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

[Rorschach]

I haven't had anyone else shoot it either. Not sure I'll be able to try that.

I have been following this thread since the start, but can't remember reading if you've had someone else shoot the rifle?

Would be interesting to let someone else have a go and see if you get the same results.

 

[JWW]

If you wanted to go cheaper than the Tikka, the Ruger American are pretty light and good shooters. The .308 comes in at 6.1 lbs. I haven't seen one that shot over 1 MOA and have seen quite a few shooting better than that. The only part I don't like is the proprietary magazine, but it does function well. It is also a 70 degree bolt throw which allows use of low rings on most optics.

 

[Rorschach]

***Update: First range session with Tikka T3x Superlite in 308win.

Rifle: Tikka T3x Superlite 308win

Conditions: Sunny, 24-30degF, light breeze (2-4mph).

Procedure:

Targets were set at 100yds. Shot three 3-shot groups of all ammunition from previous range sessions, plus a 3-shot group of Barnes Vortex. Allowed rifle to cool in a muzzle-up position with the bolt fully to the rear for ~7min between each string of three shots.

All were fired front of the stock resting on a bag. No support under the rear of the stock; held into shoulder manually.​

Types of ammo (all 308win), in order they were fired:

- 1) Federal Fusion 150gr
2) Federal Fusion 165gr
3) Barnes Vortex 150gr
4) Hornady Precision Hunter 178gr
5) Remington Hog Hammer 168gr
6) Hornady Full Boar 165gr
7) Federal Gold Medal Match 7.62x51 175gr
8) Hornady Superformance 150gr
9) Hornady Precision Hunter 178gr
10) Federal Fusion 180gr​

Observations:

Definite improvement over the Kimber Montana.

Pattern observed that two shots of each group (most of the time) were pretty close together, then one would be way out from those two.

The 178gr Hornady Precision Hunter (ELD-X projectile) performed the best, while the 165gr and 150gr Federal Fusion performed the worst in this particular series of tests. That being said, I would like to repeat shooting most of these again since just about all repeated the pattern of two close shots and one out. Not sure what that could be due to, and I am not sure which shot of the three fired were thrown, and thus, if there was any consistent pattern with that. Will pay special attention to this next time.

The Federal Gold Medal Match and Hornady Precision Hunter groups lend at least a little credence to shooter error playing less of a roll with the poor performance seen from the Kimber, in my opinion at least.

The shots all felt solid, and before the trigger breaking for each shot, the crosshairs were moving over an extreme spread of 0.5" at most. Before each shot broke, the crosshairs stayed well inside the center-most open 'white' circle on each bull.​

Feel free to offer critique, agreement, disagreement, other observations, etc.

These results being what they are, I believe that I am done with the Kimber Montana. I'm still not confident enough in everything here to call this a definite "sub-MOA" rifle (the Tikka), but I am pretty confident that, at least in my hands, it's much superior in performance (accuracy-wise, at least) to the Montana.

Links to other range sessions:
Kimber 1 (1/27/17)
Kimber 2 (1/29/17)
Kimber 3 (1/31/17)
Tikka 1 (2/4/17)
Tikka 2 (2/6/17)
Tikka 3 (2/8/17)
Kimber 4 (2/9/17)
Kimber 5 (2/14/17)

Target:

 

[aclawrence]

I'm not a reloading expert or anything but what my brother told me is that when you have two shots almost touching and one a little off it's called a consistent flier, I think that's what he called it. Apparently it means that your load development is real close and might need just a little tweak to bring all three shots together. I'm not sure what your options are if your not reloading. That's how my Tikka shot when I took it out. Ive only had it out for one range session but two would be touching and one a little off. I was also running some solvent through my barrel every so many shots. The last ammo I shot was some regular old Winchester 150's and they all three were right at it under 1". I've probably got close to 50 rounds down the tube now so I'm going to take it out again and give it a real test without cleaning in between groups.

 

[Formidilosus]

Be VERY careful trying to judge how good something shoots off of 3 shot "groups". Obviously 3 shot can show you how bad something might be, but then again it doesn't at the same time. 3 shots does not, in any way show where any one shot will land and 3 shot groups are statistically useless. The 2x1 "grouping" can be and probably is just random variation within the groups actual cone.



Rorschach,

I would take the Federal GM and Hornady PH and shoot a couple of ten round groups. Then you will KNOW what is what.

Also, why are you not using a rear sandbag or bean bag, etc?

 

[JWW]

If you have a clover grouping, I would argue the rifle can achieve that every time and that the rest of the variability is you and ammo.

 

[Rorschach]

Didn't use a rear bag simply because I'm trying to approximate in some way shooting in the field without a rear bag. However, I'm not married to the idea of not using one, as the point here is to judge the rifle's accuracy alone. I can definitely use one next trip out.

Agree on using 3-shot groups to ascertain a rifle's accuracy potential, 100%. However, wouldn't you agree that it would also be highly statistically anomalous to see two of three shots land 1/6th or less the distance from one another than to the other shot in the group? It was so consistent that it seemed odd to expect a truly normal statistical distribution to produce such results.

Would you shoot each of the 10rd groups straight thru, i.e., without waiting for any cooling between shots?

 

[Bobbyboe]

I have been following this thread from the beginning, since I was also debating whether to buy a Tikka or Kimber. Without a doubt your Tikka groups are much tighter. I would be interested to see what the Hornady precision hunter does if shot from a true cold bore. If you can repeat that group then there is no reason to look towards a different round since you would have a true .5moa gun!

My personal knock on the Tikka is the plastic parts. I've come to the conclusion that if I own a Tikka I'll just install bottom metal and a fiberglass stock. I can live with a plastic magazine. I just wish someone would figure out how to make a blind magazine for it!

 

[JWW]

Didn't use a rear bag simply because I'm trying to approximate in some way shooting in the field without a rear bag. However, I'm not married to the idea of not using one, as the point here is to judge the rifle's accuracy alone. I can definitely use one next trip out.

Agree on using 3-shot groups to ascertain a rifle's accuracy potential, 100%. However, wouldn't you agree that it would also be highly statistically anomalous to see two of three shots land 1/6th or less the distance from one another than to the other shot in the group? It was so consistent that it seemed odd to expect a truly normal statistical distribution to produce such results.

Would you shoot each of the 10rd groups straight thru, i.e., without waiting for any cooling between shots?

Unless you are in a totally controlled environment when considering rifle performance, I do not think you can say you have any statistical basis for your groupings. You are shooting off a front bag, no rear rest, if point of aim is not easily repeatable how can you expect point of impact to be? I would put the rifle in a sled and shoot it. Then there is no guessing what the rifle will do. I have shot 3, 5 and 10 shot groups both with rifle cooling and not, and the results are negligible. The big variable is me and my rest.

 

[Jason Snyder]

I wouldn't do the sled, but I do agree in that I would do front and rear bags, five shot groups minimum.

At one point in my reloading career I spent a lot of time and powder chasing my tail trying to replicate one of these anomaly 3 shot groups (that was a REALLY good one). I've since learned that more is better. It might not be as sexy when the group size is measured, but I want repeatable results.

Now I shoot five shot groups when doing load development, and I'll repeat the results when I'm getting down to final development. I don't allow for cooling between shots and I don't clean the barrel.

 

[Formidilosus]

If you have a clover grouping, I would argue the rifle can achieve that every time and that the rest of the variability is you and ammo.

No even even close to true. A true 2moa gun will have some of the "groups" be .5moa. The fact that a gun did it once means nothing. This is precisely the reason that "Accuracy" tack from the vast majority of people is a waste of time- they shoot 50 rounds have three land somewhere close to each other and then ignore the other 47.

Didn't use a rear bag simply because I'm trying to approximate in some way shooting in the field without a rear bag. However, I'm not married to the idea of not using one, as the point here is to judge the rifle's accuracy alone. I can definitely use one next trip out.

Agree on using 3-shot groups to ascertain a rifle's accuracy potential, 100%. However, wouldn't you agree that it would also be highly statistically anomalous to see two of three shots land 1/6th or less the distance from one another than to the other shot in the group? It was so consistent that it seemed odd to expect a truly normal statistical distribution to produce such results.

Would you shoot each of the 10rd groups straight thru, i.e., without waiting for any cooling between shots?

What hat you are trying to do here is measure the gun. Use a rear rest.

The 2x1 issue could be anything or nothing. Shooting 10 round groups will tell you immediately. Is the barrel free floated?


Shoot the 10 round groups with no cooling period. For one- the rifle doesn't care unless there is something wrong. Two- if there is something wrong with bedding or barrel stress you want to know about it.

 

[Trial153]

you got your answer. Pretty easy to see which baseline (rifle ) is a better starting point.
Well done.

 

[JWW]

No even even close to true. A true 2moa gun will have some of the "groups" be .5moa. The fact that a gun did it once means nothing. This is precisely the reason that "Accuracy" tack from the vast majority of people is a waste of time- they shoot 50 rounds have three land somewhere close to each other and then ignore the other 47.








What hat you are trying to do here is measure the gun. Use a rear rest.

The 2x1 issue could be anything or nothing. Shooting 10 round groups will tell you immediately. Is the barrel free floated?


Shoot the 10 round groups with no cooling period. For one- the rifle doesn't care unless there is something wrong. Two- if there is something wrong with bedding or barrel stress you want to know about it.

I should have been more specific in saying that if you are getting two shots printing on top of each other and a flier very consistently, it is reasonable to assume there are variables other than the rifle that can improve the accuracy. I am not referring to the only group with all three touching (shouldnt have said "clover"), I am referring the the majority of the groups having two shots very close to each other and 1 or 2 fliers. I agree chasing one great group is senseless and you will often see people change ammo etc to do this. I have not seen a big difference in letting my barrel cool for a given shot string, I would however let the barrel cool between ammo changes as to see where a cold barrel hits with a given load.

I wouldn't do the sled, but I do agree in that I would do front and rear bags, five shot groups minimum.

At one point in my reloading career I spent a lot of time and powder chasing my tail trying to replicate one of these anomaly 3 shot groups (that was a REALLY good one). I've since learned that more is better. It might not be as sexy when the group size is measured, but I want repeatable results.

Now I shoot five shot groups when doing load development, and I'll repeat the results when I'm getting down to final development. I don't allow for cooling between shots and I don't clean the barrel.

I understand some people love or hate using a sled, I myself do not use one, but when I have friends that are totally convinced something is awry with their gun and you put it on the sled and it does fine it sort of tells you what you need to know but didn't want to hear. Shooting is mental and if you are convinced your gun will miss, you will too.

 

[BigWoods]

I just recently came over to a Kimber 84m in 308 (Classic model) from shooting mostly AR platforms, so I've been following this thread from its beginning as well. I should also say, that I used to own a Tikka T3 (more on that latter).

AR-15's are really easy to shoot well. My Stag Arms upper 6.8spc would repeatedly go sub 1/2" with hand loads with a weaver v3 on top - almost laughably easy to shoot. Moving to the light rifle has definitely been a learning experience! That said, with the tips reiterated by many in this thread (holding the fore end, etc) I've been able to get the Hornady AWT loads down to right around 1" consistently.

Comparing some of your older range reports from your Kimber with your new Tikka, it seems that the 150gr Fusions were going pretty much into the same 2 close, 1 flier pattern for a total of about 1.5" groups out of your Kimber. With the exception of the Precision Hunters (and GMM - but that's not a hunting load), it seems like your Tikka is pretty much shooting the same way with maybe only a slight edge (maybe 1/8" for the two shots). Most of the people shooting sub 1" groups from light rifles seem to allow about 1 minute between shots. It might be that the consistent flier from both rifles is the result of a hot barrel. Just a thought.

As I said, I did own a Tikka - buttery smooth action and it would consistently go sub 1" with hand loads. Took down lots of deer with the rifle. I sold it because the magazine spring compressed and was causing jams...two of which meant I couldn't take a follow up shot on wounded deer. Tikka quoted me somewhere north of $70 for a new magazine. I'm not saying this to 'bash' (there's that word again) Tikka, but just to point out that all guns have problems and unfortunately Tikka's parts are rather expensive if you do.

All the best to you and I do hope you find a rifle you really do enjoy.

 

[mantos]

+1 on the TIkka, have one in .243 and 300 win mag, both shoot excellent for the price! Sub MOA, shot a muley at 485 yards this year. I also own a SAKO, same thing as Tikka but the "upgraded" version I guess.

If your looking for a great shooting gun get the Tikka, guns like SAKO shoot alike but have a much better finish etc..

 

[MTHunter20]

I have been following this thread from the beginning, since I was also debating whether to buy a Tikka or Kimber. Without a doubt your Tikka groups are much tighter. I would be interested to see what the Hornady precision hunter does if shot from a true cold bore. If you can repeat that group then there is no reason to look towards a different round since you would have a true .5moa gun!

My personal knock on the Tikka is the plastic parts. I've come to the conclusion that if I own a Tikka I'll just install bottom metal and a fiberglass stock. I can live with a plastic magazine. I just wish someone would figure out how to make a blind magazine for it!

Kinda thinking the same thing myself. Was pretty set on a Kimber Hunter despite Kimber's past issues, but may just go with a Tikka now. Don't really wanna gamble on getting one that will shoot.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Formidilosus]

I should have been more specific in saying that if you are getting two shots printing on top of each other and a flier very consistently, it is reasonable to assume there are variables other than the rifle that can improve the accuracy. I am not referring to the only group with all three touching (shouldnt have said "clover"), I am referring the the majority of the groups having two shots very close to each other and 1 or 2 fliers. I agree chasing one great group is senseless and you will often see people change ammo etc to do this. I have not seen a big difference in letting my barrel cool for a given shot string, I would however let the barrel cool between ammo changes as to see where a cold barrel hits with a given load.

Gothcha. And I didn't mean it to come off dickish when I wrote it.


I don't do the Sled. One it cracks stocks on heavier recoil guns, very often the zero is different than from the shoulder, and it also tends to string shots.

 

[16Bore]

Long thread....

Bedding?
Different scope?
Bullet runout?



Swap any one bullet from the left to the right and you've got "2 in, one out". This is a late 60's M70 in 270. Both groups shot at the same sitting, only difference is I had the ammo sorted by runout. Virgin bass is generally going to be your worst group anyways until it's fireformed. I can't remember the actual numbers, but if you take the 6 above rounds and shot them randomly into 3 shot groups, it was like 20:1 odds that the 3 best would be shot together.

Something like that.

 

[16Bore]

Do NOT bother with a sled, unless it's snowing outside.

 

[Rorschach]

Form, I've read several separate sources now say that the barrels aren't free-floated (they have tabs partway up the stock that contact the barrel), but I'm not super-confident in the veracity of that information. Can anyone else confirm?

I have a few different ammo makes/types that I have enough left of to try 10-round groups using (Superformance, Fusions, FGMM), and I will try to find some more Precision Hunter. For the rest, where the ammo permits, I will try to shift to 5-round groups. I'll say I'm done with the 3-rd groups, at this point then.

Will definitely do the rear bag next time out and see what happens. My wobble zone is pretty tiny, but will definitely be smaller with a rear bag. I had enough jacket on this morning with the cool temps that I couldn't see my heartbeat in the reticle's movement at all. I was set up pretty solid, even with manually supporting the rear of the stock.

JWW, what do you mean that my "point-of-aim is not easily repeatable" since I'm not using a rear bag? Are you saying that 1/8" (or less, as measured at 100yds on target) of wobble zone improvement has the potential to decrease grouping by 1"?