Printable View
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentman
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
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 idealQuote:
Originally Posted by nor-west
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentman
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.
Yes, heavy rifles are crap in every other aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian
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.
Foster I've got Vanguard 7mm mag and 300 win mag I don't use if you would like to try one.
A very useful summary of pretty much everything I was thinking (including weight). .... with the addition of a modern ergonomic stock in either wood laminate or decent synthetic.Quote:
Originally Posted by gundoc
A mighty offer, I'll give you a ring . ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian
You are of course right.... but its glorious wallowing in an agony of indecision!Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
I know exactly what You mean I wallow [ wallow is a great description] in these sorts questions at least once every week, it's marvellous ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentman
Put together a damn good 30 06 and call it done.
sorry bit late to the party but I am currrently finalising load development for a 30-06ai Mk v Weatherby ultralight it's got a fluted pencil thin barrel 24" long and weighs 3kg on the button scoped ready to go.
and yup even with the greystone titainium (radial) muzzle brake it's still quite lively to shoot running 178gn elm's at 2950ish fps, it's got more than enough snot out to much further than I'll likely ever need and looks to be a 1/2" 3 shot group shooter (pending final verification on Monday).
I'll probably change to a dedicated directional brake to help reduce recoil (well actually the recoil is managable but it certainly gets a fair whack of muzzle jump) it's not difficult to accurately shoot a light weight sharp recoiling rifle, it just takes practice.
I will remind you of that after you have scoped yourself shooting up hill on steep slope or in tall tussocks when balancing rifle on top of walking pole LOL.
haven't managed to yet......don't hold your breath waiting, I don't plan on getting scoped anytime soon ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
Quote:
Originally Posted by gundoc
20” barrels do just fine in the short cases even shorter with the 300wsm
yup my 300wsm is only 18" it's brilliant, wears a suppressor and is really well balance, it throws the same 178gn eldm's at just shy of 2800fps which is still plenty out to plenty far enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelton
it is a whole kilo heavier than the weatherby mk v ultralight at just over 4kg even with all the light weight stuff done to it.....but hey variety is the spice of life :yaeh am not durnk:
should add that the wsm load could be pushed harder....but it's just not necessary it has enough grunt and is probably the most accurate rifle I have ever owned.
as both you and myself have proven in last 12mths bud...its all acedemic if we dont point the plurry thing in right direction AKA completely miss what should have been easy shots...im my cases 30---75---100 yards and a few times more than that for yourself....
it is arguably easier to get yourself lined up in semi awkward position and shoot well with less than ideal rest using a heavier rifle....it moves less with recoil so has less chance to move off target.
Get on the weights mate, remember Brian considers 10 lbs light weight. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Tentman
Hah! Exactly. Everything is compared to a Bren and 10 spare mags.Quote:
Originally Posted by nor-west
Fifty something years ago a bloke I knew by the name of Brian Arnoff took a shot at a deer half a mile away with his 7x57 and killed it.
Was probably a reload as I still got two boxes of 173gr Kynoch soft points I got off him.
Just saying ............
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF90
And that was wayyy back before rangefinders. So if we take the lowest height of a two-story house to be 4.7m (15.5ft), then that's about how high Brian would have been aiming above that 800yd deer
(160gr Spitzer Accubond, BC-0.531, SD-0.283, 2650fps, zero @200yd).
Just put a round right on point through a deers boiler room at 450m with my 3.3kg 18” 260 this morning. My 20” 3.7kg 7mm SAUM does the same and my 3.6kg 21” rem mag before that never failed to accurately take deer out to 800 either. You don’t need a big heavy rifle to be accurate at extended hunting ranges.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelton
I recently had the chance to shoot a 300 win mag for the first time and see what all the fuss was about. I've got a 308, and both rifles are tikka T3X superlites with DPT cans (magnum can on the magnum gun)
To be bloody honest, for all that I've heard about magnums and recoil I thought it was quite tame. Another mates wood stocked sako 7mm08 without brake or suppressor on the other hand, boots me in the shoulder something fierce and I bloody hate it.
If I wanted to do all my hunting beyond 4-500m, I'd be having a 300 win mag (or similar) for sure. Suppressed or braked, pick your poison.
Yeah - said he got the shock of his life when it fell over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermitage
Probably stuck with me because its such an unlikely story, and the fact the bullet (whatever it was) still managed to do the job.
I do remember Laurie Kerr, one of the four NZ shooters who took the long range black powder trophy off the U.S. team a good few years back saying at one point their bullets were rising 80 feet above the line of sight - or maybe it was forty ......... ?
the hardest kick I have ever had was from an old 8x57 german mauser - the fact I was sitting with my back against an angle post did not help either - but I did nail the pig - plus rifle had been hanging in the cab of my dozer so likely had some crud down BarrellQuote:
Originally Posted by Jt89