Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Kimber Montana -v- Montana Rifle Co. Extreme X3 rifles

I am looking to buy one of these in .257 Roberts. Of the 2 which do you prefer. Hopefully since the new owners took over MRC there won't be as many complaints.

Apples and Oranges. One is a light, easy to carry mountain rifle that can be a little difficult to shoot accurately; the other is a nice attempt at copying the Winchester M70. Opinions will vary.

No experience with the MRC, but the X3 compares very closely to the Winchester EW. I do have an EW and a Kimber both in 308. Different tools for different jobs. The heavier Winchester is the better all around rifle. Light enough to carry well, but still heavy enough to shoot well for most people.

I really like my Kimber, but it is almost 2 lbs lighter than the Winchester. The mechanical accuracy is about the same. But most of the time I shoot the heavier rifle slightly better. Probably not enough difference to matter to me, but some people struggle shooting a rifle that can still be under 6 lbs including optics and mounts. But the Kimber is a great choice for rugged terrain.

Is the MRC better than Winchester? That I have no clue. But comparing it to Winchester is a better comparison than to a Kimber.

Having owned both makes of rifles, there is no question that the Montana Rifle Company product is your only choice.

Thanks guys. I want another .257 Roberts so these are pretty much my only choices. The MRC is ~ 1.5 lbs. heavier.

boliep

What makes the MRC rifle better?

These are both fine choices but in this case they are two different animals. One is a lightweight Mtn rifle snd the other is more of an all-around hunting rifle, if you prize a super lightweight rig go with the Montana but if weight is not a big concern go X3....I think they are equal in quality though neither company has a good reputation for customer service.....Good luck...Hb

Has this changed at MRC with the new ownership or not?

What problems were their (MRC) rifles having?

Thanks,

Jerry

I have a Kimber in 257 Roberts and MRC rifles in 260 and 6.5 PRC. No real issues with any of the three. The Kimber will be around 2 pounds lighter.

If you want a true mountain rifle,the KImber wins. For a general purpose rifle that is much more pleasant to shoot because of the lighter recoil,go with the MRC.

I carry the Kimber when I am covering a lot of ground. I use the MRCs when I am hunting from fixed locations or shooting steel for fun.

Depends on what you're looking for.

Is the kimber Montana still made in .257 Roberts? It's only shown in the Hunter on their website. I would have no issues buying the Hunter by the way.

i would get the kimber hunter if you want a bob, hands-down.

They don't list it but a store in MT lists one for sale in .257 Roberts. It is also about $300 cheaper than the MRC Extreme.

Both companies rifles have been bashed on here and both have been praised. With the sale of MRC I am curious if they have improved or not.

Actually, so would I. But the Montana does have a nicer stock IMO. I'm thinking of a Hunter in .257 myself.

Just a Hunter, I love the MT I got last week. Like you, I have to find a NIB someone had left. A .223 Rem.

I would pick the montana of the kimber variety ... and in keeping with campfire tradition, it would be a creed.

I have Kimber Montanas. 300WSM and 6.5 Creedmoor. I have a Kimber Hunter in 308. I have a Kimber Varmint in 22-250 that I have had mounted in a Wildcat stock and all the metal ceracoted.

I've shot the 300WSM the most. 3 shot groups with my handloads crowd a half inch. Same for the 22-250. I've not shot the Creed as much, no handload yet, but the Hornady 129 factory is frustrating. First two shots are very close together, but the third opens the groups up to 1-1.5 inches. This Montana shows signs of also being very accurate. The Hunter in 308 is brand new to me, just sighted it in with some old Winchester 150s. I would not hesitate to buy a Kimber. Thinking of buying another actually.

I've handled a MRC X2. Nice rifle, but way heavier than the equivalent Kimber Montana. The X2 stock contours were not as nice as a Kimber, but that is subjective, everybody's body is built differently. What fits and feels natural to me feels weird to someone else.

Unless I wanted to shoot from the bench extensively, I would choose Kimber.

Reliability and accuracy.

I'd take a Model 70 over a MRC gun anyday. For starters MRC actions are cast and the barrels suck. This oppinion might be dated on the barrels as I think they are making them in house now. The actions are still cast and look crude IMO.

I have a MRC that was originally in 270 Win. Nothing wrong with accuracy, especially with 140gn SST's and H4831sc. But after about 500 round I got a craving for a Roberts, so the gun got re-barrelled and I'm a happy camper. I had the throat made long so I could seat the bullets out more. That may be a problem with the Kimber, the only one I've seen in the Bob calibre had a short throat. AS far as the quality of the action is concerned mines nice and smooth but still not as slick as my M70 Featherweight.

Weight aside, I don't think anyone can go wrong with a Winchester M70, MRC, or Kimber 84M or 8400. IMO they are all great rifles. It boils down to which one best suits your needs/wants.

Yeah my action preference here in order:
1. Kimber
2. Winchester
3. MRC (mainly because its cast like a Ruger and im not crazy about the bolt handle)
......Hb