So I've been wanting a new, lightweight rifle. My others are Remingtons with one Ruger in the mix. They all weigh between low 8 lbs to about 9 1/2 lbs.

I would like to have one that weighs 7 lb or less all up.

I have been thinking about the following. I know there are a lot of differences in them, but what do you think.

1. Build on a remington. Will probably be spendy after machine work and still purchasing a nice stock.

2. TIKKA-

3. Kimber Montana

4. MRC-XWR-Haven't handled this one, only there ASR.

Am looking at either 30-06 or 300 Winnie. I want to stick with .308 caliber on this one.

OK let er rip. Opinions please.

Stick a Remington MR into an Edge stock. With a normal size Leupold scope and Talley rings, you'll come in under 7 pounds.

I'd say Kimber if you were going 308.

The MRC IIRC is nearly your weight sans scope and mounts. I would be you will be closer to 8+ lbs with that one.

I agree with Steelhead above. MR tube, edge stock for a quick route to get there. The 8400 Kimber montanas are not in the same league as their short action brethren.

My M700 in 30-06 weighs 7lb 8oz empty. Is that close enough?
Didn't do any metal work so it could have been less if I were so inclined. Custom syn stock fitted to me, Leupold Ultralight 3-9. It aint pretty but it works.

Sako Finnlight in 300 WSM, Swarovski 3-10x42, composite stock weighs 7.1

#2.

Everything else is dropping serious money to get the others to shoot like a Tikka.

I have a lite fluted in 308 that meets all of your criteria and was under $700 all up and shoots bug holes.

Remington? Really? How much money do you have to spend? Hopefully lots.

Kimber - some shine, others not so much. 100% of the Tikkas I've shot (upwards of 20?) were hammers out of the box.

Others? See notes on Remington

Why is that? Would you explain please?

One thing with the MRC, is that with the new stock it will be about 6 oz less than what the weight on they're website says. And possibly cut 2 inches of barrel off to make it 22" with the 30-06.

Not decided on that, just throwing it out there.

Also, whats it cost to get into a McMillian Edge or something like it? $600 or so

A 7 lb all up 300 Win Mag has bad idea written all over it. Even a 30-06 at that weight is more than most can handle. If really intent on that weight, you might think about dropping down to a 308.

Also, I�m assuming your �all up� reference means with sling and full mag. Otherwise add half a pound to come up with the all up weight.

Here is a Weatherby Bacik Country in .300 Win Mag with a Leupold 3-9x33 Compact in Talley mounts;



Recoil is not objectionable (to me), and I am of just average height with a relatively slim build. It is a pleasure to carry and is about as accurate as any rifle that I own.

7 1/2 is not a problem recoil-wise in a 30-06.
The stock just needs to fit well and have a good pad.

Prairie Goat,
I'm not worried about recoil. Although, something too severe can be quite uncomfortable. Usually, don't notice when shooting at a critter.

Mudhen,
Sweet setup you got there. I just put one of those Ultralight, 2-7, on my 350 rem mag. Nice lightweight little scopes.

Blacktailer,

What kind of stock are you running?

Haven't heard much about the Tikka Lite in 30-06 kicking to bad.

I have a Montana in .300 WSM and it would be one of the last shooters that I would let go.

donsm70

You should be worried about recoil.

But what the hell do I know. I�ve only seen a couple thousand hunters come through camp, and about 2 out of 10 who brought 300 mags could shoot a 300 Mag accurately. Those were usually in 8-9 lb. rifles. The guys shooting light 300 mags were basically guaranteed to screw up.

I've never held a 84M, but rumor has it they're a good deal more svelte than the 8400's.

I've got an 8400 in .300 WM, that goes just under 7#, 12 oz with a Conquest in Talleys. The stock handles recoil surprisingly well, but I'd not want to go much lighter. I can manage OK with 168's, but 180's and up get a bit too sporty for me.

FC

PrairieGoat,
Not trying to ruffle feathers here. I appreciate everyone's opinion. I've not been through your camp, so don't know what that involves. It does make sense that a hot loaded magnum in a light rifle will come with more severe recoil than a standard chambering.

Just for reference, a factory stock Model 700 .30-06 standard sporter contour barrel in a 22 ounce Brown Precision stock with Talleys and a Leupold 4x scope weighs 7 lbs 2 oz. Recoil is brisk but not painful in the least with a good recoil pad. A short action .308 Model 700, again with a standard 22" factory sporter barrel, weighs 6 lb 15 oz set up the same.

An out of the box Tikka .223 with factory rings and a Leupold VX 2 3-9 scope weighs 7 lb 4 oz even. Take away 2 ounces for a 4x scope and about 6 ounces for a cylinder of stainless steel 22" long with roughly .084" thick walls and that's around what a Tikka .30-06 would weigh.

Don't know much about Kimber Montanas.

The MRC is a heavy action, anything on that action with a decent barrel and scope would end up heavier than a Remington.

Tikka would be the cheapest and easiest way to meet your goal.

how about a model 70 fwt in a mcm edge, depending how you scope it you can be pretty close to your target weight, if not I'd just buy and kimber and give it a whirl.

The 8400 magnum Montana is nearly 7 lbs for the bare rifle (6# 13oz). compared to the 5# 6oz 84M Montana. Simply, the 8400 loses a good deal of the qualities of the 84M

As per there website, the 84L 30-06 family, goes 5 lb 10 oz.



Jim in Idaho,

Never handled a Brown, how do you like them?


Thanks everybody for a lot of good information here.

The stock design and how it fits the shooter has a lot more to do with felt recoil than the rifle weight, especially shooting from field positions. It's not hard to set up a nice light rifle with relatively mild felt recoil if you know what you're doing, or a heavy rifle that kicks hard if you don't.

I think they are good stocks and are very comparable to a Hi-Tech. The grip is long and open, it feels a lot like a Remington KS stock. One drawback is that they don't come with checkering and unless you put a grippy paint on them can be a little slippery.

For what Brown charges I think a nice checkered McMillan Edge fill stock would be a better choice since they are similar in price. But also be aware that if you go with anything besides the slender McMillan Hunter's Edge pattern the McMillan could end up 4-6 ounces heavier than the Brown even with the edge fill.


Here's a decent view of a Brown so you can see the profile of the grip. This was my M700 FS .30-06 and is the one I used to get the 7 lbs. 2 oz weight.

That is what I did.

My Kimber 308 is a hair under 6 lbs scoped. I like it, but consider it a special use gun for those times when it has to be really light. I find 7-7.5lbs about perfect for all around use. Light enough, but not too light. You can do the same things with a Remington and be about 4 oz lighter. I just like the Winchester better and feel it is worth 4 oz. If I really want to go light I still have the Kimber.

You can keep a Tikka at 7 lbs scoped right out of the box if you keep the optics light. For the money not a bad choice.

SS FWT in an Edge, 30-06. 7 lbs 5 oz



Winchester 70 SS Classic 300WSM, Edge stock, PTG aluminum bottom metal with VX-2 in a 3-9X40 with Talley lightweights. 7.5 lbs and recoil is very tolerable. That is a Burris scope in the photo but it currently wears the Leupold.

If my brain were oriented around to your way of thinking I would be looking at a M70/MRC/Montana in 300 WSM.

The way I tend to look at things I'm considering a Ruger American Stainless Compact in 308 topped with a FX-II next.

That is if/when/after I make some progress on the other 2 dozen projects I'm working on first.

That stock was made for me by a smith in Stockton, Ca. I don't know what he starts with. He fit it to me and knows what he is doing because he also fits a lot of competition shotguns. It was built in the mid 80's and has a Sorbacoil pad.

To the OP, I've owned all that you have on your list except the Tikka. I recently replaced my Kimber Montana 308 with a MRC and have been happier with the MRC. Both are accurate in my experience, but as reviewed in another post, the MRC is more pleasant to shoot, and easier for me to shoot well. Maybe it's the stock fit, or the extra pound+, or both. If I were looking for a lighter version, I'd pay more for the lighter version of the MRC from their custom shop before going back to the Kimber. While I buy too many, I own/keep just a few rifles that I really enjoy and sell all of the others. So, I am willing to pay for the few that I really enjoy, which is less expensive than a safe full of ones that sit unused.

From an era when people could still carry a gun hunting...

If you can stomach a Tikka you may also want to check out the Sako A7.

I have one in 300 WSM that weighs right at 7lbs with a 6x42 Leupold. Recoil is 'noticeable' with 180's at 3000 fps but if you practice with it no big deal.

That said I like the Montana a lot. The 84M is beyond sweet and I plan on getting an 84L within the next year or two. They are pretty much perfect for carrying around the hills.

The thing is, no one's rifle posted thus far is 7 lbs. all up. Most are a minimum of 7.5, and quite a few are more like 8 ready to hunt. In 30-06, you're looking at something like a Kimber 84L Montana to get to 7 lbs. ready to hunt, and it's going to generate something like 24 lbs. of fast recoil with 180s. Not fun for practice. A 300 Mag at that weight is downright unpleasant.

I understand the idea of a stock that fits. A Kimber or NULA stock is a big help with a light rifle. But there's no overcoming physics. Light rifles kick hard, and are difficult to shoot in the field. 7 lbs. ready to hunt is the bottom end of what I consider an acceptable weight for field accuracy/portability.

Any who thinks differently has simply not shot a 7lb 300 mag & sometimes field positions are not perfect to shoot from thus making the shot harder & the rifle harder to handle.

Sometimes people just gotta learn by doing.

Hell, other than for 338's & above I don't even own a magnum anymore........standard cartridges at sane ranges kill just fine.

MM

Good point....


With sling and(4 rounds of 243 ammo) my 300 WSM weighs over 7.5lbs. Throw in a bipod and it might weigh as much as Shrapnel's rifle.....grin

Edge stock which is actually about 2ozs heavier than the factory plastic.

Worst case scenario from the bench(off bags) in the original(hollow) stock, recoil wasn't terrible. The Edge and soft pad turned it into ladies gun.




The little magic wand(243).

Imagine a 308 would be even lighter.




I bet a 30-06 Montana would be more fun to shoot than a 300 Win Tikka.

Man, I thought you were set on going with the MRC. Come on man, don't disappoint us now...

I have a Tikka T3 Lite in .300 win mag with straight 6x weaver sling and kickeez pad weighs a couple of oz. over 7 lbs. Its got recoil ,but causes no pain. Aint work with it enough to know how accurate but preliminary tests have been great.

If you want a truly lightweight rifle, you should start with a short action cartridge in the first place because it's lighter than the same rifle in a long action. You should also use aluminum rings and bases instead of steel.

There's no point in spending $1200 to get a light rifle and then immediately start adding weight back on.

Tikka 30-06


Kimber 270 WSM


Faux Ti 260

Turn key I would go 84L or a Tikka super lite. Kimber's stock has it all over the Tikka, though as mentioned, ain't many that've seen a Tikka that don't shoot.

Forbes? Maybe a Colt Light Rifle? A 700 with a 22" MR or KS contour in an Edge would be sweet. If your semi-handy, a Bansner HI Tech stock cans save you a couple bills. Lots of used McMillans around as well.

Proper rings and scope go a long ways to sub 7lb set ups.

I bet you're right.........

And a 270 would be even more fun...........

And a 7-08 in the 84M would be even more fun yet.........

And it would still be able to kill elk.

I have a 1st Gen Ti in 7-08 & it goes 6.25lb, scoped.

MM

Here's a Remington Mtn rifle in an Edge. Granted it's a short action 243, but a long action ain't gonna add 1/2 pound, especially with a bigger hole in the barrel.




Here's a Husqvarna 1640 in an Edge stock with a 23" barrel. It's a 7x57 but was a 30/06 before the new tube.

[quote=JMR40]

You can keep a Tikka at 7 lbs scoped right out of the box if you keep the optics light. For the money not a bad choice.
/quote]

This is at least 1.

This is at least 2.

Light-weight rifles....like cars...are for puzzies!!

Most especially when you spend the majority of your time sitting on your ass whilst shooting/hunting.

Hah! You must be into AARP status and Cadillacs.

I had a T3 SuperLight in 300 Win Mag. With Limbsaver and 6x42 it was ~7 lbs, without ammo or sling. 200gr Accubond at 2900+ fps using 81.5gr of powder.

Recoil from prone sucked, no way around it and I'm not recoil sensitive. Its tough to "practice" with that much recoil, unless practice means "offhand" or "bench"... or only a few shots.

If you go 30-06 the 84L is a whole lot better handling rifle than the 8400.

200's at 2900fps were slightly less than fun in my A7 as well.

The Edge stock does soak up a little more recoil compared to the factory plastic stocks.

SamO,

I bet that Edge would help with recoil. And smaller powder charge with WSM? How's the balance/feel/handling with the Edge?

J

Here ya go:

Kimber Montana 84m in .308 with some magic done to it. 5 pounds 9 oz with scope and rings:


Kimber Montana 84L 338-06 with some magic done to make it lighter as well. Just under 6 pounds 2 oz scoped. Of course if I went with a VX 2 3-9X40 instead of a VX 6 2-12X42 then it should be about 5 pounds 12 oz or so:


I know it goes against what MontanaMan and Prarie Goat are saying but I have no problem killing animals with lighweight rifles.

Sure they have a bit more recoil, but I have also done 50 rounds off the bench in a single session as well (yes my shoulder feels it the next day). I don't need a 1/2 MOA rifle of a bench though as I am just hunting and don't ever plan to shoot animals beyond 400 yards. 1-1.5 MOA is plenty enough for me and the ranges I hunt. Sure smaller groups off a bench is great if it works out, but once I get within 1-1.5 MOA its generally good enough for hunting purposes for me.

I also have a 325 WSM that goes 6 pounds even scoped with a Leupy 2-7X28. It has been used that to kill a moose, 2 mountain goats, a dall sheep, 2 grizz, 3 caribou, sitka deer, and a black bear alone in the past 2 years.

Sure it takes some practice from field positions. But I am not building my rifles for shooting off a bench to make pretty holes in paper. They are simply a tool to kill animals with. After hunting with rifles that go 7 pounds or less scoped my whole life (started with a Rem Model 7 in .308 as my first centerfire rifle when I was 13) picking up any rifle that weighs more than that just seems like a lunker.

I know they aren't for everyone but certainly won't be going back to packing heavier rifles anytime soon.

BigSwede, a Kimber Montana 84L in 30-06 goes 5 pound 7 oz (after weigh a couple buddy's that have them) naked. Put just about any scope you want on it and still be sub 7 pounds without any work.

Could I shoot slightly tighter groups with a 9 pound 243? Probably, but I carry A LOT more than I shoot so I am willing to have a bit more recoil for a lighter rifle that still gets it done just fine at the end of the day.

Same for me as well. I've been into light weight rifles since Win introduced the XTR FTWT in 1981 and whenever Ruger brought out the 77 UL.

In 2008 I bought a Win 70 Winlight in 300 WM. IT is almost the same weight as my T 3 Lite SS 270W, both READY to hunt. Their weights are 7 1/4 lbs, +-.

I hunted the 300 WM exclusively 2008-2010, 3 Ark. deer seasons, and killed several WT, both bucks and does.

Long story - short.

Generalizations are 'general' and they don't cover all situations.

I'm 65 YO, 5'10" and 180 lbs. I also have a couple of health issues and the less weight I carry, the less tired I get and am able to hunt better. I can carry more weight on my back longer than I can carry it in my hands/arms.

I refuse to buy/hunt any heavy rifle.

Lots of information here. Making my brain hurt. Some good points to think over.

I never have shot a 7lb 300, but years ago I picked up a custom ultralight/skeletonized 300 winnie on a shaved down rem 700. It was an honest 5lb rifle. Only 21 inch barrel. It was down right painful with a hot 180 gr load. I had forgotten all about that rifle. I traded it off fairly quick.

My own 2 cents....I've had a 7.5# 300 magnum and could not ditch it fast enough after muscling it around a couple hundred shots. I agree with Montana Man.

Nothing wrong with a minus 7# rifle at all but you have to balance cartridge choice and the biggest I'd go is 30/06. I have done some shooting with a friends Rem 700 ti in 30/06 and it was OK.

I'd be happier with a 270 or 7mm of some sort in a rifle that light intended for BG,whether short or long action,but the OP wants a 30 cal which to me means a 308 or 30/06.

300 magnums and light rifles simply are not a good mix.....takes some folks actually doing it before they learn but they will tire of the drubbing eventually.

J, the WSM uses about 2 grains less powder so that might make a little difference as well.

The balance/handling of the rifle didn't change much. The factory stock was actually lighter/slimmer and I was mildly disappointed at first until I shot the rifle. Easier on the shoulder for sure.

You do have to 'think' about your hold on every shot but just keep it tight against your shoulder and no problem. Over 1k rounds through that rifle and only bruised a few times...grin

BobinNH,

The more I think on it, the better the 30-06 makes sense. I know a lot of people shoot smaller calibers for big game, but I am personally not one of them. As per my post above, I have owned a super light weight 300. It hurt a lot and went down the road, but it sure was nice to carry.

bigswede much as I like and admire the various 300's I've decided they are for younger, tougher people...

So the only 30 caliber rifle over here is a 30/06

I have to disagree...yeah if you want to shoot a couple hundred shots off a bench then certainly a 6 pound scoped rifle that shoots 200/210 grain bullets @ 2750-2800 (like a 300 WM does or both my 6 pound scoped 325 WSM or 338-06) isn't the best tool for the job. Heck my 5.5 pound 308 shooting 200 grainers at 2500 fps has nearly the recoil according to the "calculator" than a 7.5 pound 300WM shooting a 200 grainer at 2800 (31 ft/lbs for the 308 and 35 ft/lbs for the 300 WM). While both the 325 WSM and 338-06 are just over 40 ft/lbs. A 7 pound 30-06 should be around 28-30 ft/lbs with a stout load. All these numbers are right inline with what a 9 pound 375 H&H is roughly and lots of people use those for hunting.

I would never choose any magnum for plinking. Rather a simple 260 or 6.5 Creedmor is what I would use for plinking a lot of rounds as the recoil is light and uses much less powder than a magnum certainly.

But I don't believe the OP is planning on this being a plinking rifle from what I gather, if he his then I'd strongly discourage going this route as there are better options.

If you really just shoot occasionally to verify zero for your rifle and practice some from field positions and just carry it in the field then a lighter rifle is nice as its simply a tool to kill. Honestly it doesn't take that much practice to hit a 10" circle (kill zone on most of the critters I shoot) at 300 yards prone or sitting with as a rest.

At the end of the day we all have our preferences based on our experiences. Just cause one guy prefers hunting with a 6 pound rifle and another prefers likes using a 9 pound one, neither is wrong so long as they can make clean kills on the animals they are hunting.

Seems to me that choice of recoil pad can have significant impact on felt recoil. Some might discount the look of pads like the Limbsaver or Rem SuperCell, but they are seriously effective in taming recoil.

alaska: Yes you're right but a lot of my experience with 300 magnums included high round count

To this day I can still pick up anything from a 300 Weatherby to a 340 and still do decent work with it. I shoot those belonging to friends pretty regularly,just I don't want a steady diet of them. I don't shoot as much as I used to but I still shoot a lot.

That said those 8-8.5# 300 magnums killed game from the western plains to right around 10,000 feet out west.

I rarely shoot off benches BTW.

Actually the 300's started to fade from my gun safe as I discovered I did not need them. The big 7's sort of took their place and everything ended up just as dead but that's another subject.

Yeah but as a guide, you gotta remember you are dealing with folks that can't even figure out how to kill an animal without your help....

I hear ya there....I had a 300 WM and sold it to go to a .308 that was nearly 2 pounds lighter.

I still have a couple magnums but those are for ATV based hunts just cause they won't leave the safe any other time.

You certainly won't ever catch me shooting a lot of round from an ultralight.

Don't misunderstand.........I really like light rifles & use them between, around 6 1/4 - 7 1/4 lb, but I don't either want or like light rifles in big calibers with heavy bullets or magnums. (Scoped weights)

My 3 "light" rifles are a 7-08, 270 & 280..........the lightest '06 I own is a 7lb 15oz M-70 in an edge stock & it's very comfortable to shoot & for the most part, it get 165's not 200's.

Just have to keep "light" in perspective & match the cartridge to the gun, IMO.

MM

You need to make a decision & spend some money, boy!!!!!

MM

Kimber Montana in .308.

Don't waste your fuggin' time on anything else. Don't try and convince yourself you need a 30-06. Don't try and convince yourself a magical, special, unique build is going to get you where nothing else could.

Just pour a drink, get online, and find a Kimber Montana in .308.

It will save you a whole lot of time and money.




Travis

WOW..........I am forced to pretty much agree with deflavor, except that I'd take either a 7-08 or a 270 over the 308 but that's splitting hairs.

You can chase your tail for a long time & end up in the same spot.

MM

I'd prefer a 7 also. But he seems adamant about the .308 diameter.





Travis

This is right up there with "I don't feel the recoil when I'm hunting" as two of the most ridiculous internet hunting/shooting myths.

Plenty of folks we guided were really excellent hunters and shooters; many had taken a pile of game DIY. Several folks in particular I can recall having killed some really tremendous animals on their own, yet they came out and hunted with us on multiple occasions.

The reasons for going with a guide were numerous, and "Because they can't figure out how to kill an animal without your help" was very seldom the reason. That's the kind of thing guys who haven't been on guided hunts (or at least haven't been on high quality guided hunts) say to make themselves feel better.

A 300 mag in 7 lbs or less doesn't sound like much fun.

I was at that g-smith a year or so back and he mentioned a customer wanting to build a 300 Win with an McM Edge going with the total flyweight package. He just shook his head and said, "Some guys just don't think things through."

I've had one lightweight rifle built,(260 Rem) and with what's available off the shelf for less money now, I can't see going the building/waiting route on a Rem.

The Tikka would get my first look in .308 (since you want the 308 caliber) yeah, I know you said 300 WM and 30-06. The next would be the Kimber in .308.

All that said, I prefer a rifle in the 7.5 lb range.

Very good discussion on this thread.

I have Kimbers in 8400, 84l, and 84M. Out of the three, I prefer the fit, feel, handling, and field shoot ability of the 84M in 308W, slightly over the 8400 in 30-06, and greatly over the 84L in 30-06. This preference is not because of caliber, accuracy, bench performance or any of the normally greatly debated features of a rifle. It is simply because I find the 84M much easier to get and stay on target than the L, but just slightly better than the 8400. I believe it has to do with better balance in the LW package. Even though the 84L in 30-06 and 280AI has a longer barrel and stock fore end, they feel very front light and difficult for me to hold steady in unsupported field positions. I relearned that this late cow elk season when I could not get a steady kneel or sit in front of a herd of 100 elk using my 84L in 30-06. After about 10 minutes, I finally got steady enough, but still was not confident of the shot and missed. Granted the conditions were not great, heavy snow, chasing as many as 300 elk up and across a steep ridge, very cold, but hunting conditions are never perfect. Sometimes very good, mainly during antelope season for me, but even then there is usually something to distract me from the basic shooting tenants. Once again, I relearned the importance of a steady sight picture in field positions and the importance of a well balanced gun and lots of practice from field positions.

Considering all this, I began practicing gaining a steady sight picture with all of my big game rifles from normal field positions in the gun room and doing the same at the range.

My LW rifles are very good tools for big game hunting and I will continue to carry them, as I do much more of that then shooting them. However, lots of practice means I will have to utilize lighter loads or a similar set up in a lighter caliber so as not to develop poor shooting habits. A recent range trip allowed me to shoot many rounds from all of my LW Kimbers from different field positions, but didn't do much for maintaining proper shooting technique and my face and shoulder. I don't relish a slap to the factor hard bump to the shoulder. I finally caught a clue, picked up my 10-22 and got more out of 15 minutes with that thing than 3 hours with the others.

My bottom line is that LW rifles are great for carrying around the hills, but require more and better practice to shoot well than my heavier rifles. I'm a slow learner, but finally noticed that shooting a Remington 700 in 7-08, weighing in at about 7.5 pounds at the range was much easier and more comfortable to shoot than the Kimbers, all weighing in at least 1 pound less. A Weatherby Vanguard in 25-06 weighing even more than the 700 was a sheer joy!

Choosing LW rifles as a hunting tool, as with choosing a bow, requires a commitment to more practice and a strategy to keep shooting them fun. Which is why we do all of this, right?

Isn't a 300WM at 500 the same as a 30-06 at 400 and a 308 at 300, or there abouts?

Same bullets, of course.

Is that 7-08? Sure that's not 22-250?

They're interchangeable.

(sorta)



Dave

ROFLMAO!

I'm working on it. 2 Problems though, first I'm a working class stiff, and this will probably my last/only opportunity for something like this for many, many years. So I want to make a good decision I can live with for years to come.
Next problem, those are so many different ways to skin a cat here, that I'm having a hard time not being wishy/washy on the best skinning technique for myself.

Honestly, I would like to order up a Kimber, Tikka Super Lite, MRC XWR, and send a Rem 700 off to Kampfeld. And shoot and compare all of them for myself while traveling all the states and Canada shooting every big game critter that I can find. Just not gonna happen for this guy though. So, I'm gonna take my time and not make a hasty decision.

Honestly, unless you were to get something very light in a heavy recoiling chambering, there are no really bad decisions, some just turn out to be a little better than others in the long run.

Also, if you're just getting into this lightweight game, rarely does your 1st experience turn out to be your optimum or last experience as no matter what you do, there are always other choices that were about as good...........you really have to try something, own it & use it for a while to determine what works best for you & suits you best.

Everyone is different, most have tried several things & recommend what works best for them........that may or may not be what ultimately works best & suits you best.

Besides, we all know you never lose money of a gun..........

Everything you are considering is a good product; but you can't know how much you like it or not until you live with it for a while.

MM

MM,
"Besides, we all know you never lose money of a gun.........."

Glad that holds true for others and not just myself.

I think my plan at this time, is to upgrade the stock on my heavy 300. And possibly try out the Tikka. Of course this may all change by tomorrow. But I just weighed my 300's stock and it comes in at a svelte 44.5 oz. No wonder I don't like to carry it.

Now..........


Stock recommendations??

How much does the entire gun weigh now? What action?

A standard fill McM with pad in most designs will be around 32 oz, +/- an oz or 2.

The Edge Compact Classic w/ 1/2" Decelerator will be around 21 oz (the stock on my M-70 I sent you a pic of); other designs in Edge construction will be 3-4 oz heavier, or a little more, if the pad is 1".

MM

buy a tikka t3 in 308,270,7mag and you'll be at about the same price as a sako or a kimber. no brainer for me.

'06 Montana in the classifieds, $975 I believe.

It is a rem 700 with a 24" sporter barrel wearing a 4.5-14 Leupold. With the heavy stock on it is 9lb 5 oz with out ammo or sling.
I'm thinking a 20 oz. lighter stock would make a nice improvement.

You're not helping

"with no bedding and a 6x36 it averaged 1.25" on most. "

Thats no Tikka,

I did a full T&E on the new Back Country and came away impressed. Sure, you'll be a little over 7 lbs. full up, but you'll still have a 24 in. barrel -- and my test rifle shot tiny little groups. I did not need another 30-06, but I absolutely HAD to buy that rifle.

A guy could spend $975 on a Montana, run a box of ammo through it, and probably only be out shipping costs if he didn't like it.

OH YES! he's what we call an 'enabler'

Take 20 off the stock, put a 6x36 scope on & you get 3 more oz & you are under 8 lb...........pretty optimum for a 300 with the balance in your left hand (where it belongs) with your barrel.

I would think you could live with that if you want to stay with a 300.

MM

That would be a great way to go!

Swede, I've had most all the Kimber MT's discussed on this thread... 8400, 300 WSM and 270 WSM, 84L's in 30-06 and 270 Win, and 84M's in 257, 260, 7-08 and 308.

Of those, I've taken bull elk with the 300 WSM, 30-06, 308, 270 and 7-08.

Ironically, the two oldest and biggest bulls were taken with the 270 and 7-08. A 10 and 7 year old respectively.

I'll be 54 this year, and I've found I tolerate recoil less and less well. Not sure how old you are, but most guys I know experience less recoil tolerance as thy get older.

I don't know you, but I know me and a 7lb 300 mag is not something I want part of anymore. I had two Kimber 84L 30-06's and found the 180's too much of a good thing. Ditto the heavier 300 WSM.

As far as recoil goes in the Kimbers, my enjoyment level stops at the 270/150, 308/165, 7-08/160.

If you can find your way clear of the 30 cal thinking (I get it, I'm a 30 cal nut myself) you'll find more joy with the 7-08 and 140's/150's... the 270/150's and 308/165's recoil about the same, and definitely get your attention more than the 7-08's 140's and 150's. The 160's change things in the 7-08 as recoil definitely gets stouter. Manageable, but stouter.

A true lightweight rifle (under 7lbs "all-up" - sling, scope, rounds) is a specialized tool, not for the casual user or for "average hunting." Since you are in Idaho, can I assume elk/mule deer in the highcountry? That's what these rifles are for, and more-so if you're going way-back in under your own gas like I prefer. These rifle really don't make a lot of sense in the flatlands, where a heavier rifle is really no issue. More weight is a good thing to settle a rifle down, and a 6.5 vs 7.5 lb rifle are dramatically different in this regard.

If you're stuck on 30cal, get a 308 Win in the Kimber MT... great little rifle. I've had 4! Otherwise, get a 7-08 or 270. And of those 3, the 7-08 will kick the least while doing the same work of the other 2.

My 84M 308 with 155's feels darn close to my 8400 7WSM with 162's The 8400 is pretty comfortable to shoot but I like the 84M a lot better, especially the overall weight. I bought the 308 as a donor and it will be re-barreled to 243AI.

I also have a recently built 243AI on a 700, Ti stock and spiral fluted #2 Brux and there is probably only about 1.5 lbs difference between it and the 84M but it feels like 5 lbs.

At this point, I would have been money and time ahead building 84M's, 223, 243AI and 260 with the 8400 the only magnum in the safe, the 243AI and 260 being almost equals but wanting both.

See--wasn't that easy?

When I got my 7 lb. .300 I actually traded for a lighter recoiling gun that was more useful!!!! The 9 lb. .458 I traded away only like 500s was a pain to shoot prone anymore. So I guess I am getting old too........

My T3 standard SS in 270 weighs right at 7 lbs. 5.5 ounces with a factory rings, Leupold 3.5-10x40 with Butler Creeks, and three 130 gr. cartridges.
Pretty easy on the shoulder with factory stock/recoil pad.
Not a fan of plastic stocks but this one is stiff particularly in the fore end section.
Not a fan of detachable magazines but it does work well and is robust.
Shoots great.
Very good trigger.
Wouldn't be afraid of one in 30 06.
I've washed it off like you would a car and pulled the stock. Wasn.t much to dry off.
Hell of a meat and potatoes rifle.

Not bad sounding except for the straight 6x, from personal experience it is to much scope for ME in thick timber. The last bull I killed in that kind of stuff was an honest 30 feet with my rifle. Its just to hard to see every thing you need to on 6x.

Between the 6x42 and the 6x36, the 6x42 is more versatile, and both are much more pointable close in than looking through a 4.5-14 variable set at 6x or lower.

Now I have to admit that my eyes aren't what they used to be...(actually they are 3x better than when I was a teenager)...so I don't need or really want a scope at 30 feet to see stuff.

A 6x scope is not my first choice for 30 feet...neither is a 300 Win, but both are easily doable.

MRC 308, 20", aluminum bottom metal, lightweight stock. Done, for life.

Well my gun money is gone. Bought a McMillian for my 300, and picked up a Tikka T3 Super Lite today in 30-06. Done and done.

That'll do it......