Barrel contour for light 300 Savage project?

bassman

bassman

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
220   0   1
Location
Halton Hills
What would the lightest contour/diameter barrel a guy should look at for such a project? My plan is a 24" tube, on a LH SS Rem 700 in a B&C bdl stock. Ideally, I'd like to end up at 7 lbs scoped max. I intend to play with 110 and 130 gr Barnes bullets.

I'm thinking a #2 Benchmark contour (.575" at muzzle) weighing approx. 3 lbs would do the trick but a featherweight contour keeps creeping into my mind.

Thoughts?
 
cut it back to 18 or 19 inches and you'll gain nothing by accuracy with a wet noodle thin barrel profile, man at 24 inches that this is going to whip so much I'd be afraid of it bending....Also look into the 30 IHSMA for a chambering if your going with the lighter bullets. Gagnon sports had winchester 300 savage brass on sale for 24 bucks a bag, message them and see if they can get more at that price, I grabbed the 7 bags they had in stop last week
 
bassman said:
What would the lightest contour/diameter barrel a guy should look at for such a project? My plan is a 24" tube, on a LH SS Rem 700 in a B&C bdl stock. Ideally, I'd like to end up at 7 lbs scoped max. I intend to play with 110 and 130 gr Barnes bullets.

I'm thinking a #2 Benchmark contour (.575" at muzzle) weighing approx. 3 lbs would do the trick but a featherweight contour keeps creeping into my mind.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I like to use std Remington bbl contours. Makes it a lot easier to find/and or switch stocks if needed. I'd use the factory Mountain Rifle contour.

Seems a bit weird to want the lightest contour out there when you are going with a heavy stock and a long bbl. Why not go 21" in an ultralight Wildcat? You will be cutting a lot of weight off it w/o sacrificing much. 300savage really isn't a LR choice so losing a few FPS with a shorter bbl won't matter.
 
Thanks guys.

A couple of things to clear up-

The rifle WILL be a 300 Savage, that decision has been made.
I'm not looking for an ultra light sub 5.5 or 6 lbs all in type of rifle. I'm a 6'7", 275 lbs guy...7 lbs all in will be plenty light.

I like the mountain rifle contour suggestion, that is essentially what my 250 Savage custom wears. In a 24" tube. I already have a B&C stock on hand that, while not the lightest composite aftermarket stock available, it is lighter than wood or laminate and is a reasonable compromise between weight and cost.

I don't see much weight saving value in my plan by trimming a couple inches off a lighter weight barrel and I'm not sure yet if I buy into the barrel whip thing either...perhaps with an ultralight pencil barrel in a more potent cartridge. I have two customs with light and long barrels and have yet to experience this phenomenon (the .250 and a .280 Ackley).
 
Last edited:
I have several scope options on hand for this project, all are reasonably light.

Swarovski Z3 3-9x36 or 3-10x42
Leupold VX2 in either 2-7x33 or 3-9x40
Leupold VX3 in either 1.75-6x32 or 2.5-8x36
Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40
Nikon Prostaff 5 in 2.5-10x40

I'm going to research Rem mountain rifle contour dimensions vs Benchmark #2 contour dimensions and see how they compare.
 
The consensus seems to put the MR contour at about .550" at the muzzle. Benchmark #2 is .575" at the muzzle with a bit more of a taper than the MR contour. The #2 might be the right choice.
 
Why, if you don't care about weight, would you go with the 300 Savage? Just scratching an itch? To me it would make more sense to use the Savage in an ultralight package where the lack of weight is mitigated by the extraordinarily sedate cartridge. If you're going to make it porky, why not go with something with more oomph?
 
BigUglyMan said:
Why, if you don't care about weight, would you go with the 300 Savage? Just scratching an itch? To me it would make more sense to use the Savage in an ultralight package where the lack of weight is mitigated by the extraordinarily sedate cartridge. If you're going to make it porky, why not go with something with more oomph?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm thinkin'. Too much contradiction going on here.

As per Hornady #3 manual, a 22" 308 gets 3000 fps with 130gr bullet while the 300Savage needs a 24" bbl to get 2900fps with the same bullet.

I suppose one could always have the 300 rechambered later to 308 when reality sets in. :)
 
BigUglyMan said:
Why, if you don't care about weight, would you go with the 300 Savage? Just scratching an itch? To me it would make more sense to use the Savage in an ultralight package where the lack of weight is mitigated by the extraordinarily sedate cartridge. If you're going to make it porky, why not go with something with more oomph?
Click to expand...

I want a 7 lb ish 300 Savage. Because I want one. I don't want an ultralight, I don't want anything with more 'oomph'. I have lots of 'oomph' in the safes thanks.

Where did I say I didn't care about weight?. And I'm not sure where your porky remark is coming from...

I asked for barrel contour opinions, not what cartridge everyone thinks is a better choice than .300 Savage.
 
SuperCub said:
That's what I'm thinkin'. Too much contradiction going on here.

As per Hornady #3 manual, a 22" 308 gets 3000 fps with 130gr bullet while the 300Savage needs a 24" bbl to get 2900fps with the same bullet.

I suppose one could always have the 300 rechambered later to 308 when reality sets in. :)
Click to expand...

What contradiction? I want a 7 lb 300 Savage. Not an ultralight but also not overly heavy...a reasonable compromise between the two.

Again, I asked for barrel contour opinions. Not chambering opinions.

And thanks for the reality comment. I've clearly lost touch with it given what I'm looking for lol.
 
So, given what I have to work with, it looks like 7 lbs is a tad optimistic:redface:

Adding up estimated weights of my chosen components brings me to around 7-7 1/4 lbs sans scope.

Guntech has just finished up a nice .260 Remington for me with all of the same components except that it wears a 24" #3 Shilen tube. He advises that it is at the 7.25 lb mark bare. This tells me that a #2 contour with the larger bore of a 300 Savage might get in just under 7 lbs if I perhaps snip the barrel down to 23" or maybe even 22".

With a 10-12 oz scope and Talleys, I might be able to squeak in under 7.75 lbs. I could live with that.
 
SuperCub said:
As per Hornady #3 manual, a 22" 308 gets 3000 fps with 130gr bullet while the 300Savage needs a 24" bbl to get 2900fps with the same bullet.

I suppose one could always have the 300 rechambered later to 308 when reality sets in. :)
Click to expand...

As per a certain reloading software calculator, a 22" 300 Savage easily approaches 2900 fps with the 130TTSX using several powders. Similar data from a 24" tube shows it solidly in the mid 2900's.

As per Nosler's latest published data, a 24" tube, 125 gr Ballistic Tips and at least two powders exceed 3000 fps in the 'extraordinarily sedate' little 300 Savage.

Here's an interesting little read...have a look at the data at the bottom of the very first post...and keep in mind that this is in a 20" 300 Savage :p
https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/754191-All-hail-the-300MTN!?highlight=300+mtn
 
Last edited:
bassman said:
What contradiction? I want a 7 lb 300 Savage. Not an ultralight but also not overly heavy...a reasonable compromise between the two.

Again, I asked for barrel contour opinions. Not chambering opinions.

And thanks for the reality comment. I've clearly lost touch with it given what I'm looking for lol.
Click to expand...

Not on me. That's a nice package you are putting together

I have a number of the scopes mentioned. I would rule out the L 2X7 VXII. I have one and like it well enough but if I was going L I would go the VXIII likely in 2.5 x 8 . My 2.5x8 is an old Vari X III and I think the newer models would add to an already good package. No experience on the 1.7x6 but considered it many times

I have the Swarovski in the 3x10 model and it will fit nice , you will like it . I have the 4A , like it. Looking at the 3x9 I'm sure it's nice

Can't comment on th Ziess , Nikon has some nice scopes consider their 2.5x8

Good luck it will be a nice rig

Personally I would cut the barrel back to 22. That's just my preference and it would help you make your weight

Those 130 Barnes work nice in that cartridge, but so do most bullets. Don't be afraid to try Ramshot TAC
 
Last edited:
Gunnutz said:
Not on me. That's a nice package you are putting together

I have a number of the scopes mentioned. I would rule out the L 2X7 VXII. I have one and like it well enough but if I was going L I would go the VXIII likely in 2.5 x 8 . My 2.5x8 is an old Vari X III and I think the newer models would add to an already good package. No experience on the 1.7x6 but considered it many times

I have the Swarovski in the 3x10 model and it will fit nice , you will like it . I have the 4A , like it. Looking at the 3x9 I'm sure it's nice

Can't comment on th Ziess , Nikon has some nice scopes consider their 2.5x8

Good luck it will be a nice rig

Personally I would cut the barrel back to 22. That's just my preference and it would help you make your weight

Those 130 Barnes work nice in that cartridge, but so do most bullets. Don't be afraid to try Ramshot TAC
Click to expand...

Thanks for your input. I too think it will turn out great, I'll just have to reel in my weight expectations a bit. Ramshot powders aren't very common in my area. I'll give them a good look though!

What didn't you like about the 2-7x33?
 
Last edited:
Add up your weights so far and I think you'll find that to hit 7lb scoped you'll need to take a different approach.

The action is likely 26oz, bottom metal 4-6oz, stock is 36oz, the lightest rings will be 2-3oz, lightest scope 9oz....so you're at about 80oz or 5lbs. Your barrel has to be less than 2lbs, so even a featherweight at 22" will put you right on 7lbs. If I were you, I'd put a wildcat stock on it and use the 16oz savings to allow for a standard sporter.
 
cdn shooter said:
Add up your weights so far and I think you'll find that to hit 7lb scoped you'll need to take a different approach.

The action is likely 26oz, bottom metal 4-6oz, stock is 36oz, the lightest rings will be 2-3oz, lightest scope 9oz....so you're at about 80oz or 5lbs. Your barrel has to be less than 2lbs, so even a featherweight at 22" will put you right on 7lbs. If I were you, I'd put a wildcat stock on it and use the 16oz savings to allow for a standard sporter.
Click to expand...

Agree with your weight comments. See post #12, I've acknowledged the difficulty in my original goal weight, and have moved the goal posts over a bit, so to speak. Also, I have no interest in a $900ish Wildcat stock at this point. I am trying to work with what I have on hand. An uber lightweight stock may be something to consider down the road, however.
 
Last edited:
bassman said:
Thanks for your input. I too think it will turn out great, I'll just have to reel in my weight expectations a bit. Ramshot powders aren't very common in my area. I'll give them a good look though!

What didn't you like about the 2-7x33?
Click to expand...

First they are famous for the sticky power change, which can be fixed. Mostly preference, but just a little 'less' than the 2.5x8. Or a straight 6

I have it on a 250 savage and it works but it is what it is , not good enough to be as over priced as it is
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom