Kimber rifles

[Gone4Days]

Who?

 

[Gone4Days]

Lots of paralysis by analysis around here! Nerds drowning in ballistic spreadsheets.

 

[PNWGATOR]

Here’s a fact…. put a target up at 100 yds and give me my ammo of choice and i’ll shoot sub MOA with first 3 rds.

Please video your 10 shots and post the target.

 

[Formidilosus]

Multiple 3-round groups is absolutely plenty in an ultralight hunting rifle to prove it is repeatable.

Ok, ignoring statistical relevance, please show multiple 3 round groups from your ultralight hunting rifles with the same point of aim.

 

[fivebikies]

Interestingly a couple of posts on here Winchester Featherweight 30-06.
I still have one and they are not terribly weighty and shoot well.
It has all been done before.
I have a Rem 700 .243 in a carbon stock and you know what about the same weight as a Featherweight.
Old Husqvarna's are also a lightweight option.

 

[2531usmc]

Why is CRF important?

I admit to the same analysis paralysis when I bought my 300 win Model 700. Granted that was almost 20 years ago

i agonized over what rifle to buy and got totally wrapped around the crf wheel. After six months of agony and indecision, I came to the conclusion that if the M40 was good enough for decades of service to Army and Marine snipers it was good enough for me.

Paired it with a VX 3 and never looked back. Carted it around to South Africa and much of North America. I don’t know exactly how accurate the rifle is, but I do know the rifle is more accurate than I can shoot it

 

[gtriple]

Ok, ignoring statistical relevance, please show multiple 3 round groups from your ultralight hunting rifles with the same point of aim.

 

[atmat]

View attachment 565107
View attachment 565110
View attachment 565111

I think @Formidilosus means multiple 3-round groups at the same target, effectively making a 9- or 10-round group while eliminating the “heated barrel sends fliers” argument.

 

[gtriple]

I think @Formidilosus means multiple 3-round groups at the same target, effectively making a 9- or 10-round group while eliminating the “heated barrel sends fliers” argument.

Regardless, I don't think my personal results will sway anybody one way or another. The only thing that they do is tell me that this purpose-built rifle is sufficient for my needs. I could post 1000 10-round groups and people here would still argue.

 

[atmat]

Regardless, I don't think my personal results will sway anybody one way or another. The only thing that they do is tell me that this purpose-built rifle is sufficient for my needs. I could post 1000 10-round groups and people here would still argue.

My experience here has been a mixed bag: it seems like some are open-minded and swayed by evidence when others aren’t.

That's what the aggregation at the bottom of my post provides. No shots were fired in between those groups, and nothing was cherry-picked.

The 10-shot group regurgitation is nonsense, and I have shot a lot of 10-, 20-, 30+ round groups.

Your aggregation is why I didn’t quote your post in my initial response. That said, were all those 3-round groups shot consecutively? One potential downfall of aggregated data is folks can cherry pick which 3-round groups they want (i.e., “that group had a flier so I won’t include it in the aggregation”). Either way, great shooting.

Edit: Didn’t fully read that he said aggregation included all groups. Oops!

 

[Formidilosus]

View attachment 565107
View attachment 565110
View attachment 565111

50 meters?

 

[gtriple]

50 meters?

That's what I was limited to that day.

 

[t_carlson]

I really like Kimbers. Own several of them.

 

[Formidilosus]

That's what I was limited to that day.

And you can’t understand why @PNWGATOR wrote what he did? I’m not being rude, but stated that multiple 3 round groups proves something, and then posted 50m groups that when overlaid are around an inch- so almost two MOA at 100y.

 

[gtriple]

And you can’t understand why @PNWGATOR wrote what he did? I’m not being rude, but stated that multiple 3 round groups proves something, and then posted 50m groups that when overlaid are around an inch- so almost two MOA at 100y.

I understand what he is saying, I just disagree based on my use case. What's your point?

 

[Formidilosus]

I understand what he is saying, I just disagree based on my use case. What's your point?

How do you disagree? Your own shooting is closer to 2 MOA. Even ignoring that those were shot at 50m and not zeroed, those aren’t showing a “sub MOA” gun.

Shooting some random small number of shots that happen to land close to each other isn’t telling you anything. Statistics are a thing no matter what someone wants to think, and you don’t know whether you have a “good group” bullet in the chamber or a “flier” in the chamber. Which is the reason to see what the real “group”- aka cone is.

What size target at 100 yards is that rifle capable of hitting on demand, with no excuses?

 

[gtriple]

How do you disagree? Your own shooting is closer to 2 MOA. Even ignoring that those were shot at 50m and not zeroed, those aren’t showing a “sub MOA” gun.

Shooting some random small number of shots that happen to land close to each other isn’t telling you anything. Statistics are a thing no matter what someone wants to think, and you don’t know whether you have a “good group” bullet in the chamber or a “flier” in the chamber. Which is the reason to see what the real “group”- aka cone is.

What size target at 100 yards is that rifle capable of hitting on demand, with no excuses?

Where did I mention sub-moa? All that I stated was "repeatable".

Those 3 groups were also 2 different shooters, as it was being taken on a bear hunt and we saved weight by taking another primary rifle and this one as a secondary. That's a Fieldcraft with an SWFA UL 2.5-10 on it shooting "factory" ammo. I needed it to be repeatable for 2 different shooters within ranges that would require a quick shot. It accomplishes that goal. Alas, it is repeatable and sufficient for the purpose of the rifle.

If I decide to push this rifle (or any other rifle) to further ranges, then I'll confirm that the rifle delivers repeatable results to meet my criteria.

 

[MosquitoCoast]

I have the Kimber Mountain Ascent in 7mm-08. I shoot the Barnes Vortex TSX 120grain loads out of it. it's one of the most accurate guns at long range I have AND its the lightest rifle that is manufactured I believe. When you got to tote it around for ten days in the Bush, you cannot beat it. I highly recommend this gun.

 

[Formidilosus]

Where did I mention sub-moa? All that I stated was "repeatable".

You engaged someone that pointed out that a couple of sub MOA three shot “groups” doesn’t mean anything. Then you said “Multiple 3-round groups is absolutely plenty in an ultralight hunting rifle to prove it is repeatable”. Then I asked to see those repeatable sub MOA groups from an ultralight rifle. You posted what amounts to an almost 2 MOA aggregate shot at 50m as “proof”.

Now you are giving excuses as to why it’s not as good as it could be- that was @PNWGATOR’s point. It’s always an excuse or lack of actually shooting with those that claim a couple 3 shot groups is what the gun shoots. I’ve shot dozens of Fieldcrafts and Kimbers and it is very rare that they are mechanically capable of consistently hitting a 1 MOA target at 100 yards- extremely rare. Fieldcrafts are 1.3’ish to 1.75 MOA guns when shot for a statistically relevant number of times; Kimbers tend to be 2’sih MOA guns, sometimes worse.

 

[gtriple]

You engaged someone that pointed out that a couple of sub MOA three shot “groups” doesn’t mean anything. Then you said “Multiple 3-round groups is absolutely plenty in an ultralight hunting rifle to prove it is repeatable”. Then I asked to see those repeatable sub MOA groups from an ultralight rifle. You posted what amounts to an almost 2 MOA aggregate shot at 50m as “proof”.

Now you are giving excuses as to why it’s not as good as it could be- that was @PNWGATOR’s point. It’s always an excuse or lack of actually shooting with those that claim a couple 3 shot groups is what the gun shoots. I’ve shot dozens of Fieldcrafts and Kimbers and it is very rare that they are mechanically capable of consistently hitting a 1 MOA target at 100 yards- extremely rare. Fieldcrafts are 1.3’ish to 1.75 MOA guns when shot for a statistically relevant number of times; Kimbers tend to be 2’sih MOA guns, sometimes worse.

I appreciate your insight and won't ask you to prove it.

So, what ultralight rifle would you tell the OP is "better" than a Kimber?