Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Wanted: Flat shooter, light weight

Is the throat geometry consistent with 3.33? Meaning can the bullets tough the L&G given the mag box length for your bullet of choice? I only see this as an issue if: A. your chosen bullet requires a COAL longer than 3.33 to reach L&G, B. it won't produce a load that will shoot to your satisfaction.

With longer, more pointier (tech term for low drag <G>) bullets, the ogive is farther back on the bullet and can result in a required COAL longer than the mag box allows. I think the Bergers fall into this category. I'd like to think the Kimber folks thought of this and made the mag box-throat relationship fit most bullets on the market. I'm looking at Nosler AB and Barnes LRX for bullets. I don't think either of those is excessively long compared to the entire array of 7mm bullets available. In the end, I wouldn't be too depressed if it only shot 150/160 Partitions either.

I never even notice recoil in my 280 AI. It weighs in 1 ounce under 7#.

I don't have an answer for you. I haven't put together any loads for it yet, I was running low on time for a bear hunt so had to run factory fodder through my 270. It loved the Barnes Vortex stuff in 130 grain ttsx's, which was close to 3.25. Not a lot of room to spare. This is internet conjecture, for what that's worth, that I've read they have smaller mag confines to keep the action on the slim side for less weight and a longer barrel while keeping it balanced, and it is definitely that. I'm looking to head down the 6.5 or 6x47 when I burn through my 84m to take advantage of the smaller mag confines. Just a WAG, and maybe some can chime in, my guess is you'll have a tough time getting the Bergers to get the stars to align in the Kimber actions.

I understand your frustration, we still have no perfect factory rifle or scope design that will make all of us happy!

like I said 1deernut show me a 5lb bare rifle 270 ?? nope thought so. Yeah plenty of lightish 270s but hey handloaded 260rem are plenty flat enough with out the blast and kick of a 270. Just saying, Ive shot a few short barrel 18 and 20inch 270's and flame, noise and kick springs to mind. Certainly not helpful if a fast follow up shot is required.

Hey just sharing a modern interpretation of a longe range lightweight outfit.

is a Stainless Model 7 action, CM barrel, 20.6 inch tube, Wildcat CF stock.

who's this Doc Suess u mention ....... is he a custom gun builder ?

So, you are saying that 5.5 lbs is not considered an ultra light rifle? Light starts at 5 lbs or less? LOL. Ok, you can write your own book, I guess. But if your "book" says that, well...Ok. I would think many would disagree. No problem to get a 270, 25-06 or any 30-06 family of cartridge gun to 5.5 lbs offered from more than one gun maker and with a 22" barrel. And by the way, I never mentioned a 270 with a 18" barrel. That was you.

And, by the way, I would know a thing or two about the 260 Rem. If you think you can rack a bolt and get back on target quicker with a 5 pound 260 with a 18 or 20" barrel than you can with a 5.5 pound 270 or 25-06 with a 22" barrel, you are kidding yourself.

Doc Suess? No, Doc Suess is a series of children's books similar to "your" book mentioned. Kids books...but you already knew that didn't ya?

Gimme a break...

Adrenalin up, you can make a 375H&H rattle.

seems like you like splitting hairs 1deernut !!

OK I said Ultrlight, think forbes or Nula ? yep what they cost ?? yep a bomb.

lightweight is a 6lb plus rifle.

had 270's, 6.5 swede and I have a fair understanding of what flat shooting means lol.

Drag yaself into the modern world, we no longer need long actions when high BC pills and modern propellants make short action cartridge like the 260 Rem every bit as flat as 270. Take the time to punch the number hommies, you might be suprised, but I guess you already know everything hence your ref to Dr Suess lol

But hey go on enjoying ya 270, but it cant match the specs of an Ultralight 260. But hey each to their own, Dr Suess or not !!

bwinters, this is my own answer to your question: A 284 on a SA 700; Z3 Swaro.; PGT bolt. Second paint job now but with a 3.1" magazine; 23" tube and 3000 fps with the Nos LR 150-gr Accubond. 6.25 lbs right there.

Same-same ballistics as a pot load of cartridges off of the '06.

George - nice rifle!

Hey, 'homie'...

Here is just one of my 260s:


This is the latest one I built. Preach all you want. But do it in the mirror.

If you would like to see a couple more, let me know. By the way, for hunting, I prefer a ~7lb rifle if I'm hiking up and far, though I own a few that weigh a pound less.

I just disagree with your 'book'. 5.5 is plenty ultralight. And it can be had in the very good 270 or 25-06. Don't forget the Kimber in addition to those you mention. Can't build rifle for that price point and get those specs.

If I choose to burn powder, then by God I will. I can afford to. I've been "punching numbers" since probably before you were born, judging by your posts. But you probably already 'knew' all that too?

+1. Very nice shootin iron, George.

Nice rifle nut but youve exposed urself as someone who likes to talk down to others, funny i guess my experience for the last 30yrs pales beside your achievements in the field.

Hey Mcmillan make nice stocks but whats it weigh ?? My WC comes in at 15oz.

again u need atleast 24inches to get the best out of a 2506 and atleast 22inch for the 270.

this aint a pissing contest and Im not interested in eating the peanuts put of ur arse, seem some dont like to be skool on modern [bleep].

My Kimber 84L has a 24 inch barrel and handles like a magic wand. Ripping that bolt back is slicker than college sex. 270 is one of the most versatile and common cartridges out there that leaves little to the short action cartridges especially when it comes to hunting.

I agree that the 260 is a wonderful cartridge, fun to shoot and a killer so no argument there. But you could say the 243 or rather 6mm____ has advanced, even recently to the point that would question using the 6.5 bullets especially at more common hunting distances.

I think we can all agree that static is a word that doesn't exist in the shooting/hunting industry.

4winds totally agree with ya sentiments.

Ive used a hot 2508 and found performance eratic, tuff accubonds were pass thrus

I guess the point i was making is the the 260 does an awful good impersonation of a 270, it does the same as the 2506 but starts to leave it for dead when u look at energy delivered in the crucial 4-600 yd window.

A 270 can do a pretty good impersonation of a 7Mag.

Just like Miley Cyrus can do a pretty good impersonation of Brooke Shields...

LOL...hope you didn't pay money to see that!

I don't need 'skooled', kid. You build that rifle yourself? It is a nice rifle if super light and short is your main goal. Of course, that is not everyone's goal exclusively. If shooting a 260 Rem exclusively is your idea of being 'modern' you can keep it. If your happy, nothing else matters.

But here is where I stand: One more time and I will type slooowwwwly.

To start, go back and read my post on page 1.

Then read the points I've tried to have you understand (hard work):

Point 1: The 270 and the 25-06 are both outstanding cartridges and can be had in ultra-light rifles, regardless of what your book says.

Point 2: I've been loading and shooting for the 260 Rem before it was the 260 Rem. You can't seem to get it through your head that I think it is a great cartridge.

Point 3: There are disadvantages to extremely light rifles. Which is why all 'Modern rifles' are not 5 pound, 18" barreled 260s.

Point 4: You started this crap by insinuating the 25-06 is no longer a useful cartridge and that the 270 can't be had in a lightweight by 'your book', with a picture of your 'modern', end-all rifle with a short barrel. All of which is pretty narrow-minded and could be considered by many as 'talking down' to the folks here on the fire, many of which have forgotten more than you will ever hope to 'know'.

So change your attitude. Your opinion is just that, and nothing more.

Only with the lights out. LOL.

Exactly the point....