The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting heavy vs. lightGo | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| heavy vs. light | Login/Join |
one of us |
I don't like lightweight hunting rifles, (under 7 pounds). PERHAPS a backpacking, mountain climbing, thin-air sheep hunter can justify it, but I certainly can't for 99.99% of my hunting. Heavier rifles are more shooter friendly; they hold steadier and reduce felt recoil. Most of us could accomplish more by skipping the all-you-can eat buffet the week before leaving on our hunting trip. ------------------ | ||
|
one of us |
quote: Principially you�re right, but I would claim that balance is superior to weight. However, it�s easier for the riflemaker to make a well balanced rifle if he puts enough weight at the muzzle - and that makes the entire gun heavier. By shooting freehand you�ll estimate a well balanced gun. Take a bunch of rifles to the range for a test. Not the heaviest, not the lightest, not that one with the brightest scope but the most well balanced rifle will do best at freehand. If I compare two of my own guns, a M98 9,3x57 and a HVA/Krico .222R, I put five shots in a 5 inch circle with the M98 at 80 yards freehand. With the HVA/Krico I can hardly hit a newspaper at that distance. The M98 is perfectly balanced and rather slim and light, and a bit muzzle heavy. The .222 is balanced backwards with light barrel and heavy stock - anti-balanced, I�d say. I have sold that iron pipe with a wooden block - and bought another .222 R from BRNO. Balance is indeed superior to weight, and it�s useless with a light gun without balance - and the same with a heavy one. Fritz [This message has been edited by Fritz Kraut (edited 10-05-2001).] | |||
|
| one of us |
I agree with both. I do not like lightweight hunting rifles. If a Remington 700 BDL is kicking your butt, you need to start hitting the weight room. I also agree that a rifle's balance is important to good shooting. | |||
|
Moderator |
As Fritz said, generally speaking nothing is more important for field shooting than rifle balance. That said, however, I have a lightweight rifle for sheep hunting. It happens to be fairly well balanced, but to me that is less important on a sheep hunt than weight. On a 14 day backpacking sheep hunt, I go so far as to resort to cutting tags off my tent and sleeping bag, shortening straps and shoe laces, carrying a titanium cook pot instead of steel, eating nothing but freeze dried food, cutting the handle off my toothbrush, etc, etc. They say 1 pound in your hand is worth 10 pounds on your back by the end of a long day, and I believe it. I go into these hunts in pretty darn good physical condition, so hitting the gym has already been taken care of. Anyone that thinks that one pound of rifle weight won't make much difference on long, mountain climbing hunt, really ought to try it (ie. use a light rifle once to see the difference). The rest of my rifles are on the heavy end, as they suit a larger range of field shooting positions applicable in their application. Balance is especially critical when offhand shots may be necessary. This is seldom the case in sheep hunting however. To keep things in perspective though, very few people are "radical" back-packing hunters. I would guest that in 99% of real life hunting situations, a well balanced, mid-weight rifle (8.5 lbs-ish) would be ideal. FWIW, Canuck [This message has been edited by Canuck (edited 10-06-2001).] | |||
|
| one of us |
Fritz, your comment on "a bit muzzle heavy" is the key. That makes for steady holding. Every rifle I've ever seen designed for position target shooting was very muzzle heavy for that reason, (40X Remington, 52 & 70 Winchester Target models, European target rifles, etc) Why these rifles are generally not practical for hunting, the pricipal applies for hunting rifles as well. An extra pound of two overall, particular with a bit of it being forward, makes it easier to hold steady. ------------------ | |||
|
| <Zeke> |
Since I only have two rifles, this issue was easy to for me figure out. Both of my rifle are relatively light. My 270 with its synthetic stock, cheap light scope and paper thin barrel weighs in at just over 7lbs. The rifle is light, but with the 3-9x scope, balance is awkward at best and even with a sling it is not comfortable to carry over long hikes. My other rifle is a Savage 99. It weighs about a half pound less, has a longer barrel and is perfectly balanced. With no scope or anything sticking out. This rifle is perfect to pack around all day, with or without a sling. I consider both of my rifles to be pretty good for what they are designed to do. But if I must go tromping through the shrubs or do any kind of hiking, the Savage 99 by virtue of its better balance and ease of handling wins every time. Later | ||
|
| <Loren> |
I have a Ruger MkII stainless, and it's too light. Any ideas how to add a little weight and improve balance at the same time? I've added a nice big scope and a sling. | ||
|
| one of us |
I like heavy rifles and long barrels except for hunting horseback.. Fwt. rifles don't hold steady when I'm outta breath from running... ------------------ | |||
|
| <sure-shot> |
You guys have not hunted trophy muleys much(except for Ray). The kind of hunt where you hold out for a monster buck, hiking up or down steep rocky terrain for an hour or two in the dark every morning to be in place. Too steep for a horse(unless there is a trail which in that case means there is probably hunting pressure) and the air is thin. I hunt like this for a few weeks every year in which a light rifle pays off. I don't tire as easy with an 8lb or lighter rifle, you can learn to shoot a lite rifle well just practice. I'm leaving in a few days for a hunt where we hike in 5 mi, camp and hunt another 5mi into the wilderness. You can't take a horse - too much granite and ice this time of the year. I'll be packing my Rem Model 7 which weighs under 7lbs W/scope. A rifle becomes a hindrance after you down game and have to pack out boned meat. sure-shot [This message has been edited by sure-shot (edited 10-06-2001).] | ||
|
| <allen day> |
I don't care for rifles that at too light, either. I've carried nine-pound rifles up sheep, elk, goat, and bear mountians on at least a few occasions, and it hasn't killed me as of yet. I agree with Fritz's comments about rifle balance. AD | ||
|
One of Us |
My opinion on this can be summed up it two words, re-coil... I dont see anything wrong with a lightweight rifle if its a light load as well although most of my rifles are NOT lightweight. For a big magnum its not a good idea to opt for a featherweight IMHO. Go ahead and call me a whimp but when the others are moaning Ill still be blazing. Gun weight on the trail seems rather insignificant to me. Im usualy more hampered by multi layered clothes. A good sling does wonders to lighten a load. For a sheep hunt or something of that nature I could appreciate the need though. Those having problems steadying a lightweight rifle might do well in a weightroom as well.. [This message has been edited by Wstrnhuntr (edited 10-06-2001).] | |||
|
| <ssleefl> |
"If a Remington 700 BDL is kicking your butt, you need to start hitting the weight room. " Another classic accuratereloading moment by Mr. Lyons. Thanks for the smile. ------------------ Most divorces are based on disagreements over small matters, so are most murders. | ||
|
| <500 AHR> |
I like heavy rifles to, but they must be properly balanced to shoot accurately from the off hand position. I must be a freak or something though as I deplore a muzzle heavy rifle. I prefer a rifle to be slightly butt heavy. That way is falls into my shoulder and is "anchored" there while I just move more left hand around to position and lock the muzzle. I find that benchrest and target rifles are almost always extremely muzzle heavy due to their bull barrels. Try shooting one of these animals off handed without shaking like a leaf in a huricane. With regard to running around 8000 - 11000 ft like a mountain goat I find that the weight of the rifle doesn't matter that much because at that altitude if I were naked and running I would be puking in 1/4 mile anyway. To that end I just pace myself and take it easier than I would down at my accustomed 1500' elevation and I do OK regardless of rifle weight. If however, you are living off the land and carrying all your gear then everything needs to be as light as possible. Todd E | ||
|
| one of us |
I have a Sako L61 that was originally 30.06 but was rechambered for 308 Norma. I got it froma friend who has USED it for elk hunting for 25yrs. Every bit of weight was drilled out of this rifle until it weighs about 7# with scope. He said every ounce was a chore at 10000 ft. Well, shooting it is surely a chore. This thing kicks worse than a 458 Lott. At least it hurts worse. I keep asking myself why I still have it but I do. To make matters worse it's not particularly accurate- 1 1/2- 2 1/4 " is about all it will do. As Whelan would say,"It's not interesting." | |||
|
| one of us |
I like a rifle that balances between the hands. Roughly at the front guard screw. I don't like long rifles and don't like real light rifles. A 7.5 pounder in a light caliber like my 6.5x55 is fine. My 35 whelen weighs 8 3/4 lb as does my 308 Norma. I wouldn't want either one any lighter. Regards, Bill. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I guess that one might consider a caliber to weight ratio as being part of a well ballanced gun. | |||
|
one of us |
Stop smoking and carry a heavier, well balanced rifle. You and the game will be better off for it.  | |||
|
| one of us |
quote: Which stock do you have? If you have that one of laminate, you could cut away wood from the inside of the stock. You just take the buttplate away and use a 1" wood drill to bore away. If you got the plastic or boring isn�t enough, you could perhaps have a gunsmith to turn a barrel weight to attach at the muzzle. The form could be as a muzzlebrake, but without the ports. Such barrel weights are used om air guns, and I don�t think that they would disturb the accuracy. Perhaps someone else know a bit more about that? Fritz [This message has been edited by Fritz Kraut (edited 10-08-2001).] | |||
|
| <RAO> |
The need of light or heavy rifle depends upon the game and country you are hunting. I think no rifle shall be butt heavy, unless it is attached to a tripod maybe. Good balance ,to my mind,means that rifle be slightly muzzle heavy. Not only it will be good for stalking, but also very helpful for running shots. For mountain hunting I like light weight rifle with muzzle heaviness. Most often scope plays important role to im-balance any rifle by putting to much weight to rear. Modern rifle was not designed to mount scope over action,and even by installing one there is no place to grip and properly carry it,single handedly. And yes,scout scope concept is excellent. Anyone who has handaled Rigby stalking rifle may know very well, that how good rifles should balance. | ||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
