I have a new Remington 700 SS BDL in .338 Win Mag, I shot it for the first time yesterday and I am pleased with the initial results and I'm sure accuracy will improve as I tweak the handloads.

I have a Leupold Vari-X III 2.5-8 mounted on Warne Maxima bases and Burris Signature Zee rings and this brings the rifle's weight to about 8.5 Lbs.

The stock is the plastic injection molded factory stock and it weighs a little over 2 lbs. I recently purchased a 10 year old Brown Precision that weighs about 1.5 lbs. So when I replace the stock this will reduce about a .5 lb.

The rifle feels muzzle heavy when it hangs in my shoulder, I am thinking about cutting the barrel back to 23" from the 24" that it is presently. I know several folks here like 22" but I am leery about chopping 2" off, once it's gone it can't grow back. Will the 1" barrel length reduction be enough to improve the way the rifle hangs? And how much weight will that reduce?

Is there anything else that I could do to get some weight off this rifle? That doesn't put me out the cost of having the rifle re-barreled to a lighter contour?

Thanks.

C-ROY

C-Roy---

Steel weighs about .29 lbs per cubic inch. You can calculate the weight of that inch of barrel and add that much weight to the butt and that will show you the balance after the barrel is cut.

Many times the best way to get a light *feeling* rifle is to add weight in order to balance it better.

The best way to lighten a rifle is to lighten the barrel.

Jack's right. Consider turning the barrel down to a thinner contour.

George

HI,

I just order a stock from Mcmillan, for a 416 rigby but instead of getting a 70 model barrel I am going to get a contour number 5 douglas. I was informed that it will help in reducing the weight of the rifle. Thanks,Kev

Another vote for turning down the barrel. The Reminton barrel features a very moderate taper which puts too much weight toward the muzzle. Increasing the taper to reduce muzzle diameter by about .050 will make a dramatic difference in the way the rifle feels. I like the rifle to balance at or near the front guard screw and for most of the weight to be between the hands.
One can flute barrels but I hate fluted barrels. I hate fluting them and hate looking at them afterwards. Takes a bit of fluting to equal a .050 diameter reduction. Regards, Bill.

Turning the barrel on a lathe, as simple as it may be, seems a little risky to me. Granted, putting the barrel on the lathe and taking it slow and careful, and only removing 5 hundreths of an inch from the contour seems simple, and it would be the best way to reduce muzzle-end weight. I would start the reduction from around where the back sight goes. I am not a gunsmith and have no extensive knowledge in the gunsmithing field, but the area around the rear sight just seems like a suitable starting place to reduce weight. I would want as much steel around the chamber as possible, and plus having more weight around the chamber of the barrel will bring the center of balance toward, well, the center of the rifle. The new stock should help too. And while its sitting there on the lathe, you might as well add a nice crown to the barrel.

I'd peel that scope off and replace it w/ a quality fixed 2.5x or 4x. That would certainly save more weight than chopping off 2" of barrel. It also has the advantage of being easily reversible and if you have such a scope handy or could borrow one, you can try it to see if you like it for nothing.

But I am both cheap and dislike variable scopes, especially on hard recoiling rifles.

Each year I run into an elk hunter who began in you shoes. It usually begins with a fine 300 or 338 magnum. But the guy wants lighter so he buys the synthetic stock and chops the barrel down to 22 inches. He's happy with the weight but when he shoots the thing it's recoil is quite unplesant. But that's an easy fix with a muzzle break or magna-porting, so that is done next. In the end the hunter is carrying a rifle with a muzzle blast that's more lethal than the bullet! Seriously though, the difference between the rifle just described and a plain-jane 3006 is purely conversational.

Moral of the story: A light rifle is a slippery slope, an example in the law of diminishing returns.

The first advise given for balance is quite right. A well balanced rifle feels about 15% lighter than an unbalanced one of the same weight. IMHO. If you gun is muzzleheavy, buy an elastic cartridge holder for the stock and fill it up. Maybe add a recoil reducer in the stock (~8 to 11oz) and kill two birds with one stone. Another weight saver would be to go to a fixed power scope. Fluting is a costly remedy. FWIW

PS. My "mountain rifle" weighs 9.75lbs fully loaded. Guys that heft it never comment on it weight, rather, always compliment it's balance. The best kept secret about a weighty, well balanced rifle is the ease, stability, and accuracy of shots afield.

How much weight can one remove if they have there barrel fluted ??, or would it be easier to have it turned to smaller profile ?? what is the price of doing either of these procedures $$

PC,

Quite a bit! I've seen and handled some barrels fluted so severly they didn't feel like steel! Quite surprising I must say, but like many things, it depends. Bore diameter, barrle contour, flute, depths and widths and legenths.... If you have fluting done and done right, it will cost you. I laugh at some factory fluted barrles; the flutes are often not even close to straight!

Anyway, the real advantage of fluting is not to remove weight for the sake of removing weight. It is to imporve the overall balance and handling of a gun.

A balanced 10lb rifle carries easier than an unbalanced 5lb gun! Not to mention, it will be easier to shoot offhand, steadier in all situations, and recoil will be much less. I've never been a fan of light guns, especially as the bore gets bigger.

I have two rifles; one is a 450 Ackley CZ 550 and the other is a 458 Lott Ruger No 1. Both rifles weight about the same at around 9.5 lb. However, the CZ feels much lighter than the No 1 because the center of gravity of the CZ is toward the back while the center of gravity of the No 1 is concentrated up front. Based on this scenerio, I have to conclude that by moving the center of gravity of the rifle toward the back, it would give a lighter and well balanced feel regardless of the total mass. Have fun.

Don't cut that barrel shorter, you need the 24" to get the real performance. Either turndown the barrel or flute it.

I'd put a compact Leupold 3-9x (9 0z) in aluminum rings and base. That's 1/4 lb. gone right there. IMO durability wouldn't be an issue.

I vote for keeping some weight on the muzzle. It will help with the shot- which is the purpose of the rifle in the first place.

This came up in another forum and I pointed out that with the lighter stock it will be 8 lbs which is plenty light enough for that kicker.

I agree that balance affects the feel of a rifle and muzzle heavy was in style in the days of the good Col. Townsend Whelan with his Springfield weight 24" barrels but once I got a Featherweight I learned that a well balanced eight pound rifle is just right.

I would not spend money on a Remington for barrel work. Just leave it as is with the new stock. As pointed out a lighter scope with Weaver mounts would save more weight and improve the balance a little.

Just carry it and practice with it. I would never put a muzzle brake on a hunting rifle.

I have the same rifle...a Remingtom 700 BDLSS in 338. I just recently put the rifle in a High Tech synthetic stock. I bought it unfinished from banersrifle. Price is pretty reasonable for an unfinished stock (I had then add the butt pad). Anyway, the rifle balances much better than with the factory stock. The High tech stock is considerable lighter, but the weight is towards the butt. I compared it to the factory stock which has much more weight up in the forarm. With a decelerator pad it has less felt recoil than it did before.

I plan on getting another High Tech stock for my 308. This stock and a light scope should turn it into a great light weight mountain rifle.