I'm considering a MRC for my next rifle and would greatly appreciate opinions. Most posts I've read have been positive with a few questioning the safety of their actions. Considering a 6.5 creedmoor or a .308. Alternates I've considered are: Nosler,Sako,Kimber, & Forbes, LLC. Any input would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

The safety of their actions?

Put the LAW rifle on your " Alternatives list " as well too. They appear to be feature packed as well.

Yes, just stuff I've read on the forum here. I had to search. Nothing I would consider heavily. That's why I posted here, I generally trust the gun writers here. Aside from that, I like the attributes of the MRC. I have several Kimbers, A Sako, however my .270 Nosler shoots really well with factory ammo. John, I really appreciate your writings appreciate your input,
Thanks again

Yes, I've looked at the LAW rifle. They have 'aluminum block'? bedding instead of glass bedding ( I'm a little more familiar with). Don't know if one is better than the other, or if it is a mute point?

Yes, just stuff I've read on the forum here. I had to search. Nothing I would consider heavily. That's why I posted here, I generally trust the gun writers here. Aside from that, I like the attributes of the MRC. I have several Kimbers, A Sako, however my .270 Nosler shoots really well with factory ammo. John, I really appreciate your writings appreciate your input,
Thanks again

DDMD,

Thanks! Guess I'm asking if the question was about MRC actions blowing up, or the safety as in the lever to keep them from going bang when they're not supposed to.

Yes, that's what I had read; the 'blowing up' part. I haven't heard anything about their safety (I kinda liked the safety on the bolt)

Guess I have never heard of one blowing up!

The only problem I've heard of is not feeding well, but the Montana 1999 action was originally designed for gunsmiths to finish up, as a hybrid of the best features of the 98 Mauser and pre-'64 Model 70. This finishing was supposed to include tuning the feeding for the specific cartridge the rifle was chambered for, but many people just screwed barrels on and expected the action to feed well, no matter the cartridge, as long as the rim fit the bolt face.

I've shot several rifles made on 1999 actions with no problems, all made by gunsmith who knew how to finish up the actions, including my Serengeti Walkabout 7x57, one of my favorite hunting rifles.

I'm not a gun writer but I did get two of their charter offer actions, both left handed. One I had them barrel to 375 H&H and the other I kept for a later build. That build never happened and I sold the action.

I had the 375 for 8 or 9 years and shot a lot of test loads through it and carried it on a few hunts. I sold it because I used it so seldom for hunting, especially after I built my 400 Whelen.

The quality was excellent for the cost. It fed beautifully and was and accurate rifle. I have never heard of a Montana 1999 blowing up but perhaps I have led a sheltered life. I regret selling the other action and sometimes I regret selling the 375. But sometimes one guns has to go to make room for something else.

I'd not be afraid of another Montana action and I am on their notify list if they ever get their left handed pro hunter action off the drawing board and into production.

In regards to gas handling, the design has the same issues as a M70. I've only heard one person complain about the safety of MRC's 1999 action (other than the M70 gas handling complaint). This person wrote about it on forums multiple times. His complaint was that the "gas jet hole" was below the stockline....this has not been true on any of the 4 1999 actions I've had:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/3888085/Re_MRC_1999_404_Jeffery_Build

To the OP,

Here was a very long thread discussing them in detail including comparison of design features with some other rifles.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/9610237/1




There are some differences.

There are some photos and discussion with comparisons beginning on page 14 of the above thread.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/9610237/14

Here are a few photos.

Not sure where the buried gas port idea is coming from, at least it is not present on the three I have. That sounds like an issue with whoever fitted the action to the stock.













And there is a bolt shroud on a MRC that is absent from the M70.

I have never heard of a MRC action blowing up.I am raising the BS Flag!!!

I would recommend looking at the Shilen DGR rifle.
http://www.shilen.com/productsCompleteRifles.html

Thanks for the correction and details on the differences jeffbird

As some wise guy once pointed out, more reliable brass was what made the pre-'64 Model 70 possible.

Thanks for that tutorial, Jeffbird.

I learned something.

DF

You're welcome.

It must cost more to machine a "C" pattern like the older Mausers and CZ's rather than the "H" pattern with both raceways cut through. Looks like MRC found a way to plug the left raceway in "H" pattern guns.

I read somewhere that MRC actions were cast by Pine Tree Castings, a division of Ruger. That's not a bad thing, as Pine Tree does some very high tech work and supplies precision castings to a number of companies, making all sorts of stuff.

Didn't MRC sell their manufacturing faciility to Remington? If so, are MRC actions and barrels being made in Montana still using Pine Tree castings, or has the Remington Green cloud cast a spell on MRC?

DF

Remington has nothing to do with MRC other than they bought their barrel manufacturing business.MRC is owned by MRC.

Thanks for that info.

So, I guess MRC buys their barrels from Remington, made by Remington on MRC equipment? Or did Remeington consolidate MRC machinery into their other operations?

DF

If I remember reading correctly, that operation mainly made barrels for AR's and was moved to another state.

I think MRC still makes their own barrels for the bolt guns.

They do.....and Remington has absolutely nothing to do with MRC.

Good to hear...

DF