All Bar's are heavy when decked out with a scope, sling and ammo. Is they any way possible to do a little weight reduction on the BAR even 8 oz would help.

Lightweight glass stock? Hell the plastic finish must weigh a few ounces! Flute the barrel or cut it back.

[ 12-01-2003, 02:39: Message edited by: Recoil Rob ]

in a word, no....

the frame is alloy...

the action IS trimed down due to weight...

the stocks are rather light...

would a lighter scope help?

jeffe

Honey Comb the rear of the stock to a large degree but not so much that you deminish the strength against recoil. Depleat the stocks side walls along the barrel and free float as much as possible except at imediate front and action. Looks like hell but works great. roger

Scope mounts (bases and rings) can weigh as much as 8 ounces. Others can come in at 2-1/2 ounces. If you aren't using a Leupold, your scope can weigh another 4-8 ounces more than it should. Look at those areas, plus removing some material from the underside of the recoil pad. Best of luck.

That's what I like about my Win Model 100, it's shorter and lighter than a BAR or Remington 7400.

Shorten the stock 3-4 inches and take that much off the barrel. That should help

BAR heavy? My early .300 Win Mag BAR is about 1# LIGHTER than my friends pre-64 in .30-'06 when both are loaded to max capacity and have similar scopes. This was about 20 yrs. ago and I recall the dif. but not the weights.

In a word, no. At least not without sacrificing barrel length.

There's really not that much that can be removed from a BAR. The barrel contour is fairly trim already (at least it is in my .270, don't know about the magnum calibers). The wood could be a little trimmer, but then it doesn't weigh much to begin with and the little you could trim off wouldn't be worth the refinishing it would require. Jeff is mistaken about the receiver; it's steel. But there's nothing there to trim. The magazine hatch and trigger guard are aluminum, so there's no weight savings to be had there. What it all adds up to is that the design just requires the rifle to be a bit on the heavy side as compared to what you might do with a comparable caliber in another action type.

Actually, I just carried my .270 all weekend, and didn't find it much different in apparent weight that any of my other guns. I did notice that the combination of gas-actuated action and fairly beefy gun really soaks up recoil and made a series of quick shots at a group of running hogs both easy and accurate (meaning successful!)

[ 12-01-2003, 21:19: Message edited by: Stonecreek ]

I believe the new BAR in carbine form(20"bbl) has an alloy receiver with synthetic stock and is about a pound lighter than the steel receiver models. I handled one at BPS last year when my brother was looking for a new rifle and it was considerably lighter than my old 308 BAR.
Ralph