Im thinking about a new Kimber Montana in 270 WSM. Was wondering if anyone here had a montana in a WSM. How are they feeding? any issues? Is the 270 WSM that much superior to the 270 win?
any thoughts would be appreciated

thanks

I had one in 300 WSM, but I just traded it for a new shotgun. It was an alright rifle but I have better rifles that I spent less money on. My two cents on the rifle is this:

1. It is very light so sometimes it is hard to get it good and steady (even on the bench). So, unless, you are using it as a mountain rifle, or you are going to carry it all day, get something heavier.

2. It has a pencil thin barrel, which I think heats up in a hurry, leading to poor groups. The best group I could ever get was an inch and three quarters, but it would open up pretty fast to about three inches.

3. The factory trigger has some creep, which could probably be adjusted by a good gunsmith, I just couldn't find one that would do it.

4. I also got sucked up in the "Short Mag" craze, but I am now proud to say that I own no short, ultra, or super short mags.

So, the Montana is good if you plan to carry it 8 to 10 hours a day. If it is just for general hunting, get something else. JMHO.

quote:

Originally posted by stalker66:
Is the 270 WSM that much superior to the 270 win?
any thoughts would be appreciated

thanks

.270 WSM shines with light bullets. If you intend to use 130 grain bullets, you will see a difference in muzzle velocity and a flatter trajectory although the result on the game will be similar.

When you move up to 150 grain bullets, there is hardly any difference in .270 WSM and .270 Win. I am not very impressed with the short mag craze and will stick with the standard cartridges.

Stalker:
I was seriously thinking of getting a Kimber in .270 WSM myself. However, I'm a handloader and use 150 gr. bullets exclusively. I ran all kinds of combinations for the WSM thru Quickload and came up with very little increase in velocity. My .270 Win will give me 2937 fps as chronoed. About the most I could get with Quikload was slightly under 3100 as I recall. Running those numbers thru QuickTarget, there was very little difference in trajectory.
I'd say that if you don't have a .27 cal. rifle already and you want/need a light mountain rifle, then the WSM would be ok.
My .270 Win is a reworked pre-64 in an H-S precision stock. I know, H-S doesn't make a fibergalss stock for a pre-64 but mine was modified. Anyway, I use my .270 for sheep & caribou and carry it tied across the top of my packboard. I'll live with any "excessive" weight & use it since it'll do under an inch consistantly. Just trying to give you food for thought. Bear in Fairbanks

I just shot a rifle for the first time in 23 months due to a vehicle accident that put me out of commission until this time. I put funds together to get a Montana in 7mm WSM. First bench session-I was nervous even shooting the rifle at first, due to having broken my hips and I was afraid of the recoil factor. I started with 160 grn TSX (Barnes) at 25 yards, got it close, and actually had someone to walk out and place the 100 yd target for me. Between the Barnes and the only other ammo I had at the time, 160 Nosler Partition, here is what came about.
Results- TSX best group = 2.5" (2900+/- fps) 3 shot groups seemed to string out horizontally, I agree with the thin barrel heating up rapidly, but I tried to give time between shots to cool it.
Nosler Partitions-Best groups= 1.25" in cluster. I was really impressed with the NP's. I was expecting them to group better then the TSX, but only because I have read a lot of forums and across the board everyone seemed to find better grouping with the faster ammo. NP at 3100+ fps. I now have 160 grain Accubonds to go to the range tomorrow with me to compare with the Nosler's. I was fairly impressed with the NP groupings, especially due to the fact that I had just 4-5 rounds of them left , and knew the range officer was about ready to call a break. I shot them all in fairly rapid sequence, to the point of the barrel being too hot to touch, and got the best group of the day. The first one a called flyer, then 3 good shots, and then a fifth shot as called flyer. This group was 2.5" overall, with the 3 at 1.25" Not bad with the whip barrel, my rustiness (I used to shoot pretty well, I'm 56 yrs old), and the fact I had a strong coffee to start the day. So, with all the negative press I have heard about the WSM's in general, I believe I have a shooter. I am planning a Whitetail hunt in the Fall of 2007. Originally I wanted to go to Manitoba, but I seem to see more potential Booners being taken in Alberta, and Sask. Tell me what you have experienced with your Montana.

I got a Montana (Big Sky) for myself here a bit back. It is a 7 short mag.

It feeds wonderfully, they had some earlier ones that did not but have been getting a grip on things and they are very good now. And I am a nazi about how guns should feed!

It does have a light tube and so it does take a bit of getting used to if one is used to shooting one with a heftier tube.

I do believe that a lot of the accuracy issues with light tubes come from one of two places for the most part.

*the shooters technique

*the shooter not allowing the tube to cool well enough (I use a probe thermometer to take the temp b4 I start and then I leave it sit until the temp goes back to the starting point).

Mine will do between .6" at the best and 1.4" at the worst. At this time I call it an honest 1" rig. I am shooting make it an honest .75" rig and will be vrey happy with that.

For speeds I've found the short mags to run with the next level heavier slug that its non mag counter part would with the next lighter slug. Meaning I can run a 180 out of a 300 WSM at or about the same speed as a 165 out of an 06.

My 7 wsm will run with 150's about what my old 270 will do with the 130's.

It is a light rifle, all up a couple of ounzes over 7 with sling/rounds scope etc.

IMO it is the most intelligent rifle ever crafted and for the money is absolutely unbeatable!

Mark D

Mark D,
What brands/weight of ammo seem to shoot best in your 7mm WSM. Your take on bullet weight vs. next non-mag counterpart is interesting. I don't have a chrony, but i could tell by lighter recoil that Barnes were slower than NP's. My Montana had some scratches in the feed plate going to barrell that had to have been done at the factory to make sure feed problem was non-existent. It was in the original plastic at my dealers. He's a friend and wanted me to open it myself. I agree it is one smooth rifle to cycle. I never saw or felt any of the original with the ramp problems. Too bad they didn't catch it earlier. They would have sold a lot more of them if they had better QC back then. Is Bozeman still as beautiful as it was in the late 1980's (the only time I went thru).

quote:

Originally posted by stalker66:
Im thinking about a new Kimber Montana in 270 WSM. Was wondering if anyone here had a montana in a WSM. How are they feeding? any issues? Is the 270 WSM that much superior to the 270 win?
any thoughts would be appreciated

thanks

Stalker, I've reloaded for several 270 Winchesters and 4 270 WSM's. To try and do a test as close to apples to apples as possible I loaded the same bullets and the same powders in both and the 270 WSM is about 200fps faster in the same length barrel as the 270 Winchester. Note this is from actual chronograph readings on the same days and not computer projections. 200 fps may or may not make that much a difference in the bush but it's there.

The main reason I would prefer the 270 WSM is because of the rifles you can get them in, including the Kimber Montana. I have a Kimber Montana in 325 WSM. Here is how it shoots with 4 different loads including a factory load:



These are 3 shot groups at 100yds.

I also have 2 Kimber 8400's in 270 WSM. Here's how my first one shot at 200yds:



and my other at 100yds:




The only Kimber I've done much too is the 2nd 270 WSM it needed the floorplate bedded to keep from binding. The others I just worked the bolt back and forth a few hundred times to smooth them up, and adjusted the triggers. \
I'm with Mark D. The Kimbers are the finest made American production rifles since the 1950's model 70's. They shoot superbly if you are cabable. They aren't the rifles to shoot 5 shot benchrest groups with since they have thin barrels but they will put the 1 or 2 shots you need in hunting situations into exactly where you pull the trigger on.
This year I made my longest shot ever on a deer - 347yds with my Montana 325 WSM. I shot prone off a bipod and it handled superbly.
I guess there are some situations where you might want a heavier rifle but I'm really beginning to wonder why................DJ

If I could have got groups anywhere near that size, I never would have traded it. But, I didn't. I don't disagree that Kimber is an excellent rifle as far as quality is concerned, I just could not get mine to shoot. I think the problem was three fold:

1. The trigger had some creep that I never had adjusted.

2. I don't hand load.

3. Even though I tried to be patient at the bench, I probably shot the groups too fast, not letting the barrel cool sufficiently.

Kimber makes a good product and it is encouraging to see such tight groups. Perhaps I will consider another Kimber rifle in the future.

I've got a M8400 Classic in .30-06 that shoots an honest half inch. I had a M-84 in .308 that would do the same.

As far as the trigger creep issue. That can be adjusted out in about 5 seconds. The trigger is adjustable for weight and creep with two exposed alan screws.

The new Kimber 84's and 8400 are in my opinon one of the best buys on the market for the money.

My Montana is chambered in 7-08 and it has worked fine for deer and antelope out to nearly 400 yards. With this combo I don't feel that short mag of any flavor is necessary. Lou

Damn that's some nice groups djpaintles .

quote:

Originally posted by GA DEER HUNTER:
If I could have got groups anywhere near that size, I never would have traded it. But, I didn't. I don't disagree that Kimber is an excellent rifle as far as quality is concerned, I just could not get mine to shoot. I think the problem was three fold:

1. The trigger had some creep that I never had adjusted.

2. I don't hand load.

3. Even though I tried to be patient at the bench, I probably shot the groups too fast, not letting the barrel cool sufficiently.

Kimber makes a good product and it is encouraging to see such tight groups. Perhaps I will consider another Kimber rifle in the future.

GA,

Not to be a smartazz, bud, but how many groups have you shot on GAME! One shot from a cold barrel is enough, or should be.
Let the barrel cool between shots if you want to compare them in "groups".


Actually, if it's groups you want on paper, buy a TARGET rifle and forget the lightweight hunting guns!

Don,

I have to side with GA DEER HUNTER on this one. Any rifle costing upwards of $1000 should print better than 1.34" groups @100 yds. If I recall properly from his first post, he stated that the 1.34" group was the from a cold barrel and that groups would approach 3" when it heated up. I am just saying that for the kind of money he dropped on the rifle it should have shot better. It's no secret that alot of rifles are leaving the Kimber factory with alot of problems. There is definitely a problem with quality control. I can't speak from personal experiences, but know several people that have owned their rifles and have been thoroughly disappointed. I can't remember the thread, but someone posted a picture here showing a new Kimber 8400 with a barrel to wood fit that you would have to see to believe.

quote:

Originally posted by molar1:
Don,

I have to side with GA DEER HUNTER on this one. Any rifle costing upwards of $1000 should print better than 1.34" groups @100 yds. If I recall properly from his first post, he stated that the 1.34" group was the from a cold barrel and that groups would approach 3" when it heated up. I am just saying that for the kind of money he dropped on the rifle it should have shot better. It's no secret that alot of rifles are leaving the Kimber factory with alot of problems. There is definitely a problem with quality control. I can't speak from personal experiences, but know several people that have owned their rifles and have been thoroughly disappointed. I can't remember the thread, but someone posted a picture here showing a new Kimber 8400 with a barrel to wood fit that you would have to see to believe.

Actually, I can't really disagree with you, molar. For a grand a better barrel should be
standard!

I have a pencil thin PacNor barrel on my custom Mauser in 280 Remington that shoots 3/4" three'shot groups all day. Even when pretty warm!

Some experts believe that a wandering barrel
is most often due to profiling the barrel too quickly, and sometimes with dirty or less
than perfect chambering. I tend to agree
because it simply cannot be happenchance that
some guys can profile and chamber light barrels that shoot well consistantly!

I have several very light PacNor barrels that shoot very well hot or cold! I often grow weary of the this barrel is better than that barrel arguement. A barrel maker cannot control all the variables that make or break a barrel's overall quality as a shooter.

Secondly, Kimber has had a problem with their barrels. It seems the earlier ones were crappy and the later ones have had some change that made them more acceptable?

My intention was not to invite debate, but to point out that many hunting rifles have less than stellar quality barrels but work quite nicely since hunting game does not involve "groups".

Actually, I believe that grouping problems are often more a bedding problem than a barrel problem? Improperly bedded or improperly sealed wood can be a nightmare! Not all wood stocks move enough to look unsightly, but often move enough to change POI or cause grouping problems.

I've darn near worn out two Gunline bedding tools relieving just enough barrel channel wood
for friends to cure their barrel problems!

Most new rifles need "tweaking" anyway, regardless of cost.

My first, and only, Remington 700 was a 7X57 mountain rifle. This barrel was very light and
warped like a pretzel when it heated up! PacNor
duplicated the contour and it shot consistant MOA 5 shot groups. The most accurate rifle I've ever owned! I gave it to my son as a gradulation present and her sold it the first time he needed money. KIDS!

Dr. Lou,

Good shooting for a light gun, how do you find it is in the field to steady on game? Have contemplated one in a non-mag chambering myself.

Also, curious as to what load/ammo yours likes as I shoot 708.

Like the Ford vs.Chevy argument that will go on forever I'll just address the light whippy barrel vs. the heavier one. I believe that most of today's manufacturer's put out products that are better "shooters" than the men behind the guns. Sure, a cold barrel will shoot to Point Of Aim better than a hot one. It will always be the first shot that counts the most 99% of the time. I know for a fact that no matter what I do, my Montana 7 short mag is capable of 3 shot or 5 shot groups that touch one another all day long if given time to cool between shots, and if I hold to the same point of aim every shot.

If I was the shooter I was 20 years ago, I could put groups together as seen in a post above, but the eyes, the reflexes, and even trying to have the hammer drop between heartbeats preclude that from happening today.

I went to the range for my second session with my rifle, and produced one honest 3/4" group with 160 grain AccuBonds. I was one happy camper.

Sometimes it is just having the confidence in one rifle over another, not whether that rifle in actuality can produce better "groups" than another one from the gun cabinet.

I have seen guys at the range take a buddy's gun and put groups at 1/2", and humble the gun's owner with taunts and mild ridicule. I have also seen these same sharpshooters, who, on a given day can't shoot their own self-claimed 1/2 MOA tackdrivers inside of 2" groups. Of course, something is wrong with the gun, or somebody is goofing on them, and loosened up something on their rifled without their knowing.It is always fun seeing that happen to some of the blowhards, but my overall point is, certain people shoot well one day, and on other days can't shoot well at all.
Main point being, it is not usually the gun, but the shooter behind it.

dj, I've got a Kimber Custom Classic in .300WSM that, to date, hasn't shot your kind of groups (Lordy!), but when new, I had trouble getting under 1.5-2.0 inches with it. But, the more rounds down the tube, the better it seems to be getting. It's down to an honest inch, some days better. And not nearly as good as my first .300 WSM -- a Browning A-bolt (MANY .5" groups, with lots of different loads). The problems I've had with my Kimber are: it is extremely tight chambered, some factory rounds will not chamber; and 2) the "finish" has worn off the floorplate and bolt knob. I believe it is painted (!) which I just can't believe on a $1,000+ rifle.

But, it has gorgeous French walnut....

MKane160

I've got a couple of Kimbers, an 8400 .300 WSM with the french walnut stock, and a .243 Montana. The .243 consistently shoots the kind of groups djpaintles posted. I used it last summer to take two marmots off the same rock - at 566 lasered yards. I don't yet know just how well the .300 is going to shoot. The first powder/bullet combo I tried - 168 gr. TSX and H4831 produced 1" groups and I used that load to take an elk at 296 yds. I've owned several custom rifles, and still use one regularly, but the Kimbers I have are so good I can see no reason to spend 3 times as much for another custom. Oh, and the Kimber triggers are easily adjustable, and nearly as good as my custom ones. Haven't you bought that Kimber yet?

quote:

Originally posted by MKane160:
dj, I've got a Kimber Custom Classic in .300WSM that, to date, hasn't shot your kind of groups (Lordy!), but when new, I had trouble getting under 1.5-2.0 inches with it. But, the more rounds down the tube, the better it seems to be getting. It's down to an honest inch, some days better. And not nearly as good as my first .300 WSM -- a Browning A-bolt (MANY .5" groups, with lots of different loads). The problems I've had with my Kimber are: it is extremely tight chambered, some factory rounds will not chamber; and 2) the "finish" has worn off the floorplate and bolt knob. I believe it is painted (!) which I just can't believe on a $1,000+ rifle.

But, it has gorgeous French walnut....

MKane160

What bullet weight? Mine has a decided preference for 180's...

quote:

GA,

Not to be a smartazz, bud, but how many groups have you shot on GAME! One shot from a cold barrel is enough, or should be.

I understand that groups are not the most important thing, and that 1 and 3/4 is plenty accurate at 100 yards, but think how big that group or POI would be at 200, 300, and 400 yards.
I want to have complete confidence in my rifle the the bullet will hit exactly were I am aiming, not just some where close. Like I said before, at 300 yards, that could be a miss or worse a poor hit.
And yes, I routinely practice shooting at ranges of 100, 200, 300, and 400 yards.

Brad:

Both of the Short Mags prefer 180g Triple Shocks in front of RE-19. The Browning, however, will shoot Hornadys, Nosler Partitions, Sierra MatchKings, Accubonds, Scirrocos, and Triple Shocks into tiny little groups. I've shot 1/2 inch groups with that gun with mixed loads.

I really haven't tried many 150g or 165g loads as I tend to favor heavy-for-caliber bullets in all of my guns.

MKane160

Where are you going to get a rifle with the specifications that the Kimber 8400 WSM's have?

They are lighter than a Featherweight yet as powerful as other magnums. Not only that but they don't kick bad at all due to the stock design and the new type recoil pad. Maybe a NULA would have some of the same specs and light weight but at three times the price and ten times the wait.

6.5BR, I almost never shoot off hand, especially for long range antelope. I believe all my shots with the Montana were from a sitting postion with my elbows resting on the inside of my knees. However, the times I have practiced shooting it off hand at 100 and 200 yard gongs, I have not felt handicapped by the light weight. I believe that I can shoot it just as well as I can with my heavier Sakos, etc. Lou

The Weatherby Ultra-lightweight rifles will give the Kimbers a run for the money...no problem. The 84/8400 are not the only excellent light/accurate rifles without the high custom cost. I have them in a 30-06 and a 338-06 and both are shooters. I am going to get one of the 8400's in the 300WM long action and see how I like it to possibly replace my Kimber 89 Super Grade Hunter in 300WM. As I get older I want lighter but its going to take one hell of a rifle to replace that model 89.

Brad, what do you mean by "the finish wore off the bolt/floorplate"? Painted?

That was my Kimber. Apparently from riding in the gun scabbord (Kolpin) on my ATV. The finish has worn down to bare metal on the floorplate and the bolt knob, within the first month I owned it. Not of my other guns have suffered this problem from riding in the same scabbord. These parts look to be coated ("painted"), not blued. Anyone know for sure?

MKane160

I have a brand new Kimber 8400 in 300WSM and it's been to the range once so far. I shot 5 different factory loads, (2, 3 shot groups with each loading) and wasn't impressed that nothing shot under 1.75 at 100 yards. I have a HS precision in the Pro Lightweigt model in 270 WSM that will shoot 3/8 and 1/2 inch groups consistently. I don't know if these are good comparisons as the HS is $1,300 more, but both have pencil barrels and are lightweight rifles.

Larry Sellers

LS,

Without being a smartass, perhaps the problem may be as simple as having a clean barrel. If you have run some Barnes TSX through your Montana, as I did, it may be a a copper fouling buildup. I have read that the TSX's may accelerate this problem? Even though my last range sesion produced my best group, it also produced my most widespread, erratic groups overall. I thought I had cleaned the barrel sufficiently at the range with bore snake, but found out today that my barrel took a great deal of effort to bring back to a totally clean status.


I now am anxious to get back to the range to see if my theory was correct. I anticipate much better overall grouping, and will thoroughly clean after every other group!!!

Dano36

Dano - I think you are on the right track. My two previous WSM's 270 and 300 in Brownings would copper foul real quickly and the groups would start to spread. I am talking about after only 20-30 rounds. I have not shot any TSX bullets, only Nosler Partition 165 & 180, Trophy Bonds 180, Winchester Power Point 180, and Winchester Balistic Silvertips so far. I also just gave it a good cleaning and lots of blue patches for sure. I'll let you know how the second session goes. Thanks.

Larry Sellers

quote:

Originally posted by dano36:
LS,

Without being a smartass, perhaps the problem may be as simple as having a clean barrel. If you have run some Barnes TSX through your Montana, as I did, it may be a a copper fouling buildup. I have read that the TSX's may accelerate this problem? Even though my last range sesion produced my best group, it also produced my most widespread, erratic groups overall. I thought I had cleaned the barrel sufficiently at the range with bore snake, but found out today that my barrel took a great deal of effort to bring back to a totally clean status.


I now am anxious to get back to the range to see if my theory was correct. I anticipate much better overall grouping, and will thoroughly clean after every other group!!!

Dano36

The TSX is not gonna be a problem for you in terms of fouling. The original X's yeah you bet but the TSX no way no how.

IMO the absolute best bullet ever built for the taking of game all over the world.

Mark D

Dano-yep Boze is still as beautiful as ever, its grown a ton load since you were last here and it keeps growing. I work in Real Estate here and it is one crazy market..

To date my 7 shorty prefers 7828 and R25 with a 160 Sierra. It also seems to have a liking for the 120 VM and H4350.

Mark D

Mark D,
Thanks for the feedback. I have not started reloading yet (I used to, but don't have all equipment yet). There is a local here who, after you supply the brass, will reload at $12/box, $14 if you want supreme bullets. Fair deal, if he is any good. Pardon my ignorance, but what is VM? Have you tried the Scirocco II 150 grain?

Ironic about real estate. I am a mortgage loan officer. My brokers office is in St Pete. We have just gotten hooked up with a commercial lending group who has ties directly to Wall St, and can bundle "conduit loans" at a couple points below Prime. If you want to discuss if you have any need, email me at dan@myeasymortgage.com.

I used to go to Sanders County, Montana (NW corner near Libby for Whitetail/Elk) I havbe a friend who would like to go to the Milk River for Whitetail hunts before we get too old to enjoy.

Larry-that is a good lesson for us all. I just realized that I didn't put that many TSX's through my rifle, but 20+ Partitions before last session. I need to clean more often!!!!

I have a kimber montana in 300wsm, took around 150 shots to get the barrel broken in, as it was rough internally, looked like bits of metal were flaking off it. now it looks a consistant colour and doesnt foul too bad.
i think the light barrel thing makes it a bit finicky. with reloads itd be shooting 2" or so, then one load has done under half inch for 3 shots @ 100 yards. that same load has done 1.5" group at 300 yards. just shooting off sandbags. it likes 150gr nosler b/t and accubonds (shoot the same) seated onto the lands, 5 thou off the lands it did 1.5" groups and 10 thou off it did 2" groups. i was using 70gr of VV N160 with winchester LR primers and cases.

Work up loads with a the same bullet seated to the same depth, and just go up in 1gr powder increments. when you find the one that shoots the best just fiddle with the seating depth