Kimber Montana vs. Tikka T3x Superlite vs. Savage 16 LWH (308)

[Trial153]

pretty easy to say when it's not your money I'd say

*^ ^
Coming from the guy who's suggestions have ranged from reboring to buying more loads to magic fairy dust.

And for the record I would take the same advise as I gave. Throwing good money after bad is rarely sound advise.

 

[GKPrice]

*^ ^
Coming from the guy who's suggestions have ranged from reboring to buying more loads to magic fairy dust.

And for the record I would take the same advise as I gave. Throwing good money after bad is rarely sound advise.

you do it the way you want and others, to include myself, will do it ours - "fairy dust" ?? that's pretty funny - you are QUITE the "expert" aren't you ?

 

[Rorschach]

I ran a patch down it to clean out whatever residual oils were in there from prep for storage by the distributor. That's it. No scrubbing.

Snyder - what I meant when referring to crosshairs movement is really 'wobble zone' before the shot broke. And, throughout the process, I occasionally dry fire to 'de-flinch' myself, although I never did detect myself flinching, or in any other way 'feel' like the shots I took were not good shots.

I think the consistency of the results throughout the entire series of groups so far lends credence to my performance being fairly consistent, at the very least. However, since none of you can vet my shooting skill, it is most reasonable to also consider that I may be the issue with the rifle's performance, with it being capable in the right hands of much more.

GK - I would never unload a rifle I reasonably believed had an issue without full disclosure on that perceived issue to the prospective purchaser. And, I agree with you 100%, that Kimber deserves a chance to right this. However, I wanted to fully disclose my experience with this rifle, regardless of what happened, and to also get folks' feedback that have more experience than I do with lightweight rifles. I will fully disclose in this thread what happens with Kimber's CS.

If Kimber won't outright give my money back, I would probably send it to them for whatever work, then just sell it straight from that point without shooting it.

At this point, provided the rifle doesn't magically start shooting, I would consider them having 'fulfilled' any guarantee they offered by giving my money back. I don't consider it a very good 'guarantee' if the customer has to screw around for 2 months with shipping the rifle here and there, Kimber changing this or that, shipping it back to test, etc., etc. Am I alone in my thinking on this?

 

[Jimbob]

I am interested to see what happens.

I don't think a gun manufacture should give you your money back without them first testing it. It says 1 MOA guaranteed not satisfaction guaranteed. 1 MOA guaranteed means the guns is capable of shooting 1 MOA in the RIGHT HANDS. Not a knock on your ability but if I was a gun manufacture I would not be refunding any money until the rifle came back and it was tested and proved to not meet 1 MOA, I wouldn't just take every customers word for it.

 

[Rorschach]

Agree totally - I don't think they need to do anything until they verify that it, in fact, won't shoot <1moa with factory ammo.

However, I disagree on the "1moa guaranteed" vs. "satisfaction guaranteed". If I was told that, as a customer, I'd say that's a tad be 'slippery' or 'slimy' in the wording.

I don't think a gun manufacture should give you your money back without them first testing it. It says 1 MOA guaranteed not satisfaction guaranteed. 1 MOA guaranteed means the guns is capable of shooting 1 MOA in the RIGHT HANDS. Not a knock on your ability but if I was a gun manufacture I would not be refunding any money until the rifle came back and it was tested and proved to not meet 1 MOA, I wouldn't just take every customers word for it.

 

[Jimbob]

Agree totally - I don't think they need to do anything until they verify that it, in fact, won't shoot <1moa with factory ammo.

However, I disagree on the "1moa guaranteed" vs. "satisfaction guaranteed". If I was told that, as a customer, I'd say that's a tad be 'slippery' or 'slimy' in the wording.

How is that slimy? I'm confused with your thinking. A 1 MOA guarantee is what the website says so if the gun can shoot 1 MOA then they are holding up their end of the bargain. If your satisfaction is not met then that is on you and the company has no obligation to meet every criteria to satisfy you when they never said they would do that in the first place. The company sets the terms of the guarantee not the customer.

 

[Rorschach]

Yeah, it's just an opinion thing, man. I wouldn't personally run my company that way, but they do what they want to do.

I'd mainly take the line of rather having a 'satisfied' customer without one of my rifles, than to have one who's stuck with it and may possibly result in them spewing a little bad publicity for me, or at least never purchasing another one of my rifles or dealing with me again.

That's just me. You're right, no guarantees were made as to customer satisfaction, but that seems like a little bit of an 'out'.

How is that slimy? I'm confused with your thinking. A 1 MOA guarantee is what the website says so if the gun can shoot 1 MOA then they are holding up their end of the bargain. If your satisfaction is not met then that is on you and the company has no obligation to meet every criteria to satisfy you when they never said they would do that in the first place. The company sets the terms of the guarantee not the customer.

 

[Rorschach]

Quick question, guys: should this rifle have shipped with a test target? A guy I work with came up just now saying that it should have shipped with one. I don't remember seeing one in the box, but I didn't comb through the manual or packing or anything to find it either.

 

[Jimbob]

Ok I get where you are coming from now. I just find satisfaction guaranteed as a crazy thing for something like a rifle. I understand that retail stores do things like that but rarely manufactures give a satisfaction guarantee.

Yeah, it's just an opinion thing, man. I wouldn't personally run my company that way, but they do what they want to do.

I'd mainly take the line of rather having a 'satisfied' customer without one of my rifles, than to have one who's stuck with it and may possibly result in them spewing a little bad publicity for me, or at least never purchasing another one of my rifles or dealing with me again.

That's just me. You're right, no guarantees were made as to customer satisfaction, but that seems like a little bit of an 'out'.

 

[Jimbob]

No experience with Kimber but my Tikka that has MOA guarantee never came with a target.

 

[wapitibob]

Unless something has changed, those Kimber targets were shot at 50 yards.

Having had experience with Kimber customer service, should you send the rifle in, it's going to come back with a nice little note "This Kimber rifle meets Kimbers accuracy standard" and that'll be that.
As I mentioned before, my rifle would jam bullets on the feed shoe(in addition to accuracy issues), as did my friends, and another Rokslider. The Rokslider sent his rifle in for repair. Kimber, that awesome rifle company, took a dremmel to the feed shoe and sent the rifle back to the customer. The picture was posted here, in a past "should I buy a Kimber" thread. A dremmel to an $1,100 rifle and then sent back, here you go sucker.

I hate to say it, but I said it, Kimbers are 1 1/2" rifles. You might get lucky and get one that shoots, but after 12 pages of "they're awesome", there doesn't appear to be too many "awesome" targets getting posted.

Once again, for the guy looking at this thread in the future..... Kimber Montana's are for suckers and gamblers.
I was an $1,100 sucker.

 

[aclawrence]

Tikkas don't need evidence that they shoot 1moa hahahaha. Sorry guys. But show me a thread where somebody's Tikka shoots like crap. Of course I'm sure there's a lemon out there somewhere. Somewhere maybe. Lol

 

[aclawrence]

My post was all in good fun guys let me give you a southern perspective on this thing. Down here in Alabama we have two places that sell chicken fingers that are both really good. They are Guthrie's and Zaxbys. When Guthrie's is good it is by far my favorite. Zaxbys is also really good and at Zaxby's your food is pretty much cooked the exact same every time you go. On the other hand Guthries is super good sometimes and sometimes not so great. This is my comparison of Tikkas and Kimbers to southern fried chicken. If someone held up both arms,one with a Tikka and one with the Kimber, I'm probably going to give the Kimber a try but I'm going in to it knowing maybe it's going to be super good and maybe not. Making excuses for a rifle that want shoot 1" is a pile of baloney in my humble opinion. Of course it's good enough for shooting deer at acceptable ranges but who wants to settle for "good enough". Not me.

 

[Formidilosus]

I'm curious as to your comments about crosshairs movement. In all honesty, that has me wondering a little bit about the nut behind the trigger. I can tell you when I executed a perfect trigger press, but I couldn't give you the amount of crosshair movement guarantee.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's talking about his wobble zone. When a shooter knows what that is, and articulates it, it is a LOT more probable that they know what they are doing.

Everyone on every type of rest has a wobble zone if you are touching the gun.


1) Absolute knowledge of what size target the gun will hit at a given range (group size)
2) Wobble zone on the target
3) And present conditions


All factor into knowing whether you can reliably hit a certain target. Eliminate knowledge of any of those, and you will have misses

 

[Jason Snyder]

He's talking about his wobble zone. When a shooter knows what that is, and articulates it, it is a LOT more probable that they know what they are doing.

Everyone on every type of rest has a wobble zone if you are touching the gun.


1) Absolute knowledge of what size target the gun will hit at a given range (group size)
2) Wobble zone on the target
3) And present conditions


All factor into knowing whether you can reliably hit a certain target. Eliminate knowledge of any of those, and you will have misses

I'm firmly aware of what wobble/sight movement is, and the concept of floating sights. I've never been to a long range shooting class though, and have never tried to quantify it. I can certainly tell you if I thought it was an acceptable rest and how solid I felt the hold was. I'm kind of a caveman and would relate that as rock solid, really good, okay, half assed, and really shitty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rorschach]

Just got off the phone with Kimber's customer service. I explained fully the experimentation and documentation that I've done on the rifle's performance, etc., and was cool-headed during the call. The results:

Eight (8) week turnaround time for service. No money back. That's all they 'can' offer.

Unacceptable, in my opinion. Say it takes a couple of service trips - 4 months + shipping. Also, I'm out of a rifle that whole time, and the result is, if not a 'fixed' rifle that may well only shoot with a single non-hunting load (since they don't specify in their warranty what type of round), a used receiver with a new barrel that I then am going to go sell and take a hit on it. I also have to take it and test it after I get it back, at least with a few different types of ammo.

Thanks for the heads up, wapitibob, Formidilosus, and others who forewarned me. I took a risk and my number came up.

Let this thread serve as a warning for future purchasers of Kimber Montana rifles. Doesn't necessarily mean yours will suck, but I don't think it can't be said that you're taking a risk. They deserve an opportunity to make it right, but this should stand as a warning to those without the time/money/desire/inclination to get embroiled in 'fixing' a rifle that ought to come right from the factory. This is likely my first and last Kimber rifle.

Will continue to document any further action that takes place, and the results with the Tikka. I have rings in today that I will try on it Friday morning, most likely.

*Edit: before someone says that they're being true to their guarantee, I fully 100% agree on that. No dispute there. However, for prospective buyers, if you have no desire to be involved in something like this, I would not purchase a Kimber Montana 308. No idea what percentage will or won't live up to their accuracy guarantee, but I risked it and this is the result. Take it for what it's worth to you.

 

[Rorschach]

I may just sell this to be done with it. Not having to fiddle is worth a lot to me.

 

[Muttly]

This is gettin so thick and rich you could scoop it up with a fork!
I get to pick my priorities, do my due diligence, and purchase according to what comes closest to the stated objective.

 

[Formidilosus]

I'm firmly aware of what wobble/sight movement is, and the concept of floating sights. I've never been to a long range shooting class though, and have never tried to quantify it. I can certainly tell you if I thought it was an acceptable rest and how solid I felt the hold was. I'm kind of a caveman and would relate that as rock solid, really good, okay, half assed, and really shitty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Understood. And none of it is really aimed at you.



I/we use it as a means to quantify hit rates. When asked on a particular shot whether they can hit it or not- most will say "I think so" or "I'm confident". Past straight up rested close range shots, saying "I'm confident" doesn't really mean anything as everyone one every target has a "hit rate"- we all miss at some point. Knowing that you will have around a 70% hit rate on that target DOES tell you something. And it doesn't take long- I do it subconsciously while getting into position, taking the safety off, pressing the trigger etc.


If we use the below as an easy example-

The gun is a-
1.5moa gun system
Rested kneeling off of a pack frame and you are calm



Target is-
a deer (8 inch kill zone) 400 yards away feeding slowly broadside.
Wind is shifty from 1-5 o'clock at at 2-6 mph.



Would you/someone KNOW how often you'll hit it? Or rather how often you'll miss?




It's always stated that one should "be practiced and confident that they can shoot ______ range before doing so in an animal", especially when LR shooting comes up. Yet if a person doesn't know how often they'll hit a certain target, what is the confidence based upon?

 

[Muttly]

And I don't say that as a dig at Rorschach.
Time is something that is often in short supply. There are some things, rifles, long bows, and such, that I,m gonna spend a lot of time tinkering with.
There are other things that either work out of the box, or I cut my losses and move on.