Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Kimber Montana, 300WSM Scope |
Post Reply | Page 123> |
Author | |
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: February/20/2007 at 13:15 |
OK, I am new to the forum but have been lurking for some time. I am getting a Kimber Montana in 300wsm. I want a kahles scope. I don't know why I seem to have loyalty to this company, but I do. I have no other scopes from them, but I have a pair of binoculars that I love. (8x42). My conversations with their customer service have been very good, and I am probably going to buy at least 3 more scopes this year. Here is the delima: I also want a ballistic reticle as this caliber is capable of utilizing this feature. The Kahles 4D is only in 50mm objectives. I was planning on a 42mm. The differences are small between the two(weight is 1.41 ounces. and the length is only .51"). I would put Talley rings and may have to go with medium. What do you guys think of this setup. I am going to use this for deer hunting and some elk and who knows what else. I know lots of guys put small scopes on the Kimber Montana but the entire setup would still be light. Am I over scoping the Kimber Montana buy going with a 50mm even though the differences between the 42 and 50 are small? |
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
How about a Kahles KX 3-9x42 4D, contact SWFA they should be able to get it for you at a great price. |
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
According to the Kahles website the 42 does not come in the 4d. I hope it does. That would solve my issues.
|
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The Kahles website does not have these new models, but they are available now. Good luck and keep us posted. Contact SWFA and present this thread to them, they should be able to get it for you.
http://www.swfa.com/contact.aspx Edited by Trinidad |
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Just got off the phone with Kahles. The above chart is not accurate. 4D is not available in the KX 3-9x42.
|
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sorry to hear about the chart, it was presented very early on in the developments of this model. How about the 1.5-6x42 C that is presented on thier website with a 4D option? http://www.kahles.at/index.php?menu=14&sprache=1&pro duct_id=8&product_option=model |
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think I am going to stick with the KX 3.5-10X50. Unless something changes my mind.
|
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
That is a very good choice, most of us here prefer 50MM scopes. Good luck and keep us posted.
http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=5798&PN=2 Edited by Trinidad |
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think I would prefer the 50mm as well, it just seems that the trend on the Kimber Montana is not to overscope the gun. I don't think that you could hardly tell the difference between the two unless put side by side. .5" in length and 1.4 oz.
|
|
Trinidad
Optics Master Joined: May/04/2006 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1555 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
This is just a trend IMO, I would not worry to much about the .5" and 1.4 oz.
|
|
tahqua
MODERATOR Have You Driven A Ford Lately? Joined: March/27/2006 Location: Michigan, USA Status: Offline Points: 9044 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I like the look of a smaller scope on a rifle like that Montana. It really does justice to the stainless/synthetic look. I have a 42mm Kahles on an M700KS and it is great, I love it. If SVD is around he has some large objective S&B's on some trim rifles and they look pretty good. If you do a search you might find some pics. I sure don't think you need over 10x, though.
|
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree 10x is on the high side. I think I will like the 50mm objective and the ballistic reticle of that scope. I will do some hunting in low light. I am sure this will offer me excellent low light performance. If that was the main function for this gun I would go for the 4a reticle.
|
|
gozarian
Optics Apprentice Joined: April/04/2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 158 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I think your choice in Kahles is an excellent choice! I too am a 50 mm fan, but lately have been questioning their usefullness. A 50 mm scope mounted on some guns requires a very high mount which in turn raises your cheek up off the stock. I would try it and see; if its too high for you get a smaller objective scope! Let us know how it works because I'm thinking of moving over to all Kahles scopes!
|
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Talley rings suggest that I can use medium rings for objectives up to 50mm with barrels with standard contour. So if I can use that scope, with medium rings I think it will be perfect. If not I will go with a smaller objective scope, but I do think the ballistic reticle is of use in a gun of this caliber, so I would have to rethink alot, because I want the oversized ocular on the Kahles. I think it boils down to making the KX3.5-10X50 work. With this scope, the setup would be hard to beat. I don't anticipate recoil issues as I shot a 45-70 a good bit this year.
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I truly believe as long as you get high quality glass, which the Kahles certainly is, the difference between 42 and 50mm objectives is not that great until you get into really high magnification and is only noticeable during times when you can't legally shoot (in the U.S. anyway). If you hunt at night, you might be able to realize the low light performance the 50mm obj provides. Otherwise, the larger objective usually requires higher rings and weighs more and IMO hurts the balance and feel of a light, handy, quick pointing rifle like the Kimber Montana. With a 4a reticle the Kahles will still be an excellent low light scope with the smaller objective, plus you'll save some $. I bought most of the 50mm scopes I own not because I really wanted a large objective bell, but because it was the only config the scope came in combination with other features I wanted. Either way, the Kahles will be a great scope.
|
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
AftonJohnny
Optics GrassHopper Joined: November/03/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 47 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have the same rifle, with a Kahles 2-8X36 purchased off the sample list. It looks right and performs great. Edited by AftonJohnny |
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree RifleDude, but I think there is a benefit to the 4D, ballistic reticle and it does not come in the 42mm objectives on the new scopes. The difference between the 50mm and 42mm are small as I mentioned earlier. 1/2 inch in length and 1.4 oz. I could get the old 42mm but it is not as good a scope or the 42mm Swarovski, but that would cost about $250 more, and I am not sure it would be that much better. I am pretty sure that I am going with the 50mm, and If I don't like it I will change it, but I have a feeling it would be good. |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
CH, I was basically speaking in general terms. I'm like you; sometimes I'm willing to give up certain features in exchange for others I really want. In this particular scope, there may not be a big difference in weight and length, but still, there is a difference in ring height, depending on which rings you use, and therefore, head positioning on the stock. Admittedly, one of my objections to a large objective scope on a trim, compact rifle are due to my own aesthetic preferences -- I just think a huge scope looks "wrong" on such a rifle. Personally, I'd go for something like a 2-7X36 on the Kimber, but that's me.
Good luck with your new rig. Either way you go, you will have top notch equipment! |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Cajun Hunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: February/20/2007 Status: Offline Points: 58 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If you go for the CL 2-7X36 accourding to Kahles customer service this is basically a KX scope (no side adjustment) and cost more than the KX 3.5-10x50 with the 4D reticle. If they had the 2-7X36 in the kx line and priced accordingly it would make more sense. It is only 11 " and 13.6 ounces. So the weight is not an issue as the difference between the 36 and 50 is less than 2 ounces, but it would be much smaller. Kahles needs to move that scope over and price it accordingly. They would sell alot more at $600 instead of $800. They told me the CL and KX are the same but without the side adjustment, that scope in 4a should be $200 less. That is the only scope in the CL line without side adjustment. I think they will move soon or change something up they need a scope in that size in the KX line. If I go without the 4D reticle I may choose that size scope, but I think it is overpriced compared to the kx line which then puts me at the KX 3-9X42 which isn't that much different from the 50mm with the reticle I want. |
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I feel your pain, CH! I often find myself in these frustrating dilemmas, where I can't seem to get all the features I want together in the same package, whether it be optics, guns, bows, etc. I too don't understand why the 2-7X36 isn't a KX instead of the CL, and why it is priced at $800 when the KX scopes of essentially the same construction are priced less.
BTW -- I lived in Natchitoches, LA for 3 years... not Cajun country, but close enough I got to try some really good food. |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Post Reply | Page 123> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |