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

I'm looking at re-vamping my rifles - moving more towards portability and less recoil. I'm chewing on ideas for a portable flat shooting rifle. Recoil figures into the equation – I’m looking for reduced recoil. I must be getting old. The older I get the more I gravitate to lighter rifles that recoil less.

If someone was to pick from the Kimber Montana line-up and was looking for a flat shooter for mule deer and antelope, what would your pick be and why. I’d also like to know bullet choice.

Currently I’m leaning 270 or 25-06 shooting 130PT/140AB in the 270 or 110 AB/115 PT in the 25-06. I think the 280 AI is more recoil than I want in a 7lb rifle but I’m open to all suggestions.

I shot my first mule deer and antelope in WY in 1982 with a 270 and 130 Hornady. It worked as expected. I’ve shot several deer with a 25-06 and first gen TSX’s – and wasn’t impressed with the TSX on deer. I switched to Partitions in the rifle and it was a killer but the PT didn’t group near as well as the TSX’s. I have zero experience with the 25-06 out west and would like to hear comments by those that have. My concern with 25 cal bullets is that they aren't all that slippery plus at 25-06 vels bullet integrity needs to be there when they are fairly close.

.308 and the 100 grain Barnes TTSX.

270 or 7mm08...the performance difference between the two really isn't that big. They both kill well. The 7mm08 will kick a little less, and save you a little weight. I'd be happy with either.

I'd get a short action rifle in 260 or 7-08 and shoot the 120-130 class of bullets. Both are mild recoiling. Any bullet in that class will kill deer and antelope with aplomb. Both calibers will run 2900-3000 FPS.
No need for a long action anything but it sounds like nostalgia may play a part in your decision.

"Flat shooting" is relative but typically is interpreted as fast, more powder and more recoil...typically.

Somebody will tell you the 270 is gay, which I believe it may be from what I read on here.

well since everyone is talking 7-08, and you want lightweight, get a T3 Light.

My -06 makes me think I'm carrying air...

This is why I posted - I hadn't really considered one of the short action calibers. I have zero experience with 260, 7mm-08. I'll do some ballistic gacking on those 2.

I also learned the 270 is gay from the 'Fire. Who knew?

Any competent numerologist will tell you that the number 6 is totally feminine and therefore calibers with a 6 in them are going to be girly: .260, 6.5, etc.






Okay, I made all that up.

Mornin Mr B:

Talk about opening Pandora's Box !! Asking this ? here.

Around 1981 when Win introduced the XTR FTWT I immediately fell in love with that stock. (still have the '81 Win gun catalog) I ordered the FIRST one in Hammond, La.

Anyway don't remember the yr. but shortly after that Ruger introduced the 77 UL (tanger model). HAD to have one.

Long story/short, I've been on the 'light' rifle kick SINCE 1981. So today we have a catalog (so to speak) of light rifles. IMO you'll probably get as many suggestions as post count responses.

Seriously, Good Luck in your search and with you pick.
I suppose you already know WHICH cartridges you prefer so IMO it boils down to WHICH rifle & HOW MUCH you want to spend.


Jerry

From what you're saying I'd pick up a kimber in .270 and be done.

I live and hunt in prairie/plains country and my ideal rifle would be a 25-06/260/270/7-08 Montana.

Bought a 243 Montana a few years ago and a 270 Montana seemed like it would make a good combo so I ordered one this past Spring. Almost went with a 7-08 but wanted to try an 84L.
It handles about the same but the rifle is a little longer. Of course that makes zero difference out in open country but it isn't quite as handy inside the cab of a pickup.

243 is the coyote/dog truck gun and the 270 will be a walk around mule deer hunting rifle.

A 25-06 or 260 would be a great as well.


I shoot the 140 Accubond in the 270 because I know it flat puts the hurt on deer.

An ADDENDUM:

I would NOT pick a cartridge I was unfamiliar with.
(poor grammar) You might end up UNhappy.


Jerry

FWIW, here's a comparison between the 84M(243) and the 84L(270).




The 270 does have a little kick to it but isn't bad and that is also obviously subjective.

For mule deer and pronghorn, I'd probably pick the 243 Win out of the current Montana line up. Though the twist precludes some of the bullets I'd like to use, I think the 95gr BT and/or 90gr Scenar would be more than enough for either. Second choice would be a 308 to shoot the 125grAB or 130gr TTSX. Out to normal ranges I'd think it'd be a whole lot like a 130gr/270 load...

Might be able to find a used 84M cheap enough that having it rebarreled with a 243 or 260 with an 8" twist would be worth it. Would increase your bullet options.

I would find a 7-08 for it's light kick, good ballistics, and flat out kills. I am a .308 whatever guy but truth be I could hunt about everything with the 7-08 if starting over.

Kimber 257 Roberts, you get short action and close to 25-06 performance.

I was surprised that no one had mentioned the 243 sooner. Personally, I've not been that interested in the cartridge, and having seen the 260 in action I probably never will. But with the right bullet construction, I don't see a whole lot of difference in the short action cartridges (243, 260, 7mm/08). At least until you get up in the 140gr and up bullet weights, which I feel un-necessary for the game mentioned.

If you are thinking that the 280ai is going to be too much in the recoil dept, is the 270 and 2506 really going to be that far behind?

Kaiser Norton

Here is just what you need and listed for sale. Remington Custom Shop KS in 270. It will shoot quarter sized groups at 100 yards with factory ammo. I can send a picture of a target showing that with Federal Fusion 150 grain ammo. PM me if you want more info.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10648978/Re:_For_Sale:_Remington_700_Cu#Post10648978

Kimber Montana 243 rebarreled to a 1-8 twist. Shoot 105s. You can even get it in AI. I am shooting the 105 Amax at 3140. It will give you a noticeable reduction in recoil, and the 105s will give you the "flat shooting" you desire.

Hard to believe that a 7lb 270 is a mistake for a flat shooting, moderate recoiling deer/antelope rifle!

.243 and 80gr TTSX at 3350-3400fps is about nirvana for what you're looking for...

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10658724/WTS:_Tikka_T3_Superlite_7mm-08

I would agree with some here that the 270 Win is NOT gay. I've use it to take about everything in NA. As said above, it would be hard to beat in a 7lb rifle, though a little lively at the bench. I've begun to use 140s in 270 for a little more BC, and I happen to have a rifle that really likes the NAB.

With that said, I have leaned to the SA advantages of late, cartridges based on the 308 case, and specifically would recommend the 260 Rem, especially if you roll your own. I shoot 125 NPTs and 140 NABs lately.

My second choice would be the 7mm-08 (there is a better selection of factory rounds than the 260) with 140 and above bullets.

And my third, for your application, would be the 243. I like the 243, especially loaded with modern heavy for cal. bullets through a fast (8) twist barrel, and would be sufficiently adequate for your purpose. I've also taken a number of game with the 85 grain TSX and 85 NPT. Both performed well.

I know recoil is subjective but no way would I want a Montana in 270 over a 243 if recoil is in be picture....which it always is. Something to be said for a rifle you just want to keep shooting compared to a rifle you get good enough with and put it up. Just my opinion.

This!!

I'm shooting the 25-06/110NAB combo at 3160fps out of my Tikka T3 Lite. The recoil is very manageable. I've considered trying the 80gr TTSX to cut the recoil even more. I know that bullet has a ping-pong ball BC, but I doubt that would matter much out to 400yds and I have other rifles for use out further than that.

A T3 270 with 110TTSX wouldn't be a slouch either.

Both the 25-06 w/ 80TTSX and 270Win w/ 110TTSX have virtually identical trajectory to 400 and both have a hair less than 12" drop when zeroed at 250. That makes for a great point and shoot combo at moderate range if one doesn't like to dial.

Portability is not simply a matter of weight but length. The Kimber 84Ls are getting to be fairly long with their 24" barrels, while the 84Ms are a really nice length. So that rules out the long action rifles in my head.

A 243 or 257 Roberts is really all a guy needs for the biggest mule deer out there, and will boot a guy significantly less than a standard loaded 270, 308, or even a 25-06. Stay with 100 grain bullets in the 257, and you'll pretty well duplicate 270/130 grain ballistics. Go with an 80 grain TTSX or 90 grain Cutting Edge Raptor if you want really flat shooting.

In the 243, you have the previously mentioned 80 grain TTSX, and the 60 grain Cutting Edge Raptor.....which would make for an ultra flat shooter.

No need to rebarrel to a fast twist or some rifle looney cartridge such as the 260 - people may think it makes a difference, when the only place anything has changed is in their wallet and between their ears, when it comes time to actually go hunting.

Lots to chew on. A few of my thoughts.

The Kimber is a lightweight rifle - even the LA 84L is going to weigh 7 lbs or less, the SA likely 6.5lbs. I had a Montana in 300 WSM when they first came out. I discovered it sucked with full power loads - this is the level of recoil I'm trying to avoid while going to lighter rifles. I have a Ruger UL in 30-06 - bares bones just the rifle/scope it weighs a shade less than 7.5 lbs. It doesn't bother me from the bench at all. I currently have a 7 WSM that weighs ~ 7.5 just bare rifle/scope. With my 160 gr loads it is tolerable. In a 7lb rifle its not going to be a picnic - which is why I said what I did on the 280 AI. I'm thinking cartridges from the 30-06 on down are doable in light rifles. For comparison, a 280 AI in a Montana will recoil 29 ft/lbs, 270 about 23, 25-06 about 21.5, the Kimber 300 WSM about 34.

On bullets, I'm leery of light for caliber bullets at warp speed. I've done that with various 7mm's through the years and they produce a mess at close range. I also tried TSX's and found them less than satisfactory - at least in the early days. Many love them, I'm trying to warm back up to them. I've had 7mm 140 and 25cal 100 act like they didn't open. The TTSX may be the answer. I really like Partitions but not all guns shoot them well. From shooting woodchucks, I've seen the effects of wind on less than slippery bullets. Low BC bullets drift alot with a bit of wind and 300+ yards. I'll take a few more inches of drop to lessen wind drift.

Of everything mentioned, I like the 7mm-08 idea with 120-140 gr bullets. What vels are you guys getting with 140 AB's and 22-24" tubes?

I've also run some numbers this AM on the plain ole 30-06 shooting 150 AB's. It hangs in their with the cartridges mentioned.

Hard to outdo the .260/6.5CM/6.5x47L at light recoil and retained performance at distance. The 105gr stuff in the 243/243AI bears looking into as well, especially in open country. I'm going to try it too one of these days....

I've done that. Had two 7mm Remington Magnums, one .240 Wby, and a custom, 6 3/4 lb. .25-284. All of them would push decent bullets 3200-3400 fps. for very flat shooting.
If you want more, I'm very impressed with the .257 Wby Magnum. Kicks a good bit less than the 7mm magnums.
The trouble I found was by 300 yds., wind can be a much bigger factor than a little more bullet drop. It's pretty easy these days to learn how far away the target is, but calling the wind takes real work in the field to learn.
The other problem can be the rifle's weight. While one can argue that from a solid rest close to the ground, even a light rifle can make consistant hits out past 300 yds., but a heavier one makes that easier. If one must shoot well off the ground, say over grass and low shrubs, then a heavier rifle really helps. E

Recoil is very subjective and is more dependent on stock fit than caliber. As an example I had a post64 M70 that weighed about 9 1/4 lbs in -06 that kicked a lot off the bench. Had a M700 in -06 built with a custom fitted stock that came in at 7lbs. With the same load the M700 was perfectly comfortable off the bench. Also since you are talking about a hunting rifle how many times in a year are you going to shoot off the bench? Is recoil really going to be that big a deal?
As far as calibers go just about anything will fit your criteria although since your western trips are quite a hike from TN using something that would allow less than ideal target presentation may be a consideration so something between 257 and 284 seems like it would do the trick.
Hmmm I think I just recommended a Kimber in 270.
You have a lot of options.

This or a 260.

I would choose a 270, but a smaller case = less recoil.

The 270, 7x08, 7x57, and 308 are so close you are splitting hairs. Get the one you like the most and be done.

I'd go 7x08 of the bunch only because I love my 7x57 and they are effectively same cartridges. Shoot 140 TTSX and call it a day.

The TTSX is not in the same realm of what you witnessed with std pills. The light for caliber TTSX at warp speed behaves much like a much heavier Partition at a much slower MV.

In the Montana, with a desire for light recoil:

243 with Scenar 90 or BTip 95.
260 with Scenar 108 or TTSX 100.
7-08 with TTSX 110/120.
308 with TTSX 130.

There is very little felt recoil distinction between the above loadings. A long action would not even cross my mind. Why not make the best of the platform (short and light)?

The ideal rifle for your desires would be a Montana rebarreled to 6.5 Creedmoor in 8-twist. With great bullets available from 100 through 156 grains, you could hunt it all, everywhere. Such a rifle is available as the Adirondack, but I'd pass on that short of a barrel as being too loud unless you plan to hunt with a suppressor.

For simplicity's sake, start with the Montana in standard 243 with the Scenar 90, and only change if you end up seeing a performance need in the field. Odds are, you won't.

I'd go with the short action for weight savings. Caliber-wise, I would be concerned about the length of the magazine box in a short action and whether it would let the cartridge take full advantage of the long 6.5 (260) bullets without having to seat them too deeply and compromise powder capacity. I probably would go with the 7mm-08, although my personal lightweight rifle is a .308 that probably recoils more than the 7mm-08.

Maybe it's me, or the stocks on the rifles but my experience with recoil is that these all felt the same to me:

30-06 - 150 factory load
308 - 150 factory load
270 - 130 factory load

My 7x57 (which is the same as the 7x08) with 140s and 160 (handloads) recoils, IMO, far less than all three mentioned above. It's a lot more comfortable to shoot.

My 243 recoils less than the 7x57 as well.

So if I were purchasing a short action light rifle it would be a 7x08. YMMV.

There really aren't any wrong answers here. I'd echo those who've recommended 7-08 with 120's or .308 with 130's, both in TTSX.

Then again, maybe you want to talk about wind drift at distance, which might take some of the "flat shooter" out of the discussion. I'm sure those in the know will chime in about that.

Show us pictures of whatever you decide on.

FC

I'm a fan of the 284. You get the most for the least. Next up for me is a 6.5-284.

My 270 weighs 6lb 6oz scoped with a 6x36.

The 243 weighs 6lb 4oz scoped with a 2.5-8x36.


Like Prairie Goat mentioned the 84L is a couple inches longer than the 84M. I'm 6' tall and have fairly long arms and actually might prefer 84L, they're so close though that any difference in handling is very hard to tell.

Recoil between the two is very noticeable. The 243 basically doesn't kick at all while 20-30 rounds through the 270 begins to add up.

If you are worried about recoil, and like someone already mentioned, the 257 Roberts would be a fine choice. That or a 243 and a good bullet.

I've only shot one deer with a 243(90 Scenar) so can't comment much on performance.

Never shot a .260, but used the .25-06, and .270 quite a bit.. Also have the 7mm-08...

I felt my three favorite calibers for hunting would be the .22-250, .25-06, and .300.. But after shooting the .270 for the last 4 or 5 years, I could easily put it in the .25-06's spot.. Especially if I were using it more as a big game rifle, and less as a varmint round...

I would love a 22-250 Montana, that would be simply UBER.

Kimber 270 with 110 TTSX would be about as flat shooting as a fella could want. Creeps on 7RM territory with 120's. But its funny that the 7RM is ok, but the 270 isn't.

I'd also like to try Jordan's idea with the 85 TTSX in the 243.

Wonder how that would be on fur?

Hey Sam - I'm glad, and was hoping, you'd chime in on this. Recoil between most of the cartridges isn't going to be a problem. I didn't say I was a recoil wimp!

The weights you posted are a good data point. My buddy's 8400 36-06 weighs a couple ounces under 7 lbs in similar configuration as yours. I knew the 84L was lighter but wasn't sure how much.

Thanks for the input and taking the time to post pics.

B, I've never shot a 300 WSM Montana but have an A7(300 WSM) that weighs about as much as your 8400(just over 7lbs scoped) and it does kick. Not terrible but you do have to 'watch' it every shot.

The 270 84L is about the top of my fun limit, anymore the 300 WSM is a little past fun.


Get the 270!

When I helped a friend get into deer hunting a couple years ago I had him pickup a montana in.270 as a do all. When I helped him sight it in the recoil to me was hardly noticeable, I know the stock design works for many folks.
Another thought is, when in the past I had owned a couple 84's they seemed too "smallish" for me (I'm 6'2" on a good day), the feel of the 84L was much favored. I'd suggest Bwinters, you handle both long and short montana's before you buy.

If you don't reload, the .270 can't be beat. If you do reload, .260 would be my top choice. I really like the 7-08 as well, but the .260 has been edging it out, particularly when recoil is an important criteria. 100 grain at 3250 is perfect for open country antelope and deer, and the cow elk I shot this fall with a 120 gr mono was deader quicker than one I shot several years ago with a .375 H&H.

The big cushy pad sure don't hurt....grin



Awesome stocks though for sure.



The 84's handle like a magic wand, and I could see where a bigger dude would think the same about the 84L.

I've been thinking about trimming the barrel 1.5-2", maybe someday.

Flat shooting and light = 270 winchester IMHO

Short action fan = 260 Remington is a good one

And a 22" 270 will still make damn near 3000fps with a 140 on a warm day and H4831sc.

Anyone try the Howa Alpine yet? 5.7 lbs rifle is right in there with the Kimber offered in .243, 6.5 CM, 7-08, and .308. If I could find a 6.5 CM as cheap as the one I linked in .308, I'd be tempted to give it a go.

If "flat shooter" isn't a major factor, I'd go 7-08. I suggested .243 and 80 TTSX because flat trajectory was one of the primary criteria. I've got a Montana in 7-08 slinging the 162AM at over 2700fps, and it may not be nearly as flat shooting out to 400 yards as the .243 and 80TTSX, but it cuts the wind nicely and kills with authority.

A bud just killed a bull moose with this combo a couple of weeks ago, in fact. I was the spotter, and the pair of 162's seriously impressed me, from the bull's reaction to the shots, to the autopsy findings.

48" or less drop at 500 (100 yd zero)
20" or less drift (10 mph500)
2000 FPS impact at 500 yds


Good juju and easy to find across a slew of chamberings. Generally what gains you might make in drop, you lose in drift.

I'm shooting a 140gr Sierra PH in my 22 inch barrel Marlin XS7 and getting 2815fps avg.

I am with Sam on the 270 as I had intended to maybe use it on elk. As a matter of fact, just a few weeks ago I did. My new favorite rifle, at an ounce over 6#, without a doubt.

I really like the versatility of the 7mm-08. There is a great selection of 7mm bullets (weights) with good ballistics from 110 to 162+ grains for varmints up to elk. While my 25-06 is a real shooter and I've taken more deer with it than any other rifle I own, the 7mm-08 is hard to beat for its versatility. My Tikka T3 is probably the most accurate rifle I own. It shoots factory and hand loads equally well.

Working up a new load now for a 708, 120gr Nos BT is clocking at 2824fps. That's on top of 43.5gr of RL15.. 44gr is the book Max.

There ya go. Though I do wish Kimber would make .260 Montanas, or put the Creedmore in the Montana. The Adirondack is kindly spendy...

No sweat.

A 7 pound 270,280,or 280 AI in a standard action. 7/08 in a short action.

The trick to it all is handloading. If I didn't, you couldn't give me a 260. It appears Federal stopped making their 110TTSX 270 load. I've got some stashed for my M70. If they were still plentiful, the temptation to go 23" 270 Montana 6x42 M1 and forget everything I know about 7Rm, 260, and reloading presses would be hard to pass up. Any situation where that rig failed to deliver is because a fella phuqqed something else up.


But I reckon I just ain't there yet.....

I bought five boxes of those Fed loads at 3,400 FPS on clearance at Academy for $20 per box several years ago.

My oldest has zapped 3 WT w them at less than 100 yards. Died like they'd been shot w a .338 Lapua.

My ol' Mountain Rifle is zeroed for them, waiting for deer season. I may upgrade to a Montana 6.8-'06 this year. Need a stainless killer of everything near and far.

Big Green f'ed up what was a hell of a factory offering. Go figure.....


6.8-06, good one.

This has been a very thought provoking thread with a couple of different thoughts and associated recommendations. This is why I love this place and the people here. I thought I had an idea of where to go with this but thought I'd tap the collective experience of folks here. I can tell this is going to cost me more money than I originally thought <G>

Also note this thread hasn't turned into a pissing contest............

A left field idea that pounced on me last night. What about a 280 AI to handle double duty - elk and flat shooting? I'm also looking at a lighter weight elk rifle and was chewing on a 270 doing double duty as elk+flat shooter. I ran the numbers last night - the 280 AI recoils a little bit more than I wanted for a flat shooter but not as much as a light weight elk rifle. A 160 AB at 2900 shoots flat, bucks wind well and is up to the task for elks. A 140 AB at 3100 shoots as flat as anything mentioned plus bucks wind well. A bit more recoil than I want but not by a lot. It still recoils less than my current 300 WSM.

I also see that Barnes is offering a 145 gr LRX with a 0.486 BC. That might work on elks.

All good suggestions here - I'll throw in my two cents. I like my 25-06 with TTSX's and also 100gr Sierra's. It's in a Weatherby fibermark which is pretty darn light and handy but lighter yet would be a Weatherby Ultra Light Weight. ONe of those chambered in 25-06 would be pretty nice. I've got other lighter weight rifles in 7/08, 308 and 270. They all work pretty darn good.

b: Either of the 270/280/280AI can be sighted and arranged for "hold on meat" to 300 yards,and even at 350 you won't be holding much more than high shoulder on a mature mule deer or elk.Bullets from 120-160 gr will do it. They all have enough case capacity to give the velocity.

You can work out your own system for distances greater than that....

I know because I've used all three for exactly that. (My 280AI was labeled 7 Rem Mag).

There's lots of bullets that will handle the deer,antelope,and elk.

I was shooting a 22" 7# 270 the other day and could hardly feel it go off.

A Friendly Reminder.

In all this thread I've only seen a couple of cartridge recommendations that don't suit me. It's not about me, so..

I agree with YOU & BobNH -
The 280AI>>>270Win would accomplish YOUR expressed goal.

AGAIN -- Good Luck


Jerry

Assuming you hand load (and like it) 280AI would cover a lot of bases. I'd think a Montana would be pretty sharp in the recoil department. I hated my 270WSM Montana.

Handloading for me anymore is like watching paint dry, which is why I'd take a 270 over 280AI these days. Sure, you can load "for half price" or better.

All a matter of how much time you have on your hands.

I've reloaded since I was a kid. It's become second nature to me. Plus I like knowing I can run out to the garage and whip up a box of shells in less than 1/2 hour. It takes me that long to get to the store and back.

Recoil is a concern. Not necessarily the recoil energy but the recoil velocity is normally what people notice the most. Fast recoil velocity feels like a sharp punch in the shoulder. Heavier rifle mute the velocity better.

That's how my 7# 270wsm got sold and 8# 7RM stayed.

The key to OP's question is whether or not he hand-loads. If not that limits the choices he may have in ammunition. Nearly all if the recommendations listed above will work nicely. Obviously, the wildcats would not be suitable. Personally, I prefer to hunt big game with bullets having a Sectional Density near or above the .250 level and a B C near or above .400. Speed kills but it is largely irrelevant in 99% of big game hunting applications. I started with the .270 and have taken more game with it than anything else but have used it much longer. I would vote along with the 7mm-08 group for the SA, lighter weight rifle but I prefer a wood stock although my safe is packed with a variety of synthetics going back to Lee Six and Chet Brown. I just LIKE nice wood. IMHO the 7mm-08 will deliver the goods on about 80% of all game on the planet within the normal hunting ranges that most of us are competent. It will also allow a very wide variety of bullet selections for the reloader and yet the common factory load at 140 grains will work for most game. I think our family is up to 6 assorted 7mm-08's and I have another one on my Santa list.

whatever rifle you like...

and chambered in a 243, 260, or 7/08....

throw in any of the Creedmoor derivatives just to make that crowd happy...

ya wanna go cheap but accurate... Ruger American..

Another vote for a Montana in 243 with 95gr. BT's, from another older guy. I love mine.

Easy to carry, light, and accurate, with low recoil. I'm sure the 270 would work just as well, with a little more weight and recoil.

The 22" barrel on the 84M makes it a little more compact than the 84L with it's 24", but I've never had an issue with it.

Bwinters, just ran numbers on 110 TTSX at 3350 at 1,100 altitude where I hunt in Cannon County.

Zero 1.5 high at 100 gives ya 250 yard zero. At 400 yards its 11.4 low and zipping about 2530 w 1567 ft. Lbs. an uber macho 6.8-'06 is an elk rifle that will scrag deer and antelope with alacrity and kick less than a 130 at 3k.

And they work great in the dark woods of the Highland Rim, though they Waaay Overpenetrate.



,

Flat is fine. It does NOT solve wind drift..... rangefinders and knobs solve flat issues...

If you like to monkey with numbers, here's a few from a spreadsheet of about 125 loads (prospective, I don't own this much schit) that I've looked at over the years. Some like crossword puzzles, I like statistics.

Anyhoo....

Looking at BC and essentially MAX loads, you end up with the following median ranges of drift per "class" of BC. 500 yards, 10 MPH

.300 - .399 = 23"
.400 - .499 = 19"
.500 - .599 = 17"
.600 - .659 = 14"

I topped out at .659, but its as meaningful or meaningless as your ability to read wind. So 4 rifles with each class and we know the exact speed and direction, everyone hits. The difference though, would be the loss or gain in drift with uncertainty of speed and direction.

Summary: find a bullet suitable for the target you intend to engage and practice like hell.


Oops, dropped my pocket protector.....

And to add to the geekdom of it all, the median load of the pile is a hypothetical 143 gr, .470 BC @3,000 FPS.

Wind speed at 90 degree angle @ 500 yards

4 mph = 7.3"
6 mph = 11"
8 mph = 14.6"
10 mph = 18.3"
12 mph = 21.9"
14 mph = 25.6"
16 mph = 29.3"

Interesting? Maybe....

definitely interesting and, given linear figures, illustrates what the challenges are of hitting where you want at 1000 yds and beyond. North and South is easy. East and West, not so much.

You and I are related................

I have a spreadsheet full of drops, remaining vels, and 10 mph 90 deg wind drift. Its not all about BC, initial velocity plays a big role in drop/drift.

In all the gacking have a look at the 0.284 145 LRX. Not a super BC (0.485) but when kick started at 7 mag vels its pretty impressive but the kicker to me is that you close range performance in addition to decent drop/drift. They have a 129 gr version for the 270 crowd.

I enjoy my Finnlight in 260. I think it is a good balance of weight, recoil, and performance.
I just bought a Kimber Montana in 308, and I think it kicks too much. I'll probably sell it for another Sako in 308.

@deernut..that's why I draw the line at 500,

@bwinters..you're a sicko. Yeah, I've found the same as you and both of those bullets have impressive numbers. I had 129's to 3,100 in my 6.8-06, can't see that as anything but bad ass, regardless of the stigma. In all my looking through this stuff, most loads are not as far apart as people really want to believe. The Internet give'th and the numbers take'th away.

The hottest factory 6.8-06 load I've come up with is Hornady Superperformance 130 GMX. Oof...

I like to look at this stuff from a practical perspective as well. Here is an example.

15" vs 20" wind drift at 500 yards. (good performance vs decent)

That is 1.5" and 2.0" of drift per 1mph respectibly.
So assuming a 10" kill zone, one could miss judge the wind 3.3mph with the 15" drift and 2.5mph with the 20" and still be on target.

So that would give you 0.8mph more leeway in calling the wind.

Another way to look at it is if you miss the wind by 3mph the 15" would be 4.5" off and the 20" 6". so only 1.5" of difference in this scenario. But at that range. The little things do matter.

You are absolutely correct...IF you have time to use them.


Jerry

Hey maybe too light for ya needs !! but this is my 600 yd lightweight. 5lbs bare rifle, 5lbs 11oz with the Loopy onboard. 130gr VLD Hunting proj doing the job.

I see the 25-06 as a cartidge thats had its day and the 270 cant be had in an ultralight outfit, well atleast not in my books !!!

What kind of books are you reading? Doc Suess?

Okay. We reload and make any load up or down the scale as needed? Get the Kimber 280AI and down load for practice and redline for the hunt. I load my 7 RM this way. A 120 NBT3100 is nothing to sneeze at performance wise, but provides less recoil than the same bullet @ 3450fps and less than a 150 @ 3050fps.

Always thought a 7-08 would be nice but my 7RM in a Ti stock is fairly light compared to the standard version and I already have 5 260s in various trim.

Forget the down load, up load, sideways load. One solid load per rig and shoot the hell out of it. My light 270 load is called a 260, my heavy load is a 7RM. Learn it, love it....

Easy peasy...

Remmy 700 MR, Win 70 Classic FW or a Montana in .270 and don't look back. Worry more about comfy boots and other light weight gear...
Life is simple, don't over think it....

Never thought a person could get a rem 700 assembled at 5#, is that a Titanium action?

I decided to get a Kimber Montana vs trying to get where you are. But I do have a few 700's I could try a light build on, if you'll give up your secret to getting a 2 1/2# action, 2+ pound barrel and a 2# stock to add up to less than it's sum, LOL.

Allen

This is the direction I'm headed. I do tend to agree with 16 bore on up/download thing but have done it. A 145 LRX cruising at 3000 ft/sec shoots flat, bucks wind reasonably well, and doesn't recoil into next week. Its a bit more recoil than I wanted with a pure flat shooter but it recoils less than my current 300 WSM elk rifle. I had a dual duty rifle in the back of my head when I posted this (see my thread on 7lb 30-06), this thread helped sort that out. At the end of the day, I can get double duty from the 280 AI - flat shooter for things that need it (what doesn't?) and a capable elk rifle. All in a quality 7lb all up package. This gun is going to see considerable use.

I'm going to get flamed for this but it won't be the first time.....

280 AI shooters are an optimistic lot. I was looking at 280 AI internet loads and hope the guys posting aren't really running them at the velocities and powder charges they claim. I've had a plain jane 280 Rem since 1982, several 7RM, a 7 SAUM, and a 7 WSM, plus a couple 270's thrown in for good measure. My uncle and buddy shoot 284 Win. Suffice to say I have 7mm experience of that case capacity. The 280 AI can't run with the WSM/RM/Wea versions unless 26"-28" barrels are involved - or, more likely, they are run at high pressures.

I think the 280 AI can do 3100 with 140's, 3000 with 150's, 2900 with 160's in a 24" barrel at SAAMI specs which I think is 65k psi. At least thats what I'm going to run mine at if it shoots good groups. I promise not to make it a 7 RM/WSM/Wea...............

The other thing I was pondering is I have a 22" barrel 243. Its a SS Ruger 77. I also have a SS Ruger 77 UL in 30-06 with 20" barrel. I'm going to play with the Kimber 280 AI and then decide what direction to go with a smaller rifle. A 243 would make a good little brother to the 280 AI. Wish Kimber made a 260 - I've always been intrigued by the 6.5s.

Another funny thing happened. I recalled John B did a 280 AI article in Handloader when it was approved by SAAMI (Feb 2008). I dug through my stack of Wolfe publications and found it in less than 5 minutes.

BTW: his data/velocities seem to match my thoughts.

A quick sidetrack if I may. I just bought a Hawkeye 30-06 UL. Is yours an older M77 or a Hawkeye? What kind of accuracy are you getting? Have you found a pet load?

To your question. Treat yourself to a custom rifle in 6.5 Creedmoor!

I have the Hawkeye version. Mine is quite accurate given that I haven't bedded it. I only tweaked the trigger.

My gun likes Re 17 and H4350 and Hornady bullets. My best load is 58 gr H4350 under a 165 Horn SP with WLR primers seated 0.020" off L&G. It shoots MOA. It will shoot MOA-ish with both 150 and 180 Horn SP. It was really easy to do load development for.

I have 2 other Hawkeye and have done nothing with the stock. Only tweaked the trigger on all of them. I have loads that are MOA-ish. Accurate enough for the intended purpose.

I have an old pair of Browning Safatis in .243 And .308 that were built on small ring FN actions in '63. Wearing the pencil barrels. They fulfill my lightweight needs. Edge stocks would finish them off.

I had not shot the .243 in some twenty plus years. 80-85 Barnes or 95-100 Partitions put the .243 on steroids. I have aged and like light recoiling rifles. The .243 is it this year, It is sighted in with new glass and ready to go.

If I were shopping for a new rig, I would seriously consider the Montana in 7-08. I never owned one, but a friend does. It will do and cover everything you ask for.

Best,

Jack

bwinters, you're going to come full circle and be right back at the start.

You'll see........

B,

A drawback to the Kimber is the magazine constraints. Many of the advantages to some of these high BC/SD bullets are lost to this, 280AI's better bullet options will be limited because of the mag size.

Hadn't thought about mag box constraints. What is the mag box length? SAAMI length is 3.33 - the mag box shorter than that?

If that happens - a 7mm-08/308 will fix that.