Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Gun Fight Friday: Remington 700 vs Kimber 8400 Montana

Recent Comments

Categories

Recent Posts

Archives

Syndicate

Google Reader or Homepage
Add to My Yahoo!
Add to My AOL

The Gun Nuts
in your Inbox

Enter your email address to get our new post everyday.

June 28, 2013

Gun Fight Friday: Remington 700 vs Kimber 8400 Montana

By Phil Bourjaily

Last week the Savage 99 in .300 Savage narrowly edged out the .30/06 Remington 760 in a battle between two classics of the eastern deer woods. This week we go West for another good matchup: a pair of bolt actions for the mountains—one old-school rifle, the other totally 21st century.

Steve Huey’s Remington 700

The rifle started out life as a Remington 700 Classic, made in 1988, with a straight-comb stock and hooded front sight with rear ramp from the factory. I was shopping for a replacement for an ill-tempered .338 Winchester Magnum when I came upon this .35 Whelen. My requirements for an elk rifle were simple: shoot a heavy bullet for killing elk and have plenty of energy for a close-up defensive shot on big bears since I often hunted alone in Montana and Washington. Initially scoped with a Redfield Widefield 2-7X, it now wears a Leupold 3-9X40 with a heavy duplex reticle and CDS turret. I have taken quite a few elk and mule deer over the years with this rifle. My longest shot to date with this rifle was 308 measured yards on a bull elk. One shot and down. The 22-inch barrel and the attached Montana sling make it an easy carry in the timber or heavy brush. See you in elk country.”
 
Phil Traynor’s Kimber 8400

“This is my backcountry hunting rifle, a Kimber 8400 Montana in .325 WSM. It wears a Leupold VX-3 3.5-10x50 scope with a Boone & Crockett reticle. This rifle is light enough to carry on mountain backpack hunts, flat-shooting enough for long shots, and packs enough punch for an unplanned bear encounter. Stainless steel and Kevlar/carbon fiber may not be as pretty as fancy walnut and blued steel, but it is also a lot easier to take care of when you are in a tent at the end of the day. The only downside is that the .325 WSM is versatile enough for all North American big game, negating the “need” for a safe full of guns.”
 
Which of these rifles you would prefer depends a little on how you view a rifle: Do you want the most efficient tool for the often demanding chore of backcountry hunting, or do you prefer a rifle with some tradition behind it?

Don’t forget to send us photos and stories of your favorite guns to FSgunnuts@gmail.com to be featured in an upcoming Gun Fight Friday.

Comments (52)

Top Rated
All Comments
from Mark-1 wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

Going with Remington outfit since I hunting years with much the same, only the rifle made on Mauser action in 35 Whelen. Perfect outfit for hunting animal bigger than deer close up or at range.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from NHshtr wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

The Kimber is certainly an up-to-date shooter that I'd love to own. But I went with the just-as-capable 700, because it's a traditional classic that I'd love to hunt with.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from hhack wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

I'd go with the Kimber, mainly because of the chambering in 325 wsm, which would give you a longer effective range for out west. I also like the stainless but not a deal breaker for me. I feel the 325 wsm more of a race horse and the 35 whelen a work horse. If the chamberings were the same I would go with the remington 700 classic.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

I have not owned either of these rifles, but I know that Kimber makes a better 1911 than Remington so it might be the same with their rifles, and I like the Kimber's chambering and scope better than the Remington's. My vote goes to the Kimber.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from MReeder wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

This one's as tough a choice as last Friday's and you can't really go wrong with either gun. My favorite rifle is a Rem. 700 Mountain rifle in .270 with a classic wooden stock which shoots like a house afire and has never given me a bit of trouble in 25 years or more of use. If I was going to own or the other I'd go with the 700 in a NY minute, because I'm a traditionalist and I love nicely figured wood and blued steel. (Don't care much for Monte Carlo stocks and white spacers, though.)
That having been said, I've got to come down on the side of the Kimber if it's a matter of adding a new gun or picking between two I already own for a specific trip. There's not that much difference in price and considering the cost of a back-country hunt I've got to go with the more rugged rifle. The stock is less likely to break if a horse rolls on it and you don't have to worry about it warping if it gets wet. The Kimber also is a controlled feed action, and the one thing I don't like about the 700 is the push-feed, although it's never caused me a problem. I'd personally prefer a .35 Whelan to the .325 WSM since Whelan ammo is cheaper and I've never had much use for magnums, period. But again, the price of ammo doesn't amount to much compared to the cost of a western hunt. Overall, a close, close call, but my vote goes to the Kimber.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dtownley wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Own several of the 700 line Remington offers and have hunted the last two seasons with the action open as a Remington moment had happened to me and a small pine was shot about 11 foot off the ground.
Can't sell them or give up on them as I think highly of this outfit but never enough to be dishonest about their potential to wound, maim, or kill when you don't pull the trigger.
If the Big Green had been honest this vote would not have been tough but like that multi-million dollar payout they made to a hillbilly that shot his foot off down here in TX., it was tough. Closet 8MM freak thanks thanks to a Little League coach & Charles Askins

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Uhh ... okay.

Alright then ... this one is one is too close to call. A toss up.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I know that .35 Whelen and those 225 grain Accubond loads pictured that were built to Nosler's recipe leave nothing to that 8mm WSM.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Gotta back WAM here.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sanjuancb wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

700 is a classic, but the 8400 is the better western rifle. The Montana is impervious to weather and is a dream to pack around. I strongly toyed with buying one and may still yet. The Kimber also has a better western cartridge. Read Nosler's published load data. The 325 WSM is 50 FPS faster than the .35 Whelen with a bullet of the same weight. Furthermore, the .323" bullet has both a higher ballistic coefficient and higher sectional density than the 200 gr. .358" projectile. No doubt that I would pick up the Kimber---then hunt in the rain and snow.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Didn't David E. Petzal say sectional density doesn't matter?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from kodiak46733 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I own and shoot both Big Green and Kimber products, I carried a Kimber 1911 Custom classic as a Law enforcement Officer here in Texas till I retired. I would trust my life to that Kimber anyday. I have also taken just about every head of big game with a Remington 660 in .308 that I bought in 1969. It still shoots rings around the Remington 700 Police Tactical rifle I own. Having to choose between these two rifles would be like choosing between my right or left foot, and since my left foot is long gone, along with the leg above the knee, I will have to go with the 700......the ammo is just much easier to come by in my opinion. Either way you go, you are a winner here!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Platt wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I've always wanted a Kimber. If it were wood and blue or at least not stainless and not a short magnum it would be no contest. As it is, it is so close to call I think the scope alone throws it in favor of the Kimber.

Everyone else is picking the Remington 700 .35 Whelen, it is a dam good classic gun. You can't go wrong either way. I still want a Kimber SuperAmerica.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from elmer f. wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I am a Remington 700 fan. So that is naturally what I voted for. another part of it is keeping my money at home where it belongs. the 35 Whelen is nothing to sneeze at either. couple that, with i am not a short mag fan, made it unanimous for me. as far as ease of maintenance at the end of the day, 2 coats of Johnson's Paste Wax over the entire rifle a week before season is all that is necessary, unless your caught in a torrential down pour. and if you are, the stainless rifle will need some love also. if only it was so easy to shoot down game animals! lol.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Themasterdan wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Last year I almost lost my hand to a Kimber Montana 84L in 280 Ackley. Kimber did not set the chamber to the right dimensions when they put the rifle together. This is the only rifle that I have ever had to send back to the manufacturer. I had to send the gun back twice to get a rifle that was actually workable. The first time they had to replace the barrel and never gave any explanation. When looking at the cases from the two barrels the first barrel was not to SAAMI specs and was quite dangerous. The rifle came with an action that was as smooth as 100 miles of dirt road. I sent it back to have the action smoothed out. They told me that all they did was clean the gun. The feed ramps and rails had been smoothed out by the workers at the factory. They never cleaned the gun. If standard cleaning involved using a buffing compound then that it what they did. For the money they create a garbage product. I will bad mouth them at every turn! Stick with any of the other manufacturers and you will be fine.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Themasterdan wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Last year I almost lost my hand to a Kimber Montana 84L in 280 Ackley. Kimber did not set the chamber to the right dimensions when they put the rifle together. This is the only rifle that I have ever had to send back to the manufacturer. I had to send the gun back twice to get a rifle that was actually workable. The first time they had to replace the barrel and never gave any explanation. When looking at the cases from the two barrels the first barrel was not to SAAMI specs and was quite dangerous. The rifle came with an action that was as smooth as 100 miles of dirt road. I sent it back to have the action smoothed out. They told me that all they did was clean the gun. The feed ramps and rails had been smoothed out by the workers at the factory. They never cleaned the gun. If standard cleaning involved using a buffing compound then that it what they did. For the money they create a garbage product. I will bad mouth them at every turn! Stick with any of the other manufacturers and you will be fine.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Very nice Kimber there, Mr. Traynor!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Rem 700. Forget caliber. We're comparing guns, not cartridges.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Forgeting the caliber I would still pick the Kimber.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greenhead wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Thanks, WAM, yours sure is a looker I'd be proud to own!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ralph the Rifleman wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

This choice took some thought for me. I like the 700, own one in .35 Whelen,but I have used a kimber, in 30/06, a few years ago that worked like a charm. The kimber was decked out with wood, that was flawless...as for this contest, I'm going with the weather proof-er Kimber.
ps-My Alaska gun is going to be an 8mm Rem mag in the 700 stainless/laminate stock, just to clarify I do prefer the Remington rifle, just not in this case!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckstopper wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I have 2 - 700's and 1 Kimber 8400, wouldn't trade none of them

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

We are talking rifle and caliber. The Whelen and all it's bullet weights from 200gr sp to 310gr Woodleigh Weldcores is a more versatile round, like the '06. jmo

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I have a Sako A7 in 300WSM and I like the WSM rounds. I would like to own a Kimbner so the choice is easy for me. The Kimber all the way.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Longrifle wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

The Kimber may have the panache factor, but I like the Remington. Wish the irons remained intact though. Like the wood, like blued steel, like the barrel length. I will take the Colonels advice on the cartridge, he knew what he was doing. Would love a 7600 carbine in Whelen for the Maine woods. The short magnum cartridges seem like a complicated solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Give that Kimber a Whelen chamber and a 22" barrel and I'm in, but I'll have to go with the classic gun for now. I guess it depends if I was really getting nitpicky with weight for some serious climbing.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Thanks, Greenhead. The original stock in the closet looks a lot better than the old BDL stock on it now, but I like the feel of the current one. As Beekeeper can attest, it has its scars. I just keep finishing over the scars with stain and matte polyurethane. It is glass bedded and has enough polyurethane inside and out that anything short of Katrina won't warp it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Roderick K. Purcell wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

One thing you can't do with a picture is pick up the rifle. Once you've hunted with a lightweight rifle, it's hard to go back! It's not only the weight on your shoulder, but the extra readiness that comes with a light rifle in your hands. That's why my Kimber gets a lot of field time and my heavier bolt actions stay in the closet. Tough call, but I vote for the Kimber.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Buck 41 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I know Kimbers are nice, but I've always been a Rem guy. I could be persuaded, though.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 4 days ago

WAM: Actually, believe it or not, shellac provides the best vapor barrier of all the finishes. Much better than polyurethane. But, of course, it's not terribly tough. My suggestion for those who want to finish their own wood gun stocks is to put on a couple of primary coats of clear shellac, then work it back down to the wood with fine to medium steel wool, then use several coats of oil base polyurethane for the pretty work. The latex base stuff doesn't seem to hold up very well to harsh conditions. Acrylic lacquer IS NOT a good choice. Dries too fast, very hard to work with (as in hard as nails), and too brittle (it chips easily). I prefer the semi-gloss finish of Varethane. However, I recommend thinning it at least 25% and using very thin coats. Minwax is easier to work with and doesn't require thinner but I find the luster options aren't quite what I desire (either too glossy or too flat). Oil finishes (e.g. Linspeed) are very pretty but not very durable. Also, stay away from spar type exterior varnishes/urethane. The stuff is purposely very soft (and it stinks like hell - takes forever to finish outgassing).

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Treestand wrote 42 weeks 4 days ago

I like the Kimber its so much like the old Pre/64Winchester Mod/70.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Over the years I have heard a few complaints about safety on both the 721 and 700 Remington. Quite a controversy recently when documents were uncovered indicating that Remington knew from the get-go that the 700's safety might give way unexpectedly. See the following link: h.ttp://www.cnbc.com/id/39759366 Read right to the end for quotes on Remington company internal correspondence that seems to be quite revealing.

Mind you, I have never owned either the 721 or 700 but my brother has. Talked to him last night and he said that though the 700 addressed the 721's bolt opening only on off safe position (Remington has made a recall on this for 721), he still thinks the 700's safety is "too soft." Any other thoughts on this?

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Never had a problem with either of my 700's. Both well worn and shot a lot. I tend to pay little attention to media BS and chatter from others when I have relevant personal experience.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hobob wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

My 700 is all I ever will need. The Kimber is nice too but my Remington has never let me down. The safety on my Remington 788 was very unsafe it would catch and disengage so many times I retired the weapon. Its a shame it was most accurate but just could not be carried by me safely.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Here's what David E. Petzal had to say about the Remington's safety and NBC's program about them.

www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/hunting/2010/10/petzal-different-look-remin...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Thanks for that link, Stinky. My wife was killed in a car accident when Petzal made this report so I missed it.

I'm sorry but if a gun discharges without the shooter pulling the trigger then it is unsafe. Saying that it's not a problem because the gun should always be pointed in a safe direction ... well, that doesn't make much sense to me. A "safety" is supposed to ENSURE that a loaded gun is not going to discharge without the trigger being depressed. Period. If it can't be relied on to do that, then it's not safe. Makes no difference if it discharges and kills a kid behind a horse trailer or lobs one at the man in the moon. Unsafe is unsafe.

As I understand it, the biggest complaint with the 721 (and early models of the 700?) was that to eject a loaded round from the chamber required that the safety be disengaged. I agree, that was not a safe way for a gun to operate. My good old US Army issue Springfield 1903-A3 also cannot be unloaded without disengaging the safety and though I love it dearly, I readily acknowledge that my 1903-A3 certainly is not as safe as a rifle that can keep the firing pin blocked while the bolt is worked. And if the trigger had issues with skipping by the safety as has been alleged ... well that would make unloading the gun even more hazardous.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CJ wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Honher,
Just another fine example of your know-it-all attitude and shooting off your gums before you load the brain! LMFAO

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

CJ,

Just another fine example of your inability to think outside the box ... or at all?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CJ wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Honker,
Must be great to be smart as you!

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Well, I see there's apparently been a rash of heavy-handed editing of some recent comments to this thread. Very surprising since as far as I can tell it involved nothing that violated the Terms of Use, i.e. filthy language, malicious behavior, etc. Only a controversial safety issue with one of these guns. A SAFETY ISSUE! Someone is overly sensitive I think. You'd think there was a million bucks at stake in these gunfight competitions. C'mon guys!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

I stand corrected. Seems a string of comments disappeared and now they have reappeared. Or maybe for whatever reason my computer only showed page one of the comments when the thread is brought up. I tried bringing the thread up several times with the same results. Also, the Jeep ad was taking over the site on its own again today. Anyway, my apologies to the editors.

CJ, just trying to send a bit of it your way. Yes, I have much more than I need.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from the Preacher wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

not sure of Ontario Honker is actually a canadian, but I would expect it to take a canadian to be the first to point out the 700's problems.

Just because it is a classic doesnt make it great. I have the new ruger american which I find more accurate than the 700.

obviously Kimber.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from dtownley wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

Preacher, I brought up the safety, the(suspected)Montana refugee had some spare change and threw it in the ring. Ontario is a beautiful Province though, did some smelt fishing off Pt.Pelee when I was a kid.
OH, bless you & your wife, sincerely.
That said, I think your full of something and just want to be there to read it, others have noticed also, so spin the spinner...its twister !

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

Downley, I think the problem is you are the only one who can understand what you are writing. I suspect I can speak for most of us when I say your first post above (and many others) was pretty much gibberish. I don't see the word "safety" mentioned once so no I wasn't throwing any "spare change" on anything anyone else had written ... that made any sense. If you want to be clever writing in riddles, then don't be surprised if what you're writing is misunderstood ... or ignored. If you have something to say, just say it.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Safado wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

This is a tough call because I considered purchasing a .35 Whelen and am curious about the .325 WSM as a good all around caliber for western hunting. That being said I go with the .35 Whelen.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

the .325 has good enough specs. IMO, i'd be worried about the longevity of the cartridge. perhaps its not a problem if you are a reloader.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

the .325 has good enough specs. IMO, i'd be worried about the longevity of the cartridge. perhaps its not a problem if you are a reloader.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

OFF TOPIC

Ole Jim Carmichel sets a benchrest record, and this is his interview:

www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots/2013/06/q-jim-carmichel

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from dtownley wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

Obtuse Hokum, open action = obvious
I would wage your suspicion would fall
flat.(been wrong before)
Puckish with just a touch of impenitence
I leave you clever OH, its seems a lifes
experience...eh Bobby Pin ?

-3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Red Angus wrote 41 weeks 3 days ago

I went with the Remington. I have absolutely nothing against the Kimber, I just would hate to have one rifle for everything. That would just make me feel guilty for owning a bunch of rifles.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from hutter wrote 41 weeks 3 days ago

I own a Kimber 8400 in .260 remington. That gun is sooo light it kickes the snot out of you even in .260. Also the Kimber has a pencil barrel and heats up so fast that the third shot is way off center, So I choose The 700. Any body want to buy a .260?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 41 weeks 2 days ago

A .260 that kicks that hard??? I have a Ruger Ultralight, 6# or so, in .257 Roberts and it's a pleasure to shoot. Something wrong with this picture that I just don't get.

0 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

from Longrifle wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

The Kimber may have the panache factor, but I like the Remington. Wish the irons remained intact though. Like the wood, like blued steel, like the barrel length. I will take the Colonels advice on the cartridge, he knew what he was doing. Would love a 7600 carbine in Whelen for the Maine woods. The short magnum cartridges seem like a complicated solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Mark-1 wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

Going with Remington outfit since I hunting years with much the same, only the rifle made on Mauser action in 35 Whelen. Perfect outfit for hunting animal bigger than deer close up or at range.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from NHshtr wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

The Kimber is certainly an up-to-date shooter that I'd love to own. But I went with the just-as-capable 700, because it's a traditional classic that I'd love to hunt with.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from hhack wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

I'd go with the Kimber, mainly because of the chambering in 325 wsm, which would give you a longer effective range for out west. I also like the stainless but not a deal breaker for me. I feel the 325 wsm more of a race horse and the 35 whelen a work horse. If the chamberings were the same I would go with the remington 700 classic.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Beekeeper wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I know that .35 Whelen and those 225 grain Accubond loads pictured that were built to Nosler's recipe leave nothing to that 8mm WSM.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Rem 700. Forget caliber. We're comparing guns, not cartridges.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

Downley, I think the problem is you are the only one who can understand what you are writing. I suspect I can speak for most of us when I say your first post above (and many others) was pretty much gibberish. I don't see the word "safety" mentioned once so no I wasn't throwing any "spare change" on anything anyone else had written ... that made any sense. If you want to be clever writing in riddles, then don't be surprised if what you're writing is misunderstood ... or ignored. If you have something to say, just say it.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

I have not owned either of these rifles, but I know that Kimber makes a better 1911 than Remington so it might be the same with their rifles, and I like the Kimber's chambering and scope better than the Remington's. My vote goes to the Kimber.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from MReeder wrote 42 weeks 6 days ago

This one's as tough a choice as last Friday's and you can't really go wrong with either gun. My favorite rifle is a Rem. 700 Mountain rifle in .270 with a classic wooden stock which shoots like a house afire and has never given me a bit of trouble in 25 years or more of use. If I was going to own or the other I'd go with the 700 in a NY minute, because I'm a traditionalist and I love nicely figured wood and blued steel. (Don't care much for Monte Carlo stocks and white spacers, though.)
That having been said, I've got to come down on the side of the Kimber if it's a matter of adding a new gun or picking between two I already own for a specific trip. There's not that much difference in price and considering the cost of a back-country hunt I've got to go with the more rugged rifle. The stock is less likely to break if a horse rolls on it and you don't have to worry about it warping if it gets wet. The Kimber also is a controlled feed action, and the one thing I don't like about the 700 is the push-feed, although it's never caused me a problem. I'd personally prefer a .35 Whelan to the .325 WSM since Whelan ammo is cheaper and I've never had much use for magnums, period. But again, the price of ammo doesn't amount to much compared to the cost of a western hunt. Overall, a close, close call, but my vote goes to the Kimber.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Gotta back WAM here.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from kodiak46733 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I own and shoot both Big Green and Kimber products, I carried a Kimber 1911 Custom classic as a Law enforcement Officer here in Texas till I retired. I would trust my life to that Kimber anyday. I have also taken just about every head of big game with a Remington 660 in .308 that I bought in 1969. It still shoots rings around the Remington 700 Police Tactical rifle I own. Having to choose between these two rifles would be like choosing between my right or left foot, and since my left foot is long gone, along with the leg above the knee, I will have to go with the 700......the ammo is just much easier to come by in my opinion. Either way you go, you are a winner here!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Themasterdan wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Last year I almost lost my hand to a Kimber Montana 84L in 280 Ackley. Kimber did not set the chamber to the right dimensions when they put the rifle together. This is the only rifle that I have ever had to send back to the manufacturer. I had to send the gun back twice to get a rifle that was actually workable. The first time they had to replace the barrel and never gave any explanation. When looking at the cases from the two barrels the first barrel was not to SAAMI specs and was quite dangerous. The rifle came with an action that was as smooth as 100 miles of dirt road. I sent it back to have the action smoothed out. They told me that all they did was clean the gun. The feed ramps and rails had been smoothed out by the workers at the factory. They never cleaned the gun. If standard cleaning involved using a buffing compound then that it what they did. For the money they create a garbage product. I will bad mouth them at every turn! Stick with any of the other manufacturers and you will be fine.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Jim in Mo wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

We are talking rifle and caliber. The Whelen and all it's bullet weights from 200gr sp to 310gr Woodleigh Weldcores is a more versatile round, like the '06. jmo

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Never had a problem with either of my 700's. Both well worn and shot a lot. I tend to pay little attention to media BS and chatter from others when I have relevant personal experience.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Hobob wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

My 700 is all I ever will need. The Kimber is nice too but my Remington has never let me down. The safety on my Remington 788 was very unsafe it would catch and disengage so many times I retired the weapon. Its a shame it was most accurate but just could not be carried by me safely.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Here's what David E. Petzal had to say about the Remington's safety and NBC's program about them.

www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/hunting/2010/10/petzal-different-look-remin...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Thanks for that link, Stinky. My wife was killed in a car accident when Petzal made this report so I missed it.

I'm sorry but if a gun discharges without the shooter pulling the trigger then it is unsafe. Saying that it's not a problem because the gun should always be pointed in a safe direction ... well, that doesn't make much sense to me. A "safety" is supposed to ENSURE that a loaded gun is not going to discharge without the trigger being depressed. Period. If it can't be relied on to do that, then it's not safe. Makes no difference if it discharges and kills a kid behind a horse trailer or lobs one at the man in the moon. Unsafe is unsafe.

As I understand it, the biggest complaint with the 721 (and early models of the 700?) was that to eject a loaded round from the chamber required that the safety be disengaged. I agree, that was not a safe way for a gun to operate. My good old US Army issue Springfield 1903-A3 also cannot be unloaded without disengaging the safety and though I love it dearly, I readily acknowledge that my 1903-A3 certainly is not as safe as a rifle that can keep the firing pin blocked while the bolt is worked. And if the trigger had issues with skipping by the safety as has been alleged ... well that would make unloading the gun even more hazardous.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

CJ,

Just another fine example of your inability to think outside the box ... or at all?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Well, I see there's apparently been a rash of heavy-handed editing of some recent comments to this thread. Very surprising since as far as I can tell it involved nothing that violated the Terms of Use, i.e. filthy language, malicious behavior, etc. Only a controversial safety issue with one of these guns. A SAFETY ISSUE! Someone is overly sensitive I think. You'd think there was a million bucks at stake in these gunfight competitions. C'mon guys!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dtownley wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Own several of the 700 line Remington offers and have hunted the last two seasons with the action open as a Remington moment had happened to me and a small pine was shot about 11 foot off the ground.
Can't sell them or give up on them as I think highly of this outfit but never enough to be dishonest about their potential to wound, maim, or kill when you don't pull the trigger.
If the Big Green had been honest this vote would not have been tough but like that multi-million dollar payout they made to a hillbilly that shot his foot off down here in TX., it was tough. Closet 8MM freak thanks thanks to a Little League coach & Charles Askins

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sanjuancb wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

700 is a classic, but the 8400 is the better western rifle. The Montana is impervious to weather and is a dream to pack around. I strongly toyed with buying one and may still yet. The Kimber also has a better western cartridge. Read Nosler's published load data. The 325 WSM is 50 FPS faster than the .35 Whelen with a bullet of the same weight. Furthermore, the .323" bullet has both a higher ballistic coefficient and higher sectional density than the 200 gr. .358" projectile. No doubt that I would pick up the Kimber---then hunt in the rain and snow.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Didn't David E. Petzal say sectional density doesn't matter?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Tim Platt wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I've always wanted a Kimber. If it were wood and blue or at least not stainless and not a short magnum it would be no contest. As it is, it is so close to call I think the scope alone throws it in favor of the Kimber.

Everyone else is picking the Remington 700 .35 Whelen, it is a dam good classic gun. You can't go wrong either way. I still want a Kimber SuperAmerica.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from elmer f. wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I am a Remington 700 fan. So that is naturally what I voted for. another part of it is keeping my money at home where it belongs. the 35 Whelen is nothing to sneeze at either. couple that, with i am not a short mag fan, made it unanimous for me. as far as ease of maintenance at the end of the day, 2 coats of Johnson's Paste Wax over the entire rifle a week before season is all that is necessary, unless your caught in a torrential down pour. and if you are, the stainless rifle will need some love also. if only it was so easy to shoot down game animals! lol.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Themasterdan wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Last year I almost lost my hand to a Kimber Montana 84L in 280 Ackley. Kimber did not set the chamber to the right dimensions when they put the rifle together. This is the only rifle that I have ever had to send back to the manufacturer. I had to send the gun back twice to get a rifle that was actually workable. The first time they had to replace the barrel and never gave any explanation. When looking at the cases from the two barrels the first barrel was not to SAAMI specs and was quite dangerous. The rifle came with an action that was as smooth as 100 miles of dirt road. I sent it back to have the action smoothed out. They told me that all they did was clean the gun. The feed ramps and rails had been smoothed out by the workers at the factory. They never cleaned the gun. If standard cleaning involved using a buffing compound then that it what they did. For the money they create a garbage product. I will bad mouth them at every turn! Stick with any of the other manufacturers and you will be fine.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Very nice Kimber there, Mr. Traynor!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Old Stinky wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Forgeting the caliber I would still pick the Kimber.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Greenhead wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Thanks, WAM, yours sure is a looker I'd be proud to own!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ralph the Rifleman wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

This choice took some thought for me. I like the 700, own one in .35 Whelen,but I have used a kimber, in 30/06, a few years ago that worked like a charm. The kimber was decked out with wood, that was flawless...as for this contest, I'm going with the weather proof-er Kimber.
ps-My Alaska gun is going to be an 8mm Rem mag in the 700 stainless/laminate stock, just to clarify I do prefer the Remington rifle, just not in this case!!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from buckstopper wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I have 2 - 700's and 1 Kimber 8400, wouldn't trade none of them

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I have a Sako A7 in 300WSM and I like the WSM rounds. I would like to own a Kimbner so the choice is easy for me. The Kimber all the way.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Give that Kimber a Whelen chamber and a 22" barrel and I'm in, but I'll have to go with the classic gun for now. I guess it depends if I was really getting nitpicky with weight for some serious climbing.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Thanks, Greenhead. The original stock in the closet looks a lot better than the old BDL stock on it now, but I like the feel of the current one. As Beekeeper can attest, it has its scars. I just keep finishing over the scars with stain and matte polyurethane. It is glass bedded and has enough polyurethane inside and out that anything short of Katrina won't warp it.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Roderick K. Purcell wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

One thing you can't do with a picture is pick up the rifle. Once you've hunted with a lightweight rifle, it's hard to go back! It's not only the weight on your shoulder, but the extra readiness that comes with a light rifle in your hands. That's why my Kimber gets a lot of field time and my heavier bolt actions stay in the closet. Tough call, but I vote for the Kimber.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from John Buck 41 wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

I know Kimbers are nice, but I've always been a Rem guy. I could be persuaded, though.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 4 days ago

WAM: Actually, believe it or not, shellac provides the best vapor barrier of all the finishes. Much better than polyurethane. But, of course, it's not terribly tough. My suggestion for those who want to finish their own wood gun stocks is to put on a couple of primary coats of clear shellac, then work it back down to the wood with fine to medium steel wool, then use several coats of oil base polyurethane for the pretty work. The latex base stuff doesn't seem to hold up very well to harsh conditions. Acrylic lacquer IS NOT a good choice. Dries too fast, very hard to work with (as in hard as nails), and too brittle (it chips easily). I prefer the semi-gloss finish of Varethane. However, I recommend thinning it at least 25% and using very thin coats. Minwax is easier to work with and doesn't require thinner but I find the luster options aren't quite what I desire (either too glossy or too flat). Oil finishes (e.g. Linspeed) are very pretty but not very durable. Also, stay away from spar type exterior varnishes/urethane. The stuff is purposely very soft (and it stinks like hell - takes forever to finish outgassing).

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Treestand wrote 42 weeks 4 days ago

I like the Kimber its so much like the old Pre/64Winchester Mod/70.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from CJ wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Honher,
Just another fine example of your know-it-all attitude and shooting off your gums before you load the brain! LMFAO

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from the Preacher wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

not sure of Ontario Honker is actually a canadian, but I would expect it to take a canadian to be the first to point out the 700's problems.

Just because it is a classic doesnt make it great. I have the new ruger american which I find more accurate than the 700.

obviously Kimber.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from dtownley wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

Preacher, I brought up the safety, the(suspected)Montana refugee had some spare change and threw it in the ring. Ontario is a beautiful Province though, did some smelt fishing off Pt.Pelee when I was a kid.
OH, bless you & your wife, sincerely.
That said, I think your full of something and just want to be there to read it, others have noticed also, so spin the spinner...its twister !

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Safado wrote 42 weeks 2 days ago

This is a tough call because I considered purchasing a .35 Whelen and am curious about the .325 WSM as a good all around caliber for western hunting. That being said I go with the .35 Whelen.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

the .325 has good enough specs. IMO, i'd be worried about the longevity of the cartridge. perhaps its not a problem if you are a reloader.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jay wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

the .325 has good enough specs. IMO, i'd be worried about the longevity of the cartridge. perhaps its not a problem if you are a reloader.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from O Garcia wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

OFF TOPIC

Ole Jim Carmichel sets a benchrest record, and this is his interview:

www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots/2013/06/q-jim-carmichel

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Red Angus wrote 41 weeks 3 days ago

I went with the Remington. I have absolutely nothing against the Kimber, I just would hate to have one rifle for everything. That would just make me feel guilty for owning a bunch of rifles.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from hutter wrote 41 weeks 3 days ago

I own a Kimber 8400 in .260 remington. That gun is sooo light it kickes the snot out of you even in .260. Also the Kimber has a pencil barrel and heats up so fast that the third shot is way off center, So I choose The 700. Any body want to buy a .260?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 41 weeks 2 days ago

A .260 that kicks that hard??? I have a Ruger Ultralight, 6# or so, in .257 Roberts and it's a pleasure to shoot. Something wrong with this picture that I just don't get.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 5 days ago

Uhh ... okay.

Alright then ... this one is one is too close to call. A toss up.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Over the years I have heard a few complaints about safety on both the 721 and 700 Remington. Quite a controversy recently when documents were uncovered indicating that Remington knew from the get-go that the 700's safety might give way unexpectedly. See the following link: h.ttp://www.cnbc.com/id/39759366 Read right to the end for quotes on Remington company internal correspondence that seems to be quite revealing.

Mind you, I have never owned either the 721 or 700 but my brother has. Talked to him last night and he said that though the 700 addressed the 721's bolt opening only on off safe position (Remington has made a recall on this for 721), he still thinks the 700's safety is "too soft." Any other thoughts on this?

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CJ wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

Honker,
Must be great to be smart as you!

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ontario Honker ... wrote 42 weeks 3 days ago

I stand corrected. Seems a string of comments disappeared and now they have reappeared. Or maybe for whatever reason my computer only showed page one of the comments when the thread is brought up. I tried bringing the thread up several times with the same results. Also, the Jeep ad was taking over the site on its own again today. Anyway, my apologies to the editors.

CJ, just trying to send a bit of it your way. Yes, I have much more than I need.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from dtownley wrote 42 weeks 1 day ago

Obtuse Hokum, open action = obvious
I would wage your suspicion would fall
flat.(been wrong before)
Puckish with just a touch of impenitence
I leave you clever OH, its seems a lifes
experience...eh Bobby Pin ?

-3 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Comment

bmxbiz-fs