Stock Mountain Rifle Opinions

I'll second Kimber. I think the Montana is the best value. A Tikka T3X Superlite would be another option.
 
Depends on your budget.

to me the market breaks about every $500, with gains in function, weight and finish at every level.

$500 - ruger american
$1000 - tikka, xbolt, bergara
$1500 - Kimber
$2000 - Christensen
$2500 - seekins, other small batch semi custom

I, like many think a Tikka 3x lite is about the most bang for the buck And plenty of gun for most people right out of the box. I have one in 6.5 creed and 308. Both shoot well enough that I don’t think I would ever buy another Remington 700. My buddies Kimber is lighter, feels more solid in the hand (cheap feeling tikka plastic stock) and more expensive but shoots about the same. I have been eyeballing a Christensen at my local shop but don’t do enough Rifle hunting to drop the coin right now.

dont underestimate glass too. I have another buddy that bought an xbolt and then low end glass. It works fine for him but it is a shame to see a nice rifle with a cheap scope. Some will say to spend as much on the scope as the gun. That might be true. My tikka wears a v3xi and that seems to get the job done.
 
I’m looking forward to seeing how the SIG Cross works out.
A different style of bolt lockup and easily changed barrel.
 
Like another guy said, depends on your budget and also overall expectations.

Tikkas are great if you’re looking on the cheaper end. I don’t think the stocks are bad at all(especially compared to the other cheap plastic stocks they’re pretty much the best one). They do have downfalls, the barrels are twisted slower and the action is one size only. Doesn’t matter for the average hunter who buys factory loads, but for someone wanting to run heavy bullets in a long action cartridge it could be restricting.

The Kimbers are nice as well, but in a completely different direction. They will shoot, but often need to be tinkered with(google Kimber preflight checklist) out of the box for good results. They are finicky when it comes to technique... any super lightweight gun is going to be finicky though. I had a Montana in 308, scoped it sat at 6lb even with 4 rounds. Me personally I wouldn’t shoot past 500-600 yards with it. At that distance it became more and more difficult to shoot accurately. It wasn’t a rifle issue - it was a me issue. I don’t think people buy these rifles for “long range hunting” anyway.

As far as Christensen, I’d steer clear. They’re overpriced for the fit and finish you’re getting IMO. I had a Ridgeline in 280, while it shot well I was amazed looking at the lack of finish. The tenon area(inside the action) looked like an amateur put it together. I’m serious, I have zero machining experience and I guarantee any rifle I built would’ve looked cleaner. Not to mention it came in heavier than advertised(this is a normal thing with CA) and the stock, while nicely constructed, didn’t have the greatest ergos. All in all, not worth the price paid. While I understand that “it shot” and the finish issues were cosmetic, how come tikka and even savage can get it right for a thousand less? It makes you wonder what other corners were cut.

You could get into a Tikka with a proof prefit for around the same price and have a nicer rifle... before someone mentions the stock, I’ve seen where people opened up the Tikka stock to fit a proof prefit with no issues.
 
Keep your eye out for a fieldcraft 6.5, they show up in the classifieds from time to time.
 
Back
Top