Ultralight Ultralight Rifles

[SLG]

I used it for a few years then sold it. I found it to be a very inferior rifle for a rifleman.

 

[Thegman]

Thanks for taking the time to reply. For hunting, if you *had* to put a number on it would you guess these are 300 yard builds? I always have some solution for front, and usually rear support in field.

I think that will end up having more to do with the shooter than the rifle. I've found the inherent accuracy as good as any of my other rifles and generally find them to shoot very well, or even very, very well. That said, there may be a learning curve to shooting them as well as other rifles; I know I had to learn to shoot the AR platform in general coming from a lifetime of shooting traditional bolt rifles.

I would say if you’re comfortable shooting 300 yards with your other rifles, and shoot from support as you noted, you should be able to do the same with these once you learn to shoot them how they "want to be shot".

I like to keep my shots on big game within 300 yards as well, but I've actually taken 3 of my 4 longest shots with one of these (293, 300+ and 350). (Longest was 470ish with my 308 Montana, but that's not something I'd make a habit of). So far, it seems my range really isn't limited by the rifle (within my normal shooting limits).

All that said, this spring/summer I want to be able to answer your question more definitively. My "field practice" is shooting game which isn't the best way to really gauge how well the rifle does compared to another rifle in the same conditions. All my rifle comparisons are from the bench, I'm planning on doing field comparisons this summer to see what if any differences there are (for me anyway).

 

[Thegman]

I used it for a few years then sold it. I found it to be a very inferior rifle for a rifleman.

What was it that you didn't like?

Like SrupidLightweight, I always wanted one as well. This was my poor man's version. I sold it as well, but that rifle did have some good mojo. I don't think I ever missed anything I pointed it at.

 

[SLG]

What was it that you didn't like?

Like SrupidLightweight, I always wanted one as well. This was my poor man's version. I sold it as well, but that rifle did have some good mojo. I don't think I ever missed anything I pointed it at.

View attachment 674968

What rifle is that?

My complaints about the RR may not be yours. That said, the metalwork and stock work was a bit sloppy, certainly not a top smith's work, though he certainly charged as if it was. The skeletonized bolt handle was a bit painful to work at speed, making practice tough. The stock's forend is incredibly flimsy. A sling on it could pressure it too easily and I always worried about it breaking. It certainly could not be slung up with, which is a very important part of rifle shooting for me.

Though many of my field shots have been from prone, a reasonable percentage have been from kneeling, since not all fields have as nicely manicured a lawn as my rifle range. Slinging up for me is almost entirely an option I use from kneeling, and as unsteady as kneeling is, I really appreciate a good shooting sling.

Switching barrels was easy, but keeping up with multiple zero's was not. I effectively had to go to the range every time I wanted to swap calibers so that feature was not as useful as it could have been. I am also not a big fan of the Remington 7/700 design, so that was another strike against the gun for me. The carrying case, made by Kifaru, was really excellent though.

ETA: I forgot to mention that while the change caliber feature was neat, having a 308/260/358 was really a pretty silly combo as the ballistic overlap from a big game standpoint makes 2 of the 3 kind of useless.

 

[180ls1]

I need a little help, feeling a touch overwhelmed.

Here is what I have so far:
Poly Lower
NFA Lightweight LPK
IMI Folding Stock
16" Faxon pencil

Nothing else... keeping the above in mind (budget build) what else is recommended?

 

[Taudisio]

I need a little help, feeling a touch overwhelmed.

Here is what I have so far:
Poly Lower
NFA Lightweight LPK
IMI Folding Stock
16" Faxon pencil

Nothing else... keeping the above in mind (budget build) what else is recommended?

Solo300 upper receiver (or modify one yourself)
Kaw valley PCC handguard (or make one yourself)
If you choose to, a way to block the gas port (not necessary if your handguard is short enough).
Thread protector/brake/suppressor adapter depending on your wants
Sights and a magazine!

 

[robtattoo]

I'm not sure if anyone else has linked these, but I found them this morning. 2.6oz & clamps directly to a rifle buffer tube.....

https://a.co/d/4eAAOZ9

 

[Thegman]

What rifle is that?

My complaints about the RR may not be yours. That said, the metalwork and stock work was a bit sloppy, certainly not a top smith's work, though he certainly charged as if it was. The skeletonized bolt handle was a bit painful to work at speed, making practice tough. The stock's forend is incredibly flimsy. A sling on it could pressure it too easily and I always worried about it breaking. It certainly could not be slung up with, which is a very important part of rifle shooting for me.

Though many of my field shots have been from prone, a reasonable percentage have been from kneeling, since not all fields have as nicely manicured a lawn as my rifle range. Slinging up for me is almost entirely an option I use from kneeling, and as unsteady as kneeling is, I really appreciate a good shooting sling.

Switching barrels was easy, but keeping up with multiple zero's was not. I effectively had to go to the range every time I wanted to swap calibers so that feature was not as useful as it could have been. I am also not a big fan of the Remington 7/700 design, so that was another strike against the gun for me. The carrying case, made by Kifaru, was really excellent though.

ETA: I forgot to mention that while the change caliber feature was neat, having a 308/260/358 was really a pretty silly combo as the ballistic overlap from a big game standpoint makes 2 of the 3 kind of useless.

I definitely get your points about the rifle. I think they sound a lot more useful than they actually prove to be.

My rifle was a NULA barreled action in 308, cerakoted and put in one of Rick Stienhour's MPI stocks (same guy that made the original Kifaru rifles). For a while, years ago, one could buy a NULA barreled action at a pretty reasonable price. It wasn't through their normal website.

The biggest problem I had with this rifle (as I recall) was that it wouldn't carry on a sling without flipping over. The upper sling point doesn't work that far down; it's useless. I generally had to hunt with it in a home made "gun bearer", which worked okay. Eventually I decided I liked my somewhat lightened 308 Montana a little better and still use that rifle.

 

[StupidLightweight]

Exciting package delivered by UPS today....

Behold the second iteration of Shaw Custom Barrel's ultralight .223 Wylde barrel sans gas port. According to my wife's scale, which I can't guarantee is 100% accurate, this little wand weighs 1 pound, 1.8 ounces, making it the lightest factory made barrel available. It is 1.5 ounces heavier than the first Shaw barrel my gunsmith turned down close to what I call the "danger zone" because it's so wispy.

This barrel is 16 inches in length, 1:7 twist, and looks like it was built specifically for our purposes. Oh yeah, that's because it was. For anyone building a straight-pull AR, do not proceed without contacting Shaw first. I think you'll be pleased.

The other image shows the Shaw barrel next to Wilson Combat's lightest offering, the gold standard for semiautomatic ultralight barrels.

 

[Thegman]

Hell yeah...where do I sign up? Are these on their website or does one have to call them? Thanks for getting this going with them, that's awesome. I especially like that they're 1:7 as well.

 

[180ls1]

Exciting package delivered by UPS today....

Behold the second iteration of Shaw Custom Barrel's ultralight .223 Wylde barrel sans gas port. According to my wife's scale, which I can't guarantee is 100% accurate, this little wand weighs 1 pound, 1.8 ounces, making it the lightest factory made barrel available. It is 1.5 ounces heavier than the first Shaw barrel my gunsmith turned down close to what I call the "danger zone" because it's so wispy.

This barrel is 16 inches in length, 1:7 twist, and looks like it was built specifically for our purposes. Oh yeah, that's because it was. For anyone building a straight-pull AR, do not proceed without contacting Shaw first. I think you'll be pleased.

The other image shows the Shaw barrel next to Wilson Combat's lightest offering, the gold standard for semiautomatic ultralight barrels.

View attachment 675848View attachment 675849

Sweet!

Rough pricing on one?

 

[StupidLightweight]

I don't know what final pricing will be or if they're listed on the site yet, so give Shaw a call. Good luck!

 

[packgoatguy]

How would you compare the real-world range/accuracy between the two? Or just with these Ultralite builds in general.

For instance, with my bow, the longer ATA version and an offset/rear bar added about a pound but probably increased my usable range by 15-20 yards and it settles down much quicker for the shot. It is well worth the trade-off in my book.

Real-world accuracy and my max effective range is dependent on several factors:

1) Recoil Management: For being able to shoot accurately beyond 300 yards, I set up my rifles to have 13 foot pounds of recoil energy or less. So, for my 6.5 Creedmoor setup with the 140ELD I shoot, that is about an 8 pound rifle (including everything... scope, tripod, suppressor, etc). For a 6 Creedmoor with a 108ELD, that is about a 6.5-7lb max rifle setup. For a 223Rem/5.56... its irrelevant, as even a 5lb setup all in is just 7 foot pounds of energy... well under my threshold. For an example of this, ive mentioned my 5.75lb 308win kimber (which includes suppressor, mag 2.5-10x scope, scope caps, ammo sleeve, arca mount, and a DIY vertical grip... or 6.25lbs including my DIY tripod). This rifle is TOO light for reliable long range shooting as it sits (nearly 20ft pounds of recoil energy)... and my hits at distance reflect this. I can nestle it between heavy sandbags to restrict movement off the bench and shoot 1.5MOA 10 round groups... but if I shoot off a backpack to simulate realistic hunting conditions, I have trouble hitting a 10 inch gong at 400 yards... maybe 3 hits out of 10 shots. Contrast that with my 6.75lb 6.5 Creedmoor kimber, at just one pound heavier (set up identically, but with a heavier scope) if I add a 1lb tripod (which brings the total rifle weight up to just under 8lbs), I can shoot sub moa groups out to 500 yards from various positions. The difference has everything to do with the recoil of the rifle. Its not that the recoil "hurts" or causes me to flinch, or jerk the trigger (this is not the case, as verifiable by slow mo video recording of the trigger pull and shot break)... but rather that there is movement that occurs between the time that the bullet leaves the chamber and when it leaves the muzzle. This movement is easier to manage and control with heavier rifles, but beyond a certain point, a rifle that is too lightweight will be affected to the point that every slight change in shooting position will affect where the bullet hits. In a perfect world... a shooter could perfect the placement of the stock in their shoulder and can mitigate this to extend their capable range with rifles that recoil more than 13ft pounds... but it is extremely easy to make a tiny error that results in a missed shot. This is why when you watch youtube videos of the 'super hunter' types taking 700 yard plus shots off of a backpack in an awkward field position off of a bipod or backpack with a heavier recoiling rifle like a 28 nosler or 338RUM in a sub 10lb "lightweight" rifle setup... they often miss a shot and make comments like "I dont know what happened", "I was so stable..." "the shot felt right... " etc. Its because they dont realize they can get used to a particular body position while shooting at the range, and can consistently get good groups from that single position at the range... which leads them to believe that their rifle system is accurate and ready for long range in the field... however they dont realize that even the slightest deviation in their stock placement due to a different shooting position can, and likely will mean they can do everything else right... but still have the bullet go wild. This does NOT occur to as much of a degree with lesser recoiling rifle setups. This means that my little ultralight 308win is limited to shorter range... which in fact is exactly what I built it for... a sub 200 yard elk or bear thumper that can be held easily in the hand and shouldered quickly for dark timber still hunts. My 17 yr old son dropped his 300 class 6x6 bull at 150 yards with one shot this past fall with this setup... the rifle performed perfectly from a hasty rest when a shot opportunity materialized very quickly... however this would not have been the rifle he would have used if a much further shot had been required.

2) Accessories MATTER! My 13 ft pound max recoil threshold is dependent on having several "add ons" or accessories on my rifles that make them more shootable. The most important is a good suppressor tuned to my barrel harmonics (with a load and dope taylored to those specific harmonics). Not only does the mass of the suppressor add to the mass of the rifle setup to get me under the 13ft lb threshold, but it also reduces the effects of recoil on the shooter. Were in not for the suppressor, my "shootable" threshold would be closer to a 10 or even a 9 ft pound max recoil threshold to still be able to achieve similar accuracy at distance. The second "accessory" or upgrade is a scope I can trust to hold zero no matter what. This typically means that my "longer range" setups like a 6.5 Creed, 6mm Creed, etc will wear a 20.5oz Nightforce NXS or SWFA HD, or a 22.5oz Trijicon Credo 2.5-15x. The added 10-15 ounces over truly ultralight scope options allows added mass to the rifle system that gets me under the 13 foot pound threshold, but also gives me improvements like reliable dialing turrets, ballistic reticles, illuminated reticles, more light gathering capabilities, etc... these added scope features all make a huge difference when getting beyond 300 yards effectively. The third "accessory" is an ultralight tripod mounted to an arca plate with a useful and sturdy ball head that an support the full weight of the rifle. Again, like the scope and suppressor, this feature adds weight/mass to the rifle, but also serves the purpose of creating a stable platform from which to shoot in various field positions. For me, I need a tripod that weighs less that 13oz including the ball head, which has adjustment capabilities to allow me to shoot from the prone up to a kneeling height... unfortunately there is nothing on the market that met my criteria of lightweight and offered the range of height that I needed, so I made my own. In its most basic configuration (prone only) with the most minimal ball head I will accept (and only shot from my lightest recoiling rifles like the 223rem) it is just 6.5oz. The fourth "accessory" has to do with the ergonomics of the rifle. For a longer range setup, I need a proper cheek weld which requires a cheek riser on my stock... I need proper length of pull, and I need a vertical grip of some sort (being able to pull the rifle straight into my shoulder with the 3 non-trigger fingers of my shooting hand allows me to isolate trigger finger movement and minimize the post break movement from the rifle). These are creature comforts often left off of "minimalist" uberlite hunting rifle setups... but are features that I will NOT hunt without if I intend to take shots on game beyond 300 yards. In the end, I want the lightest weight rifle I can "effectively" shoot, and due to the necessary weight of the above listed accessories, this means creating sub 4.5lb, and even sub 4lb bare rifles.

3) I set my max "effective" range to mirror the terminal ballistics of the particular bullet and cartridge combo I am using. For big game, my typical rule of thumb is a 2000 fps impact velocity for modern cup and core style bullets, and a 2200 fps impact velocity for bonded/mono style bullets. For smaller game (coyotes, wolves, etc) I extend that impact velocity down 200 fps (ie 1800fps for cup/core, 2000 fps for bonded/mono). So, with my shorty 16 inch 6.5 Creedmoor setup, my loads are pushing a 140eld at 2638fps, which means with that particular BC, at my elevation... that bullet doesnt drop below 2000fps until it gets beyond 554 yards. It doesnt drop below 1800fps until beyond 745 yards. My 16 inch 223 wylde shooting 77gr TMK bullets at 2771fps will get to 423 yards before dropping below 2000fps, and 545 yards before it drops below 1800fps.

So, the simple answer is, yes ultralight rifles can be shot accurately out to extended range, but only if the rifle is set up appropriately and the terminal ballistics of the bullet match the intended range to be shot. This is why when you see my posted weights, I usually give the "all up" or fully loaded weight, including Suppressor, Scope, Tripod, mag, ammo sleeve, scope caps, etc. Every ounce counts. An "8 POUND" 6.5 Creedmoor rifle may not sound very light... but if you consider all the accuracy enhancing features that are included in that weight... you will find it is extremely difficult to get to that point without sacrificing something.

 

[Thegman]

Real-world accuracy and my max effective range is dependent on several factors:

1) Recoil Management: For being able to shoot accurately beyond 300 yards, I set up my rifles to have 13 foot pounds of recoil energy or less. So, for my 6.5 Creedmoor setup with the 140ELD I shoot, that is about an 8 pound rifle (including everything... scope, tripod, suppressor, etc). For a 6 Creedmoor with a 108ELD, that is about a 6.5-7lb max rifle setup. For a 223Rem/5.56... its irrelevant, as even a 5lb setup all in is just 7 foot pounds of energy... well under my threshold. For an example of this, ive mentioned my 5.75lb 308win kimber (which includes suppressor, mag 2.5-10x scope, scope caps, ammo sleeve, arca mount, and a DIY vertical grip... or 6.25lbs including my DIY tripod). This rifle is TOO light for reliable long range shooting as it sits (nearly 20ft pounds of recoil energy)... and my hits at distance reflect this. I can nestle it between heavy sandbags to restrict movement off the bench and shoot 1.5MOA 10 round groups... but if I shoot off a backpack to simulate realistic hunting conditions, I have trouble hitting a 10 inch gong at 400 yards... maybe 3 hits out of 10 shots. Contrast that with my 6.75lb 6.5 Creedmoor kimber, at just one pound heavier (set up identically, but with a heavier scope) if I add a 1lb tripod (which brings the total rifle weight up to just under 8lbs), I can shoot sub moa groups out to 500 yards from various positions. The difference has everything to do with the recoil of the rifle. Its not that the recoil "hurts" or causes me to flinch, or jerk the trigger (this is not the case, as verifiable by slow mo video recording of the trigger pull and shot break)... but rather that there is movement that occurs between the time that the bullet leaves the chamber and when it leaves the muzzle. This movement is easier to manage and control with heavier rifles, but beyond a certain point, a rifle that is too lightweight will be affected to the point that every slight change in shooting position will affect where the bullet hits. In a perfect world... a shooter could perfect the placement of the stock in their shoulder and can mitigate this to extend their capable range with rifles that recoil more than 13ft pounds... but it is extremely easy to make a tiny error that results in a missed shot. This is why when you watch youtube videos of the 'super hunter' types taking 700 yard plus shots off of a backpack in an awkward field position off of a bipod or backpack with a heavier recoiling rifle like a 28 nosler or 338RUM in a sub 10lb "lightweight" rifle setup... they often miss a shot and make comments like "I dont know what happened", "I was so stable..." "the shot felt right... " etc. Its because they dont realize they can get used to a particular body position while shooting at the range, and can consistently get good groups from that single position at the range... which leads them to believe that their rifle system is accurate and ready for long range in the field... however they dont realize that even the slightest deviation in their stock placement due to a different shooting position can, and likely will mean they can do everything else right... but still have the bullet go wild. This does NOT occur to as much of a degree with lesser recoiling rifle setups. This means that my little ultralight 308win is limited to shorter range... which in fact is exactly what I built it for... a sub 200 yard elk or bear thumper that can be held easily in the hand and shouldered quickly for dark timber still hunts. My 17 yr old son dropped his 300 class 6x6 bull at 150 yards with one shot this past fall with this setup... the rifle performed perfectly from a hasty rest when a shot opportunity materialized very quickly... however this would not have been the rifle he would have used if a much further shot had been required.

2) Accessories MATTER! My 13 ft pound max recoil threshold is dependent on having several "add ons" or accessories on my rifles that make them more shootable. The most important is a good suppressor tuned to my barrel harmonics (with a load and dope taylored to those specific harmonics). Not only does the mass of the suppressor add to the mass of the rifle setup to get me under the 13ft lb threshold, but it also reduces the effects of recoil on the shooter. Were in not for the suppressor, my "shootable" threshold would be closer to a 10 or even a 9 ft pound max recoil threshold to still be able to achieve similar accuracy at distance. The second "accessory" or upgrade is a scope I can trust to hold zero no matter what. This typically means that my "longer range" setups like a 6.5 Creed, 6mm Creed, etc will wear a 20.5oz Nightforce NXS or SWFA HD, or a 22.5oz Trijicon Credo 2.5-15x. The added 10-15 ounces over truly ultralight scope options allows added mass to the rifle system that gets me under the 13 foot pound threshold, but also gives me improvements like reliable dialing turrets, ballistic reticles, illuminated reticles, more light gathering capabilities, etc... these added scope features all make a huge difference when getting beyond 300 yards effectively. The third "accessory" is an ultralight tripod mounted to an arca plate with a useful and sturdy ball head that an support the full weight of the rifle. Again, like the scope and suppressor, this feature adds weight/mass to the rifle, but also serves the purpose of creating a stable platform from which to shoot in various field positions. For me, I need a tripod that weighs less that 13oz including the ball head, which has adjustment capabilities to allow me to shoot from the prone up to a kneeling height... unfortunately there is nothing on the market that met my criteria of lightweight and offered the range of height that I needed, so I made my own. In its most basic configuration (prone only) with the most minimal ball head I will accept (and only shot from my lightest recoiling rifles like the 223rem) it is just 6.5oz. The fourth "accessory" has to do with the ergonomics of the rifle. For a longer range setup, I need a proper cheek weld which requires a cheek riser on my stock... I need proper length of pull, and I need a vertical grip of some sort (being able to pull the rifle straight into my shoulder with the 3 non-trigger fingers of my shooting hand allows me to isolate trigger finger movement and minimize the post break movement from the rifle). These are creature comforts often left off of "minimalist" uberlite hunting rifle setups... but are features that I will NOT hunt without if I intend to take shots on game beyond 300 yards. In the end, I want the lightest weight rifle I can "effectively" shoot, and due to the necessary weight of the above listed accessories, this means creating sub 4.5lb, and even sub 4lb bare rifles.

3) I set my max "effective" range to mirror the terminal ballistics of the particular bullet and cartridge combo I am using. For big game, my typical rule of thumb is a 2000 fps impact velocity for modern cup and core style bullets, and a 2200 fps impact velocity for bonded/mono style bullets. For smaller game (coyotes, wolves, etc) I extend that impact velocity down 200 fps (ie 1800fps for cup/core, 2000 fps for bonded/mono). So, with my shorty 16 inch 6.5 Creedmoor setup, my loads are pushing a 140eld at 2638fps, which means with that particular BC, at my elevation... that bullet doesnt drop below 2000fps until it gets beyond 554 yards. It doesnt drop below 1800fps until beyond 745 yards. My 16 inch 223 wylde shooting 77gr TMK bullets at 2771fps will get to 423 yards before dropping below 2000fps, and 545 yards before it drops below 1800fps.

So, the simple answer is, yes ultralight rifles can be shot accurately out to extended range, but only if the rifle is set up appropriately and the terminal ballistics of the bullet match the intended range to be shot. This is why when you see my posted weights, I usually give the "all up" or fully loaded weight, including Suppressor, Scope, Tripod, mag, ammo sleeve, scope caps, etc. Every ounce counts. An "8 POUND" 6.5 Creedmoor rifle may not sound very light... but if you consider all the accuracy enhancing features that are included in that weight... you will find it is extremely difficult to get to that point without sacrificing something.

Good points about weight and rifle movement. No way around Newton's Laws of Motion.

Out of curiosity, I compared the mass of bullet+powder/rifle weight of my 308 Montana to the "Red Ryder". The 5.56 projectile+powder mass : rifle weight in this case is only about 80% of my 308. This assumes equal acceleration over equal time, which are probably actually less in the 5.56's 16" barrel.

Looong way of saying their recoil and "shootability" is probably similar, but I do want to test that when winter is over. There are a whole lot of other variables between them, as you have pointed out.

 

[packgoatguy]

Good points about weight and rifle movement. No way around Newton's Laws of Motion.

Out of curiosity, I compared the mass of bullet+powder/rifle weight of my 308 Montana to the "Red Ryder". The 5.56 projectile+powder mass : rifle weight in this case is only about 80% of my 308. This assumes equal acceleration over equal time, which are probably actually less in the 5.56's 16" barrel.

Looong way of saying their recoil and "shootability" is probably similar, but I do want to test that when winter is over. There are a whole lot of other variables between them, as you have pointed out.

I use the Bison Ballistics recoil calculator
Probably not perfect, but creates a reasonable baseline when comparing all of my 16 inch barreled cartridges.

Firearms Recoil Calculator

Calculate the recoil for a rifle based on its weight and ammunition

bisonballistics.com

Here are my loads:

223rem:
77gr TMK
23.5gr powder
2771fps mv
5lb rifle *all up, includes suppressor, tripod, scope
6.8 foot pounds recoil energy

308 win
178gr eldx
42gr powder
2500fps mv
6.25lb rifle *all up, includes suppressor, tripod, scope
20.1 foot pounds recoil energy

 

[180ls1]

Good points about weight and rifle movement. No way around Newton's Laws of Motion.

Out of curiosity, I compared the mass of bullet+powder/rifle weight of my 308 Montana to the "Red Ryder". The 5.56 projectile+powder mass : rifle weight in this case is only about 80% of my 308. This assumes equal acceleration over equal time, which are probably actually less in the 5.56's 16" barrel.

Looong way of saying their recoil and "shootability" is probably similar, but I do want to test that when winter is over. There are a whole lot of other variables between them, as you have pointed out.

I've wondered the same. Speaking completely ignorantly here. Looking at the Absolute Hammer bullet which barely touches the rifling and also looking at the groove count in the rifling. I've got to think reducing those factors decreases recoil.

How much? Who knows but I know my 6.5 with Hammers is incredibly pleasant to shoot.

 

[SLG]

I think you will find that the weight of the rifle is the issue, not the recoil. Unless you are actually flinching or losing your position too much from it. The weight is what allows for any movement from trigger pull to bullet exit to be damped, recoil occurs after the bullet leaves the barrel.

When I started shooting lightweight rifles, there was a learning curve as they require more technique and ability than a heavy rifle. Daily dry fire is your friend

 

[Thegman]

I use the Bison Ballistics recoil calculator
Probably not perfect, but creates a reasonable baseline when comparing all of my 16 inch barreled cartridges.

Firearms Recoil Calculator

Calculate the recoil for a rifle based on its weight and ammunition

bisonballistics.com

Here are my loads:

223rem:
77gr TMK
23.5gr powder
2771fps mv
5lb rifle *all up, includes suppressor, tripod, scope
6.8 foot pounds recoil energy

308 win
178gr eldx
42gr powder
2500fps mv
6.25lb rifle *all up, includes suppressor, tripod, scope
20.1 foot pounds recoil energy

That calculation shows an even larger (much larger) difference between my 3#1oz 5.56 and 4#14oz 308 Montana (I entered more or less their "all up" weight in the calculations). The actual difference with respect to rifle movement while the bullet is traveling down the barrel is probably somewhere in between that and my simplistic estimate. The recoil calculation has to account for gasses accelerating out of the muzzle, but by then the bullet is no longer part of the system.

Makes me think, hypothetically, I may be able to shoot the Red Ryder as well or better in the field than my "old reliable" 308 Montana. So far, in the field, it seems so. Have to test that out a lot more systematically like you have.

 

[Thegman]

I think you will find that the weight of the rifle is the issue, not the recoil. Unless you are actually flinching or losing your position too much from it. The weight is what allows for any movement from trigger pull to bullet exit to be damped, recoil occurs after the bullet leaves the barrel.

When I started shooting lightweight rifles, there was a learning curve as they require more technique and ability than a heavy rifle. Daily dry fire is your friend

A little bit of a rabbit trail here, but pretty applicable, for sure.

I think you're 100% right about rifle weight being sensitive to all the other shooting variables, like breathing, trigger pull, trigger pull weight, etc, etc. Less mass accelerates (and moves) more against these forces that are fairly constant from one rifle to the next. But recoil is also a part of the movement. The rifle accelerates reward in concert with the mass of the bullet and gasses accelerating forward while in the barrel, proportional to their respective masses. Gasses accelerating further after the barrel is "uncorked" are another component.

Imagine throwing a weight forward by pushing straight out with your arms. Your body will move back in the opposite direction the instant you start accelerating the weight forward, even though they're connected at that point. As soon as you release the weight and stop accelerating it, the force accelerating you rearward also ceases (though your movement doesn't, obviously).

 

[packgoatguy]

I think you will find that the weight of the rifle is the issue, not the recoil. Unless you are actually flinching or losing your position too much from it. The weight is what allows for any movement from trigger pull to bullet exit to be damped, recoil occurs after the bullet leaves the barrel.

When I started shooting lightweight rifles, there was a learning curve as they require more technique and ability than a heavy rifle. Daily dry fire is your friend

We might be referring to "recoil" in different ways. I agree that the majority of the "felt" or perceived recoil impulse probably happens when the bullet exits the muzzle, however physics dictates that there is an energy transfer occurring from the moment the primer ignites the powder. Imagine the force pushing the brass back against the boldface in that instant when the bullet enters the lands of the barrel. While we are talking about fractions of milliseconds here... the movement from the energy transfer happening prior to the bullet leaving the muzzle is exacerbated the lighterweight the rifle is... however there is a point of diminished return, and for my personal hunting purposes where I intend 1.5 moa accuracy to 400, 1moa accuracy from 400-550, and and 3/4moa accuracy or better beyond, I find that a max recoil factor of 13 foot pounds makes the rifle system shootable from a variety of positions. Higher recoil setups can be shot well if the shooter is doing everything right, and they can practice from a variety of field positions... but my focus is on mentoring 6-10 youth and novice shooters every year, and I've found the shootability at 13ft lbs and under to provide a significant help to get first round impacts on target. From a practical perspective, if a shooter does not intend to take shots beyond 250 or 300 yards, a 10 or 15 inch diameter kill radius is easily hit with far greater recoil numbers... this analysis really only applies if you intend to stretch the rifle into the 400 plus yard range.