Thread: Reaching out a bit rifle thoughts

Just back from a hunt where I was way undergunned for the country, had 300M in hand but needed 500M with some snot.

Looking through the "parts bin" I was wondering why so many of the bigger rigs have biggish weight barrels . . . What's the downside of a lightweight barrel in a rifle with stock ergonomics suitable for good long range shooting . .. I'd only ever fire two consecutive shots?

Aesthetics only I'd wager. Most of the dedicated LR stocks have biggish barrel channels and wide forends. pencil barrel would look weird.

Easier to shoot a heavy rifle accurately.

the downside is it is very snappy recoil, it becomes a bit hard to shoot
plus long needs to be thick so it is more rigid

I like lightweight rifles but man Im finding my 7mm08 kimber exponetially harder to shoot than my 243 that runs 80gr

Originally Posted by Tentman

Just back from a hunt where I was way undergunned for the country, had 300M in hand but needed 500M with some snot.

Looking through the "parts bin" I was wondering why so many of the bigger rigs have biggish weight barrels . . . What's the downside of a lightweight barrel in a rifle with stock ergonomics suitable for good long range shooting . .. I'd only ever fire two consecutive shots?

You don't need a bull barrel to shoot 500m. It's just a cool factor thing. You need a rifle that puts a cold bore and follow up shot into sub inch reliably. 3/4 inch is better. Very doable with a normal sporter weight barrel.

Recoil can be managed with a can, brake and/or good stock ergos.

An lr rig is always going to be heavier than the equivelent close range rig. Much of this is in the optic weight. Certainly don't need to be lugging a 12 lb rig around to shoot those distances though.

Any of your other big game rifles will do 500 easily.

It's much easier to shoot a heavy rifle accurately, especially with a decent recoiling cartridge.

It's not that you can't get a 7-8lb rifle to shoot well, but a 10-12lb rifle will sit on a bipod/pack a lot better and will be less susceptible to small movements you impart into the rifle.
There's a reason why target rifles weigh up 20lbs when carrying up a mountain isn't required.

I used to shoot a factory Tikka T3 in some longer range competitions and even did a little bit of F Class. The pencil thin barrel never proved to be a problem but I replaced that rifle with a Tikka CTR and it is far easier to shoot that accurately.

My guess is that most of these 'longer-range cartridges' are designed in rifles made for American long-range hunting.

From what I have seen the USA has quite a bit of shooting from hides, over cornfields, and down tracks... with very little walking to the hide (many times it seems you can drive close to the position).

The Remington Sendero is a good example of a heavier barreled magnum offered rifle designed for this American style of hunting ('Sendero' means 'path, trail, track')

You've litterly just described my 284win.

Pencil thin barrel and puts 2 rounds touching and 1 just under a inch away and is super light plus portable with the 20"barrel.

And the calibre is another topic in itself but yeah if it can do 2 rounds touching from a cold bore and the third not far off it'll do the trick.

Ask the deer

You know all of this @Tentman

Originally Posted by nor-west

Any of your other big game rifles will do 500 easily.

Haha yes both the 8x57 and 7x64 would reach that far and both shoot well enough. Both are more suited to classic scopes though, and the stock configurations of them are less than ideal

I'm not thinking lightweight particularly, for sure the right stock ergonomics and scope are priorities!

Originally Posted by Tentman

I'm not thinking lightweight particularly, for sure the right stock ergonomics and scope are priorities!

Ergos are a big one for me as well. I could shoot my 284 in 3/4 Moa at 600m reliably but struggled a bit to spot my shots when shooting in less than perfect positions. The standard tikka stocks just don't manage recoil impulse well.

The new rifle is in a carbon chassis so can be better dialed for fit and should help manage recoil impulse better.

Monticarlo and standard hunter stocks aren't ideal for prone shots imo.

Originally Posted by Brian

Easier to shoot a heavy rifle accurately.

Yes, heavy rifles are crap in every other aspect.

One fair compromise (which is not really a compromise) is a heavy barrel shorty.

500 metres with reliable accuracy requires a powerful cartridge throwing at least 140 grain bullets at 3000 fps, a longish barrel (24-26") to burn all the powder, medium contour to prevent barrel whip and give it enough weight to absorb some recoil, good quality scope and rings, and a lightweight bipod is useful. All-up weight will probably be 4.5-5 kg. Lighter rifles are available, of course, but lack the consistent reliability you need for long shots, plus they are less pleasant to shoot. Some suggested calibres are 6.5PRC, .270 Win, .280 Rem, 7mm Rem Mag .30/06, .300 Win Mag. The 6.5PRC and .280 are more difficult to find ammo for.