|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,948
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 47,948 |
The present trend seems to be centered around short-action rifle and cartridges, and I've had my share of light rifles based on that theme. But the one I've had the longest, and killed the most big game with, is a NULA .30-06 that's now 20 years old--and would be one of the last I'd part with. Despite having a 24-inch #2 Douglas barrel it weighs six pounds on the nose with scope.
One of the great virtues of NULA's is they shoot a LOT of ammo well, and often to the same point of impact, one reason I've never permanently settled on one load. (The other is new bullets and powders over the last 20 years.) Another is that unless the scope goes bad, or somebody falls on it, they retain zero year after year, even when traveling from continent to continent. My wife's first NULA was a .270 Winchester with a #1 22" barrel, and for a decade she'd go to the range early each fall and shoot one round. It would land two inches high at 100 yards, never varying more than about a 1/4", and she'd go hunting. The scope finally died (the sometimes do on real lightweights) but that wasn't the fault of the rifle, and in that period it had not only hunted all over Montana but went on two caribou hunts involving several plane rides, plus bouncing around in boats, one on the Arctic Ocean.
Some people make a big deal about the lighter weight and shorter bolt throw of short action, but the .30-06 is a Model 24, which means the action weighs 24 ounces. The bolt throw is less than half an inch longer than that of a Model 20 NULA action.
I acquired this rifle back when I was traveling a lot more than today, one reason it's a .30-06: If anything happened to my ammo, some could be easily found, anywhere ammo is available on earth. If making the same choice today I might opt for a .308 Winchester, but maybe not One thing I've noticed is the .30-06 also works fine with what are essentially .308 loads, whether factory ammo or slightly reduced handloads.
All in all, however, the virtue of my NULA isn't the chambering but the overall consistency of NULA rifles. Eileen eventually replaced her .270 with another NULA, a Model 20 in .257 Roberts, not for lighter weight but due to less recoil. We went to the range the other day to check the zero before pronghorn season, and it put one shot in exactly the same place it has for several years. There is no doubt that the NULA is an absolutely awesome lightweight rifle. I've truly enjoyed mine. I've had a few different calibers. My 30-06 is incredibly accurate, but I don't enjoy shooting it as much as the other, especially in a prone position. I'm not exactly carrying a lot of extra weight and my stiff handloads pack about as much punch as I can tolerate. I've been debating rebarrelling to something a bit tamer since I'm such a wus. For a lightweight carrying rifle, I wouldn't look any further. That's the beauty of the 308... especially in a true lightweight, I notice the difference in recoil between it and the 30-06. My "lightweights" (I consider a true lightweight sub 7lbs scoped, with sling and rounds) have all been Kimber MT's. What I've found is my enjoyment level peaks out at the 308 in the 84M and 270 in the 84L. One of these days I'm going to rebarrel a Montana to a no.2 contour, in which case I'd consider them about the pinnacle of lightweight design. As it is, I consider the NULA with its no.2 about perfect. Brad, if the 308 is your suggestion to herchel, it's a good one. However, if he's shooting a 30-06 right now and his rifle is a long action I'd probably lean more towards the 7x57mm mauser. As much as we like to give Ingwe chit about it, it's still a damn good cartridge..
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065 |
If "ultimate" is subjective, it can't be done...
fwiw...
Rifles that are both very light and easy to shoot well are expensive propositions and for me at least, get chosen for hunts with more on the line in money, prep and years accumulating points. Personally speaking...have had Nula, Montana and a custom lightweight M-70. Prefer a barrel with a bit more out front. I'm not crazy about 700s, but the 700TI cuts weight where others (cept Pierce) can't.
A 24" #3 tube reduces the waving wand effect when panting at altitude and it has been a notable improvement for me, over past lightweights.
Prefer the 280AI as recoil-wise the 280AI is as much case capacity as I want to stand in a 6# all-up piece. The scope included in that 6# figure is a 3-9x42 Zeiss 1" (16oz). At the time of the build, the smith talked me out of the 7 Rem SAUM, which has effectively the same capacity. Since then Nosler made the 280AI legitimate w/brass. I like the way it worked out.
If I had your SA TI, I do whatever 6.5 or 7mm case without having to fireform, that would get me the most FPS with a .248 SD class bullet.
YMMV...
Defend the Constitution
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,662
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,662 |
I use a Rifles Inc Strata in 7 STW. It handles anything as far out as I care to shoot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
I'm not opposed to long actions.... when there's a reason. However the "ultimate light weight hunting rifle" will most assuredly be a short action. It's that whole "ultimate" thing. Flame suit on!  Phooey. Internet hyperbole. Bob, you and I put together our ultimate actual using hunting rifles. Jeff argues a theoretical concept. Not so! I've put together a 7-08 M700 MR that while perhaps not the "ultimate", is on the face of it, more properly in the conversation than a LA M70 buildup. To wit, an ultralight glass stock, blind mag, aluminum TG, Gre-Tan shroud, Talleys, Leupold. It's very light, AND it possesses great potency. Then I have a 7 WSM Montana. Can't really say I put that one together, though it is a re-barrel, but it's one heck of a light rifle, again if the idea is matching weight against capability. You guys are starting from the premise that the ultimate rifle is a LA M70, then building light from there, then calling that the ultimate lightweight hunting rifle. If viewed more correctly for the purposes of this discussion then maximum utility per pound is the metric. By the way I think those M70's are great looking and well thought out packages. I just think you are trying to shoehorn them into the category. Take the word "ultimate" out of the title and replace it with "excellent" or "classiest" and you might just have it.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 21,680
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 21,680 |
No joke, the more I shoot, the less custom i need Crazy talk and off-kilter from the OP's question! Just funnin' This is my All around 308 bartlein 5r 20 inch barrel Defense an even machine rebel action Manners t1 ![[Linked Image]](http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj222/bmt4tax/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_0422_zpsubnjgweb.jpg)
"The Church can and should help modern society by tirelessly insisting that the work of women in the home be recognized and respected by all in its irreplaceable value." Apostolic Exhortation On The Family, Pope John Paul II
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,345
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 4,345 |
What would a short action Pierce weigh in an edge with a 22" in a winchester ultralight contour? For one thing, you sacrifice beautiful wood for synthetic but it is lighter If you go to Jon Beanlands website to the build section, check out build #15. Its pretty much what you just described and per the website it weighs 5 lbs. Thanks! I am going to order an action soon, I just need to decide if I want to go with a .260 or a 6.5 GAP......Decisions decisions
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
If "ultimate" is subjective, it can't be done...
fwiw...
Rifles that are both very light and easy to shoot well are expensive propositions and for me at least, get chosen for hunts with more on the line in money, prep and years accumulating points. Personally speaking...have had Nula, Montana and a custom lightweight M-70. Prefer a barrel with a bit more out front. I'm not crazy about 700s, but the 700TI cuts weight where others (cept Pierce) can't.
A 24" #3 tube reduces the waving wand effect when panting at altitude and it has been a notable improvement for me, over past lightweights.
Prefer the 280AI as recoil-wise the 280AI is as much case capacity as I want to stand in a 6# all-up piece. The scope included in that 6# figure is a 3-9x42 Zeiss 1" (16oz). At the time of the build, the smith talked me out of the 7 Rem SAUM, which has effectively the same capacity. Since then Nosler made the 280AI legitimate w/brass. I like the way it worked out.
If I had your SA TI, I do whatever 6.5 or 7mm case without having to fireform, that would get me the most FPS with a .248 SD class bullet.
YMMV... His boltface is wrong (easily correctable) but the 6.5 SAUM does as you spec.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 95,928
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 95,928 |
What would a short action Pierce weigh in an edge with a 22" in a winchester ultralight contour? For one thing, you sacrifice beautiful wood for synthetic but it is lighter If you go to Jon Beanlands website to the build section, check out build #15. Its pretty much what you just described and per the website it weighs 5 lbs. Thanks! I am going to order an action soon, I just need to decide if I want to go with a .260 or a 6.5 GAP......Decisions decisions .260 Rem
Life Member SCI
Life Member DSC
Member New Mexico Shooting Sports Association
Take your responsibilities seriously, never yourself-Ken Howell
Proper bullet placement + sufficient penetration = quick, clean kill. Finn Aagard
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,126
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,126 |
![[Linked Image]](https://www.24hourcampfire.com/images/600_weight.jpg) I built this .308 before Kimber put out the Montana or Rem the Ti. It shoots lights out, but if I had to do it now I think I'd buy a Montana in 6.5 Creedmoor and call it good. You should just sell that to me and buy the Montana!
"Never miss the opportunity to shut the f$%K up." Colonel Hopewell.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,257
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,257 |
You guys are starting from the premise that the ultimate rifle is a LA M70, then building light from there, then calling that the ultimate lightweight hunting rifle. If viewed more correctly for the purposes of this discussion then maximum utility per pound is the metric.
By the way I think those M70's are great looking and well thought out packages. I just think you are trying to shoehorn them into the category. Take the word "ultimate" out of the title and replace it with "excellent" or "classiest" and you might just have it.
With due regard to my good friends Bob and Rick, I agree 100% with everything you wrote there Jeff. For my definition of "lightweight" (sub 7lbs, scoped with sling and rounds - it doesn't make sense to talk about a rifle any other way), most M70's just can't get there. Not really. Case in point, I have a superb little SA M70 Classic Stainless 308 Featherweight. It's in a McMillan Edge with 1/2" Pad. Replacing the all-steel versions, it wears PT&G aluminum bottom metal, and a graphite follower. With a 6x36 Leupold in X-Low Talley Lwt's, 4 rounds and an Uncle Mikes Mountain Sling (about the lightest functional sling out there) it still weighs 7lbs 3.5 oz's. That's 13.2 oz's heavier than my Kimber MT 308 with the same scope... While I wouldn't call my M70 an "Ultimate Lightweight," in some ways its extra heft is a good thing, and I sure as heck like M70's. But I can promise 13 oz's less weight on a BP hunt makes a difference.
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,052 |
herschel,
I've gotten excellent accuracy in my NULA .30-06 with 150-165 grain bullets using several powders, including both H4350 and IMR4350, IMR4451 and Ramshot Big Game. Anything around a published starting load will result in .308 ballistics and recoil, though often a magnum primer helps with Big Game.
The last 150-grain bullet I tried was the Cutting Edge Raptor. 54.0 grains of Big Game got around 2850 fps and tiny groups, with what I consider very tolerable (if not downright pleasant) recoil. And I'm not nearly as willing to tolerate recoil as I used to be.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
I'm not opposed to long actions.... when there's a reason. However the "ultimate light weight hunting rifle" will most assuredly be a short action. It's that whole "ultimate" thing. Flame suit on! Phooey. Internet hyperbole. Bob, you and I put together our ultimate actual using hunting rifles. Jeff argues a theoretical concept. Not so! I've put together a 7-08 M700 MR that while perhaps not the "ultimate", is on the face of it, more properly in the conversation than a LA M70 buildup. To wit, an ultralight glass stock, blind mag, aluminum TG, Gre-Tan shroud, Talleys, Leupold. It's very light, AND it possesses great potency. Then I have a 7 WSM Montana. Can't really say I put that one together, though it is a re-barrel, but it's one heck of a light rifle, again if the idea is matching weight against capability. You guys are starting from the premise that the ultimate rifle is a LA M70, then building light from there, then calling that the ultimate lightweight hunting rifle. If viewed more correctly for the purposes of this discussion then maximum utility per pound is the metric. By the way I think those M70's are great looking and well thought out packages. I just think you are trying to shoehorn them into the category. Take the word "ultimate" out of the title and replace it with "excellent" or "classiest" and you might just have it. Phooey again. "Ultimate" is subjective. "Lightweight" is subjective. There is no substantive difference between a rifle weighing a few ounces under 7 pounds to a few ounces over 7 pounds...neither in terms of portability or shootability. The rifle in the photo above weighs 7 pounds on my scale with scope and mounts. Call me a liar and say 7.25. That's with leupold DD's,medium rings,and a S&B Summit. Scope and mounts are not lightweight gear, and I can easily get that rifle under 7 pounds with Talleys and a 4-6X scope. I know because I have done it...owned the rifle for 30+ years and shot out 2 barrels on it. It isn't "shoehorned" in any way.....  Can I get a lighter rifle? yes. Will it be better than the M70? No. If by "ultimate" we mean "lightest" then say so. I won't comment on plastic parts, flimsy extractors, plunger ejectors, and enclosed triggers that usually accompany such pearls but that's another subject.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 6,065 |
Jeff, I mentioned two calibers if it was my SATI, not any cartridges.
Defend the Constitution
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,312 |
I wonder what my M700 MR weighs... there's no more obvious ways to lighten it (other than skeletonizing and fluting) but it's not a Ti.
Bob, since you mention triggers, I do recall your story about an issue with an enclosed M700 trigger when you were but a "yute" and I don't doubt you. That said, really light rifles need light triggers IMHO and I've never like the feel of the M70 trigger. With the new FN built ones it's compounded by the fact that you can't get replacements for them, either. Maybe that's changed.
On balance the Kimber starts looking hard to beat <grin>. At least on my sample of 1 the trigger is fantastic, and I have it set really light.
Anyway.... semantics aside as far as what the OP meant, clearly you've blueprinted one heck of a lightweight hunting rifle.
6.5 SAUM/GAP holds much potential when talking "ultimate lightweight"... I'm building one now but as a midweight. Once I have the reamer, who knows what mayhem might ensue.... grin. I think my Kimber would make a great 6.5 SAUM.
Just 'cause self-inflicted irony is cleansing, I actually packed a PIG of a rifle on my last backpack hunt. I wanted the capability. It's certainly easier to shoot a heavier rig über-accurately.
The CENTER will hold.
Reality, Patriotism,Trump: you can only pick two
FÜCK PUTIN!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,581
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,581 |
Jeff and Brad, I won't disagree with any of what you have said. But for me, ultimate lightweight and ultimate lightweight hunting rifle are not close to the same thing. I have had the Montana 7mm-08, no thanks. The green stocked 280 above is 7 pounds 0 oz with a 6X36 and 7-4 with that Kahles CL. It was designed for lightweight backpacking but more importantly hitting in the field. When I spec'ed it I didn't go all-out for lightest weight, obviously. That is a kevlar stock, 22.9 oz with alloy trigger guard and blind mag. DD rings which are in every way superior to LWs except for a couple ounces, a barrel 23" with a .575" muzzle which could have been slimmer but was designed to be slightly muzzle heavy. A Leeper-tuned original pre-64 trigger which is safe, 2 pounds and dead crisp. And yes Brad, the bolt modified to clear a super low ocular, not that you can tell (the 6X36 is in super-low DDs). I could have easily dropped a half pound but designed it for hitting in the field and backpacking durability. And like yours my rifles see mountains every year. I don't post as much here anymore but shoot a lot more. In excess of 10 000 rounds a year, 2/3 of that in silhouette. You want to learn hitting in the field which at its essence is trigger squeeze and more importantly follow through, take up silhouette. There is no replacement for actual trigger time. I know what fits, and hits, for me. You want to see a backpacking AND hitting field rifle, look again at my pic. i will carry the extra half pound. Been there done that.
Last edited by RickF; 10/15/16.
Anybody who seriously concerns themselves with the adequacy of a Big 7mm for anything we hunt here short of brown bear, is a dufus. They are mostly making shidt up. Crunch! Nite-nite!
Stolen from an erudite CF member.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,065
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,065 |
I'm not opposed to long actions.... when there's a reason. However the "ultimate light weight hunting rifle" will most assuredly be a short action. It's that whole "ultimate" thing. Flame suit on! Phooey. Internet hyperbole. Bob, you and I put together our ultimate actual using hunting rifles. Jeff argues a theoretical concept. Not so! I've put together a 7-08 M700 MR that while perhaps not the "ultimate", is on the face of it, more properly in the conversation than a LA M70 buildup. To wit, an ultralight glass stock, blind mag, aluminum TG, Gre-Tan shroud, Talleys, Leupold. It's very light, AND it possesses great potency. Then I have a 7 WSM Montana. Can't really say I put that one together, though it is a re-barrel, but it's one heck of a light rifle, again if the idea is matching weight against capability. You guys are starting from the premise that the ultimate rifle is a LA M70, then building light from there, then calling that the ultimate lightweight hunting rifle. If viewed more correctly for the purposes of this discussion then maximum utility per pound is the metric. By the way I think those M70's are great looking and well thought out packages. I just think you are trying to shoehorn them into the category. Take the word "ultimate" out of the title and replace it with "excellent" or "classiest" and you might just have it. Phooey again. "Ultimate" is subjective. "Lightweight" is subjective. There is no substantive difference between a rifle weighing a few ounces under 7 pounds to a few ounces over 7 pounds...neither in terms of portability or shootability. The rifle in the photo above weighs 7 pounds on my scale with scope and mounts. Call me a liar and say 7.25. That's with leupold DD's,medium rings,and a S&B Summit. Scope and mounts are not lightweight gear, and I can easily get that rifle under 7 pounds with Talleys and a 4-6X scope. I know because I have done it...owned the rifle for 30+ years and shot out 2 barrels on it. It isn't "shoehorned" in any way..... Can I get a lighter rifle? yes. Will it be better than the M70? No. If by "ultimate" we mean "lightest" then say so. I won't comment on plastic parts, flimsy extractors, plunger ejectors, and enclosed triggers that usually accompany such pearls but that's another subject. I was contemplating a similar response... but neither was my rifle (though I have some like it) and I knew Bob would come back with sound logic. Regardless, the word "ultimate" was exactly why I would have considered Bob and Rick's M70's great suggestions. To me, ultimate means tops in reliability, ruggedness and shootability. Who knows if the OP is at all interested in a 70 (as he has a Ti in hand) but ultimate certainly describes more to me than "lightweight" or otherwise trimmed and tricked out!
"You know why nobody panic buys 30-06 ammo? ... Because men with 30-06's don't panic"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 35,900 |
Jeff I saw two Rem 700 trigger/safety mechanisms quit on the same day in Northern Maine. I have also had to flush out a Rem 700 trigger mechanism twice in Wyoming in separate years to make the rifle work.Dust,silt whatever. Im not saying it happens all the time,but in distinguishing between rifles I play with and rifles I build to hunt with, I will take the open architecture of a M70. I will echo what Rick says. I can easily build a lighter rifle than that M70;after having done it, I like something like that one. I think the Kimber is hard to beat in certain configurations. I like this one so far. I just got it; off the shelf and I did nothing to it. ![[Linked Image]](http://i1187.photobucket.com/albums/z395/BobinNH1/IMG_0685.jpg) Here's what it does so far.....for 5 shots; not 3....... Can I repeat? Who knows? we'll see. ![[Linked Image]](http://i1187.photobucket.com/albums/z395/BobinNH1/IMG_0702.jpg)
Last edited by BobinNH; 10/15/16.
The 280 Remington is overbore.
The 7 Rem Mag is over bore.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,586
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,586 |
Jeff I saw two Rem 700 trigger/safety mechanisms quit on the same day in Northern Maine. I have also had to flush out a Rem 700 trigger mechanism twice in Wyoming in separate years to make the rifle work.Dust,silt whatever. Im not saying it happens all the time,but in distinguishing between rifles I play with and rifles I build to hunt with, I will take the open architecture of a M70. I will echo what Rick says. I can easily build a lighter rifle than that M70;after having done it, I like something like that one. I think the Kimber is hard to beat in certain configurations. I like this one so far. I just got it; off the shelf and I did nothing to it. Have one just like it in 257 Roberts with a leupold 2.5x8x36 VX3 thats hard to beat. Here's what it does so far.....for 5 shots; not 3....... Can I repeat? Who knows? we'll see.
Never take life to seriously, after all ,no one gets out of it alive.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 4,571 |
"Ultimate" actually leaves a lot of room for interpretation... The "ultimate" custom lightweight is really anything your heart desires... you'd have to be very specific to come up with a winner here. The "ultimate" factory Lightweight is undoubtedly the Kimber Montana... The "ultimate" value Lightweight is probably the Tikka SL... The "ultimate" Custom/Semi-Custom is probably the NULA... or the Rifles, Inc. Strata... Is it the "ultimate" LW Deer rifle... or Elk rifle... or Sheep rifle? Because those can certainly be different in dimension, weight, and caliber. Here's my "ultimate" Lightweight... and pretty much "ultimate" hunting rifle in general. It's not the lightest "Lightweight" on this thread... but so far, it's the only one you can shoot without plugs and/or muffs... Kimber Montana in .300 WSM, cut to 17" for use with a suppressor. With the can attached: it's the same length as your average 24" barreled '06. It only weighs 7.5lbs all up, with rounds, sling, optic, and suppressor. It shoots 200s/208s at 2750 and 155s at 3050... does it easily sub-moa, with recoil similar to that of a .270 Win. It sounds like a .22 lr when you shoot it... but it's fully capable of clobbering any critter that I ever hope to hunt. ![[Linked Image]](http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/DDP2005/6C54D87C-9F6F-4FDF-970E-02D804CF67E4_zpswo51xukt.jpg) Shoots several bullets like this... at 100 ![[Linked Image]](http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r325/dogdownproductions/50ED2DD0-C739-466F-BD83-5651DFE94CCD_zpscowyviyq.jpg) ... to 700 ![[Linked Image]](http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/DDP2005/BF6B85C6-454D-41BE-ACA9-C3099588A9BC_zpspk6n7n5b.jpg)
You better pray to the God of Skinny Punks that this wind doesn't pick up......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,257
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 30,257 |
Jeff and Brad, I won't disagree with any of what you have said. But for me, ultimate lightweight and ultimate lightweight hunting rifle are not close to the same thing. I have had the Montana 7mm-08, no thanks. The green stocked 280 above is 7 pounds 0 oz with a 6X36 and 7-4 with that Kahles CL. It was designed for lightweight backpacking but more importantly hitting in the field. When I spec'ed it I didn't go all-out for lightest weight, obviously. That is a kevlar stock, 22.9 oz with alloy trigger guard and blind mag. DD rings which are in every way superior to LWs except for a couple ounces, a barrel 23" with a .575" muzzle which could have been slimmer but was designed to be slightly muzzle heavy. A Leeper-tuned original pre-64 trigger which is safe, 2 pounds and dead crisp. And yes Brad, the bolt modified to clear a super low ocular, not that you can tell (the 6X36 is in super-low DDs). I could have easily dropped a half pound but designed it for hitting in the field and backpacking durability. And like yours my rifles see mountains every year. I don't post as much here anymore but shoot a lot more. In excess of 10 000 rounds a year, 2/3 of that in silhouette. You want to learn hitting in the field which at its essence is trigger squeeze and more importantly follow through, take up silhouette. There is no replacement for actual trigger time. I know what fits, and hits, for me. You want to see a backpacking AND hitting field rifle, look again at my pic. i will carry the extra half pound. Been there done that. The thread was about "ultimate lightweight", so I offered my opinion and experience. As devoted an M70 fan as I am, I just don't think they belong in the category. IMO however, they are a superior all-around wilderness wandering rifle when properly kitted. I do think, to fully qualify, they need detachable scope mounts and open sights. And yes, I will take the M70 open trigger over any closed trigger for a hard-duty rifle. I'll disagree about your DD's being "superior in every way" to Talley Lwt's. I see it exactly the opposite. To each his own. Will add, I fully believe the plain-jane Weavers superior to the DD's in every way for a rifle in this category. Here's one of my M70s... a 270 with 6x36. As shown, 7lbs 1.9oz's. Same as yours, just that the McMillan is 24.0 oz's, hence the difference. It will eventually get open sights. It's a superb midweight "practical rifle" that settles down easier for the shot than my Kimbers... but I'll always take one of my Kimbers for mountain hunting, BTDT. Differences make the world go round, and there are many paths to the same end. ![[Linked Image]](http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa326/bradmacmt/Gun%20Stuff/m70-270fwt_zpsuugfqcm9.jpg) Its older, heavier brother: ![[Linked Image]](http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa326/bradmacmt/Gun%20Stuff/m7030-06.jpg) To me, the "ultimate" is still a muzzle heavy, sub 7lb all-up rifle, but with a no.2 contour (.600+ @ 22")... I'll eventually own such a rifle when one of my Kimbers gets rebarreled.
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
|
|
|
|
|
564 members (10ring1, 10gaugemag, 10gaugeman, 12344mag, 160user, 007FJ, 54 invisible),
2,260
guests, and
1,143
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,609
Posts18,454,873
Members73,908
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://s8.photobucket.com/user/DDP2005/media/6C54D87C-9F6F-4FDF-970E-02D804CF67E4_zpswo51xukt.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s352.photobucket.com/user/dogdownproductions/media/50ED2DD0-C739-466F-BD83-5651DFE94CCD_zpscowyviyq.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s8.photobucket.com/user/DDP2005/media/BF6B85C6-454D-41BE-ACA9-C3099588A9BC_zpspk6n7n5b.jpg.html)