As a quick backdrop, my baby is a South Carolina Built, Semi Custom Win 70 270 based on the following specs...
Win 70 Super Grade Action
Timney Trigger
Williams 1 piece Obendorf BM
#3 Shilen SS Finished at 24.75"
McMillan Edge Classic Stock
Talley Ringmounts
Zeiss Conquest 3-9x40

Rifle as it is, weighs 8.7 pounds

This gun is approx 1/2-3/4" MOA out to 400 with Barnes 129 LRX at 3100 FPS. I would like to make a couple tweaks and try to set this up as a 600 yard rifle and this is my plan which is PRETTY DARN SIMPLE - Replace the Zeiss with a NF 2-5-10X42 - However, I dont want to add even 1 more ounce to this rifle.

Changing to 30 mm talleys ringmounts and the NF scope should add approx. 5 oz as it sets right now. My first idea is to chop down the barrel from 24.75" to 24" even and moving from medium rings to low.

Do you all think those two tweaks get my 5 oz? I don't have any interest in fluting the barrel or swapping out bottom metal. Can you flute the bolt on a Model 70 like on the Kimber Accents?

Thanks

Chopping 3/4" off your barrel won't even net an ounce. Replacing the Steel bottom metal with aluminum will shed some ounces.

A Shilen #3 is a heavyish barrel in .270. Fluting it would shave more weight than fluting a bolt. Though, messing with a barrel that shoots good, well, its a gamble.

Replacing the heavy steel rings and bases with AL would shed some additional weight.

You can "lightening" the 270 with reloader 26 and 150 grain bullet. With this combo the 270 shoots almost like a 7 mag which has been said by many to shoot as fast as "lightening". Good luck



Trystan

Hairing, your build was fu cked from the begining with that heavy azzed barrel. That seems to be the theme with you. You've built a few just like this and some of the responses have been just this. Why you building such a heavy azzed rifle when it's not necessary, especially in the chambering you are using. You should have just started with a fwt rifle with a 22" tube, if you wanted it to be lighter... Another thing is your scope choice. The conquest is a heavy scope. Should have went with something like a Leupold 2.5-8x36, 3-9x40, 3.5-10x40 or 6x36.... JMHO..

Keep your rifle as is for a long range rifle. Add a rail and scope of your choice and don't worry about weight. Heavier is better for long range anyway. Buy a light weight rifle,Montana ,Fieldcraft, Forbes, NULA, Tikka Superlight, whatever, and use it as your walking around light weight rig. I wouldn't fool with the other except to maybe change bottom metal,and flute the bolt but you won't loose enough to be worth the cost IMHO. You could spend $500 modifying your rifle and be basically throwing it away as much weight as you will shed. Just add another $500 and buy a 270 Kimber Montana.

+1

My thoughts exactly.

Re bore to a 338-06.

Or you could Re Bore to a 35 Whelen, nip the tip on that barrel and enjoy! plenty of meat on that bone for a bigger hole:)

Could go to 9.3 if we want big holes, not sure about long distance on this one though.

I went through the "Mountain Rifle Phase" from 1993-1998, to be exact. Even though I am not a "long range hunter", my personal limit has been 375 or so, I discovered something. The light rifles shot well from the bench, and reasonable well in the field, at normal ranges ( av 200) I had to really find a good rest or use excellent unsupported positions to hit past that. The lightweight rifles were "impossible" to settle down, it made squeezing the trigger/getting the crosshairs right an ordeal! If I was out of breath from climbing ( always) or cutting a critter "off at the pass", out of breath with the rifle showing every heartbeat! An antelope hunt in WY ( just pick a spot, its all WY over there!) They really do use "Log Chains on telephone poles" for wind flags!) my and my sweet little Mod 700 MR in 280 AI, 3x9 Leupold compact scope, were blown all over the place. I finally got wrapped up in a snow fence and shot a nice one, finally, after missing 6 that morning! ha. I went heavier rifles ( yours is PERFECT RIGHT NOW) AND LO N BEHOLD though I fussed about them some, I could settle right down, whether from sitting to cross sticks to deer blinds, personally, I would not change a thing from what you have. The "most" I would change is the steel mounts/scope ( I'm a Leupold Man.) Have a ball though!

Overweight, gay, and stupid is no way for a rifle to go through life.
















I'm sorry, I couldn't resist!

Aluminum bottom metal will save 4-5 oz. and might just even out the difference in the scope. Not any other real options. I'd sell it and buy a lighter rig. You don't have to carry around a boat anchor to shoot well.

My 300WSM, Edge stock, aluminum bottom metal and Leupold scope with dots. I find somewhere between 7-8 lbs light enough to carry, heavy enough to shoot well. Around 7.5 seems perfect for me.

Here's a barrel fluting calculator..

https://www.longriflesinc.com/colle...ucts/gunsmithing-services-barrel-fluting

I wouldn't stick a nickel in lightening that rifle if you have no interest in different bottom metal.
And if I was going to cut the barrel, I sure as heck wouldn't stop at 24".

While I appreciate everyone support in the belief that I don't know how to spec out a rifle or am an Idiot for building this rifle the way I did - let me clarify a couple things.

1. The barrel is a #3 contour, but was custom contoured by the smith - if you had to re-categorize it - it would be more along the lines of a 2.5 barrel contour.
2. The finished weight of the rifle was never a problem, has always been just fine for my needs...The question posed was if there was a way to make a couple changes to put a heavier scope on it and stay were its at - not shed a pound or more.
3. I don't mean to get argumentative and hope it doesn't come off that way, but I have killed quite a few critters - Big and Small with the 270. It flat has gotten it done for me time after time. From mule deer to elk, black bear, antelope, even a shiras moose. Its OK to not like the .270, but to call it gay is just plain petty. Plus this rifle will put 5 shots inside a quarter at 200 yards - something was done right.

The 129 Barnes LRX, leave at 3100 FPS - especially at the 4000-8000' elevation I hunt at - produces some pretty good numbers out to 600 yards and while I am not a Long Range Hunter, I would love to update my equipment to maximize that opportunity. I also would prefer the ability to hold on an animal at 350-450 yards and not "hold over and hope".

With all this being said, I have settled on a solution and I think this should work out OK for me. I am leaving the rifle itself unchanged - I am not about to tempt fate and mess around with a shooter. I am going to switch optics and rings/bases. Changing the medium Talley 1" aluminums for some lows in 30mm and replacing the 16oz zeiss with a LNIB VX6 - 2-12X42 CDS. This scope is spec'd at 16.9 oz. All in all, approx a 1 oz net gain in weight, but with a developed CDS dial, I will easily be able to run out to 600 yards and get a bit of an optics upgrade as well.

I will post pics once it comes in and I can get it mounted. Appreciate everyone's feedback.

I wouldn't mess with a great shooter either, 8.7 lbs isn't bad.

My .338-06 went right around 8.5 lbs with a 26" barrel. It was perfect for those across the canyon shots, it settled down nicely. Light rifles can shoot small groups, but in the field, a rifle with some weight tends to be easier to shoot well. IMHO.

Buy a Tikka

Who said that to you Jeffrey? that wasn't very nice of them...

Honestly, as long as it fits you, who cares? I have carried 8-9lb rifles just about everywhere and never thought much about it. I think if the rifle balances and carries in your paws nicely means much more than a couple of ounces.