Kimber Montana or Barrett Fieldcraft

Daniel_M

WKR
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
1,430
Location
Wasilla, Alaska
Can’t speak to the Barrett, but my Kimber 06 has served me well out to 418yds. Replaced the firing pin spring, torqued the action screws and polished the feed ramp. I have friends who discipline with extreme accuracy. Me not so much, an inch at 100 is plenty for my needs. For the sake of numbers, .338” is my best 5 shot group at 100yds. Notched quite a few tags in the past 4 years with it, never failed me. That said, I am well overdue for another rifle and have been wanting a 6.5 for the kids to shoot.

Barnes TTSX, Accubonds and Partitions all grouped relatively the same, but POI shifted a bit.

3a9774f7e4c639a313d8d13c9b05bb8f.jpg


9814538b29633f3162eac6aa27991ef7.jpg


660e6b3d4d6646e93047a7797a4a0308.jpg





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

oenanthe

WKR
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
415
Location
Fbks, AK
I can't remember what the wt. was on my short action Montana before I started working on it to lighten it up, but I'm pretty sure that it was a fair amount heavier than my 6.5 CM Fieldcraft. If I remember right, the stock on the .300wsm Montana weighs 26 oz., but I've never had the stock off the Fieldcraft to weigh it. I've also never had the stock off the .270 Mountain Ascent to weigh it either. The naked wt. of my FC is 5.18 lbs. according to my scale, and my Montana (after taking several oz. off of it), now weighs 5.65 oz., both short actions but not really apples to apples comparisons.

Hoo, man, now I'm really confused. My 84m 7mm-08 weighs 5.18 lbs. bare, and it's a 2008 or 2009 model with steel trigger guard and no drilled out bolt handle. My 2019 Subalpine .30-06 weighs 5.28 lbs.

Is your 5.65 lb. Kimber an 8400 by chance, or is it an 84m?

Truly not intending to hassle you here, just trying to figure out what these things actually weigh.
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
7,391
Location
Chugiak, Alaska
Hoo, man, now I'm really confused. My 84m 7mm-08 weighs 5.18 lbs. bare, and it's a 2008 or 2009 model with steel trigger guard and no drilled out bolt handle. My 2019 Subalpine .30-06 weighs 5.28 lbs.

Is your 5.65 lb. Kimber an 8400 by chance, or is it an 84m?

Truly not intending to hassle you here, just trying to figure out what these things actually weigh.

It’s the 8400. All of their magnum calibers (even the short mags), are 8400’s, all the other short action’s are 84M’s, and long actions are 84L’s.

I didn’t realize that the 84m weighed the same as the SA Fieldcraft.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

prm

WKR
Joined
Mar 31, 2017
Messages
2,144
Location
No. VA
If you have a Kimber 84M that is working for you, a Barrett won’t do anything the Kimber doesn’t. If starting from scratch with one of each, the Barrett will likely be easier to get shooting well, and will shoot a greater variety of loads well. If the Kimber shoots a bullet you're happy with quite well then you’re set.
 

oenanthe

WKR
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
415
Location
Fbks, AK
It’s the 8400. All of their magnum calibers (even the short mags), are 8400’s, all the other short action’s are 84M’s, and long actions are 84L’s.

I didn’t realize that the 84m weighed the same as the SA Fieldcraft.

Thanks for clarifying. For some reason when you said "short action" I fixated on the 84m. My bad.

* Note 1 - there are some non-magnum 8400 models; until they came out with the 84L they called those 8400. Calibers like .30-06 and .270.

* Note 2 - the newer 84m should be about 2 oz. lighter due to the aluminum trigger guard.
 

AnchorF22

WKR
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
1,383
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
I'll echo some of the comments from Formidilosus...

In my experience with Kimber Montanas of various calibers from .270 Win to .325 WSM, they can be VERY finicky and take a ton of ammo to find a load that'll group even decently. I had a .300 WSM that shot every ammo about MOA or better, and others that won't get anything inside 2" no matter what loads I tried. The barrel mounting isn't always consistent either... I've had some free floated and others that had firm contact at the end of the forend. I really like the fit and finish of the Montanas, and they carry great, but they're too much hassle for me now. I just picked up a Barrett FC in .30-06, but haven't shot it yet, so I can't give a comparison in that realm just yet.
 

USMC-40

WKR
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
545
Location
NW Missouri
Why take the chance? I’ve wanted a Kimber, but the risk of getting a turd pushed me towards the fieldcraft. I have two fieldcraft’s (6.5 and .270). I have never owned a Kimber rifle, and probably won’t. It’s a NULA on the cheap, and chances are it will shoot very well, especially with heavy for caliber bullets
 

OneRingTrTa

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
105
Location
Pennsylvania
After having a kimber Montana rebarrled for quite sometime now, and after recently picking up a Tikka T3x lite, I think it would be a tough choice to pick one. The stocks are the big difference. The Kimber is awesome, the Tikka SUCKS! The Tikka cost me $600. The Kimber and rebarrel...a lot more. If the Tikka stays, it will be getting a new stock with all the bells & whistles. ($600-$1000). That's my Montana's territory.
The Barrett is a tough call. From what Im seeing, it is the top of the comb of the stock relates to how much you will be getting thumped. The Tikka in 270 win kicks as much or more than Kimber's in 300 win mag. Even after spending +$1500, it still wouldn't be perfect in my eyes. Im just guessing. I would like to see a video of the cycling of the Barrett action. I got a kimber hunter, thinking it would cycle as smooth as my broke-in montana. NADA! It isn't broke in yet [beeep]. The Tikka, on the other hand, cycles like greased glass, w/o any work done to it.
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
7,391
Location
Chugiak, Alaska
After having a kimber Montana rebarrled for quite sometime now, and after recently picking up a Tikka T3x lite, I think it would be a tough choice to pick one. The stocks are the big difference. The Kimber is awesome, the Tikka SUCKS! The Tikka cost me $600. The Kimber and rebarrel...a lot more. If the Tikka stays, it will be getting a new stock with all the bells & whistles. ($600-$1000). That's my Montana's territory.
The Barrett is a tough call. From what Im seeing, it is the top of the comb of the stock relates to how much you will be getting thumped. The Tikka in 270 win kicks as much or more than Kimber's in 300 win mag. Even after spending +$1500, it still wouldn't be perfect in my eyes. Im just guessing. I would like to see a video of the cycling of the Barrett action. I got a kimber hunter, thinking it would cycle as smooth as my broke-in montana. NADA! It isn't broke in yet [beeep]. The Tikka, on the other hand, cycles like greased glass, w/o any work done to it.

The Barrett FC is easily as smooth cycling as the T3 Lite, but with a MUCH nicer stock, and just a much nicer fit and finish over all IMO. It’s also about twice as much money, but worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Formidilosus

Super Moderator
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
8,004
The Barrett FC is easily as smooth cycling as the T3 Lite,

?

I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing if you are saying a FC is the same as a T3...

Seems to be lost in translation on the internet with most judging the action “smoothness” by moving the bolt forward and back a couple inches repeatedly. That is definitely not what I mean when I say “smooth action”. What I and others are talking about is really “resistance to binding while running the bolt fast under stress”. The FC has a tendency like pretty much all non European rifles to bind at the farthest point of travel to the rear, while trying to push forward to chamber. If your grip/finger is not perfect, you get lateral tension put into the bolt and it binds up.

This is very apparent when you have someone do rapid bolt manipulations with various rifles. The rifles that people almost never bind or cause a malfunction in, will almost universally be European with the T3 leading the pack.
 

JO.

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
124
Location
Colorado
I had wanted a Kimber for years and finally bought one last year after gathering the funds to set up as I wanted. Went with a new Montana in 280 AI, its threaded and wears a NF NXS 2.5-10. Started w/ some factory nosler 140 BT ammo that shot .3-.5” 3 shot groups from the bench. Hunted w/ factory ammo last year and shot a bull and a buck. Worked a load over the summer and just took another bull and buck this week during the 2nd season.

I was really set on this rifle for many years and read all the horror stories about other older Montanas people had posted. Stubbornness or whatever you want to call it I bought one and have no regrets. I think a lot of their past issues have been corrected as you see much less about their newer rifles. I looked a FC too and just wasn’t interested in the caliber selection for what I wanted. That said, I still think a FC in 243 would make another great rifle for predators or antelope. Either will make a great rifle.
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
7,391
Location
Chugiak, Alaska
?

I don’t think we’re talking about the same thing if you are saying a FC is the same as a T3...

Seems to be lost in translation on the internet with most judging the action “smoothness” by moving the bolt forward and back a couple inches repeatedly. That is definitely not what I mean when I say “smooth action”. What I and others are talking about is really “resistance to binding while running the bolt fast under stress”. The FC has a tendency like pretty much all non European rifles to bind at the farthest point of travel to the rear, while trying to push forward to chamber. If your grip/finger is not perfect, you get lateral tension put into the bolt and it binds up.

This is very apparent when you have someone do rapid bolt manipulations with various rifles. The rifles that people almost never bind or cause a malfunction in, will almost universally be European with the T3 leading the pack.

Ok, I can agree with that. I just pulled them both out, loaded and cycled ‘em, and the T3 is a bit smoother for sure. I don’t know if it would ever be apparent in a real world hunting application (cycling rounds through and firing as fast as I can), but it’s definitely apparent in the controlled environment of my garage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
1,356
Location
Wasilla, Alaska
Despite Luke's experience of the bolt opening, I have not experienced this even one time over the course of 2 sheep seasons with a huge amount of bushwacking. While it doesn't lock, it not like it just flips up easily. So, take that for what it's worth. Your mileage may vary, as they say.



Have owned several Kimbers, and 2 FieldCrafts. All plenty accurate for my hunting. That said I grew tired of the bolt coming open on the Barrett when strapped to my pack going through the brush. Really the only major downside the to Barrett IMO. But enough of a downside that all my hunting rifles either say Kimber or Tikka on the side of them.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2019
Messages
875
Bought A Kimber Montana 8400 in 300WSM about a year after they first came out - so about 15 years ago. Was looking for a premium lightweight mountain rifle, and was sold by the way it handled, 3-position safety, and kevlar stock. Also, the Mountain Rifle selection back then was much more limited. So, I had high hopes. However, it just never shot well and about 2 MOA was the best it would do no matter what we tried. After countless attempted remedies and years of frustration I just got tired of throwing money at it and moved on to a an H-S Precision PHL - night and day difference. The PHL is just superb in every way and ~1\2 MOA shooter with several loads.
 

TNHunter

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Messages
194
Location
Nashville, TN
Man that’s a tough one. I have owned a few of them but currently only have two Kimber’s (Montana & Mountain Ascent), and one Fieldcraft. They are, and have all been, great shooters and I can’t really say that I prefer one over the other. The FC’s are just a tad lighter (apples to apples), and have a smoother action when cycled, however, I am kind of partial to the 3 position safety and CRF of the Kimber’s. If you have the opportunity to handle them both and mess with them a bit, that would probably be your best bet for deciding IMO. Good luck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What AK Trout said.. I have both and all shot extremely well... for me I like the feel of the Barrett better but that’s a personal choice... I did have a question for Barrett customer service because the bolt was hard to close and they immediately answered my question, pull up my particular rifle and discussed its firing at the facility... just a good tight fit in the chamber. So Barrett’s customer service is great in my opinion... I’d say just get both and you will be happy ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
OP
T

turley

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Oct 20, 2019
Messages
264
Thanks for all the information and personal experiences regarding each rifle. After handling both I like the feel and the of LOP (a bit shorter) of the Kimber better. It seems that most believe the quality control issues are in the past....but it still was a factor considered.
My local gun shops that have Kimber rifles are not discounted.
Any recommendations for online distributors?
Thanks,
Turley
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,407
Location
S. UTAH
I have a post about my issues with a Kimber Montana in 280ai. Some of it may be self inflicted. I need to shoot it more but I am having a hard time being consistent with it. Bottom line is I have lost some confidence in it. Considering a rebarrel with oregunsmithing and maybe one of their stocks. Or I may sell it and get a Fierce or Cooper or CA.

Check out Eurooptic for an online seller. A bunch on gunbroker too.
 
Top