jdmcconnell
Inactive
I was just curious if anyone uses any of these and what you thought of them. I am looking at getting a 300 win mag and want a controlled round feed and I'm down to a Montana rifle or a kimber. Thanks for the help
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Montana rifle company
- Thread starter jdmcconnell
- Start date
Can't help you with the Montana.
I have a Kimber 308 I'm very pleased with, but I wouldn't want one in 300 WM. They are good quality rifles, but the premium you are paying is for a rifle 2-3 lbs lighter than the competition. Not a good idea with a 300 WM. My 6 lb 308 has almost exactly the same recoil as a 7.5 lb 30-06. Certainly tolerable and I feel giving up 100 fps to save 1.5 lbs with no difference in recoil is a fair trade-off.
If you do decide on Kimber I'd suggest staying with 30-06 or 300 WSM instead. Kimber makes 4 action sizes. The short action 84, long action 8400 (which the 300 WM comes in), the 84L sized for 30-06 length rounds and the short action 8400 WSM designed just for the WSM rounds. If it has to be 300 WM I'd go with the Montana, or some other route.
The 8400 action size is just all wrong to me. The feel, balance, etc just isn't there. It is hard to describe until you hold all of them side by side. The others are just right. The 300 WSM will be about 50 fps slower than the 300 WM. But it uses 12-15 gr less powder resulting in noticeably less recoil which is a plus in a lightweight rifle. No game animal will ever notice the difference, you'll never notice any difference in trajectory, but your shoulder will thank you.
I have a Kimber 308 I'm very pleased with, but I wouldn't want one in 300 WM. They are good quality rifles, but the premium you are paying is for a rifle 2-3 lbs lighter than the competition. Not a good idea with a 300 WM. My 6 lb 308 has almost exactly the same recoil as a 7.5 lb 30-06. Certainly tolerable and I feel giving up 100 fps to save 1.5 lbs with no difference in recoil is a fair trade-off.
If you do decide on Kimber I'd suggest staying with 30-06 or 300 WSM instead. Kimber makes 4 action sizes. The short action 84, long action 8400 (which the 300 WM comes in), the 84L sized for 30-06 length rounds and the short action 8400 WSM designed just for the WSM rounds. If it has to be 300 WM I'd go with the Montana, or some other route.
The 8400 action size is just all wrong to me. The feel, balance, etc just isn't there. It is hard to describe until you hold all of them side by side. The others are just right. The 300 WSM will be about 50 fps slower than the 300 WM. But it uses 12-15 gr less powder resulting in noticeably less recoil which is a plus in a lightweight rifle. No game animal will ever notice the difference, you'll never notice any difference in trajectory, but your shoulder will thank you.
If a long heavy rifle is what you want then perhaps the montana action could be it.
However if you carry a rifle while you hunt a Kimber in 300 WSM would be so handy and light and not have that belt that stretches brass at the web like the old fashioned 300 WIM. Approximate weight: 6 pounds 3 ounces.
Also make sure a montana action is well finished. The ones I got when they started up had an "as cast" finish to the action's metal. I sent them back.
However if you carry a rifle while you hunt a Kimber in 300 WSM would be so handy and light and not have that belt that stretches brass at the web like the old fashioned 300 WIM. Approximate weight: 6 pounds 3 ounces.
Also make sure a montana action is well finished. The ones I got when they started up had an "as cast" finish to the action's metal. I sent them back.
Last edited:
I was just curious if anyone uses any of these and what you thought of them. I am looking at getting a 300 win mag and want a controlled round feed and I'm down to a Montana rifle or a kimber. Thanks for the help
Well, since you've already written off Zastava, CZ, and Ruger and settled down to Montana or Kimber...
Either will be fine. I like Montana if you are going the custom build route (although a Mausingfield would be every bit as good), Kimber if you are getting a factory stick.
Jimro
Coppershot
New member
I have a Montana 1999 (standard length action) on a custom build in 6.5 x 284 Norma. It is a hunting rig, not a target rifle. I will echo that is a pretty heavy action. I have it matched with a Douglas Premium # 3 medium shorter and a French walnut stock. It is pretty heavy, but is a real tack driver. The action is certainly very strong and functions well.
jdmcconnell
Inactive
Thanks for all the help. I would love to get one of the mausingfields but their action is about the same price as a Montana rifle. I do like the idea of a semi custom over a mass produced. It looks like the Montana rifle company synthetic stick is only a pound heavier than the kimber so that shouldn't be to bad. I do appreciate all the input and advice.