Looking to hear what you guys prefer.

Future plans for a custom in 260, likely around 23" in length.

Debating #3 or ???

Looking to make about a 6.5-7.0 lb rifle naked. Stock choice not set but perhaps a Ti or a McM. Not aspiring a fly weight, but want it very handy/portable, yet balanced.

My past preference is a muzzle from .65 - .70 for stiffness, etc. but this rifle will be shot mostly for hunting, and probably no more than 3 shot groups.

i like a 2 or 3 for a sporter....

I'd be leaning #2 or maybe #1, depending on maker.

I'm currently building a 260. I spent some time talking with Tim North of Broughton Barrels and decided to go with his 3.05 contour. He had me order it to be finished at 24", then I'm having my smith cut 1" extra off the breech end, so it will be finished on the rifle at 23". Tim felt this would maximize stiffness and reduce weight.

FWIW, Charlie Sisk in his book "Selecting and Ordering a Custom Hunting Rifle" states on pg 148 "My suggestions for maximum barrel length with regard to proper stiffness in relation to contour are as follows:

#1 20"
#2 21"
#3 22"
#4 24"
#5 26"


405wcf

Hmmm. My daughters lefty Model 700 wears a #2 Hart, finished at 23" with a 1 in 8 twist chambered in 260. Sits in a 13.5" mickey with 1" pad and weighs right at 6 pounds 2 ounces. Balances extremely well.

Mickey Edge classic. Sorry.

That sounds like "just right".

Moose, how she shoot- the rifle? Thanks for all replies.

It shoots 129 Hornady and 130 Accubonds good, as in under an inch. And it shoots 140 Accubonds even better. Never ran 140 bergers in it but might once she shoots up the accubonds. I fired a 3 shot group at a little over 400 yards that was right at 2.5".

Nice, esp. to HOLD that tight at 400 with a sporter weight, good shooting sir.

Not sure where this falls in the number scale but I like a standard Remington contour.

IMO , The Remington FBC starts out as a #2, then finishes about a #3 at .660 Muzzle od.

I like using a #3 contour with only 1" breech left forward of the action.

Just had a Model 7 built on a 21" #3 Hart. Balances about 1" forward of the front action screw and weighs 6lbs 6oz with a 3x9 Leupold Compact in Burris rings on 2 piece Weaver aluminum bases. High Tech Specialties stock. If you're going 23" I'd definitely go with a #2. My barrel has light flutes done by Hart. No barrel maker that I know of will do full flutes on a #3 stainless barrel. I like the slight barrel heavy feel as it holds very well off hand.

I went back and forth about the barrel weight thing as well. I guide/hunt in the Adirondacks of NY where a 100 yard shot is long so I didn't need the longer barrel. I decided to go one size up in hopes of better accuracy. The gunsmith did barrel break in and said his best group was 5/8's without any load development. Should have potential.

Pictures to follow as soon as I get the stock painted - Zolatone jungle camo.

Frank

Couple factory Muzzle od's that I know of.....

Sako/Tikka muzzle od = .630 muzzle od at 22.5"
Reminton Sporter= .660 muzzle od at 24"

Average #2 contour custom barrel is .575-.600 muzzle od at 24".

I would cut another inch off the barrel, rather than stepping down to a smaller contour size.

Thanks all for your info. Frank, what cartridge did you pick?

Any sporter contour that leaves you with .600"-.630" MD at 22-23" bbl length.

Lighter tubes will shoot but if there is anything amiss the issue will be far more noticeable accuracy-wise.

MtnHtr

#3 or #4 for sure it is still not heavy to carry but still enough weight to get it steady.

It's a 7-08. I already had dies, brass, etc., and that cartridge works for me.

Just an fyi on the Hart #2. At 23" if finishes at .610 for muzzle diameter.

fshaw, that sounds like a sweet build.

708, never a bad choice. Hows she shoot?

Soon to find out. Have to finish the stock first.

I like the standard Remington contour. Enough diameter to make it shoot and balance, yet not too heavy to carry all day. Works really well for me with a lightish stock.

I tend to like a bit lighter contour, about .6 at the muzzle. That is the Rem factory KS contour I think.

Thanks again.

+1

I'd duplicate the Rem KS pattern which measures .59" at 24" and measures .60" at 23".

Just MAYBE if I get over my past experience with FACTORY lightweight tubes, how they heat and walk, and try me a good custom in say a #2, I will get more confidence. Cost aside might go 3 fluted, but not sure how much more mass that may be, or if the same weight. Fluting looks nice, but functionally, well I am not ALL that compelled to think it's a huge difference in cooling and rigidity, though the argument is there for some difference no doubt.

Had a good shooting 700 sporter, a 7/08 I chopped to 21, and later put in an HS stock. First 2 were tight as in 1/2 MOA at 200 yds (<1") and tight POI for first shot. I was thinking that sporter weight was around .650 at muzzle but perhaps not. I always thought the sporter mag contour, but at 22-23 was a good balance, not sure where that would fall on 'contour chart' might have to just order that specifically.

Desert Mule Deer, My gun unfortunately accurate and consistent, was a tad heavy w/full length Al bedding block. Next go round would be a Micky or Ti. Problem solved....

I like a #3!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My Rem sporter contour, only with flutes, seems to be about 4 ounces heavier than a similar mountain contour.

DD, I wonder if that CDL fluted bbl is a sporter, or mag sporter to begin with, any idea?

DD, I wonder if that CDL fluted bbl is a sporter, or mag sporter to begin with, any idea?

I prefer not ordering numbered contours. Different barrel and stock makers mean different things with the same number which can lead to mismatches between barrel diameter and barrel channel in the stock. "remington sporter", etc are universal and if the barrel and stock makers use those, you're more likely to get compatible dimensions.

Remington lists their factory short action sporters around 7-1/4 pounds. With a slightly lighter stock, I think you can break under 7 pounds with a sporter, rather than mountain rifle, barrel contour.

Not all barrel makers will flute a factory sporter, most will flute a factory magnum (that's what a LVSF barrel is), but you might ask. Flutes on a small barrel like a factory sporter won't save much weight, but even a couple ounces might make the difference between hitting your weight or not.

You can save a little weight by going with ADL rather than BDL magazine setup.

Tom

Contour numbers do vary greatly between makers. Also, how long the shank is (full diameter in front of the recoil lug) will affect the weight of the final project. I do not understand folks that have a #1 and leave a 3.75" shank.

For a lightweight 260 or 7mm-08, I'd do a Douglas #1 contour (or a #2 if I wanted a little more meat) with a 1.25" shank. I did one up on a Rem600 in 7mm-08 that is fatter than a MR contour but thin enough to keep the weight to a minimum.



RH

Always like seeing those 600 customs of yours, nice. McM stock? So what contour again are you 7/08 and 338F? 21"?

Had a Pac-Nor #3 24� on a M70, that felt a bit heavy so later had it recontoured to their #2. That was about right.

The Remington sporter contour is interesting in that it tapers down from the breech to a point about 18� out (maybe that�s 16�) where it will be the full .660� diameter, then runs straight to the muzzle. So you can cut it from 24 to 22 to 20 or whatever and still have that .660� OD.

That contour seems to be a very good compromise between weight, balance and maintaining a stiff barrel.

With their CNC programming, I had Pac-Nor re-taper one of their Rem. Sporter contour barrels (mounted on a Winchester Model 70) to have a .600� muzzle diameter. They just increased the taper to that same point 18� out to be .600 and then ran it straight to the muzzle.

That�s a real nice contour and I�m liking it fine in a 22� barrel. Definitely lighter than the standard and moved the balance point back an inch or more to make it overall quicker feeling.

Pac-Nor and Hart barrel pics are often shank-o-rama.

Jim, what cal in that .600?

.30-06

After playing around with a few different contours, including the Remington mountain rifle (.550� OD at muzzle) that half-way Sporter contour is about my favorite for a lighter weight rifle. .600 is just about halfway between Remington�s standard .660 and their MR .550 which is why I chose that diameter.

FWIW, the Winchester standard sporter contour for .30-06 and .270 rifles finishes up at .600� OD at 24� which was another sort of influence on the decision. I can't remember off the top of my head all the particulars of the Winchester measurements though I believe it tapers all the way from breech to muzzle.

The one pictured is 7mm-08 and is a Douglas #1. The 338F is a Douglas #2. Both have 21" barrels and are in McM mountain rifle stocks - the 7mm-08 is an EDGE.

RH

Jim, CORRECT, and I always did like that aspect of a slow taper on the Winchester barrels, feeling it gave them rigidity, though odds much be the Rem bbls do ok too if a good one, consistent harmonics/vibration even if not as stiff.

Thanks RH, good to know. Is that Olive?

I've got one rifle with a Pac-Nor Lt. Mtn. contour which has a .550 muzzle. At 24 inches, it's a bit whippy. Balance is good, but it's harder to get really accurate loads for it. It's a .25-284. If i had to do it again, it would be a 22 inch barrel or a 24 inch, #1.
Both of my other customs, a .280 and a 30'06, have 24 inch, Pac-Nor #1's. That's a .60 muxzzle. The barrel shanks on both have been reduced to a minimum. BTW, the famous Winchester FWT, 22 inch barrel has a .570 muzzle and almost a straight taper.
I'm happy with the little .25-284, and very happy with both the '06 and the .280. All of them balance on the front reciever ring, and they run 6 3/4 lbs. for the .25-284, 7 1/4 for the '06 and 7.5 for the .280. All of them wear 6X42 Leupolds with steel mounts. E

It is a Model 7 "magnum sporter" which in reality is a Model 700 "sporter" contour. I.e. it finishes out at .660 at the muzzle.

If I were getting a full custom barrel contour for a lightweight rig, I would go .600 at the muzzle between 20 or 22", and get a replica of the Winchester Featherweight shank.

If it was on a 338/06, I'd go with the FWT shank but increase the muzzle diameter to .650+

E, no doubt the Winchester taper is thin on the muzzle, the FWT, but vs a Rem which tapers quickly to a point then keeps the same dia. the Win. seems to have a little more beef midway in the bbl, but I don't have two in front to compare. Obviously they all work, to varying degrees. I take it very thin tubes are more prone to NOT shoot well if a not so great factory tube, and/or it is a bbl with stress and other 'issues'...true?

Looks like .600 muzzle O.D. is a good minimum in a quality bbl.

Good points, thanks.

I understand that Charlie Sisk developed his guidlines because he found that most of his customers won't spend much time developing loads. But a properly put together light, even a light, long, whippy barrel will shoot at least some loads quite well. Just not nearly as many as a much stiffer one. My 24 inch, Lt. Mtn. Pac-Nor has, and does, shoot some ammo into .5, even a few times down to .2-.3 MOA. But not nearly as many as my #1 contour barreled rifles.
The two most important things in building a light mountain rifle are (1) make sure all of the pieces make your weight goals, and (2) make sure that rifle doesn't end up muzzle light. I prefer it balance on the front reciever ring.
Any top quality barrel, properly installed, should shoot at least a few loads plenty good enough for a light big game rifle. E

I kinda like the 24" 700 CDL-SF barrel in 260, but I would opt for a lighter 22" LSS-MR barrel is I was going to carry said rifle for miles and miles.

Jeff

Yep.

RH

Thanks guys, E - agree, when you build a big game rifle, more is in mind besides simply bench rested groups, but often customs will please even if on the light side based on most owners reports.