Thread: Kimber hunter vs Forbes

Looking at getting a lightweight rifle and have come across a Kimber hunter and a Forbes both second hand but trying to decide which way to go.

Anyone had both and can make a recommendation?

Thanks for any advice

I would imagine Forbes would be a higher quality rifle. More like the Kimber mountain ascent

I have had a Forbes in 7-08 and currently have a kimber Montana, have also had a kimber mountain ascent. I can’t comment on the hunter stock but I prefer the kimbers I have had over the Forbes.

Specifically the Forbes stocks seem to lose their coating over time even with careful use. The Forbes barrels aren’t free floated, I prefer the free floated barrel on the kimbers.

In terms of accuracy I don’t think there was a lot of difference between the three I have had they all shot well.

Hope that helps.

Kimber a much nicer action the forbes look ok but they're a bit agricultural compared to a kimber. Better stock on the Forbes and internal box mag instead of removable mag. I much prefer internal box or floorplate than a box mag for a hunting rifle. Been a few flops accuracy wise with both rifles.

Currently have a Forbes 7mm/08, Kimber Hunter 6.5CM and a Kimber Hunter Pro .308. Previously had a Forbes .308.
Hard question as I think both are good rifles. The Forbes is a very accurate rifle for what it is and not fussy on ammo. Yes the stock wears badly but overall an amazing rifle. Both Kimbers are capable of good accuracy, but fussy on ammo. The Kimber is a very light rifle with the stock gel taken out. The Kimber Pro .308 with Talley ring, Swarovski Z5 3.5-18, magazine, bolt in weighs under 6lb!! good stainless steel on both Kimbers.
If bush and some open hunting then get rhe Forbes. If open hunting and some bush then get the Kimber. If I had to choose one I would choose the Forbes, more because it is a unique rifle with a cool heritage. My son loves the Forbes and is trying to claim it.

Thanks guys, the Kimber is cheaper and looks to have had less use. Just a shame it's not the Montana or it would have been an easier choice. I would prefer not to have the mag.
I'd read some can be rubbish accuracy wise for both if you get a bad one.

Originally Posted by Southern lite

Thanks guys, the Kimber is cheaper and looks to have had less use. Just a shame it's not the Montana or it would have been an easier choice. I would prefer not to have the mag.
I'd read some can be rubbish accuracy wise for both if you get a bad one.

What caliber is the Forbes

Sent from my CPH2531 using Tapatalk

As far as narrowing down whether to buy the Forbes, check out the number as I read somewhere that the earlier production numbers are the more accurate and better finished.

Originally Posted by 25/08 IMP

What caliber is the Forbes

Sent from my CPH2531 using Tapatalk

308 and the Kimber is 708. Think I'd prefer a 708 to be honest

Originally Posted by Staffnurse41

As far as narrowing down whether to buy the Forbes, check out the number as I read somewhere that the earlier production numbers are the more accurate and better finished.

I'll have to see if I can find what numbers are the good ones. Think he send a photo with numbers on.

I had a Forbes.260 it was an awesome little rifle also had a Montana.260.
I prefer the safety on the Forbes and the fit of the stock with a low mounted scope was perfect.


Sent from my CPH2531 using Tapatalk

Which one would be lighter, it's hard to find weights. Everything I look at say something different for both. But seems the Forbes should be light right?

Originally Posted by Southern lite

Which one would be lighter, it's hard to find weights. Everything I look at say something different for both. But seems the Forbes should be light right?

If you remove the gel from the hunter stock it will end up lighter. Its lighter than the montana once this is done. I'd buy the kimber.

Have a Kimber "Hunter" , have handled but not hunted with a few Forbes. The weight difference is neglible once you get it ready to go hunting, your choice of scope and rings will make more difference.

If you can handle them both and see what you like, for example the fit of the stock, and almost as important, will the way the stock material "scratches" on things ranging from your clothing/gear like knife belt etc to scrub/trees bug ya.

For me the gap between the bolt body and reciever on the Forbes always bugs me - it makes absolutely no practical difference but it catches my eye everytime I look at one . . . .

Seeing as Tentman has commented. I took the Forbes and the Kimbers to the Invercargill range with him a few months back. The Forbes 3 shots and put it back in the case, which always seems to be the way with the Forbes. The Kimbers like always took a little more to get on target and never seem to group quite as well for me at least.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk