Mountain Ascent 280 AI or 300 WM

alexanderg23

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
521
Location
Wasilla, AK
So I want a lightweight rifle, I think I want a Kimber mountain ascent or really a Subalpine. I plan to use it for whitetail, elk, and hopefully in the not to distant future moose and hopefully brown bear.

I would prefer a custom like Cooper or one a local guy could build me, but I think a Kimber would be work.

I thought I wanted a 280 AI, but if I was to get 1 gun to do anything I know a 300 WM would work.

Question I have is, is the Kimber solid enough for 300 WM. I've looked at them in 6.5 and 257 and they are definitely trimmed down, which I like but worry about a 300 WM being a little too much for that lightweight action.

I know for 90% of the type of hunting I'll do a 280 is great, but I would really like to get 1 gun and stick with it.

Does anyone have a Kimber in 300 WM and how do You feel about it?
 
OP
alexanderg23

alexanderg23

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
521
Location
Wasilla, AK
Also I'm red/green color blind and hunt by myself offen. Blood trailing isn't an option (I have a dog for whitetail) I've never lost a deer, but need to knock em dead.
 

GKPrice

Banned
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Messages
2,442
Location
Western Oregon
the Kimber MA in 7mm mag and 300 WM are not as lightweight as the standards - 280AI would work well enough - so would a 30.06, same weight as the 280, better selection of heavy bullets, lots of ammo and components readily available, no fireforming to do
 

rfurman24

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,724
With moose and brown bear on the table I would consider a CA Ridgeline in 300 WM.
 

rfurman24

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,724
It's your money. That comment makes no sense to me. What are your expectations? If you just want a lightweight rifle and shots will be under 300 yards why not save your money and get a Tikka? I am sure others will chime but I really can not see the appeal of a Kimber MA in a magnum cartridge. I get the smaller cartridges with the huge weight savings but magnums there are several better options.
 

AK Troutbum

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
6,167
Location
Chugiak, Alaska
I have a Kimber Montana in 300wsm and it's been my go to rifle for the past 11 years or so. I've killed multiple deer, moose, goat, sheep and a brown bear with it. With the few modifications that I've done, I've been able to get the wt. down to 6.1 lbs. w/scope. I could shave more wt. if I wanted to spend the $$ but I've decided not to. I did just purchase a MA chambered in 300wm two days ago but I won't receive it until Tues. or Wed. so more on that to come. On a side note, I also have a Montana chambered in .280AI and it is definitely a sweet shooter. Last fall was my 1st time hunting with that rifle and so far I've only taken a single goat with it, killed it just like the .300wsm, although I would rather carry the .300 if pursuing BB's.
 

16Bore

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
3,020
Unless you handload, 280AI wouldn't even be on the list. 300WSM Montana would be my pick.
 

6.5x284

Senior Member
Joined
May 7, 2015
Messages
271
Location
Seattle, WA / Thompson Falls, MT
It's your money. That comment makes no sense to me. What are your expectations? If you just want a lightweight rifle and shots will be under 300 yards why not save your money and get a Tikka? I am sure others will chime but I really can not see the appeal of a Kimber MA in a magnum cartridge. I get the smaller cartridges with the huge weight savings but magnums there are several better options.

Maybe he wants to seat bullets near the lands or take advantage of the CRF. I had a Tikka in .300 WM and sold it for my Kimber MT in .280 AI. Very glad I did. With new more modestly priced Kimber rifles, it's a no brainer to me if available in a caliber someone wants.
 

rfurman24

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,724
My comment was about the CA which will have zero problem with bullets seated at the lands. I am confused about being adamantly against carbon. Once again I see the point in a lighter weight Kimber such as a 280AI or even more so with short action. I love the round but it would not be my choice for a do everything rifle with moose and big bears on my list. If you are shooting under 300 yards then you are putting way too much thought into the this vs that argument. Pick the cartridge you wish to shoot and buy the cheapest gun in the weight range you choose. Ballistics are almost a non factor at these ranges and any rifle will have the accuracy needed. I do think the 300 WSM in the Kimber would be a great compromise.
 

16Bore

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
3,020
No mention of bullets, but I assume it won't equate to a 30-06 when its all said and done.

Kissing lands and CRF are fairly overblown in hunting rifles. Safari and Benchrest chatter...
 
OP
alexanderg23

alexanderg23

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
521
Location
Wasilla, AK
I just like the looks and feel of a steel barrel. Carbon is cool. But just "feels" awkward to me. I like cleaning a barrel with a oily rag type of feeling in a gun.


My comment was about the CA which will have zero problem with bullets seated at the lands. I am confused about being adamantly against carbon. Once again I see the point in a lighter weight Kimber such as a 280AI or even more so with short action. I love the round but it would not be my choice for a do everything rifle with moose and big bears on my list. If you are shooting under 300 yards then you are putting way too much thought into the this vs that argument. Pick the cartridge you wish to shoot and buy the cheapest gun in the weight range you choose. Ballistics are almost a non factor at these ranges and any rifle will have the accuracy needed. I do think the 300 WSM in the Kimber would be a great compromise.
 

AK Troutbum

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
6,167
Location
Chugiak, Alaska
I think that you should just go ahead and kill two birds with one stone. Purchase a lifetime membership with BHA for $2500 and choose what ever MA caliber you want.
 

rfurman24

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,724
Like I said before it is your money. I view them as tools. I could not care less about cool. I would bet nine times out of ten the CA will outshoot the Kimber and will be lighter in a magnum caliber. For what it sounds like you are after I would lean towards the Kimber MA 300 WSM.
 

AK Troutbum

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2012
Messages
6,167
Location
Chugiak, Alaska
Like I said before it is your money. I view them as tools. I could not care less about cool. I would bet nine times out of ten the CA will outshoot the Kimber and will be lighter in a magnum caliber. For what it sounds like you are after I would lean towards the Kimber MA 300 WSM.
Probably hard to say which one would shoot better but they're listed wt. is exactly the same (6.5 lbs. for the .300WM).
 

rfurman24

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
1,724
Ya, weights are the same. I was thinking the Kimber spec was 6.7lbs when it is 6lbs 7oz. I have seen far too many ugly Kimber groups too expect much from the lightweight barrel contour.
 

ianpadron

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
1,020
I have a Kimber Montana in 300wsm and it's been my go to rifle for the past 11 years or so. I've killed multiple deer, moose, goat, sheep and a brown bear with it. With the few modifications that I've done, I've been able to get the wt. down to 6.1 lbs. w/scope. I could shave more wt. if I wanted to spend the $$ but I've decided not to. I did just purchase a MA chambered in 300wm two days ago but I won't receive it until Tues. or Wed. so more on that to come. On a side note, I also have a Montana chambered in .280AI and it is definitely a sweet shooter. Last fall was my 1st time hunting with that rifle and so far I've only taken a single goat with it, killed it just like the .300wsm, although I would rather carry the .300 if pursuing BB's.
Trout do you have those rifle mods listed in a thread somewhere?

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
 
Top