Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Plains Rifes - MD and SA

John:

Great article in the current SA, as usual. After reading it, if I didn't know any better, I'd almost think your preference runs to 9 pound rifles over the current lighter "mountain" weights. And I use the word "current" there because when I read about the necessity of sub-seven pound rifles for mountain game I can't help thinking about what I see in some of the older mountain hunting anthologies, particularly those dealing with sheep and goats. There are a lot of pictures and stories in Robert Anderson's "Wind, Dust, and Snow" volumes, as well as his "Great Rams" series, showing sheep and goat hunters using rifles that are at least in the 9+ pound range. As a matter of fact, the rifles that Elgin Gates was lugging up those Asian mountains - all Weatherbys from the looks of them - certainly weren't the sub-seven pound rifles that seem to be more and more common today. Either that's how far we've come in building lighter and lighter rigs - obviously some of the materials we have today weren't around when Gates was climbing up and down the Pamirs - or perhaps it's simply a matter of preference and experience. I know a couple of fellows whose preference runs to rifles weighing between 8 and 9 pounds regardless of where they're hunting, mountains or otherwise, and regardless of the fact that they can afford to hunt with just about anything their hearts desire. I suppose that the bottom line is: use what works for you and that you have confidence in.

But there is something that you've touched on a number of times in the past, and you even allude to it in the current article: fit and balance. Within reason, that seems to be far more important than weight ("reason" being that even a well-fitting, well-balanced rifle would be a pain to lug around if it weighed 13 pounds!). My own very limited experience has proven it to me. One of the best fitting, best balanced rifles I own is a 7x57 (duh) built on an Argentine action, unknown brand 24-inch barrel that was turned down by Tom Jackson out in Iowa, bedded into an old B&C Carbelite stock. At 8.2 pounds all up it's no fly-weight mountain rifle, nor is it a real heavyweight either, but it fits me well and is balanced so that it settles down better than just about any other rifle I own. Other than the fact that it offends my curmudgeonly blue steel and walnut sensibilities, it certainly fills the bill for my use.

Anyway, just a couple of thoughts that your article prompted. No offense to Mssrs. Hughes, Spomer, McIntyre, et al., but yours is always the first one I read.

RM

Rev,
I second just about everything you said. Another great, thought provoking article by JB. My own experience mirrors yours, fit is everything. Weight, aiming and recoil are all mitigated by proper fit within reason.
Blacktailer

Where in Iowa is Tom Jackson located? Is he still doing work? Thanks.

Blacktailer,
I third this. Properly fit and balanced is the winning combination in a hunting rifle. D'Arcy Echols comes to mind as someone who figured this out LONG ago and probably directly related to the fact of his field time. Anyone who doubts this should hold a Legend and see...

Yep. I have been in the habit of just turning strait to whatever JB's article is. Lately, I have been intentionally reading everything else and saving the best for last.

Always interesting how guys will try so hard to shave a pound off of rifle weight but then will have 5 pounds of stuff in their pack that they will never use. I'm as guilty as anyone, I I cleaned out my day pack a few months ago and realized I'd been carrying around 3 sets of pliers

I'm stuck in the past and prefer wood especially nice wood vs any type of synthetic. I have a nice restocked Pre64 M70 270 FWT that scales under 8lbs with a Leopold VariX 3 3.5X10. It fits like a glove and can be carried all day. IMHO the light rifles are nice to carry but harder to shoot especially if it's windy. They wobble all over the place.

That's a grail rifle!

Sorry: I was buttoning up the hunting camp yesterday, and just back and can answer.

Tom is on the 'fire, but posts regularly on a couple of the Accurate Reloading forums, both under the screen name "dpcd". As far as I know he's still doing work in Davenport, Iowa.

RM

Mike,

You're exactly right about me mentioning fit and balance quite often--and it applies to ALL rifles, not just plains rifles.

One reason I like New Ultra Light Arms rifles when I do choose a lightweight is Melvin Forbes understands balance very well. My pair of NULAs have 24" Douglas # 2 barrels, which shift enough weight forward to make them comparatively easy to shoot accurately in field conditions. Used the .30-06 to take a mule deer last fall at 327 yards--when I was still breathing pretty hard from a climb to intercept the herd, which was headed into some rough country to bed. Worked fine--but I did deliberately choose to take the lighter rifle, rather than one of my plains rifles, because I knew that piece of country was more vertical than horizontal, and that was where I was likely to find 'em....

I just replaced the scope on my Mini Grendel with Trijicon Huron 1-6, which brings the weight up to 7lbs 8.8oz, a pound heavier than my FC with. 2-10 Leupy, and almost 5oz more than my Alpine. Plan is to acquire an OregunsmithingLLC stock which should drop the weight 10-12oz and shift the balance forward to help steady things. Muzzle-light rifles may feel snappy in your hands, but in mine they’re tough to hit anything with.

Still have a couple of “plains” .270s that go 8.5 - 9.75lbs., but they seem to stay inside for some reason, aside from annual zero checks.