A std98 30/06 keeps ringing my bell, however ever I do have a secret to bear, a love affair with the long tall slender shouldered lady of the African plain, the 300H&H, the paradox is I dont like excessive weight.
Question:
What weight is it possible to get a walnut stocked 300H&H magnum mauser down too?
We can use a No:1 barrel(2.5lb), thats a start....
How much will a slimmed walnut stock weigh?

I would like to achieve around 8 3/4lb or less scoped, I mite be just dreaming ?

Thought you were working on a cost is no limit miniture mauser action.....

8.75# is fairly easy, without "weird" lightening cuts...

start with a featherweight (not #1) and save 6 or more oz.

use american black walnut.. it'll look nice, and as a whole, weighs less than english, bastogne, or highly minerialed anything...

22" barrel... theres another oz or 2

fixed power scope .. theres 3-6oz

plastic or aluminum follower

alum bases, and perhaps rings...

jeffe

Jeffosso,

that minature 98 is still on the backburner while I find interested parties.
In regard to the .300H&H above,and as with any 98, I would like to keep it "best grade", so nothing other than all steel components and english or circassian walnut, sorry I was not clearer.

k,
if you want "Best" grade parts, you'll not make your weight.

jeffe

I have the same love affair with the 300 H&H, but I think it is more gun than I typically need on black-tailed deer at 250 yards, pigs within 200 yards, and black bears within 50 yards.

I have been designing what my perfect rifle would be around a 6.5mm SE, but recently have been considering the Montana 1999 Magnum action in 300 H&H.

Is this a stupid idea? I am a big guy at more than 6'8" and 250 pounds. A long rifle with a resonable weight would be okay.

While I wouldn't pick a 1999 action to build any rifle, your 9 inches taller than me and you weigh 20 pounds more. A ten pound rifle to you would be the same as a 8 pound rifle to me.

Build whatever you want.

you will have a hard time making a rifle tha fits you out of wood that doesn't weigh close to 10 pounds scoped.

I have a good friend of mine that is 6'6 and he hates recoil, to him the 30-06 is the upper end of his tolerance, though he hasn't been seriously shooting for more than a few years.

I have thought about building a big mag mauser 300 H&H rifle with a 26 inch barrel, 4-14 Swarovski 30mm, express sights, drop mag, monte carlo stock, just like the mag-mausers Hollands make, but for $4000 tops instead of $50K.

D99

You read my mind in a lot of ways!

What do you not like about the Montana 1999? This might help me not make a poor decision? My understanding is that is mimics most of the M70 Win features?

Recoil does not bother me. I have been shooting a 505 Gibbs lately during load development and I have found it to be a lot, but rotate shoots a little to give a break and it is all good. The 721 Remington i used on elk was a 300 H&H and I loved it. I found it much lighter in recoil than the 338 Win Mag I currently have.

Elmer Kieth used to tell everyone that recoil didn't affect him as their wasn't much of him to move around.

I have heard this from several small statured people and was wondering if anyone else had any thoughts on it.

I personally agree. I am 5'11 and I weigh 230ish. The 416 and 375 are shootable, but not ridiculously so. The 30-06 works very well for me, and I can shoot the 338 without much fanfare.

How do you guys feel about recoil absorption compared to size?

Anyway, I forgot to add, that really big guns really start to take their toll. Especially if they are really light. I guess that's why I hate light rifles, muzzle break or not.

I don't beleive muzzle breaks work as well as people think they do. I hate the shock concussion more than I hate the pain on my shoulder.

Actually, I am really big on the average standards. I do not find recoil to be bad at any level, but I do not try and stop it either. I hold the rifle properly and let it recoil into me. Does that make sense? I have watch people brace themselves to stop the recoil and they get pounded!

D99--What part of the 1999 action do you not like?

They could have made a M98 instead of a M70 clone.

I don't like clones of things I never liked in the first place.

But you really shouldn't listen to my advice, I shoot Blasers, Steyrs, Sakos, M700s, M98s, and like non 98 Mausers very much like the 66, 99, and Mauser 96 (not the swede, the straight pull one).

I just think they are kind of rough, and for similar money you could get a FN Mauser, a Pre-64 M70, or a new M70 classic, and then make it right.

Hey, I prefer my Mannlicher Scho actions, but try finding a good one that you dont feel guilty about stripping the wood from.

Gotcha, that would be a fine rifle as well. Custom Man-Scho, now your talking!

Your wanting the best of both worlds.If you cut down the weight,then you will have more bell ringing for sure,especially in a H&H compared to and 06. If your gun is lighter you will definately notice more recoil! van

I think in a lot of ways these actions are misunderstood. There isnt a true short action that is designed strictly for the 308 Win family (e.g. 243, 260, 7-08, 308, 358, etc), nor is there a tue action for the 30'06 family (25'06, 270, 280, 30'06, 35 whelen, etc). The SHORT action is desinged for the Mauser intermediates such as the 6.5 SE, the 7X57. The LONG action is actually designed to handle the long toms like the 300 H&H and the 375 H&H. So yeah, they are heavier than a standard M700, or a short action M70, but they are different rifle actions. I want an action that can handle original loads in the 6.5 SE and 6.5 MS. This is over 3 inches and cannot be handled in the M70 short actions. If you use a regualr 30'06 action then you have a lot of extra room in the box. If you choose to shorten a pre-64 M70 you run into a lot of expenses.

These actions are not perfect for every caliber but they are for the two I am currently looking at 6.6X55 SE and 300 H&H Magnum.