Just wondering if anyone could post what the actual weight of their new FN model 70 featherweights are. i'm mostly interested in a 270. I ask because it seems that the marked weight on the website is a little high. They list the 25-06, 270 and 30-06 as all having the same weight, yet a 30-06 should weigh about an once or so less than a 25-06 due to a larger bore diameter. Also, I own a push feed model 70 in 270 with a 22" sporter barrel and a slightly bulkier monte carlo stock, This gun with the heavier barrel profile weighs approximately 7lbs, so I find it hard to belive that a 270 featherweight is 7lbs. Please let me know if I'm wrong. Thanks
Actual weight of Model 70 featherweights
- Thread starter StevieK
- Start date
Maybe you are sweating the details just a little more than you need to.
That, or, if the weight is actually a concern, you need to take a scale with you when you go to choose the one you wish to take home. Or, buy something completely different.
Simple answer. The variations in wood densities, from stock blank to stock blank, are going to make more difference than the differences in bore size may.
Don't waste your time sweating it.
Cheers
Trev
That, or, if the weight is actually a concern, you need to take a scale with you when you go to choose the one you wish to take home. Or, buy something completely different.
Simple answer. The variations in wood densities, from stock blank to stock blank, are going to make more difference than the differences in bore size may.
Don't waste your time sweating it.
Cheers
Trev
shortaction
CGN Regular
- Location
- Manitoulin Island, Ontario
I had a Featherweight Classic in 280rem that weighed just a hair over 6.5 lbs.
The ones I have handled are typically 6 3/4 to 7lb 2 ounces, for long actions. I like them, but featherweights they are not.
Nothing like putting a rifle on a scale to get an actual weight. I suspect the thread originator's sporter is somewhat over 7 lbs when it hits a scale.
Nothing like putting a rifle on a scale to get an actual weight. I suspect the thread originator's sporter is somewhat over 7 lbs when it hits a scale.
You're right that I am sweating the small details. But the difference in weight from "just a hair over 6.5 lbs" to "7lb 2 ounces" is quite significant. That's about a difference of 10 ounces. Even looking at a a drop in a few ounces does not seem significant when looking at a 7lb rifle. But when you consider that the lightest wood stocked guns are made at 6lbs 2 oz (kimber) and some of the heaviest at around 7lbs 4 oz (model 70 sporter) that leaves 18 oz between the lightest and heaviest (I realize some models with nice walnut do weigh more, like the super grade, but for comparison we'll stick to low density wood). So a few ounces becomes a large percentage out of 18. If the featherweight weighs in at 7lbs it would be about the heaviest 22" gun available, if it weighs around 6 lbs 9 oz it becomes one of the lightest. It may be a small change but if you're concerned about weight then it may sway your choice a bit. My sporter probably does weigh in a bit more than 7 lbs. My bathroom scale is erratic so it's hard to get an accurate reading, I just know that the sporter is at a weight that is uncomfortable to carry and handle all day.
shortaction
CGN Regular
- Location
- Manitoulin Island, Ontario
I also had a Model 70 Classic Sporter in 300 WSM and it was substantially heavier, shot really, really well, but it was a pig of a thing to carry around all day! Of course it had a 2" longer barrel and had a magnum action but it was a short action. They where not even in the same ballpark for weight and handling though.
It shouldn't.
If you are that concerned about a pound, steer clear of Tim Hortons for a while and you end up at the same weight. Or cut out the 'bulking up' routine at the gym, in favor of something that will build lean muscles that will be useful climbing up where the game is, if that's more your lifestyle.
Really though, if that is the weight difference you are concerned about, you are shopping for the wrong rifle in the first place, and pretty much spinning your wheels obsessing over some of the details that will be the least concern.
In short, once again, you are shopping for the wrong rifle, from the wrong maker, for the wrong reason.
Want light weight? Buy a light rifle. This one ain't it!
Cheers
Trev
shortaction
CGN Regular
- Location
- Manitoulin Island, Ontario
It shouldn't.
If you are that concerned about a pound, steer clear of Tim Hortons for a while and you end up at the same weight. Or cut out the 'bulking up' routine at the gym, in favor of something that will build lean muscles that will be useful climbing up where the game is, if that's more your lifestyle.
Really though, if that is the weight difference you are concerned about, you are shopping for the wrong rifle in the first place, and pretty much spinning your wheels obsessing over some of the details that will be the least concern.
In short, once again, you are shopping for the wrong rifle, from the wrong maker, for the wrong reason.
Want light weight? Buy a light rifle. This one ain't it!
Cheers
Trev
I have never understood this analogy? By this line of thinking if I lost 10 lbs I wouldn't feel any weight from my firearm or i should be able to bench press 10lbs more?
Exactly. Carrying 1lb less on you waiste is very different than having a rifle that is 1lb lighter. Grab an 8lb rifle and a 6lb rifle and the difference is like night an day. On the other hand a little bit of weight makes a rifle easier to steady for the shot - especially off hand.
First off, if people didn't care about the small, insignificant details then there would only be about 7 threads ever started in this forum, and topics about "30-06 vs 270" would not get 6 pages of comments each week that it comes up . I agree with you that if I'm looking for a truly lightweight gun then the featherweight is not in that class. My question was whether or not it actually is as heavy as listed. For example the x-bolt and tikka hunter, both with 22" barrels weigh 6lb 12 oz and 6 lb 13 oz respectively. For marketing purposes the gun industry is pushing "lightweight, all weather guns" so if their rifle weighs less than the marked 7lbs it would be advantageous to mark it down, even if it's 1 oz. Most people also consider the lightweight guns like kimber 84's to be too light, carry easy but don't handle as well. So if I want a gun that still has enough weight to handle and point nicely, yet light enough to carry all day then maybe the 3 extra ounces in a medium weight class gun will make a difference to me
. I agree with you that if I'm looking for a truly lightweight gun then the featherweight is not in that class. My question was whether or not it actually is as heavy as listed. For example the x-bolt and tikka hunter, both with 22" barrels weigh 6lb 12 oz and 6 lb 13 oz respectively. For marketing purposes the gun industry is pushing "lightweight, all weather guns" so if their rifle weighs less than the marked 7lbs it would be advantageous to mark it down, even if it's 1 oz. Most people also consider the lightweight guns like kimber 84's to be too light, carry easy but don't handle as well. So if I want a gun that still has enough weight to handle and point nicely, yet light enough to carry all day then maybe the 3 extra ounces in a medium weight class gun will make a difference to meUnfortunately this is a misconception on how our body's build muscle. There is no magical thing as "lean muscle" and non lean muscle. We have fast and slow twitch fibres in our muscles but that's the only differentiation. When working out in a high intensity manner we still burn many calories, just like an extended endurance exercise. Both endurance and high intensity training will increase the amount of mitochondria in the muscle to help burn fat. High intensity cardio and endurance cardio will both improve you're VO2 max, the difference being that prolonged endurance cardio gives a greater benefit to cardiovascular function
It shouldn't.
If you are that concerned about a pound, steer clear of Tim Hortons for a while and you end up at the same weight. Or cut out the 'bulking up' routine at the gym, in favor of something that will build lean muscles that will be useful climbing up where the game is, if that's more your lifestyle.
Really though, if that is the weight difference you are concerned about, you are shopping for the wrong rifle in the first place, and pretty much spinning your wheels obsessing over some of the details that will be the least concern.
In short, once again, you are shopping for the wrong rifle, from the wrong maker, for the wrong reason.
Want light weight? Buy a light rifle. This one ain't it!
Cheers
Trev
With all due respect, Trev, you must have not have carried many rifles for hours and hours as you climbed, both up and down, for sheep or goats. By the time you get back to camp that extra pound feels like ten! Having said that, a rifle that weighs around seven and a half pounds, all up, with scope, mounts, ammo and sling is not too bad, even for this old guy.
As for staying away from Slim Hortons, that and pushing away from the table is some of the best exercise a guy can do to make hunting trips more enjoyable.
Ted
Last edited:
Think of it in terms of dumbbells. How many times can you lift a five pound dumbbell with your arm? Now how many times can you lift a ten pound dumbbell?
Of course, rifles are often carried slung and weight makes less difference if not in the hand all the time. IMO something between 7 and 8.5 pounds all up is fine. Too light and especially too short can be harder to shoot well. 9+ pounds can be burdensome for some depending on condition and terrain, but may be a great workout for others.
Of course, rifles are often carried slung and weight makes less difference if not in the hand all the time. IMO something between 7 and 8.5 pounds all up is fine. Too light and especially too short can be harder to shoot well. 9+ pounds can be burdensome for some depending on condition and terrain, but may be a great workout for others.
Uhh... I actually carry a M70 Fwt, in .308Win for my hunting rifle. Ayup. All day if I gotta. The design is not, and never gonna be a "feather weight'. During the early season it sucks, later, it's what I'm used to. <shrug>With all due respect, Trev, you must have not have carried many rifles for hours and hours as you climbed, both up and down, for sheep or goats. By the time you get back to camp that extra pound feels like ten! Having said that, a rifle that weighs around seven and a half pounds, all up, with scope, mounts, ammo and sling is not too bad, even for this old guy.
As for staying away from Slim Hortons, that and pushing away from the table is some of the best exercise a guy can do to make hunting trips more enjoyable.
Ted
Sheep and goats are not my thing either, but having seen the areas that friends of mine hunted, I'll suggest that any rifle you cart around there is gonna feel like a crowbar by days end. One of my bud's came back from a week in the hills, 15 pounds lighter than he was when he left. He said it was fun, mostly.
Yeah philtygeezer, in terms of dumbells... take that dumbell off where it hangs over the belt buckle, or wherever else the weight might be carried, and there is a dumbell's worth of weight that you don't have to carry around along with all the hunting gear. End of day, whatever weight lost, is weight not carried up a hill, or across the countryside.
Hardly ever see anyone running around the woods carrying their rifle over their head these days, so how many times you can lift the weight seems rather a poor analogy.
And, finally, I'd kindly suggest that the published weights are pretty close to as valuable as the published fuel economy numbers for cars and trucks. Your mileage is gonna vary.
If the weight actually matters, buy a suitable scale, and check each potential purchase individually.
Cheers
Trev
IMHO, I think heavier rifles are ok to carry and at the end of the day the difference of 2 or 3 pounds isn't going to make much of a difference on where you will and will not hunt. Your body will adapt to the weight of the rifle after a few days.
The M1 Garand was over 9.5 lbs and it was carried over multiple countries, by men with a lot of extra gear, over all kinds of terrain, in all kinds of weather.
I think its more of a matter of how much you are willing to condition your body.
The M1 Garand was over 9.5 lbs and it was carried over multiple countries, by men with a lot of extra gear, over all kinds of terrain, in all kinds of weather.
I think its more of a matter of how much you are willing to condition your body.
I meant to compare sensitivity to a rifle carried in the hand to a slung rifle. Sore arms come quicker with incremental changes in weight when carried in the hand. Weight matters more if your rifle doesnt have a carry strap. Apologies for lack of clarity.
