Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

If your comparing lightweight rifles (rifle minus scope= 6 1/2lbs or less)vs an average weight rifle(rifle minus scope = 7 1/2 to 8.5) which is preferable for all kinds of hunting? Does anyone have preferences or opinions:D on using either in a high altitude situation much like that found in our Western states?

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

For Western hunting, a lightweight is the way to go. First time I went to Canada, I took a 11lb rifle. About killed my shoulder. But I managed. Since then, I have been light nuts. What I did was extreame and I should not have did it. Truth be told, the sporter versions like a 700BDL would be a nice balance of wieght and carry. You will know the difference in a lighter rifle like a 700ti. I couldn't believe that 2lbs can wiegh so much more after 10 miles of humping.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I had a average weight 270, probaly more than average,probably 9lbs that I used for years. It was a old family gun then i retired it and bought a remingon mountain rifle and could definatley tell the difference. Its nice packing the light one around.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I still pack the moutains of West Virginia, not quite the Rockies but still up there. For many years I carried a custom Winchester mod 70 with a medium heavy contour barrel in .270 Win. Weight was right at 9.5 lbs. w.out scope. I did not mind the weight one bit, especially for the time this combo was much more accurate than the light weights and I had the apportunity to make long shots whitetail. Today with a little age on my side and with the vast improvements in rifle manufacturing, I am using a rifle still in .270 Win but weighing in just under 6.5 lbs. It is every bit as accurate but much easier to carry and point. In .270 the recoil is about the same in the light rifle, not sure about the big boy calibers.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I'll have a lightweight rifle as often as I can.....it's another reason that Magnums are not carried on my trips. I can get a featherweight rifle in .30-06 or .280 Rem and a Magnum will normally be a pound (or more) heavier.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

Next year I plan on packing a Remington Titanium rifle. Provided they still make them on 2005? I would like it to be chambered in 270-Winchester or 280-Remington.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I suppose one day I'll run into someone in the woods, carrying a 3 pound rifle and wearing jogging shoes and a hunter orange jock strap and that is it --- all trimmed down for weight, but IMHO, there are trade offs.

Currently use a M70 Supergrade in 375HH for elk, 4 to 8 miles a day in gentle 1000' vertical gain/loss country at 8500 to 9500 ASL. It weighs 11.75 scoped and loaded and along with a 25 pound day pack it is plenty to carry. I love it though --- feels very steady in my hands in those few seconds that it really really counts.

If I'm going higher or farther or harder OR if I start acting my age, then I have a Sako in 338WinMag with synthetic stock that weighs 7.0 pounds scoped and loaded. However, it is a waspy little thing to handle at the range, okay in the field though; very light, but almost too light for steady sighting purposes, in my opine.

I like a heavier rifles for as long as I got the horsepower to carry them. Just "feel" better to me when it comes "show time".

EKM

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I have a bias towards carrying a longer, heavier piece. Out of all the stuff I hump into the bush, a 7-9 pound rifle is not that much. For an experienced shooter that understands recoil & deals with it, it is not such a big issue. But for the average office pogue who dreams about light rifles and 500 yard shots with a 300 Win Mag..., well, that is the kind of guy that may be selling his rifle the next season. Sorry, I don't believe in short barrels for high velocity rounds, squirrel rifles for standing armies, and tinker toys for heavy calibers. Flinch city.

I think production rifles are too light and short for the 30 06, especially, although I see more 24 and 26" barrels today than years past. To me, that was a magnum that just wasn't belted. My view.

My packs going in were 100 pounds easy. Get a good sling! Take 5 when you need.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

As far as I'm concerned, the lighter the better...most "real hunting" is done at ranges no farther than 200-250yrds, and that's a stretch!!! Compact bolt rifles or short leveractions are very capable of sufficient accuracy at this range, probably double it in fact.

Compact bolt rifles tend to recoil much more than their leveraction bretheren, but then again, they're typically chambered in much higher pressure rounds at higher velocities...while as you mentioned, a compact bolt gun might weigh 6.5# naked, a compact levergun can get as light as 5#!!!!

I don't necessarily believe that weight is the only thing that makes a rifle easier or harder to carry afield. IMHO, the more important aspect is the size....Compare a Ruger 77 compact, Win 70 featherlight (pre-64), a Marlin Guide gun, Marlin 1894 carbine

The Ruger compact is 6.25# naked and 35.5", the Win. is 6.5# full length, Guide gun is 7# 37", and the 1894 is 6.5# 37".... Between the two bolt guns, there isn't much difference in weight, but the compact is MUCH MUCH easier to carry...However, the Guide gun, only a half pound heavier, seems much more difficult to carry than the 1894. IMHO, leveractions are much easier to carry in general, if for no other reason than the flatness of them and the fact that they're designed to be carried.

Try some on, see how you like them, whether you think they'd feel better or not has no effect on how it actually feels...I always think I'd prefer a 3.75" bbl on a vaquero, but it never handles well for me. If you can't keep steady with a compact rifle, it doesn't matter how handy it is to carry.

I ALWAYS prefer to carry the "handiest" rifle I can, which, to me, means the best combination of weight and size, without compromising power and accuracy...typically the Marlin Guide gun or 1894 wins out for me, while my new Winchester 94 Ranger Compact (33" 5.25# .30-30) is probably going to take the place of the best long WALK, mid range hunting rifle I have.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

Most people can more easily lose 5 lbs off their bodies that they won't have to carry around than shave another pound off their rifle.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

That is the truth. I prefer a heavier rifle because I can hold it steady. I remember one pleasant hike one early AM when by the time we got on top ..I couldn't hold my lightweight rifle steady until i stopped puffing. At that time I thought any legal animal coming thru here is going to be safe at any normal shooting range. Sure was nice walking up the mountain with that lightweight though.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I prefer the heavier rifles but thats because I seldom hike around carrying a rifle. We either set in Ambush points or use horses for transporting gear and game. If I were going to do much foot work though I would be looking at rifles like the Model Seven or other lightweight guns. I do have a Savage scout rifle thats not bad to carry. It is in 7mm-08.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I pondered the idea of getting one of those ultra light big game rifles, for years. Before I bought one, I got to the age where I limit how much I walk anyway. Ride the horse up to within a half mile of where I want to hunt, tie him off and walk a bit. Scout on the horse. That said, I believe that for a younger hunter, in shape hunter, the light weight, so called "mountain rifle" can be a very good thing. Carrying a lighter rifle certainly does make humping a bit easier. However, you have to treat most light weight rifles a little differently on the range, if you want to maintain accuracy. Most light weight rifles have trimmed "fat" off the barrel and therefore will heat up quicker. At the range, shooting a rifle hot causes rapid barrel erosion. Also, your shot at that trophy will be from a cold barrel. You must learn the discipline, at the range, of firing the cold barrel one time and then waiting 20 minutes before again firing. By doing this, you will find out how that rifle will shoot cold, which is again, the way it will be when you have that once in a lifetime chance at a world class trophy "whatever". Easiest way to maintain that "cold barrel shots only" discipline, is to take at least two other rifles to the range and play with them during the waiting period. Even if you shoot slow fire with a hunting rifle, shot strings will change the point of impact as the barrel heats up, this is amplified when you are using a light weight rifle. The second big issue, is whether that ultra light will settle enough, in your hands, to get an accurate shot off. When you are climbing and pumped up, by the sight of game, your heart rate is elevated and you may be breathing in an irregular manner. Consider that a standard weight rifle may feel more stable, then would an ultra light. Try jogging up and down, behind the shooting positions at the range. Jog while carrying some weight and do that until you feel a bit fatigued. Then, go to the shooting position and take a target under fire. Is it difficult to get the rifle steady, after you have worked a bit? Do you see any difference in the way a standard weight rifle settles down on target, as opposed to the way an ultra light rifle settles down? How these questions are answered may help you to decide whether the ultra light rifle is for you, or not!

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

Briman, thats true, but from someone that lost 40lbs, it didn't make a difference on my shoulder with my heavy contour rifle. I have hunted alot of places from the west to NF, and its all different.

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

Hi OE:

I do a pack-in hunt at about 11,000', and have always preferred a heavier rifle. I take a Sako .416 Rem, app 11 lbs, and don't mind the weight at all. However, at least for the time being, I have youth on my side.

I like to shoot ALOT during the off season, with my hunting rifle, and although I have two compacts, I don't like waiting for the barrel to cool. Also, I have a favorite load with a .416 300 gr Barnes at 2900 fps, and I don't want any part of that in a compact.

EKM, please don't scare us with such thoughts!

Anyone in Denver looking for a good deal on a compact, Galyans in Broomfield has a Ruger .243 & .260, laminate/stainless compact for $380, NIB, one of each.

Good luck on all your hunts this year!

CE

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

I wish i had a dollar every time i heard someone say that!!!

As soon as i figure out how to spread my rifle "thinly all over my body", i'll agree with your theory! Untill then, make my rifle "light" please!!

Drilling Man

RE: Light vs Average weight hunting rifles
 

Use your current rifle, have chrestensen arms put a lightweight barrel on it. also if weight is your concern use a ruger #1 you eliminate the action that way. put a carbon barrel on it shave down the stock just a little and youve got a light weight rifle, any caliber you choose(no long action,short action decision), and because of the lack of action a 26 inch barrel will still be shorter than most bolt guns w/ 22 inch barrels.