Lightweight hunting rifle set up

[Decker9]

There is someone on outdoorsmenforum who was fluting bolts and barrels, and their is wildcat composites out of sherwood park, my suggestion is to keep it if you like it, and make it lighter.

Exactly what I did with my t3 6.5x55. Bedded it into a wildcat stock, it ended up 5lb 13 oz bare rifle. The barreled action is at a black art rifles in BC right now getting bolt and barrel flutted, and cut down to 20”, and cerakote.

Those wildcat stocks sure feel nice!!

 

[cody c]

Exactly what I did with my t3 6.5x55. Bedded it into a wildcat stock, it ended up 5lb 13 oz bare rifle. The barreled action is at a black art rifles in BC right now getting bolt and barrel flutted, and cut down to 20”, and cerakote.

Those wildcat stocks sure feel nice!!

Nice nice! You oughta post some pics of this beast and final weight.

 

[FLHTCUI]

Well....
I have 8lbs scoped and loaded Ruger in 30-06 that shoots with excellent trajectory, accuracy, it's 180gr bullet don't destroy meat and in my hands is plenty for any game.
I am 65 years old and hunt in the mountains of BC not at all complaining about rifle's weight in addition to my 10lbs+ back pack.
My hunting buddy is 70 years old and climbs the hills even faster than me with same rifle and comparable weight.
I think some CGNers either need to hit the gym or loose some weight or both.
This talk about shaving couple of oz here and there is laughable....
GR8 2c worth and I am sticking to it.
"My circus and my monkeys...."

Very well said...shaving ounces off a rifle set-up while chowing down cheese burgers is humorous at best.
Bragging rights is all that comes to mind when talking about the lightest this or that .
Rob

 

[rral22]

A number of people on here likely could do to hit the gym or loose weight, but a number of us have also just embraced the fact that there is better technology available now. The same reason you don’t take a horse and buggy to work or correspond with pigeons these days. Just because it’s been done a certain way for ever doesn’t mean it can’t be different. Progress I believe is the term

Just because it's new, doesn't mean it's actual progress of any kind that matters. Many times, "new and improved" is much more marketing hype than any real life hunting advantage. Take a close look at the 6.5 Swede, and compare it to the .260 Rem or the Creedmoor and you will find some obvious hair splitting in the descriptions of the advantages that are irrelevant for any hunting application, but (for the Creedmoor especially) the hyped "technology" of the "new" gets a lot of attention from those who think new equals better.

I agree with the idea that saving 6oz. of gun weight is far less valuable than saving 10 lbs of body weight when we are talking about being able to navigate hunting territory on foot. There is nothing wrong with getting new technology and reducing gun weight, but there is no way that reducing the weight of a hunting gun by a few ounces is going to make any real difference in a hunter's ability to carry and use it. If bragging around a campfire is your real sport, then you're right.

 

[brybenn]

In all honesty how many of us hunters start working out before hunting season?
I'm over coming a torn Achilles tendon and pushed myself a bit to far for my bear hunt this fall but I made it. I still can't run but I'm planning a bear hunt over hounds for spring 19 so that's my goal to be able to run 10 km again non stop over plowed field land. I hit the weights a little bit before bear baiting season to
I admit I was out of shape based on what I was in college but 4 months laid up on the couch really set me back. Followed by another 5 months of light activity just sucked. I really felt it dragging a 230 lb deer thru a corn field this year
Next year I'll be in a lot better shape I'm sure
I can still carry 2 rifles in the 9-10 lb range for several miles before my tendon starts to really hurt

 

[HankBC]

Well said, not sure why you wouldn’t stick with the Sako 270 and Tikka 338
Good hunting calibres and fairly light weight already.

They are, I’m just setting out feelers to see if there was a ‘do it all’ or not. Plus, who doesn’t like a project rifle? To find that I was going to sell these two.. looks like I may just be saving a bit longer. Thanks for all the responses folks! I have a good bit of research to do now.

 

[vultr]

I'm not immune to wanting to shave unnecessary weight off my rifles (and I also have a terminal case of Tinkeriris). Whether it's a lr bolt gun or a shortie 870 (or a motorbike for that matter) I totally get the impulse to improve a product to make it more user friendly, more powerful, ergonomic etc. However, things like fluting barrels and bolts definitely are not dollars well spent if your sole goal is to shave weight off your pack. As someone who does the lions share of his hunting in the alpine and sub alpine I think you'd be better off getting a nice light pair of quality mountaineering boots or an ultralight stove. A five pound gun will never shoot as nicely as an eight pound gun and you will be able to shave way more weight off your ruck by putting those extra g's towards lighter packs, boots hiking poles etc.

Carbon barrels and fluted bolts are veeeerrrryyy ###y - I just think they're more of a showpiece than anything else.

 

[NolanOsborn]

Just because it's new, doesn't mean it's actual progress of any kind that matters. Many times, "new and improved" is much more marketing hype than any real life hunting advantage. Take a close look at the 6.5 Swede, and compare it to the .260 Rem or the Creedmoor and you will find some obvious hair splitting in the descriptions of the advantages that are irrelevant for any hunting application, but (for the Creedmoor especially) the hyped "technology" of the "new" gets a lot of attention from those who think new equals better.

I agree with the idea that saving 6oz. of gun weight is far less valuable than saving 10 lbs of body weight when we are talking about being able to navigate hunting territory on foot. There is nothing wrong with getting new technology and reducing gun weight, but there is no way that reducing the weight of a hunting gun by a few ounces is going to make any real difference in a hunter's ability to carry and use it. If bragging around a campfire is your real sport, then you're right.

I agree,with you that losing weight is a needed approach, most clients I’ve had show up on a mtn hunt have no problem spending 10 grand in lightweight gear but are still 30-50lbs over weight, and in that case it’s rrally not going to help you get to the sheep faster. My point was that just because gunrunner is 65 and hauling around heavy #### doesn’t mean that other people can’t take advantage of current technology and use lighter gear, and it certainly doesn’t mean that some people who use light rifles aren’t capable of carrying heavy ones.

 

[rral22]

I agree,with you that losing weight is a needed approach, most clients I’ve had show up on a mtn hunt have no problem spending 10 grand in lightweight gear but are still 30-50lbs over weight, and in that case it’s rrally not going to help you get to the sheep faster. My point was that just because gunrunner is 65 and hauling around heavy #### doesn’t mean that other people can’t take advantage of current technology and use lighter gear, and it certainly doesn’t mean that some people who use light rifles aren’t capable of carrying heavy ones.

I never said it did.

I did say that light weight guns make very little difference in how much you can carry, or how far you can carry it. Whatever personal load you can carry will be very minimally changed by saving a few ounces in your rifle, and there ARE other, more effective ways to lighten the load (as others have pointed out) if you want it lighter. It's not any kind of personal attack; it's just the truth about the relative weights of things we all carry when hunting. Light weight rifles make little difference.

 

[mikeelliot]

They are, I’m just setting out feelers to see if there was a ‘do it all’ or not. Plus, who doesn’t like a project rifle? To find that I was going to sell these two.. looks like I may just be saving a bit longer. Thanks for all the responses folks! I have a good bit of research to do now.

You have 2 fine rifles, if you can try to keep them and find a tweener project light gun.
It’s fun to tinker, but I would not be surprised if you reach for the 270 or 338 8 times out of 10 trips into the bush.

 

[cam1936]

I never said it did.

I did say that light weight guns make very little difference in how much you can carry, or how far you can carry it. Whatever personal load you can carry will be very minimally changed by saving a few ounces in your rifle, and there ARE other, more effective ways to lighten the load (as others have pointed out) if you want it lighter. It's not any kind of personal attack; it's just the truth about the relative weights of things we all carry when hunting. Light weight rifles make little difference.

As the alpine climbers say: every ounce counts.

Being fit is the most important step. But even a 8 ounce difference is noticeable, especially on a rifle which is always with you (sleep system and food ect. Can be left at camp, rifle cannot).

The rifle isn't the only thing to spend $$$ on and obsessing over 2 ounces on a rifle when you have a 7 lb tent is ridiculous. But if you are fit, have good, light, well thought out gear, you will be able to hunt harder. Those ounces definitely do count.

 

[Rman]

Again, it always seems fairly easy to tell the ones that have, over the ones that haven't. Building a 6 pound rifle is a lot like building a 500hp 350...It sounds really easy, but isn't. A six pound rifle allows for two pounds more of something else that's just as, or more important, versus an 8 pound rifle. It isn't complicated. I can weigh 200 pounds, or 165 pounds, my pack will still weigh 40. It's the 40 that's important.

R.

 

[pete dobinson]

Take a look at a Kimber Hunter, it has no fluted barrel or bolt and has a detachable mag. Its reasonably priced for a light rifle. Get one chambered in 270 win or 280 ackley and keep your 338.

 

[gunrunner8]

I agree,with you that losing weight is a needed approach, most clients I’ve had show up on a mtn hunt have no problem spending 10 grand in lightweight gear but are still 30-50lbs over weight, and in that case it’s rrally not going to help you get to the sheep faster. My point was that just because gunrunner is 65 and hauling around heavy #### doesn’t mean that other people can’t take advantage of current technology and use lighter gear, and it certainly doesn’t mean that some people who use light rifles aren’t capable of carrying heavy ones.

Well,
I didn't express myself clear enough.
I much prefer 8lbs rifle than 6lbs one. As a retired machinist I can build or buy almost any rifle I want.
Tad heavy at the muzzle is better for offhand shooting b/c there are no bench rest tables in the bush....
The longer and heavier barrel will also add performance, accuracy and lighter report compared to short, pencil like one....
That's why clay target shooters prefer muzzle heavy 28"-30" long barrels instead 22"-24" long for point ability and smoother swing.
Also....who does carry the ear protection in the bush?
After all those years spend hunting I won't sacrifice CRF, large capacity drop plate magazine and left hand bolt operation either.
Each to their own, that's why life has so much flavour.

 

[Milt Dale]

Just like the op, I have a Sako A7 in 270 and I did have a Tikka In 338, for me both of theses rifles were the right weight to carry all day I have tried numerous slings but anything heavier gets uncomfortable and I am constantly shifting from shoulder to shoulder. I am not talking about goat hunting just walking through steep forested country for deer. My preferred rifle is a hinged floor plate CRF and for a Moose rifle I have a Winchester 70 as I do less walking. The idea of one do all rifle is an ideal that would require more self control than I care to exercise. I think the 7mm would be a good choice for a lone rifle, I do covet a light weight 7-08 but it would not be my only rifle.

 

[Salty]

Different strokes different folks. I love lightweight rifles and wouldn't be without at least one in my collection and they get used the most it seems. Its not about the weight of packing the thing that's not an issue but in thick brush being able to quickly swing the short barrel through a hole in the salmon berries, being able to handle it with just the trigger hand while clearing stuff... things like that. It used to be a lever carbine some years back but now a bolt action carbine is what I prefer. I'm currently slumming a RA comact, had a Savage lwh before that kind of thing. Going to upgrade to a Kimber or such next I think, I like to experiment quite a bit.

 

[blwebster]

You have 2 fine rifles, if you can try to keep them and find a tweener project light gun.
It’s fun to tinker, but I would not be surprised if you reach for the 270 or 338 8 times out of 10 trips into the bush.

I tend to agree. Several persons I know went from 8 pound rifles that they could shoot well, to 6 pound lightweight rifles that
they could not - at least not without a lot more shooting practice and perhaps lessons on how to shoot right.

 

[madashell]

I'd probably go with the Remington 700 Mountain Rifle in .308 (most would probably go 7/08). Swap to trigger of choice and a Wildcat stock.

Or,

700 AWR in .300wm. Swap to trigger of choice and a Wildcat stock.

Both should get you light enough for your needs I'm guessing.

 

[monster hunter]

i have a kimber in 308 its under 6 lb with a swaro 3x9 (12 oz) tally rings( 2 oz).does it kick like a mule? not at all. ive carried alot of rifles over the 35 years hunting deer.used to think long bbl and heavier was better,until one year i used my buddys rem 600 mohawk( 6 1/4 pounds no scope).so i bought one ,used it for a few years then got a model 7 compact (5 3/4 lb no scope) few years back got the kimber and i love the lightness of it. a couple of pounds makes a huge differance in carry feel. i will never carry a heavy rifle again for deer hunting.
i really like the look of the new barrett lightweight,bit more $ then the kimber but should be a nice rifle.

 

[Boomer]

The various 7mm magnums can all be wonderfully versatile, but no more so than any number of similar cartridges that are slightly larger or slightly smaller. If versatility is what you crave, handloading provides the real answer, since its you, and not the factory, that controls the throttle. Bullets with .308" and .284" diameters are available in more styles, with a broader range of weights, and with more types of construction, than any others, so you're heading in the right direction with a 7mm.

Now I own rifles in .308, .30/06, and .300 Winchester, and there's nothing that I can do with either the .308 or the .30/06 that I can't do as well with the .300, but if a light rifle is desired, an appropriate piece that chambered in .308 will be easier to find. A .30 caliber 150-165 gr bullet, with a muzzle velocity of 2700 fps or 2600 respectively, from a 20" barrel, shoots flat enough to make longish shots reasonable, and hits hard enough to ethically kill most things we're likely to eat, with the possible exception of bison. For those occasions when you might want or have to shoot something bigger, tougher, or more dangerous, the 150-165 gr bullets should probably be exchanged for a 180-200s.

In 7mm similar options are available, a short action 7-08, a long action .280, a 7 magnum, and it should be noted that various 7-300 magnums like the 7mm Practical are becoming the darlings of long range hunters like Nathan Foster, but his rifles typically weigh 10 pounds If you are tempted by the WSMs, but intend to load long, heavy for caliber bullets, a long action rifle has some advantage since you can seat the bullet longer so the shank doesn't intrude upon the cartridge's powder capacity. Finding a long action WSM light enough to suit you may present a challenge, but the short action has of no disadvantage when loading 160 gr lead core game bullets, short enough to cycle through the magazine. Bullet weights would typically be 140-160 grs for general duty, 175 gr for big stuff, while 195 gr needles are available for long range work, if your rate of twist is quick enough to stabilize them.