Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Kimber Montana VS. Tikka T3 Lite

  1. #1

    Default Kimber Montana VS. Tikka T3 Lite

    I have made up my mind I am getting one of these two guns in 300 wsm. I know there is a significant price difference. I have enough to buy the kimber, but is the Kimber worth the extra 500.00?

  2. #2

    Default If your sold on the 300 WSM Kimber for sure!!!

    Check out this thread:

    If you are sold on the 300 in WSM and can afford it that you should get the Kimber as a no brainer due to the simple fact that you get the lightweight advantage in a true short action gun like the kimber. Where as if you go the Tikka route in a 300 WSM you are still getting the added weight in of a standard action gun even though you are getting a short again caliber gun.

    Personally, I couldn't justify the extra 500 bills for the Kimber and went with simplicity and ammo choices and picked up a 300 WM Tikka for $575 at Boondocks in Eagle River cause its the same weight as the WSM.

  3. #3
    Member rlcofmn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007

    Default sako finlight

    I doubt I will get anyone to back me up (dont ask me why) but thats my opinion. Accuracy guarrenty, 4 in the detachable mag, smooth action it has everything going for it.

  4. #4
    Member Kay9Cop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Wasilla, AK


    I've never shot, much less handled, Tikka or Sako, but my wife's 300 WSM Kimber is awesome. I haven't experienced any of the problems that I've seen about Kimber in some reports on the net. The Kimber's stock design is excellent and reducing felt recoil and doesn't bother my wife one bit.

  5. #5


    I would have to agree with rlcofmn... I've read a lot of reviews on a lot of rifles, including dozens on Kimbers, TIKKA's and SAKO's.

    What I've learned is that Kimber used to produce quality rifles consistently, but no more. I've read numerous unstatisfied reviews about Kimbers, many more unsatisfied than satisfied, and that Kimber wasn't standing behind their rifle. I have read many satisfied reviews on TIKKA's and SAKO's and I can't remember anymore than one dis-satisfied review for either. The differenc between the TIKKA and the SAKO being some internal quality such as plastic vs metalic parts and SAKO's and TIKKA's aren't quite as *good lookin* as SAKO's. Also, SAKO's have a 5 shot group guarantee vs TIKA's 3 shot Guarantee???

    I have a Finnlight 300 WSM on order and I'll let you know what i findout.

    Michael, *I would not buy a Kimber* for any price...

    The best rifles are made in Montana

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2006

    Default Kimber is top shelf

    Can't speak for the Tikkas, but I bought my first Kimber Montana 300 WSM last year. Despite all the Kimber bashing that occurs regularly, I can report that my Kimber performs flawlessly. It feels incredible, balances perfectly, feeds reliably, and shoots factory loads sub MOA. Can't wait to reload for it. My Winny mod 40 used to be my go-to gun. It has been replaced by my Kimber which is a pleasure to carry up across the tundra. I forgot to mention that the trigger is crisp and clean. You may want to lighten it up, though.

    If you can get past the stock design and the plastic on the Tikka's bolt assembly, I understand they are very accurate and reliable. May try one for myself eventually.

    Please know that Kimber makes a top shelp rifle. Worth every cent. I've got to win the lottery so I can get a Kimber Super America next.

  7. #7


    OneRound, I dont mean to bash your rifle. There are some excellent Kimbers out there, but from the reviews I read from other owners, many are dis-satisfied and the issues *seem* to be consistency and Kimbers reluctance to stand behind the product. So it sounds like a gamble. The last two rifles I have bought have a factory guarantee and the companies rep to stand behind it... Cooper (1/2 MOA @ 100 yds) and Sako (1 MOA @100 yds). I got the SAKO because Cooper didn't make a 300. Incidentally, Dan Cooper used to work for Kimber.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace


    Kimber Montanas either shoot or they dont. if they dont, then you are out of luck.

    The highest quality bolt gun in the sub $1000 range today is Browning, if you like the looks.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Fairbanks, Alaska


    I would go with a Tikka. You hear of to many problems with the Kimber and I just don't see where its $500 better. Just my 2 cents.

    I have a Tikka and I'm very happy with it and will be buying more of them.

  10. #10


    If money is not an issue then the Kimber is the way to go. When I bought my Kimber Montana 300WSM I had 3 Tikkas , I sold 2 of them to buy a great lightweight mountain rifle. I went to the store and handled the Sako FinnLite, the Rem Ti, and the Kimber Montana. To me it was a no brainer. First off the Sako was $100 more and comes with a Tupperware stock just like every other synth plastic stock made. The Kimber wears a stock that would cost you $400 to equal it with a McMillan Edge. It has CRF, a 3 position safety and well if it shoots , you have the best of all worlds in a lightweight stainless mountain rifle. I am not a big Remington fan and didn't feel that the Ti balanced well for me. So the Kimber it was. I am not bashing Tikkas as I have owned 4 of them, but they are not in the same ball park as the Kimber, the Kimber offers you so much more.

  11. #11
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Kachemak Bay Alaska


    I really like the Kimbers feel because it reminds me of a M-70 Feather Weight. But I have talked to about 30 owners and about 7 of them were not happy with some sort of problems.

    I own a couple High Dollar Remingtons. I think it was a waste of money since I had to put a bunch of work into 1,300 rifles to get them to shoot straight. Yesterday I visited a smith up in Kenai who showed me a whole rack of hi-grade expensive Remingtons waiting for him to work on them.

    I tried going the cheap route with one Ruger Rifle, which has not been my best move either. I should have learned my lesson from the Ruger Red Label shotgun I owned for 60 days.

    I am amazed how many guys are shooting out of the box Savage rifles that group much better than out of the box Remingtons that cost 4 times as much.

    The Tikkas seem to be great little shooters, but I personally cannot get past theh plastic parts and the semi enclosed action.

    The guys shooting Montana Rifles all seem to be happy campers. And then there are the folks with lots of money who shoot Dakota Rifles, which are SUPER NICE.

    I have hunted with a few guys with Browning rifles and they seem to be happy with them as out of the box rifles. They look a little different, but them seem to shoot pretty well and shoulder real nice.

    The three modern CZ rifles I have owned are better than average in accuracy and workmanship, although they are still not up to the old standards.

    The best shooting rifles I have now were all made over 50 years ago.

    For the money of a high dollar Remington Ti or a Kimber Montana, you might be able to get somebody to custom build a nice Mauser action into your dream rifle.
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member

  12. #12


    {I tried going the cheap route with one Ruger Rifle, which has not been my best move either.}

    I bought two Ruger M77's about 20 yrs ago, 7mm Rem Mag and a 270 Win. The 7mm was a great shooter with about .75 MOA factory and handloads. I didn't go to a whole lot of effort to tweek a better handload. The 270 wasn't quite as good, about 1.5 MOA.

    {I am amazed how many guys are shooting out of the box Savage rifles that group much better than out of the box Remingtons that cost 4 times as much.}

    I have heard the same about Savages. More than one source has said that they are the best out of the box rifle out there as far as accuracy, not very pretty, but good shooters.

    {The Tikkas seem to be great little shooters, but I personally cannot get past theh plastic parts and the semi enclosed action.}

    Also have heard folks say that TIKKAs are the best out of the box shooters, and they have a guarantee. Also not real pretty. And have to agree that I wouldn't be real thrilled about plastic parts.

    {The guys shooting Montana Rifles all seem to be happy campers.}

    Amen, preach it brother...

    There are a couple of *production* makers of rifles in Montana. I have heard nothing but good about them.

    Cooper Firesarms of Montana, they have a 1/2 MOA out of the box guarantee and only one other gunmaker I know has the same guantee and that is HS Precision Rifles which start at almost twice the cost of a Cooper. Coopers are packed with a test target 3 shot group fired from a bench by a person at 42 yds. Most of them look like one bullet hole. They are a standard handload out of an unbroken in barrel. With a little care and work it's usually easy to get .25 MOA or better out of them. Unfortunately Cooper has a limeted choice of calibers and 300 WSM isn't one.

    Also, there's Montana Rifle Company which makes actions, barrels, and actioned barrels. You have to get the stock. They have no guarentee, just their rep which is good. A stainless barreled action costs about $1000 - $1100.

    The next rifle I get will have a Montana Rifle action and a Lilja barrel. Lilja makes barrels for bench rest shooters, military snipers, target shooters, varmit hunters, big game hunters, etc. They have an impecable reputation. The longest confirmed sniper kill was made with a Lilja barrel, 2430 m. They are also made in Montana.

    I may be biased, but I like guns made in Montana, go figure

    {I have hunted with a few guys with Browning rifles and they seem to be happy with them as out of the box rifles. They look a little different, but them seem to shoot pretty well and shoulder real nice.}

    I have to agree again, I haven't heard anything bad about Brownings. At one time the A Bolt (now discontinued) was touted as the most accurate out of the box rifle. They are coming out with the X Bolt which looks like it has a lot of great features but I wouldn't buy anything that I haven't heard/read reviews on.

    {For the money of a high dollar Remington Ti or a Kimber Montana, you might be able to get somebody to custom build a nice Mauser action into your dream rifle.}

    Like a Montana Rifle action and a Lilja barrel???

  13. #13


    The Kimber is three times the rifle the Tikka is in design, fit an finish. Hands down the Kimber is worth the extra money. I have owned them both and shot and hunted with both and the kimber is the better rifle.

  14. #14
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006

    Default Kimber

    I have a Kimber Montana in 300 WSM and have not been too pleased with it. The bolt rattles around when carried unless you have a round chambered. It is loud enough enough that it is noticeable. When I sent it back to Kimber they said "they all do that".I finally just got the gun to shoot a consistent group. Tried 3 differant types of ammo and finally I achieved a group that is acceptable to me.It took about three boxes of ammo to break the barrel in I guess. The barrel heats up very quickly which causes the groups to be inconsistent.I like the design of the gun and appreciate the weight but I am not sure I will keep the gun. I have had much better luck with my two Remingtons. I have a 300 Ultra Mag that shoots 1/2 Inch groups and a 270 which shoots 1/4 groups for about 1/2 the money.I know everyone has a favorite brand but for the money I do not know if the Kimber is worth it. Just my 2 cents.

  15. #15

    Default Tikka is the one!

    I have been shooting Tikka's for years, and have never had any kind of problem or complaint. This January I fell into the Kimber trap, and thought I had to have one for an upcoming sheep trip.

    Well, you know, it's 1# lighter than the Tikka, match grade trigger, chamber, barrel, etc. What a joke! All the horror stories I read were true. Bolt had over an inch of side play when open. 1/4" when closed, necks on fired cases expanded to way past SAMMI specs, (match grade chamber),very rough chamber, no firm middle position on safety, oh, and it didn't shoot either. I reloaded and shot over 40 different powder-bullet-seating depth combinations. Finally I just gave up.

    Pulled the .308 tikka out and threw together 3 new 150gr loads and shot a .246", .350", and .485" group. Man is that rifle pretty!!

    So, yes, I have owned and used both. And to answer your question, NO, it is not worth the extra $500.


  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    NW Washington


    I had the same decission to make about a month ago and opted for the Tikka T3 Lite and have no regrets. If i had the extra cash i might have gone with the Sako however.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2006


    Raise your "3 times" to "4 times" with the Tikka, or Sako or even Savage over Kimber. It's a matter of personal preference along with input from respected family member/friend. I'm sure another's experience is different from mine. Thank goodness we don't all see things in the same way. If we did, we would all drive Toyota pickups, shoot Tikka's, drink Dr. Pepper and be married to 5'2" cute redheads. Just my personal bias.

  18. #18


    I can't speak about the kimber except to say that I held it in my hands for comparison at the time that I purchased my tikka. I've found my tikka to be exceptionally accurate with multiple different factory loads, very lightweight, and light on recoil (300wsm). The tikka may not be as pretty but I have never heard a single truly bad thing about them except the "looks" and the plastic worries. I will say that I used mine hard sheep hunting and had zero issues.

  19. #19
    New member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    St.Croix, US Virgin Islands

    Default Kimber?

    I recently went to a reputable gun shop just so I could actually get my hands on a Kimber because I was thinking of buying one. The owner of the shop told me he longer carried them.Some of his previous Kimber buying customers had some problems with their guns and when he tried to deal with his Kimber rep for help he couldn't get the rep to respond. He tried going up their chain of command and not only didn't he receive the service he expected he felt he was being dealt with in a rude manner. His words to me were to the effect that he was in business to make his customers happy and apparently Kimber didn't feel the same way.So he dropped them.He didn't really say anything bad about the guns themselves.I was surprised at the time but since then I've heard and read enough negative things about quality control and lack of factory backup that I figure there must be something to it.A lot of people really like their Kimbers for sure but if this is how they treat a distributor of their own product it raises a red flag for me.

    I ended up buying a Sako and I couldn't be happier.


Posting Permissions

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