LadyK

Hey everyone, im a new member. I currently hunt with a .243 and am looking to spend my tax return on a new hunting set up. Im also a lady, so the lighter the better.

Things im looking for in my new gun
-.270
- lighter weight, probably not a real wood stock
- less recoil(any stock mods you'd suggest?)

oh, im also looking for a good scope. the one im currently using is a 3-9 and its about 25 years old(as is the gun) so its not exactly top grade anymore

i wouldnt really need more than a 3-7 power scope since i never hunt with it set any higher than that. I need something that can help with my poor 'twilight' vision(i feel like i cant see well enough during that sweet spot in the evening when the deer are out and about)

Thanks for the help in advance, i obviously dont know the terms and words that are correct for what im looking for, which is why i dont want to go into a gun shop quite yet. The guys working there usually ignore me anyways. So thanks for the help!

Terasec

welcome,
i cant help with which gun to try, plenty of folks here who will jump in and help,
but if your shop isnt giving you the help/attention you need,
novice or pro, find another shop,
no point giving a lousy shop your $$$, when plenty of good shops out there with very helpful and knowledgable staff

LadyK

Thanks for the welcome! and I completely agree. They immediately disregard that im there, so i dont plan on buying from any of the shops in town. i do have a shop picked out out of town if i chose to buy new, but theyre 5 hours away so theyre helpful customer service is a bit out of the question

salukipv1

how about a Remington 700 mountain stainless/synthetic in 270win or 280rem?

heavier gun = less recoil
synthetic stocks less recoil IMO than wood.
my 340synthetic no brake kicks harder than my wood 300win mag with a brake!

soft recoil pad of course helps

semi auto, less kick, my bar 270 barely kicks at all, although as a 15yo I swore it kicked like a mule, now it's a puppy dog.

3-9x is a great all around scope, I wouldn't settle for less than a VX3 in a leupold.

LadyK

Thanks for the response! I have definitly been looking at the 700s, i have faith in them.

I was originally considering a 280 but decided against it since its a bit less common and i dont want to have to deal with the limited ammunition for it.
I know a heavier gun is probably best(for recoil), but i was hoping to wiggle around that issue with a good pad. I really cant hike around in the woods with a gun thats heavier than i am(slight exaggeration, but you get the point). My 243 borders on too heavy for me.
I currently have Leupold binoculars and really love the quality, but im not sure ill quite have the budget for one of their good scopes. we'll have to see.
Thanks for the review of synthetic stocks, i wasnt sure if that was really the case with recoil or if it was just a myth.

homers brother

It might be important to know if you plan to hunt anything larger than deer?

Although you mention the .270, you'll almost by necessity be forced into a standard-length action, rather than the short-action your present .243 is more likely than not based upon. Not surprisingly, you can expect the extra capability that comes in a .270 to also bring with it slightly more weight. Have you considered at all the .260, .7mm-08, or .308 at all? Any of those will likely allow you to stick with a lighter action.

Though I'm also a fan of the Model 700s great and small, I've also become a fan of the Weatherby Vanguard and its near-clone, the Howa 1500. In spite of its long-action, my Vanguard is an easy carry. If you can consider the aforementioned short-action calibers, a great compromise might be the Remington Model 7.

Most of us do just fine with a 3-9x. I haven't found many redeeming qualities in any optic I've found for less than $200, but in the same breath I've had three mid-range Leupolds (VX-2s) taking beatings on anything from .243s to .300 Weatherbys for a few years now and still hold zero. You many not get the use out of a VX-3, Swaro, or Zeiss to justify the premium prices you'll pay. Just buy the best glass (and mounts) that you can afford and you'll do well.

bugsNbows

My wife's favorite (she is a small lady...about 105 lbs.) is a Ruger Compact in 7mm-08. She also has a .308 (in another Ruger), but it kicks a bit more. The Browning Micro's are also very nice. Scope-wise, there are MANY, MANY very good choices depending upon your type of hunting, preferences and, of course, budget. A 3-9 X 40 is a good all purpose selection. Bushnell Elites, Vortex Vipers, Sightron SII and the Big Sky models, Burris Fullfield, Redfield and Leupold (to name a few) have such offerings and are good choices.

LadyK

Thanks guys! I know its a tall order, im hoping to make it work somehow. I would love to be able to 'test drive' a few guns but its not always that easy, haha. My boyfriends grandpa has quite a few rifles i can shoot to get a more accurate idea of what hurts and what doesnt.

Has anyone shot a Tikka? The sales guy at a local place here was talking them up, and another man looking at guns said his son got one and loved it. It's just another brand i havent heard of, but i would like to at least examine all my options

NE Hunter

haven't handled or shot a Titka, but I know their lineage .... Titkas are made by Sako and are designed to be their entry level rifle I also vote for the 7mm-08 less recoil than the .270 and will get the job done ...unless Elk, Moose, and/or bears are on the list

salukipv1

tikka only is made in long action, so I'd get a long action cartridge for it, ie the 270 over the 7mm-08 for that reason. nothing wrong with either cartridge but again I wouldn't want a short action cartridge in a long action rifle of the tikka.