Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles NULA model 24 30-06

Purchased Rem 700 Mountain rifle with wood stock in 308, replaced the stock with McMillan Hunters Edge, Tally lightweight rings and Leupold VX3 4.5-14x40 30mm side focus scope, it weighs 6.75 lbs and shoots .5 inch three shot groups with Sierra 165 SBT, Hornady Interlock 165 SP and Barnes 130 TTSX. I can replace the scope with Leupold VX2 4-12x40 and save 5 oz.

Guy’s loonier than the folks on the Q thread.

True, but coyote had said 2 grand.

And that's the thing.....bunches of guys here have done it and know what they're talking about. Whether those builds were using 700 action or Rem TIs and clones, as well as owning the ultralights like the ULA/NULA/Forbes/Fieldcraft, and Kimber Montanas.
If going for a midweight, a Remington works great. If going for a true ultralight, starting out with a truly light action is a better route.
The other factor with "modern" builds is that reliable dialing scopes and suppressors add a lot of weight, so starting out with an ulralight like the Wilson Combat yields a nice midweight rifle by the time a heavy scope and can are attached.

That's pretty fuucckking looney!

Depends a lot on the cartridge and the individual.

My lightest Mtn rifle is 6lbs 9 ozs chambered in 30-06AI. A fullhouse load with a 200g NPt lets you know it’s there.

My 6lb 11oz 270W with a 150g NBT w/ RL26 at 3000fps is quite tolerable and I’d say even easy to shoot.

And I am far from being one of those recoil tolerant people.

The thing about light, skinny bbl rifles there is more muzzle jump and the butt will “rock” back on the shoulder, kind’ve pinching the shoulder. Keeping the weight off the butt in the form of a lighter recoil pad seems to create less weight at the rear and reduces the “pivot point”.

👍

And, I didn't know Timney made a "Timney one piece ring/base with built in bubble level"?

And, the weight of that NULA is "12lbs"?

Mistakes - ok. But, makes you wonder how legit this dude is.

Guess I didn’t catch that part.

I did say 2 grand or there abouts anyways. Where in the heck are you guys grabbing 3000 from?

There are few things different about ULA/NULA rifles than the typical 700-based "build":

First, the action's even stronger. This is because Melvin put the important structure where it made the most difference, in the length the locking lugs, and the receiver ring, and reduced it elsewhere--and used very good steel. There has been more than one bullet company that used an ULA/NULA action and reported that they lasted longer than any other action.

It's also built from the ground up with very precise machining, rather than being a "corrected" factory action. Plus, the actions are light enough that you can use a longer, heavier contour barrel, which makes the rifle balance a lot better than most other "ultra-light" rifles. Have watched my wife shoot more than one big game animal offhand at 150 yards or so with one--because as she noted, "It just held on the right spot."

Plus, the stock was designed with the help of one of Melvin's friends who's an actual rocket scientist. The materials and the way they're put together (especially in terms of fiber alignment and the stuff that holds them together) make them exceptionally stiff and strong. At least one of his rifles was rolled on by horse that decided to "scratch its back" while the rifle was still in a saddle scabbard. It did not break.

Plus, the stiffness allows the forend to be "fully bedded" under the barrels, instead of free-floated. This tends to result in even finer accuracy, as many ULA/NULA owners have discovered. (Another well-known "accuracy" gunsmith named Kenny Jarrett, once told me during a half-hour conversation that not only did Melvin "get more out of Douglas barrels than anybody else," but is one of the few people "who really knows how to actually build an accurate rifle," rather than just "blueprinting" of a factory action.

The action and the mounts are also so precisely made that you can center the reticle on a scope, mount it, then shoot the rifle at 100 yards and have the first shots land within a couple inches of the scope's aiming point.

Have also yet to shoot an ULA/NULA that wouldn't put three shots in a half-inch or less at 100 yards with decently constructed handloads--and often various bullet weights will also land in the same place, again due to the stiff forend and full-length bedding. My .30-06 Model 24, for instance, will put three shots with of 150 and 200-grain full-power handloads into under 3/4" at 100--a total of six shots, not just the three most shoot these days. In fact, the first ULA I ever "tested" was a Model 28 in .300 Winchester Magnum. I worked up accurate loads with 165, 180 and 200-grain bullets from three different manufacturers, then fired a 9-shot group with three of each that went into .9" at 100.

But am always interested to hear opinions from hunters/shooters who've never fired an ULA or NULA....

Just covering my butt. My gunsmith seems to be more expensive than most but despite the fact he’s a Classic, Grumpy, Curmudgeon of a gunsmith I like him and trust his work.
I know how to do most of the stuff on a rifle but I leave the lathe and milling to a professional who knows more and is better at it than me.

Won't ever fire one. Don't feel the need to spend 3500 to save a pound. Put the money in your optic. Lots of people buying a 3500 dollar wilson/Nula a slapping a 400 dollar vx3 8x on it. I'd rather have a 400 dollar rifle and a 3500 dollar scope.

If you’re paying $3500 you haven’t been looking very hard.

Seller probably got some heat from his wife cause he dropped a bundle on an expensive gun. Had to list a couple like this to convince her he made a good buy. He might get a temporary reprieve until she realizes it won’t sell. Hopefully he has a plan B by then. We should all root for him. 🫤

I bought what turned out to be a very early NULA in 1989. I had never heard of NULA or Melvin Forbes when I bought it. The guy who sold it to me received it to pay off a debt and mentioned “Melvin Fort”. Turns out I bought it really cheap even for back then.

Only after I owned the rifle for a time, asked around, then read about NULA in the outdoor magazines did I find out what I had.

The rifle and Var-X II 2-7 with Weaver bases and rings was VERY light. I could shoot from the bench fine, but offhand, sitting holding the rifle across my knee, or prone from my pack I found it difficult to shoot accurately.

Although it shot other bullets well, it didn’t shoot 150 or 160g NPt’s, which are the bullets I wanted to use.

I sold the rifle at a profit, built a M700 “faux” Mtn rifle and put an MPI stock on it.

Over the years I found, for me, rifles that weigh 6.5 to somewhere under 7 lbs are the ones I like to carry and I can shoot well.

That’s always a possibility but I prefer to think the guy is on an epic fishing expedition……😊

For nulas?

FWIW, it does seem that a big name gun can hold its value much better than a high quality gun without the name. I see lots of good, but no-name, custom builds heavily discounted on the used market.

Agreed. You can buy whole guns for the replacement cost of the custom stocks some of them wear.