rifle weight, how low should one go?

[Handwerk]

What are your thoughts on trends towards lighter rifles? I'm talking about a gun in 7mm-mag or .270 used for hunting. I shoot 2 tikka t-3's that with scopes are 7.6lbs and 7.10ibs. I also hunt with a old remy that is a little under 9lbs. My question is by hunting with a lighter rifle is there any disadvantages? will the lighter guns hold up as well over time? I am sure there are some of you with far more experience than I, so whats your take on this matter? I've been looking at a sako 75 in wood but with scope it's nearing 10lbs! Why not go lite?

[Ramrod]

Some disadvantages are...
Increased recoil. Cant get around this fact, unless you go with less powerfull cartridges.
Harder to hold steady. Especially apparent when you are winded from climbing, or hurrying to get out ahead of moving game.
Less important, but still a fact, the barrel heats up fast. I believe this is why everyone brags about their wonderfull 3 shot groups. 5 shots groups used to be the standard for rifle accuracy. But with some of the new lightweights, 5 shot groups can be pretty sad looking.

[Redhawk1]

I totally agree with Ramrod.  

[roper]

I got a tikka t3 last year and for shooting past 300yds it's harder for me too hold steady I just when back to my heavy rifle.  I got good groups and recoil was OK in the 300wsm in fact alot less than a win FWT in the same caliber.  I put a 6x scope on that rifle and I'm shooting it better.  Just my .02

[ScoutMan]

Handwerk,

Jeff Cooper gave us the parameters in his "scout rifle" concept, namely a weight of 7 lbs. and an overall length of 39 inches.

For a full discussion of the "scout rifle" concept, visit the web page of fr. frog.

[lilabner]

Have you checked out the Lazerroni (sp?) rifles. Ultra powerful magnums in very light weights. Long slim barrels. Muzzle brakes are standard. Sort of like a Scout rifle on steroids.  My older rifles weigh 8 1/2 to 9 pounds with scopes. Could be my imagination, but I think I can hold them a bit steadier when I'm winded, which is common when mountain hunting. I don't think you have to worry about light rifles being durable, though. If the rifle is for hunting, five shot groups aren't of much concern. My theory is that if you are accustomed to carrying a heavy rifle, it doesn't bother you much to haul around the extra weight. If you aren't, they can wear you out

[Lawdog]

I totally agree with Ramrod.  

I too totally agree with Ramrod.  It always amazes me when someone buys a "Wonder Gun"(a short barreled rifle that weights so little that you don’t know you’re carrying it) then complain it kicks.  So they add a muzzle brake to control the recoil and now it has a muzzle blast that makes a brass monkey flinch at 100 yards.  Maybe that’s why they call them “Wonder Guns”.  Lawdog
 

[Muskie Hunter]

I have light rifles and I have standard weight rifles too.I find that the rifles that I enjoy to shoot and shoot better are the ones about 8 pounds,scoped out.They absorb recoil better,hold better and they don't require muzzle breaks.Wow,how I hate muzzle breaks.My friend has a boss on his Winchester 06 that will change your mind about shooting with him.I have good muffs too and I am still bothered by all the noise they produce.Hearing protection is a must with that kind of set up,even during hunting.It only takes one time to destroy your hearing.I know,a lesson learned the hard way.The light rifles that I own are just dust collectors now and take up good room in my safe.I shoot a lot in the sitting and kneeling position and sometimes ,the prone.For me,the 8 and 8.5 pounders are ideal.My groups are way better.
My dad told me one time that if I couldn't carry a 8 pound rifle hunting then I couldn't carry a 7 pound rifle hunting.Sure is a lot of truth in his statement and then he asked the real clincher," how much did that M-14 sniper rifle weigh,that I carried in the jungle and in the highlands"?.I'm not sure anymore but I think it went over 12 pounds.

[Zachary]

What are your thoughts on trends towards lighter rifles? I'm talking about a gun in 7mm-mag or .270 used for hunting. I shoot 2 tikka t-3's that with scopes are 7.6lbs and 7.10ibs. I also hunt with a old remy that is a little under 9lbs. My question is by hunting with a lighter rifle is there any disadvantages? will the lighter guns hold up as well over time? I am sure there are some of you with far more experience than I, so whats your take on this matter? I've been looking at a sako 75 in wood but with scope it's nearing 10lbs! Why not go lite?

Everyone has done a very good job explaining your question but there is one thing that I think has been overlooked - stock fit.  Many people, including myself, overlook the importance of stock fit.  A good stock fit can overcome the disadvantages of low weight in a hurry.  Also, no one has seemed to tackle your question in practical terms by listing a weight to a particular cartridge.  Well, I'll take a try at it. :grin:

That said, and all else being equal (stock fit, trigger pull, etc.), I think that most shooters can probably comfortably go as low as:

.243 Winchester - 6.0 pounds complete (rifle, scope, rings, ammo)
.25-06 Remington - 6.25 pounds
7mm-08 Remington - 6.5 pounds
.270 Winchester - 6.75 pounds
.30-06 Springfield - 7.0 pounds
7mm Rem Mag - 7.5 pounds
.338 Win Mag - 8.0 pounds

Notice the quarter pound increments in the standard cartridges and half pound increments in the mag cartridges.  Of course the above is just my personal opinion, and it also varies with choice of bullet weights.  Can people shoot the above calibers in lighter rifles than stated above - of course.  But to make things interesting, I just started with what I thought a .243 would be, and then added weight accordingly.

I do know that there are several people that  shoot 7mags that weigh less than 7.5 pounds complete, but I can't - just too dang light for me.

Zachary

[Rogue Ram]

:eek:   Find my previous posts about my now sold 7.5 pound .340 Weatherby!  I was very skeptical, but smithy swore the stock design would take most of the sting out of it.   :shock:   There's no emoticons for looking like a raccoon otherwise I'd use one.   First shot the scope hit my shooting glasses, barrel went nearly vertical, my head went numb, and I was senseless for a few seconds......then the blood came out where the glasses embedded into my head.   A muzzle brake solved that, but that created its own problems and the gun would never shoot, so I dumped it.

I've shot 9 pound .375s that were pussycats compared to this monster.  Never again............

RR

[TScottO]

Light weight rifles definitely have a place in the hunting field if you are willing to put up with a little more bump. Others have outlined the cons and have done a good job doing so.

In my opinion the light weight guns are applicable to woods hunting where ranges are short and possibly a 200 yard shot sometimes. For someone that walks a lot, stalks etc I believe the light weight rifles are perfect.

If someone primarily hunts from shooting houses weight doesn’t matter that much.
If someone hunts at long ranges more times than not the extra weight of normal guns is helpful in holding steady.

One comment people frequently refer to with light weight barrels and their slim tapers is the lack of multiple shot repeatability once the barrel is heated. Everyone likes to be able to stack bullets shot after shot, I’m no exception, but this really isn’t a requirement for a hunting rifle. I’ve personally never been in a hunting situation where a barrel heating up would have made a difference. If I were to hunt in a situation where a heating barrel or needing a heavy barrel is an issue I shouldn’t be using a light weight gun.

For a practical hunting rifle used in its application I really like the light weight rifles. For my personal uses a light weight rifle will suit every need I have.

Take Care,
Scott

[Redhawk1]

I totally agree with Ramrod.  

I too totally agree with Ramrod.  It always amazes me when someone buys a "Wonder Gun"(a short barreled rifle that weights so little that you don’t know you’re carrying it) then complain it kicks.  So they add a muzzle brake to control the recoil and now it has a muzzle blast that makes a brass monkey flinch at 100 yards.  Maybe that’s why they call them “Wonder Guns”.  Lawdog
 

brass monkey flinch, now that funny.... :-D

[Handwerk]

thanks for your input thus far guys. Part of the reason I posted this was I just finished a job and have a little $ burning a whole in the pocket, I have a tikka ss/syn in 7 mag that I'm very happy with but at times think about getting a sako 75 ss/syn  in 7 mag which weighs a pound more than my tikka. If I got the sako I would have to trade in the tikka. Just trying to figure out if the extra pound would be a good or a bad thing. And if the sako would be that much nicer of gun.

[Ramrod]

Well, I'll take a try at it. :grin:

That said, and all else being equal (stock fit, trigger pull, etc.), I think that most shooters can probably comfortably go as low as:

.243 Winchester - 6.0 pounds complete (rifle, scope, rings, ammo)
.25-06 Remington - 6.25 pounds
7mm-08 Remington - 6.5 pounds
.270 Winchester - 6.75 pounds
.30-06 Springfield - 7.0 pounds
7mm Rem Mag - 7.5 pounds
.338 Win Mag - 8.0 pounds


Zachary

While most shooters can probably get away with guns that light for occasional use, I think you need to add a pound to those weights (complete with scope, rings, and ammo), for "comfort". They do look about right for bare rifle, though. I think most average sized males would develop a flinch real fast if they did much shooting with a 7 pound .30-06, for example.

[Slamfire]

Here's a little ancient history that might help you decide how light a rifle ought to be. When their bolt action rifle was not accepted to replace the Krag, Savage shortened it up till it just acommidated their .250 Savage cartridge. Depending on the weight of the stock it ran a bit over 6 lbs. The post war shooter greeted it with shouts of joy, but petitioned Savage for a bigger cartridge. They wanted a .30-05 by golly. Well Savage invented the .300 Savage, which fit their nifty Model 20, and put it on the market. It looked at first as if they had a winner. Sales slowed, however as the word got around, the danged thing kicked to hard. Savage increased the diameter of the barrel and added more wood to the stock, until a 7+ pound riflle was available. Sales continued to lag however and the Stock Market crash of '29 put this light rifle out of business. Nowdays there are muzzle breaks that deafen bystanders or effective recoil absorbers of various types,  So you can get away with heavier recoil than in the old days, but there aren't that many cartridges over .30 caliber that are setting sales records, despite the hype in the gun rags.

[Coyote Hunter]

Handwerk -

Go to www.huntingnut.com and download a free copy of "Point Blank" a ballistic calculator,  It has as one of its features a recoil calculator.

If you are comfortable with the recoil of your current rifles you can calculate their recoil (might have to guess on powder charge if shooting actory ammo, check some reload manuals or sights like Hodgdon, Alliant or Accurate or Winchester for online/downloadable load data), then play with the load data and rifle weight to see how recoil changes.