Best non custom mountain rifle

[Whisky]

I don't see Sako selling to many of those for $2900. Its a Finnlight with a fancy carbon stock. Finnlight can be had for around $1500. They are crazy to think their stock is worth $1400.

 

[idig4au]

I don't see Sako selling to many of those for $2900. Its a Finnlight with a fancy carbon stock. Finnlight can be had for around $1500. They are crazy to think their stock is worth $1400.

$2900....serious? I would have to agree with you on that especially for the caliber offerings.

 

[Clarktar]

Just stoking the fire, but have many people looked at the Forbes Rifles? It seems to be a factory production of Ultra Light Arms. It is basically the same thing from what I have read, except you do not have the ability to choose options...

http://downeastdigitalcinema.com/catalogtest/index.html#p=6

35 Whelen at 5.5 lbs.... I think the cost is similar to Kimber rifles, except Forbes manufactures Lefties!!

 

[MattB]

I just read that Kimber now has a 1" accuracy guaranty on its rifles - interesting.

 

[Beendare]

I just read that Kimber now has a 1" accuracy guaranty on its rifles - interesting.

I know Kimber has had some complaints on the mtn rifle and as any good company does- they are making some changes, testing every one...good to hear

 

[Highcountry_Hellrazor]

I really like my Sako 85 Finnlight in 300 Win. No plastic on my guns.

 

[DenRuyter]

WBY Mark V in .300 Wby mag is my favorite. Tack driver with a handload.

+1 for this cuz they are tack drivers! Mines an .300 Wby Accumark with a Swaro Z6 2.5-15x44 and is a tank at 10.2lb empty weight. If I had to do it all over again, it would the the MK V Ultra Lightweight and the extra 2 lbs.

 

[Ben]

Just stoking the fire, but have many people looked at the Forbes Rifles? It seems to be a factory production of Ultra Light Arms. It is basically the same thing from what I have read, except you do not have the ability to choose options...

http://downeastdigitalcinema.com/catalogtest/index.html#p=6

35 Whelen at 5.5 lbs.... I think the cost is similar to Kimber rifles, except Forbes manufactures Lefties!!

I too would like to hear thoughts on these rifles.

 

[BeWitty]

Absolutely love my Weatherby Mark V Ultralight .300 WBY with the factory brake!! I'm actually selling the scope I have on it in the classifieds because its so accurate at 600 yards and is capable of so much more. Hopefully it'll be a 1000-1200 yard setup in a couple months.

 

[trekker9]

Anyone use the Ruger Gunsite Scout. I have one and am debating wether to keep it or trade up to a Kimber Adirondack.

 

[HawkCreek]

Anyone use the Ruger Gunsite Scout. I have one and am debating wether to keep it or trade up to a Kimber Adirondack.

I have one. Haven't gotten to take it hunting yet. Took me a while to find a hunting load that would shoot well but I think I found one finally. It's a bit heavier than some of the previously mentioned choices but mine shoots great (I'd say amazing but the jerk behind the trigger keeps messing it up) with select loads.

 

[Mad Mountain Mike]

I'm no expert on this matter but my Browning X-bolt stainless fluted barrel with carbon fibre stock chambered in a 300wsm works well for me.
I've not weighed it but it carries well and shoots even better.

 

[GKPrice]

I'm no expert on this matter but my Browning X-bolt stainless fluted barrel with carbon fibre stock chambered in a 300wsm works well for me.
I've not weighed it but it carries well and shoots even better.

Brownings are well made and not priced too bad - Browning was in my choice list originally so I researched them a lot, can't find any really "bad" feedback on the Xbolts at all, some but it sounded like user error - The Xbolts will stay on my potential future list for sure

 

[GKPrice]

I have one. Haven't gotten to take it hunting yet. Took me a while to find a hunting load that would shoot well but I think I found one finally. It's a bit heavier than some of the previously mentioned choices but mine shoots great (I'd say amazing but the jerk behind the trigger keeps messing it up) with select loads.

two pretty much different beasts IMO - for hunting I'd pick the Kimber in a second

 

[Mad Mountain Mike]

Brownings are well made and not priced too bad - Browning was in my choice list originally so I researched them a lot, can't find any really "bad" feedback on the Xbolts at all, some but it sounded like user error - The Xbolts will stay on my potential future list for sure

Year before last I tried a Sako 85 Finnlite in a 270wsm for a season. Weight wise I didn't notice much difference, but in felt recoil the deference was huge. I've never scoped myself like I did with the Sako.

 

[HawkCreek]

two pretty much different beasts IMO - for hunting I'd pick the Kimber in a second

I dont have a Kimber to compare to so I only have the online spec sheets to go off of. The Kimber is definitely lighter but comparing the .308 version to the Ruger what else is different? I'm not discounting the 2+ pounds difference or trying to be a smart ass, legitimate question.

 

[MattB]

I dont have a Kimber to compare to so I only have the online spec sheets to go off of. The Kimber is definitely lighter but comparing the .308 version to the Ruger what else is different? I'm not discounting the 2+ pounds difference or trying to be a smart ass, legitimate question.

I believe the Ruger has a 16" barrel versus 22" for the Kimber, so the Kimber will have a significantly velocity advantage, all else equal. There are likely some unique issues with scoping the Ruger versus the Kimber (intermediate eye relief versus standard). The combination of these factors would likely make the Kimber the obvious choice for longer shots that can occur in mountain hunting. The Kimber would likely provide a better trigger pull, better accuracy, etc. Not to mention the 2# difference, which is significant.

Insofar as the broader question is concerned, for me it comes down to the totality of the features of the Kimber which is purpose-built as a mountain rifle whereas the Scout was built to be a jack of all trades (and likely master of none).

 

[GKPrice]

I believe the Ruger has a 16" barrel versus 22" for the Kimber, so the Kimber will have a significantly velocity advantage, all else equal. There are likely some unique issues with scoping the Ruger versus the Kimber (intermediate eye relief versus standard). The combination of these factors would likely make the Kimber the obvious choice for longer shots that can occur in mountain hunting. The Kimber would likely provide a better trigger pull, better accuracy, etc. Not to mention the 2# difference, which is significant.

Insofar as the broader question is concerned, for me it comes down to the totality of the features of the Kimber which is purpose-built as a mountain rifle whereas the Scout was built to be a jack of all trades (and likely master of none).

THAT pretty much sums the comparison up but to add the Kimber is a blind magazine rather than the Scout with a magazine box protruding from the bottom - Both seem to have equal pros on action/safety/trigger - 2 lbs is a BIG difference as well - for what it's worth, a Kimber "MONTANA" is essentially the same as the Adirondak but quite a bit cheaper and if you still want to go ultralight you can do a bit more lightening a piece at a time for less money and have it "YOUR" way

 

[HawkCreek]

The blued Rugers have an actual bolt face to crown measurement of 17.25" while the Andriondak has an 18" barrel. 3/4" of barrel will increase the velocity a tiny bit but the difference will be nil. The Ruger will also take a conventional scope but you do have to remove the rear sight to do so. Ruger triggers take all of one pin to remove, mine took a few minutes with some fine grit sandpaper to make it quite crisp or you could get a Spec-Tech trigger for less than $100, even then you're still way ahead on cost. I didn't mess with the spring so it could be lightened but it works fine. With a 3 round magazine the only protrusion is the bottom plate so to my hand it feels the same as my blind magazine and drop floor plate feature rifles.

The 2+ pound difference IS a big deal. Trying to get a rifle down to that weight alone could burn up many budgets.

If i was a better shot Ruger would be better represented but dont think it's a slouch for accuracy just because it's a Ruger.


I'm not saying the cost isn't worth it. If I could afford one I'd be begging for the chance to buy a Kifaru Rambling Rifle. As it is the Andriondak is probably the closest most readily available replacement. But if the weight alone ISN'T a factor to someone I don't see much difference otherwise. But if someone wants to send me one to shoot the snot out of I certainly won't refuse the offer.

ETA: Yes I realize this is in the lightweight forum. An analogy I read on another forum is this "rifles, like auto racing, losing ounces costs money, the final ounces cost a lot of money"

 

[GKPrice]

THAT pretty much sums the comparison up but to add the Kimber is a blind magazine rather than the Scout with a magazine box protruding from the bottom - Both seem to have equal pros on action/safety/trigger - 2 lbs is a BIG difference as well - for what it's worth, a Kimber "MONTANA" is essentially the same as the Adirondak but quite a bit cheaper and if you still want to go ultralight you can do a bit more lightening a piece at a time for less money and have it "YOUR" way

another think I noticed when handling a Ruger is the safety lever hugs the action pretty closely, not necessarily a "bad" thing but "could" hinder getting it into battery in a tight spot