Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
one of us |
A lot of the weight is in the barrel. I saved 1.25 lbs. going from the Win. Mod 70 stainless .375 factory barrel to a Douglas #3. I would think it is going to be tough to shave that much out of a stock and/or action. | ||
|
one of us |
I was always told .100 was minimum per side. But, .125 per side is a more practical and realistic minimum. Ottmar turned me onto .150 taper per foot for barrel dims. I believe he credited Burgess with this barrel taper for lightweight, but accurate sporter dimension. This rapid taper profile has always been aesthetically attractive to me. | |||
|
One of Us |
Don, I don't get you... you reccomend the old-style Featherweight barrel (which on the 358 Win was ridiculously thin), then proceed to put-down the idea of a modified featherweight barrel which would be substantially beefier than what you previously reccomended... | |||
|
one of us |
Quote: Brad, I was answering this question. I am not really recommending it but answering the minimum wall thickness! My second comment was about Winchester Featherweight barrels. I have no comment on a special Featherweight contour to a heavier muzzle. There is more weight in a heavier barrel of course but those barrels are so thin that I would go to a cored stock and light action and put some meat on the barrel. Perhaps Brad's idea is the way to go to do it. One of the higher ups at Kimber likes the .358 Win cartridge so there is a chance that they may chamber for it someday. I don't think that I would buy one however as I like my 99's more and I have a M70 in that cartridge. | |||
|
one of us |
Here is a M70 Featherweight in .358 Win. Now that I got it out and looked at it I like it as is. | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia