Kimber 84 in 7mm-08 or ?

[jimbo]

In 7mm-08 or in 260 Remington.

I want a light game rifle with acceptable recoil. I've decided on the Kimber 84 (POSSIBLY a Rem. mountain rifle). I hate to buy a gun and then swap. I like to buy only once, so I'm trying to make sure which I want, a 260 or 7mm-08 before I buy one.

I can see a big advantage of a .260, over a .243. Much more energy at every range and can fire 140 gr. bullets, and heavier is possible. On the other hand, I can't really see what a 7mm-08 will do that a .260 Remington can't do and a .308 can't do better.

I guess I'm saying if I were to go with a 7mm-08, I would probably go with a .308 and use 150 gr. instead of the 7mm-08 140 gr. And I know I don't want a .308 yet as I work up the chain in recoil.

So, am I just trying to talk myself into a .260 Remington, or does the 7mm-08 have any real world advantage over a .260.

FWIW, they both seem to be excellent rounds and I can see going either way. They seem so close ballistically, I'm having a devil of a time seeing an advantage either way so guess I'm hanging my hat on the slighly lower recoil of the .260.

So confusing.

 

[paul105]

It depends on what you want to do with the rifle and whether or not you're a handloader. If you are a handloader, the 6.5 Rem is fine, but IMHO the .308 and the 7-08 more flexible.

I have a 7-08 and a .308 but no 6.5 Rem. I have shot prarie dogs with both -- 100 gr Horn HP in 7-08 and 110 gr Horn SP in 308. Two guns are different as night and day. 7-08 is a Rem 700 Mtn Rifle with 24" Shilen #3 Fluted. The .308 is a Remington Varmint Laminated 26" Factory bbl that has been Fluted. Also shoot gophers (ground squirrels) w/7-08 -- mainly because we walk and shoot -- 7-08 is much more portable than .308.

Have also shot sihloutes (SP?) with both -- prefer the .308 for sihlo but 7-08 for gophers/praire dogs -- portability of rifle for dogs/phers vs target config w/.308 for sihloutes.

Had a friend who shot a rag horn 4 point bull elk at about 40 yards straight on at base of neck with the 7-08 and 140 gr Barnes X. It penetrated back to the kidneys. It dropped in its tracks.

Recoil in same weight rifles 7-08 vs .308 with same ballistic coef. bullets will be less with 7-08 and even less with 6.5 Rem -- basically, 140gr 7mm = 165gr .308 and 150gr 7mm = 180gr .308. Practically speaking, you could use and 150 gr .308 and never notice the between it and the 140gr 7mm.

If you don't handload, the .308 would be the best choice IMHO and a good choice if you do. If you handload, my personal opinion is that the 7-08 is more versatile than the 6.5 Rem, and the ballistics are virtually identical.

 

[jimbo]

.308 really seems like the ideal round for hunting deer size game and still be able to hunt pigs. And it is accurate enough to be a good target gun. I'd be shooting 90% target and 10% hunting.

That said, I don't want a .308 yet as I'm looking for a little less recoil. I'm wondering if 7mm-08 is really a big enough reduction in recoil to go down from the .308. That's why I'm thinking I need to go down to a .260 to get a SIGNIFICANT reduction in recoil.

If 7mm-08 is a significant reduction in recoil, then I can really see going that way for the greater cartrigdge availability and bullet selection, including heavier bullets than the .260 can handle. But is the recoil of the 7mm-08 that much less than a .308 to justify going that way? If not, then I have to step down to the .260.

I'm building up to being able to handle shooting .30-06 in a 7 1/2 pound rifle. So what is the appropriate step up from .243 I'm currently shooting. Would it be .260 or would it be 7mm-08?

PS - I won't be hand-loading cartridges in the forseeable future. someday.

 

[Smaug]

If you already have a 243, you'd be silly to go with an intermediate cartridge, IMO. Especially if you're thinking you want to go with such a nice rifle as the Kimber.

A 243 will work well for varmints with bullets in the 70 gr. weight or for deer-sized game in 90-100 gr. It should work well-enough for target shooting.

You're really missing out by closing your mind to handloading. It can be done safely and affordably; check out my web page on the topic:

Jeremy's Reloading Page

Once you do that, your accuracy will drastically increase. You can load 308 Winchester loads that kick the same as factory 243 loads. If you bought the Kimber in 308, that one gun could do everything.

I guess you have to stop and decide if you're more in it for the shooting or the gun-collecting.

 

[paul105]

Jimbo,

If you already have the '06 you could try the new Remington Managed Recoil ammo to see if it meets your Target accuracy requirements. The 125gr bullet is rated at 2,660 fps, which should be close to or less than .260 Rem recoil wise. http://www.remington.com/ammo/centerfire/managed_recoil.htm
There is a writeup on this newly introduced Rem fodder in the latest (July 2004) Guns magazine.

If you don't already own the '06 and bought one with the thought of using the Rem 125gr Managed Recoil load ammo as your target load, you could be in for a big disappointment if it didn't shoot well in your rifle. The same can be said of the .260 Rem and the 7-08, both of which have somewhat limited choices in factory ammo.

The availability/selection of .308 (and 30-06 for that matter) factory ammo is very large -- enhances your chances of finding an acceptably accurate target load. I'm not convinced that you would notice a difference in recoil between the .308 and the 30-06 in similar weight rifles shooting the same bullet weights.

I shot a round of Silhoulete (40 targets) with the 7-08 mentioned above. The load was a 140gr Sierra BTS at about 2,800 fps. It was an informal shoot at the local gun club. I was wearing a t-shirt. The 7-08 is pretty light -- about 7 1/2 pounds with scope. I was starting to notice the recoil about 2/3 of the way thru those 40 rounds. My son and I were shooting the above mentioned .308 (probably goes close to 10 lbs w/scope) along with a .243 at the silhoutte range. The .308 load was 165 gr at about 2600 fps. We shot 50 rounds of .308s and were really having a good time -- wished we had a bunch more ammo -- recoil was not a problem at all, even though more than the .243.

The bottom line is that recoil if as much a function of gun weight/stock design as it is caliber in the above illustrations. Unfortunately, if you don't handload, you will most likely need access to decent selection of ammo to find a load that shoots accurately in your rifle.

 

[Mannlicher]

IMHO, but a rifle that fits you well, and is priced right. No game animal will ever be able to tell if he was shot with a .260, a 7mm, or a .308. The differences between one caliber and another are not worth arguing about.

 

[jimbo]

Hi Smaug

I'm not at all against reloading. I don't have any room to put it until I get into a house.

I have the .243 Sauer 202 only for range work, not hunting. The .30-06 kicks more than I would like in the Rem. Mountain Rifle. I'm just not used to it yet. I'm new to rifle shooting and I don't want to develop a flinch by trying to manhandle the light .30-06 before I'm ready for that challenge. That is why I'm looking for a mild recoiling hunting rifle that will anchor a deer or a pig somewhat better than a .243. Also, the Sauer is pushing 9 lbs. with scope and sling. A lighter hunting rifle that kicks little would be very appreciated.

There is some of the gun collector in me, but mostly I see guns as tools. I like to buy nice ones that last a lifetime. Mostly it is what it can do for me (reliability, accuracy, support) that outweighs a brand name or a look. I mean the Sauer is kind of funny looking, actually. What I like about the Kimber is: awesome trigger, superb accuracy, and it weighs about a pound less than any other rifle out there chambered for the .308 cartridge family. It seems like an ideal tool for my purposes in a low recoil cartridge.

 

[jimbo]

Hi paul,

I've got the .30-06, a Remington Mountain Rifle. It is a great gun but too light = recoil. I'm a newbie rifle shooter. I don't like that recoil. I'm convinced I can get used to it, based on my years of shooting handguns. In the meantime, I'm looking for something to split the difference between that and my non-recoiling .243 Sauer. (It's a pussycat. )

You report little difference in recoil between 7mm-08 and .308. That was my EXACT question in this thread. So I think you answered my question and I think I've decided. Since the 7-08 is a small step down in recoil, it makes sense for me to go with the .260. Thanks for the help!

 

[jimbo]

Hi Mannlicher,

I think you answered my question too! The .260 sounds like the way to go. If the deer & pigs won't know the difference between the 3, and since the .260 has the lowest muzzle energy it has to have the least recoil.

The reason I like both the .260 especially is because when you look out at 300 yards, it seems like the .260 catches the 7mm-08 in either 120 gr. or 140 gr. due to better section density and generally better ballistic coefficient.

Anything has great energy under 100 yards, even the .243. But the .260 retains it out there a bit. So I'm really leaning toward .260 Rem. But the 7mm-08 is SO popular and handles heavier bullets so I was really unsure.

But after you're opinion that .260, 7mm-08 and .308 will all work, coupled with Pauls opinion that 7mm-08 is not much lower recoiling than the .308 Win, I figure .260 is the way to go.

So thank you all for helping me decide. Unless there is something I'm missing, I'm deciding to go with the .260 Rem.

Thanks for the help! How often does somebody go from confusion to clarity in one short thread? This site is GREAT!

Thanks, guys.

 

[paul105]

Jimbo,

I know you'll enjoy that Kimber .260. I was drooling over the Kimber myself, but then, I would have to choose a caliber

 

[jimbo]

quote, "I was drooling over the Kimber myself, but then, I would have to choose a caliber."

Ah, the irony!

 

[paul105]

Jimbo,

"Word"

 

[ArMa]

I was hoping for a thread like this, I felt a 5lb 10oz kimber 84m montana, pulled the 2lb trigger and that sold me right there. I went home took the silver VX-III 3-9x40 off my A-Bolt and put it on consignment for a 84 Montana... the A-Bolt isnt sold yet but thats alright since I'm having the same caliber delimma as everyone else. its mainly going to be my hunting gun but I will be shooting paper and um... "varmints" like 70% of the time. I'm thinking either 300WSM or .308, this is what I've come up with so far... (granted I shoot 150 ballistic tip winchesters)

300 WSM : $35 a box, 3300 FPS, drops 2.2" at 200 yards, no telling how long available WSM will be in the future.

308: $25 a box, 2800 FPS, drops 3.6" at 200 yards, Proven itself in accuracy over the years...

The kimber is such a nice shooter than I doubt I'll ever be able to look at it as strictly a hunting rifle. It would probably be smarter to buy 308 but for hunting I bet 300 WSM would be supurb. Ahhh I hate this caliber crap I'm buying a sauer 202

 

[jimbo]

ArMa,

Montana? Oh no! Now I have to decide between the Classic and the Montana. I'm getting a headache.:banghead:

(Actually, the Montana looks to be the way to go as the Sauer is my best range gun)

A note on that Sauer 202!

When I bought it, I thought it would be a cheap barrel swap to change from .243 purchased to .30-06 and 6.5x55. Well, lo and behold, the .243 Sauer is the only model where to go from .243 to .30-06 I have to buy a new barrel AND a new magazine AND a new bolt! At premium Deutch prices. It is looking like only a hundred bucks more to buy a brand new Sauer 202 in .30-06 than to purchase the 3 components separately. That was a shock I wasn't prepared for.

Now to go from .30-06 to .308 you only need a barrel and mag. To go from .30-06 to .270, all you need is just a $350 barrel. (I think $) I still can't find a good source for the dang barrels.

So before you buy a Sauer 202 and think you can just swap barrels to get any caliber, make sure you know in advance what calibers you will want the gun for. Make sure the model you buy just needs a barrel or maybe a barrel and mag. I think the mags go for like $100 or something.

Be warned.

Love the Sauer but am a little disappointed about the huge costs to upgrade from the little .243.

PS - Can anyone in the world tell me why I need a new bolt to upgrade my Sauer from .243 to .308 or .30-06. Isn't the rim diameter identical among .243, .260, 7mm-08, .308 and .30-06. Yet the Sauer Manual says you have to have a specialized bolt JUST for the .243.

Ah, c'est la vie.

Just an excuse to get yet another gun (the Kimber)

 

[ArMa]

Yea I already ruled out buying a sauer no specific reason. It would solve these caliber problems however.

As for Montana vs Classic - If my VX-III wasn't silver, and I didnt have to crawl on my stomach through manzanita, poison oak, and briar patches to go hunting in my area then I would without a doubt get the classic and whipe down the grade A walnut every night. However, since I do have to do those things and indeed my VX-III is silver I'm going to buy the Montana. If I scratched the stock on the Montana it wouldn't bother me a bit, if I scratched my grade A walnut I'd jump off a bridge.

 

[ArMa]

I ordered my Kimber 84m Montana today in .308, not sure when I'll get it but I'll give you guys a report when I do.

 

[jimbo]

Hi ArMa,

Good for you! We expect a full report. I won't be even looking for a Kimber until I get back from France. 2 week tour of France/Belgium for the D-Day Anniversary.

After checking cartridge selection, I may be forced to go with a 7mm-08 after all. I REALLY think .260 is better for me. But I can't do reloading in the short term. And I would really like to be able to buy the Winchester 240 gr. failsafes. Winchester doesn't load for the .260 Remington.

So I may have to go with a 7mm-08 for better cartridge availability, just like I was warned.

Well, at least I've got a couple of months to think about it now, until after I get back from Europe.

Can't wait for your report on the new Kimber Montana. I'm hearing from some folks it's TOO light. Sounds like nonsense.

Congrats on the new shooter. A lot of people would love to own such a nice rifle.

 

[jimbo]

Ah! All is not lost!

Barnes offers XLC cartridges with 120 and 140 gr. bullets. I'd like the option for failsafes but I can live with this. I may be able to get the .260 after all. Cool, baby.

BARNES XLC data:

.260 Rem 120 gr., SD= .246, BC= .441

.260 Rem 140 gr., SD= .287, BC= .522



Still, I'm REALLY impressed with these in the 7mm-08 rounds:


7mm-08 140 gr., SD= .248, BC= .477

7mm-08 160 gr., SD= .283, BC= .508



That 160 gr. bullet has a better Sectional Density than the 180 gr. .308, SD= .271. I think you could just about hunt Elk with that thing! They certainly would make a fine pig load.

Now I am REALLY confused which way to go, .260 Rem or 7mm-08.

Well, I have a few weeks to think on it.

 

[knzn]

Hi jimbo, have been reading along here and enjoying your post. One thing is for sure, you have not gotten ANY negitive feedback on your choice of Kimber for you rifle brand. They sure read great, and I would love one myself.

My one question though is on the recoil issue since that is your goal in the first place. You said in your original post that the 260 should recoil less than the 7-08. I am not at all arguing that, but I just need someone to explain to me how a .260 cal. 140 gr bullet leaving at similar velocity as a 140 gr 7-08 cal bullet is going to recoil less?

By the way, I have a 7-08 and hunt with 140 gr bullets leaving the muzzel around 2850 fps. or so. Although the recoil from that round is less than many other caliburs out there, to the "recoil sensitive" like myself, while fine for hunting, it is not what I call a pleasurable plinking round.

However for my plinking ammo, I load 120 gr bullets using Hodgens youth data. ( http://www.hodgdon.com/data/youth/index.php )

Very pleasant to shoot at cans, and would be fine for hunting too. This data can apply to the .260 also. I know that you do not hand load, but just something I had to throw in.

 

[jimbo]

Hi knzn,

My conclusion that .260 would recoil less than 7mm-08 is based on the assumption, perhaps false, that a 120 gr. .260 round will perform similarly to a 140 gr. 7mm-08 round, as they have roughly the same sectional density. I know the 120 gr. .260 round will carry 200 lb-ft less energy or so at the muzzle, but will close the gap to around 100 lb.ft less at 300 yards.

If you discuss firing 140 gr. bullets from both cartridges, you would indeed get the same recoil but you may well get better energy and performance from the .260s higher sectional density out at 200 - 300 yards.

I haven't shot either round and maybe there is no difference between the two. If not, I would have to go with the 7mm-08 for the much larger factory cartridge/bullet selection.

I need to shoot each of these myself. Maybe there is no practical difference between the two. Maybe I should just stick with the tried and true .308. But I have shot a .308 and know recoil is definitely noticeable and I sure would like to find a rifle cartridge with similar performance and significantly less recoil. I guess I can dream...

 

[ArMa]

I'm not sure how recoil sensitive you are but it seems to me that any or a combonation of the following would significantly reduce recoil: OPS INC makes a really nice muzzle break, (go here for the video). A nice recoil pad... the kimbers come with a decelerator which is very good but X-Coil pads and limbsavers just might do the job better, all personal preference. or you could get a mercury recoil supressor that goes in the stock of the rifle.

 

[paul105]

muzzle brakes

I have a Ruger Ultra Lite 30-06 with a McMillan Stock (12.5" length of pull - built for my daughter) and a 2x to 7x Leupold compact. This rig is really light -- right at 7 Lbs with scope and ammo.

It has a KDF muzzle brake -- recoil is like shooting a .243 -- very confortable. The down side is serious muzzle blast -- you can actually feel the concussion on your face when your fire this rifle. This is not necessarily a problem, but it is a weird sensation.

 

[jimbo]

I'm not particularly recoil sensitive, but I'm no recoil junky either. I'm looking for a paper-puncher/deer & pig hunter with the most power available for the least recoil cost.

I hate ported barrels, so I don't think I would like a muzzle break. I'd much rather step down in power. I don't doubt my ability to work up to .30-06. Handgunning, I found recoil to be 90% mental. I just needed to block out the fear & shock. It takes some practice and still does. I know I'll be able to handle that .30-06 before too long. Just dont want to jump up from .243 all in one bite.

 

[paul105]

JIMBO,

I handled a Kimber Montana (the stainless, synthetic model) in .260 Rem at the local gun show today. Had it been a 7-08 or .308, I would be mounting a scope on it right now. As it was, I almost couldn't control myself. I couldn't believe how light and wll balanced it was. There was also a Remington 700 Titanium in 300 Rem Short Action Ultra Mag at the show -- it almost seemed "clunky" in comparison.

 

[Art Eatman]

I wouldn't say I'm merely an athletic supporter, but I've never been Mr. Whizbang for great strength.

I've done more walking hunting than sitting, and a nine-pound '06 never seemed like that big a deal to tote. Many of my walks were well above five to eight miles. Three or four was quite common. At that weight, recoil was no big deal.

These days, pushing 70 years, I've down-sized to a 700 Ti in 7mm08. 6-1/4 pounds with ammo, scope and sling. I figure I'm giving up a hundred yards or so, but that's no big deal. I've been pushing 150-grain .30 bullets at around 3,000; now, 140-grain bullets at some 2,800 or a tad better. Off the bench, the recoil is no problem at all. So far, with a Weaver V3, it's giving reliable 3-shot groups at one MOA; not bad for 3X.

I started handloading in 1950. One thing for sure, you can't wear out dies or a press. Mid-range loads are easy, and with lead gas checks, they're cheap.

Just some thoughts...

Art