If had to build arifle that you were required to go hunting in moutainous terrain(not extreme),as well as take to Africa for plains game out to 300yds,what weight rifle and cartridge would you choose?

I would go an CRF m70 in .280, 26" tube .525muzzle dia. Leupold 4.5-14x
Kevlar/carbon stock(lex webernick,Rifles Inc.)
all up weight around 7.25lbs
Pushing a 160gn FS,northfork,woodleigh,barnestsx at 2850fps

...it's a M-70 .30-06 (.280 is fine too) featherweight with a Leupold 3 X 9 Compact scope.

It's 22" barrel pushes a 180 grain A-Frame at 2,825'/sec and weighs well under 7.5 pounds.

My Savage 338 WM stainless synthetic, 24" barrel, 230 gr. FailSafes, compact Burris 2x7.

270, 280 or 30-06 would meet my needs... especially with today's bullets I really doubt there's much difference between any of them. I currently have an M70 30-06 Fwt that's a very reliable rifle and weigh's 8lb's 1 oz "ready to go." It's what I use in the mountains here and what I'd take if after African plains game.

However, I'm currently building a light 270 on, gasp, an M700. It's actually one of the old, original SS ADL Mtn Rifles made in 1993. Got it at a local pawn shop for $375. I doubt it's had more than a box of rounds through it. I found a used M700 Ti stock and traded into that for a bunch of loading junk (I was going to throw the stuff away) and $40. The real expense was to put a NULA/Timney trigger on it (locks the bolt with safety "on") which was $155. Im putting a Leupold FXII 6x36 on top ($260) in Talley Lwt rings ($40)... with sling and four rounds it goes 7lb's 3 oz's and cost a total of $870. I'll probably spen another $30 and shave another ounce by replacing the steel trigger guard with an alloy one.

It's a lot of fun to turn a cheap pawn shop find into a bonafied hunting rig!

I used the gun you described in AFrica and in the mountains.

I have a Mod 70 featherweight in a .280 Rem. I have taken 4 elk, one oryx (New Mexico White Sands Missle Range hunt), 11 whitetails, 1 mule deer on various hunts in the US.

I have taken kudu, springbok, vervet monkeys, steinbok, mountain reedbuck and impala in Africa with it.

I used 150 grain Nosler Partitions from Federal.

All were one shot kills except the kudu as I hit him high on the first shot.

Great calibre and great in the mountains.

I would not hesitate to use a .270, 30-06, or 7mm Mag. I just like the .280.

What are the specifics on getting a 26" long tubed M70 down to 7.25 lbs with a 4.5-14 scope on it? Is the stock going to have a blind magazine? In any case what do all the parts weigh?

I would not take the same gun to the mountains and then for plains game in Africa. The same one would do it of course but my Kimber 270 WSM will out range a 280 Rem and weigh less and that with a shorter 24" barrel. A 26" barrel is kind of long for the mountains.

My M70 in 7mm WSM weighs a pound more than my Kimber Montana. Part of it is the blind mag but the Kimber is the better gun for hunting and it's easy to get. No gunsmith involved.

Gotta agree that an M70 with a 26" tube and 4.5x14 would never come in "all up" (w/ sling and rounds) at 7lbs 4 oz's unless a REALLY light stock was used and the magazine is blind limiting mag capacity to 3 rounds.

A nine-pound 300 Win. Mag. on a Model 70 action with a McMillan stock and a 24" custom barrel is the formula I've used primarily for African plainsgame -- 73 seperate and distinct plainsgame species so far, plus lion, leopard, and buffalo -- for over ten years, plus I've used it for sheep and goat hunting, plus some very steep elk, moose, mule deer, Coues deer, grizzly, and black bear hunting for even longer than that.

I haven't suffered too much for carrying a nine-pound rifle up mountains from Alaska to Mexico, and it's killed whatever I've shot with it deader'n a doornail, from Oregon to Tanzania and there's more to come this year, next year, and beyond.

I dislike rifles that are too light. They're too hard to hold steady, and they kick too hard if you want to shoot a cartridge bigger than a 270 Win. I would never hunt with an '06 or 270 that weighed less than 8 lbs. complete, or a belted-magnum that weighed less than 8.5-9 lbs. complete, or even slightly more.

AD

I have a pre-64 M70 in .338 Win Mag. Has a Kreiger bbl, a McMillan stock, and a 3# trigger. Is fitted with a 3-9x Zeiss Conquest on Leupold QR mounts and NECG iron sights (with the flip up low light bead). Weights 8.5 lbs. Holds 2" goups at 300 yards

To my minds this is an ideal rifle for larger game when the land starts to get more vertical or the weather gets bad. Should work very well on plains game too.

quote:

( By Allen Day)...I dislike rifles that are too light. They're too hard to hold steady, and they kick too hard if you want to shoot a cartridge bigger than a 270 Win. I would never hunt with an '06 or 270 that weighed less than 8 lbs. complete, or a belted-magnum that weighed less than 8.5-9 lbs. complete, or even slightly more.

Allen, I agree totally on this point. However for me its the opposite.....if I carry around a nine pound gun all day I'm so tired that I can't bring it to my shoulder to fire it anyway.

I'm delighted with my M-70 featherweights

Just something to think about...don't know whether I agree with it or not...Townie Whelen used to say that a man who couldn't comfortably carry & use a rifle which weighed 1/20th of his body weight wasn't fit enough to take a walking hunt with ANY rifle...

rem 7600 synthetic phosphated 30-06 18.5" barrel...easy

Yeah, I'ld go w/ the .280 in a 24"bbl. rifle, M700 or M70. I have a beautiful, trim M70 that comes in @ 7 1/4# w/ a 23"bbl. I get 2850fps w/ 160grNP using 7828. It hasn't been to Africa, but I would feel comfortable hunting any of the plainsgame I have been after using this combo. A bit light for Eland & Zebra or a big bull elk, but it would do. For me, a magnum needs a heavier rifle, like closer to 9#, & that takes it out of the "mountain rifle" catagory, but would be fine for 95% of the African plainsgame hunting you would do.
Now, how can you get a M70 w/ a 26" bbl. & a 4.5x14 scope down to 7 1/4#? MIne wears a 3-9 compact in a light, trim wood stock, no recoil pad.

Alberta, I'd wager I'm in better shape than 99% of the guys who post on these forums and have humped heavy packs up and down mountains all my life yet I truly dislike a 9lb rifle. A rifle isn't carried like a backpack at the center of one's gravity, it's carried in awkward position's away from one's center of gravity. One pound makes a BIG difference in how a rifle carries and that pound translates into more than one pound weight carried in a backpack... just like the old axiom, "one pound on the feet is like five on the back." Personally, I'm going to take a smarter approach to my hunting than what was available in Townsend's time... remember, "if you're gonna be dumb you'd better be tough."

And, BTW, that's not to infer 9lb rifles are "dumb", it's just to make the point that we have more options available than were available to Whelen... there's a reason Lance Armstrong has the lightest bike available and why a cyclist in Whelen's time could never keep up with him...

I use two guns for African plainsgame, since eland are encluded I like my .338 Win Custom rifle with 210 Noslers and my pre 64 Win. M-70 in 300 H&H with 200 gr. Noslers...These two rifles work well on everything...I know a .270 or 30-06 will kill anything and have used them a lot early on, but today I like the reach and killing power of the 300 and 338, they have both proved their worth to me on plainsgame and elk....

I might add that to me a Mountain rifle should have some heft and a long tube, I cannot shoot a light featherweight rifle off hand after a run and off hand shot, I need that weight to settle it down...about 9 to 9.5 pounds suits me just fine and I can tote it all day if I must...

I don't have any idea what sort of shape I'm in compared to most guys on AR. All I know is, I've been tough enough to get up the mountain and back, and my rifles have been "smart" enough to get the job done, and I suspect they'll continue to be, and maybe I will be as well...........

AD

Ray,

Remember Jac Weller? He carried a Win. M70 Bull gun in 300 H&H in the Rockies. He liked a heavy gun.

I never liked a heavy big game rifle. I seem to carry them a lot and the shots are seldom. Even then one shot and the hunt is over. I had a pretty Browning 7mm RM with the stepped barrel and all. That gun must have gone well over eight pounds. I tried to get rid of it and finally a club member took it for a $100. Now it would worth more.

To each his own. I can shoot light rifles well and have done so on both game and at running deer matches.

I like Col. Whelan a lot but not his pattern rifle. When the M70 Featherweight came out in 1952 that was a sea change in rifles. To this day I have no standard M70's not because they are not nice but because they are too heavy. Now for cannons (magnums) I have some old M70's. If you really want a magnum then some weight is a good idea.

plains game and mountain rifle?

okay, i'll bite..

7.5-8.5# 376 steyr

210 gr barnes at 2800+

if you got light, go nose heavy, so you have a prayer of shooting it offhand.... seen too many light guns that are either balanced at thefront screw or rearward...

I just can't shoot a nose-light gun off hand...

jeffe

I was asked by Savage99 & fredje338 how I would get theM70 .280 26", 4.5-14x .to 7.25lbs:

LA m70 with all its metal weighs 2.85lb
Krieger#1 .560@24",.525@26" 2.50lb
Lex Webernick,or MPI Kevlar stock 0.90lb
Leupold 4.5-14x 0.85lb
Gentry liteweight steel rings,bases 0.15lb
TOTAL: 7.25lb

* the Kriegers#1 average blank weight is 2.5lbs as supplied with std.27" length,by time you chamber,profile,thread,trim to26",it should be close to 2.5lb
Another option is to build a SAm70 .284win bringing the weight to 7.0lb.
NO, the above weights do not include sling and ammo.
I addition,You can also replace the trigger guard with an alloy or Carbon fibre unit,eliminate the floorplate(blind magazine),scollap the left side of the reciever.
Lex Webernick stocks are those used on http://www.riflesinc.com
If necessary, I would carry a heavier rifle/calibre. 8lb/7mmRmag,8.5lb/300mag,9lb/.338win. but most the time the 280 would suffice.
I like Jeffosso idea of going nose heavy, I found that a great advantage in a 300weath.I had with light carbon stock,eased the pain of carry,but was great for offhand shots.

" a weight on a mans shoulders,is relative to what he carries in his mind."

Allen, I've carried heavy backpacks, I've carried light backpacks, I've carried heavy rifles I've carried light rifles... lighter is better.

Wow, didn't think anyone made a syn. stock under 1#. Does that include a recoil pad? Sounds sweet.

Brad-

Neither I nor Col. Whelen suggested you shouldn't be free to choose any weight rifle you want.

His comment was cited in reference to a poster who said that if he carried a "heavy" rifle all day, then he was too exhausted to shoot it at the end of the day.

The more I think about it, the more I am inclined to agree with Whelen. A person who can't carry 1/20th of their weight in a rifle all day and still use it effectively at day's end probably needs to take all the steps possible to optimize fitness before embarking on a walking hunt in the mountains or Africa. It would be a pity for all concerned if some companion ended up having to carry HIM out of the bush or the mountains.

The older I get, the more it seems that some (maybe most) of us more and more try to buy short cuts to success...we want rifles which are so accurate we don't have to learn how to shoot, so flat shooting we don't have to learn basic ballistics out to longer ranges (or how to hunt well enough to get close), so light we can carry them without effort or inconvenience, etc., etc., etc.

Honestly, the more I hear of it, the less I suspect we deserve hunting success.

That is not intended as a slam at anyone here on the forum. It's just an expression of generalized disappointment in the steadily eroding work ethic and understanding of the responsibilities of hunters which seems an inexorable part of our times.

Now, if anyone wants to flame me, have at it. It is not my intent to say we shouldn't work for better rifles and cartridges, whatever they entail. I just don't think we should become reliant on them when we don't need to. Those are my honest views, and now for a while I'm outta here. Best wishes to you all.

As things have progressed,rocks to clubs,to spears,to arrows,blowguns,gun development over the centuries,catapults to artillery, man has always experimented with weights,balances, velocities,projectiles,barrel/action materials,techonolgy advancments,to what best siuted him at the time for the task at hand.
The all have their limitation and versatility ,in relation to each of our own individual limitation and versatility.
Knowing whats best and available, or able to be developed,and the best way to use it is what is important. Human skill & ingenuity applies to both its operation as well as its development.

I admire best grade 98 mausers,doubles, etc. but that will not stop me using Titanium, kevlar, carbon,cryogenics,etc if it suits my purpose. If we are not open to progress then we would not have what we have today to admire.a 100 yrs from now they may be viewed like we do a 15th century bronze cannon.
BOTTOM LINE: ITS ALL GOOD!

quote:

Originally posted by allen day:
I dislike rifles that are too light. They're too hard to hold steady, and they kick too hard if you want to shoot a cartridge bigger than a 270 Win. I would never hunt with an '06 or 270 that weighed less than 8 lbs. complete, or a belted-magnum that weighed less than 8.5-9 lbs. complete, or even slightly more.

AD

I'll vote for this approach as well. To gain confidence in a rifle, I must be able to shoot it well on the range - normally from a standing position with a vertical rest, which is not too far from what real hunting positions are like. It is a LOT easier to shoot a rifle with with a decent weight, your scores will quickly prove this.

- mike

AB, you're turning this into some sort of social commentary.

All I'm saying I'd rather fly a 747 to London in 8 hrs safe and comfortable at 40,000 feet than a Constellation taking 23 hrs at 18,000 feet... call me a wimp, but technology can be a wonderful thing.

Great hunters always work hard and are in shape and that will never change. Great products make it safer, more comfortable and enjoyable tipping another tiny advantage to the hunter. If we followed the line of reasoning that only those of the past are "real hunters" we might as well be truly consistant and use flint tipped spears.

I absolutely agree that if you're exhausted carrying a 9lb rifle you need to get in shape... my point is that the 9lb rifle isn't a requirement for lack of choices. I'd also add that anyone serious about hunting the mountains in a hard fashion will find energy management is critical and weight savings are an important componant of energy management. Any altitude climber or long distance hiker can tell you that. A small reserve of energy at the end of a long day could very well make a break a hunt.


There obviously is a happy medium in rifle weights. Too light rifles kick obnoxiously and barrel-light rifles want to wander around on target. Precisely hitting the target is, at the end of the day, what carrying the rifle is all about. Me, I've gotten away from hard kicking magnums in heavy platforms to lighter rifles in standard chamberings. A 7.5 pound 30-06 is absolutely no problem to shoot. I wouldn't, however, want it 6.5 lb's and muzzle light.

Finally, it must be noted, as Jack O'Connor pointed out, Whelen really wasn't a very experienced big game hunter. O'Connor certainly hunted the mountains more and I think we all understand he liked lighter weapons for that work.

Brad, I certainly do believe that light is better for you, but it isn't for me. If a guy is only going to hunt in the mountains in the western U.S., I can see going extremely light, but not for all around "Mountain/African plains" use, as is the theme of this thread.

Back in 1988-90 I was hunting with Remington 700 KS 'Mountain' rifles quite a bit. For the most part these were very accurate and reliable rifles, and very light, but they were at their best in standard chamberings, not magnums. They were good rifles, but poorly balanced and again, these felt too light to hunt with.

I don't think it's wise to get too carried away with any one aspect of rifle construction for a general-use rifle. EVERYTHING is a compromise, including lightweight. If I have to compromise balance, ballistics, structural integrity, steadiness off-hand, chamberings, and shootability for the sake of lightness, I'll go heavier every time, and I don't consider 8.5-9 lbs. to be unmanagable in the mountains at all.

Particularly for a rifle that's going to see wide use. African hunting requires the ability to shoot quickly and steadily off-hand and from shooting sticks, as well as improptu field positions. Light rifles aren't as steady for this sort of use, and magnums just-plain shoot flatter and kill stuff better. And, as with this this season, I'll use the same rifle in Africa, as well NM, TX, and OR, with more than a few mountains along the way.

AD

Allen you're absolutely right, of course, the thread topic does mix two very different terrains with possibly different requirements. Having only been to Cairo where no hunting took place I've limited my comments to what I personally know (unlike a LOT on these threads)! I wouldn't doubt a lot of African hunting is very similar to what we do in mixed sage country however. Out in the open with long ranges I'll always take some barrel weight! It's an absolute fact that a 9lb rifle with a no. 3 tube will settle down better than the Rem Mtn rifle.

Ultimately it's just plain smart to stick with one rifle you know well and have confidence in no matter what its weight... that's obviously the case with your wonderful 300 WM and I'd never argue otherwise!

I still think Mel Forbe's NULA might be the ultimate compromise... I really "need" one of those rifles!

I've owned a couple of really light rifles. They were a joy to carry, but were "whippy" to shoulder and fire. I had an early Remington Mountain rifle that caused this problem for me. I've never really noticed the weight on a rifle as a problem, as long as it wasn't over 9.5 lbs. I don't want to carry a 10 lb rifle in the hills and won't. 8.5 to 9lbs. is actually just right for me.

Everything is a tradeoff. A really light rifle in a standard chambering is going to recoil like a magnum. A magnum with some weight to it isn't that bad to shoot.

There are plenty of ways to carry a rifle so as to distribute the weight around. I seldom have the sling attached to my rifles while hunting, they are usually in my daypack. But I still use my shoulder to carry the rifle at times.

I guess I just can't get all worked up over 16 ounces.

Brad, a NULA rifle would be super, and I've always wanted one in 284 Win. The stocks are really well-shaped, the action is really strong, and they shoot. I'd just make sure that Melvin thoroughly tested the rifle before he sent it to me. Based on what I've heard there have been occasional problems with detached bolt handles and feeding issues, but given enough lead-time before a hunt, these problems, if present, should be solvable.

One of my friends from NH was on a sheep hunt with me in Alaska, and he carries an Ultra-Light in 7mm Rem. Mag. as his standard rifle. He's taken two Grand Slams with it, and he's working on his THIRD! He loves that rifle.....

AD

I think a NULA in 284 would be the cat's meow. Mel Forbes is one smart guy and it's refreshing that he came along thinking new thought's. He came from the aerospace industry and brought a "fresh" set of eyes to rifles. His composites are, IMO, the finest made anywhere (the composite technology was borrowed from his aerospace experience). You're absolutely right though, I'd want to have really "lived" with one of his rifles before I took it on a "serious" hunt... course I feel that way about the 700 I have too!

BTW, I figured up what 1/20th my body weight is and now I know why I like my 8lb 30-06... 8lb's IS 1/20th my body weight ! Guess I need to put on a few pounds so I can carry heavier rifles LOL!

Right up front, I have never hunted Africa and probably never will, so my practicle knowledge on this subject is zip. I have hunted the plains of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and Idaho though and I think I have the idea, only bigger critters.

My question is to our more knowledgable posters is: Aren't these two different situataions between Mountains and Plains. Is the ideal rifle for one ideal for the other?

Concerning rifle wieght, I am not a fan of very light rifles, my preference is a heavier contour barrel. Not a bull or varmit barrel, a number 3 contour in 23" is ideal, 24" is OK, and 26" is to long but best length on magnums. That adds wieght no getting around it. In a 30-06, 270, or 280 a number 3 contour and 23" is ideal for me. Depending on the action and stock thats ends up being somewhere between 8 1/4 lbs to 9 lbs on the scale ready to go. Yes a #1 profile can save some wieght but I don't like skinny tubes on my rifles, and a #2 is as light as I am interested in.

Another item that contibutes to my heavier rifles is my action choices and stocks. Most of my actions are heavy, a pre 64 Model 70 is a pretty heavy action, most mausers are just a little lighter. Couple this with my preference for real wood and it isn't light.

Schromf, you CAN make a case for a specialized set of rifles for every hunting situation if you want to, and many guys do. Other guys like me are sick of so many rifles, and would rather rely on just a few that'll get the job done anywhere and everywhere. I'd rather use my 300 Win. Mag. for all of my hunting, along with my 416 Rem. Mag. for the stuff that can fight back. SIMPLE is GOOD!

One of my local friends has a 300 Weatherby that he's used to literally take every huntable species of the world's big game over a forty year period, with the exception of a few he's taken with a 458 Win. Mag. His 300 might get criticised for any number of reasons, yet it was good enough to legitimately earn him the Weatherby Award, and no, he's never complained that it's too heavy, or that the belted cases has caused him problems, or that it kicks too hard, etc.

Instead of collecting gear and fussing over having the exact and perfect rifle for every situation, he's gone out with one good all-around rifle and hunted the world. The time and money he's saved on rifles he's spent on hunting.

There's got to be a lesson there somewhere, at least there has been for me..........

AD

Allen,

You are of course correct, and spot on, and I readily admit I own more rifles than I need to hunt.

For me covering all the game species I will ever hunt, four rifles covers it all:

1. 22 LR bolt action rifle with scope
2. 7x57 an old friend, and Ray rightfully chastised me for even considering relegating it to non hunting status.
3. One of my 30 mags either my 1909 Argentine or my FN
4. My 375 H&H

#2 and 3 really could be boiled down to one rifle, but for deer and black bear hunting I really don't need the mag, and I like the 7x57 especially on running and offhand shots.

The only addition I would possibly make is if I hunted furbearers more I would look to a lighter caliber, with a heavier barrel. But I don't do enough of that hunting anymore to justify a purchase.

I'd be torn between a 30-06 with 165-180 gr. bullets, with medium weight and length barrel. Or my Dumoulin 338 Win, Mannlicher stocked with 21.5" barrel shooting 215-250 gr. loads. Either one would do the job with the right bullet, and I can get ammo just about anywhere.

I agree with Ray on both posts! We see eye-to-eye on the calibers and weight.

Until 27 of July my answer was on the .270/7mm/.30 calibers.
On that date I tested my 9.3x62 rifle, zeroed at 200 maters, at 300 meters and also at 400 meters.
At 300 meters a 286 grains Nosler Partition bullet has a fall of 30cm ans 80cm at 400 meters.
I made the same test at the range using a 9.3x62 rifle of a friend of mine, barrell lenght 50 cm, mine is 55, well the difference has been the same.

I choose 9.3x62

Steve has discovered what I did a few years ago. The 9.3 is a great all around round. I have taken game in the US and Africa (Pronghorn to Eland) from 35 yards to over 275 yards with the same bullet/cartridge combination. Makes things simple.

Now that does not mean that I'll give up my other rifles.

Confidence, fit, and accuracy are more important in my book that weight. As a famous back pack hunter once said, 6-24 ounces off your rifle won't efect the quality of your hunt nearly as taking 10-20 pounds off your a_ _.

I agree. Good luck

Mike

I'm working on having a 280 Rem built on a Remington Titanium action which will go into a McMillan stock. I also have a Winchester CRF as a backup