to zero in scope I shot 2 - 7/8" 3 shot groups at 100 - I tried 4 other loads, nothing that good amongst those - I'm gonna tweek the load and shoot in the morning again but I'm thinking of using it week after next for 1st season bull elk

excuse me while I spit out the crow feathers .....

 

[Dirty-D]

I wouldn't own a hunter, detachable mags are begging to get lost, and the plastic stock vs. the montana stock is worth double the price difference between the 2.

 

[Formidilosus]

I wouldn't own a hunter, detachable mags are begging to get lost, and the plastic stock vs. the montana stock is worth double the price difference between the 2.

Have you ever seriously used a rifle with detachable mags?

I, and pretty much everyone that I know have used rifles with detachable mags for the last couple of decades and I don't know a single person that has lost a mag. Not that the Montana isn't a better way to go, but detachable
mags isn't the reason.

 

[MuleyFever]

If it was me, get the Montana, run the brake at the range, pull it for hunting..

Does this affect accuracy?

 

[VernAK]

Again.....the stock is worth the difference in funds.....

And I have to agree with Dirty D....no detachable magazines unless they are duct taped in position.

 

[Dirty-D]

Have you ever seriously used a rifle with detachable mags?

I, and pretty much everyone that I know have used rifles with detachable mags for the last couple of decades and I don't know a single person that has lost a mag. Not that the Montana isn't a better way to go, but detachable
mags isn't the reason.

Yes I hunted with a Steyr in .243 for a few years with a flush fit mag. Handi for making the rifle safe while crossing fence lines, into the vehicle post hunt. But I did have to handload and go single shot in the field once (extra shells in the field bag) when I swapped jackets at the last minute before heading out.

They have a place, just not in my safe/hands