anyone have a montana rifle
- Thread starter bigtommy
- Start date
i had a montana, and now i have basically the same thing with a wood stock.
very handy feeling rifle, lightweight, accuracy from the one i had and the one i have now is good. i bought mine for high country mule deer hunting where shots could easily be in the 300's or more. i have complete confidence it its accuracy at those ranges.
very handy feeling rifle, lightweight, accuracy from the one i had and the one i have now is good. i bought mine for high country mule deer hunting where shots could easily be in the 300's or more. i have complete confidence it its accuracy at those ranges.
Winny Fan
New member
I currently own three Montana rifles and several other Kimber rifles with wood stocks.
All shoot very well - all under MOA until the barrels get hot after a few (5 or more) quick shots - and for being factory rifles, all of them are a delight to carry in the field.
With the light barrel profile they will never qualify as bench shooters that will WOW even the least ardent BR keyboarder who shoots small groups all day long on the internet, but that is not what they were designed to do. They are light weight hunting rifles that I feel are more than well worth the money spent.
All shoot very well - all under MOA until the barrels get hot after a few (5 or more) quick shots - and for being factory rifles, all of them are a delight to carry in the field.
With the light barrel profile they will never qualify as bench shooters that will WOW even the least ardent BR keyboarder who shoots small groups all day long on the internet, but that is not what they were designed to do. They are light weight hunting rifles that I feel are more than well worth the money spent.
Winny Fan
New member
Originally Posted By: K22Are you asking about Montana rifles or Kimber Montana rifles? I own 3 Kimbers, 2 of which are Montana's. I love them. I have inletted several stocks for Montana barreled actions and personally I wouldn't spend the money on them. Buy a Winchester instead.
I'm curious as to why that is. I have a semi-custom rifle built on the current small (actually a medium action) Model 1999 Montana Rifle Co. stainless action with a Douglas #2 contour barrel and it is a great rifle. Also own a bunch of Model 70's, both pre-64 and older.
As for your question about what the OP is asking about: Quien sabe..? Maybe he'll come back and be more specific.
I'm curious as to why that is. I have a semi-custom rifle built on the current small (actually a medium action) Model 1999 Montana Rifle Co. stainless action with a Douglas #2 contour barrel and it is a great rifle. Also own a bunch of Model 70's, both pre-64 and older.
As for your question about what the OP is asking about: Quien sabe..? Maybe he'll come back and be more specific.
Originally Posted By: bigtommyI am talking about montana rifle company.
I kind of thought that was the one you were talking about wasn't totally sure.
Winny, for sure it is my opinion, but I did base it on the ones I've inletted for and a few of our customers rifles they had to send back for issues they were having. Mostly I base it on the inletting experience and they appear to be a cast of some sort. Not so well finished. They are/were a copy of the pre 64 win. but I don't think they are a very close copy. The pre 64 and the newer "pre 64" Win. are well machined with very good tolerances. Much easier to inlet for.
I realize that inletting for a barreled action isn't going to be considered by a fella buying one unless he has to inlet for one.
So, I guess you could say that I based my like/dislike of the Montana Rifle Co. rifles out of the stock sitting beside a Win. out of the stock.
I kind of thought that was the one you were talking about wasn't totally sure.
Winny, for sure it is my opinion, but I did base it on the ones I've inletted for and a few of our customers rifles they had to send back for issues they were having. Mostly I base it on the inletting experience and they appear to be a cast of some sort. Not so well finished. They are/were a copy of the pre 64 win. but I don't think they are a very close copy. The pre 64 and the newer "pre 64" Win. are well machined with very good tolerances. Much easier to inlet for.
I realize that inletting for a barreled action isn't going to be considered by a fella buying one unless he has to inlet for one.
I have one of the original left handed charter actions which they barreled to 375 H&H for me. I let it into a Winchester take off stock and have been well pleased with it. I wish I had not let them talk me into such a heavy barrel. The barrel on it would be better suited for a 458WM or 450 Ackley. The rifle as it is right now is very accurate and comfortable to shoot. I've heard stories about them being rough but mine is on a par with most factory rifles (Ruger, Remington, Winchester)in that regard and really pretty well finished.
I have the 375 H&H pretty well bracketed with a 35 Whelen, 375 Whelen and 400 Whelen so it may go off later this winter to JES Reboring to become a 450 Ackley. That's not an indictment of the rifle, I just don't use it much as a 375 H&H.
I've been well pleased with the rifle as far as finish, feeding, dependability and accuracy.
Mart
I have the 375 H&H pretty well bracketed with a 35 Whelen, 375 Whelen and 400 Whelen so it may go off later this winter to JES Reboring to become a 450 Ackley. That's not an indictment of the rifle, I just don't use it much as a 375 H&H.
I've been well pleased with the rifle as far as finish, feeding, dependability and accuracy.
Mart
Winny Fan
New member
The Montana Rifle Co. stainless action I have is very well finished, and it has been the basis of a very fine hunting rifle that I had built.
If you look at a few older Win 70 actions, or any action for that matter, they are not all the same dimension in all cases.
In addition, any aluminum chassis in a rifle stock like you're working with K22 is going to have its own dimensional variations coupled with variations in any rifle action built. That is one big reason why many smiths still recommend skim bedding a Model 700 action in an H-S Precision stock.
If you look at a few older Win 70 actions, or any action for that matter, they are not all the same dimension in all cases.
In addition, any aluminum chassis in a rifle stock like you're working with K22 is going to have its own dimensional variations coupled with variations in any rifle action built. That is one big reason why many smiths still recommend skim bedding a Model 700 action in an H-S Precision stock.
Winny Fan
New member
Originally Posted By: 6724i have a cz model 3 which was made by montana rifle co. it shoots very well. it is not as refined as some rifles i have but it is a hunting rifle that gets carried.
IIRC, Montana Rifle Company used the CZ action for chambering the WSM line of cartridges as the model 1999 actions were not designed for the WSM cartridges.
I handled a couple of them and they were indeed rough in appearance at first impression, but their owners were happy with them in both cases. Still the model 3 action is totally different from the Model 1999 action.
IIRC, Montana Rifle Company used the CZ action for chambering the WSM line of cartridges as the model 1999 actions were not designed for the WSM cartridges.
I handled a couple of them and they were indeed rough in appearance at first impression, but their owners were happy with them in both cases. Still the model 3 action is totally different from the Model 1999 action.
i do not believe that the 1999 and the model 3 are different.
the story i read was that cz contracted with montana rifle company to build the model 3 for them. the project lasted only 1 year. looking at the model 3, and the 1999, they look nearly identical. i forget who it was that told me, but the 1999 sees more hand fitting than did the model 3.
i had a kimber in 300wsm that i bought for a sheep hunt, it was a beautifully put together rifle with nice wood. i tired numerous loads in it, 150gr, 165gr, 180gr, magnum primers, regular primers, 2 different powders and 4 or 5 loads for each powder and bullet combination. i never could get better than 1.5" 5 shot groups out of it. when it came time to go sheep hunting i took a different rifle.
i sold the kimber and bought the model 3 after doing much research and finding out that it was made by montana rifle co, i bought one. i took the last of my test loads from the kimber and the cz shot all seven different loads into a 1.5" group. it shoots under an inch and it did not take much effort to find that load.
i would NOT call my model 3 rough. fit and finish are as good as most rifles, but the bolt is not quite as smooth, and the trigger not quite as good nor is it not bedded. but with a price tag in the mid-sixes for an unfired one, i am quite happy.
the story i read was that cz contracted with montana rifle company to build the model 3 for them. the project lasted only 1 year. looking at the model 3, and the 1999, they look nearly identical. i forget who it was that told me, but the 1999 sees more hand fitting than did the model 3.
i had a kimber in 300wsm that i bought for a sheep hunt, it was a beautifully put together rifle with nice wood. i tired numerous loads in it, 150gr, 165gr, 180gr, magnum primers, regular primers, 2 different powders and 4 or 5 loads for each powder and bullet combination. i never could get better than 1.5" 5 shot groups out of it. when it came time to go sheep hunting i took a different rifle.
i sold the kimber and bought the model 3 after doing much research and finding out that it was made by montana rifle co, i bought one. i took the last of my test loads from the kimber and the cz shot all seven different loads into a 1.5" group. it shoots under an inch and it did not take much effort to find that load.
i would NOT call my model 3 rough. fit and finish are as good as most rifles, but the bolt is not quite as smooth, and the trigger not quite as good nor is it not bedded. but with a price tag in the mid-sixes for an unfired one, i am quite happy.
Winny Fan
New member
Originally Posted By: 6724i do not believe that the 1999 and the model 3 are different.
the story i read was that cz contracted with montana rifle company to build the model 3 for them. the project lasted only 1 year. looking at the model 3, and the 1999, they look nearly identical. i forget who it was that told me, but the 1999 sees more hand fitting than did the model 3.
i had a kimber in 300wsm that i bought for a sheep hunt, it was a beautifully put together rifle with nice wood. i tired numerous loads in it, 150gr, 165gr, 180gr, magnum primers, regular primers, 2 different powders and 4 or 5 loads for each powder and bullet combination. i never could get better than 1.5" 5 shot groups out of it. when it came time to go sheep hunting i took a different rifle.
i sold the kimber and bought the model 3 after doing much research and finding out that it was made by montana rifle co, i bought one. i took the last of my test loads from the kimber and the cz shot all seven different loads into a 1.5" group. it shoots under an inch and it did not take much effort to find that load.
i would NOT call my model 3 rough. fit and finish are as good as most rifles, but the bolt is not quite as smooth, and the trigger not quite as good nor is it not bedded. but with a price tag in the mid-sixes for an unfired one, i am quite happy.
On re-thinking it and reading the link below, I'm sure that you are right.
http://czechpistols82792.yuku.com/topic/11988/CZUSA-Model-3#.UojNpOJurV0
I do remember that the CZ logo was almost bigger than the area is was stamped on which looked out of place an not well thought out from an appearance point of view.
Again, IIRC, it was a WSM action and possibly not as finished as the regular Model 1999. The two I saw were both WSM rifles and both shooters liked them, which is all that is important.
The medium length Model 1999 action I had built into a 6MM Rem is extremely smooth and well finished and it came that way in the box from MRC. Maybe I got the only decent one, but I doubt it. It came with a custom serial number (001) preceded by three letters that were requested.
the story i read was that cz contracted with montana rifle company to build the model 3 for them. the project lasted only 1 year. looking at the model 3, and the 1999, they look nearly identical. i forget who it was that told me, but the 1999 sees more hand fitting than did the model 3.
i had a kimber in 300wsm that i bought for a sheep hunt, it was a beautifully put together rifle with nice wood. i tired numerous loads in it, 150gr, 165gr, 180gr, magnum primers, regular primers, 2 different powders and 4 or 5 loads for each powder and bullet combination. i never could get better than 1.5" 5 shot groups out of it. when it came time to go sheep hunting i took a different rifle.
i sold the kimber and bought the model 3 after doing much research and finding out that it was made by montana rifle co, i bought one. i took the last of my test loads from the kimber and the cz shot all seven different loads into a 1.5" group. it shoots under an inch and it did not take much effort to find that load.
i would NOT call my model 3 rough. fit and finish are as good as most rifles, but the bolt is not quite as smooth, and the trigger not quite as good nor is it not bedded. but with a price tag in the mid-sixes for an unfired one, i am quite happy.
On re-thinking it and reading the link below, I'm sure that you are right.
http://czechpistols82792.yuku.com/topic/11988/CZUSA-Model-3#.UojNpOJurV0
I do remember that the CZ logo was almost bigger than the area is was stamped on which looked out of place an not well thought out from an appearance point of view.
Again, IIRC, it was a WSM action and possibly not as finished as the regular Model 1999. The two I saw were both WSM rifles and both shooters liked them, which is all that is important.
The medium length Model 1999 action I had built into a 6MM Rem is extremely smooth and well finished and it came that way in the box from MRC. Maybe I got the only decent one, but I doubt it. It came with a custom serial number (001) preceded by three letters that were requested.
I certainly do not want to deter anyone from buying what they want and that includes a Montana and if 99 out of 100 are satisfied owners I'm good with that.
Winny, the aluminum chassis has nothing to do with the inletting. Hard to explain unless your doing a show and tell. Remingtons are not as difficult and once inletted you can interchange from one Rem. action to the next. I know the debates of Chassis vs skim bedding with me "originally" leaning real heavy towards skim bedding. Also, B&C chassis are different than ours.
Installing a Montana in a factory Winchester stock should not be a problem. Winchester is not required nor do they keep the tolerances that we are required to do .
If a fella likes and wants to buy a Montana, then I say do it. If you are soliciting my opinion, then I will honestly give that. But like everyone elses, its my opinion.
Debating whether I'm right concerning the inletting for Montana's vs others I won't debate unless of course the person I'm debating is working beside me. Debating whether skim bedding is better than a chassis I also won't do, because I do both. Heck, I won't even debate whether a B & C chassis is better than skim bedding, because their chassis are not the same as ours and I have no experience with theirs. In fact, I have never pillar bedded one of their stocks either, so I can't say if one is better than the other and nor will I. So I guess I'm done debating this issue. But its all good.
Winny, the aluminum chassis has nothing to do with the inletting. Hard to explain unless your doing a show and tell. Remingtons are not as difficult and once inletted you can interchange from one Rem. action to the next. I know the debates of Chassis vs skim bedding with me "originally" leaning real heavy towards skim bedding. Also, B&C chassis are different than ours.
Installing a Montana in a factory Winchester stock should not be a problem. Winchester is not required nor do they keep the tolerances that we are required to do .
If a fella likes and wants to buy a Montana, then I say do it. If you are soliciting my opinion, then I will honestly give that. But like everyone elses, its my opinion.
Debating whether I'm right concerning the inletting for Montana's vs others I won't debate unless of course the person I'm debating is working beside me. Debating whether skim bedding is better than a chassis I also won't do, because I do both. Heck, I won't even debate whether a B & C chassis is better than skim bedding, because their chassis are not the same as ours and I have no experience with theirs. In fact, I have never pillar bedded one of their stocks either, so I can't say if one is better than the other and nor will I. So I guess I'm done debating this issue. But its all good.
Last edited:
Winny Fan
New member
I think maybe you're taking this more seriously than others as far as "debating" goes, K22.
I actually own one of the AI stocks where you now work from when they were located in Rapid City, South Dakota. I guess I should say I owned one past tense as I traded the rifle away a few years ago, so I've seen your system. At least the early system in case its changed.
Like you with the Montana action, I wasn't overly impressed with the stock and never considered buying another. For me, there are better mouse traps available. Other people seem to like AI stocks and I'm overly fine with that, so don't read my comment as being negative. Just being honest. Not debating.
I actually own one of the AI stocks where you now work from when they were located in Rapid City, South Dakota. I guess I should say I owned one past tense as I traded the rifle away a few years ago, so I've seen your system. At least the early system in case its changed.
Like you with the Montana action, I wasn't overly impressed with the stock and never considered buying another. For me, there are better mouse traps available. Other people seem to like AI stocks and I'm overly fine with that, so don't read my comment as being negative. Just being honest. Not debating.
I have a montana 99 in an ai stock. It is a good setup. The stock only required minor fitting but it was one of the early production stocks from the old owners. The action looks a little rough where you can still see the casting marks in a few places but the bolt runs smoothly. as far as the accuracy goes it is great. I had it chambered in 6.5x55 and it is one of my favorite hunting rifles. I have built other rifles since and have used remingtons or clones just because of all of the aftermarket goodies out there for them, but still take out the montana 99 quite regularly.