A bit of common sense on rifle weight??

[D Lee]

Over the years, a few have vehemently disagreed with my posts. I expected that before pressing the Post button. With merit on both sides of the discussion - we'll just agree to disagree.

Once again, I know my opinion here will agree with a few, but probably not the many. So, here goes.....

My humble / experienced opinion, FWIW: Unquestionably and rightfully so, hunts in very high elevations, every ounce matters in the total gear / rifle weight being carried.

For the other 90% of hunting situations...a few points to consider:

1. Another pound or three in the rifle will noticeably reduce "felt" recoil - and especially with 7 Rem Mag, 30-06, 300 Win mag and similar cartridges in light weight rifles often carried into upper altitudes. A joy to carry? Absolutely. To shoot "accurately?"

2. Proven countless times - not always mind you - extra weight in a rifle typically improves both "rifle and shooter" accuracy. Referring to the countless words written and spoken to the critical importance of bullet "placement."

3. Spoken from long experience - taking a serious approach to getting in shape minimizes the work it takes to haul stuff into / up / and all over the mountains. Those out of shape who find themselves in the middle of that - quickly learn the lesson. For some, reducing gear / rifle weight is the answer. Likely so. See # 1 and # 2 above. If you can handle that and maintain your accuracy - good on you. Me personally - I've always felt getting in shape to "comfortably" carry a heavier rifle - which I do - always took priority - maintaining my accuracy when it came time to pull the trigger. YMMV.

JM2CW.

Cheers.

 

[SloppyJ]

I'm not sweating a pound or maybe even two if the rifle hammers. I spend enough time in the gym to carry it along. For a hunt I know that would be a death march though, I'd be going for a lighter one.

 

[hereinaz]

I haven’t done much long walk or high altitude stuff, but I am still building a lighter smaller rifle cause my short walks are easier, lol.

Losing weight is harder, but I have a LOT of weight to cut there. I love my carbs and sugars… Sucks that my body changed after 45 and I quit burning whatever I put into it.

 

[Samson7x]

This is RS, land of the 223 and 6mm which takes care of numbers 1 and 2 so don't fret.

 

[dieselchessy]

I like 7.75# to 9.25# or so for my hunting rigs. With 8 to 9# being the sweet spot. I have lighter and heavier. Lighter is nice to carry, heavier is more stable when shooting field positions.

Ive gone down near 5# and up past 10#.
Ive carried 9# rifles on many backpack hunts. I survived.
Carrying light sub 7# guns taught me I don't shoot them that well when it matters.

 

[06 SB]

I like my hunting rifles in the 6 to 7.5 pound range. Even when I was in the best of shape, I preferred lighter rifles for hunting. Some of the factory ultralight rifles were not done right because the balance was off and/or poor stock design to note the biggest flaws. Light done right has always been accurate for me. My first venture down this path started with 7mm08 I had built. Initially, it was down around 5pounds but the rifle was tail heavy and more difficult to shoot. I swapped to a slightly heavier scope and bedded a bit lead shot in the barrel channel. It now weighs 6 pounds all up and ready to shoot and is awesome. I learned a lot and was a bit more selective about components. I built it sister shortly there after and it was perfect. I just upped the barrel contour and used the same scope. It is great from the start. With the addition of suppressors in the build, it changes a lot of things. I feel like I am starting the process all over again.

 

[Parkerpusher]

I just want a rifle to shoot good, feel good and look good… In that order. Weight is something I check afterwards just for the sake of knowing. Seems like anything for me that checks those 3 boxes always ends up in the 8.75 - 10 lb window. All personal preference. I’ve got buddies that like them heavier and a few that go for lighter.

 

[rclouse79]

As far as rifles I agree with you. I bought the standard aluminum XLR chassis for the new 25-06 I am building. It is already light recoiling, but a little extra mass will help. I may buy the magnesium version for the 223 I plan to put together since recoil won't be a factor.

 

[Macintosh]

Theres nothing at all controversial in this post.
Heavier rifles reduce recoil—that is an easily proven fact. No debate.
Heavier rifles are easier to shoot accurately—again, absolutely true.
Getting in shape physically will help you, and will likely make more of a difference than a bit of rifle weight will—again, I dont think there’s any debate here.

Sounded like you came for an argument, but you have failed to post anything worthy of arguing with. Try to do better next time.

 

[huntnful]

I tell this to anyone that’ll listen lol.

I’ll take a 10lb rifle over a 7lb rifle any day of the week. Regardless of cartridge.

I said it on the Rokcast. The only benefit to an ultralight rifle is carrying it. Everything else about it is a drawback.

I think some decent guidelines are

9lb - 6.5 and below
10lb - 7mm
11lb - 30 cal
12lb - 338

And that’s with a muzzle device of some sort and shooting the heavy for caliber bullets at a decent speed

 

[D Lee]

Macintosh,

Thank you for your insightful comments. Having done that multiple times already, shouldn't be too hard to get back on the argumentative path.

 

[StupidLightweight]

I love pushing ultralight boundaries as much as anyone, but the drawbacks are real. Obviously, a million variables exist, but if punching tags is the goal, lightweight guns are often a liability. Total weight in the 7- to 9-pound range merges shootability with easy carry. Go below that, and they're trickier to shoot. Go above that, and they become harder to pack.

On the once-in-a-lifetime Idaho sheep hunt I hope to someday draw, I'd use a 10-pound rifle. Carrying it would suck, but if/when an opportunity occurred, I could shoot to the best of my abilities.

 

[Parkerpusher]

I love pushing ultralight boundaries as much as anyone, but the drawbacks are real. Obviously, a million variables exist, but if punching tags is the goal, lightweight guns are often a liability. Total weight in the 7- to 9-pound range merges shootability with easy carry. Go below that, and they're trickier to shoot. Go above that, and they become harder to pack.

On the once-in-a-lifetime Idaho sheep hunt I hope to someday draw, I'd use a 10-pound rifle. Carrying it would suck, but if/when an opportunity occurred, I could shoot to the best of my abilities.

It’s really just preference which side of this scale somebody leans towards. My last backpack hunt my rig weighed 9.5 and I didn’t even give it any thought…. I just knew it was back there on the pack ready to go when the moment came. My body weight fluctuates 5 lbs week to week and I’m not thinking about it or bitching when I’m headed uphill…. Too busy focused on the top

 

[pacoalcracker]

You carry the rifle 99.99% of the time and the shot takes 15 seconds. It's not the rifles weight and it isn't the shooters weight that is going to cause a hit or miss. It's going to be the shooters abilities. The shooter needs to practice and be prepped for whatever shot they are likely going to get. Forget the rifles weight...work on your abilities.

 

[TaperPin]

It has to be extra accurate if it’s heavy. I chuckled at a kid packing a varmint weight 25-06 up a mountain that was so inaccurate, the barrel should have been thrown out - the heavy barrel had no benefit, other than we got a laugh out of it.

If someone is tough with strong hands, hand carrying a 10 or 12 lb rifle might be doable, but many guys get tired out and keep their rifle on a sling, even when they should be ready for quick action. The most accurate 1000 yard rifle doesn’t do you much good if the biggest deer runs across 150 yards from you and it’s on a sling or strapped to the pack. Crawling through sagebrush it’s nice to not have a 12 lb rifle.

Big magazines and light barrels are a sure sign the person hand carries the rifle very little because the balance point is partially onto the magazine.

Super light weight is probably not the best - it’s just too hard to shoot.

Perfect weight for me has been about 8 lbs, but the more I’ve been shooting varmint weight barrels the more they have grown on me - when shooting over a pack they definitely settle in better.

In the end it probably doesn’t matter as long as the person shoots it ok and accepts the limitations. I’ve been spotted mule deer hunting grinning ear to ear with a 10 lb Ruger #1 tropical. Lol

 

[Thegman]

OTOH, I'd argue it's not common sense to say "this is my experience, so it should apply to you, too".

I've never had trouble successfully hunting with my sub-6lb, all up, 308s, but I understand that doesn't mean that others will have the same results with them, across the board.

Some people (maybe a lot of people?) may have more trouble shooting a rifle that light successfully, so yeah, it's not a good choice for them. No argument at all that they'd be better served with a rifle they can shoot better.

 

[handwerk]

I've always considered 7.5-8.5 pounds scoped the sweet spot, it's where all my BG rifles are.

 

[Turkeygetpwnd38]

Around 8.5lbs scoped/suppressed is the sweet spot for me, but everyone’s hunting style is different. I carry my rifle in my hand 95% of the time while hunting, the difference between 8.5lbs and 10lbs is huge, no matter if I’m 220lbs or 180lbs. I don’t really get the lose the weight off your body vs gear argument. Absolutely lose the weight, it’ll help, but 5lbs distributed throughout your skeletal system vs 5lbs hanging off your back or in your hand is not the same thing.

 

[cowdisciple]

I'm putting together a new moose rifle in .300 win mag because I got peer pressured out of bringing the 6.5creed with 147s. It'll be just a hair under 9# scoped, suppressed and with 4 in the mag. I don't think I'd want a .30 cal magnum any lighter. .223 blacktail gun, on the other hand...