To me the Banser and Brown are a little fuller through the for end than I like. Both have high, straight combs that are comfy to shoot but the grip on the Browns is ever so slightly thinner. Both are light but the Pound'R is the lightest. I can live with the for end.
The Pound'R is very stiff; stiffer than a McMillan. It's all Kevlar far as I know. I would let Brown bed/install it. It isn't cheap.
I have had the Brown's in calibers to 375H&H. Today in any magnum chambering from 7 mag up, I want the Echols stock or Borden RR if you can find one...but of course the Bansner and Brown are both good too.
I think the pre 64 Bansner stock has a cheekpiece; the Classic does not IIRC. Pre 64's have a higher bolt handle lift than Classics so the scope might have to be swung a bit further over to clear the bolt handle. The cheekpiece helps you stay behind the scope better,also helps prevent canting.
I would not want a Brown Pound'R in anything bigger than a 7 mag....they are stiff and will transmit that recoil. Plus they are light and snappy. In a 270/280 they are perfect.
I agree the McMillan Compact comb could be higher and straighter; but I have a longish face so they fit me OK with a low mounted scope. I carry a rifle under the floor plate and the narrow profile feels good.Again best in 270/280 type cartridge
es.
If Bansner's are still made the way they were when I had them, they come with integral fiberglass pillars. These will not shoot "loose".and action screws come to a dead stop when tightened.This contributes to good accuracy and stable maintenance of POI. I have had Bansners where the action screws never loosened after 5-6 years active shooting and hunting, until the barrel quit. Very reliable.
Last edited by BobinNH; 12/27/14.
