Of these two rifles, both in stainless/synthetic, which do you prefer and why?

If I had to bet on out of the box accuracy, I'll take the Sako every time. I have 7 Sakos and all shoot lights out. I have had three Kimbers and gave up on two of them.

That's interesting. What are your views on the new lightweight Sako? I hear the Montana is pleasant to carry, but I've got a Sako itch, I think.

I'd go with the sako. I've had two kimbers, neither shot that good or had as smooth of action as my sakos which I now have 4 of and no kimbers. I also like the lower bolt lift of the sako and detachable mag. The sakos just plain shoot.

You need to hear from DJPaintless here on AR. He has several of both. I couldn't ever get the affintiy for the Kimbers he and many others have.

I'm a Sako nut, so I would go that way in a heartbeat. I think DJ is more objective than I am, and has some of both and likes both. The fit is maybe a little different, I would say to pick which ever one looks, feels, fits, you the best.

I do think ON AVERAGE, the Sako's shoot more accurately, more easily.

I looked at both and I went with the 75 Finnlight in 300WSM. I was a bit concerned about recoil but its really pleasant to shoot. Plus holding them side-by-side, the Sako fit me so much better. I installed a limbsaver and the felt recoil is no more than my fathers browing ’06. With the short mags, I think the Sako 85 is only 3 oz. heavier than the montana.

I am not crazy about the stock on the Montana. It feels so slippery to me. If you are shooting uphill in the snow with gloves and a parka on is this gonna go flying out of your hands? Plus I had the opportunity to shoot a 325WSM Montana and it kicked like a mule, but I think that was more how it fit me though.

Thanks guys, this info is great. It's funny, I hear of guys all the time speaking about how great the Kimber rifle is compared to anything else. Unfortunatly, I've never actually heard from anyone direct on the subject. However, I have never, ever heard anyone speaking poorly of the Sako rifle. I guess that says somthing right there.

I think the only issue I have with the Sako is the scope mounts. The Optilocks are solid, but they're heavy and high. I think the "Low" versions allow you to mount a 56mm objective, and the aftermarket models have some problems, too. I understand they use tightening screws that may mar the finish (second hand - I've never used them).

Still, the Sako is more likely to be accurate out of the box and they hold their value well - there do seem to be a lot of "used, like new" Kimbers that people are willing to part with for a substantial discount.

Sako
4-sure.
regards

Even though I've never owned one, it'd be a Sako. Will never own another Kimber unless and until they implement some nebulous program called "quality control".
Bear in Fairbanks

quote:

Originally posted by Jaywalker:
I think the only issue I have with the Sako is the scope mounts.

Talley bases and rings cure that, and the Leupold QD's are pretty good too. With the Leupy QD's they have super low rings available. You don't have to use the set screws for the bases, that is the beauty of the tapered dovetail, the just snug up with use, they aren't going to loosen.

SAKO

Sako for sure. I currently own 11 in different iterations. Never had a sako that wouldn't shoot or had problems.
I've owed three Kimbers, two wsm's in the classic wood stocked configuration and one montana. The montana in 260 rem I still own. Its a great gun, but the two 8400 in the wsm's I blew out. The 300 would not shoot partitions. Missed two of the best deer I've ever seen due to feeding problems. The 7mm short mag had a problem with hang fires. got rid of both. I'm not saying I wouldn't own another Kimber but I'll probably not buy one new. Rather buy one used at a price that I won't loose to much bucks If i need to blow it out

GWB

Of the two I like the kimber better. it is lighter and handier. There is nothing wrong with a sako but I still like the kimber better. It might be due to my afinity for the winchester 70 classic actions.

Wow, that's a tough one for me because I am an avid Sako collector (older A series) and own a Montana in 7-08. I am not a big fan of Sako's current synthetic stock; it doesn't not compare to the Fiberclass (McMillan). The Montana's stock is far superior in that regard, I even like the CRF action of the Montana. For me it would be a toss up. The only reason I would buy the Sako over the Montana is because the Sako is consistantly more accurate, even if you get a good shooting Montana. However, the Montana is real pleasure to carry. Lou

quote:

Originally posted by Thebear_78:
it is lighter and handier.

I don't know if it is really that much different than a Finnlite model.

The CRF is a true differential, the CRF aspect of the 85 is really a glorified push feed, and you CAN over-run a cartridge in the mag if you short stroke it. Just FYI

I have both, like both, hunt with both. I think both have advantages and disadvantages. Sako's might be more accurate overall but it isn't always true. My Kimber 270 WSM is definately more accurate than my Sako 270 WSM (1/4 to 3/4 MOA 3 shot groups). Here's how I see some of the advantages of both.

Kimber Montana:

Stiffer better stock.
Blind Magazine - this is a preference for some not all.
American made
True CRF with Blade extractor
Better Recoil pad
Traditional recoil lug
More scope mounting options
Slightly less expensive
Better stock geometry vs M-75
Easier to restock than M-85
Tighter WSM throats

Sako:
Shorter bolt lift
Higher magazine capacity
More consistant over quality
Smoother OTB
Better trigger (though Kimbers is good)


Other comments:

I like the Optilock mounts on Sako's but they are a little higher than optimum, I had a Swaro 2.5-10x56 PH in LOW mounts on my 338 M-75 Stainless.
Sako's are smoother out of the box but the Kimbers do Smooth up easily and are easier to work on.
So far Sako doesn't make a 325 WSM - I love my 325 WSM Montana.
The new synthetic stock on the M-85's is a little to much Guigaro for me and looks a little odd.
I like the checkering patterns on the Kimbers much better.
Some of the Kimbers have much nicer wood.
Some of the Kimbers have less stable (Claro) wood.

Like I said I really like both rifles if at all possible try both and see which one fits you better. I noticed above that one of the poster mentioned that the Sako fit him a lot better, I'm the other way around but the only way to tell for you personally is to try both on for size. Be sure and check out both you might think you like one going in and end up with the other.................................DJ

I dont own an 85, but own or have oned pretty much everything else Sako has made.
Like many others have said, they do shoot!
Every goddamn single time you walk up to mark, the holes are just there.
I also own a Kimber. Its my first, and it is as much pleasure to carry, as the Sakos are to shoot. And since i believe i fixed the problems with the feeding, and found a petload for it, I think it stays with me.

I really dont care much for the newer Sakos. I think they are loosing in craftsmansnhip more and more. I now own one, a mod. AV cal. 375.
Its just NOT for sale, and will never be.

between those two I prefer the Prohunter.

asti, I'm glad to hear you are enjoying the Kimber. What load did you find for it and what kind of groups are you getting?.....................DJ

I use a pretty mild load of 55 grs IMR 4350 over a 165 grs TSX.
I shot 3 groups of 4 shots each, and none went over MOA. Smallest was 0.6 at 100 yds.
I dont know velocity though.

pharoha2,

As usual djpaintles does his superb job of presenting the facts in an objective manner. I am also pleased to read that asti is having good results from his new Kimber.

We need to know what specific cartridge that your looking at and also your use of the rifle?

The Kimbers vary a lot in the way they handle and in size and weight also.

For instance the Kimber 84M Montanas are very small and light rifles. Such a rifle weighs just over five pounds! Few rifles are this light.

For more power than what the 308 case series brings to the 84M's there are the 8400 Kimber Montana's in the WSM's. Again these rifles stand out as quite light for the power they have. Such a rifle starts out just over six pounds!

To be frank I am not attracted to the 8400 long action Kimbers as they are so much longer and heavier. They do have the M70 type safeties and CRF however.

I have a number of rifles for various uses and the Kimbers fill the syn/ss/light notch for me. For big game where I want that my Kimber 84M Montana in 308 is really quite a gun.

For just a pound more in weight where I just have to have a 'magnum' the 8400 WSM is worth a close look.

I'd go with the Sako. I have one of each. The Kimber is kind of a crap shoot in regards to quality. Mine, in 30-06, sprays bullets everywhere. It is currently at the gunsmith in hopes of finding a correctable problem. I bought this gun from a local dealer who won't stock them anymore (this was a special order) due to having several returned for feeding problems (all were short mags). That said, my dad has a .300 WSM that shoots and feeds well. Again, kind of a crap shoot. My Sako 85 in .270 Win shoots wonderfully.

Sako are good rifles, I've had a few over the years and have my eye on one in the new Bavarian model.
As for the Kimber Montana, I have one in 260 Rem which, with handloads, is a 1/4 inch rifle. It's a joy to carry and the 260 kills very well.
In my view the Sako is a better made rifle and they are consistently accurate, but then some Kimbers shoot very well too, sadly some do not.

"which would you prefer?" - sako would be my choice.

"why" - accuracy!

the bottom line is that you need to select the rifle that feels best in your hands. good luck......

SAKO! Why, because they always work great out of the box. Kimber well, flip & coin & take your chances.

Sako - 15 votes
Kimber - 3 votes
Undecided - 2 votes

Another Sako fan here. My choice is based on the fact that I like Sako rifles and the only Kimber I've seen around these parts shot like crap which left a bad taste, it was a real letdown for my rifle group and we've pretty much avoided them since. Since no one's Sako barrel exploded on them, we still like 'em!

quote:

Originally posted by KSTEPHENS:
between those two I prefer the Prohunter.

prohunter stocks are ugly. steyr stocks in general are ugly.

I used to have a kimber 8400 in 300WSM. was nice to carry all day and was as accurate as you'd ever need in a hunting rifle really. did plenty of group under half MOA. in the end i got rid of it because im not a huge fan of recoil, esp shooting 190gr vlds out of it all the time.
so i made up a 280ackly (i know its pretty much a standard cartridge now!) - trued rem700 action, 26" #5 lilja stainless barrel. one peice 20MOA nightforce base, the base that has the rings built into them. and a Nightforce 5.5-22X50 mil-dot scope on it. sure it weighs a couple of pounds more but its a pleasure to shoot and it points beautifully. got the original wooden stock on it but it looks decent just put a pachmayr decelerator pad on it and the barrelled action has been dura-coated matte black. looks real nice. sorry, went a little off topic there.

go with whatever suits you best, sometimes you can take all the "right" advice and you'll still be dissapointed with what you end up with.


for what its worth sakos are more consistant. go the finns!

I have had both, the Sako's went down the road. Probably the one of the worst bolt designs of the modern rifles available. Try stripping the bolt in the field.

Kimber is the better design, better stock, better rifle. The Sako has higher quality control at the factory. You almost always get a good Sako product.

If you can get a good Kimber, you will have the better rifle.