Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Kimber MT 325 WSM Scope??

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,231

    Question Kimber MT 325 WSM Scope??

    Any suggesstions? I am thinking maybe a Burris Short Mag 4.5-14x32? Or a Burris Sig Select 3-10x40. Both have the Hi-Lume match grade coating, 5 inches eye relief and Balistic Plex reticle. Not sure about a Leupold VarX II might consider VX III. Maybe a Zeiss Conquest. Do you think a regular fullsize scope is to large and bulky?
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    555

    Default

    I looked at one and the only scope that I could see being mounted on it would be the Leupold VxIII 2.5-8, you can get it in the boon & crocket reticle if you like. Its an excellent scope. I just got a 3-9x40 Vx II with the long range duplex for my 300 mag, its not too bulky and a great scope.

  3. #3

    Default Scope

    Seeing how the Kimber is a lightweight rifle, and in trying to keep it that way, I think I would opt for the Leuplod VX III in 1.75 x 6 at just over 11 ounces.
    My 2 cents.

  4. #4

    Default

    Your scope choice should depend mostly on where you typically hunt and the usual range for shots. While I have higher powered scopes on some rifles, my favorite for bigger bores is one of the old Burris 1.5 x 5's I have on hand. The 5X is plenty for long range shots, but the extra field of view at 1.5x is really welcome in the tight stuff. I haven't tried the Leopold 1.75 x 6 that talkeetnakid recommends, but it sounds like it would be just my cup of tea if I couldn't find anything lower at the small end.

    The only time such a wide field and low power is a liability is on rifles with a front site still in place. You can see the sight through the scope, and in the heat of the moment I'd be afraid of instinctively aiming off that rather than the crosshair until you get used to it. I let a friend shoot my 375 that still has the sight, and he was throwing his shots 4 or 5 feet high at 100 yards till we figured out what was going on.

  5. #5
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,231

    Default Thanks

    Thanks for all the responses so far. I appreciate it. My current gun is an old Ruger M77 06. Yes I bought the Kimber because of the light weight (and other factors) and I do not want a large heavy scope. 11-12 ozs seems about right. Should put the gun and scope at 7lbs before ammo and light sling. The Burris 3-9 Short Mag is 12 oz. 4.5-14 is 15.

    I will definalty look in to the lower powers. Don't really care about 14. I have always had the ol' 3-9x40 but can see where the lower power 1.5 or 2 could make a differnce in low light or close up high pucker factor shots at a big brown blur...

    This will be my all around Alaska hunitng rifle. First hunt with it will be sheep in August. I also hunt caribou and of course will shoot the stray blackie that may present himself. Might go for a brownie someday but not to serious at this point. I'd try for a Goat first. I hunt typical moose country that can range from river bottom or flats where max shots are probably 150 yds to hunting moose in the hills at tree line glassing the alders. Last year twice I passed up 300+ yd shots at large bulls. I didn't feel confident in the 06 180 grain bullet at that distance. Some guys might but not me. Don't want to wound and lose a majestic animal like that, or any animal for that matter. I used to shoot deer and antelope at 400yds with a 243 so don't have a problem taking long shots. Just want to have the right setup. I figure the .325 will do the job nicely. Now for the scope.

    Any other thoughts??
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Snyd,
    You might want to check with this guy:

    If there is anything else that I can assist you with please let me know.
    Doug
    212-753-5128
    gr8fuldoug@aol.com

    He is a regular to the Short Mags forum, he shoots short mags, he understands the optic needs for the short mags, and he has very good prices.

    Hope this helps.

  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    15

    Default Scope Suggestions

    Sorry to disagree with you scope selection but it is poor-it is not the brand but you're hunting large targets in Alaska. Critters here are large, sometimes moving-you may be required to shoot at close range, in the rain-my personal experience is that large objective scopes get banged up on backpack or ATV hunts thus maintaining zeros is tough regardless of brand/mounting system. Reticles need to work at long/close range and I suggest the complex reticles are not a good choice. Try tracking a running target at 30-40 yards with a 4-12x scope-a test the Europeans use for moose hunting license tests, pretty tough with fine reticles. Over a good field rest, large standing targets with a 9-12" kill zone can be reliably hit at 300+ meters with a low to medium power scope. Major C

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sterling, AK
    Posts
    70

    Default Scope for 325

    I have a classic 8400 wood. It wears a Conquest 3 x 9 and is a great combo. A little extra weight on a 325 dosen't hurt (No pun intended.) in the recoil Dept. I hope yours shoots as good as mine.
    Good Luck with it!!!

  9. #9

    Default 325

    Well I have a Kimber 8400 Montana in a 325 and because of how small the gun is (compared to others I have anyway) I am going to be using this gun in wooded brush terain for moose. So I have decided to get a scope with as much light gathering as possible. I have chosen to go with a Leupold VXL 3.5-10 with the 50mm objective. I think this scope will make the rifle the most usable for what I intend to use it for.

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 17 Rem
    Sorry to disagree with you scope selection but it is poor-it is not the brand but you're hunting large targets in Alaska. Critters here are large, sometimes moving-you may be required to shoot at close range, in the rain-my personal experience is that large objective scopes get banged up on backpack or ATV hunts thus maintaining zeros is tough regardless of brand/mounting system. Reticles need to work at long/close range and I suggest the complex reticles are not a good choice. Try tracking a running target at 30-40 yards with a 4-12x scope-a test the Europeans use for moose hunting license tests, pretty tough with fine reticles. Over a good field rest, large standing targets with a 9-12" kill zone can be reliably hit at 300+ meters with a low to medium power scope. Major C
    No need to apologize. I haven't selected a scope yet. Just threw out a few options. I welcome and appreciate your input. The Burris shortmags are 32mm objective. I'm thinking that is big enough, maybe a 36. I think I have ruled out the 4.5-14x. I am a little leary of 4.5 being lowest power especially with 32 objective lense and I can't really see much of a need for 14x, plus it weighs more. 2.5 or 3x would gather more light with a 32 or 36 objective. The Leupold Vari X III 2.5-8x36 at 11.6ozs is looking pretty good. May have to see if I can have a look through one. That or the Burris Short Mag 3x9-32 at 12 ozs.

    Thanks all!
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Snyd,

    Glad you found www.shortmags.org I have learned quite a bit there about the WSM. I hope you got the answers you need and you can find many tips on reloading and data for the short mags.

  12. #12
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoghunting
    Snyd,

    Glad you found www.shortmags.org I have learned quite a bit there about the WSM. I hope you got the answers you need and you can find many tips on reloading and data for the short mags.
    Ya, that's a great site. I'm pretty excited to get this gun set up. I'm going with the Kimber bases and hopefully Burris Signature Series rings. I also ran across a picture of a 325 kimber setup like this at shortmag.org. I have decided to get either the Leupold VX III 2.5-8x36 or the VX III 3.5-10x40. I looked at them both today along side the Kimber and the 40mm doesn't seem to be to big. The 36 almost seems small. Maybe I'm just used to a 40 mm scope. The 40 only weighs 1 oz more. 12.5 ozs I think and is only $70 more. Can't see a reason NOT to go with the 40 at this point. Still open for input though. Also the 2.5-8 is really 2.3-7.6. I'm thinking I might like the 10 power at 300+ yds for sheep and other long shots. Not too big of deal on moose. 3.5 should be low enough and gather light will with the 40.

    Later. Thanks.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  13. #13
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Bethel, Cantwell, Fort Yukon, Skagway, Chevak and Point Hope
    Posts
    967

    Default

    The Leupold Ultra-Lite only weighs 8 ounces.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    555

    Default

    The leupold 2.5-8x36 is an excellent scope and suits the montana like they were made for each other.

  15. #15
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,231

    Default

    Well, just got the 325 today with the VX III 2.5-8x36mm. Seems just right. Time to go shoot.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  16. #16

    Default Scope

    Well I ordered my scope for my 325 a couple days ago. I ordered a Leupold VXL 3.5 - 10 x 56. I wanted a scope that gathered as much light as possible since the majority of my hunting with this rifle will be done in the evening when light is poor.

  17. #17
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    5,231

    Default

    Cool. I looked at one of those the other day. Pretty wild looking. I am 45 and getting older so an exit pupil of about 4 or 5 is all that I will benefit from. I don't know the specs on the 56mm but the 2.5 has a 13 feet more field of view than the 40mm at 3.5 power and should gather more light. I figured that will do me more good than an extra 2x on the higher end. Plus I wanted to keep the gun as light as possible and the size seemed right.

    I'd like to see a picture of that Kimber MT with that scope once you get her set up. What rounds are you ging to shoot? I'm going with the Win 200gr Accubonds. $43 a box at Sportsmans...x4=youch!

    Where did you get your rifle? Sportsmans in Fairbanks can't get any. Down Under Guns says they can order them. I happened to find one on the shelf at Sentry. They said it was the last one. While I was there I talked to a guy who had one on order from somewhere. Sportsmans said they have mounted scopes on 3 in the past couple weeks that guys got other places.
    A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and donít have one, youíll probably never need one again

  18. #18

    Default 325

    I am also hoping that my Kimber shoots the 200 accubonds well becuase that is what I am planing on using most. I'll send you a pic when I get everything on the gun. I was wanting a scope to gather the most light possible (to an extent). The wieght wasn't an issue to me because I thought the gun was really light anyway.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •