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

[Rorschach]

I know, I know. Tiny safe, but it was free (gift!). I thought of it as a good way to manage how much of a 'collection' I end up with.

 

[elkguide]

Since you're going to buy a new rifle.... you "NEED" a new safe!

 

[GKPrice]

Room in the safe for only one???????????????

What language are you speaking?

I agree ! GHASTLY, JUST GHASTLY .....

 

[GKPrice]

I just got a brand new 2016 montana. I was nervous about playing "kimber roulette" but now I'm looking for another one. The one I got is a 308 and it's shooting well under 1". To say that I'm happy with it is a huge understatement.

I also have a tikka, the benefits of the montana over the tikka are the stock, trigger and of course weight. The tikka stock is very nice and my trigger is as good as any timney I've used.

I had the same question: buy a montana? Or spend 50% more and get the mountain ascent. Like you I wasn't too interested in a brake and 5oz wasn't worth 600 dollars to me, I can just run a few more miles and lose 5oz.

You could check out the new kimber subalpine, seems like an ascent without the brake and the msrp is listed lower than an ascent.

Earlier you said something that implied that the montana isn't a "high end" rifle, I can assure you that the montanas are very high end rifles.

I like the ascents and I'll probably get one at some point but being. My first kimber, not wanting a brake, I decided to save the extra $$$ the ascent would have cost and get a. It better scope, I ended up with a Swarovski z3 for my montana, I couldn't be happier with the set up.

The tikkas are great rifles but in my opinion the draw to them lies within the price. Yes they are great for the price (I paid 700 for my t3x ultra light). But I'm really digging the montana.

Call Kimber and ask them what serial # they're on for the new Montana in your chosen cartridge then talk to Europtic and ask for the serial # of the one you would be buying, if they don't have the newer #'d rifles there are several good dealers on Gunbroker.com. the dealer that has the bright orange box in each ad and pays for shipping is as good as any I've ever dealt with online or local and they usually have quite a few of latest Kimbers in stock (if you find one there, buy it, they move fast - It'll take an hour at the most and help alleviate some of your fears in the QC -

 

[Rorschach]

I can't be the only married fellow here...

 

[rileybassman]

I can't be the only married fellow here...

I have almost opposite problem... I got married, wife liked my guns, so I had to buy 2 of everything lol. At least she shoots lefty, so she bought her own bolt gun... but the semi's and pump, yea... I miss using those guns....

 

[elkguide]

I can't be the only married fellow here...

My wife loves clothes, shoes and purses.



I have my own issues!

 

[Rorschach]

All good problems to have...

Just called EuroOptic and the fellow said they can't get me an exact serial number, but he does know (and their website says this also) that the Montanas they have are of 2016 manufacture.

Is this good enough to pull the trigger on ordering one? I'm still a slight bit uneasy about it, but that weight is too good to pass up.

Part two: optics recommendations? I'd like a lightweight optic with low-profile exposed elevation turret (to allowing dialing) in the 3-9x range (2-10x works also, but I'm fine with 3-9). Don't want to go over 40mm, and the smaller, the better. Don't care one way or the other about illumination, unless someone can make a good case for it being essential. I've had optics either way, and while the illumination is nice in low light, I wouldn't be willing to pay a premium for it.

Should I make a new thread? I didn't want to clog up the thread list with a thread that's been hashed out 100 times (I've not looked to see if this is the case yet, but I can/will).

 

[GKPrice]

All good problems to have...

Just called EuroOptic and the fellow said they can't get me an exact serial number, but he does know (and their website says this also) that the Montanas they have are of 2016 manufacture.

Is this good enough to pull the trigger on ordering one? I'm still a slight bit uneasy about it, but that weight is too good to pass up.

Part two: optics recommendations? I'd like a lightweight optic with low-profile exposed elevation turret (to allowing dialing) in the 3-9x range (2-10x works also, but I'm fine with 3-9). Don't want to go over 40mm, and the smaller, the better. Don't care one way or the other about illumination, unless someone can make a good case for it being essential. I've had optics either way, and while the illumination is nice in low light, I wouldn't be willing to pay a premium for it.

Should I make a new thread? I didn't want to clog up the thread list with a thread that's been hashed out 100 times (I've not looked to see if this is the case yet, but I can/will).

there's a week or two old thread about just that topic - I was chatting back and forth with another member on that and he OBVIOUSLY knows more than me on the topic, apparently has had the opportunity to test literally dozens of different highly "thought of " scopes and picks apart the wheat from the chafe on the subject - THAT said, what I would do in your "shopping shoes" is buy a Leupold lightweight of your choice and send it in to the Leupold custom shop with the clear instructions to call you when received, then tell the technician precisely what you plan and expect from the scope and do what he suggests - Leupold's custom shop is attentive and the techs know all scopes inside and out, might not even cost you or very little and you'll get the state of the art from one of the leading optics companies OR you could buy a Nightforce and be done with it (but have a HEAVY scope) - For MY money I enjoy researching to attempt to get exactly what I'm wanting and maybe putting some faith in a company's word, but that's just "ME"

 

[rileybassman]

^ yup, or go with one of the discounted VX-6's on sale right now... I picked up the 2-12 with the zero lock (makes me feel way better with a locking turret while hunting). A little heavier, but I gladly carry the extra 6 ounces or so...

 

[Jimbob]

Leupold VX2 2-7x33, compact and lightweight (10.5 ounces). MOA dial on top is very low profile. I have this scope on a t3 and a ruger compact, I really like it. The vx3 2.5-8x36 would make a good choice as well.

 

[Rorschach]

You talking about one of these? Cabela's Online Store - Quality Hunting, Fishing, Camping and Outdoor Gear

This is about 100% what I'd want. Is there anything wrong with a 13" long, 17oz. scope for a lightweight rig?

 

[luke moffat]

Honestly you stated you only wanted to hunt to 400 yards or so. I think for those distances you'd be better off with e a set it and forget it scope with a good reticle that you have worked out the hold over points with. Even the simple leupold long range duplex would get ya out to 450 yards with a 165 accubond doing 2750 or so sighted in at 200.

This way you don't have to worry about if the scope is tracking correctly or not. Just sight it in and in the event you find yourself having to take a longer shot the reticle should get you there with some practice. Keeps things lighter overall too

 

[rileybassman]

You talking about one of these? Cabela's Online Store - Quality Hunting, Fishing, Camping and Outdoor Gear

This is about 100% what I'd want. Is there anything wrong with a 13" long, 17oz. scope for a lightweight rig?

Not in my book

You can send to leupold and have them put in the B&C retical too if hold over is your thing. FYI, the 2-12 does not have an external parallax... they can set it to whatever you want, I think default is 150 - does not matter much inside of 4-500 yards tho. Comes with a free custom turret too.

Been an awesome scope!

 

[GKPrice]

there's a week or two old thread about just that topic - I was chatting back and forth with another member on that and he OBVIOUSLY knows more than me on the topic, apparently has had the opportunity to test literally dozens of different highly "thought of " scopes and picks apart the wheat from the chafe on the subject - THAT said, what I would do in your "shopping shoes" is buy a Leupold lightweight of your choice and send it in to the Leupold custom shop with the clear instructions to call you when received, then tell the technician precisely what you plan and expect from the scope and do what he suggests - Leupold's custom shop is attentive and the techs know all scopes inside and out, might not even cost you or very little and you'll get the state of the art from one of the leading optics companies OR you could buy a Nightforce and be done with it (but have a HEAVY scope) - For MY money I enjoy researching to attempt to get exactly what I'm wanting and maybe putting some faith in a company's word, but that's just "ME"

page 4 of this here FIREARMS topic, near the bottom - "2.5 x 10 x 40 OR 3.5 x 14 x 40 started by hjcruger - all the TRUTH a person needs about what's good and what's not good for dialing - Formidilosus is the poster in the know

 

[GKPrice]

Honestly you stated you only wanted to hunt to 400 yards or so. I think for those distances you'd be better off with e a set it and forget it scope with a good reticle that you have worked out the hold over points with. Even the simple leupold long range duplex would get ya out to 450 yards with a 165 accubond doing 2750 or so sighted in at 200.

This way you don't have to worry about if the scope is tracking correctly or not. Just sight it in and in the event you find yourself having to take a longer shot the reticle should get you there with some practice. Keeps things lighter overall too

I totally and completely agree with Luke on this ! Allow common sense to rule the day - for those who don't like Leupolds, why not suggest a commensurate scope then ?? He wants as lightweight as possible

 

[Jimbob]

IMO its good for a longer range rig (500 and over). I would just never buy a lightweight (under 5.5lbs) rifle for max 400 yd shots then put a heavy 17 oz scope on it. Hey it will still perform great though, but you will be carrying the extra 7 ounces around for nothing.

Luke is correct on the set it and forget it simplicity of a hunting scope for 400 yd max shots. I have the dial on my scope mainly for range practice and the weight penalty is negligible.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

I tend to follow Luke's logic on hold over anymore.......and quite frankly all of my scopes are cheap. None have failed.

 

[GKPrice]

You talking about one of these? Cabela's Online Store - Quality Hunting, Fishing, Camping and Outdoor Gear

This is about 100% what I'd want. Is there anything wrong with a 13" long, 17oz. scope for a lightweight rig?

not really "wrong" but a VX3i 3.5 x 10 x 40mm is lighter yet and will serve you every bit as well for less weight AND $$ (my opinion and also what I use)

 

[oenanthe]

Honestly you stated you only wanted to hunt to 400 yards or so. I think for those distances you'd be better off with e a set it and forget it scope with a good reticle that you have worked out the hold over points with. Even the simple leupold long range duplex would get ya out to 450 yards with a 165 accubond doing 2750 or so sighted in at 200.

This way you don't have to worry about if the scope is tracking correctly or not. Just sight it in and in the event you find yourself having to take a longer shot the reticle should get you there with some practice. Keeps things lighter overall too

I very much agree with this. Since 2009. my 84m has had a VX2 3-9x UL on it, with the standard reticle. The power ring was pretty tight, so I sent it in this summer. They repaired it at no charge, and I also had them install a LR Duplex reticle for fifty bucks or so. I don't really want (or need) to shoot much beyond 400 with this rig, but I like it because it is simple and foolproof. And light!

Really the only complaint I have with these scopes is that the eye relief is not very good.