Are these rifles as good as they look or are they over-rated?

My mom picked one up a while back... superb rifle but .22 mags were really expensive, nevertheless the gun itself.

I don't think it comes down to "is it worth the money", it comes down to "do you have the money?"

-BG

I've had one of the .22 Hunter rifles for a couple of years now and it is a joy to shoot.  At 50 yards, I can consistently get 10 shot groups of about .75" - which is very good for me.  They are also very nice looking - nice blueing and choice walnut stocks.

On the downside, the chamber is off-bore of the receiver and the ejector sticks up quite a ways in the receiver - making this a very difficult rifle to clean as you have to hold the ejector down while you insert the cleaning rod and you can't use a coated rod because the ejector will scrape the coating right off.

Knowing what I know now though, I would buy another one in a heartbeat.  

I want a new 308 deer gun and I was torn between this and a tikka t3, still can't decide.

My Dad has a Kimber 84C .223 and it is a fine rifle.  It is a single shot but it is a wonderful rifle.
I too really want a .308 Kimber. I like the .308 Kimbers short barrel and balance.
Kimber rifles are as good as they look.

Chris

I consider Kimber bolt actions to be top of the line. No question in my mind.

Don't know about the new ones, but the originals were works of art. The .22's put any Winchester 52 Sporter I have seen...and I have seen several... to shame and the centerfires are the equal or better of the very best from Europe!

I have a Kimber sporterized model 96 mauser.  It's an interesting gun, and in an oddity caliber (.22-250).  The action is smooth (considering it's swedish) and the heavy fluted barrel is nice.  I like it - tis a nice gun.