Kimber hunter or Vanguard wilderness ?

[pumatom]

Narrowed down my choice between 2 rifles
Mountain rifle chambered in 270 caliber
Kimber is a pound lighter
Any opinions on Weaterby vs the Kimber

 

[PredatorX]

That wilderness is too heavy for a mountain rifle in my opinion.

But keep in mind I am one of those weight weenies.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

 

[Ben]

I’ve been looking at these rifles as well. After going down to the local gun store and having them side by side, and working the actions, I’m sold on the Weatherby wilderness. Plus, there are some not too great reviews about the hunter.

 

[ams]

I am gonna be that guy...... but why a 270? I would go with the weatherby in these two choices. It is heavier but also has a better stock and a 24” barrel. The stock triggers are pretty nice but a Timney will only run you another $100. Cerakote it and you are off and rockin. I have the same setup with a howa (same rifle with a 22” barrel). Ok, all that said, if I may be so bold..... Go mess with a Tikka also. A super light from Sportmans will be in the same price range or cheaper, comes stainless, and is lighter than the weatherby. Lastly, unless you have 270 components I would pick a 6.5 creedmoor. There is nothing the current 270’s have over the 6.5’s and they are all in the 130-140 grain range. The 270 has a ton of potential with new bullets but the gun makers aren’t making the twists to go with it. Anyways, rant over. Good luck! I am a big vanguard/howa fan but a tikka 6.5 comes with a 24”barrel and is around 6 pounds!

 

[backcountry_hunter]

I'd go with the Roy simply because of the issues the hunter has had with the magazine/feeding... With the roy you know it'll be accurate and well built, but they do use the heavier action. If you would consider a used firearm I'd look for a late model kimber montana and (IMO) you'd have a better gun than either of the two you listed for roughly the same costs. That said if it's new between the two I'd go with the wby...

and this is from a kimber fan. I love most of what kimber puts out, but not their hunter.....

 

[backcountry_hunter]

There is nothing the current 270’s have over the 6.5’s and they are all in the 130-140 grain range. The 270 has a ton of potential with new bullets but the gun makers aren’t making the twists to go with it.

The 270 does have an 82 year headstart in ammo availability and reputation.... I don't dislike the 6.5 creed, but I've seen enough new calibers come and go in the last 20years that (playing devils advocate) I'd see no reason to stray from the classics, in fact there isn't much the 6.5 creed will do that the 270 won't in a hunting scenario. I have never shot an innaccurate .270.... regardless of manufacturer and price point as I recall they have all driven tacks.

 

[wannakillabigbull]

The 270 does have an 82 year headstart in ammo availability and reputation....

The 270 also has an advantage in literally every single external ballistic category. More energy, velocity, and fly flatter; even for loads that only stabilize in a 1 in 10 twist barrel. The 6.5 has the advantage of less recoil and a shorter rifle by about an inch.

 

[thinhorn_AK]

I have a weatherby backcountry and it’s a nice rifle, I think the wilderness just has a different finish on the metal than the backcountry.

I don’t shoot mine all that much but it did get used hard for a few seasons with zero issues, it’s very accurate and reliable like all the vanguards I’ve had over the years. I don’t really like the vanguard triggers but they aren’t too bad.

Between the guns you mentioned I’d get a weatherby. I have no interest in a kimber hunter. I’m a big fan of Montana’s and MAs but I’ll pass on the hunter.

 

[ams]

Want to know something funny? I own a 270 but not a 6.5 but the info is out and that 6.5 is a pretty awesome round. But in the OP weight was mentioned. The Tikka is 3/4 pound lighter than the weatherby and both are awesome rifles. The weatherby comes in with a 24” barrel but the tikka only has a 22” barrel in 270. The Tikka creed is 24” and will do all that the 270 can but in a lighter gun when considering the Tikka. So if weight is a concern I would choose the Tikka. Next year I’m having a 270wsm or 270AI built with a 1-8.5ish twist for the Berger 170 grain and the cutting edge coppers.

 

[luke moffat]

The 270 also has an advantage in literally every single external ballistic category. More energy, velocity, and fly flatter; even for loads that only stabilize in a 1 in 10 twist barrel. The 6.5 has the advantage of less recoil and a shorter rifle by about an inch.

I agree with this....until just after 350 yards. Then the 6.5 starts walking away from it in terms of velocity and energy (if that matters to you), and the 6.5 drifts less the entire way. Sure it is just under a 1/2 MOA less drop on the 270 at 500 compared to the 6.5, but I can deal with that a lot easier than the 1/2 MOA more of wind drift the 270 brings.

Granted both are plenty capable to where most of us till our game (sub 350 yards) so I would take the short action and less recoil of the 6.5 over the 270 in that case, and I did.

 

[wannakillabigbull]

I agree with this....until just after 350 yards. Then the 6.5 starts walking away from it in terms of velocity and energy (if that matters to you)

I have yet to see that for any factory hunting loads I've ever compared between the two (Federal Accubonds, Nosler BTs, Hornady ELD-X Precision Hunter). I'm not a reloader so I couldn't comment on those loads. Luke knows far better than I do, I just haven't seen factory ammo that do either of those. They definitely do drift a little less so I stand corrected there.

HSM loads the VLDs for both (140s for the 6.5 and 150s for the 270, which do stabilize in the 1:10 twist) but doesn't post the drop charts. I just ran the numbers and, barring an error from me, the 270 holds a velocity advantage out to around 350 like Luke says, but holds the energy advantage out to about 800. Drops are the same essentially and at 400 yards the full value wind hold is only a quarter MOA less for the creedmoor.

Luke, are handloads that much better than factory loads for the creedmoor? Or maybe I'm not doing math right? Regardless, the short action, lighter weight, and less recoil of the 6.5 certainly hold an advantage if that's what you're looking for. I just haven't seen a ballistic advantage.

Like I said Luke knows far better than I do so take his advice, not mine.

 

[luke moffat]

I have yet to see that for any factory hunting loads I've ever compared between the two (Federal Accubonds, Nosler BTs, Hornady ELD-X Precision Hunter). I'm not a reloader so I couldn't comment on those loads. Luke knows far better than I do, I just haven't seen factory ammo that do either of those. They definitely do drift a little less so I stand corrected there.

HSM loads the VLDs for both (140s for the 6.5 and 150s for the 270, which do stabilize in the 1:10 twist) but doesn't post the drop charts. I just ran the numbers and, barring an error from me, the 270 holds a velocity advantage out to around 350 like Luke says, but holds the energy advantage out to about 800. Drops are the same essentially and at 400 yards the full value wind hold is only a quarter MOA less for the creedmoor.

Luke, are handloads that much better than factory loads for the creedmoor? Or maybe I'm not doing math right? Regardless, the short action, lighter weight, and less recoil of the 6.5 certainly hold an advantage if that's what you're looking for. I just haven't seen a ballistic advantage.

Like I said Luke knows far better than I do so take his advice, not mine.

I was figuring handloads yes. I guess I just don't feel the need for 20-25% more recoil only to be ran down further out later. Both are equally capable cartridges and both will work no doubt for as long as you'd kill game with either. Can't really go wrong with either. If you prefer long action the 270 is good (though the 280 or 30-06 I like mo betta) if you like short action the 6.5 is proving to be a good choice despite my resistance to it just over a year ago, but I am hard headed like that.

Luckily with cartridges and bullets this day in age its really hard to pick a "bad" setup to go with unless you go really out of your way. Kinda like a 16" 358 win

 

[sndmn11]

I agree with this....until just after 350 yards. Then the 6.5 starts walking away from it in terms of velocity and energy (if that matters to you), and the 6.5 drifts less the entire way. Sure it is just under a 1/2 MOA less drop on the 270 at 500 compared to the 6.5, but I can deal with that a lot easier than the 1/2 MOA more of wind drift the 270 brings.

Granted both are plenty capable to where most of us till our game (sub 350 yards) so I would take the short action and less recoil of the 6.5 over the 270 in that case, and I did.

I just quickly compared factory Hornady loads, and compared like sectional densities between the two, and cant get the 6.5 ahead in velocity, energy, or trajectory . That said, I agree that things are close enough to not be worth the extra recoil. We have a 7mm-08 on the way for the same reasons the 6.5 is good.

I have a Tikka and I also have a Wilderness DM on the way (1/4lb lighter). The Tikka is a great rifle and a fantastic value, and I think that the Wilderness is as well. I will be using the Weatherby because of a few quirks with the Tikka that are not present with the Weatherby. I would have zero problems hunting with either.

 

[pumatom]

Alot of great advice on here
Appreciate the feedback
Just to cloud up the issue more
I found a Sako A-7 Big game for the same price as the the other two